Old Wive's tales are true! and an ethics question..
- Thread starter PlynSets
- Start date
I would normally agree with this, unless it is to your wife/girlfriend.Russ Chewning said:
I think you made the right choice plynsets. Great story too!!!
If his GF is anything like my wife, she could care less about the game and what place she "earned" and rather have the larger prize.jema888 said:
Don't agree with all of your thoughts on this but.....
I really don't have to nor will we all ever have the same thoughts and reactions! I will read your next story also ! Hell! isn't this what storys on here are for? to stimulate discussion and thoughts ! In that aspect stories are just like opinions ! "every one has one! LOL!
Gerry said:I liked the story!.....I'll read your next one.
but like in every cross section of life, some agree with you some don't and if we bring politics and religion into this post, it might just really get interesting
Gerry
I really don't have to nor will we all ever have the same thoughts and reactions! I will read your next story also ! Hell! isn't this what storys on here are for? to stimulate discussion and thoughts ! In that aspect stories are just like opinions ! "every one has one! LOL!
Ahhhh....Bangersville. I've been there hundreds of times
We've got, or at least used to have, Bangervilles spread across Australia, though more and more non-bangers began to find these bars and clubs and make the action a bit tougher...lol
Just one story: I remember one bar ran a 15-ball pot out comp. You'd break (ball didn't have to go in) then have to pot all remaining balls without a miss. The comp was jackpotting for 8 weeks by the time me and a buddy found out about it.
They got a little nervous when they recognized us walking in the door so made a rule on the spot that A-graders had to run the table twice in a row to win, thinking that would scare us away. Still great odds we thought at $2 entry per attempt to win about $500.
Anyway, I'm about 3rd guy up, with my buddy who shoots about the same to follow. I clean up the 2 racks, collect the cash and then my buddy (who's going halves with me) asks for his $2 back, which didn't get a warm response.
Couldn't help but feel a bit guilty ruining all the local's fun. But hard to knock back such opportunities.
As for your ethical dilemma Plynsets, I think you should play the game and accept the result. It's kind of the unwritten code of entering a tourney. But I don't feel too strongly about it. In some ways it's a kind of strategy that most entrants accept and take part in when they get the chance.
I wonder if Russ, if playing a semi with a buddy (who he's going halves with), who happens to play a tad better and is a proven final winner, would not be tempted to let his mate win?
If he didn't, and then loses the final, it may be the last time he gets to go halves. If that's his choice, so be it.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone I say.
Colin
We've got, or at least used to have, Bangervilles spread across Australia, though more and more non-bangers began to find these bars and clubs and make the action a bit tougher...lol
Just one story: I remember one bar ran a 15-ball pot out comp. You'd break (ball didn't have to go in) then have to pot all remaining balls without a miss. The comp was jackpotting for 8 weeks by the time me and a buddy found out about it.
They got a little nervous when they recognized us walking in the door so made a rule on the spot that A-graders had to run the table twice in a row to win, thinking that would scare us away. Still great odds we thought at $2 entry per attempt to win about $500.
Anyway, I'm about 3rd guy up, with my buddy who shoots about the same to follow. I clean up the 2 racks, collect the cash and then my buddy (who's going halves with me) asks for his $2 back, which didn't get a warm response.
Couldn't help but feel a bit guilty ruining all the local's fun. But hard to knock back such opportunities.
As for your ethical dilemma Plynsets, I think you should play the game and accept the result. It's kind of the unwritten code of entering a tourney. But I don't feel too strongly about it. In some ways it's a kind of strategy that most entrants accept and take part in when they get the chance.
I wonder if Russ, if playing a semi with a buddy (who he's going halves with), who happens to play a tad better and is a proven final winner, would not be tempted to let his mate win?
If he didn't, and then loses the final, it may be the last time he gets to go halves. If that's his choice, so be it.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone I say.
Colin
Well ...
Anyone that has split 1st and 2nd place money in a tournament would be in question? As would savers in a tournament? Would be nice if everyone played by the same rules, but everyone doesn't. I have split with friends even though I knew I could win, because friendship is more important to me than the $20 or $30 dollars it is going to cost me.
I can't believe a 'D' player (girlfriend) won 3 consecutive matches to get to the final match on the winner's side!
I have a question for Plynsets though - Is your girlfriend now a HO legally since she gave you a BJ for the dollar difference between 2nd and 3rd that
you paid for?
Ethically - no, legally - yes? See, depends on how you looki at things ... lol
Anyone that has split 1st and 2nd place money in a tournament would be in question? As would savers in a tournament? Would be nice if everyone played by the same rules, but everyone doesn't. I have split with friends even though I knew I could win, because friendship is more important to me than the $20 or $30 dollars it is going to cost me.
I can't believe a 'D' player (girlfriend) won 3 consecutive matches to get to the final match on the winner's side!
I have a question for Plynsets though - Is your girlfriend now a HO legally since she gave you a BJ for the dollar difference between 2nd and 3rd that
you paid for?
Ethically - no, legally - yes? See, depends on how you looki at things ... lol
Snapshot9 said:
A few weekends ago my wife (Bless her 'ol no pool-shootin' heart) who is an APA SL3 (probably on the low side) and I entered a Friday night 8-ball tourney at the local bar we frequent. Eight players entered. To make a long story short my wife won the tournament, beating three men with SL5 skill levels. What made this more unlikely was that the format was that the matches were the best-out-of-three. She got hot, and got some breaks and some timely missed shots from her opponents. It can happen to anyone, anytime. They weren't cutting her any slack either, because the guy she beat for the money went straight to the TD for his second place money and left in a huff (come to find out he doesn't like to lose to a woman, and he'd better get used to it).
Maniac
I oughta keep silent....
....but I'm too stupid to. I'm seeing some comments here about ethics, morals, and "unwritten rules" type of posts. IMO, the same people who thought it was O.K. for Harriman to climb up on the table w/shoes off to take a shot shouldn't have a problem with a guy forfeiting a match to give his g/f a shot at more money and a higher finish. After all, there obviously was nothing in the rules to prevent it, right? Now, I'm not gonna say which side I'm on with this "forfeiting" thing, because I don't want to stir the pot any more than it already is. But ethics, morals, and "unwritten rules" are subjective to each and every individual who may or may not break one for their own advantage, The only thing that is an absolute in anything, is a "written" rule!!!
Maniac
....but I'm too stupid to. I'm seeing some comments here about ethics, morals, and "unwritten rules" type of posts. IMO, the same people who thought it was O.K. for Harriman to climb up on the table w/shoes off to take a shot shouldn't have a problem with a guy forfeiting a match to give his g/f a shot at more money and a higher finish. After all, there obviously was nothing in the rules to prevent it, right? Now, I'm not gonna say which side I'm on with this "forfeiting" thing, because I don't want to stir the pot any more than it already is. But ethics, morals, and "unwritten rules" are subjective to each and every individual who may or may not break one for their own advantage, The only thing that is an absolute in anything, is a "written" rule!!!
Maniac
Snapshot9 said:
SnapShot, she didn't give me a BJ for some dollar difference between 2nd and 3rd? Not that it's any of your biz, but I didn't get a BJ that night? Where do you get off calling her "legally" a ho?
As far as her winning the 3 consecutive matches, I was a little more then surprised myself, but she pulled them out.
DJ
Cuebacca said:Thank you for bringing up these additional points. To answer your question, no, my thought process on this topic would not lead me to dump a backer. Not just no, hell no. That is a good example of something that is flat out wrong. Admittedly, I didn't think my comment through enough to address these additional factors at the time of the post.
My comments were based smaller tournaments, no calcutta, no spectator fee, no one backing the forfeiter, no advanced sign-ups that would lead someone to drive many miles to watch a specific pro. Basically, I'm saying that if someone is not getting screwed by the money-game guy leaving, then it is just as morally sound as business guy leaving.
For a professional match where spectators have already paid, or where Accu-Stats has already invested, based on the condition that a certain number of pros will be there, then I agree that it is best for the sport to keep things professional. (As an aside, that also means that the business guy better have had his phone on silent.)
I do think that the Accu-Stats aspect might depend on what the players are told, what they know, or what they agree to in advance. If Accu-Stats is sponsoring a tournament, then those pros should be told up front or made to sign a contract agreeing to play. However, there should be exceptions in cases of emergency, etc.
Basically, what I was saying is that the type of business shouldn't matter, assuming its not the business of screwing people over. What should matter is what type of expectations are there for the person to stay, and whether or not those expectations reasonable. If a pro entered a $5 weekly tournament, and left to play a one-pocket for $1000 per game, I think that's just as legit as the business guy leaving because he's short on help at his store and wants to keep it open for the last two hours of the day. There is no reasonable expectation in this case that the pro would be causing loss for someone by him leaving.
At the DCC, if Efren left before I got to play him, it would be bad for the other reasons discussed (Accu-Stats, fans, professionalism, etc.). However, I wouldn't feel like he did me personally wrong by leaving before I got to play him. I'm not saying I wouldn't be disappointed, but I wouldn't feel like he screwed me. The reason is because I don't think we can have it both ways. This is a professional event we are talking about. If I am a no-name chump at pool, which in the grand scheme of things isn't too far off in my case, then I don't have a right to enter a pro tournament and demand that they should have to stay just to play against me. If I get to play them, I'm lucky, and I'm toast. If Efren leaves, I'll just have to tell my friends, tongue in cheek, that I got past Efren.
Cheers,
Cuebacca
I'd like to add to this a bit.. Out here we don't have tournaments of that scale (atleast not that I've ever seen). Sometimes there's side action on players and things of that nature, but it's pretty rare unless your up at Hardtimes or something. I've never even heard of a "calcutta" previous to being on this website, and I've always paid my own entree fee's into tournaments so I wouldn't be letting anyone down, and my choices are just that, my choices. They don't affect anyone else except me with regards to whether or not I packed up my cues and walked out, or played till the bitter end.
A few weeks back I played the family tournament in Oceanside, and managed ended up playing a pretty decent local A player. Actually the same guy that put 3 racks on me to put me in the losers bracket. When we played in the finals I didn't play my best, but to say I got some rolls is an understatement. I could do no wrong against this guy.. I missed the ball it'd end up safe somehow someway, or in one case I missed a 6 ball pretty thick and it went 2 rails and cut a 9 ball down the rail like it had eyes. In a race to 5 the score was 4:2 (me winning) and on sitting on the hill I looked at the guy and felt bad about what had happened so I offered to split 1st and 2nd with him. He was a little take back becuase the odds of him winning the set were pretty slim. He accepted and we split.
Is it ethical that I offered that becuase I was killing him on luck and not skill? Seemed like the right thing to do to me..
Or would that be considered "dumping" becuase I didn't finish out the set.
DJ
Snapshot9 said:
The ethical question is wether it is OK to do something that may adversely affect a player who has no control over your decision. In your example, both players are agreeing to split first and second place prizes. There is no ethical compromise here because the outcome of that agreement doesn't affect anyone but the two parties involved. You're comparing two completely different scenarios.
Same answer for post #51.
Last edited:
OMG, is there even a question that this is unethical????
Basically, there are 3 people left and you pull a move so that you and your gf can pull 1st and 2nd. The stranger is basically screwed into 3rd place.
Does this happen? All the time. I've seen players better than you with much more at stake pull stunts that were far more obvious. Is it wrong? You better believe it is.
Look, you pull it at your homeroom and everyone will have a chuckle about it and move on. Do this where YOU'RE the outsider and you're taking your chances.
Basically, there are 3 people left and you pull a move so that you and your gf can pull 1st and 2nd. The stranger is basically screwed into 3rd place.
Does this happen? All the time. I've seen players better than you with much more at stake pull stunts that were far more obvious. Is it wrong? You better believe it is.
Look, you pull it at your homeroom and everyone will have a chuckle about it and move on. Do this where YOU'RE the outsider and you're taking your chances.
Jude Rosenstock said:
How do ya figure that?
I pulled a move that locked my chick into 2nd, and the stranger isn't "screwed" into 3rd place, he just has to get by me to get to play for first.. He still has a chance to win?
Incidentally, I did do this in a hall where I was the outsider, not my local hall.
DJ
PlynSets said:
Well, I think this will be my last post on this thread, because some people just don't seem to "get" it.
A lot of people on here (me included) believe in playing as hard as you can against every opponent, no matter who they might be. Forfeiting a match to a friend, gf, wife, etc, has the SAME effect as actually playing them, and losing on purpose.
A lot of people also believe (me included) that every placing in a tournament should be decided by skill, as much as the inherent luck factor in pool will allow. Therefore, by forfeiting a match to a friend, gf, wife, etc.. You are changing the natural flow of the tournament, for your own gain. Does that sound right to you?
Besides, losing matches on purpose or forfeiting them to your friend, gf, wife, etc, does nothing to build the killer instinct that higher level pool players need to beat champions.
You've conveniently ignored my question about you possibly going into the loser's bracket and playing your first match there, breaking in an 8 ball, scratching, and busting out of the tournament. In that scenario, you have possibly stolen a developing player's chance to play you once in the winner's bracket, and once in the loser's bracket.
IMHO, changing the natural flow of a tournament for personal gain is wrong. Just plain wrong. Use semantics to word it another way, you'll never convince me. It's just wrong.
Then again, my tendency to play my hardest in every single match or matchup is what has lead people to say I have "heart".
Do you want to have "heart" too?
Russ
PlynSets said:
If you need to ask me this question, no answer I give you will make you understand but I will try:
HONEST: Everyone plays as well as they can and whatever happens, happens.
DISHONEST: Two of the remaining three players make an agreement with the intention of increasing their chances of finishing 1st and 2nd.
If you're gonna box a guy out for $20 more, I mean, wow. That's really kinda sad. I wouldn't come here expecting us to pat you on the back and tell you you're a champ! It's a move and an old one at that. And there are a lot of people just waiting to beat the shit out of the next kid that pulls that move. You do that at a room where you don't know the history and you are taking a serious chance with your health. Why on Earth would you bother for such low stakes?
you forfieted,(dumped) so your gf could get the hotseat and you could play the guy because you had a better chance of beating him on the b side than your gf and you don't understand how he got screwed?PlynSets said:
C'mon....
Jude Rosenstock said:
Jude, let me clarify somethings for ya real quick. 1st off I didn't come on here expecting anyone to "pat me on the back." I came on here to tell an entertaining story and pose a debatable ethics question.
Now there's some that will say that's there's nothing wrong with it, and some that will say there is.. Hence the "debatable" portion of the question at hand. It seems like you and ole Russ over there are trying to take it to a more personal level and I have to question why?
As far as alot of guys waiting to beat the shit out of a "kid." Well I officially hit the old guy mark on the 1st of october (I'm 30). The only thing that's truly sad mentioned here is that there's alot of guys waiting to beat the shit out of a kid?
You can disagree with it, and you can say that you believe it to be unethical (which hey, I'm all for that's the reason I put the thread up was to discuss it.. both sides of the equation). You see alot of people in this thread look at both sides of the equation and make a decision based upon that information. They realize while that may be their opinion it's not the only one out there, and to fully come to a conclusion on any debatable topic you must fully understand both sides of that equation.
What you failed to read was, it wasn't sitting quite a 100% with me which is the reason that I poised the question in the 1st place. I see nothing wrong with splitting 1st and second with my chick, that's pretty common place. Your right though it wasn't too cool to box the guy out of his opportunity to play for second. I had already come to that conclusion previous to posting the thread.
I've seen "the move" (as you put it) done in several tournaments before (and so have several others by the looks of the thread) so what I poised was how does everyone feel about it?
Again it's a debatable question, not personal, why can't we just leave it at that?
DJ
Last edited:
supergreenman said:
LOL... Well ya know for the sake of debate.
Yeah the odds shifted considerably against him once "the move" (god I like that term.. thanks for that Jude) was pulled. So I suppose he got the short end of the stick with regards to that. Hey the guy just beat my roomate though (plays even speed with me) so it's not like he didn't have some chance of winning. Albeit my roomy should've won the set, and happened to miss an 8 ball which is how the guy advanced. Had the roomate won the set, then I guess this would be a pretty moot conversation as we would've split 1st - 3rd as we'd be the only 3 in the finals.
I'll agree on that point though, yeah the guy got screwed a bit. My point above though is his odds of winning seriously decreased, but he wasn't "screwed" to 3rd place. He still did have some chance of winning, he could've gotten by me same as my roomy, and perhaps either beaten or lost to my chick?
Honestly though "the move" happened to me in the past and I never cared, still doesn't make it right though I suppose.
Something to be noted as well (not that it matters too much but some) "the move" was pulled previous to my roomate playing the guy that took third. If my guy won that set then we were splitting either way.. Again not a huge point, but should be noted.
DJ
Last edited:
Russ Chewning said:
God I hope so...
Ya know Russ, when you go out to a bar with some non pool players and you run a rack.. They think it's pretty cool. If you run two in a couple games they think your gods gift to pool.. If you sit there and pound them into the ground their not going to want to play pool with you anymore. For the most part I don't play pool when I go out with my friends to bars (or other social interactions where "pool" isn't the main venue) I just go and have beers and have a good time. I guess I just don't have that "beat their brains in" mentallity that's going to make me a world champion someday like you. I could see how Beating a bangers brains in is definately key in that venture.
Well no Russ it doesn't.. That's the reason why I poised the question in the 1st place, was for the sake of debate. The difference here though is I'm willing to explore both sides of the fence and look at all the angles. Your seeing one, and anyone that disagrees with you is a schlep in your mind.. Or they just... what was the words you used? Oh that's right
You always seem to have to put yourself on some pedestal, or throw some insult to try to justify what your saying is right. Russ.. Might I point out to you that you yourself by your own admission have pulled the very same move? If it is so fundamentally wrong on soooooo many levels, then why did you do it way back then? You said you only did it once and y'all lost. In that post you made it sound like the reasoning for never doing it again was becuase it didn't work out the way you planned. Only in the other posts are you throwing boulders in the metaphorical glass house.
Russ, I've been keeping my mouth shut, and doing my absolute best to not get into the pissing contest with you, but I'll be damned if with your tone and words you've yet rubbed me the wrong way again in this entire thread.
That being said, what in the hell do you think you know about higher level pool or what it takes to "beat" champions? Have you ever played a champion? Gambled against one? Had the opportunity to practice with one? Aside from some fantasy in your head, I don't think you have.
Further more the advice and things I learn from this website come from people that are actually willing to "listen" and talk, as well as back up what they say. You are in my opinion a Blow Hard. I don't think you have the faintest idea about what your talking about. I honestly think your some C player that came on here picked up some terminology and has been running racks online ever since.
Ignored? In the way you wrote it in the previous post it didn't come acros to me like you were asking a question, it came across as you were making some hypothetical statement. I thought the hypotheticals were covered after you followed it up with your deranged logic of how a business man could forfeit but a guy forfeiting to play a large money set couldn't.
Well again Russ, my purpose here wasn't to "convince" you of anything, but rather to have an interesting and hopefully intellectual debate covering both sides of the coin about a given topic. Nobody was attacking you or trying to change your opinion on anything. You've since the beginning of this "morally bankrupt" thread have been attacking me, and even after I tried the "lets turn over a new leaf" thing you keep going with your blowhard self. That in turn is what finally generated this response.
Russ, again, I don't believe your a player. I also believe (scratch that "know", just becuase of your post above) that you don't have the faintest idea of what "heart" is to a "real" pool player. Having "heart" as it's typicaly described in a pool room, is overcoming some challenge when the odds are stacked against you, and not falling apart during the process.
Russ, I know I have "heart.." I also know I have "gamble.." I'm also pretty convinced you don't know what either of them mean.
DJ
Last edited: