Questions CSI should answer about 25July2014 Ko Pin Yi-Ralf Souquet 8ball semifinal
- Thread starter spartan
- Start date
would be an error
If Ralf was paid third place overall instead of third place in the round robin that would indeed be an error. In this case and this format Ralf is disqualifying himself from a match he already played, a bit odd but not unheard of. Ralf could be paid first place in the round robin and Shane move ahead but that would indeed take some high level cyphering to sort out prize money.
I think that CSI did the right thing putting in Shane when Ralf withdrew before the start of the final stage, I don't know if their reasoning for doing it was right. They might have done the right thing for the wrong reason! :thumbup:
Hu
If Ralf was paid third place overall instead of third place in the round robin that would indeed be an error. In this case and this format Ralf is disqualifying himself from a match he already played, a bit odd but not unheard of. Ralf could be paid first place in the round robin and Shane move ahead but that would indeed take some high level cyphering to sort out prize money.
I think that CSI did the right thing putting in Shane when Ralf withdrew before the start of the final stage, I don't know if their reasoning for doing it was right. They might have done the right thing for the wrong reason! :thumbup:
Hu
RBC
Deceased
This is all just crazy.
I remember a few years back when that guy in Arizona tried to run a pro event. He ended up at the last minute moving the event to a pool room. At the pool room he couldn't raise enough from the admissions to cover what he had planned and couldn't pay the last 11 or 12 players. He wrote them all checks, but they all bounced.
I don't think he was crucified like this and he out and out failed to pay the top 12 players!
To continue with the saga, I was present when Mark Griffin got many of the players together during the BCA Nationals and paid them! Yes, that's right. He paid off another promoters failed tournament!
For years the US Open has failed to pay the top players until much after the tournament.
At the Qlympics, held in Louiseville several years ago by none other than Mark Griffin, the tournament was a complete bust. The turnout was extremely low for both the pro's and the amateurs. But, even though he lost a seriously stupid amount of money, Mark Griffin paid. He added all the money he promised to add even though the turnout was bad.
Facts, at least as I understand them:
This was not an elimination tournament, it was a round robin.
Ralph finished first in his group.
Shane finished second in the same group.
One player from each group is advanced to the final group.
Ralph backed out so Shane, the next in line was advanced.
What Ralph got paid, or whether Ralph got paid is between Ralph and the tournament promoters.
If any player refused to play, then he should be informed of the consequences. If I told my local tournament director that I won't play the finals, I'm sure he will inform me that if I don't play, then I certainly can't win.
Sorry guys, but all this is just crazy. It's pool biting the hand that is feeding it.
I think I have to let this go now.
Royce
I remember a few years back when that guy in Arizona tried to run a pro event. He ended up at the last minute moving the event to a pool room. At the pool room he couldn't raise enough from the admissions to cover what he had planned and couldn't pay the last 11 or 12 players. He wrote them all checks, but they all bounced.
I don't think he was crucified like this and he out and out failed to pay the top 12 players!
To continue with the saga, I was present when Mark Griffin got many of the players together during the BCA Nationals and paid them! Yes, that's right. He paid off another promoters failed tournament!
For years the US Open has failed to pay the top players until much after the tournament.
At the Qlympics, held in Louiseville several years ago by none other than Mark Griffin, the tournament was a complete bust. The turnout was extremely low for both the pro's and the amateurs. But, even though he lost a seriously stupid amount of money, Mark Griffin paid. He added all the money he promised to add even though the turnout was bad.
Facts, at least as I understand them:
This was not an elimination tournament, it was a round robin.
Ralph finished first in his group.
Shane finished second in the same group.
One player from each group is advanced to the final group.
Ralph backed out so Shane, the next in line was advanced.
What Ralph got paid, or whether Ralph got paid is between Ralph and the tournament promoters.
If any player refused to play, then he should be informed of the consequences. If I told my local tournament director that I won't play the finals, I'm sure he will inform me that if I don't play, then I certainly can't win.
Sorry guys, but all this is just crazy. It's pool biting the hand that is feeding it.
I think I have to let this go now.
Royce
Do you really think that Mark cares if this thread showed up. He was 100% correct. And Ko didn't get screwed, he knew when he won his group to make the final 4 he had to WIN a match to make the finals, no matter who he played.
dom_poppa
Banned
Under no circumstance should a tournament bring back an eliminated player to fill up a spot just to please the viewers that were watching. It is part of the game, forfeits happen and dream match-ups don't pan out in sports.
Don't mess with the integrity of the game just to please viewers. If the viewers are mad then they should be mad at forfeiting player or forfeiting team. The viewers will understand because the integrity of the game can't be compromised.
It is first and foremost a tournament not a spectacle.
I thought the "free" lessons had been discussed from the beginning. I recall hearing about them months ago on the podcast. Why was this even an issue? Was it a miscommunication, or a change of heart by the players after agreeing to do them?
I assume that no Taiwanese players were forced into attending this event? Maybe I'm wrong.
Last edited:
And you give no consideration to the muti staged nature of this tournament along with precedent?
Wow,I'm surprised anyone is brave enough to live stream ANY pool event with all the crap they gotta listen to.Get over it and let's move on to the next one and see how terribly they run that tournament too.
dom_poppa
Banned
If there is a good reason or stated in the rules that this can be done then I am ok with it. As a player, one should know what he is getting into.
As for people addressing SVB being thrown in there to play Ko for the audience. That is wrong. I am sure the viewers here are adults and the game can't be compromised.
Pleasing viewers when there is more at stake such as the prize money. You can't go messing around with spots. I know it is their tournament but if you are going to help pool, the game comes first before a bunch of streamers.
Want to get mad for not seeing SVB play or a semi-finals match? Get mad at SVB for not playing better -or- get mad at the gentleman who forfeit. Might as well have SVB play the champion of the tourney too. Since online streamers want that too.
I think we agree!
This is the conceptual problem. This is not an elimination tournament format. It's not about eliminating anybody. It's about advancing one player from each group to play in the final 4.
If you get fourth place in the US Olympic trials you don't go to the olympics--unless of course one of the top three backs out...
Ralph advanced and was paid. His name was on the brackets and he forfeited. Thus giving ko a bye.
where did this info come from?
Last edited:
Standing Our Ground!
I hope these champion Taiwanese players don't think we make up special rules just for them. Taiwanese winners DQ'd from Open 8 ball in 2012 and now an opponent reassignment in 2014. Hope they don't think we don't want them over here! Can you imagine finding out late as you're advancing in the US open double elimination tournament that your scheduled opponent forfeited but you had to play someone else they "just moved them up?" Or how about at Derby if your opponent in the round before the money forfeits and the Tournament Director says they have found somebody else to play you, like, say, Shane Van Boening? (I always thought a forfeit was a loss and a loss was a win for the opponent. But on second thought we don't need their kind of players over here anyway skimming off our payouts. IMHO. LOL. WTF. IDK!)
I hope these champion Taiwanese players don't think we make up special rules just for them. Taiwanese winners DQ'd from Open 8 ball in 2012 and now an opponent reassignment in 2014. Hope they don't think we don't want them over here! Can you imagine finding out late as you're advancing in the US open double elimination tournament that your scheduled opponent forfeited but you had to play someone else they "just moved them up?" Or how about at Derby if your opponent in the round before the money forfeits and the Tournament Director says they have found somebody else to play you, like, say, Shane Van Boening? (I always thought a forfeit was a loss and a loss was a win for the opponent. But on second thought we don't need their kind of players over here anyway skimming off our payouts. IMHO. LOL. WTF. IDK!)
One could get the impression from reading these and similar threads that the Taiwan players are under the control of some murky band of 'investors' back home. They are in fact supported by their federation headed by a hard working president named Mr Tu and his glamorous sidekick Sophie Chen. He put in place a remarkable government backed scheme that got pool on the school curriculum. So Ko, Ko and Chang were all schoolboy pool pupils. Now they are battle hardened world travellers
I have negotiated flight and accommodation deals with them in the past and I am pretty certain that Mark would have done something similar. This would give him some leverage on the ‘free lessons’ thing. But not all players are comfortable teaching. So perhaps just mingling or an organised autograph session should have been an alternative contribution.
If Mark picked up those expenses tabs and he pulled up the prize fund then, faced with a number of legitimate alternative solutions, he chose one that suited him. The next best thing to do after that was to say He who pays the piper calls the tune. So MYOFB!
I have never understood the concept that promoters are required to bare every aspect of what should be private commercial information to bystanders on this forum.
I have negotiated flight and accommodation deals with them in the past and I am pretty certain that Mark would have done something similar. This would give him some leverage on the ‘free lessons’ thing. But not all players are comfortable teaching. So perhaps just mingling or an organised autograph session should have been an alternative contribution.
If Mark picked up those expenses tabs and he pulled up the prize fund then, faced with a number of legitimate alternative solutions, he chose one that suited him. The next best thing to do after that was to say He who pays the piper calls the tune. So MYOFB!
I have never understood the concept that promoters are required to bare every aspect of what should be private commercial information to bystanders on this forum.
You would have a point if Ralf or Ko broke the 1st rack and then Ralf quit. At that point, Ko would get a bye.
But that's not what happened.
So you're wrong.
Sorry.