USPPA Reno players, did they get paid?
- Thread starter bumpypickle
- Start date
Jay, What happened to you in Phoenix(where ever) when you flew out there to oversee the money that was supposed to be in escrow and all of a sudden it just vanished?. Also, Did you put on that tournament you were collecting $ here on AZ for a 2010 LA Open ?
First of all, I never collected a dime from anyone, but nice try anyway. :thud:
As far as Phoenix is concerned, that was one big scam by someone named Chuck Bobbitt. He scammed me and a lot of pool players. I won't go into all the details, it could be a chapter in a book. Thanks to Mark Griffin we got paid an initial 70% of the money owed to us within a couple of months. And thanks to my pursuit of Bobbitt in the criminal system he coughed up another 15% one year later. The last 15% is still outstanding. Unfortunately the statute of limitations on his bad checks has expired.
You just can't win, can you "canwin?" :help:
Last edited:
So who got the 5% commission?
So who got the 5% commission?
You got me on that one Bobalu! I'll get you next time! :thumbup:
I think I said that when I referred to ratio of event entry to added money, $1 to $100. That is another expression for percentage. I am not disagreeing with you, I am saying I agreed with you and that you misunderstood that I meant $1 for $100 as a fixed amount and not as in $1:$10 or 1/10 or 0.1%. I should have emphasized it more when I explained a specific example.
having lived in Vegas for almost 20 years, I know a bit about the Gaming Commission. Infact if anyone really wants to look into it all their enforcement laws, rules, regulations are online to read. They cant act outside the laws they are bound to. I dont have the interest to look it up myself but its all there for someone who like to read law.
Having said all that, my guess and its a guess is the Gaming Commission doesnt give a rats ass about how or when pool players are paid, its out of their jurisdiction. Sounds like a good story, but IMO dosent hold a drop of water. At the most they might want to know who the promoters are and be made aware of the event and maybe just maybe request the pay-off schedule's. Gaming also wants to be sure that the licence holder of hosting casino is able to disclose its involvement in the event to the extent it isnt booking action as thats illegal. You cant make book in NV on sporting events that are played in NV. Gaming dosent care about rail bets-its over looked.
Perhaps the players and prize money could be help by something like paypal. This way there is no chance of someone splurging the cash on hookers and drugs or paying old loans. It is more of Swiss bank type thing where people drop money into an account that stays locked until the prize winners cashout, but I doubt a Swiss bank account is something you are interested in applying for.
The cheap way would be to create paypal orders the prizes are held as a product and someone is then given a key or password to unlock it. I think the bid process can be reworked to do that. This way a computer admin will then wait for the prize winners, enter it into the system and then paypal can release the money.
It isn't a pretty solution but it prevents the ethical dilemma of someone taking the cash and running. Money orders would be a product placed on the exchange market and then a computer admin sits waiting for the auction or tournament to play out. That computer admin would be the person that ensures the money order is sent to the correct person. This would be a problem if a promoter does not have the prize money ahead of the event.
The cheap way would be to create paypal orders the prizes are held as a product and someone is then given a key or password to unlock it. I think the bid process can be reworked to do that. This way a computer admin will then wait for the prize winners, enter it into the system and then paypal can release the money.
It isn't a pretty solution but it prevents the ethical dilemma of someone taking the cash and running. Money orders would be a product placed on the exchange market and then a computer admin sits waiting for the auction or tournament to play out. That computer admin would be the person that ensures the money order is sent to the correct person. This would be a problem if a promoter does not have the prize money ahead of the event.
Last edited:
Thats because 3C players are smarter than pool players.
the problem with pool for long as I can remember is everyone has their own idea of what the right way of doing things is and to make matters worse the promoters are short sighted and want to make a score for themself on the first event, suppose a promoter was willing to take a loss for the first 2 years to build up a event, tour etc and not looking to make $$$ until year 4 or 5. Then you would see a honest effort and something that would be a success.
and no fuzzy math, or disappearing $$$,
I dont see that happening anytime soon. I'm to lazy to get involved with that sort of thing myself. But As a Biz man I know if I try and make a score out of the gate-i'm robbing someone. Actually thats how the boiler rooms I hustled in worked, Again I been a square since 96, but I know the racket.
I will vouch for that!
Mark makes full disclosure easy and simple for any of his customers "Players" and does exactly what his advertising says. No fuzzy math, or added $$$ that for what ever reason isnt there come payday.
He dosent over state the value of a event that fizzles out to be nothing like the Texas thing did. Mark has taken some big hits on failed events as well, but HE took the hit not the players.
It aint hard to be honest.
best
Eric
An idea
I have an idea: Have an industry rating list. Much like they do in the stock market. This is to encourage "Best Practices". The time has come to hold industry "stinkers" accountable.
A simple and clear way to publically review those who follow through and those who do not. Those who promote the sport in a positive and professional light and those who do not.
Start strictly with the promotional side, since this is the subject of this thread as well as a more discussed topic overall this year.
i.e.: simple A, B,C, F rating (people can go up and down based on their history and professionalism just as stock ratings fluctuate). Needs to be pretty simple to start out. The below is just a brainstorm idea upon reading this thread.
A = Promoters who payout what they promise 100% and are consistent / clearly defined event guidelines and formats and communicates the event to the pool playing community effectively / Only place their event on the global and their respective national or state calendars once they have most of the components firmly in place such as the location, added money if any secured and solid, for example (too often, from the local, state and even international level promoters will block time on the calendar and even announce an event when in fact they do not have all their contracts completed or event secured from the production side. This is not acceptable and causes bedlam on the calendar and not fair to the players, other promoters or the governing bodies such as the WPA at all)
B = Promoters who payout 100% but may not be as effective at communicating their event to the players or other promoters. May have had one payout mishap in the last 3 years, such as paying late to players in larger events, but overall do an excellent job, just could work on communication and consistency better. Is however sincere and honest when scheduling events and works within the industry to not schedule on top of other events within that event's "same category", i.e., major state event being scheduled on top of another larger state event already on the calendar or a national event on top of another national event. This is tough to follow on the local level, but they do try.
C. Does consistently pay out 100% as promised however does not take into consideration other already scheduled events (only should be applied for state, regional, national and international events that might draw from the same group of players). A promoter that is inconsistent in their policies and following their own stated rules and or has demonstrated what could be considered "unsportsman like promoters conduct"
F. Risky, has demonstrated irresponsible, inconsistent and untrustworthy behavior. Has a history of not following through as promised. Has stiffed players, vendors, and or other people or organizations associated with their event.
I have an idea: Have an industry rating list. Much like they do in the stock market. This is to encourage "Best Practices". The time has come to hold industry "stinkers" accountable.
A simple and clear way to publically review those who follow through and those who do not. Those who promote the sport in a positive and professional light and those who do not.
Start strictly with the promotional side, since this is the subject of this thread as well as a more discussed topic overall this year.
i.e.: simple A, B,C, F rating (people can go up and down based on their history and professionalism just as stock ratings fluctuate). Needs to be pretty simple to start out. The below is just a brainstorm idea upon reading this thread.
A = Promoters who payout what they promise 100% and are consistent / clearly defined event guidelines and formats and communicates the event to the pool playing community effectively / Only place their event on the global and their respective national or state calendars once they have most of the components firmly in place such as the location, added money if any secured and solid, for example (too often, from the local, state and even international level promoters will block time on the calendar and even announce an event when in fact they do not have all their contracts completed or event secured from the production side. This is not acceptable and causes bedlam on the calendar and not fair to the players, other promoters or the governing bodies such as the WPA at all)
B = Promoters who payout 100% but may not be as effective at communicating their event to the players or other promoters. May have had one payout mishap in the last 3 years, such as paying late to players in larger events, but overall do an excellent job, just could work on communication and consistency better. Is however sincere and honest when scheduling events and works within the industry to not schedule on top of other events within that event's "same category", i.e., major state event being scheduled on top of another larger state event already on the calendar or a national event on top of another national event. This is tough to follow on the local level, but they do try.
C. Does consistently pay out 100% as promised however does not take into consideration other already scheduled events (only should be applied for state, regional, national and international events that might draw from the same group of players). A promoter that is inconsistent in their policies and following their own stated rules and or has demonstrated what could be considered "unsportsman like promoters conduct"
F. Risky, has demonstrated irresponsible, inconsistent and untrustworthy behavior. Has a history of not following through as promised. Has stiffed players, vendors, and or other people or organizations associated with their event.
Holly, I think this is a great idea. However alot of the people who are really in the know as to some of these factors that would lead you to make a statement or a rating, may be in the industry or a player. My guess is that alot of them would be a little shy to give a promoter a "F" rating for fear of burning a bridge just in case that promoter can give them some $$. I hope that makes sense. I kn ow alot of people are hurting for $$ right now and can't take a chance of offending someone. You can't do it annonymous or people who just have a vendeta against someone could sabotage. If there was a way tomake it work Holly I think it would be a great idea.
The rating agency proved useless in preventing the economic devastation of recent times.
I think isolating the people that face the ethical dilemma and containing that problem is a better solution. If a promoter is so good than providing documentation of the funds ie tracking via paypal or a money manager that is independent of the event would establish some idea of what can go wrong and where the financial problems begin.
Dirk Grundmann
New member
My guess on what happened is this. Legends gaming offered to sponsor a poker tournament for which the entry was free for the players in the pool tournaments. However due to some gaming laws (or Casino rules), the Legends money (money from an gaming company in Panama) could not be used for the poker tournament held at the Peppermill. Therefore Tony decided to use the money that was set aside to pay for the pool tournament to pay for the poker tournament and use the Legends gaming money to pay for the pool tournament. Then Lengends gaming did not pay and therefore there were no funds. -- This is just my best guess though - Tony would be able to confirm or give the real reasons.
In its 20 something years of operation, the USPPA always paid on time.
In its 20 something years of operation, the USPPA always paid on time.
Yeah, unfortunatly I don't know enough about the history of this event or their events. However if they have always paid in the past I can only guess that something bad had happened that is out of their control. It just seems unusual for after 20yrs they all ofa sudden are not able to cover.
His phone and computer could be busy attracting donations. Or he could be deciding if he wants to pay the players out of his pocket.
My idea is the beginning of just that, an idea. Not a full fledge structure which will take more time and input from folks.
I do not believe the stock market rating system caused the global economic issue and in no way was designed to prevent fluctuations in economic conditions. Just an avenue for investors to decide what level of investment risk they wished to dive into.
But that is a different disscussion, in a different forum and it's own thread.
Regarding players and others being concerned about "outing stinkers".
1. they already do that, hence this thread
2. I am suggesting the industry get more involved in some manner and make it more structured on how these issues are monitored. Then let the players make decisions for themselves which events they decide to participate and use the list as a guide and only that.
3. As individuals have personal credit ratings, let producers have "credibility" ratings.
Each walk starts with the first step n'est pas?
I do not believe the stock market rating system caused the global economic issue and in no way was designed to prevent fluctuations in economic conditions. Just an avenue for investors to decide what level of investment risk they wished to dive into.
But that is a different disscussion, in a different forum and it's own thread.
Regarding players and others being concerned about "outing stinkers".
1. they already do that, hence this thread
2. I am suggesting the industry get more involved in some manner and make it more structured on how these issues are monitored. Then let the players make decisions for themselves which events they decide to participate and use the list as a guide and only that.
3. As individuals have personal credit ratings, let producers have "credibility" ratings.
Each walk starts with the first step n'est pas?