Message From the WPA North American Representative

[Bob Jewett]

... I am not US-centric when it comes to a world championship. I truly mean the best 128 players in the world. ...

But there is presently no mechanism for determining who that is. Who are the top 128 players?

I suspect your point is moot. In the current state of affairs, I don't think the US would have more than 14 in the top 128 if an accurate rating system did exist. We are likely getting more spots under the present quota system than we deserve.

 

[Grady]

1994

I got stiffed in 1994 by the WPA. It took me two years to get my money and I didn't even get an apology. Because of that I didn't take a planned
trip for four tournaments that included Japan, Indonesia, the Philipines and Germany. The tournaments were also sanctioned by the WPA.
While I think a lot of Fran Crimi and Bob Jewett I stand by my remarks before. I think the WPA is awful.
Let's talk about criteria for calling an event a World Championship. I always thought the promoter had to have: Either a one of a kind event with respectable prize money or the most prize money in a particular discipline. To my mind they also have to be truly "open".
The WPA doesn't have a right to everything with the word world in it. Invitations today should never be based on rankings because they are suspect and terrible. A family man may only be able to play in one or two or no events to gain suspicious qualifying points. On top of that there are a few hundred excellent players in the world. So to be a "World Championship" at a popular discipline like 9 Ball the field should be opened up to a minimum of 256 players.
I could relate tales about the BCA too but what's the use?

 

[MikeM]

Hu you're skirting the question of...

Bob,

I am not US-centric when it comes to a world championship. I truly mean the best 128 players in the world. How many can the Philippines send that have a legitimate chance of winning? How many is a fair number to send from that tiny country according to the quota? If it is determined by region, who is left behind in Asia or the Pacific rim to allow extra Filipinos to play?

Gathering people from all regions far from determining the best individual insures that some that should be there are left behind so that there can be "token" representation that doesn't have any realistic chance of winning.

You are talking support for chosen players, but equally gifted players are left behind because of the quota system and must travel on their own dime and then try to qualify from what I gather.

Bottom line is that if anyone is trying to determine an individual world champion then the best individuals in the world, from anywhere in the world, must be allowed to compete on their own merit. When that doesn't happen the "World Championship" has a hollow ring to it.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Mine is that if anyone were to find a sponsor and hold a well paying "World Championship" that was based on merit and all players competing on an equal footing not where the player was from then this person or organization would have a more legitimate claim to have determined a world champion than the contrived manner the WPA seems to be using.

Hu

....how do you determine the best individuals in the world. How would you?

Find a sponsor? Equal footing? Where do these exist? How would you come up with a merit-based system that encompasses the entire world?

While I agree with Fran that Overbeck's statements were unfortunate and go even further and call them ludicrous, still let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Pool in the US is NOT going to lead the global growth of pool. There's just way too much apathy and infighting in our pool scene. The WPA with all it's warts - and Overbeck should be thrown overboard - should be supported.

MM

 

[ShootingArts]

You still fail to grasp my point

I suspect your point is moot. In the current state of affairs, I don't think the US would have more than 14 in the top 128 if an accurate rating system did exist. We are likely getting more spots under the present quota system than we deserve.

Bob,

Not trying to be stubborn here but you still fail to grasp my point. I am not speaking up for the US players here, I am speaking up for the best . . . period. What you are saying is that it is more important for a worldwide organization to play politics and appease it's various member associations than it is to determine a true world champion. I'm disagreeing with that assessment or at least saying that someone that attempted to truly determine the best individual would have a better claim to have determined the world champion.

A legitimate goal of any world championship is to ensure that people from all regions have a chance of participating. This is especially true if you have a world governing body that has as members national federations or regional confederations.

Before I am accused of putting words in your mouth here is the quote from your earlier post. That is politics plain and simple, it isn't individual competition. If you want to say the World Champion is a nation, continent, or region then this is fine. If you wish to say a champion is an individual this is a false way of determining the best. Even if other players can qualify it is hardly a level playing field.

Hu

 

[Bob Jewett]

... If you want to say the World Champion is a nation, continent, or region then this is fine. If you wish to say a champion is an individual this is a false way of determining the best. Even if other players can qualify it is hardly a level playing field.

Hu

I think it would be useful at this point if you could describe a format that you feel would be fair. I've tried to imagine what you are getting at and I can't.

 

[ShootingArts]

Since you asked . . .

Since you ask how I would, I would do it through qualifying events. The events would have to have a minimum number of players to be acceptable and nobody would get an exemption to come play without qualifying making it fair to all. Also I would not base qualifications for one event on placing in any series of events except for higher levels of qualifiers. What I am saying here is that points races would not determine entry into a world championship unless I specified it was the world point championship. This prevents someone that makes every event but is a weaker player from qualifying ahead of a better player who didn't play in as many events.

As I said in my last post to Bob Jewett, when the politics become more important than the individuals you are no longer crowning an individual world champion or not one with any great legitimacy.

Supporting the WPA and supporting the WPA warts and all are two different things. When we have to blindly toe the party line you can count me out. However I see you slamming Overbeck and recommending getting rid of him. That is hardly supporting the WPA warts and all yourself.

Hu

....how do you determine the best individuals in the world. How would you?

Find a sponsor? Equal footing? Where do these exist? How would you come up with a merit-based system that encompasses the entire world?

While I agree with Fran that Overbeck's statements were unfortunate and go even further and call them ludicrous, still let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Pool in the US is NOT going to lead the global growth of pool. There's just way too much apathy and infighting in our pool scene. The WPA with all it's warts - and Overbeck should be thrown overboard - should be supported.

MM

 

[pdcue]

AZB is posting this for Fran Crimi. Fran is on the WPA Executive Board and serves there as the North American Representative. She also serves on the BCA/WPA............

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I wish everyone great pool playing."

Fran Crimi

I'm sorry, but this is all way too silly for words.

Baseball has a World Series that may admit a team from
southern Canada.

Snooker is more international than it once was, but still...

I'm all in favor of trying to go global with pool, but reality is,
there is no overall governing body.

'Championships' are controlled by the promoter, just like they always have been. Recall the days when Brunswick ran everything?

Dale

 

[Scott Lee]

Holy cow Fran! I can't believe you posted this. Back in the 70's and early 80's there were NO Europeon players...at least none of note. There was Parica and Efren, from the Phillipines; and one or two Japanese players...but NO noteworthy European players. That's why the PPPA did things the way they did...because the LION'S share of talent was right here. It is obviously no longer the case now, as there are world-class players from every continent.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

edit: I didn't read Jay's response before posting mine, but what he said is right on. I was there too!

"Hi all. I know there are things that make you angry about the BCA and the WPA, like Thomas Overbeck's comments about the title of World Champion. I don't think I would have made the comments Thomas did, but I understand how he feels. Before the WPA came along, it's true that anyone could hold an event and call it a World Championship. The PPPA comes to my mind back in the late 70's and early 80's. I know this first hand because I was the WPBA President for some of that time and I worked with the PPPA and the organizers.

Here's how they invited players: They made sure that all the American players who wanted to play were in the event, and after those spots were secured, they invited any foreign players to fill the spots that were left over. Oh, and of course they did extend a few invitations directly to a few foreign players. That's the way world championships worked back then. They were held in the U.S., they were run by Americans, the majority of the players were Americans and they were mostly won by Americans. Most of the time, people on other continents didn't even know the events were taking place.

Fran Crimi

 

[Bob Jewett]

... I'm all in favor of trying to go global with pool, but reality is,
there is no overall governing body. ...

In what ways do you feel the WPA is not meeting its obligations as a world governing body for pool?

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Back in the 70's and early 80's there were NO European players...at least none of note. ...

I agree that maybe no one in the US in the 70's knew of anyone in Europe who could hit the end rail, but I'm not sure we can conclude from that that none existed. If in fact Europe started from a complete zero at that time, the current success of European players is all the more remarkable.

 

[Scott Lee]

I agree 100% Bob! If they did exist, they didn't have the balls to come over here and play ANYBODY. Their success in the past 20 years is nothing short of incredible...but of course that can be said of the players from Asia too! Why?...because their countries SUPPORT pool...unlike here. 30 years ago there was Efren and Parica. Now you have (at LEAST) three or four DOZEN world beaters, between China, Taiwan, Japan and the Phillipines!

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

I agree that maybe no one in the US in the 70's knew of anyone in Europe who could hit the end rail, but I'm not sure we can conclude from that that none existed. If in fact Europe started from a complete zero at that time, the current success of European players is all the more remarkable.

 

[beav99_4life]

Snapshot, WPA World Championships are 128-player fields. The reason that the little countries with players who are not as good as Americans who are left out get spots is because that is their right. They have the right to representation. Just as in the Olympics where countries have the right to submit basketball teams made up of 5 four-footers who can't make a ball.

A\

This passage here is not correct. If you look at several of the individual sports, athletes from each country have to QUALIFY to even get an invite to the Olympics. Look at swimming for example. You are expected to qualify and have a reasonable time in your preliminaries in order to enter the Olympic games.

 

[Bob Jewett]

This passage here is not correct. If you look at several of the individual sports, athletes from each country have to QUALIFY to even get an invite to the Olympics. Look at swimming for example. You are expected to qualify and have a reasonable time in your preliminaries in order to enter the Olympic games.

I think this is true for some situations but not others. I visited the Olympic Museum in Lausanne a month ago, and among the remarkable memorabilia on display was the Speedo of one swimming competitor who achieved an astounding time in 2000. You can watch it on a site that has this introduction:

Watch as Eric Moussambani from Guinea makes history at the 2000 summer Olympics by swimming the 100 meter freestyle with a time of 1:52.72 - which is more than twice as much time as his competitors?even slower than the 200 meter record!​

My analysis of his heat: Although he finished first in his heat, he went out too fast, he missed his turn, he hit the lane line, and both his kick and his pull failed him at the end.

In some sports, you have to get through very tough preliminary trials. I think the format is determined mostly by the International Federation for each particular sport.

 

[beav99_4life]

In some sports, you have to get through very tough preliminary trials. I think the format is determined mostly by the International Federation for each particular sport.

Which is why invitations are BS. Hold qualifiers to determine who are the best players in the world. This is where the support of players, fans, sponsors and a qualified governing body are needed to achieve such a goal. In other words, I dont see this happening anytime soon.

 

[BigDogatLarge]

All of this talk is fine and good. I think it is great that we are all trying to move forward for the good of cuesports worldwide. This conversation started with the outrage of the dismissal of past "world champions".

WPA, just recognize that we had the world champs in pool before you all came along. Just recognize that and give the champs their due and let's all move forward. List from the very first Champion in what was the known world at that time and list all of them up until present day. Where is Freddie and Terry? Why is there so much crap about this? You are wasting time away from the real business of moving cuesports forward. Make everyone happy and represent!

Dwight

 

[JB Cases]

Someone help answer my post 13 in this thread. It sounds like the BCA and WPA are affiliated in some way.

How does the BCA vote guys like Sigel, Hopkins, Varner, Hall, etc, into the hall of fame for winning the world championships the WPA doesn't recognize?

????????????????????

The BCA has it's own criteria. IF players won "World Championships" before the formation of the WPA then neither the BCA nor the WPA has any right to discredit them.

And most of these world titles were open tournaments meaning that anyone could show up and vie for the title. So, while there was probably little in the way of TRYING to encourage or make sure that such WC titled events were populated with players from other countries they were definitely open to them.

The WPA in fairness has conducted an unbroken run of 9-Ball World Championships with pretty much the same criteria for inclusion since it's inception. I think Matchroom may have been granted some leeway as the promoter/organizer but in essence it's inclusive of players from around the world.

All sports are different as to how they select the participants for the their World Championships. Billiards is perhaps the most fractured "sport" on earth. I can't think of another sport that has so many different variations played at world class levels. Racing?

In any event, a World Champion is a world champion only under the organization that holds the event. The authenticity and reputation of that title belongs to the organization that put on the event. Thus no one but total newbies and most certainly not Mike himself really thinks that he is World Champion through the IPT thingy with Loree Jon. Now Mike may claim it because he is on the IPT dole but I am sure that he doens't give it any credibility himself.

On the other hand the open events he won (if he did win any) that were pre-WPA and billed as World Championships surely did make him a legitimate world champion.

The BCA is the North American representative of the WPA. The BCA Hall of Fame has nothing to do with the WPA however.

 

[fdambi]

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.

 

[memikey]

I agree 100% Bob! If they did exist, they didn't have the balls to come over here and play ANYBODY. Their success in the past 20 years is nothing short of incredible...but of course that can be said of the players from Asia too! Why?...because their countries SUPPORT pool...unlike here. 30 years ago there was Efren and Parica. Now you have (at LEAST) three or four DOZEN world beaters, between China, Taiwan, Japan and the Phillipines!

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]

I agree that maybe no one in the US in the 70's knew of anyone in Europe who could hit the end rail, but I'm not sure we can conclude from that that none existed. If in fact Europe started from a complete zero at that time, the current success of European players is all the more remarkable.

Bob, I will agree with you on many points you've made on this thread, but this is not one of them. In the 70's and into the 80's, pool as we know it, was barely played anywhere in Europe. Snooker and Billiards were the dominant games, with English 8 Ball popular in Great Britain. And this was played with snooker sized balls on a small table.

The Europeans didn't start from zero. Most of them had a snooker background before taking up pool. Pool started to gain some following in the 80's in Europe. By the early 90's they had made significant progress in developing talented players.

 

[jay helfert]

Let's get something straight here. It is true the WPA conducted some certified World Championships in the 1990's, but when Barry Hearn and Matchroom came along in 1999 to produce their version of the World Pool Championships, the WPA and their "World Championship" became a footnote. They were forced to offer Matchroom sanctioning for their WPC just to save face, and maintain some credibility. And the WPA gave up any prior interest they had for in producing their own "World Championship".

Barry Hearn came in and took over. He trumped the WPA "World Championship" the old fashioned way. He offered the players much more money! And since then the World Championship has belonged to Matchroom and not the WPA. And that's the name of that tune!