The Jeanette Lee Calcutta Scandal

Had Everyone.

wahcheck said:
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.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember someone saying that the guy made a comment to the effect that, He "had" everyone left.

Which, to me, means he was gonna win it all anyway. Giving up half at that point was not gonna cost him anything extra and gain him $70.

If this was the case, maybe he said something to the effect of, "Let me do some figuring and I'll get back to you". She would've taken that as a smart a$$ remark. "IF" that's what happened then I can see where the break down happened.

Ray

The above post sure had a lot of Ifs and buts, maybe I should add some cherries and nuts! LOL
 
Bigtruck said:
The above post sure had a lot of Ifs and buts, maybe I should add some cherries and nuts! LOL
Click to expand...

It seems like threads like this almost always have mostly ifs and butts until @ post 143 when the smoke clears because we finally get enuf facts, like tooth extraction, to make the informed deductions.

Paging Willie/JL and the buyer! Come on down and sign in please! You're the next pre-convicted contestants on the Price is Right!

Matt <---- reserving my right to meaningless condomnation
 
corvette1340 said:
lmao, that attitude is precisely why pool will never be popular with the mainstream and garner big sponsorship.
Click to expand...


you're right.. because all mainstream sports have calcuttas where players have to depend on the people gambling on them for money.

if someone buys you in the calcutta and something happens where you don't feel like finishing the tournament, you're telling me you owe it to the gamblers to keep playing even though you don't want to?

that's a joke.

if you're looking at what's wrong with calcuttas for reasons why pool won't make mainstream then you can see the forest for the trees...
 
branpureza said:
you're right.. because all mainstream sports have calcuttas where players have to depend on the people gambling on them for money.

if someone buys you in the calcutta and something happens where you don't feel like finishing the tournament, you're telling me you owe it to the gamblers to keep playing even though you don't want to?

that's a joke.

if you're looking at what's wrong with calcuttas for reasons why pool won't make mainstream then you can see the forest for the trees...
Click to expand...

its the same thing as a "dump"...and if your morals do not understand this, then life is gonna be very difficult for you.
 
Right you are!

branpureza said:
... if you're looking at what's wrong with calcuttas for reasons why pool won't make mainstream then you can see the forest for the trees...
Click to expand...

Across most of the nation organized gambling is not allowed on most major sports with humans involved. The reason is simple. Everyone recognizes the potential for the players manipulating the games. "Nobody" trusts pro players making millions a year not to try to make a little more.

Allowing people other than the players to buy into calcuttas increases the payout to the players and gets many more people involved in the event and hanging around spending money. However pool not being mainstream enough for decent payouts and profits for venues is what breeds calcuttas not the calcuttas being the problem.

Hu
 
satman said:
AS A PLAYER WHEN YOU ENTER A TOURNEY, IF THEY HAVE A CALCUTTA, YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO DO YOUR BEST. It should be a matter of respect for the game, as well as the person who was willing to risk their money, by believing in your skills. If you don't have a enough respect for the game to finish the tourney, maybe you should try just playing online poker. True, the calcutta is not what you are paying your entry for, but it's still a part of the tourney.
If you wish to be excluded form the calcutta, tell the tournament director. When I was playing music for a living, I went to a tourney 1 and 1/2 hour drive from home. I told the tourney director, and everyone at the tourney, at 8pm, I'm leaving, no matter what. They left me out of the calcutta, and I end up winning the winners side, guarenteed 2nd. They took all calcutta money and
moved it down.
As for this thread, and the other, I'll not post in either again. From what I hear from a reliable source, who was at the tourney, there is a 3rd side to this thing.
Click to expand...

You're going to leave the thread and not post, just after saying there is a 3rd side to this thing. WTF?:D

Actually, I agree with you and disagree with John. A player does have an obligation to finish a tournament in good faith.

I think the attitude of "Well, it's my entry fee money and if I want to quit, I can any time I want" just plain SUCKS.

Pool tournaments aren't created for the benefit of just one individual. They are designed, promoted and directed for the benefit of the whole and any time a player quits a match for any reason, it sleights the whole.

Players know that problems arise in tournaments and most pool tournament directors try to not compromise their integrity by condoning sharking and other forms of cheating. (Some tournament directors look the other way or feign sleep apnea when they see a player sharking another player for various reasons).

All pool players should recognize that they have a responsibility to finish a match/tournament REGARDLESS of the problems that they encounter.

Without this consciousness that each player has a responsibility to the whole, pool will remain in its doldrums and we'll continue talking about how inadequate and unjust the funds are for professional players.


JoeyA
 
even if the buyers were total jerks, no player should ever expect to be able to pay their half of the calcutta 8-9 hrs after the tournament starts and one match before the money.

This isnt Jeanette Lee's first rodeo here. She knows how calcuttas run.
 
Ironman317 said:
its the same thing as a "dump"...and if your morals do not understand this, then life is gonna be very difficult for you.
Click to expand...

On this i have to disagree.

So i go and hop in the car and drive out to a tournament, and play in it, and someone on the sidelines has me in the calcutta.

So your saying that the money i've already invested isn't good enough, but now that the money someone else invests, someone i don't have any obligation to or business dealings with, NOW also has some say in what i am or am not allowed to do?

What type of garbage is this?

I mean, i can fully understand your "DUMP" point, if i didn't invest a dime of my money, and was getting a free ride from a backer, but that's not the issue at hand.

It is not even CLOSE to being the same.

If i'm spending my money on me, i can go to the moon if i want in the middle of the tournament.
If your trying to coattail on my investment and make some cash of your own OFF OF MY OWN INVESTMENT, your completely out of your mind if you think i owe you.

You can cry morals all you want and it's not going to make a difference.

Unless there was a written contract before the tournament started, and there were witnesses, and a notary public on the scene to make sure that there was a binding contract between the 2 parties involved, the player can do whatever the heck they want, WHENEVER they want.

Your definition of DUMP is flawed.
 
At this point, the only point of view I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to is the TD's. Not the OP, not JL, nor either of their friends.
 
I have obtained a picture of Jeanette and the calcutta buyer from the tourney. This is how the encounter went down.
 

Attachments

  • jeanetteleeorlyowl.jpg
    jeanetteleeorlyowl.jpg
    36.6 KB · Views: 361
corvette1340 said:
I have obtained a picture of Jeanette and the calcutta buyer from the tourney. This is how the encounter went down.
Click to expand...
I don't care who you are or whose side you're one, that's funny.
 
Lol

Sweet Marissa said:
I don't care who you are or whose side you're one, that's funny.
Click to expand...

It almost looks like that guy in the background is chewing on Jeanette's hand! LOL

Vette you're a twisted man! imo

Ray
 
interesting opinions on both sides of the calcutta debate

Some interesting opinions on both sides of the calcutta debate and I see some merit to all of them. However, my first introduction to calcuttas was at the horse tracks and my thoughts about them carry over from that.

The calcuttas predate pari-mutuel betting but are commonly used at the tracks that aren't allowed to have pari-mutuel betting now. The general rules of horse racing are loosely followed including a "best effort" from horse owners, trainers, and jockeys. However even on the biggest and most famous pari-mutuel tracks this isn't a rule that is strictly enforced. It is recognized that there are many reasons that winning a race might be secondary although the group behind the horse wishes to give it an outing.

For me, much the same is true in a pool tourney. If I plan to bid on someone in a calcutta I would like to know if they are trying to win first and in condition to win. If I don't know these things I am taking the same risk as someone at the pari-mutuel window who has no idea if the horse is going to make an all out run to the finish.

I have played in a few medium sized pool tournaments, never huge ones. Having led a parade after showing too much speed in the first tournament I entered as a stranger a few times, I never intend to win a tournament the first time there if I am a stranger. Buying me in the calcutta is a sucker's bet and I will cheerfully tell anyone who asks not to buy me.

I have also entered local events to support the event knowing I could not be around for the money rounds if the tourney went as long as expected. If it went quicker than expected I might have time. What do I do here? If I announce that I may have to leave and things go fast and I don't leave I am accused of manipulating the bids. If things drag on and I have to leave before the event ends then the buyer feels cheated if I didn't say something. Whatever I do about the calcutta, I may leave bad feelings behind.

This isn't a perfect world and too often we make big things out of a tempest in a teapot. I'm most inclined to go with the opinion that when you gamble you pay your money and take your chances. The less information you have, the more chances you take. I don't feel like the bidder owns the player body and soul until the event concludes, I don't feel like the player has no obligation to the bidder. There is a lot of gray area between those two extremes though.

Hu
 
Ken_4fun said:
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
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that the problem are calcutta's but your right, it boils down to people.

I have bought players in calcutta's on more than one occasion in which buddies that play each other late in a tournament might "dump" depending on the best financial outcome for the team (i.e. they might have all of the calcutta for one player and only half for the other). I didn't whine about it and knew that it was going on and still made some money but still it's not right.

As with anything, buyer beware.
 
At the point that the person in question won the bid for 140.00, he had no idea how much money was going to be in the calcutta. At this time, he was taking the same risk that he offered to JL. She is supposed to be obligated to either take the same risk a the same time or decline the offer.
Why should she have the luxury of waiting to see if there was enough money involved? If they posted money and later she decided that the investment wasn't worth the risk, then the original person would have been stuck with the deal, not to mention that she could have lost an early match without having committed to the deal and then backed out.

She should have either accepted or declined the deal right after her name came up in the calcutta. This is the same option that is afforded to every other player in a calcutta. By not doing so, she forfeited her right to any of the calcutta.

Dropping out of the tournament on the verge of getting the money just for spite seems to be in very poor taste, especially if you are a public figure.
 
bchilton said:
At the point that the person in question won the bid for 140.00, he had no idea how much money was going to be in the calcutta. At this time, he was taking the same risk that he offered to JL. She is supposed to be obligated to either take the same risk a the same time or decline the offer.
Why should she have the luxury of waiting to see if there was enough money involved? If they posted money and later she decided that the investment wasn't worth the risk, then the original person would have been stuck with the deal, not to mention that she could have lost an early match without having committed to the deal and then backed out.

She should have either accepted or declined the deal right after her name came up in the calcutta. This is the same option that is afforded to every other player in a calcutta. By not doing so, she forfeited her right to any of the calcutta.

Dropping out of the tournament on the verge of getting the money just for spite seems to be in very poor taste, especially if you are a public figure.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY

Ken
 
GMAC said:
I agree she should have bought herself in the beginning, but once a player asks for half you almost have to give it up.
Click to expand...

I have not been involved an ANY tournament calcutta where the player was allowed to buy half of themselves after the first rack has been broken. (unelss of coruse, there is an agreement between the buyer and the player for payment of the players half at a later time) It is the players OPTION to buy themselves before the first match begins. Afterwards, the original buyer is entitled to all of the Calcutta monies which that player wins. As Jay said, usually there is a 10-15% gapper thrown to the player as a tip, but that is a courtesy, nothing else.
 
Bigtruck said:
It almost looks like that guy in the background is chewing on Jeanette's hand! LOL

Vette you're a twisted man! imo

Ray
Click to expand...
That's why she had to leave! Her hand hurt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top