The Jeanette Lee Calcutta Scandal

[Ken_4fun]

The only thing I would have done differently in the scenario portrayed by the OP is that when I was asked at 8 PM about selling half back to the player, I would have made it abundantly clear that it was too late now. My answer would be NO, but I will gladly give a tip (typically 10-15%) to the player out of my winnings.

Also in the original conversation after the calcutta, I would have reminded her to let me know before she plays her first match. That takes all the "wiggle" room out of the whole deal.

I have bought MANY players in Calcuttas and rarely had a problem. The normal understanding is that they must buy half of themself before they start play. Sometimes it is okay to accept a "yes" to buying back half, and let them play a match or two before they actually pay you. But at some point all deals are off.

Jay is exactly right. I have bought players who didnt want to buy themselves back and I gave them a tip or jelly (usually 10%) if they cashed and if they did buy themselves back usually more than the 1/2 if they cash (usually 10%). Frankly I didnt care if they bought themselves back or not.

I have been around Jeanette, I not a friend or enemy just someone who as been around and observed. I have no doubt that this happened at least pretty closely to the the discription.

It is low class IMO.

The only starstruck people are those folks on AZ (and elsewhere) that defend such actions because she is JL.

JMO

Ken

 

[trustyrusty]

JB, you are dead on in this post. The calcutta is completely independent of the tournament. I really don't care what my playeys do that I buy in the calcutta. Some of them buy half, some of them don't. Doesn't really matter to me, it's a gamble and I know that going in.

That being said, its the precise reason that I rarely give jelly. I can't stand when a player thinks they deserve jelly for a completely separate gamble that I took all the risk on. I've never once had a player that I bought that didn't cash come up to me and offer me some jelly, but I've had several come up to me and want some jelly when they cashed.

Also, I've won people thousands and thousands of dollars in golf calcuttas and never expected or got any jelly.

just wondering here....seems folks didn't like Bran saying that a player can do whatever they want in regards to leaving early; that attitude is why pool is in it's current condition, etc. Then it's stated that the calcutta is completely seperate from the tourney and a gamble....

What gives? I've seen golfers scratch outta tourneys that they still had a chance in (whether it was poor attitude about something, medical reason, whatever), and I'm sure "bettors" mighta lost something in the deal...yet golf is still fine.

I'm with vette, the calcutta is GAMBLING, and with Bran...a player CAN drop out anytime he/she sees fit...One has nothing to do with the other. In this case, the player left because of a calcutta issue....the gambler shoulda thought twice about not letting her in on it, since she did ultimately hold the fate of the BET in her hands.

 

[dardusm]

This is why I don't care for calcutta's. On one hand, they can be fun and interesting and let the rail get in on the action. But on the other hand, situations can arise that make them more trouble than they are worth. First of all, they are probably illegal. Especially when a party takes a percentage out of the pool. Second, It makes the player feel obligated to someone who they might not know or like who bought them. I've had plenty of people get a little upset with me for not buying half of myself because I went to high in relation to the total calcutta pot size. Why do I have to answer to someone else in a tournament that I payed an entry to play? If I decide to forfeit then that should be my option. Now saying that, I always try my best regardless but sometimes my best isn't very good

 

[Ironman317]

just wondering here....seems folks didn't like Bran saying that a player can do whatever they want in regards to leaving early; that attitude is why pool is in it's current condition, etc. Then it's stated that the calcutta is completely seperate from the tourney and a gamble....

What gives? I've seen golfers scratch outta tourneys that they still had a chance in (whether it was poor attitude about something, medical reason, whatever), and I'm sure "bettors" mighta lost something in the deal...yet golf is still fine.

I'm with vette, the calcutta is GAMBLING, and with Bran...a player CAN drop out anytime he/she sees fit...One has nothing to do with the other. In this case, the player left because of a calcutta issue....the gambler shoulda thought twice about not letting her in on it, since she did ultimately hold the fate of the BET in her hands.

every tournament i have been to had some kind of rule in effect for calcuttas. if a player had an emergency and had to leave, the person that bought them got their money back and the payout was adjusted accordingly. if they pulled a move and just quit, then they had to pay the person that bought them back or they were not allowed to play in that tourney anymore. it shouldnt matter that it is JL or anyone else...

 

[Craig Fales]

So, let me get this straight. Jeanette Lee was approached by an unknown person in a crowd of many. In your post you say "she always has people hounding her for pictures and autographs, I go find her". You say this because (in some form of words) you believe that you're being magnanimous and doing her a favor. After all, finding her in order to offer an opportunity to buy half of herself was a gesture that you didn't have to do. Especially because you say "we think we got a steal" by buying her. So you assess her to be a surefire lock for return on the investment.

When you propose that she can buy half of herself from you, and she says "I'll let you know", you both put your honor on the line via a verbal contract. Thinking rationally: she would have a hard time finding you (as an unknown) in a crowd of many. So she makes the effort to go to the tournament director and announce that she will take the offer, which fulfills on her end of the bargain to let you know. You and everyone in the crowd knows of the verbal agreement.

At this point in time, if you don't believe that Jeanette Lee is good for the $70, then you have easy access to locate her and get the money in advance. Instead you sit in the crowd, remaining difficult to distinguish, even if you happen to be within 5 feet of her, or whatever. You make no effort to complete the agreed upon transaction.

Afterwards, you insist that she has no claim to half of the calcutta...

You can play it that way if you choose, but personally in this case (knowing that you have no reason to doubt someone like Jeanette Lee), I think I'd honor my word in the verbal agreement rather than try to stiff Jeanette Lee on a couple of hundred bucks.

Like I say, you can play it that way if you choose.
Personally, I'd honor my word.

I don't think you're quite getting it either. She didn't come looking for him until after the matches started, which usually to most is after the cutoff to buy half of yourself. That's probably why he just walked away. And she did know what he looked like from what I gathered in his post. No matter what she should have fulfilled her end and finished the tournament. You know now that no one will buy her in a calcutta again.

 

[Williebetmore]

Wow, another thread regarding this situation. Still filled with speculation regarding motives and events.

I've been asked to post Jeanette's side of the story (significantly different than the versions proposed so far....though I always enjoy the discussions, speculation, and fantasy:smile: ).

I will post her story in a separate thread since there are several threads running the same gossip.

 

[Patrick53212]

Well, you can be assured that if you place your money on this long shot...I am taking half and I am playing my heart out!!! But then again...I will only go for about $10 or $20....

I suppose that in an instance where someone did not take half of themselves, I would indicate to that said individual that I will pay out a "cut" of the calcutta money to them. Just a little incentive. However, it would not be more than 20% of the amount left after subtracting the bid I paid.

 

[trustyrusty]

every tournament i have been to had some kind of rule in effect for calcuttas. if a player had an emergency and had to leave, the person that bought them got their money back and the payout was adjusted accordingly. if they pulled a move and just quit, then they had to pay the person that bought them back or they were not allowed to play in that tourney anymore. it shouldnt matter that it is JL or anyone else...

sounds like the tourney is more beholden to the gamblers than the players then....I wouldn't like this rule at all!

If the star quarterback, and running back get hurt in the first quarter of a game should they let everyone who bet on that team outta their bet (or have those two players who had the most significant effect on the outcome of the game pay the bettors back)?? I dunno, I don't think the calcutta, and what happens in it should have anything to do with the players participating in the tourney or not. And I don't care if it's Janette Lee or Joe Schmo.

 

[corvette1340]

just wondering here....seems folks didn't like Bran saying that a player can do whatever they want in regards to leaving early; that attitude is why pool is in it's current condition, etc. Then it's stated that the calcutta is completely seperate from the tourney and a gamble....

What gives? I've seen golfers scratch outta tourneys that they still had a chance in (whether it was poor attitude about something, medical reason, whatever), and I'm sure "bettors" mighta lost something in the deal...yet golf is still fine.

I'm with vette, the calcutta is GAMBLING, and with Bran...a player CAN drop out anytime he/she sees fit...One has nothing to do with the other. In this case, the player left because of a calcutta issue....the gambler shoulda thought twice about not letting her in on it, since she did ultimately hold the fate of the BET in her hands.

the only difference I see is that Jeanette is one of the, if not THE, most recognizable pool players in the world. She has sponsors to look at as well as tons of fans that pay her salary. If some random schmoe unscrewed then it would still be pretty low class but nothing would really be said about it.
The players that are put in the spot light and actually get paid appearance fees, sponsor monies, etc. definitely should not do this kind of thing.
That being said, If it were me that bought her, I'd rip up $140 and hand her the pieces and laugh at her because she forfeited.

 

[KoolKat9Lives]

Miscommunications

Sounds to me like both were confident of their position and when the rubber met the road, offense was taken and Pffft. Game over.

I'm betting this is all a result of miscommunications, compounded by human nature, the difficult nature of calcuttas, and circumstance.

I trust Williebetmore will bring JL's side accurately to light, and then this forum can go double ape-sh*t on that.

Hopefully the buyer will get his AZ key and post his side, and then this forum can go triple flips.

MISCOMMUNICATIONS + MISUNDERSTANDINGS + CIRCUMSTANCES + PERSONALITIES = 42 PAGES OF AZB FREE-FOR-ALL


imho

 

[trustyrusty]

Well, you can be assured that if you place your money on this long shot...I am taking half and I am playing my heart out!!! But then again...I will only go for about $10 or $20....

I suppose that in an instance where someone did not take half of themselves, I would indicate to that said individual that I will pay out a "cut" of the calcutta money to them. Just a little incentive. However, it would not be more than 20% of the amount left after subtracting the bid I paid.

that's what the OP shoulda done even after the hours of no reply....I mean, the player was completely in control of the outcome, I'd try not to get them ticked at me.

 

[Ken_4fun]

This is why I don't care for calcutta's. On one hand, they can be fun and interesting and let the rail get in on the action. But on the other hand, situations can arise that make them more trouble than they are worth. First of all, they are probably illegal. Especially when a party takes a percentage out of the pool. Second, It makes the player feel obligated to someone who they might not know or like who bought them. I've had plenty of people get a little upset with me for not buying half of myself because I went to high in relation to the total calcutta pot size. Why do I have to answer to someone else in a tournament that I payed an entry to play? If I decide to forfeit then that should be my option. Now saying that, I always try my best regardless but sometimes my best isn't very good

Calcuttas isnt the problem. It allows the railbirds to enjoy and the players to make more money.

People who dont understand why there are calcuttas reminds me of the girl in "Let it Ride" movie, where she says, "Why do we have to bet? Cant we just watch the horse run around the track?"

The problem isnt calcuttas, its the nits.

Ken

 

[clolson]

Wow, another thread regarding this situation. Still filled with speculation regarding motives and events.

I've been asked to post Jeanette's side of the story (significantly different than the versions proposed so far....though I always enjoy the discussions, speculation, and fantasy:smile: ).

I will post her story in a separate thread since there are several threads running the same gossip.

this isnt gossip, this is from the player that bought her directly, we have his side and now we want jeannettes side......

 

[Patrick Johnson]

... deleted for dumb mistake ...

 

[clolson]

Nonsense.



You ducked her. She was right to stiff you.

pj
chgo

lol, can you read guy??.....she called for him 8 hours after the tourny started.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

lol, can you read guy??.....she called for him 8 hours after the tourny started.

Oops. You're right. I didn't do the time math (just assumed that happened before the tourney started).

Apologies to the OP (and I'll delete my post).

pj
chgo

 

[ShootingRazbone]

So, let me get this straight. Jeanette Lee was approached by an unknown person in a crowd of many. In your post you say "she always has people hounding her for pictures and autographs, I go find her". You say this because (in some form of words) you believe that you're being magnanimous and doing her a favor. After all, finding her in order to offer an opportunity to buy half of herself was a gesture that you didn't have to do. Especially because you say "we think we got a steal" by buying her. So you assess her to be a surefire lock for return on the investment.

When you propose that she can buy half of herself from you, and she says "I'll let you know", you both put your honor on the line via a verbal contract. Thinking rationally: she would have a hard time finding you (as an unknown) in a crowd of many. So she makes the effort to go to the tournament director and announce that she will take the offer, which fulfills on her end of the bargain to let you know. You and everyone in the crowd knows of the verbal agreement.

At this point in time, if you don't believe that Jeanette Lee is good for the $70, then you have easy access to locate her and get the money in advance. Instead you sit in the crowd, remaining difficult to distinguish, even if you happen to be within 5 feet of her, or whatever. You make no effort to complete the agreed upon transaction.

Afterwards, you insist that she has no claim to half of the calcutta...

You can play it that way if you choose, but personally in this case (knowing that you have no reason to doubt someone like Jeanette Lee), I think I'd honor my word in the verbal agreement rather than try to stiff Jeanette Lee on a couple of hundred bucks.

Like I say, you can play it that way if you choose.
Personally, I'd honor my word.

Man, they werent at a concert! They were at a pool hall lol. couldnt have been that freaking crowded. All she has to do is ask the tourny director.... What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong.... Everyone in their right mind knows how to conduct business in the calcutta. Especially her.

Quitting in the middle of a tournament for an emergency or being sick is understandable. Quitting because your pissed off or you just dont feel like shooting anymore is completely ridiculous. Unless your a complete a-hole, you should respect the format and the people who bought you. Not caring about that is just plain rude and tells me alot about you. Everyone knows whats right and wrong here and there shouldn't be a discussion about it.

 

[GMAC]

What happened after the PA announcer said she was looking for you.

I don't get the whole story. After you bought her you ran over to see her. At 8 o'clock she told the houseman she was looking for you and to please see her. All of a sudden you couldn't find the Black Widow for two more hours.

I think you knew your friend had no chance of beating her and you decided to hide for two hours. Now that your friend is playing her and you have first place locked up you tell her you missed the boat baby.

I agree she should have bought herself in the beginning, but once a player asks for half you almost have to give it up. Remember 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing IMO.

Calcutta's are a tricky business and sometimes the rules stink but you had the money locked up all you had to do was keep your horse happy.

 

[wahcheck]

still not right

Regardless of the Calcutta business, I agree with everyone who said she should not unscrew and forfeit. That stands alone as something that is definitely unprofessional. This shows me another side of JL, and it was not a good mistake to make, if she cares about her image and rep.

 

[pooltchr]

Anybody who knows anything about tournament pool knows that if a player does not buy themselves in the calcutta then THEY must find the person who bought them and BUY half themselves from the buyer. .

I think I know a thing or two about pool tournaments, having spent a few years running a regional tour. This is the first I have heard that a player MUST buy half of themselves in the calcutta. As a courtesy, they should be given the option of buying half, but I know of no requirement that says they must do it.

Steve