Let's Hear From The ABP On Choping

[Bigtruck]

There is some confusion on this thread. It is seeming to lump all scenarios together, when in fact there are at least 3 different situations:

1. tournament savers - you meet up with a friend one from the money and make a saver for a small amount if the the other player makes it XX far.

2. action (2 man tournaments) - when each player has his own sponsor(s) staking the match for winner take all and the players make a deal on half of the money. aka cutting up the backer. socialist pool. all players get paid the same regardless of who wins, so it doesn't matter to the players.

3. exhibition - when one sponsor puts up all the cash and the players don't like the split and make their own deal.

Are ALL of these chopping scenarios unacceptable, or only some?

Does this happen in golf too?

Ray

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

Does this happen in golf too?

Ray

Not on the PGA tour. Several years ago there was a chop at an unofficial off-season event where players from the senior tour chopped the money. The PGA tour found out about it and dished out about $100K in fines to the offending players - and this wasn't even an actual tour event.

Of course, the economics of chopping in pool don't really play out in professional golf. If you have a tour card you are making a very good living, even after travel expenses. On the PGA tour the top 125 or so keep their card for the following year. In 2011, 125th place made over $700k.

 

[BarneyCalip]

ABP is Evil

The ABP is bad for pool.

Lot's of people on this forum have said the ABP only promote themselves.

They do not answer any questions?

Why does the AZB let them get away with this?

ABP chops and in the case of SBE don't play in the finals.

Charlie Williams is ABP not Johnny Archer their president.

 

[Black-Balled]

The ABP is bad for pool.

Lot's of people on this forum have said the ABP only promote themselves.

They do not answer any questions?

Why does the AZB let them get away with this?

ABP chops and in the case of SBE don't play in the finals.

Charlie Williams is ABP not Johnny Archer their president.

AZB is at best public opinion. As long as players and promoters get in bed with the ABP/ Dragon Promotions...well, there's gonna be sume fu#*ing goin on.

As long as Johnny is in cahoots with CW...well, there's gonna be sume fu#*ing goin on. Shame too, coz I always felt Johnny was bigger that tne player's association du jour.

 

[Ghosst]

Why does the AZB let [the ABP] get away with this?

And yet, there's another thread where people complain about troll spotting. You get slammed if you do, slammed if you don't. Should we draw a line in the sand and switch sides depending on which person is under the gun? I find it interesting because I see on Charlie's FB lots of people who stand out against him here support him in a public arena like FB.

It's just celebrity worship as far as I'm concerned. That, and fear you might be ostracized from his clique.

Since we're pool players, we tend to see patterns on the table. Have a look at the patterns in behavior and then ask yourself about other events surrounding the leader of the ABP. Has there been a huge outpouring of concern over image? Have there been some "shady" events regarding him? Has there been any explanation or does the person just call us idiot fans? This is not genius level trivia to connect the dots. Some people like to be surrounded by the unsavory types I suppose.

But since we're not allowed to out trolls and goons, I guess we'll all just have to join a love in.

PS: Good post Barney.

 

[watchez]

It means taking the money and whacking it up. I guess the thing is with a tourney I sm sure alot of people have done tyhis in vegas maybe with APA singles or BCA singles even TAP. Lets say you and a buddy go to play in the BCA singles in Vegas together. Drive there to save on expenses, split gas $$, room together and you are close friends. Maybe you would make a deal like "Listen, whatever we win we split. SO it gives you more chance to make $$ if by chance you come 2nd and 5th you split the winnings. I suppose its something that 2 friends would do. Now when it comes to the pros, in an event that is maybe televised or streamed . and the 2 friends are in the final. They may not care who wins as their $$ stays the same. Personally though I would kinda like to win anyway just for the points or the hardware and credentials. SO who knows how hard they try when its like that. I am sure the OP is referring to the Wyoming event that went off recently. I have no idea if like 4 people were all in on a chop Suey as that is too many I think to be chopping with. I can imagine that happening but not sure if it actually did. Maybe there is something else out there that I have not heard.

So since you are with Johnny a lot -- what is his take on all of this and why is the ABP only a voice to speak out on what they want but never respond to any questions?

 

[Johnnyt]

Bump because I don't believe anyone from the ABP has seen it. Johnnyt

 

[jay helfert]

When you "assume" something you make an "ass of u and me." What I see here are a lot of assumptions and accusations being bandied about by people who just don't know or care about the reality of what they are discussing.

I have 30 years of experience running major tournaments, where deals and chops have often taken place, so I'm comfortable in saying that I know of what I speak. More often than not in a major event, the final few players will make "savers." meaning that the winner of the match or the tournament will share a portion of his winnings with the player(s) he defeated in the final match or matches. The saver could be something like 10% of his winnings or a flat amount like $1,000. This makes perfect sense when the difference in money can be as much as five or ten thousand dollars (or more).

Trust me when I tell you both players are still playing to win, since the winner will get the lions share of the money. I wouldn't be surprised that in a tournament like the recent Super Billiard Expo where first paid $20,000 and second paid only $7,000 that the two players (Shane and Stevie) made a $3,000 saver. That way the winner would get 17K and the loser 10K, a little more equitable split.

That said some players do not like to make deals or savers, Shane being one of them. He's had many opportunities to make deals and turned them down, that much I know. He likes to play for the whole enchilada if you know what I mean. I would say (estimate) that in about half of the major tournaments held WORLD WIDE, some sort of saver is in place with the final few players. This is accepted by most promoters, who understand that the players are all struggling to make ends meet. Very few famous players have not made deals when there was serious money on the line.

If the ABP were to attempt to ban this practice or fine players who make savers, then most of the membership would be guilty. On the other hand, "chopping" the money is a lot more rare. Not to say that it can't or doesn't happen, but it's usually only done when two players are friends or "partners." I do know of one major event last year where two players from the same country split the money in the finals. It was 30K for first and 15K for second, so they each got 22.5K. I was aware of this and watched the entire match. Both players still tried hard to win, for the title and the WPA points that went with it. The man who lost was just as disappointed, even though he got the same money as the winner.

So that's the long and short of it. It happens, it's a reality in pool today, but it doesn't always happen, especially if the players are true rivals, which a lot of them are.

 

[pro9dg]

Many professional pool player are

Dishonest
Untrustworthy
Selfish
Ungrateful
Unsporting
Of Low Intelligence

They would lie, cheat, even steal if it gave them an edge - even with their friends and supporters. To many players Kevin Trudeau (like him or not) was their biggest benefactor. Still they tried to cheat him on bonus prizes. The Filipino promoter who put several million dollars into the pot (eventually) has never been recognized for this contribution.
The Middle East promoter who, because of a technical hitch, paid out prize money two weeks after a recent tournament was vilified and had his culture insulted by two World Champions.

Likewise, Ian Anderson, the WPA President has developed a program of events for next year that offers close to $4 million in prize money and yet he is still criticized by players who have derived six figure incomes from the existence of the WPA.
This type of scenario is not new because many of the superheroes of the 80s/90s disgraced themselves at a major 'winner takes all' tournament.
Earl refused to go along with the plan and pulled out of this event.

At Cardiff during the World 9 Ball Championship, players defrauded the on site Sports Book by predicting and betting the correct scoreline on matches in which they were involved. This cost the bookmaker/sponsor $80,000.

Players delude themselves into believing that they are important when in fact minor blips even in a sporting context.

Of course there are exceptions but not enough of them.

 

[JAM]

Many professional pool player are

Dishonest
Untrustworthy
Selfish
Ungrateful
Unsporting
Of Low Intelligence

They would lie, cheat, even steal if it gave them an edge - even with their friends and supporters. To many players Kevin Trudeau (like him or not) was their biggest benefactor. Still they tried to cheat him on bonus prizes. The Filipino promoter who put several million dollars into the pot (eventually) has never been recognized for this contribution.
The Middle East promoter who, because of a technical hitch, paid out prize money two weeks after a recent tournament was vilified and had his culture insulted by two World Champions.

Likewise, Ian Anderson, the WPA President has developed a program of events for next year that offers close to $4 million in prize money and yet he is still criticized by players who have derived six figure incomes from the existence of the WPA.
This type of scenario is not new because many of the superheroes of the 80s/90s disgraced themselves at a major 'winner takes all' tournament.
Earl refused to go along with the plan and pulled out of this event.

At Cardiff during the World 9 Ball Championship, players defrauded the on site Sports Book by predicting and betting the correct scoreline on matches in which they were involved. This cost the bookmaker/sponsor $80,000.

Players delude themselves into believing that they are important when in fact minor blips even in a sporting context.

Of course there are exceptions but not enough of them.

Long time no read, Doug. Geezy peezy, Doug, tell us how you really feel! :grin:

I might agree with a few of your adjectives, but "low intelligence"? :embarrassed2:

Tell me more about this one or at least the name of the tournament, if you can remember, please: This type of scenario is not new because many of the superheroes of the 80s/90s disgraced themselves at a major 'winner takes all' tournament. Earl refused to go along with the plan and pulled out of this event.

Savers don't bother me too much. They're usually made between friends who see each other on the road all the time at various events. It is just a little jelly roll to help with expenses that one player might offer another.

The chop-chop, though -- four players, as an example, agreeing to pool all their tournament payouts beforehand -- is not kosher, and I had not realized it until somebody brought it up that since each player would be basically pocketing the same amount, whether they win, place, or show, it doesn't give anyone incentive to play their best.

Plus, let's say the tournament was a Mosconi ranking point event. Maybe one player might not be in the running for the Mosconi Cup, so he lets the other player win or doesn't show up for his match for a nominal sum. This seems to be a new trend.

For a high-profile tournament like the U.S. Open 9-ball Championship or the World Championship, I can't see anybody dumping to another to allow them to advance. Most every pool player I know would love to have those championship titles in their portfolio, but it is the smaller events, maybe the non-Mosconi-Cup ranking events where the dumping may -- and I emphasize the word "may" -- come into play.

I've been involved with pool since I was a teenager, and I am almost 60 years old now. I have witnessed a lot of things, good and bad, but this latest chop-chop arrangement made before the tournament begins is wrong in so many ways.

 

[watchez]

When you "assume" something you make an "ass of u and me." What I see here are a lot of assumptions and accusations being bandied about by people who just don't know or care about the reality of what they are discussing.

I have 30 years of experience running major tournaments, where deals and chops have often taken place, so I'm comfortable in saying that I know of what I speak. More often than not in a major event, the final few players will make "savers." meaning that the winner of the match or the tournament will share a portion of his winnings with the player(s) he defeated in the final match or matches. The saver could be something like 10% of his winnings or a flat amount like $1,000. This makes perfect sense when the difference in money can be as much as five or ten thousand dollars (or more).

Trust me when I tell you both players are still playing to win, since the winner will get the lions share of the money. I wouldn't be surprised that in a tournament like the recent Super Billiard Expo where first paid $20,000 and second paid only $7,000 that the two players (Shane and Stevie) made a $3,000 saver. That way the winner would get 17K and the loser 10K, a little more equitable split.

That said some players do not like to make deals or savers, Shane being one of them. He's had many opportunities to make deals and turned them down, that much I know. He likes to play for the whole enchilada if you know what I mean. I would say (estimate) that in about half of the major tournaments held WORLD WIDE, some sort of saver is in place with the final few players. This is accepted by most promoters, who understand that the players are all struggling to make ends meet. Very few famous players have not made deals when there was serious money on the line.

If the ABP were to attempt to ban this practice or fine players who make savers, then most of the membership would be guilty. On the other hand, "chopping" the money is a lot more rare. Not to say that it can't or doesn't happen, but it's usually only done when two players are friends or "partners." I do know of one major event last year where two players from the same country split the money in the finals. It was 30K for first and 15K for second, so they each got 22.5K. I was aware of this and watched the entire match. Both players still tried hard to win, for the title and the WPA points that went with it. The man who lost was just as disappointed, even though he got the same money as the winner.

So that's the long and short of it. It happens, it's a reality in pool today, but it doesn't always happen, especially if the players are true rivals, which a lot of them are.

Jay - this is the mentality that has put pool into the state it is in. Just because it is the way it has been done before, does not make it right. Simply to accept it just repeats history. And frankly, the history of pool sucks.

Last week in The Masters, first place was 1.4 million - second was 850K. You are saying that a chop in pool makes sense over $5K. Do you think the two players in the Masters even thought about a chop involving $550K?

There is no pool on TV - why? Cause they don't want to put on TV something that could be deemed scripted --- unless it is The Jersey Shore.

If I was promoting a tournament and added $25K - $50K - I would not be ok hearing that any players did a chop. I run tournaments with $5K added and make sure that when putting out the payouts, I ensure that their will be no thoughts of a chop. No one wants to watch thinking that a player might not give his all.

 

[AtLarge]

... Tell me more about this one or at least the name of the tournament, if you can remember, please: This type of scenario is not new because many of the superheroes of the 80s/90s disgraced themselves at a major 'winner takes all' tournament. Earl refused to go along with the plan and pulled out of this event.

JAM -- He's referring to the first (1991) International Challenge of Champions in Las Vegas, where Lebron beat Hall in an ugly finals.

But pro9dg says Strickland pulled out of that event. Jay Helfert says that occurred the second year of the event, not the first: http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=2402290&postcount=129

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

If I was promoting a tournament and added $25K - $50K - I would not be ok hearing that any players did a chop. I run tournaments with $5K added and make sure that when putting out the payouts, I ensure that their will be no thoughts of a chop. No one wants to watch thinking that a player might not give his all.

Watchez, how do you do that? You could 1099 the winner for the whole first place money but couldn't he simply 1099 the 2nd place finisher for the amount he jellied him?

 

[JD_Hogg]

Jay - this is the mentality that has put pool into the state it is in. Just because it is the way it has been done before, does not make it right. Simply to accept it just repeats history. And frankly, the history of pool sucks.

Last week in The Masters, first place was 1.4 million - second was 850K. You are saying that a chop in pool makes sense over $5K. Do you think the two players in the Masters even thought about a chop involving $550K?

There is no pool on TV - why? Cause they don't want to put on TV something that could be deemed scripted --- unless it is The Jersey Shore.

If I was promoting a tournament and added $25K - $50K - I would not be ok hearing that any players did a chop. I run tournaments with $5K added and make sure that when putting out the payouts, I ensure that their will be no thoughts of a chop. No one wants to watch thinking that a player might not give his all.

When golfers get to that level they are rich and playing for titles and legacies. Pool players are playing for leftover food scraps. I don't see an issue with them splitting that up.

If me and a buddy go to a tourney we usually split all winnnings.

 

[watchez]

When golfers get to that level they are rich and playing for titles and legacies. Pool players are playing for leftover food scraps. I don't see an issue with them splitting that up.

If me and a buddy go to a tourney we usually split all winnnings.

The amount of money shouldn't be a factor in how you lead your life, both ethically and based upon situation.

If you borrow $5.00 or $500.00 from a friend, do you think about paying both debts back or just forgo the $5.00 since it really isn't that much?

 

[JD_Hogg]

The amount of money shouldn't be a factor in how you lead your life, both ethically and based upon situation.

If you borrow $5.00 or $500.00 from a friend, do you think about paying both debts back or just forgo the $5.00 since it really isn't that much?

How is splitting tournament money related to borrowing money.

If 2 buds decide to go splits in a tourny what is the big deal.

 

[stumpie71]

When golfers get to that level they are rich and playing for titles and legacies. Pool players are playing for leftover food scraps. I don't see an issue with them splitting that up.

If me and a buddy go to a tourney we usually split all winnnings.

When golfers get to that level they don't split, chop are saver not because of titles and legacy's but from the fear of getting caught, fined and or banned/ suspended.

And most pro golfers aren't playing for titles/ legacy's (just the top pro's) but to make a living albeit a very good living.

As soon as money is being split, saved, chopped or whatever the tournament and sport loses credibility. That's why ALL major sports (you know the ones that make all the money) take such a hardline stance on issues such as this.

 

[Johnnyt]

When golfers get to that level they don't split, chop are saver not because of titles and legacy's but from the fear of getting caught, fined and or banned/ suspended.

And most pro golfers aren't playing for titles/ legacy's (just the top pro's) but to make a living albeit a very good living.

As soon as money is being split, saved, chopped or whatever the tournament and sport loses credibility. That's why ALL major sports (you know the ones that make all the money) take such a hardline stance on issues such as this.

Yet the ABP wants to raise pro pool to a new level. I think they are...heading South. Johnnyt

 

[Blue Hog ridr]

As soon as money is being split, saved, chopped or whatever the tournament and sport loses credibility. That's why ALL major sports (you know the ones that make all the money) take such a hardline stance on issues such as this.

Mention this to the APB. Maybe they will take note, and maybe not.
2 words, Credibility and Major Sports. I think they are doing a bang up job in the lose the credibility Dept. for a start and not doing much in the way of promoting as a Major Sport.

 

[elvicash]

This kind of chop business will keep big business and true world class sponsors out of pool. The samething with savers, I think they are bad for pool. I definitely believe there have been some strong players running with their lesser skilled buddy and the weak player has almost wilted out of the way if they should meet in the brackets. Keep the money seperated and may the best player win.