Message From the WPA North American Representative

[Craig Fales]

Fran said it a lot more politely but she still said that pool and world champions didn't exist before the WPA. I'm in the group that disagrees wiht that belief.

HU-

Exactly...even though it wasn't perfect whoever has been recognized STILL needs to be currently recognized and acknowledged as a World Champion...if you look back 15 years ago and beyond foreign interest in pool didn't exist so of course the majority were American...I think the WPA shouldn't be so short sighted in the situation...

 

[memikey]

Jay.......in case you don't already know it and to help perspective, in UK the number of people regularly playing American style pool (ie 9 ball or any other game on American equipment) is absolutely tiny when compared to the number of people playing uk style 8 ball on "mini snooker table" style equipment. There are probably several hundred of the latter for every one of the former, although the American style pool players have organised for themselves a couple of very healthy tours/tournaments. Few players play both, though some of the top notchers do. When I say tiny I mean they would be numbered in a few thousands only. There are probably 20/50 times as many regular American pool players in any one state of USA than there are in the whole of the UK.

France is pretty much dominated by uk style 8 ball as well as is of course Australia and South Africa.

For reminiscing purposes I can also recall that in fact the very first pool tables to be used in most pubs in Uk were actually American bar boxes (with the big white ball, boy did that take some moving around!) in the late 60's and early 70's. It was only a good bit later that Uk style 8 ball tables started being produced and taking over. Once they had a choice the public quickly adopted the uk style equipment. They simply hated those bar boxes, probably mainly because of being brought up to the background of snooker being played (in snooker halls and private clubs) and the pool balls being alien. Personally I feared tripping over and falling into the pockets, lol. There was no such thing as "pool halls' in UK until relatively recently.

 

[sputnik]

I think that sanctioning tournaments is important, especially if it's branded a 'world championship', but these sanctioning bodies hold no responsibility if the promotional group decides to stiff the players, so while they want to add the prestige to events by attatching their names, and while they want to be selective with what tournaments they sanction, they essentially tuck and run when the cash isn't there. That isn't prestigious to me, and neither in my mind does it govern resolution when players are vulnerable. If some Joe Schmo wants to hold his own world championship, but does guarantee the payout, then sanctioned or not it is more of a benefit than the WPA, which otherwise isn't good for sh*t.

In the Sanctioning Catalogue of the WPA, it says in their website:

IV Sanction fees:
The total cost of sanctioning is 5% of total added money in all categories. There are no fees applied to any entry fee money which is added to the prize fund. The 5% fee is limited to a prize fund up to USD 500,000.

So if a tournament will have a prize money of $400,000.00, the WPA stands to earn $20,000.00, with percentages going to regional and country representatives. Money is suspect for the WPA wanting organizers to have their tournaments sanctioned; and supposedly, they are non-profit.

The more our sport is fragmented, the more tournaments they will have. The more tournaments sanctioned by them, the more money they will earn. I don't have a tally of all the prize monies is for all the World Championships, Qualifiers for World Championships, and the Open Tournaments, but I would imagine that it is way over three million bucks.

And what does the organizer get in return?

VI What benefits does the organiser receive from his sanction:
This depends on the height of the sanction amount and the importance of the tournament. The following items will be offered to the organiser. One is free to use these items.

Category A

1. The date will be reserved and must be respected by the WPA members.
2. (Category A) A WPA representative is present. He arrives 2 days before
the event and leaves 1 day after the event (the accommodation costs will
be paid by the organiser). His main task is to support the organisation and
the participants.
3. The WPA sport director is at the venue for technical support.
4. The event information is distributed by the WPA and its members.
5. The use of the WPA logo for publicity purposes is allowed.
6. Points are awarded for the world ranking.
7. The WPA makes the medals available. (Category A)
8. For Category A events only: if requested, referees can be provided. The
costs will be divided between three partners: the organiser, the WPA and
the continental federation which is supplying the referee(s).

Category B.

1. The information, including invitations if requested, is distributed by the
WPA throughout its membership.
2. The use of the WPA logo/emblem for publicity purposes is allowed.

All I see is a one way street, and this kind of attitude explains the ego of the organization. It has to have a stringent policy for self-preservation. In the Limitation on Liabilities of their Constitution, they wash their hands of the wrong-doings of their members, officers, employees or agents. This for me is the biggest reason why there is abuse in their ranks, breeding an authoritarian hand. "We will accredit you, you can do your own thing if you may, but we will have nothing to do with the way you mess-up".

The basic unit in the sport is hardly ever mentioned - the player. The least that WPA can do is to have a fair opportunity for players to be able to have themselves ranked in WPA tournaments. But with the way that the sanctioning and accreditation is being handled, the beneficiaries of these mandates are not meting equal chances for players to participate in tournaments. As it is, the country members have the full discretion in fielding in the players. This unauditted power to nominate players distorts rankings. An example is this year's Qatar open where world champions Pagulayan (WPA rank#43) and Alcano (WPA rank #3) had to go through qualifiers because the favored players like Andam (rank #119 and was blanked 9-0 by a Qatar player) were the ones enlisted instead.

(By the way, what was the criteria in selecting the USA team to the planned Manila 10-Ball? What happened to the qualifiers?)

In the discussions in this forum regarding the last WPA statements, the only saving factor of WPA is its ranking system, which is much to be desired.

This unfairness that is being tolerated by WPA casts doubts in the organization's sincerity in player care. If WPA is truly non-profit as stated in its constitution, then why do they tollerate unfairness. What is the motivation? Say the 5% is for the maintenance of running the organization, what motivates them to be tolerant of abuses? Is it oblivion because of the Limitations in Liabilities, or is there something else that does not appear in ledgers?

Why does Andersen (who had accredited a World 10-Ball Franchise in Manila) not even lift a finger to investigate on the rattling in Manila where his country representative and its partners cannot even be found registered in the Securities and Exchange Commission? Why does he not even investigate about the complaints that he can easily see in player list submissions to WPA accredited tournaments? Why can't he see that his country representative does not have the rightful mandate as majority of the players (10 of WPA's top 53) have left the folds of his country representative?

Instead, he issues a statement that blindly protects his country representative. Is this blind loyalty or what?

Something is terribly wrong, and we all know it. All the recent statements of WPA are really too transparent.

 

[Scott Lee]

Well, to be fair, I was referring more to the Asian countries, in particular China and Taiwan, where there are national teams, funded through the government. In Europe, Germany and Holland both fund and develop national teams, that have produced several great players. However, "wipe the floor" of players in the U.S. is a BIG stretch, imo. ANY top American player is capable of, and has on many occasions, 'wiped the floor' of any other players in the world. As far as pool being easy to master, I have to disagree wholeheartedly with you. Pool is one of the most difficult sports to master, regardless of where you're from.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Don't know where you get your information but can assure you that with a couple of exceptions countries in Europe give no more support to pool as a sport than the USA does, less in many cases. Pool forums in Uk and mainland Europe are choc-a-bloc full of pool players doing exactly the same moaning about lack of support/recognition/sponsorship that you do.

Pool is a young, zero rated, downmarket, unsupported, seedy imaged, tiny minority sport in Europe. The fact that they can often already produce players to wipe the floor with the players of a country with a pool pedigree like USA is testament in part to how easy a sport pool is to master, although it obviously sticks in my throat to have to say that given that we would all like to think the opposite.

Cue sports are going down the plughole everywhere but Asia. Even the world snooker championships in Uk have just lost their main sponsorship.

 

[jay helfert]

In the Sanctioning Catalogue of the WPA, it says in their website:

IV Sanction fees:
The total cost of sanctioning is 5% of total added money in all categories. There are no fees applied to any entry fee money which is added to the prize fund. The 5% fee is limited to a prize fund up to USD 500,000.

So if a tournament will have a prize money of $400,000.00, the WPA stands to earn $20,000.00, with percentages going to regional and country representatives. Money is suspect for the WPA wanting organizers to have their tournaments sanctioned; and supposedly, they are non-profit.

The more our sport is fragmented, the more tournaments they will have. The more tournaments sanctioned by them, the more money they will earn. I don't have a tally of all the prize monies is for all the World Championships, Qualifiers for World Championships, and the Open Tournaments, but I would imagine that it is way over three million bucks.

And what does the organizer get in return?

VI What benefits does the organiser receive from his sanction:
This depends on the height of the sanction amount and the importance of the tournament. The following items will be offered to the organiser. One is free to use these items.

Category A

1. The date will be reserved and must be respected by the WPA members.
2. (Category A) A WPA representative is present. He arrives 2 days before
the event and leaves 1 day after the event (the accommodation costs will
be paid by the organiser). His main task is to support the organisation and
the participants.
3. The WPA sport director is at the venue for technical support.
4. The event information is distributed by the WPA and its members.
5. The use of the WPA logo for publicity purposes is allowed.
6. Points are awarded for the world ranking.
7. The WPA makes the medals available. (Category A)
8. For Category A events only: if requested, referees can be provided. The
costs will be divided between three partners: the organiser, the WPA and
the continental federation which is supplying the referee(s).

Category B.

1. The information, including invitations if requested, is distributed by the
WPA throughout its membership.
2. The use of the WPA logo/emblem for publicity purposes is allowed.

All I see is a one way street, and this kind of attitude explains the ego of the organization. It has to have a stringent policy for self-preservation. In the Limitation on Liabilities of their Constitution, they wash their hands of the wrong-doings of their members, officers, employees or agents. This for me is the biggest reason why there is abuse in their ranks, breeding an authoritarian hand. "We will accredit you, you can do your own thing if you may, but we will have nothing to do with the way you mess-up".

The basic unit in the sport is hardly ever mentioned - the player. The least that WPA can do is to have a fair opportunity for players to be able to have themselves ranked in WPA tournaments. But with the way that the sanctioning and accreditation is being handled, the beneficiaries of these mandates are not meting equal chances for players to participate in tournaments. As it is, the country members have the full discretion in fielding in the players. This unauditted power to nominate players distorts rankings. An example is this year's Qatar open where world champions Pagulayan (WPA rank#43) and Alcano (WPA rank #3) had to go through qualifiers because the favored players like Andam (rank #119 and was blanked 9-0 by a Qatar player) were the ones enlisted instead.

(By the way, what was the criteria in selecting the USA team to the planned Manila 10-Ball? What happened to the qualifiers?)

In the discussions in this forum regarding the last WPA statements, the only saving factor of WPA is its ranking system, which is much to be desired.

This unfairness that is being tolerated by WPA casts doubts in the organization's sincerity in player care. If WPA is truly non-profit as stated in its constitution, then why do they tollerate unfairness. What is the motivation? Say the 5% is for the maintenance of running the organization, what motivates them to be tolerant of abuses? Is it oblivion because of the Limitations in Liabilities, or is there something else that does not appear in ledgers?

Why does Andersen (who had accredited a World 10-Ball Franchise in Manila) not even lift a finger to investigate on the rattling in Manila where his country representative and its partners cannot even be found registered in the Securities and Exchange Commission? Why does he not even investigate about the complaints that he can easily see in player list submissions to WPA accredited tournaments? Why can't he see that his country representative does not have the rightful mandate as majority of the players (10 of WPA's top 53) have left the folds of his country representative?

Instead, he issues a statement that blindly protects his country representative. Is this blind loyalty or what?

Something is terribly wrong, and we all know it. All the recent statements of WPA are really too transparent.

Are you trying to imply that the WPA is in the business of "selling" their sanction to the highest bidder? This is beginning to sound more like what the various boxing associations do. If this is true, then the WPA is in the sanction business. Nice work if you can get it!

 

[chamillionare]

Are you trying to imply that the WPA is in the business of "selling" their sanction to the highest bidder? This is beginning to sound more like what the various boxing associations do. If this is true, then the WPA is in the sanction business. Nice work if you can get it!

im sure some people here must of heard the story of ian anderson calling up kt and asking demending lol sanction fee's for his ipt tournaments?

 

[Terry Ardeno]

So guys like sigel, hopkins, hall, miz and others are voted into the BCA Hall of Fame for winning the world championships the WPA isn't recognizing?


Show me any foreign players at the time fading sigel, hop, hall and miz in their prime? The result was determined no matter who played...IMO

spider

Great points.

Here's something interesting to consider.
The first recognized World 141. Championship was held in April 1878, with Cyrille Dion beating future champion Samuel Knight. It was held every year from 1878 until 1990 with the following exceptions....1903, 1935, 1939, 1954, 1957-1962, 1975, 1984, 1987-1989. There were several foreign players who had played in those tournaments and matches, including Alfredo DeOro and Gothard Walhstrom. The vast majority of these matches were held in the USA.

Now consider this. The very first European 14.1 Championship was held in 1980. The first German 14.1 Championship was held in 1976. (Our U.S. Open 14.1 Championship began in 1966)

Also, the USA held such illustrious tournaments as the Johnston City and Stardust events, in 1961 and 1965 respectively. And a host of other "World Championships" in 9 ball, One Pocket and Banks. What did the European federations do??? (And this has nothing to do with the great players, such as Ortman, Souquet, Engert, etc. They are some of my favorite players. It's the politicians that my beef is with, not the players.)

What's my point here? Simply this. No one can deny that the greatest pocket billiard players from the late 1800's until the 1980's were almost exclusively AMERICAN players. Once the Parica's and the Reyes's came on the scene, the Philippines started being a powerhouse also. I think Germany would have to be considered the next powerhouse in the world pool scene, that happening in the 1980's with the emergence of the great Ortmann, Souquet & Engert. Fast forward to 2008. The pool world is more equally balanced than ever before, with countries like Taiwan, China, England, etc all having very formidable players that are very capable of winning any major championship. So, the WPA (largely composed of European board members) now think that they have the right to re-right pool history. As I said in other posts, the WPA is brazen enough to openly say that they basically want a monopoly on the title of "World Championship".

Just because the Europeans spent the better part of the 20th century kicking around soccer balls instead of honing their pool skills does not give them the right to negate all of the great and highly revered champions from the golden years of pooldom.

 

[Johnnyt]

Great post Terry. I think that says it all. Johnnyt

 

[Scott Lee]

Terry...I'm pretty sure your history is a little off here. 14.1, known back then as 'continous pool', was invented by Jerome Keogh, IIRC in 1909. Prior to that, they were playing balkline, or just one rack at a time. I don't have my copy of The Billiard Encyclopedia at hand, or I could give you more info.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Here's something interesting to consider.
The first recognized World 141. Championship was held in April 1878, with Cyrille Dion beating future champion Samuel Knight. It was held every year from 1878 until 1990 with the following exceptions....1903, 1935, 1939, 1954, 1957-1962, 1975, 1984, 1987-1989. There were several foreign players who had played in those tournaments and matches, including Alfredo DeOro and Gothard Walhstrom. The vast majority of these matches were held in the USA.

 

[Terry Ardeno]

Terry...I'm pretty sure your history is a little off here. 14.1, known back then as 'continous pool', was invented by Jerome Keogh, IIRC in 1909. Prior to that, they were playing balkline, or just one rack at a time. I don't have my copy of The Billiard Encyclopedia at hand, or I could give you more info.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Scott,
I know that Keogh "invented" 14.1 from the former way of "continuous". I have Mike Shamos's article on that as well as a boatload of info on Keogh. But 14.1 traces it's genesis back thru the 1878 match that I mentioned.

Balkline is not one rack at a time, it's either 18.1 or 18.2 and it's a series of nudges along the rail. Totally diferent than the pocket games. Continuous was when they broke and kept shooting until they missed, provided they sank one on the break. Keogh proposed keeping the last ball on the table to encourage longer runs and to use it as a break ball, as I know you know.

***Edited to add this-check out the July 2006 issue of Billiards Digest, pages 70-74.
Terry

 

[Bob Jewett]

... The first recognized World 141. Championship was held in April 1878, with Cyrille Dion beating future champion Samuel Knight. ...

I'm not sure, but I think the game that was called 14.1 in 1878 was played on a table with no pockets. It was a forerunner of 18.1 (called 47/1 in metric areas).

In another source, I see that Dion was said to have been playing 15-ball rotation (to 61 points per game) in the 1878 tournament.

And in another source, Dion was said to have played on a pocketless table.

Where is Shamos when you need him?

 

[Terry Ardeno]

I'm not sure, but I think the game that was called 14.1 in 1878 was played on a table with no pockets. It was a forerunner of 18.1 (called 47/1 in metric areas).

In another source, I see that Dion was said to have been playing 15-ball rotation (to 61 points per game) in the 1878 tournament.

And in another source, Dion was said to have played on a pocketless table.

Where is Shamos when you need him?

Bob,
I am not sure about it being called "14.1" in 1878, but I am sure that it was played on a table with pockets.

Cyrille Dion actually played a game called 15 ball, where each ball is scored on its numerical value, but the balls do not need to be hit in numerical order as in rotation. This game (15 ball) progressed into continuous where any of the 15 balls could be made but each only counted as one point. This happened in 1889. As Scott pointed out, it then morphed into traditional 14.1 thanks in large part to Jerome Keogh.

How nice would it be if pool had records as accurate as those kept by MLB or the NFL?

 

[JB Cases]

I don't think either Taiwan or China has a national pool team. Nor do I think that they are receiving financial backing from the government or either country. As far as I can see it in Xiamen China all the pool happenings including training are privately funded. To my knowledge there is no national billiard training school where players can go and live and practice. Those schools exist for other sports but not for pool.

In Taiwan though billiards is offered in some schools as a sport. That's where Wu Chia Ching got started. So there is that.

 

[sputnik]

Are you trying to imply that the WPA is in the business of "selling" their sanction to the highest bidder? This is beginning to sound more like what the various boxing associations do. If this is true, then the WPA is in the sanction business. Nice work if you can get it!

If only WPA, at the very least, attended to statistic reporting from the grassroot tournaments in their organization... and comes up with a scheme where the selection of players that are brought to WPA sanctioned tournaments is equalitarian in chances for a player to earn in both ranking points and prize money -- then people will be pleased with them.

Sanctioning should at least have a job behind it.

 

[memikey]

...... So, the WPA (largely composed of European board members)................

Good post as always Terry but the above bit is just plain wrong.

There are 8 board members of the WPA. They consist of:-

2 representatives of North America
2 representatives of Europe
2 representatives of Asia
1 reprsentative of South Africa
1 representative of Australia

That can by nobody's terms of reference in any way be fairly described as largely composed of European board members. Even if it was a fair description there are an identical number of North American board members as there are European board members so you would have to agree that it is also largely composed of North American members.

Perhaps you meant largely composed of board members from regions other than North America?

 

[JB Cases]

"No athlete sould be making hundreds of millions of $.
The highest paid people in our country should be the U.S.Navy SEAL's, the U.S. Army Delta Force operators, Rangers and Special Forces, the USMC personnel and every other soildier, sailor or airman who goes overseas, away from family and home and fights in combat."

No, the soldiers should not be the highest paid people in the USA. Then they would be mercenaries. The ideals they fight for are worth far more than money.

The highest paid people should be teachers and only those who have major life experience backed by professional experience should be allowed to teach. Our educational system is dysfunctional and we are bringing up a nation of shallow and apathetic people.

On another note - I spoke with Ian Anderson at the 2007 Women's WC. These board members do this out of a labor of love for the sport. They very often foot the bill to travel to meetings, get things done like sending hard copies of documents, and other business. Neither the WPA as an organization nor the members are rich or getting rich from doing this.

They STILL have a collective dream to see billiards organized worldwide.

Have they made all the "right" moves in their existence? Of course not. Do they deserve some applause and recognition for the things that they have done right? Absolutely!

Jay said that Matchroom controls the WPA. I don't think that this is true. Matchroom could have held a seperate "World Championships" and winning that title would have probably been considered to be a world class feat. But the winner would never be a WPA champion drawn from the WPA's established guidelines.

The facts are that any promoter can come along and wave money and the players will follow them. Why not? They need the money. The IPT proved that.

Pool on a professional level is obviously still mostly about the sport or the "pros" would be out getting real jobs - but it's enough about the money that anyone who offers a decent payday is going to get a following.

Pool on an amateur level is mostly about the sport. When the WPA was founded it wasn't thinking about pool as a professional endeavor. The WPA was founded to attempt to unify billiards worldwide as a sport that could be played in any country the same way. It was about having a way to have the best players represent each country. And the ultimate dream was to see billiards represented in the Olympics.

Sadly, pool is now and probably will always be too fragmented for it to ever be truly a world sport under one banner. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe the diverse ways to play are one of the things that makes billiards so vibrant in the hearts of those who play.

One thing is certain, no group or organization will ever please everyone.

 

[AuntyDan]

Follow the money...Or lack thereof

After four pages of this the inestimable Mr. Barton is finally getting close to the stunningly simple core of the entire matter - It's all about the money.

If there is enough money in a sport to provide a living to it's players it is run professionally by professionals for professionals. If there is not enough money in a sport to provide a living for it's players it is run in an amateur fashion by amateurs for amateurs.

In the USA the majority of the available money in the sport has come from gambling, so you end up with a sport run by gamblers for gamblers as one big gamble. By definition gambling results in occasional big wins interspersed by many small losses. Hence a legacy of exceptionally skilled players without a penny to their name, and a sport with an alphabet soup of failed acronyms that gambled on their own success and inevitably lost.

As far as I can see the WPA falls into the amateur sport category with aspirations to move in to the professional game. The players certainly have the skills for this, but until or unless any meaningful source of revenue can be found the WPA is relegated to well intentioned meaninglessness.

Frankly couldn't care less if a player achieves a WPA approved World title and a prize purse that barely covers their round trip airfare. I also don't personally care about supporting the gambling habits of habitual gamblers, regardless of whether they are playing a game that I enjoy. I do care about supporting a professional sport with professional players playing a professional game. I did care when players could win a decent years salary at an IPT event and then lost it.

Until someone figures out how to achieve something similar to the IPT's level of funding there will never be a meaningful professional world champion of Pool.

 

[jay helfert]

"No athlete sould be making hundreds of millions of $.
The highest paid people in our country should be the U.S.Navy SEAL's, the U.S. Army Delta Force operators, Rangers and Special Forces, the USMC personnel and every other soildier, sailor or airman who goes overseas, away from family and home and fights in combat."

No, the soldiers should not be the highest paid people in the USA. Then they would be mercenaries. The ideals they fight for are worth far more than money.

The highest paid people should be teachers and only those who have major life experience backed by professional experience should be allowed to teach. Our educational system is dysfunctional and we are bringing up a nation of shallow and apathetic people.

On another note - I spoke with Ian Anderson at the 2007 Women's WC. These board members do this out of a labor of love for the sport. They very often foot the bill to travel to meetings, get things done like sending hard copies of documents, and other business. Neither the WPA as an organization nor the members are rich or getting rich from doing this.

They STILL have a collective dream to see billiards organized worldwide.

Have they made all the "right" moves in their existence? Of course not. Do they deserve some applause and recognition for the things that they have done right? Absolutely!

Jay said that Matchroom controls the WPA. I don't think that this is true. Matchroom could have held a seperate "World Championships" and winning that title would have probably been considered to be a world class feat. But the winner would never be a WPA champion drawn from the WPA's established guidelines.

The facts are that any promoter can come along and wave money and the players will follow them. Why not? They need the money. The IPT proved that.

Pool on a professional level is obviously still mostly about the sport or the "pros" would be out getting real jobs - but it's enough about the money that anyone who offers a decent payday is going to get a following.

Pool on an amateur level is mostly about the sport. When the WPA was founded it wasn't thinking about pool as a professional endeavor. The WPA was founded to attempt to unify billiards worldwide as a sport that could be played in any country the same way. It was about having a way to have the best players represent each country. And the ultimate dream was to see billiards represented in the Olympics.

Sadly, pool is now and probably will always be too fragmented for it to ever be truly a world sport under one banner. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe the diverse ways to play are one of the things that makes billiards so vibrant in the hearts of those who play.

One thing is certain, no group or organization will ever please everyone.

John,

You may want to read my post #40 again. I did NOT say that Matchroom "controlled" the WPA. I did say that they took over the name World Pool Championship (since 1999), and how they did it was by offering the players a better deal, i.e. much more money! Plus worldwide television exposure.

What has transpired over the years is a symbiotic relationship between Matchroom and the WPA. Matchroom produces the first class WPC, and the WPA assists in the process of determining which players from which regions can play. They have learned to co-exist as opposed to engaging in a power struggle.

Too bad more of the entities in the pool world can't take a lesson from this.

 

[JAM]

I don't know the persons who wrote the message, but I have followed Fran Crimi's track record in American pool, and I believe her to want what's best for the United States. I think her words were written sincerely and from the heart.

That said, I believe pool will never succeed in this country, the way we would like it to. There are just too many damn variables.

Pool as a whole, though, will succeed elsewhere in the world, hopefully. Those Americans who want to compete professionally must be prepared to travel and give it their all. It won't be easy, but then again, nothing in life is a freebie.

I don't care for the WPA's words about the United States, but it doesn't matter what I or anybody else thinks. They're going to do what they want anyway, no matter what the American pool public thinks.

JAM

 

[Terry Ardeno]

Good post as always Terry but the above bit is just plain wrong.

There are 8 board members of the WPA. They consist of:-

2 representatives of North America
2 representatives of Europe
2 representatives of Asia
1 reprsentative of South Africa
1 representative of Australia

That can by nobody's terms of reference in any way be fairly described as largely composed of European board members. Even if it was a fair description there are an identical number of North American board members as there are European board members so you would have to agree that it is also largely composed of North American members.

Perhaps you meant largely composed of board members from regions other than North America?

Mike,
That's my fault for not checking out who composed the WPA board before I posted. Thanks for pointing out the correct composition.

The last sentence in your post describes how I assumed it was structured, but I don't want any wiggle room. A mistake is still a mistake.

Good info in your post Mike!