Update on the Des Moines pool scene

SnapdaNine said:
Here's the list of Elites:
Adam Behnke, Ryan Behnke, Dwaine Bowman, Jamey Bowman, Jesse Bowman, Jason Chance, Chad Duster, Jack Craft, Dennis Favaro, Jamie Fenton, Dustin Gunia, Scott Hargens, Rory Hendrickson, Tom Hernandez, Josh Johnson, Scott Kitto, Don McCaughey, Kevin McCombs, Jody McLaughlin, Wes Nemmers, Marv Rapp, John Rozmus, Rich Sager, Nate Schoepske, Chad Vilmont, and Whitey Walker....

If all these guys can make a living at pool....I hope they don't quit there day jobs....my Taxes are high enough!!!!
Click to expand...

Duster is a bad ass last name. Whitey has a pool hall so he's making a living at pool. Other than that there are some good players on this list but on a 7 foot valley in a race to 7 I don't think any of them are stealing in a tournament with other masters players as well.

Have all these guys won state titles or something? Is that how they landed here? Why is Jon Kucharo not on this list? Why do they have a list of like 8 names anyway, what's the point of that? Doesn't this thoroughly screw people for the team events?
 
SnapdaNine said:
Here's the list of Elites:
Adam Behnke, Ryan Behnke, Dwaine Bowman, Jamey Bowman, Jesse Bowman, Jason Chance, Chad Duster, Jack Craft, Dennis Favaro, Jamie Fenton, Dustin Gunia, Scott Hargens, Rory Hendrickson, Tom Hernandez, Josh Johnson, Scott Kitto, Don McCaughey, Kevin McCombs, Jody McLaughlin, Wes Nemmers, Marv Rapp, John Rozmus, Rich Sager, Nate Schoepske, Chad Vilmont, and Whitey Walker....

If all these guys can make a living at pool....I hope they don't quit there day jobs....my Taxes are high enough!!!!
Click to expand...

Scott, I think you misunderstood me. I do not think that all of the players on our current Elite list are in fact Elites. But we do have a definition of what an Elite is, how you get on that list and we have to stick to that...for now. You know exactly who could make a living and that would (should) be the Elite list. Read what I said...that is my opinion and some don't agree.

L8R...Ken
 
Ken
I would like to know what kind of changes you and the other board members are going to make if an elite player wins state this year, The board has made changes almost every year since I have been playing and just about everyone has been geared towards bringing the lower level players closer to the upper level players without them having to earn it. Players don't get good by having things given to them it takes practice and commitment. Lets all remember this is a state championship which means you are the best in the state on that day not the best player to be given a state title.

Ron O'Meara Jr.
 
Good post Ron.

Missed you this last weekend. I played Josh in the singles 8ball, his break reminded me of you alot, lol.

Hope all is well sir :)
 
MrSchon9 said:
Ken
I would like to know what kind of changes you and the other board members are going to make if an elite player wins state this year, The board has made changes almost every year since I have been playing and just about everyone has been geared towards bringing the lower level players closer to the upper level players without them having to earn it. Players don't get good by having things given to them it takes practice and commitment. Lets all remember this is a state championship which means you are the best in the state on that day not the best player to be given a state title.

Ron O'Meara Jr.
Click to expand...

The question 'what to do if an Elite wins' was considered. We think we will just add another game to that Elites handicap. I know it waters down the tournament, but with all the trouble we are having just keeping Masters playing, we need to find a solution and trial and error is the only test we have. You are right, seems we change things every year. Until we get it right, it's hard not to change something.

I'd love to run a Masters Division with not handicaps and allow all the Masters/Elites to compete for a State Championship, but how many current Masters do you think would compete if we didn't restrict some of the players? How many Masters would sign up for a tournament if they knew they had to play Jessie, Josh, Jamie Baraks, Chad and the other Elites even? You know that some of the players on the Masters list aren't really Masters, just like some of the Elites aren't really Elites...but they've earned the classification through tournament play and we need to draw the line somewhere.

We want a good turnout for this event and handicapping seems like it would draw more players. We've tried an Elite only tournament, which I thought would be a really good show, but there was too much finaggling, too much colusion between players to make sure this guy didn't win or that guy placed in the money. Then we tried the Elite tournament with out of staters allowed. That was intended to be an entertainment ploy as well. We thought we'd attract some 'name' players and we threw extra money at that event, but it didn't work out either.

We are in the delema of trying to satisfy as many as possible and or course, we upset somebody always. Everybody will never be satisfied so we have to try to satisfy the majority.

Maybe we should allow the current Masters and Elites to decide who should be considered a Master and who should be considered an Elite. Then those players could figure out a tournament that would satisfy themselves. We're flexible. We could work with that. We'll supply the place, tables and some added money. You make your own bed and sleep in it.

You know what they say about opinions...let's hear your suggestions.

L8R...Ken
 
I personally, always thought the tournament was just fine the way it was. Masters division with all the best players in the State playing even. Best player wins.

Without having the exact numbers in front of me, I can think of one reason the Masters tournament numbers are down in the last few years. It seems like there was right around 100 players (on average) in the tournament when the Elite list started. Original Elite list had about 10 players. Then every year the top two players in both the 9 ball and 8 ball became elite. Four players per year. After five years that is 20 players in addition to the first 10 for a total of 30. That is 30% of the field that cannot play. In my opinion that is a pretty big number.

As far as handicapping goes, if someone wants to play in a handicapped tournament there are other events throughout the year that are handicapped.

I vote to do away with the Elite list and do away with the handicaps...let the best players be determined on an even playing field. I feel like any State title won under the current conditions should have an asterisk with it.
 
What are the thoughts on Master's requesting to go down to Open again, if not cashing for 3 years?

That or Once a Master - always a Master??
 
Mike B. said:
I personally, always thought the tournament was just fine the way it was. Masters division with all the best players in the State playing even. Best player wins.

Without having the exact numbers in front of me, I can think of one reason the Masters tournament numbers are down in the last few years. It seems like there was right around 100 players (on average) in the tournament when the Elite list started. Original Elite list had about 10 players. Then every year the top two players in both the 9 ball and 8 ball became elite. Four players per year. After five years that is 20 players in addition to the first 10 for a total of 30. That is 30% of the field that cannot play. In my opinion that is a pretty big number.

As far as handicapping goes, if someone wants to play in a handicapped tournament there are other events throughout the year that are handicapped.

I vote to do away with the Elite list and do away with the handicaps...let the best players be determined on an even playing field. I feel like any State title won under the current conditions should have an asterisk with it.
Click to expand...

Good point. Without having gone through the ISPA tourney yet I also see an issue. There's no incentive to really play in the Masters division for the players who play Masters speed but can sneak into the Open divisions. With the masters list I have seen, there are guys on it that I can spot and there are guys on it that I need a big spot from which tells me I am fairly borderline in the scheme of things. I would like to see Open players playing in the Open divisions, no offense but all Masters level players won the tournaments in Cedar Rapids, despite division.

Give the masters players a longer race, alternate the break, play even, and make the money right in that division because that's your true state championships there. The Open divisions are where you start but the Masters is the end of the rainbow, it should be treated as such. Anyone who feels like they can get there should be allowed to play in the Masters division.

I also think it is silly to have 16 lists people can reference to figure out what level player they are. It's Iowa, make a state list and stick with it. If you can be on a Masters team and do well you should be able to fight it out in the Masters division. I can't tell you how many people in the Open division at Valley have stories where there opponent didn't miss a ball in the Open or Intermediate. That sounds silly doesn't it? If you are capable of playing that well you should be duking it out with similar competition. If everyone played in the appropriate division these issues wouldnt even come up. The money is shit anyway, even if you win a division, you end up maybe a couple hundred on the week, that's not big dough. So most of it is for the pride and challenge...so run the tourney according to that. There are too many fees coming out of the players entries and the money ain't right. The tourney organizers need to raise funds from selling booth space, advertisements, and getting gappers off of concession stands. If they did this effectively the state champ migh make $2500 and it be worth it to win it and people would want to play in the higher divisions.
 
Good point MikeB and I believe you are correct (close enough) with your numbers.

I think there are too many players that we are trying to call Elites. One question is how do we determine who should be an Elite? The current method of earning points for high finishes in the Masters Division is, I think, a part of the answer. We just need to tweak it to get it right.

What's the difference between players (whether it be Open/Master or Master/Elite)? I think it's consistancy. That's what the point system will show. You get one Master player that finishes in the top 5-6 every year, should that guy be considered better than most other Masters? Yes, but is he an Elite? When a Master wins the division, should he be considered an Elite? As it is now...yes...but is he really an Elite? Where do you draw the line?

Eliminate the Elite classification all together...I think not. Shrink it down to where it belongs...yes. But again, where do you draw the line.

Mike, you just won the IOMA 9-ball. Would you consider it a mistake to put you on the Elite list (we won't because it's not ISPA)? Would you consider that title a title of honor? Would you consider yourself an equal to others currently on the Elite list?

I would like to see the Elite list as a privledge to earn, not a penalty. Maybe raise the points to become an Elite but not penalize (handicap) Elites.

A problem then comes with the advance of Open players to the Masters. The same problem exists there. Is the guy that just won the Open Division a Master? Or did he have a good draw? There again, points will help determine consistancy. And what about the true Master player that gets into the Open Division (fox in the hen house...shark in the guppy pond)? Do we allow that guy to dominate the Open Division for a few years, stealing cash prizes from true Open players when he should be in the Masters Division.

Now that we've defined who the Master are coming out of the Open (hypothetically speaking), will they be able to compete with the Elites. That is one reason we are loosing some of the Master players...they do not want to compete with the Jessie's, Josh's and Chad's so they just don't play. We are hoping that the handicap system we are implimenting will help keep those new players around.

This is a serious problem with no clear answer. All we can do is try to do a good job, try different things and maybe someday we'll get it right.

Matt, I'd like to see the day when Masters are in the Masters Division because they are Masters, then let them stay there.

Sorry for the long post, but you asked....Ken
 
Last edited:
mikeyfrost said:
Good point. Without having gone through the ISPA tourney yet I also see an issue. There's no incentive to really play in the Masters division for the players who play Masters speed but can sneak into the Open divisions. With the masters list I have seen, there are guys on it that I can spot and there are guys on it that I need a big spot from which tells me I am fairly borderline in the scheme of things. I would like to see Open players playing in the Open divisions[/B], no offense but all Masters level players won the tournaments in Cedar Rapids, despite division.

Give the masters players a longer race, alternate the break, play even, and make the money right in that division because that's your true state championships there. The Open divisions are where you start but the Masters is the end of the rainbow, it should be treated as such. Anyone who feels like they can get there should be allowed to play in the Masters division.

I also think it is silly to have 16 lists people can reference to figure out what level player they are. It's Iowa, make a state list and stick with it. If you can be on a Masters team and do well you should be able to fight it out in the Masters division. I can't tell you how many people in the Open division at Valley have stories where there opponent didn't miss a ball in the Open or Intermediate. That sounds silly doesn't it? If you are capable of playing that well you should be duking it out with similar competition. If everyone played in the appropriate division these issues wouldnt even come up. The money is shit anyway, even if you win a division, you end up maybe a couple hundred on the week, that's not big dough. So most of it is for the pride and challenge...so run the tourney according to that. There are too many fees coming out of the players entries and the money ain't right. The tourney organizers need to raise funds from selling booth space, advertisements, and getting gappers off of concession stands. If they did this effectively the state champ migh make $2500 and it be worth it to win it and people would want to play in the higher divisions.
Click to expand...


Mikey...You've figured it all out already. Unfortunately, there are plenty of people willing to sacrifice a little chump change so they can win every match. Way too many over skilled players in each division. Unfortunately, this is a common practice among pool players. Everybody want the nuts!!! And the integrity of some pool players just aint there!!!

"With the masters list I have seen, there are guys on it that I can spot and there are guys on it that I need a big spot from which tells me I am fairly borderline in the scheme of things."...Your quote...so which Division did you sign up for? Since you can compete in the Masters Division, I hope you signed up for the Masters Division.:D Not picking on you, just making a point.

L8R...Ken
 
Ken, I know you are doin your best to make this state tourney as good as it can be. This is great to have you on here discussing these issues with the players.

I really like what Minnesota does for their state tourneys...Master, AA, A, B. No Elite division. Up there Masters and Elites are the same thing. It seems like this way of doing things has always worked up there. I can't remember the last time I heard a complaint about the players in each division not being where they should be. For whatever reason it just works. At the end of the day, you still have to earn your way up the ladder.

Also, it seems to me that payouts are much better in Minnesota than Iowa. Last weekend was terrible!

So why isn't there a BCA state tourney in Iowa?
 
Last edited:
Yes, Ken please understand we're not picking on you. The ISPA site gets no action, its way better to bounce ideas off of people here.

Thanks for replying/discussing :)

Last thing i'll probably say this afternoon. When a new resturant opens, they don't try to appeal to everyone, they try to make the best food they can and offer great service. The people who like it will come and tell others to go. Point im trying to make is. Instead of pleasing everyone, why not just put up the best tournament and let it grow by word of mouth.

The MN tournament had 2 people from IA two years ago, 10 people last year and 30 people this year. (numbers not accurate) But you get my point ? Two years ago i didn't even know they had a tournament we could go to. Now i can't wait til next year so i can go back.
 
Ken, you asked if I should be Elite...in my honest opinion, no. The question that has to be asked is, "does this guy play that much better than the other masters?" There are a handful of players that do play a notch above everyone else. The problem is, where do you draw the line?

Like I said before, I don't think there should be an elite list. All the masters should play even, in one division. I believe the reason the elite list was created, was because some people didn't like playing against the top players in the state. Then criteria had to be created to make these players elite, and that started to include too many people and now we don't have the numbers that were there before.

To answer the question about the open players that win or finish high enough to be placed in masters...any player that goes through an open tournament all the way to the end is playing at a master level. I placed fifth in what was the Iowa State BCA open about 10 years ago, and if I remember correctly, I had to play some pretty good pool just to get that far. For the record, I could still be playing in the Level 1 at Valley...I tried at least 3 times to cash in that tournament and never finished high, so I voluntarily moved myself up to masters to play the "longer" race to 4. lol

One other comment. I was looking at payouts from last year. I'm not sure what was added to the men's elite tournament, but there was $2,000 added to the women's elite tournament...10 players competed. Needless to say, I am glad the elite tournament's are done.
 
Mike B. said:
One other comment. I was looking at payouts from last year. I'm not sure what was added to the men's elite tournament, but there was $2,000 added to the women's elite tournament...10 players competed. Needless to say, I am glad the elite tournament's are done.
Click to expand...

Yeah the payout was nice. :) BUT we were practically banned from all of the other tournaments due to the team configuration having to be just so, no elites in the scotch, no elites in the mini's, etc. Plus our matches were spread out over three days, so the expenses were higher.

I am personally very happy to be back in a tourny with a longer roster. I'm not thrilled with having to spot, but if that's what I have to do so be it.
 
Ken, I'm playing the Open division for ISPA. Like I said I feel like I am fairly border line. I can off the top of my head name about 10 people from DSM alone that are also playing in the Open division that spot me, so state wide if the average holds up I'll be a top 50 player in the Open at best, which with a good draw would give me a chance to finish well. Like Mike B. said if you go deep in the Open you are easily shooting Masters level pool. Pool is a funny sport sometimes. I think it's weird that say Jody would have to spot Athens in a tournament, doesn't that sound ass backwards? That race to 7 for Valley seemed to work for folks. Hell even at a race to 7 most of the good players still felt that was a hair short of a race. I always have liked the US Open because as the tournament goes on the races get longer, you gotta really earn it to get there.

Enough yapping out of me though because the system in place almost makes people take advantage wherever they can. That's part of the reason I am so happy about our makeshift Masters team at Valley finishing 5th/6th. We weren't stacked or favorites, in fact we were underdogs against almost every team. We won matches because the rolls were with us and we played good for about 15 hours as a team. It would be nice if that was more the rule than the exception. Just sayin....
 
My thoughts and prayers go out to the Richardson family, as Tammie's father passed away tonight.
 
mikeyfrost said:
Ken, I'm playing the Open division for ISPA. Like I said I feel like I am fairly border line. I can off the top of my head name about 10 people from DSM alone that are also playing in the Open division that spot me, so state wide if the average holds up I'll be a top 50 player in the Open at best, which with a good draw would give me a chance to finish well. Like Mike B. said if you go deep in the Open you are easily shooting Masters level pool. Pool is a funny sport sometimes. I think it's weird that say Jody would have to spot Athens in a tournament, doesn't that sound ass backwards? That race to 7 for Valley seemed to work for folks. Hell even at a race to 7 most of the good players still felt that was a hair short of a race. I always have liked the US Open because as the tournament goes on the races get longer, you gotta really earn it to get there.

Enough yapping out of me though because the system in place almost makes people take advantage wherever they can. That's part of the reason I am so happy about our makeshift Masters team at Valley finishing 5th/6th. We weren't stacked or favorites, in fact we were underdogs against almost every team. We won matches because the rolls were with us and we played good for about 15 hours as a team. It would be nice if that was more the rule than the exception. Just sayin....
Click to expand...
Hey, you really think there are 10 guys in Des Moines that are playin the open that can spot you? I think all those guys need a spot from you! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top