I think a big variable in answering questions like this one is if the guy plays again or not. if he keeps playing you, hes not a nit to answer your question. if not, id say he is for sure and to keep away and tell others the same.
Nitty or not?
- Thread starter Woof Biscuit
- Start date
Everyone's assuming the guy thought he was in over his head and quit in retreat, but it could have also been that his back was bothering him a game or two before he quit, and he figured he'd just give you one more shot to break even before he left out of niceness. People do stuff like that sometimes.
$10 a game is not lint on your shoe, but it isn't a huge nose bleed either. I'd give his motives the benefit of the doubt.
$10 a game is not lint on your shoe, but it isn't a huge nose bleed either. I'd give his motives the benefit of the doubt.
If he took the $20 he's a nit. If he said, " we'll play again sometime and I'll start off up $20" His excuse was valid.
My guess is he thought he was stealing and had no money. When it became apparent he was in a tougher game than he thought, he made up a quick excuse and bailed.
Ray
My guess is he thought he was stealing and had no money. When it became apparent he was in a tougher game than he thought, he made up a quick excuse and bailed.
Ray
I get something in my back sometimes and it aint gradual. When it comes, it tightens up and hurts real bad real fast. Its only happened one time but I dont see how anyone can play with back problems. If that guys is anything like what happened to me he did you a favor even playing one more.
If he's lying hes a roach
If he's lying hes a roach
I dunno...maybe I'm a nit, but I don't give a shit. I announce my "nittyness" at the outset because I think the old school mentality of not feeling right if a guy quits up is ridiculous.
If we make a game for $10/game, that's all you're going to get out of me as far as a commitment. If you're really concerned about wanting to play for hours and hours, then let's play race to 20 for $500.00. One race, whatever it may be, we discuss it ahead of time and you ask for THAT game, not whatever you want as the night goes on.
I don't believe in having to give a guy a chance to win his money back. If we're playing $10/game and the guy goes down $80.00 am I also obligated to allow him to bump it to $20.00/game? Am I a nit if I don't allow this?
It's funny why people think the action in pool is gone...it's because of this crap...who wants to play by this ridiculous "etiquette" that doens't exist anywhere else in the world?
If I'm playing poker I can't just tell the other guys at the table they can't leave up. They have to give me a chance to win my money back. Nope...I had a chance to win money, I blew it, so I owe money.
If we make a game for $10/game, that's all you're going to get out of me as far as a commitment. If you're really concerned about wanting to play for hours and hours, then let's play race to 20 for $500.00. One race, whatever it may be, we discuss it ahead of time and you ask for THAT game, not whatever you want as the night goes on.
I don't believe in having to give a guy a chance to win his money back. If we're playing $10/game and the guy goes down $80.00 am I also obligated to allow him to bump it to $20.00/game? Am I a nit if I don't allow this?
It's funny why people think the action in pool is gone...it's because of this crap...who wants to play by this ridiculous "etiquette" that doens't exist anywhere else in the world?
If I'm playing poker I can't just tell the other guys at the table they can't leave up. They have to give me a chance to win my money back. Nope...I had a chance to win money, I blew it, so I owe money.
This subject can be a lot more complicated than this situation. This was not a "gambling match", imo, it was simply some fun for a small amount. That's why I thought it was nitty to abruptly quit and take the money. It wasn't a "money" match, it was a fun match with something to go for.
I have a bad back and certainly know the pain involved. I live in constant pain. I would never take the money in this situation if I had to quit because of my back. Unless, as you eluded to, I hated playing the guy and didn't care to ever play again. From the internet Woof seems like a cool guy.
I would like to know if it was the other way around and Woof was ahead a game or 2....... would he have taken the money or agreed to play again another time ahead?
Good topic of discussion for sure. We will never ALL agree on this.
Ray
DD, I have only spoken with the guy one time before. Just in passing. Most of the conversation we had is here in the posts. I'm not a man of many words honestly. I just get up and play. I don't have a problem making friends though. The guy was very nice to me as well before and after we played. I got the feeling he liked me. I think you are being hypothetical in your scenario.
Whether he will play again will be a defining factor. I think that will tell the tale.
Ray, thanks for the kind words. I don't have back problems so if I suddenly got a really bad stomach ache for instance, I would tell him just that and not take the money. That is pretty standard operating procedure (like you said) in a friendly match like this. Or I would probably offer, if he just paid the time we could call it even. That would have been about ~$5. I would have hoped that he took the two games down deal. That way I could get him to play again later.
The more I read some of the responses, I feel like I may be living in the past even though I'm only 36. Put the back issue aside, me nor any of the guys I grew up playing with would ever quit winner. We would try to out grind the guy and bust him. Then we would give him a "walking stick" ($100 or so depending on how much he lost) to get back home if he was a road player. Maybe things are different here in South Florida or other parts of the Country. I grew up in Mississippi and did most of my playing in the 90's.
Laser, nothing personal, but I probably wouldn't play you unless I was stealing and you had no chance of ever getting ahead. If I knew that we were evenly matched and you would possibly quit the moment that you got a couple of games ahead, I would just keep my money. If the match is dead even, at some point in the match, you are going to be a few games ahead. I have enough to worry about without having to sweat you quitting.
Whether he will play again will be a defining factor. I think that will tell the tale.
Ray, thanks for the kind words. I don't have back problems so if I suddenly got a really bad stomach ache for instance, I would tell him just that and not take the money. That is pretty standard operating procedure (like you said) in a friendly match like this. Or I would probably offer, if he just paid the time we could call it even. That would have been about ~$5. I would have hoped that he took the two games down deal. That way I could get him to play again later.
The more I read some of the responses, I feel like I may be living in the past even though I'm only 36. Put the back issue aside, me nor any of the guys I grew up playing with would ever quit winner. We would try to out grind the guy and bust him. Then we would give him a "walking stick" ($100 or so depending on how much he lost) to get back home if he was a road player. Maybe things are different here in South Florida or other parts of the Country. I grew up in Mississippi and did most of my playing in the 90's.
Laser, nothing personal, but I probably wouldn't play you unless I was stealing and you had no chance of ever getting ahead. If I knew that we were evenly matched and you would possibly quit the moment that you got a couple of games ahead, I would just keep my money. If the match is dead even, at some point in the match, you are going to be a few games ahead. I have enough to worry about without having to sweat you quitting.
Always agree to a game minimum , 10 games at 10 dollars a game . Playing a race for a certain amount eliminates this , unless you think quitting after one race is chicken poop . Playing a race to 15 for 200 , you commit a little more , and 1 of you end up with it all . Never heard of people playing sets until the last couple of years , which is to the stronger players advantage , and eliminates the quitting after 1 race.
I'm perfectly okay with that. There's also a difference between a guy ALWAYS quitting when he gets ahead a couple of games and a guy that answered the simple question "do you want to play a few" from some guy that just walked up to him. He should have the right to quit whenever the hell he wants.
Granted, as I stated earlier, I can avoid that whole situation by disclosing up front that I'm only going to play for an hour or however long I planned on being at the pool hall. I've had guys keep me for 4 or 5 hours because they are down and won't pay until they have a chance to get back. It's obnoxious and while I enjoy stomping more money out of them, I generally would rather go home.
If I am meeting someone at a pool hall for a serious race, then I'll play them that race and that's that. I get that some guys like to play the whole game with the makeing more sets, me having to give a guy weight after he's lost 3 races so that he can try to win his money back BULLSHIT, but I don't do it. I also accept that a lot of guys won't play because they want that opportunity.
To me there's only 2 options...guy that just wants to play for "fun" $5 or $10 games or maybe $20 race 3 sets...he can quit whenever the hell he wants.
The other is someone who wants to play for $$$$, but not at all for fun. In that case we come to an agreement on what we are going to play and at the end of that arrangement both parties are free to offer another matchup or leave. Ex.... Race to 7 - three sets, $200/set.
At the end of each race, we aren't going to adjust the spot or any handicap, but at the end of the 3rd set we can discuss if we are going to continue, what the spot needs to be and what we are playing for. I may leave right then winner if we can't come to an agreement on our next game. Does that make me a nit? I don't think so. It means that I'm not going to GIVE the money back by letting this guy run around in an iron wheelchair to get it back.
I guess I'm a "disclose what we're playing up front" kinda guy. I don't like feeling obligated to play...ever. I don't feel like being pushed around just because I'm up. If I spent the last 4 hours stomping your face in, I don't intend to let you play one last set -double or nothing while you get a HUGE handicap just so you can have a "chance" to win your money back. I worked hard for the past 4 hours beating you and now I have to offer you a chance to snatch all of that back?
To each their own, I'm not out trying to rob guys, but I sure hate that "you can't quit now" feeling. It's just not pleasant for me and I'd rather stay away from it. I don't knock guys for feeling they always want this chance or somehow deserve this shot, that's ALWAYS been the way it is around pool and so I discuss it up front. That way there is no hard feelings and those that feel it's inapprapriate won't play from the word go and we don't have a problem.
Granted, as I stated earlier, I can avoid that whole situation by disclosing up front that I'm only going to play for an hour or however long I planned on being at the pool hall. I've had guys keep me for 4 or 5 hours because they are down and won't pay until they have a chance to get back. It's obnoxious and while I enjoy stomping more money out of them, I generally would rather go home.
If I am meeting someone at a pool hall for a serious race, then I'll play them that race and that's that. I get that some guys like to play the whole game with the makeing more sets, me having to give a guy weight after he's lost 3 races so that he can try to win his money back BULLSHIT, but I don't do it. I also accept that a lot of guys won't play because they want that opportunity.
To me there's only 2 options...guy that just wants to play for "fun" $5 or $10 games or maybe $20 race 3 sets...he can quit whenever the hell he wants.
The other is someone who wants to play for $$$$, but not at all for fun. In that case we come to an agreement on what we are going to play and at the end of that arrangement both parties are free to offer another matchup or leave. Ex.... Race to 7 - three sets, $200/set.
At the end of each race, we aren't going to adjust the spot or any handicap, but at the end of the 3rd set we can discuss if we are going to continue, what the spot needs to be and what we are playing for. I may leave right then winner if we can't come to an agreement on our next game. Does that make me a nit? I don't think so. It means that I'm not going to GIVE the money back by letting this guy run around in an iron wheelchair to get it back.
I guess I'm a "disclose what we're playing up front" kinda guy. I don't like feeling obligated to play...ever. I don't feel like being pushed around just because I'm up. If I spent the last 4 hours stomping your face in, I don't intend to let you play one last set -double or nothing while you get a HUGE handicap just so you can have a "chance" to win your money back. I worked hard for the past 4 hours beating you and now I have to offer you a chance to snatch all of that back?
To each their own, I'm not out trying to rob guys, but I sure hate that "you can't quit now" feeling. It's just not pleasant for me and I'd rather stay away from it. I don't knock guys for feeling they always want this chance or somehow deserve this shot, that's ALWAYS been the way it is around pool and so I discuss it up front. That way there is no hard feelings and those that feel it's inapprapriate won't play from the word go and we don't have a problem.
I'm dead set against quitting winners without an agreement up front, however, he did give you a chance to get even. That's not too bad. He probably felt that he was ahead the whole time and after being ahead, he didn't want to quit losers. A lot of players feel that way who are ahead and then lose their lead. He was willing to accept a break even which isn't really quitting winners.
I don't think he did anything wrong.
I don't think he did anything wrong.
Last edited:
People who are trying to take short shots and quit winner are nits. If you agree with this practice, then you are a nit also. Now the case is closed.
You are wrong on both counts. Grhammer pretty good though...
Laser, I agree with most of what you say. I think communication is the key here as it is in most things in life. If at some point in the game/match the spot or anything else changes, then there is NO obligation on the winners part to keep playing. Heck, even if he wants to change from one table to another one in the room that's the same, I don't feel obligated. I feel I can quit right there. If nothing changes, however, I do feel an obligation to keep playing or make some other arrangement. If my opponent wants to win his money back the same way he lost it, that's fine by me. If you always quit when your up a little, it's awful hard to make a nice score. I'm not saying you do that, by the way.
Although it is questionable if his back actually was bothering him, I personally have had issues in the past and if it flares up I'm not going to keep playing I'm going home to let it rest.
I agree with those who believe that if a long gambling session is what you are looking for, you should declare it at the outset. But both players should make it clear what they are intending and when someone asks to play a few games, that to me indicates a short session and not that someone owns me for the rest of the day or until I'm losing money.
I agree with those who believe that if a long gambling session is what you are looking for, you should declare it at the outset. But both players should make it clear what they are intending and when someone asks to play a few games, that to me indicates a short session and not that someone owns me for the rest of the day or until I'm losing money.
Lol, like I said earlier...I just consider it paying for info on that person's character and putting them on my "too nitty to gamble with list". Have a nice day.
Assuming that both competitors are runout players, a race (particularly a short race, like less than 11) does not redound to the better player's advantage as much as an 'ahead set' does. A high 'B' player has a MUCH better chance of winning a race to seven against a low 'A' player than s/he does of winning a 'five ahead' set against the same opponent.
As it relates to quitting after one set, the only thing that ABSOLUTELY guarantees it won't happen is posting up for multiple sets at the beginning. I've seen people win a set against a superior player and then, after finding out (either by aspects of the opponent's play or by 'getting the wire') that the opponent was the favorite, they ran straight out the door!
As it relates to quitting after one set, the only thing that ABSOLUTELY guarantees it won't happen is posting up for multiple sets at the beginning. I've seen people win a set against a superior player and then, after finding out (either by aspects of the opponent's play or by 'getting the wire') that the opponent was the favorite, they ran straight out the door!
Yes , i assumed a set was the best of 3 races to a predetermined amount of games . In multiple races the stronger player has the advantage . The reason for alternate break instead of winner breaks is to give the weaker player a shot in tournaments , which is not bad if you want to fill a tournament , and better players usually out run this.
20 or 30 years ago players weren't looked at in terms of ratings , this is a direct result of league pool . I never heard 2 people matching up in pool rooms referencing any ratings 20 years ago , maybe someone gave up weight on known abilities but not by numbers or letter ratings .
Back in 1991 wasn't the USPPA big? I remember people always talking about their "speed" back in the day. It was understood that if you are over 100 you're not to be played with (not by me...). I personally LOVED USPPA tournaments and found that handicapping system to be the best, but haven't seen it in use in a long time.