Tonight I watched an amatuer 9 ball tournament in in which there were approx 20-25 players with the highest level player being a 70 year old APA player who only started playing pool at the age of 50 with the exception of one pro player who has placed in the top 12 once at DCC and once in the top 10 in the 9 ball event there. It was a race to 5 winner break which is played every weekend and heretofore the top 2 players split the 1st and 2nd place payout of $100 at $50 each. It is a winner take all tournament so a split isn't manndatory, just the norm. The pro level player refused to split and then, naturally, won the tournament. He could have given anyone there 5 out and the break easily. The older player played well but lost 5-2. Personally I think the pro player was a nit! Whadda you think?
Just your opinion
- Thread starter Doug
- Start date
Well, he was perfectly in his rights. But, if he is really that strong, he shouldn't be allowed in the tournament if it's an amateur one. Or, he should have some sort of handicap. It all depends on what the owner is looking for at his tournament. Is it designed for the regulars to come in and spend money? Or is it designed to bring in the strongest players? If it's the former, the bar should change the rules for this player, otherwise the regulars will stop showing up if he keeps winning it every week.
Brian
Brian
My thoughts exactly. Winner take all formats dont work at the amateur level because once good players start showing up the rest of the field will have very little chance to cash and will eventually stop participating. Btw how much is the entry because a $100 payout with 20-25 players seems a little low to me.
Pro player
It was only $5 entry and the question was not whether there was any impropriety on his part. Rather it is a question why he would choose to enter a tournament of this type when he knew there would not be anyone near his ability level. Thee are many area pro level players who never play in this tournament. Danny Smith and John Hagar just to name a couple. Most likely he will not play again or at least not often. Naturally if it were to become commonplace this level tournament would cease to exist. It's IMO similar to speed traps in small towns. They are obviously within their rights to issue speeding tickets because those who get them are speeding but do you really think they are kosher?
It was only $5 entry and the question was not whether there was any impropriety on his part. Rather it is a question why he would choose to enter a tournament of this type when he knew there would not be anyone near his ability level. Thee are many area pro level players who never play in this tournament. Danny Smith and John Hagar just to name a couple. Most likely he will not play again or at least not often. Naturally if it were to become commonplace this level tournament would cease to exist. It's IMO similar to speed traps in small towns. They are obviously within their rights to issue speeding tickets because those who get them are speeding but do you really think they are kosher?
i think he was hurting for money and wanted/needed all of it. it happens
Agreed. He saw it as an easy $100 based off of a $5 investment.
Winner take all
In our little weekly tourneys we used to say the winner of last weekly tourney could only take second, not much money. It's true when real good players start winning everything the average shooters quit and down goes the tourney.
Doug,
Sounds like the worst tournament in the world. Why do they even play? I'm assuming most of these players are not pros. Don't they want to test themselves? Are they really thinking they are going to make money at pool? Have they no respect for the game? Have they no desire to advance the level of sportsmanship and pride in the game?
What other sport would get to the point where such shenanigans are acceptable - it totally ruins any credibility of your tourney being a true and honest test of ability. Doesn't anyone really want to know who would win in a fair contest? Doesn't anyone want to get better; or are they just interested in improving their bargaining and negotiation skills?? Perhaps you guys need to change it to a Monopoly or Risk tournament where negotiation is key.
Just my opinion, but such behavior at the "grass roots" level is just as deplorable to me as if Efren and Brumback had decided to split the pot in banks last year instead of playing a GREAT match for the prize at DCC this year. I know there are a lot who disagree, I'm just sad for the sport.
Rather it is a question why he would choose to enter a tournament of this type when he knew there would not be anyone near his ability level.
easy money
Mr. W,
A friend of mine says that such a tourney (that doesn't reward skill) is already down as far as it can go, and doesn't deserve to continue if that's what you mean by "down." Also, your description of shooters as "average" should be amended to "way below average" if they are satisfied with trying to win more money without getting better.
What the heck is wrong with the sport that people continuously try to penalize any attempt to become "real good." A recipe for failure in my view.
old folks can play... go for it!!
If I had the chance to beat a DCC money winner you would have to shoot me to keep from playing that individual for first!! For a 50 rock split??
If I had the chance to beat a DCC money winner you would have to shoot me to keep from playing that individual for first!! For a 50 rock split??
I've always felt that it's a great opportunity to play good players in small tournaments with a low entry fee. I know many players that don't feel that way and will complain when a good player enters the "local" tournament. One of the best ways to improve is to play better players. And for $5, what a bargain.
The only problem that I see is the winner take all format. The tournament should pay down to 1/4 of the field. The pro probably wouldn't be interested in the tournament if it only paid 50 for first, so it might solve the problem of good players playing if it paid down a few spots.
The only problem that I see is the winner take all format. The tournament should pay down to 1/4 of the field. The pro probably wouldn't be interested in the tournament if it only paid 50 for first, so it might solve the problem of good players playing if it paid down a few spots.
Last edited:
100 for first and 50 for second
The first post said 100 for first and 50 for second.
The first post said 100 for first and 50 for second.
IMHO, this is like the New England Patriots showing up for the High School playoffs......it's classless.....they guy could have at least cut it up, as is custom in this tourney.....sounds like the old guy gave him a run for his money.....or, more likely, the pro laid down a couple of games to make the old guy feel better.....
Again, I don't like it.....but it ain't my tourney
Your best bet is to talk to the TD and institute payouts for 1st and 2nd....methinks everyone would be happier....
Again, I don't like it.....but it ain't my tourney
Your best bet is to talk to the TD and institute payouts for 1st and 2nd....methinks everyone would be happier....
Your opinion
Have to admit that I like your style DD. I now own a roofing company which is the realm of "real men" who will appreciate your thinking. In fact I have a couple of guys who come to mind when I read your post. Once they asked for a raise in pay and I told them only whiners who complained about not having enough to eat asked for raises. And later, after one fell off a roof they asked about medical benefits. Again I explained that only timid mousy people not tough enough to handle a few bruise or broken bones asked for medical benefits. Many timid and mousy employees have come and gone but these guys have remained loyal to me and sucked up their hardships. I in turn reward their loyalty with job security, regular minimum wage pay, but I am real careful not to allow them to make decisions that could be detrimental to my profitability. Regrettably real men like these are harder and harder to find nowadays.
Have to admit that I like your style DD. I now own a roofing company which is the realm of "real men" who will appreciate your thinking. In fact I have a couple of guys who come to mind when I read your post. Once they asked for a raise in pay and I told them only whiners who complained about not having enough to eat asked for raises. And later, after one fell off a roof they asked about medical benefits. Again I explained that only timid mousy people not tough enough to handle a few bruise or broken bones asked for medical benefits. Many timid and mousy employees have come and gone but these guys have remained loyal to me and sucked up their hardships. I in turn reward their loyalty with job security, regular minimum wage pay, but I am real careful not to allow them to make decisions that could be detrimental to my profitability. Regrettably real men like these are harder and harder to find nowadays.
Institute a handicap system and spread the winnings to the top 3 or 4 players and the pro will have less incentive to crash your tournament. And even if he does show up, everyone still has a chance to cash.
One thing I want to say though is that nowhere else will you have a chance to play a set with a high calibre pro for a measly 5 bucks. That in itself is worth the entry fee many times over.
One thing I want to say though is that nowhere else will you have a chance to play a set with a high calibre pro for a measly 5 bucks. That in itself is worth the entry fee many times over.
I think the tourney winner should have bought a round of drinks for everyone in the house 
:thumbup:.
FWIW, I once was in the finals of a local 8-ball tourney where the payout was $100 to winner (no other payouts). We were hill-hill. I was on the eight-ball. He was shooting at his last object ball and missed. Can you believe it? He hooked me (accidently) from hitting the eight-ball with the only friggin' object ball left on the table. I would have had a simple shot on the eight, save for his ball rolling up onto the cueball. I kicked and made a successful hit, but he went out anyway. Tournament and payout should've been mine, except for a well-timed stroke of luck. For reasons like this one I have always believed that ANY tournament should at least pay money for first AND second place, if not more places.
Maniac
:thumbup:.FWIW, I once was in the finals of a local 8-ball tourney where the payout was $100 to winner (no other payouts). We were hill-hill. I was on the eight-ball. He was shooting at his last object ball and missed. Can you believe it? He hooked me (accidently) from hitting the eight-ball with the only friggin' object ball left on the table. I would have had a simple shot on the eight, save for his ball rolling up onto the cueball. I kicked and made a successful hit, but he went out anyway. Tournament and payout should've been mine, except for a well-timed stroke of luck. For reasons like this one I have always believed that ANY tournament should at least pay money for first AND second place, if not more places.
Maniac