Unethical Win at Swanee 2014

[Jaden]

it's easy. ..my keyboard is wireless. ..

Apparently, behavior befitting a "friggin gentlemen" includes going onto the Internet and calling people names and passing judgement on them for not doing what you do.

How do you reach the keyboard sitting on such a high horse?

I didn't call anyone names. I didn't blame the kid either. I blamed all the people that gave him such awful self serving advice because it affects all of society to promote that type of behavior.

Jaden

 

[poolhustler]

withdrawn then!!

 

[terryhanna]

Thats not what Greg said in his post dude

 

[poolhustler]

Thats not what Greg said in his post dude

Damn..... now I have to go read the entire thread.

 

[krupa]

We have a young impressionable kid serious about pool and what are we doing, teaching him to be a self serving little ***** instead of an honorable gentleman.

That's why I said I don't blame him. I blame all of these punks that think it's alright to use the rules to your advantage even when it's NOT the right thing to do.

When I foul I call it on myself, if I see my opponent doesn't mark his score, I let him know. It's not right to take advantage of every little thing. Be honorable with your opponent. It's a game for christ's sake. If you're in the trenches pull their hair and gouge their eyes out for your survival, in a game, be friggin gentleman and encourage the same in others.

Jaden

Jaden

I didn't call anyone names. I didn't blame the kid either. I blamed all the people that gave him such awful self serving advice because it affects all of society to promote that type of behavior.

Jaden

You're right, you're not calling anyone in particular a name, just a certain group of people.

 

[mcsock]

Apparently, behavior befitting a "friggin gentlemen" includes going onto the Internet and calling people names and passing judgement on them for not doing what you do.

How do you reach the keyboard sitting on such a high horse?

I am not saying names, but there was some real ugly statements made about a 16 year old kid, when the accusers didnt even have the facts about what went on. There has been some less than quality infact lowlife statements from more than one adult about this. True colors do surface and not always what we want to see.

 

[Neil]

Interesting how some peoples thinking is so upside down that they feel that what is right (following the rules) is wrong, and what is wrong (making up your own rules) is right. They even state that it is a lowlife thing to take advantage of the rules to win a game without playing it out. Yet, these same people see no problem with the three foul rule. The rule states that if you foul three times ina row, you lose that game. Yet these same people will take advantage of that rule and try and force their opponent to foul three times in a row to get the early win without playing the game out. And, they fail to see how it is the exact same thing.

 

[easy-e]

Interesting how some peoples thinking is so upside down that they feel that what is right (following the rules) is wrong, and what is wrong (making up your own rules) is right. They even state that it is a lowlife thing to take advantage of the rules to win a game without playing it out. Yet, these same people see no problem with the three foul rule. The rule states that if you foul three times ina row, you lose that game. Yet these same people will take advantage of that rule and try and force their opponent to foul three times in a row to get the early win without playing the game out. And, they fail to see how it is the exact same thing.

Idiotic statement.

 

[Neil]

Idiotic statement.

Then explain why if you can.

 

[Jaden]

There was NO rule for this.

Interesting how some peoples thinking is so upside down that they feel that what is right (following the rules) is wrong, and what is wrong (making up your own rules) is right. They even state that it is a lowlife thing to take advantage of the rules to win a game without playing it out. Yet, these same people see no problem with the three foul rule. The rule states that if you foul three times ina row, you lose that game. Yet these same people will take advantage of that rule and try and force their opponent to foul three times in a row to get the early win without playing the game out. And, they fail to see how it is the exact same thing.

There was no rule for this. It was a call that had to be made. For a call to HAVE to be made in the first place, there has to be a contest to the situation. As soon as it was determined that the requisite games had been won, there should have been no contest, it should have been acknowledged and over.

Greg was more than fair to suggest they play out a last hill hill game at 7-7 and it was shitty for people to suggest that he not do so.

Jaden

 

[Neil]

There was no rule for this. It was a call that had to be made. For a call to HAVE to be made in the first place, there has to be a contest to the situation. As soon as it was determined that the requisite games had been won, there should have been no contest, it should have been acknowledged and over.

Greg was more than fair to suggest they play out a last hill hill game at 7-7 and it was shitty for people to suggest that he not do so.

Jaden

Apparently you missed the posts explaining why that is not a fair thing to do, and why the rule is the way it is.

In reality, Gregg wasn't being fair at all. He was trying to come up with something to lessen the consequences of his action. Or acturally, his inaction, in this case.

 

[Jaden]

What RULE are you talking about???

Apparently you missed the posts explaining why that is not a fair thing to do, and why the rule is the way it is.

In reality, Gregg wasn't being fair at all. He was trying to come up with something to lessen the consequences of his action. Or acturally, his inaction, in this case.

Show me where the rule is that states if you remember that you didn't mark up a game (regardless of how or why you remember) that it can't then be marked up???

This was NOT a rule, this was a judgement call that had to be made. For a judgement call to HAVE to be made there has to be a contest by the opponent to the situation.

Once it was determined that the game was missed there shouldn't have been a contestation.

That there was and then that a ruling was made does fit the letter of the rules and I can understand why Dave made the ruling that he did. That doesn't make the original contestation any more ethical or right.

Then to refuse to play a final determining game based on advice from the crowd, showcases the bad advice of the people in the crowd.

Jaden

 

[easy-e]

Then explain why if you can.

Not going to spend my whole work day explaining it so you can comeback with a smug response full of your favorite while completely missing the point. But think about this... If more people disagree with your stance on this than agree with it, perhaps our thinking is not as upside down as you believe. Maybe the issue isn't black and white like you think. Just food for thought.

 

[JoeyA]

I believe there are a couple of things that can be learned from this.

Number 1. Be responsible for marking your score and checking to see that your opponent is marking his score correctly.

Number 2. Know full well in the future, that if you purposefully accept a ruling in your favor that you did not in fact earn, that there will be those who will look upon you as a cad. Accept that fact or be a gentleman and do the right thing.

Number 3. Tournament directors and referees are human and they make mistakes. It is your job as a competitor to make sure that they understand the situation so that they can make their best call. As soon as an error or impropriety is realized, take it to the referee to have it resolved. Stand your ground but take the referee's decision like a man, unless you know for a fact that he is wrong, then take it to the next level; the tournament director.

The Internet might open your eyes a bit wider but it won't resolve the particular issue and most everyone will likely get a little dirty in the process.

JoeyA

 

[nine_ball6970]

This happened to me in a tournament last year. I forgot to mark a game and realized it two racks later. Do you know what I did? Nothing. I didn't say a word to my opponent and didn't go ask the tournament director if I could mark a past game now. I knew it was my fault because it is my responsibility to mark my own score. I simply played out the rest of the match.

I see this as being almost the same as a golfer signing his card for a higher score than he actually got. He does not have the option to make the correction after it is signed. If he signs for a lower score, then he is dq'ed. It is his responsibility either way.

Do you guys only feel this way because it was on the streamed table and there was actual proof it did happen. What if they weren't on the stream table? It goes hill-hill then one player says "Hey wait. I forgot to mark one of my games earlier in the set so I won..... Good game." The thing that makes this even more bothersome is Greg had no clue he had forgot to mark a game until spectators told him. He didn't know and neither did Chris yet everyone blames Chris in this situation.

I believe Dave made the correct decision. For all of you guys who say that Chris should have just handed him the match, here is a scenario. Your opponent is about to shoot the 9 ball and taking practice strokes. He barely taps the cue ball. Do you call the foul and take ball in hand or do you just tell him to shoot anyway because it was a small mistake he made and shouldn't affect the outcome of the match?

 

[Neil]

Not going to spend my whole work day explaining it so you can comeback with a smug response full of your favorite while completely missing the point. But think about this... If more people disagree with your stance on this than agree with it, perhaps our thinking is not as upside down as you believe. Maybe the issue isn't black and white like you think. Just food for thought.

Some food for thought for you- more agree with me than disagree on this issue.

 

[fast&loose designs]

I believe there are a couple of things that can be learned from this.

Number 1. Be responsible for marking your score and checking to see that your opponent is marking his score correctly.

Number 2. Know full well in the future, that if you purposefully accept a ruling in your favor that you did not in fact earn, that there will be those who will look upon you as a cad. Accept that fact or be a gentleman and do the right thing.

Number 3. Tournament directors and referees are human and they make mistakes. It is your job as a competitor to make sure that they understand the situation so that they can make their best call. As soon as an error or impropriety is realized, take it to the referee to have it resolved. Stand your ground but take the referee's decision like a man, unless you know for a fact that he is wrong, then take it to the next level; the tournament director.

The Internet might open your eyes a bit wider but it won't resolve the particular issue and most everyone will likely get a little dirty in the process.

JoeyA

Very well said Joey. I just can't get my head around the idea that someone would rather give up his/her own integrity and respect from peers just to get a win, even if the win is "legal." Just because a rule exists doesn't mean it should; its how laws get amended rules evolve.

 

[BasementDweller]

This thread has me really scratching my head. There are people on this forum whose judgement I respect and I'm a bit surprised that I'm coming down on the opposite side of this question as they are. I suppose maybe this is an instance where decent people can disagree but I'll at least take one last stab at this.

The idea that not giving Greg credit for the missed rack is unfair to him may very well be true. However, what is being overlooked is the fact that going back after the fact and giving Greg the rack is unfair to Chris. In pool, especially among amateur players the score can have an impact on the match. If you're opponent is on the hill maybe your shot selection will be different. Add to that if you are playing an alternate break format and you are up by a couple of racks you may go for the win instead of playing safe. Also, we have all seen guys that for whatever reason, they just have a hard time closing out a match. Going back and giving someone a match in the fashion that so many people are advocating for removes this last hurdle before the finish line. That's very unfair to Chris.

So here's where I think the actually ethical dilemma lies - if Chris knows in his heart of hearts that the score being wrong had no bearing on his shot selection, his performance, or that of his opponent, then I think he should give him the rack. This is why early in a match I can see how correcting the score makes since. However, as you get closer to the finish line -- knowing these things is absolutely impossible. This is why I think it is important to remember that ultimately it's the player's responsibility to keep an accurate account of his own score and if you fail to do so, the gentlemanly thing to do is to just accept the blame for it and move on.

Like many on here, I will call fouls on myself much to the chagrin of some of the onlookers just because it's the right thing to do. But giving someone a rack that they failed to mark properly goes beyond being gentlemanly and to me it feels more like charity. We shouldn't be expected to be charitable when we are competing. That may sound harsh but hopefully it doesn't sound immoral or unethical.

Very thought provoking thread.

 

[jay helfert]

Jay what do you think is the right thing to do if a player is shooting the wrong ball
and only shoots the right ball because a commentator or someone else says
something before he actually shoots. Except for an opponent, do you feel it
is fair for anyone else to point out to a player they are shooting the wrong ball ?

Further more is it even fair for the opponent to say anything when the other player
is shooting?

I would first warn the person who said something to the player not to do this again and allow the match to continue. It's happened, I've warned them and that was the end of it. Never had to warn them twice!

Sh-t happens, you take care of it and the tournament goes on. I like to keep things running as smoothly as I can, with as little fuss as possible. Sometimes fewer words and less heavy handedness by the official is better. I don't ever want the match to be about me or the ruling I made. I want it to be decided on the table by the players.

 

[CreeDo]

"If there's evidence, and they still refuse, I get the ref.
If the ref rules against me, I make a mental note that I need to be extra careful
with my opponent. I'm going to see them as kind of weaselly.

How about you make a mental note up your games, as it's your responsibility.
Instead of trying to weasel out of your responsibility by looking to blame someone else?

There's no weaseling to take credit for a game we both know I won.

My responsibility is to A: play pool and B: follow the rules.
If there's tournament-specific rules like a dress code, or a penalty for being late,
then those are ALSO my responsibility.

Scorekeeping is just an incidental chore that is needed to keep track of
who won at the pool table. Tracking scores is in the same general
category as figuring out seeding, drawing up brackets, and so on.

Really it should be handled by someone else - if I mark my own score, it opens the door
for shenanigans like sneaking in an extra win. (Hey, if I can lose a game based on my
bad scorekeeping, why can't I win one too?)

In a perfect world it would be done by someone neutral, not one of the players.
We put up with doing "tournament work" like scorekeeping
because there's nobody has the money to pay a neutral scorekeeper.

But just because I reluctantly will handle that chore, doesn't mean
my skills as a scorekeeper should have an impact on whether I win the match or not.
That should be decided on the table ONLY.

Try reading the rules sometime Gene. It states that if you don't mark up your game, it is not a win.

Please link to the rule that says that. I can't find it.
If that's a written rule under any major ruleset, then I guess there's no room for complaint.