Opinions regarding a former top pro playing in and dominating a Poolroom‘s weekly handicapped tournament?

[ChrisinNC]

I'd tell the former pro he can't play in your event.

I can only assume he’s still playing in the tournament because the TD has yet to kick him out or has yet to give him a spot that would make it marginally closer to a 50/50 chance to win every match, which obviously has not been the case up to this point.

With a 45-5 match W/L record for the 7 tournaments he’s played in (that’s winning 90% of his matches) for what is supposed to be a fairly handicapped tournament, obviously the onus at this point is on the TD.

 

[sjm]

Dennis Hatch used to play on the Joss Tour. That was like money in the bank for him. I'm pretty sure he won more than half of the events he played. Should he have been banned?

In a cheap, social tournament that tries to equal things out some with a handicap, I say let him play. If I were on the other side of that match, I wouldn't mind losing to a much better player; they're supposed to win. If the handicap game me a fighting chance, that's all I could ask.

I don't see the comparison. Joss is a pro, unhandicapped regional tour, not a tour that designs to bridge the skill gap between participants. Nobody should ever be barred from a pro event on the basis of being over-skilled. Dennis Hatch, Jayson Shaw and Mike Dechaine all minted money on the Joss Tour before moving on to a higher level of competition, and that's as it should be. The regional tours like Mezz and Joss are the breeding ground for elite players.

In handicapped play, it is routine to disqualify those who are overqualified in the name of fair play. That's why the BCA has a masters division in its eight-ball national championships. That's why capped Fargo events have come into vogue. Nobody expects to draw a pro player in such events.

Handicapped events, far more than anything, are what is keeping pool growing in the United States, and, for all the problems that come with them, if the basic integrity of that system is compromised in events that are handicapped, it is bad for our sport.

 

[Z-Nole]

I believe Ray is closing in on 90.

It shouldn’t be too hard to throw his old ass out then, right?

 

[The Old Jaybird]

Let's just say as a 400, you don't know what you don't know.

boy isn't this the truth. as a kid, and a banger, I thought I was a decent player, as I got older, took some lessons, got more into the game, I realized just how clueless I was. I now know about 5% about playing pool.

I used to just wait until my opponent missed, then I started playing guys who didn't miss.
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Just remembered this....

About 25 years ago, I was in Albuquerque, taking lessons from Louis Roybal, and the women's pro tour came thru town. Allison Fisher, who was at the top of her game, was at the local room getting a couple pointers from Louie. He was showing her something about the game that she didn't know, hasn't ever encountered before, that I was aware of and a part of my game.

I was amazed, I knew something she did not about the game.

Might have been about banking, as that has been one of my stronger points.

 

[maha]

I think at some large difference in level, game spots are the wrong way to go. The weaker player gets two or three shots in the match where he can hit the ball. He doesn't actually get to play.

If you do make the spot reasonably fair -- like the champ is only a 70% favorite in each match -- the champ will likely stop showing up. As a 70% favorite in each match, he has only a 1 in 6 chance to win the tournament of about 32 players. Maybe he just likes to play and will be happy with that.

i like your first sentence bob

but for the
70% is ridiculous. no one in a handicapped tourny should be close to a 3 to 1 dog to win his match. 2 to 1 is too high.
3to2 ( 60/40)should be tops. if not then the handicap is flawed and the person giving it out doesn't understand grade school math.
and being a 5 to 1 dog to win against 32 players come on.

things are fun when you win relatively often. no fun when you hardly ever win.

and to be clear i am a lock artist when i make a game. but i am gambling with one person who understands what he is getting into.

 

[fjk]

I don't see the comparison. Joss is a pro, unhandicapped regional tour, not a tour that designs to bridge the skill gap between participants. Nobody should ever be barred from a pro event on the basis of being over-skilled. Dennis Hatch, Jayson Shaw and Mike Dechaine all minted money on the Joss Tour before moving on to a higher level of competition, and that's as it should be. The regional tours like Mezz and Joss are the breeding ground for elite players.

In handicapped play, it is routine to disqualify those who are overqualified in the name of fair play. That's why the BCA has a masters division in its eight-ball national championships. That's why capped Fargo events have come into vogue. Nobody expects to draw a pro player in such events.

Handicapped events, far more than anything, are what is keeping pool growing in the United States, and, for all the problems that come with them, if the basic integrity of that system is compromised in events that are handicapped, it is bad for our sport.

The Joss Tour is a handicapped "regional tour". They handicap on the entry fee ($120 vs $70). Also, the year-end points leaders typically have a 720-730 FR. I'm not sure if that tour could fairly be called a "pro tour".

The fact that Dennis dominated those regional stops meant he overcame the basic integrity of the handicap system and used that tour as his personal ATM. I don't see a significant distinction between that example and the OP's question.

Someone else hit the nail right on the head when they mentioned something about the significance of the amount of money being donated to the pro is subjective. While it could be chalked up to entertainment for some, it could be significant to others.

Look at it this way, let's exaggerate a pro tournament's entry fee to one million dollars. How many participants do you think each tournament would have? I'm going to say around 10-15 to start and that number will quickly dwindle if the same few players keep winning.

My point is (IMHO): the larger the entry fee becomes, the more equitable / accurate the handicap process should become. For small money, fun tournaments, the accuracy of the handicap is far less critical.

 

[sjm]

The Joss Tour is a handicapped "regional tour". They handicap on the entry fee ($120 vs $70). Also, the year-end points leaders typically have a 720-730 FR. I'm not sure if that tour could fairly be called a "pro tour".

The fact that Dennis dominated those regional stops meant he overcame the basic integrity of the handicap system and used that tour as his personal ATM. I don't see a significant distinction between that example and the OP's question.

Someone else hit the nail right on the head when they mentioned something about the significance of the amount of money being donated to the pro is subjective. While it could be chalked up to entertainment for some, it could be significant to others.

Look at it this way, let's exaggerate a pro tournament's entry fee to one million dollars. How many participants do you think each tournament would have? I'm going to say around 10-15 to start and that number will quickly dwindle if the same few players keep winning.

My point is (IMHO): the larger the entry fee becomes, the more equitable / accurate the handicap process should become. For small money, fun tournaments, the accuracy of the handicap is far less critical.

Fair point. It's a training ground for the pro tour, but a training ground works best without using handicaps. Perhaps it's just a semi-pro tour, in view of the fact that the prevailing view of late on the forum is that pro speed does not begin below 725 Fargo (some say higher).

I do get your point that graduated entry fee is a type of handicap and must concede that I did not know that this was the case.

 

[white1]

I think at some large difference in level, game spots are the wrong way to go. The weaker player gets two or three shots in the match where he can hit the ball. He doesn't actually get to play.

If you do make the spot reasonably fair -- like the champ is only a 70% favorite in each match -- the champ will likely stop showing up. As a 70% favorite in each match, he has only a 1 in 6 chance to win the tournament of about 32 players. Maybe he just likes to play and will be happy with that.

Absolutely agree. Game spots mean nothing when the gap is so wide. Ball spots are the only way to go and make them all wild. That levels things out pretty good.

 

[maha]

yes game spots are only appropriate when both are reasonably close. bob is right on about that. but you can devise all kinds of spots to even things out. that is on the t.d. if he is capable of it. most are not.

handicapping the money only works if they are close as a bad player even if playing for free will never ever win. unless we go by the monkeys typing a Shakespeare.

 

[R2PQZ]

For years I ran tourneys 7 days a week. You do not have to entice the top players to play. Spread the money out. First place does not need to be big money. Most are playing to learn or have a good time. Pay more places and get more players. With 16 people it would be $50 for 1st, $40 for second,$30 for third, $20 for 4th, and $10 each for 5th and 6th. And the same person could not win two weeks in a row.

I didn't mention that I won a majority of these tourneys. I was not greedy and the players enjoyed the competition. These were bar tourneys between West Seattle and Burien. $5 entry and house matched.

 

[gregcantrall]

It shouldn’t be too hard to throw his old ass out then, right?

Oh that's just wrong.
It does however give me a flashback. I think it was the Portland room. At the golf game, the one Senior Citizen hobling around the table in his walker threatening the other Senior Citizen with mayhem....if he ever catches him.

 

[gregcantrall]

I didn't mention that I won a majority of these tourneys. I was not greedy and the players enjoyed the competition. These were bar tourneys between West Seattle and Burien. $5 entry and house matched.

Well here I have been guessing who Maha is .....my lips are sealed. I never had to venture to the west side. It was a tournament rich environment on the east side. Well Grannies in Federal Way was too good to pass. With a ring game before and a big field. A small hop from Bellevue. Another up in Lynnwood got lots of attention too. Can't remember the name but had baseball bat door handles.

 

[Maniac]

Had a bar tournament here years ago at the Getaway Tavern that limited the first place winners to only playing once a month. It seemed to work okay.

We had a Wednesday night 8-ball tournament locally that had this same rule with the exception that you had to skip a week instead of a month. Nobody had a problem with it.

I went to play in the tournament one Wednesday night (this has been at least seven and maybe more years ago) and I'll be darned if Buddy Hall wasn't up there playing and ended up entering the tournament. Everybody seemed to enjoy having such pool royalty aboard and some players nearly beat him. When I left, he was still on the winner's side getting deep into the tournament.

 

[gregcantrall]

Everybody seemed to enjoy having such pool royalty

How did the Priceless commercial go?
The entry fee $xx
Being able to say I beat the Mizz Priceless.
For a recent aquintance it was Shane. Priceless.
Well for Efren just, "I got to play him" would be Priceless
As for the "you can get it on youtube ". At the handshake post game being able to say, "Uh Sir do you mind if I ask......?" Incredible answers are available if you play your cards right.

 

[Black-Balled]

That might be your best option. We have a local chip tournament that alternates between singles one week, and scotch doubles the next. Our local champion, Joven Bustamante (779 Fargo), plays in it often. It's bar table 9-ball, and he only gets 3 chips. For him to win the tournament, he has to win something like 40+ games before losing his 3 chips. Almost all of those games, his opponent breaks. It's triple tough for him to win, but he does sometimes. Usually when he does, you'll hear at least one person complain about how it's "not fair" to let him in...

It is brutal, you play so well you have to give a huge spot and in order to be competitive, you have to play that speed...and get vilified for it.

Playing for a living is tough!

 

[gregcantrall]

do you mind if I ask......?"

AND I did just that at the handshake. After I won playing Mr 600. What a bonus ! I Got the Priceless and the insight. It was double elimination and only the first set so not like I took food from his mouth. Not like I laid down in the second set but it was painless taking second that night.

 

[gregcantrall]

Priceless

OK the whole story. It was race to 2 playing 9 ball on 7 foot Diamonds.
I snapped the 9. It was a planned shot. The look he gave as he racked 'em again was uh? Did you know that break or was it luck?....Priceless! The second game that I won came to a touchy situation with the last 3 balls. I wasn't sure of the right solution but my choice worked. It might not have been the best solution but, I made it. Hence the question at the handshake. He didn't ask if the 9 ball break was planned. It didn't matter. But I did get the benefit of his insights. After he won the second set the atmosphere was conducive to more knowledge sharing.....Priceless

 

[straightline]

Curious but prolly some guy/girl I never heard of anyway...

 

[gregcantrall]

John Schmidt had the 14.1 record briefly. Mr 600.

 

[gregcantrall]

During the brief period he was in the Tri Cities WA, nobody would miss the opportunity to play in a tournament with him.