Unethical Win at Swanee 2014

Like I said, it is the 2nd best option. Mind you there is a HUUUUGE gap between that option and the one that was taken.

Like I said it makes no sense at all.

How does acknowledging the score do anything, by that point in the match it
has already affected the match.


To acknowledge that the score was affected and the score actually being affected are completely different things. The second actually means something.

So you're saying that once I acknowledge that I shouldn't have walked out into the street, I can get up and walk out of the hospital because the car didn't really hit me and there's no need for all these bandages. Just saying, maybe you want to rethink that!

The fact that you acknowledge a car hit me, doesn't repair any damage done by
a car hitting me. Does It ?
 
I was trying to make a point.

I took the position that it was Greg's responsibility to mark his score. He did not and it wasn't fair to have Chris penalized because of this.

Many people took the opposite view. They felt Chris should have conceded the match! Not only did they think this (Jaden specifically), but they also questioned OUR character in the process. My question to them is: Do you think my proposal would be worth considering? If you do, then you might want to slow down on questioning the character of those that you disagree with.

If you don't like this proposal - then you are just stubborn.

I'm glad you took the position that it was Greg's responsibility.
I agree Chris shouldn't be penalized because of this.

Unfortunately I can't change my view for you and right after agreeing with you that Chris shouldn't be penalized turn around (like you did) and want to penalize him by taking away one of his games.

The penalty should only be felt by the person who made the mistake.
Not liking your proposal doesn't make me stubborn it makes me rational


This is a not a good proposal, how about if they all get together and they come to the
conclusion that Greg learns a tough lesson that you have to take responsibility for marking up your own score. From then on he learns to make it a part of his routine
after making the winning ball mark up your score right away.

It becomes a learning experience for Greg so he hopefully doesn't do it again.
Is that a bad outcome?
 
I was trying to make a point.

I took the position that it was Greg's responsibility to mark his score. He did not and it wasn't fair to have Chris penalized because of this.

Many people took the opposite view. They felt Chris should have conceded the match! Not only did they think this (Jaden specifically), but they also questioned OUR character in the process. My question to them is: Do you think my proposal would be worth considering? If you do, then you might want to slow down on questioning the character of those that you disagree with.

If you don't like this proposal - then you are just stubborn.

I'm curious as to why I haven't read many "rules" which govern mistakes by the players. I know that in one pocket it is generally a rule that once a "slept ball" is discovered, it is then spotted.

I don't see why rules to cover such situations as this can't be added.

Like you, I believe Greg made a mistake in not marking his score. It happens to players all of the time. We learn from our mistakes and sometimes we just repeat them.

I don't know what Chris knew about the scoring error and the thread has gotten too long for me to dig through it but I don't think Chris is a cad because he did not go against the referee's call. Perhaps it is the referee that should be on trial. Lol

I don't know how scoring error rules can be applied fairly. I mean, it is the player's responsibility to keep track of their earned games and to monitor their opponent's score keeping as well.

I don't want the audience, the commentators, my friends, my opponent's friends etc suggesting that the score is incorrect. Maybe when I get a little a older and my memory fails even more, I might change my mind. :grin-square:

The bottom line to pocket billiards is that it is a game between two people not between a group of people and players should be responsible for their score keeping or pay the price. This doesn't mean that an opponent can't be a gentleman and proffer an unnoticed error not in favor of his opponent.
But in my opinion, the player who abides by the rules shouldn't be castigated for playing by the rules. If the rules don't cover being a gentleman, a person has the right to be one or not. The fact is that sometimes people just don't know if the score is incorrect or not.

If we start having outside sources telling us that the score is incorrect, why stop there? We might as well have "coaching" in tournament as in some of the amateur pool leagues.


JoeyA
 
if you forget to mark your game and 2,3,4,5 games later you remember and i dont SPECIFICALLY rememeber it too ? you are shit out of luck and i sleep well that night.
 
I'm curious as to why I haven't read many "rules" which govern mistakes by the players. I know that in one pocket it is generally a rule that once a "slept ball" is discovered, it is then spotted.

I don't see why rules to cover such situations as this can't be added.

Interesting you would bring this up. I've been following this thread and don't think I've seen this posted from the World Rules (in the regulations):

5. Playing with an “Area” Referee

It may be that a tournament is being played with “area” referees who are each responsible for several tables and there is no referee constantly at each table. In this case, the players are still expected to observe all the rules of the game. The recommended way to conduct play in this situation is as follows.

The non-shooting player will perform all of the duties of the referee. If, prior to a particular shot, the shooting player feels that his opponent will not be able to properly judge the shot, he should ask the area referee to watch the shot. The non-shooting player may also ask for such attention if he feels that he is unable or is unwilling to rule on the shot. Either player has the power to suspend play until he is satisfied with the way the match is being refereed.

If a dispute arises between two players in an unrefereed match, and the area referee is asked to make a decision without having seen the cause of the dispute, he should be careful to understand the situation as completely as possible. This might include asking trusted witnesses, reviewing video tapes, or reenacting the shot. If the area referee is asked to determine whether a foul occurred and there is no evidence of the foul except the claim of one player while the other player claims that there was no foul, then it is assumed that no foul occurred.

Let me address the 2nd highlighted part first. It appears it is within the rules for the TD to take witness testimony and video tape into account in making a decision.


But in regard to the first highlighted part, it seems if the non-shooting player is to perform the duties of the referee then perhaps the solution would be to have the opponent mark the player's score each rack. In this particular scenario the remedy would then have been clear: The player is awarded the game that wasn't marked. Since it was the opponent's responsibility as "acting" referee to mark it, he was at fault for not doing so. Therefore penalizing him would have been appropriate.

Sure, Greg still should check that Chris has marked it and the score is correct, but the responsibility would have fallen on Chris so awarding Greg the game after the fact would have been proper.
 
Last edited:
Interesting you would bring this up. I've been following this thread and don't think I've seen this posted from the World Rules (in the regulations):



Let me address the 2nd highlighted part first. It appears it is within the rules for the TD to take witness testimony and video tape into account in making a decision.


But in regard to the first highlighted part, it seems if the non-shooting player is to perform the duties of the referee then perhaps the solution would be to have the opponent mark the player's score each rack. In this particular scenario the remedy would then have been clear: The player is awarded the game that wasn't marked. Since it was the opponent's responsibility as "acting" referee to mark it, he was at fault for not doing so. Therefore penalizing him would have been appropriate.

Sure, Greg still should check that Chris has marked it and the score is correct, but the responsibility would have fallen on Chris so awarding Greg the game after the fact would have been proper.

Great post.
I will remember it but try to enforce it if there's money on the line.:wink::thumbup:
 
Great post.
I will remember it but try to enforce it if there's money on the line.:wink::thumbup:

Well, at least the decision would be fully supported by the rules. The thought did occur to me that it could open up an opposite problem in the case where the opponent marks the score twice by accident. Then Greg has the moral decision at supposed hill-hill to decide to allow one game to be removed from his score after the fact, leaving his opponent alone on the hill. But how often will this happen, LOL? It would eliminate the more likely scenario where a player gives himself an extra bead when he thinks his opponent isn't paying attention.

I can also understand there would probably be a cultural learning curve. Marking your own score is pretty ingrained and were are conditioned to keep our hands off an opponent's beads. Just brainstorming here that this would prove a solution to some of the problems with marking your own.
 
Last edited:
Interesting you would bring this up. I've been following this thread and don't think I've seen this posted from the World Rules (in the regulations):

"perhaps the solution would be to have the opponent mark the player's score each rack."

Except then your opponent could choose to not mark your score on purpose repeatedly just to get inside your head, or try to shark you by marking it while you're shooting. I don't see that working at all.

Every tournament I've ever played in or watched each player was responsible for
marking their own score up.
There should be a solid rule on this. Such as once a player breaks the following game it's to late, if you haven't marked your score up by then you don't get the point for the game you forgot to mark.

When I played One-Pocket in NYC at Chelsea Billiards, if my opponent owed a
ball because he had none, when he finally made some balls it was my responsibility to
spot any balls owed (and vise versa) before I took my next turn.

If I didn't, then he no longer owed any, (you snooze you lose) it didn't take awfully
long to remember to spot owed balls before you shot.
 
This year's Jay Swanson Memorial tournament was as great as any of the past annual events - many top pros and amateurs from all over the country (192 of them) competing at Hard Times in Bellflower, CA. Congratulations to Dennis Orcullo for his 11-5 victory over Mika Immonen (who was in the hotseat), along with other top finishers Carlo Biado, Oscar Dominguez, John Morra, and others.

In a 2nd day match, on the TV table, a young 16 year old by the name of Chris Robinson - I believe from California -, who had been playing strong through the field, matched up against local amateur Greg Herada. The match was close, and somewhere around 5-5 (in a race to 7), it was brought to the attention of the commentary booth by a known spectator, that Greg was actually at 6, and had forgotten to score a bead on his side early in the match.

This was later confirmed by several sources, including Pool-Trax, a 3rd party that provides stats on matches that are streamed, as well as Chris' mother, who - apparently - texted him either at the time of the mistake, or during a short break taken by Greg at 6-6 (bead score, not actual score). Either way, at 6-6, both players knew the situation.

When Greg returned from his break, no doubt having heard about his own mistake, did not bring up the matter with Chris, and instead continued his match, which he quickly lost.

Was this outcome ethical? Should Greg be punished for a mistake he made, which by TECHNICAL rules in the tournament, players need to mark their own scores? Or should Chris, having known about Greg's error, been more sportsmanlike and conceded the match when Greg reached 6 games on the beads (7 in total wins)? This could have been conceded even after the match was over, since both parties knew at that point what happened?

The two arguments are that

Yes, Chris should have used his best judgement and been a "gentleman", despite the rules. The rules are there because there cannot be a ref at every match, but players should conduct themselves professionally.
No, match should not be conceded, because it is Greg's own fault, and players should mark their games and are therefore responsible for those errors?

If the latter were true, isn't is fair to say that a player can mark up 2 games when he wins only 1 and if his opponent doesn't notice, then it's his own fault? It is a rule that is being taken advantage of here, and is exactly the kind of unsportsmanlike conduct that we should not be teaching players. Chris is only 16, and already is showing signs that he is leading himself down the wrong road.

This match will likely be uploaded soon by POVPool, and will be cited in this thread.

If Chris knew the guy forgot to mark his game
At that time he should have said something get it taken care of right Away
Then we wouldn't be talking about it right now
1 of the 2 players knew what the right score should be
 
If Chris knew the guy forgot to mark his game
At that time he should have said something get it taken care of right Away
Then we wouldn't be talking about it right now
1 of the 2 players knew what the right score should be

Agree, but if Chris didn't know till many games later?
It's to late at that point, it's already changed
decisions in the match possibly.
 
Just watched the replay of the U.S. vs Russia Olympic hockey game. The Russians appeared to have scored a goal. Then it was negated because the net was dislodged from it's mooring. Well the net was not completely dislodged, more accurate would be dislocated. One corner looked like the mooring was bent and dislocated about one inch. By all other hockey rules in the world both moorings have to be dislodged to negate the goal. Still under Olympic rules the officials negated the goal. Should the U.S. team have just given them an open net to score a goal to make up for the one that was UNJUSTLY TAKEN FROM THEM BY THE OFFICIALS?

What kind of example are they setting?????

Not a valid comparison. A referee ruled on it.
You have no choice but to accept a ref's ruling, whether you love it or hate it.

How about this:
What would you think about if the ref's view were blocked,
and three americans saw the other team score a goal?

Say the americans all choose to keep quiet about it,
and as a result they win a game they should have lost?

Would you feel OK with doing that?
Could you show that olympic medal to anyone with pride?

I mean, why even GO to tournaments, if your attitude is
"I got outplayed, and I lost, but I got to advance anyway by
just playing dumb and keeping quiet about the score"?

The point is to test yourself.
The point is to show you're the best player in the room, at least on that day.
If you got outplayed, who cares if you're the Swanee 2014 Scorekeeping Champion?
 
Interesting you would bring this up. I've been following this thread and don't think I've seen this posted from the World Rules (in the regulations):



Let me address the 2nd highlighted part first. It appears it is within the rules for the TD to take witness testimony and video tape into account in making a decision.


But in regard to the first highlighted part, it seems if the non-shooting player is to perform the duties of the referee then perhaps the solution would be to have the opponent mark the player's score each rack. In this particular scenario the remedy would then have been clear: The player is awarded the game that wasn't marked. Since it was the opponent's responsibility as "acting" referee to mark it, he was at fault for not doing so. Therefore penalizing him would have been appropriate.

Sure, Greg still should check that Chris has marked it and the score is correct, but the responsibility would have fallen on Chris so awarding Greg the game after the fact would have been proper.

Very interesting.

I think we will need to print up a large billboard and place that first one in the tournament room. :):)

JoeyA
 
Not a valid comparison. A referee ruled on it.
You have no choice but to accept a ref's ruling, whether you love it or hate it.

How about this:
What would you think about if the ref's view were blocked,
and three americans saw the other team score a goal?

Say the americans all choose to keep quiet about it,
and as a result they win a game they should have lost?

Would you feel OK with doing that?
Could you show that olympic medal to anyone with pride?

I mean, why even GO to tournaments, if your attitude is
"I got outplayed, and I lost, but I got to advance anyway by
just playing dumb and keeping quiet about the score"?

The point is to test yourself.
The point is to show you're the best player in the room, at least on that day.
If you got outplayed, who cares if you're the Swanee 2014 Scorekeeping Champion?

Well said. It appears to me that most here value winning above all else. I just can't believe this many people TRULY think that rules should always trump ethics in such a black and white manner.
 
Well, at least the decision would be fully supported by the rules. The thought did occur to me that it could open up an opposite problem in the case where the opponent marks the score twice by accident. Then Greg has the moral decision at supposed hill-hill to decide to allow one game to be removed from his score after the fact, leaving his opponent alone on the hill. But how often will this happen, LOL? It would eliminate the more likely scenario where a player gives himself an extra bead when he thinks his opponent isn't paying attention.

I can also understand there would probably be a cultural learning curve. Marking your own score is pretty ingrained and were are conditioned to keep our hands off an opponent's beads. Just brainstorming here that this would prove a solution to some of the problems with marking your own.

In One Hole, how do you stop your opponent from moving the balls in your rack to his?:cool:
 
The ethical thing to do here is except the penalty for not marking
your game up.

I can't believe some people here keep trying to frame this discussion
as rules or ethics. You don't mark your game you lose credit for that game.
It's really quite simple.

Self-righteousness rears it's ugly head once again.
People don't believe as you do, so you say I can't believe
people TRULY think so and so...

Trying to fault the player who's score was correct, that's the closest thing to
unethical i see in all of this.
Let's get real, if you realize 6 or 7 games games after the fact that you forgot
to put a game up, the ethical thing to do is swallow the bitter pill that you forgot
take your medicine and move on.
It's hard for me to TRULY believe anyone thinks this isn't the ethical thing to do.
Sound familiar?
 
In One Hole, how do you stop your opponent from moving the balls in your rack to his?:cool:

I don't know, by being aware of what the score should be and keeping an eye on things? Why would that be any different than 9 Ball and beads on a wire? If you're not paying attention and a player is going to cheat he could move his bead instead of yours "by accident".

Look, I'm not suggesting this is the only answer and I'm so smart to have come up with it. Just brainstorming is all. The thing that gave me the thought was after JoeyA's post I looked at the rules and remembered there is discussion about the opponent being the ref in the absence of an official. :wink:
 
Back
Top