Unethical Win at Swanee 2014

[gregcantrall]

You can not pick which rulings to respect.

Conceding is out of line? That makes zero sense. There is no way it is ever out of line to concede/forfeit. If a ref tells me "you win", and I say "no, I forfeit," how is that out of line?

It would be unsportsmanlike to pick and choose which rules or rulings you wish to accept.

When I was 8 years old and playing Little League baseball, I was taught not to argue with the umpire. If I was safe but called out, I was to accept it and go sit down. I did not understand that this had to work both ways. I was catcher and the umpire called the runner out at the plate. I knew he was safe and argued for that call, unsuccessfully. After the game my father explained to me that we have to respect the umpire no matter which way the call goes. They will not be right all the time but we still must respect their decisions.

 

[LAMas]

What Greg Niceguy said:

"...I sit at one side of the table and Chris arrives shortly after and takes the other seat. above each players seat are the score beads, Chris wins the first game and marks his game over my seat. I thought it was odd but one set of beads is white and the other are orange maybe he wanted white.

at 2-2- I win the game and Chris marks my game for me while i was racking.

score is now 3-2. I win a game and break and run the next. and I only marked 1 game.

score says 4-2 (5-2 is the actual score)

it goes 6-5 (7-5) and the commentators are informed that the score is wrong. I can hear them saying something that like" Gregs unaware of that" i figured it had to do with the pool game itself.

at 6-6 (7-6) my opponent takes a break I go to get a water and am informed about my score being wrong. a couple people had been trying to get my attention in the stands by waving their arms earlier but I was focused on my match and did not notice.

after knowing this I go to the back of the room to speak to the tournament director. i explain what happened and that it has been confirmed by pool-trax and everyone watching online and in the stands knew. and there was video proof. I was told that because it was so many games ago that it would not count.

Obviously this news sucked for me and there is no rule about your game not counting if you dont mark it, i see it all the time at tournaments, someone forgets to mark a game and a game or two passes and the player is informed by someone in the stands and they correct it.

I saw no point in making a big deal of it in front of everyone. I would only be upset and most likely still be forced to shoot a hill hill game. When i return to the table I hear people from the stands telling Chris to not let them count my game as a win. I sat down and waited for him to break, I lose the game..."

 

[nine_ball6970]

Conceding is out of line? That makes zero sense. There is no way it is ever out of line to concede/forfeit. If a ref tells me "you win", and I say "no, I forfeit," how is that out of line?

I am under the opinion that we have refs to make these calls. When he says "you win" and then you say "no I forfeit" you are basically saying he doesn't know what he is talking about and is wasting his time by being there. Why even bother with a ruling if the players won't abide by it anyway?

 

[fast&loose designs]

I am under the opinion that we have refs to make these calls. When he says "you win" and then you say "no I forfeit" you are basically saying he doesn't know what he is talking about and is wasting his time by being there. Why even bother with a ruling if the players won't abide by it anyway?

I could understand if the ref says "you lose" and I say "no, I win" - THAT is not allowed. But you can't sit there and tell me it's against the rules to forfeit a match. Show me that rule, and you have won your argument.

 

[mcsock]

The really sad part of all of this is if it was not the streamed table, it would have gone un noticed. Then all of the haters would be on another thread bashing someone or something else.

Mistakes were made, TD made a ruling, THE END.

 

[fast&loose designs]

The really sad part of all of this is if it was not the streamed table, it would have gone un noticed. Then all of the haters would be on another thread bashing someone or something else.

Mistakes were made, TD made a ruling, THE END.

No bashing, no hate here. Don't make this out to be something it isn't. It's a debate, no one hates anyone. And this situation happened on 3 different tables that weren't streamed, and all of those were resolved by the opponent who let the player know he forgot to mark a bead.

 

[terryhanna]

Conceding is out of line? That makes zero sense. There is no way it is ever out of line to concede/forfeit. If a ref tells me "you win", and I say "no, I forfeit," how is that out of line?

That would not be fair to the player in the next match he would be playing somebody the TD ruled lost his match that would open up a new can of worms if you forfeit after the match you both should be eliminated from the tournament

 

[nine_ball6970]

No bashing, no hate here. Don't make this out to be something it isn't. It's a debate, no one hates anyone. And this situation happened on 3 different tables that weren't streamed, and all of those were resolved by the opponent who let the player know he forgot to mark a bead.

I am not sure if you can compare those situations with this one because the opponent told the other player he forgot to mark a bead. In this situation, neither one of them knew until a break was taken at what they thought was hill-hill and a spectator informed Greg. There were what 8 games played after that?

 

[mosconiac]

[devil's advocate] The player noted that his error occurred at 4-2 (5-2 in reality). It is plausible that at some point his opponent may have "played the score" and made shot/safety decision(s) based on that score...thereby affecting the outcome of the match. Therefore, it would be unfair to award the game & match at that later time. [/devil's advocate]

 

[itsfroze]

[devil's advocate] the player noted that his error occurred at 4-2 (5-2 in reality). It is plausible that at some point his opponent may have "played the score" and made shot/safety decision(s) based on that score...thereby affecting the outcome of the match. Therefore, it would be unfair to award the game & match at that later time. [/devil's advocate]

Exactly Right

 

[fast&loose designs]

[devil's advocate] The player noted that his error occurred at 4-2 (5-2 in reality). It is plausible that at some point his opponent may have "played the score" and made shot/safety decision(s) based on that score...thereby affecting the outcome of the match. Therefore, it would be unfair to award the game & match at that later time. [/devil's advocate]

Once again, I am not contesting those facts. I am simply saying that after the match ended, after both players understood everything that happened, the match could and should have been conceded. That is all. Simply put.

 

[itsfroze]

I enlarged what I thought were the key words in this post.

Originally Posted by mosconiac View Post
[devil's advocate] the player noted that his error occurred at 4-2 (5-2 in reality). It is plausible that at some point his opponent may have "played the score" and made shot/safety decision(s) based on that score...there by affecting the outcome of the match.Therefore, it would be unfair to award the game & match at that later time. [/devil's advocate]

Exactly Right

 

[BasementDweller]

Cut the Baby In Half

Some are arguing that the most ethical solution would have been for Chris to have awarded the match to Greg.

Others are saying that the match was potentially affected in certain ways by both players playing the game with the wrong score.

Others are saying - who cares, you snooze you lose.

Well, it just dawned on me that the best solution would have been that at the time that the discrepancy was identified, the players along with the tournament director should have huddled up and came up with the following simple solution:

They should have removed one game from Chris' score and continued on. This would have eliminated the act of simply giving Greg the match and it would have acknowledged the possibility of the match being affected by the wrong score being used.

Just throwing that out there as a possible solution for anybody that runs into this in the future.

 

[BeiberLvr]

Some are arguing that the most ethical solution would have been for Chris to have awarded the match to Greg.

Others are saying that the match was potentially affected in certain ways by both players playing the game with the wrong score.

Others are saying - who cares, you snooze you lose.

Well, it just dawned on me that the best solution would have been that at the time that the discrepancy was identified, the players along with the tournament director should have huddled up and came up with the following simple solution:

They should have removed one game from Chris' score and continued on. This would have eliminated the act of simply giving Greg the match and it would have acknowledged the possibility of the match being affected by the wrong score being used.

Just throwing that out there as a possible solution for anybody that runs into this in the future.

The best solution is the one that happened.

This would be the 2nd best solution.

 

[BasementDweller]

The best solution is the one that happened.

This would be the 2nd best solution.

Yeah - I think you are probably right.

 

[itsfroze]

WHAT, are you kidding.
My opponent is lax and forgets to take the responsibility to mark up his score
so later in the match, you want to take a game away from me for something my opponent forgot to do. That's ludicrous.

Wait let me reread before I post this to make sure I read what was written correctly?

To acknowledge that the score was affected and the score actually being affected are completely different things.

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!

 

[BeiberLvr]

Rarely, if ever, have I bean wrong.

 

[BeiberLvr]

WHAT, are you kidding.
My opponent is lax and forgets to take the responsibility to mark up his score
so later in the match, you want to take a game away from me for something my opponent forgot to do. That's ludicrous.

Wait let me reread before I post this to make sure I read what was written correctly?

To acknowledge that the score was affected and the score actually being affected are completely different things.

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!

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.

 

[punter]

Rarely, if ever, have I bean wrong.

I've never sean you bean wrong either.

 

[BasementDweller]

WHAT, are you kidding.
My opponent is lax and forgets to take the responsibility to mark up his score
so later in the match, you want to take a game away from me for something my opponent forgot to do. That's ludicrous.

Wait let me reread before I post this to make sure I read what was written correctly?

To acknowledge that the score was affected and the score actually being affected are completely different things.

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!

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.