TX Poolnut said:
TX,
For being the voice of integrity in an otherwise generally morally bankrupt thread, I'm giving you positive rep!
Russ
Old Wive's tales are true! and an ethics question..
- Thread starter PlynSets
- Start date
TX,
For being the voice of integrity in an otherwise generally morally bankrupt thread, I'm giving you positive rep!
Russ
PlynSets said:
The thing is that you weren't gambling, you were competing. When you rig a competition there is a bit of a smell in the air. However when the TD blessed your action there is nothing anyone else can say.
Competing in individual sports as a team goes on in quite a few sports now and indeed is how Dale Earnhart got himself killed racing stock cars. If it is legal, it will be done. Is it ethical? Not in my book.
It wasn't a sin that would keep me up nights but the fact that you don't feel quite right about it answers your own question.
Hu
PS Playing in the wading pool is fun now and then and I was glad to find bangersville once in awhile when I was paying bills off of pool winnings.
Hi Russ. I would have to respectfully disagree with this statement as a blanket over all situations. Certainly, you and I agree that dumping is wrong and in this case we believe he did the wrong thing.Russ Chewning said:
However, there are times when "forfeiting a match on purpose as dumping" may not be the case.
I've seen a player forfeit a match on purpose because he got a call that his wife was going into labor. Certainly, that isn't dumping.
I think dumping and forfeiting shouldn't be muddled together, because they can be two totally seperate things.
Russ Chewning said:
The world doesn't revolve around you.
ghost ball
For the original poster: Respectfully, I think it was wrong to take the experience of the first time cashing in a tournament away from your gal. How much better she will feel when she finally cashes on her own merit.
As good as she seemed to feel, I'm sure when she finally does cash on her own, her pride in her game and self-esteem will go thru the roof.
If I offend, I certainly don't mean to.
As good as she seemed to feel, I'm sure when she finally does cash on her own, her pride in her game and self-esteem will go thru the roof.
If I offend, I certainly don't mean to.
hilla_hilla said:On a side note I played a bar tournament the other day. My friend saw that if we both won our next matches we would be playing each other in the finals. We both decided to split before we even played and ironically we both lost that match and ended up playing on the losers side way before the finals. I ended up knocking her out and won 2 more matches before placing 2nd which was barely enough money to buy us a good chinese dinner
Yup.. I got talked into letting a friend win a match ONCE, and only ONCE. Back then I really didn't know about such things, and did not realize it was an integrity thing.
It was a "Quick Draw Showdown" video game tournament, where you pull a light gun and average your times to see who wins a match. My friend and I always had consistently lower averages than this other guy, who was our main competition. I was a bit more consistently low than my friend. He says to me, "Lose to me, and I'll beat this guy, and we'll spilt the money. That way, you can take out everyone in the loser's bracket.
Well.. I do.. And then he has a bad match against the guy, and I have a bad match in the loser's bracket. He loses to someone else, and we split $100, versus the probable $500 we split if we just let the best shooter on that particular match be decided by the draws.
I now have a hard and fast rule: If I play a friend in a tourney, I try to beat his brains in, and he does the same to me. The best shooter goes through, and the weaker shooter is still fired up from playing his hardest. He then goes to the loser's bracket with a good attitude. This is the best way to do it, and luckily enough, it's the most honest way to do it!
Russ
TX Poolnut said:I've seen a player forfeit a match on purpose because he got a call that his wife was going into labor. Certainly, that isn't dumping.
I think dumping and forfeiting shouldn't be muddled together, because they can be two totally seperate things.
Oh come on now, TX.. You know this isn't what I am talking about.
Russ
does'nt matter to me i'd beat my girlfriends brains out cause that guy in the loser's bracket may get lucky and win then what have i accomplished? i dont care who your playing i've beat top notch players and i've been beat by bangers so i'll always opt for the sure money even then knowin my girlfriend she would beat me to death if given the chance.
TX Poolnut said:For the original poster: Respectfully, I think it was wrong to take the experience of the first time cashing in a tournament away from your gal. How much better she will feel when she finally cashes on her own merit.
As good as she seemed to feel, I'm sure when she finally does cash on her own, her pride in her game and self-esteem will go thru the roof.
If I offend, I certainly don't mean to.
Another excellent post. You might be right on that! She did play well enough that she would've placed 3rd overall even if we did play each other and I won. I just bumped her to 2nd via the forfeit.
It's an interesting question indeed, if whether the prize money jump was worth taking the experience of her actually placing in the money on her own merits away. I suppose on some level if she was going to place 3rd minimum it's arguable that she already got some of that experience? But your right winning on your own merit and nothing else is a good feeling. I might have taken something away from that experience by pushing her up the ladder in the tourny through something other then her own merit.
I'll ask her about that later today when I see her and let you know how she responds.
DJ
Yes, I know. I just wanted to make sure that forfeiting and dumping don't get all cozy in this discussion.Russ Chewning said:
The bottom line is forfeiting by dumping is always unethical.
Forfeiting can go either way depending on the circumstances.
In this situation, it was dumping. As such, it was unethical IMO.
Sorry for the nitpicking.
Rep back to ya.TX Poolnut said:Yes, I know. I just wanted to make sure that forfeiting and dumping don't get all cozy in this discussion.
The bottom line is forfeiting by dumping is always unethical.
Forfeiting can go either way depending on the circumstances.
In this situation, it was dumping. As such, it was unethical IMO.
Sorry for the nitpicking.
Not to get caught up in semantics here.. But..
isn't dumping when your misleading a person or persons by playing below your capabillities?
Forfeiting isn't attempting to mislead anyone? It's a declaration of loss for whatever reason.
I'm struggling to see how I "dumped?" I can see how I didn't give my best efforts to "win" persay, but I certainly didn't mislead anyone with my actions? (which would imply "dumping" to me.) Well not my best effort to win isn't even right.. I put forth my best effort to "win it all" I'd guess you'd say.
Again, I don't know if what I did was right but I didn't think I "dumped" at all in this tournament. I thought the "ethical" portion I was dipping into was more the taking advantage of the situation at hand with regards to knowing the rules of a tournament and the odds on outcomes to a match before it was played, and making decisions on those odds to maximise the outcome.
I will say though that I do appreciate both yours and Russ's comments on the thread. I put it up here for both good and bad. So I do not take it personally when you guys say you don't agree with what I did.
DJ
Last edited:
I think the confusion is that we sometimes get the two words mixed up and it's very important that we don't do that. I say IMO:PlynSets said:
Wether forfeiting is wrong is totally dependent on the circumstances.
Not all forfeiting is wrong.
All dumping is wrong including forfeiting to a weaker player.
I love ethics threads.
Last edited:
To clarify MY definition of dumping:
Dumping is purposely losing a match for any reason that does not include having to leave the tournament in the immediate future for some reason.
I.e. If you have to leave because you were supposed to be home at 11PM, then it is okay to forfeit the match. If you forfeit because you have a money game on the side, that is dumping. If you forfeit to increase your odds of taking more money in the tourney, that is dumping. If you forfeit because you got a business phone call that you have to take care of immediately, that is not dumping. If you forfeit because you like your opponent and just want him to win, that is dumping.
Hence, dumping is being at the location, healthy, and ready to play, but forfeiting or losing on purpose for any reason that is completely within your control, to a certain extent.
Please, no nitpickers need to respond saying losing or not losing to your girlfriend is not under your control. I think at this point, every one knows what I think would be a dump, and what would be a valid forfeit.
Russ
Dumping is purposely losing a match for any reason that does not include having to leave the tournament in the immediate future for some reason.
I.e. If you have to leave because you were supposed to be home at 11PM, then it is okay to forfeit the match. If you forfeit because you have a money game on the side, that is dumping. If you forfeit to increase your odds of taking more money in the tourney, that is dumping. If you forfeit because you got a business phone call that you have to take care of immediately, that is not dumping. If you forfeit because you like your opponent and just want him to win, that is dumping.
Hence, dumping is being at the location, healthy, and ready to play, but forfeiting or losing on purpose for any reason that is completely within your control, to a certain extent.
Please, no nitpickers need to respond saying losing or not losing to your girlfriend is not under your control. I think at this point, every one knows what I think would be a dump, and what would be a valid forfeit.
Russ
Last edited:
Russ Chewning said:
If the business guy gets a pass, then the money-game guy should also get a pass. I don't match up for money that often, and I have never quit a tournament to gamble, so I'm not saying this to be defensive.
They are both forfeiting for the same reason, which is because they feel that quitting the match will result in more net profit than continuing in the tournament. Just my opinion.
Cuebacca
PS. Good thread.
Last edited:
Cuebacca said:If the business guy gets a pass, then the money-game guy should also get a pass. I don't match up for money that often, and I have never quit a tournament to gamble, so I'm not saying this to be defensive.
They are both forfeiting for the same reason, which is because they feel that quitting the match will result in more net profit than continuing in the tournament. Just my opinion.
Cuebacca
PS. Good thread.
No offense, and I swear I am not being antagonistic on this one..
But isn't this the thought process of a pool player who "dumps his backer"? He figures he will make more money this match if he locks up a profit on the front end by agreeing to throw the match to his opponent in return for an assured share of the profits. If this were the prevailing thought process, there would never be an honest match. The player being backed by the bigger "go-off" between two backers would always dump.
Sometimes, integrity and honor have to be a part of the game. If it weren't for regular people with regular jobs, there would not be any money in circulation for anyone to gamble with. Therefore, if a person gets a legitimate business call during a tournament, sorry.. He's gotta do what he's gotta do.
Let me put it like this. A few times players at the Derby City Classic or other tourneys have forfeited matches because they have been up all night gambling. Now, for the spectators who got to see the after hours matchup, this would be great fun. For those who buy Accu-Stats videos of the tournament matches, they might be a little irritated that they won't be able to buy the match between Mr. Pro A, and Efren Reyes.
Who deserves more attention? Ida know.. But sometimes when you are a "professional".....You gotta act "professional"...
All I am trying to say is, IMHO, entering a tournament and then quitting to gamble is unprofessional. People often attend tournaments for the chance to compete against certain players in the tournament. "Name" guys.
Not that he would do it, but if you were at the DCC, playing extremely well, and Efren was your next match, and you had never played him before, and he forfeited to go play a money match... Would you still feel the same? You might.. But I know I would be really hacked off. Then again, I think Efren is WAY too professional, and has WAY too much pride to do something that low.
Russ
Russ Chewning 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
Sounds like you had a fun night out, playnsets and your ethics were on par with where you were playing. It can backfire being too clever though. I've seen 'anyone' win a comp.