No Master players playing on open teams

sharandrew

sharandrew

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
To everyone:

Our area is in the process of creating a “no masters on open teams” format in our regional league event. This would make a stand-alone event for that level of player. The VNEA has done this Nationally and the BCAPL is going to do it. I would like to know if any other area has done this and how effective it has been. We are also going to stratify our payouts so that our regional masters pays more then the next skilled division. The added money will be as you see in national events. We want to be comparable in ratio add to masters.

I am interested in how separating the master level players has worked for others both the pros and cons and how the stratified payouts have worked pros and cons. Tournament directors and players input a must. State or regional tournament payouts examples of events held would be nice too.

Please…. all serious experience and knowledge Send emails

Thanks

Andrew Monstis
WBCA
 
I posted this question about 2 months ago and never got a response from Mark Griffin. I had heard that this was going to be the new BCA rule from a friend of mine. I don't like this rule in the least because it prevents a master player, who plays on a weekly league with his friends, from being able to play with them in Vegas. Unless this master player is from an area with many master players, he basically is eliminated from the team event. His only option then may be to play on a team with some players he doesn't care for. Or drive several hours to play on a good team. I think this rule will encourage the already frowned on practice of All Star teams. Many times these teams have players from out of the area who play 3-4 matches a week or in some cases none at all. Since this is against the BCA rules, I'm sure there is some creative paperwork going on. ;)
Until the BCA starts an intermediate division, like Valley, they should leave things the way they are. JMO
 
Thanks for your input:
What about those players who can't compete with the very good players, many of them say that an open event is for open level players?

Also master level players (on local level) stack teams with unrated players because often the money is better in open event because of the number of entries?
 
sharandrew said:
Thanks for your input:
What about those players who can't compete with the very good players, many of them say that an open event is for open level players?

Also master level players (on local level) stack teams with unrated players because often the money is better in open event because of the number of entries?
Click to expand...
Good points. If you took an honest poll of open players and asked them if they wanted to become better players, I bet the majority would say yes. My theory on it is that as a master player playing with open level players, you are supposed to help them become better players if possible. If the BCA league expects the game to advance by having the better players help the weaker players, than they can't say to the master players- "please play with open players all year long and try to help them improve and then when it's time to go to Vegas, you can't play with them". That sort of logic seems counterproductive to the game, no?
 
dogginda9 said:
Good points. If you took an honest poll of open players and asked them if they wanted to become better players, I bet the majority would say yes. My theory on it is that as a master player playing with open level players, you are supposed to help them become better players if possible. If the BCA league expects the game to advance by having the better players help the weaker players, than they can't say to the master players- "please play with open players all year long and try to help them improve and then when it's time to go to Vegas, you can't play with them". That sort of logic seems counterproductive to the game, no?
Click to expand...

I am really looking for statistics not so much a debate. Did splitting up open teams help or hinder numbers. Did the masters come to play or sit home. I agree that the players should be all in one event. In my area more of the events small ones and big ones have left out Master level players and open level players are spoiled playing and winning without them. The master players got more and more disinterested with staying sharp. I do want to see them return to playing at their top levels.
 
Personally, I feel restrictions are only going to hurt pool, especially and this issue is a perfect example of such. Who is to say what is Masters and what is not? Where is this defined and how can this be enforced? I can assure you, Master Players seep through the cracks every year, either deliberately or by natural progression. I think part of the success of the BCA event has to do with it's lack of restrictions instead of the rigorous APA.

On the local level, the BCA league I play out of allows professional players and players RARELY leave the league. Everyone is really happy about the opportunity to play great players and they understand what's involved the moment they enroll. At this point in my game, I'd probably be labeled as a Master. If restrictions were imposed on me to such an extent locally, I might just give up league play altogether which would likely lead to less play overall.
 
It's all about the money

I play in this area and let me fill you all in on the REAL story. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY here. All the master players are crying because their payouts are not as high as the open payouts (singles and teams). So now we have a problem with a few master player complaning about this. They are upset because they don't win enough money to pay for thier trip. So a couple master players now go to the regional BCA meetings to stack the vote to make changes to our payouts and format.

Now let me tell you the rest of they story.
Last year in the Western BCA Regional event only 60 or so master men players showed up to play. There are over 210 master players in our region! What's up with that? The problem here is the same 4 people win (Glen Atwell, Stan Tarango, Rich Gilar, and one or two others) and frankly the rest of the masters have no chance winning. So instead of paying for their trip to compete they just stay at home. That is not the fault of open players, taking their money is not the answer. Find out how to get the remaining 140 non playing master players to play and you'll have your cash. I bet if you created a Grand master division and moved out some of our "Pro" players more of your non playing master plays would give it a try. Quit taking the open players cash.

This is also the same issue in the master team event. There were only 10 master teams! The same two teams win every year. They are stacked! Other master players would rather play with four open players in a much larger event and actually have a shot of winning. I feel the decision to dis-allow master players from open teams is only going to do one thing, decrease the open team field and it will do nothing to the master team field. I have already heard from master players who said they will not attend this years events because they don't want to find four other master players to play in a event which the same two teams win every year. Again, money from the open divisions is not the answer. Grand master divsion along with no master players on open teams might work.

And lets not forget to tell everyone the awesome committee that suggested and then voted this in:
Andrew M. (master player)
Mike S. (Master player)
Mike J. (Master player)
Cindy D. (Womans Master player).

Where is the "open" players rep? How fair are things getting moved into the system if your committee is so stacked?

And let's not forget to tell everyone how a few people got to move the Western BCA in such a direction that the president quit right after the meeting!@!

I'm not saying i have the answers, but as you can see there are other questions that need to be addressed before making huge changes. I do know one thing for sure, taking money from one pool and adding it to another will not solve your problems, only create more.
 
To all of those concerned;

I hope I can respond and explain this stuff. The BCA Pool League is planning on instituting the rule that no masters can play in NATIONAL EVENTS on an open team. This will probably take effect June 1, 2006.

I am following the posts and opinions because this topic has a lot of viewpoints. Historically, about 64 men become master players - yet the master field gets smaller every year. That is why we created the Grandmaster division. It peels off the best masters, because there is a vast difference in master skill levels. I disagree that creating another division (VNEA intermediate) would solve the problem. Pool players are constantly moving when it comes to skill levels.

We had been asked quite a few times about this issue. We ran it by our advisory board. It voted unamiously to not allow master on open teams. Several states currently have that policy in effect. There are not even 10% as many master players as open players. We determine who is a master player based upon performance as an individual player.

An interesting problem is "what to do with the players who do not play in singles?" We are identifying players who are on a high finishing team and are not in singles. We will be addressing that porblem real soon.

This policy is only in effect for National events. We are NOT trying to create all star teams in the local level. But on the national level, we had to create a method for smaller leagues to compete. So we now allow master teams to come from anywhere in the league. There is no "3 original" requirement any more.

On the local level, I agree - let anyone play. And with the creation of the grandmaster division, we can accomodate that thinking a little bit better. And natural progression is a good thing. I believe a person should win their way - rather than just be put into a master divisin. Can't always do that, however.

Just so you know, half of the top 64 teams had one master player on them.

I agree, some of this ends up being about the money. The BCA Pool League is going to be adding money to the open fields in May event. There are way more open players entered, and in the past only master players got the added money. That is not right. I agree someone should be rewarded as they get better. But so many players just quit when they get to the master stage. Not sure why, but I think grandmaster division may help a little.

Sorry this is so long. It is a tough subject. We cannot please everyone. But we are trying. I appreciate your comments. Feel free to contact me for further discussion. By the way, I sent dogginda9 a private message, since I never got an email from him. I almost always respond in a day or so - unless out of town. Thanks again for your comments.

Mark Griffin
BCA Pool League
markg@playbca.com
 
Mark: I think the addition of the GM division will help. However with only getting 32 in the field the first year (some open players), it may take time to develop. There are certainly more names that should be added to the list.

Looking at how the masters division never grows, it is most likely due to the fact that they feel they cannot compete in it. Again, another plug for the grandmaster division. Every year 64 are moved from the open to the master, but to no avail. Now you have players who have made the trip to Vegas (only a fraction take that step) and won't come back because they had one good tournament and were moved up. They can't go back to open because they haven't played their way back in. Suggestion being go back 4-5 years and check how many of the 33-64 in this group are not coming back to Vegas. I think the top 32 moved up is adequate.

As far as the players on open teams advancing. Only one way to do this.
Save the scoresheets. Take the 2 or 3 players on that team that had the best win/loss and move them up. This will stop the same teams from changing their names and winning again that for sure is happening. This is a
time consuming undertaking however but Phil B. on your staff told me he really wants to do it.

Looking to really increase numbers. Can anyone say "B" division?
We all know that the majority of the open division players come from the top half of most leagues. Open, being the lowest division offered at the national level is still tough. Why not have a division for all of those who have been reguarly pounded in Vegas?

Anyway, I think you are doing a fine job. Looking forward to the national nine ball tourney again. Hope you hire the same guy who ran it last year, he did great.
 
To cbi1000

Good morning….The thread is about asking for information to be helpful not spiteful as what you seem to be expressing in your post. The ideas and comments have been carefully thought out several month, even years ago. Finally something is being done, your thoughts and opinions for this group have already been considered. If you need to debate some issue regarding this decision and the association neglect by a resign officer then start a thread and it can be debated. Using personal names in the post is a breech of selfishness. This thread is the wrong place for your political and personal issues.
 
Last edited:
to Mark Griffin

You explained your end well. ……………But why master players don't show up is that they resent the payouts differences. It is harder to place in masters if you do you can't win a respected amount as you can in the open. Master players also pay their fees (and more) play their weeks just like everyone else and why not be able to be rewarded as the open players. They often seem to apologize for being good.

I would like cold facts as to what would happen by moving masters out of open fields. Do the numbers increase for masters or not? At this point I see only speculation. Taking this step is bold and we might have to see how it develops. It might be the best thing ever…again does anyone have some tangible facts to share.
 
LastChance said:
Mark: I think the addition of the GM division will help. However with only getting 32 in the field the first year (some open players), it may take time to develop. There are certainly more names that should be added to the list.

Looking at how the masters division never grows, it is most likely due to the fact that they feel they cannot compete in it. Again, another plug for the grandmaster division. Every year 64 are moved from the open to the master, but to no avail. Now you have players who have made the trip to Vegas (only a fraction take that step) and won't come back because they had one good tournament and were moved up. They can't go back to open because they haven't played their way back in. Suggestion being go back 4-5 years and check how many of the 33-64 in this group are not coming back to Vegas. I think the top 32 moved up is adequate.

As far as the players on open teams advancing. Only one way to do this.
Save the scoresheets. Take the 2 or 3 players on that team that had the best win/loss and move them up. This will stop the same teams from changing their names and winning again that for sure is happening. This is a
time consuming undertaking however but Phil B. on your staff told me he really wants to do it.

Looking to really increase numbers. Can anyone say "B" division?
We all know that the majority of the open division players come from the top half of most leagues. Open, being the lowest division offered at the national level is still tough. Why not have a division for all of those who have been reguarly pounded in Vegas?

Anyway, I think you are doing a fine job. Looking forward to the national nine ball tourney again. Hope you hire the same guy who ran it last year, he did great.
Click to expand...

My thoughts as well
 
Tell the real story

To Sharandrew:

This is the place to voice what i have to say. You are asking for advice about how and what to do from people, but you didn't tell them the entire story!

You can't take opinions from people who don't have all the facts. Well i guess you could, but it would be stupid.

As for the personal names, quit crying. Stand up for your self and be proud of what you and the others in the committee did. I didn’t put last names in, and for the 99% of this forum have no idea who you guys are.

I like how you are trying to deflect everything I said, ignoring the true and real fact about what is happening here in the Pacific NW.

When are you guys going to get your crap figured out? Meeting after meeting and yet nothing ever seems to get done. I’m really interested to see what the membership numbers will be next year. I have a feeling other pool associations will be gaining in numbers while the Western BCA slowly looses numbers. And that in my opinions is a direct reflection of the Western BCA management, or lack there of.

If Mark (former Western BCA President) is reading this, I feel you did a great job. I feel sorry you had to deal with such individuals who made doing your job such a pain in the ass you felt your only option was to quit.
 
cbi1000 said:
To Sharandrew:

This is the place to voice what i have to say. You are asking for advice about how and what to do from people, but you didn't tell them the entire story!

You can't take opinions from people who don't have all the facts. Well i guess you could, but it would be stupid.

As for the personal names, quit crying. Stand up for your self and be proud of what you and the others in the committee did. I didn’t put last names in, and for the 99% of this forum have no idea who you guys are.

I like how you are trying to deflect everything I said, ignoring the true and real fact about what is happening here in the Pacific NW.

When are you guys going to get your crap figured out? Meeting after meeting and yet nothing ever seems to get done. I’m really interested to see what the membership numbers will be next year. I have a feeling other pool associations will be gaining in numbers while the Western BCA slowly looses numbers. And that in my opinions is a direct reflection of the Western BCA management, or lack there of.

If Mark (former Western BCA President) is reading this, I feel you did a great job. I feel sorry you had to deal with such individuals who made doing your job such a pain in the ass you felt your only option was to quit.
Click to expand...

I am sorry and apologize for the bci1000 posting. Cbi needs to be satisfied here. If you reread your post (cbi) you will see that you are the one crying. Iam trying to get information not complaining. Well I guess you don’t really know the rest of the story. Since you insist. The president did a job worthy of a pile of grievances 4 inches high, to say it lightly, stemming back to November of 2004 and since then many more serious observances have occurred.17 different board members registered complaints. A majority of complaints were about his neglect, but you didn’t know that, you were looking through at the world with blinders on. I personally tried to get agenda topics discussed but the president refused to put them on for discussion. His board support was down to one person, me, until the bitter end March of 05. I no longer could protect him from the actions and lack of action on his part. The association needed to move on, period. Oh several people tried and tried to move forward. It was the president solely who stalled the association. Not returning any contacts ect..This is all well documented and has been presented to and consulted with the National BCAPL office personnel. 17 people could be wrong but I know now they are not. Try to respect what a huge group of people have done. You don’t have to like the decision but its done try to help not hinder. Now you have accused a bunch of terrific people of not figuring out their “crap” They have and are moving on. You sound too much like a wife who is in denial that her husband has been doing things behind her back. You could contact me for more details you know who I am. I am easy to find.

I am still trying to get tournament organizers etc… to help provide information. All I am trying to do here is get more "experienced" information. I have already received some information via other forums and other contacts thanks.
 
Last edited:
Whatever! I know all about YOUR issues with Mark, and i've also heard others issue too. But I've been to the meetings and all i've seen a small number of people (master players) trying to figure out how to make things better for themselves. Period! I've seen all the wasted minutes go by so some people can argue and complain about everything.

Let's put a committee together of all open players and see what happens.

One other thing, i'm tired of master players feeling like their owed money because they work so hard for so many years and it's not fair the master money pots are not big enough. CRAP again. What makes you think that open players don't put in the same about of time? I know lots of open players who play/practice hours a day. There are many players who play just as much as master players and will never move up into the master division. So why do you continue to try and find ways to take money from the open players or put all the added money into the master divisions? That is not right. Once again, focus your efforts on finding out how to get the remaining 75% of your non playing master players to play!
 
Tocbi1000

Too bad you haven’t been to some or enough of the meetings where these issues have been discussed. Everything is being done, sorry you are so far out of the loop…..You made this posting personal that is not what this posting was intended for. I am trying to get information to do a better job you do not repect that. I suggest that you post on the WBCA blogg where your posts really belongs.

My original post: Our area is in the process of creating a “no masters on open teams” format in our regional league event. This would make a stand-alone event for that level of player. The VNEA has done this Nationally and the BCAPL is going to do it. I would like to know if any other area has done this and how effective it has been. We are also going to stratify our payouts so that our regional masters pays more then the next skilled division. The added money will be as you see in national events. We want to be comparable in ratio add to masters.

I am interested in how separating the master level players has worked for others both the pros and cons and how the stratified payouts have worked pros and cons. Tournament directors and players input a must. State or regional tournament payouts examples of events held would be nice too.

Please…. all serious experience and knowledge Send emails

Thanks

Andrew Monstis
WBCA
 
Thanks.... to all of you who have sent emails to this date still open for information

Andrew Monstis
 
sharandrew said:
But why master players don't show up is that they resent the payout differences.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I will continue showing up regardless, because I always have a great time during the Vegas trip. But the Masters division, at least before the addition of the GM, has always been tough action.

The payouts are much worse, but it's a smaller field. And half the sets are basically coin flips anyway, because nobody in that division really ever misses.

Anyway, playing in the individual masters division is not really a problem. One thing I would hope is that nobody in the masters gets raised to a grand master based on regulation-size table ability. Bar table 8-ball is a different game, and when you think of the best (Kirkwood, Edey, Pickering, Wines, Tarangeau, etc..), they all play a ton of small-table pool. They're killers on a big table too, but I think that to qualify for a GM, you should be a known bar table player, or come in the top 4 of the masters division.

However, this idea about no master-level player on an Open TEAM... that is very upsetting. I love competing in the team event. I play in NYC, where we have a huge BCA league system. As far as I know, there has never been a masters-level team representing NYC, though. And if we can't put one together here, I don't know how a lot of other places with smaller systems could. (I believe there are 4 master players in NYC, and one of them has quit pool, lol.) Sure, we could put together a team, but I don't think it would be very competitive in that division. And there wouldn't be much incentive to play with us for the lower-level players we'd have to add, since they'd feel like they couldn't compete in that division.

I don't know... it's a tricky situation, but I think the previous system wasn't broken enough to warrant such a dramatic "fix".

- Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top