John Schmidt BANNED from Viking Tour
- Thread starter Southpaw
- Start date
Don't mess with the big dipper with the little flipperTimberly said:I would assume that you're giving John the 8 in this game of pool, correct? He is an "AZer" and your screen name says any AZer has the 8. I bet Hillybilly, Danny, & Shawn would like to get in on that action too.
T
Timberly
Guest
LMAO, now THATS funny!ribdoner said:Don't mess with the big dipper with the little flipper
southpaw needs to calm down
i think you need to step back from this situation for a second and really ask yourself why you are so upset, and why are you spending hours at a computer trying to bring down john schmidt? do you really care that someone other than yourself lost $400, i doubt it. is it because you think pro players should present themeselves more professionally? if so, go bug someone else, becasue john is a much better for pool than about 90% of the players i can think of. he handles himself very well most of the time, is he perfect, no.... but you need to calm down. YOU are the one making players look bad by perpetuating this discussion in a negative manner. if you care so much about pro pool, you can prove it by easing off a little.
i bet you're thinking of all the clever ways you can respond to me and bring down john even more right now. well, i may read it, but i won't respond to you, i wont give you the satisfaction. and i am right now enjoying the fact that you will work hard for me, john and others in an attempt to counter all these posts.
i think you need to step back from this situation for a second and really ask yourself why you are so upset, and why are you spending hours at a computer trying to bring down john schmidt? do you really care that someone other than yourself lost $400, i doubt it. is it because you think pro players should present themeselves more professionally? if so, go bug someone else, becasue john is a much better for pool than about 90% of the players i can think of. he handles himself very well most of the time, is he perfect, no.... but you need to calm down. YOU are the one making players look bad by perpetuating this discussion in a negative manner. if you care so much about pro pool, you can prove it by easing off a little.
i bet you're thinking of all the clever ways you can respond to me and bring down john even more right now. well, i may read it, but i won't respond to you, i wont give you the satisfaction. and i am right now enjoying the fact that you will work hard for me, john and others in an attempt to counter all these posts.
Wow... this thread is just mind boggleing...
I'll admit I'm not heavy into pool and certainly not for a long period, but it seems ludacris some of the analogies or just pure BS people are spouting off.
First off, there is a *HUGE* difference between being a paid employee(most proffesional sports have the players under contract and salary) and a private individual who is plunking down his own money to enter a contest.
If you are a paid employee under contract, then obviously taking a dive, not showing up, acting unsportsmanlike, etc can be punishable and "wrong" to do....
However, if you are a private individual who is spending his own money to enter a contest, then you have no obligations to anyone for anything, short of playing your game by the rules and actually paying the entry fee. If you want to leave, dump, whatever else then you are free to do so since you are not part of the organization.
If anyone has a problem with this, then they need to change the way pool events are held, such as having *only* the calcutta and pay the players to be there, charge the fans to watch.
As long as pool events are being held as tournaments that the players must pay to enter, they are under no obligations to anyone....(except not to cheat).
Let's look at a simple analogy:
I goto the movies and pay my $10 for a ticket, and at this point two people see me and bet between themselves whether I'll like the movie or some such nonsense....
I get a phonecall and decide to leave the movie, and one of them stops me telling them they have a couple thousand bet and that I'm obligated to stay for the movie because they bet on me, or that I am responsible to them because they put money on me, etc, etc.
That is COMPLETE BS!!!!!!!!!
I can put money on you doing anything in your private life, and that grants me absolutly ZERO control over anything you do.
I would really like to find these people that are saying John did something wrong, go into THEIR lives, bet some money on something and then try to tell them what to due because I have money staked on them.(now please remember I have no idea who john is nor have I been around in pool enough to really care about how tournaments are run).
It seems to me that the key issue here is that running events such that private individuals are paying to enter(instead of paying them as employee's) and then gambling on them is what's wrong... Anyone's actions that cause harm to the fans is due to whoever setup this system, not the player for doing whatever it is he wants to do(and is free to do so).
If you don't like the system, then change the system, don't blame innocent players.....
If I pay to do something and then decide not to do it, how is it anyone else's buisness except my own? Again when answering please let me know where you live so I can come down and plunk some money on your live and then tell you how to live it.
-macgyver
ps I have now made a wager with a friend about this thread.... anyone disagree'ing with me is now responsible for that bet and is obligated to agree with me since I have money on this...
I'll admit I'm not heavy into pool and certainly not for a long period, but it seems ludacris some of the analogies or just pure BS people are spouting off.
First off, there is a *HUGE* difference between being a paid employee(most proffesional sports have the players under contract and salary) and a private individual who is plunking down his own money to enter a contest.
If you are a paid employee under contract, then obviously taking a dive, not showing up, acting unsportsmanlike, etc can be punishable and "wrong" to do....
However, if you are a private individual who is spending his own money to enter a contest, then you have no obligations to anyone for anything, short of playing your game by the rules and actually paying the entry fee. If you want to leave, dump, whatever else then you are free to do so since you are not part of the organization.
If anyone has a problem with this, then they need to change the way pool events are held, such as having *only* the calcutta and pay the players to be there, charge the fans to watch.
As long as pool events are being held as tournaments that the players must pay to enter, they are under no obligations to anyone....(except not to cheat).
Let's look at a simple analogy:
I goto the movies and pay my $10 for a ticket, and at this point two people see me and bet between themselves whether I'll like the movie or some such nonsense....
I get a phonecall and decide to leave the movie, and one of them stops me telling them they have a couple thousand bet and that I'm obligated to stay for the movie because they bet on me, or that I am responsible to them because they put money on me, etc, etc.
That is COMPLETE BS!!!!!!!!!
I can put money on you doing anything in your private life, and that grants me absolutly ZERO control over anything you do.
I would really like to find these people that are saying John did something wrong, go into THEIR lives, bet some money on something and then try to tell them what to due because I have money staked on them.(now please remember I have no idea who john is nor have I been around in pool enough to really care about how tournaments are run).
It seems to me that the key issue here is that running events such that private individuals are paying to enter(instead of paying them as employee's) and then gambling on them is what's wrong... Anyone's actions that cause harm to the fans is due to whoever setup this system, not the player for doing whatever it is he wants to do(and is free to do so).
If you don't like the system, then change the system, don't blame innocent players.....
If I pay to do something and then decide not to do it, how is it anyone else's buisness except my own? Again when answering please let me know where you live so I can come down and plunk some money on your live and then tell you how to live it.
-macgyver
ps I have now made a wager with a friend about this thread.... anyone disagree'ing with me is now responsible for that bet and is obligated to agree with me since I have money on this...
T
Timberly
Guest
I agree. As stated earlier, John and Mike shook hands and agreed that there was no hard feelings...they just each did what they had to do. Enter this post a month later and tempers have flared on both sides. Both the guys got defensive because of stuff other people(southpaw for one) said.enzo said:
Forgive me in advance for being the confirmed idealist that I've always been, but it always disheartens me when I read how some feel that a player has no obligation to either tournament proprietors or the game's fans. So many feel it's a player's right to not show up for a match or to unscrew whenever they please, that they have no obligations other than to themselves.
Let me open by saying that I wholeheartedly agree with those who say John Schmidt has no obligation to anyone who purchases him in a calcutta, but this is hardly the point.
As far as I'm concerned, when money is added to the prize fund, the persons or businesses adding that money should be viewed as sponsoring the players, and players should feel at least some obligation to them. Second, there are fans of this game who come to watch their favorite players, and it is regrettable that players don't feel a greater obligation to their fans. Finally, a professional player must behave with professionalism, whether playing in the WPC or a Viking tour event.
Frankly, I just don't get it. Scott Frost can skip his first round match at the 2004 US Open because some good action came along, and everyone's OK with it. Corey Deuel can unscrew in mid-match at the 2004 Hilton event in Florida to go golfing, and everone's OK with it. Larry Nevel unscrewed on the same day of the same event during mid-match, and everyone's OK with it. Jeremy Jones unscrewed in mid-match in Grand Central Station during the 2004 World Summit, and that's OK with everyone, too. Danny Harriman concedes to Corey Deuel at the UPA Championships, and that's OK with everyone. John Schmidt, yes this John Schmidt, unscrewed in mid-match at the 2004 Big Apple Nine Ball Challenge, and that's OK, too. This is all very puzzling.
Some suggest that the formation of the IPT has ushered in a new age in which etiquette, demeanor, respect for the game and respect for the fans will rule. Some have argued that now the players are being treated like professionals, they'll behave with professionalism. Well, at least for me, it will take quite a bit more convincing.
Let me open by saying that I wholeheartedly agree with those who say John Schmidt has no obligation to anyone who purchases him in a calcutta, but this is hardly the point.
As far as I'm concerned, when money is added to the prize fund, the persons or businesses adding that money should be viewed as sponsoring the players, and players should feel at least some obligation to them. Second, there are fans of this game who come to watch their favorite players, and it is regrettable that players don't feel a greater obligation to their fans. Finally, a professional player must behave with professionalism, whether playing in the WPC or a Viking tour event.
Frankly, I just don't get it. Scott Frost can skip his first round match at the 2004 US Open because some good action came along, and everyone's OK with it. Corey Deuel can unscrew in mid-match at the 2004 Hilton event in Florida to go golfing, and everone's OK with it. Larry Nevel unscrewed on the same day of the same event during mid-match, and everyone's OK with it. Jeremy Jones unscrewed in mid-match in Grand Central Station during the 2004 World Summit, and that's OK with everyone, too. Danny Harriman concedes to Corey Deuel at the UPA Championships, and that's OK with everyone. John Schmidt, yes this John Schmidt, unscrewed in mid-match at the 2004 Big Apple Nine Ball Challenge, and that's OK, too. This is all very puzzling.
Some suggest that the formation of the IPT has ushered in a new age in which etiquette, demeanor, respect for the game and respect for the fans will rule. Some have argued that now the players are being treated like professionals, they'll behave with professionalism. Well, at least for me, it will take quite a bit more convincing.
Chris said:
Sorry Chris,
You stand corrected!
Now before I go any further, I would like say I've lost money to John on ghost games & will get back to that latter. I also have a lot of respect for his game. I once bought John in a final 16 auction and he was on the 1 Loss side. What does that say?
Chris, John's actions did infact ensure his tournament loss as he forfeited on the 1 loss side!
I just want the readers here to know where to find the facts.
The Event was "The Southern Classic"; John forfieted on the 1-loss side of the three event tournament.
To review the brackets, go back to AZ's home page. Click on "Tours & Tournaments" (upper left). Click on "Viking Tour", right side click on anything that refers to Stevie, scroll down thru the story to "online brackets" & click. You will now see the three brackets of this event. The One Pocket event is where all of this started, just check the brackets.
"Feared of running out of space hear",
Lamar (I'll Be back shortley)
It sounds to me like Mike ran things like "you can withdraw from having your name put up in the calcutta if you wish". Perhaps one small change would do the trick - "you may PUT your name into the calcutta if you wish" - i.e. flip it around. Make it a conscious decision on the part of the players to participate, not the other way around.
I've pondered this situation a bit over the day, and I've basically come to the conclusion that some others have - that the guy who lost the $400 is SOL. He was gambling to start with. He had a good chance of losing his $400 anyhow (i.e. JS not winning). It's sad that he had to lose his cash in the manner he did, but that's part of gambling. And, and this is my opinion, I don't think Mike should maintain that ban on JS. Granted, I think JS ditching a match to go play golf, regardless of the situation, was bad form - but he did pay his fee and if he wanted to forfeit a match and go on the one-loss side due to it, that's his business. I'm sure it was a PITA for Mike, but not that huge a PITA. But Mike (or any TD) cannot 100% control the actions/behavior of the players in their tournaments, nor should they expect to. They should, however, be prepared to adapt to changes that the players' actions/behavior does cause. Of course, that's just my opinion, I wasn't there, etc. etc.
Can we go back to talking about pool instead of gossip now?
I've pondered this situation a bit over the day, and I've basically come to the conclusion that some others have - that the guy who lost the $400 is SOL. He was gambling to start with. He had a good chance of losing his $400 anyhow (i.e. JS not winning). It's sad that he had to lose his cash in the manner he did, but that's part of gambling. And, and this is my opinion, I don't think Mike should maintain that ban on JS. Granted, I think JS ditching a match to go play golf, regardless of the situation, was bad form - but he did pay his fee and if he wanted to forfeit a match and go on the one-loss side due to it, that's his business. I'm sure it was a PITA for Mike, but not that huge a PITA. But Mike (or any TD) cannot 100% control the actions/behavior of the players in their tournaments, nor should they expect to. They should, however, be prepared to adapt to changes that the players' actions/behavior does cause. Of course, that's just my opinion, I wasn't there, etc. etc.
Can we go back to talking about pool instead of gossip now?
SJM,
You're not the only one puzzled by these so called "PROFESSIONALS". We must have read a different dictionary than they did.
One thing though I don't think they are obligated but they are responsible AS PROFESSIONALS to act and behave professionally.(Again some people must have the matchbook versions of Mr. Websters book)
Terry
PS- ANYBODY KNOW WHO F'N WON??
Still just curious.
You're not the only one puzzled by these so called "PROFESSIONALS". We must have read a different dictionary than they did.
One thing though I don't think they are obligated but they are responsible AS PROFESSIONALS to act and behave professionally.(Again some people must have the matchbook versions of Mr. Websters book)
Terry
PS- ANYBODY KNOW WHO F'N WON??
Still just curious.
Whoa !!! This thread has gotten way outta line. There are way many speculations.
Here are a few facts to help clear up the speculations.
JS stated that there isn't enough money in the sport.
John, I couldn't agree with you more but the event in question paid out over $53,000 the the overall winner received over $12,000 in winnings. I personally don't think that a bad payday in our sport.
After reading as much as I could on this thread I assume that some think JS never played a match at the event in question. If he didn't play in the opening rounds this wouldn't be an issue. I would have simply gave the funds back to the person that posted the fee.
JS did play Putnam in the opening round but lost and hit the 1-loss side. That's when the I want to go glofing with JA came into play. Additionally, several other professional players made the same request as JS because they were all going to the same place. However, JS was the only one that made the decision to forfeit out of the pool event.
To JS........ We had this discussion at the event. You were specifically told of the penalties for such actions. You and CD made the exact same request about the golfing situation and I specifically mentioned to you that you would be making a bad choice. If you recall, I told you to ask CD about this because he was on a similar ban a few years ago on the Viking Tour.
John, from what I recall you have only participated in 2 of our splash events on the V-Tour. #1. The $25,000 National Championship. At this event you didn't place high but you did win the Brunswick Gold Crown IV in the raffle. #2 the SCO which is the event in question. I hope you will realise all of the issues on the table and come to an amicable solution so you can once again enjoy participating with us.
I aslo suggest that the next time you JS participate in an event that has either a Player Auction, Calcutta or Audience Participation involved with the event that you remove yourself from the list so you are not bound by the rules of participation and mutual respect that is associated with them.
Respectfully,
Mj
Here are a few facts to help clear up the speculations.
JS stated that there isn't enough money in the sport.
John, I couldn't agree with you more but the event in question paid out over $53,000 the the overall winner received over $12,000 in winnings. I personally don't think that a bad payday in our sport.
After reading as much as I could on this thread I assume that some think JS never played a match at the event in question. If he didn't play in the opening rounds this wouldn't be an issue. I would have simply gave the funds back to the person that posted the fee.
JS did play Putnam in the opening round but lost and hit the 1-loss side. That's when the I want to go glofing with JA came into play. Additionally, several other professional players made the same request as JS because they were all going to the same place. However, JS was the only one that made the decision to forfeit out of the pool event.
To JS........ We had this discussion at the event. You were specifically told of the penalties for such actions. You and CD made the exact same request about the golfing situation and I specifically mentioned to you that you would be making a bad choice. If you recall, I told you to ask CD about this because he was on a similar ban a few years ago on the Viking Tour.
John, from what I recall you have only participated in 2 of our splash events on the V-Tour. #1. The $25,000 National Championship. At this event you didn't place high but you did win the Brunswick Gold Crown IV in the raffle. #2 the SCO which is the event in question. I hope you will realise all of the issues on the table and come to an amicable solution so you can once again enjoy participating with us.
I aslo suggest that the next time you JS participate in an event that has either a Player Auction, Calcutta or Audience Participation involved with the event that you remove yourself from the list so you are not bound by the rules of participation and mutual respect that is associated with them.
Respectfully,
Mj
Last edited:
20 to 1 that schmidt didn'tTbeaux said:SJM,
You're not the only one puzzled by these so called "PROFESSIONALS". We must have read a different dictionary than they did.
One thing though I don't think they are obligated but they are responsible AS PROFESSIONALS to act and behave professionally.(Again some people must have the matchbook versions of Mr. Websters book)
Terry
PS- ANYBODY KNOW WHO F'N WON??
Still just curious.
Well you are wrong... these are PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS PAYING TO ENTER A CONTEST.
In all other sports(well all that *I* can think of), the fans pay the players salaries... They buy tickets, goes to organization who pays the players. Even in poker many of the televised events are invitationals where the players are all payed to be there and arent paying entry fee's. In the actual poker tournaments, the players are under no obligation to even play once they've paid their money.
In this case(which is why its so different from other sports), the players are there representing themselves and payed to be there.
If buisnesses are adding money, than they should just pay the players to compete... but you can't take someone's money as entry fee, then try to claim sponsership just because they are adding money that a player MIGHT NEVER SEE!!!!!!
I agree with you that there *should* be obligations to the sport and to the fans, but that needs to happen by coming up with a better system where the fans and the sport support players rather than players supporting themselves(by paying entry and whatnot).
Under the current system, the level of obligation/responsiblity is exactly what it should be(none)....
Last edited:
Damn...just when I thought pool might have turned the corner, this thread pops up and reminds me how "shortsighted" , "greedy", "selfish" and "ethically corrupt" pool players are....
I have read comments in this thread of "If the payouts were bigger","Its not really a professional event anyway" , "I was not going to get any of the money" (aka..what is in it for me)....and comments of people being jealous of so called "superstars"...
"If the payouts were bigger".....Well actions like signing up for an event and then skipping out to play golf is like a slap in the face to the spectators that showed up to watch...Do you think they are going to want to come back next time to watch that player...fan base draws sponsors, sponsors bring money and eventually bigger and better events and payouts.....
"It's not really a professional event anyway".........Well sure its not the freakin PGA Tour, but I sure as heck would compare it to the Hooters Tour, Gateway Tour, etc.....Each and every one of those tours expects the players to be professional, The event was and event that has "aspiring" professionals that play, and people do show up to see them...skipping out only sets the stage for what people will expect in the future...
"I was not going to get any money"........Perhaps not, but could this have been the one time a potential backer or sponsor, or heck even a talent scout been sitting in the stands expecting to see a certain player?...or could the person that paid the AUCTION price been a potential sponsor?....
Jealousy...Hell yes there are jealous people...heck I am jealous of anyone that is better than me at pool? Does that make their actions right just because they are "better" at pool?
Shyster in action??? ..........Could skipping the event have been a plan so that next time a AUCTION takes place, no one bids and this player gets himself for next to nothing...then snaps of the event and the money???
Only one person had any control of allowing that question of morally corrupt actions to even be thought of...
Contractual and Ethical...No there were no contractual obligations for a player to play a match in that event....But there is a matter of Ethical obligation to give the best effort to present as a professionals. Especially for a person that is aspiring to play on the IPT....
Bottom line....JS for all I know is the nicest person in the world, and maybe the best player and future star in the world...I don't know cause I have never really heard of him other than on this board...but apparently he is a big enough name on the east coast to cause a stir by not showing up....Anyone with that amount of talent that is aspiring to make a living at pool, should think about how their actions may have an effect on his/her future and HOPEFULLY cares enough about the game that they are indeed "lucky" to be so good at....
It really bothers me when really good players take their skill for granted. It bothers me even more that normally reasonable posters back this type of action...
I have read comments in this thread of "If the payouts were bigger","Its not really a professional event anyway" , "I was not going to get any of the money" (aka..what is in it for me)....and comments of people being jealous of so called "superstars"...
"If the payouts were bigger".....Well actions like signing up for an event and then skipping out to play golf is like a slap in the face to the spectators that showed up to watch...Do you think they are going to want to come back next time to watch that player...fan base draws sponsors, sponsors bring money and eventually bigger and better events and payouts.....
"It's not really a professional event anyway".........Well sure its not the freakin PGA Tour, but I sure as heck would compare it to the Hooters Tour, Gateway Tour, etc.....Each and every one of those tours expects the players to be professional, The event was and event that has "aspiring" professionals that play, and people do show up to see them...skipping out only sets the stage for what people will expect in the future...
"I was not going to get any money"........Perhaps not, but could this have been the one time a potential backer or sponsor, or heck even a talent scout been sitting in the stands expecting to see a certain player?...or could the person that paid the AUCTION price been a potential sponsor?....
Jealousy...Hell yes there are jealous people...heck I am jealous of anyone that is better than me at pool? Does that make their actions right just because they are "better" at pool?
Shyster in action??? ..........Could skipping the event have been a plan so that next time a AUCTION takes place, no one bids and this player gets himself for next to nothing...then snaps of the event and the money???
Only one person had any control of allowing that question of morally corrupt actions to even be thought of...
Contractual and Ethical...No there were no contractual obligations for a player to play a match in that event....But there is a matter of Ethical obligation to give the best effort to present as a professionals. Especially for a person that is aspiring to play on the IPT....
Bottom line....JS for all I know is the nicest person in the world, and maybe the best player and future star in the world...I don't know cause I have never really heard of him other than on this board...but apparently he is a big enough name on the east coast to cause a stir by not showing up....Anyone with that amount of talent that is aspiring to make a living at pool, should think about how their actions may have an effect on his/her future and HOPEFULLY cares enough about the game that they are indeed "lucky" to be so good at....
It really bothers me when really good players take their skill for granted. It bothers me even more that normally reasonable posters back this type of action...
T
Timberly
Guest
Terry, I think this was the tournament that was held back in Oct.. 1p, 8b, & 9b... week long tourney. I think Larry Nevel won the all around or came close to it. Larry & Shannon Daulton were in the running for it as best as I can remember. Larry Nevel won the 1p, I think Stevie Moore won the 9 ball & I don't know who won the 8 ball. Normally I would suggest a quick search but instead of keeping most things in one thread, a certain person insisted on starting a new thread every few hours to the tune of 3 & 4 threads per day for the whole week.Tbeaux said:Okay,okay
Since nobody seems to know who won the tournament or how Monica, Helena and Sarah did could somebody at least tell me if Archer beat Schmidt? Who has the higher handicap?
Terry
As do IChris said:
T
Timberly
Guest
Actually, I correct myself. John told me correctly the first time. In sitting here thinking about him telling me what happend, I remember him saying that he didn't know that he would be forfeited out of the 8 ball and 9 ball if he chose to forfeit out of the 1p. My apologies for not getting the story right the 1st time.
Also Terry, JS is a better golfer than JA.
Also Terry, JS is a better golfer than JA.
Tbeaux said:Okay,okay
Since nobody seems to know who won the tournament or how Monica, Helena and Sarah did could somebody at least tell me if Archer beat Schmidt? Who has the higher handicap?
Terry
Terry, the most immediate Viking event, Paul Song won without a loss, Cliff Joyner for second, and Monica Webb for third.
I'm confused now, not knowing which Viking tournament you might be referring to.
JAM