Vote for the IPT Future -- IPT players only

[JAM]

Well, I'm going to go out on a real short limb here and post up an IPT poll.

One of the biggest stumbling blocks of the IPT to date has been the lack of COMMUNICATION, IMHO.

Getting the messages out via the Internet, with no capability to ask questions when questions crop up, is a big problem. When I have e-mailed the IPT in the past, several of my e-mails were not responded to until 2 or 3 weeks later. Sometimes they went unanswered.

Having said that, though, I am posting up an Internet poll. This will be an OPEN poll, with the AzBilliards names of the posters revealed.

I invite all IPT members and IPT players, those who have competed in IPT qualifiers and/or tournaments, to cast their vote.

Thanks in advance to any response. Being that this is an Internet poll, it will be interesting, taking in my above-referenced comments, to see how many votes are actually made.

JAM

 

[JAM]

Well, I'm going to go out on a real short limb here and post up an IPT poll.

One of the biggest stumbling blocks of the IPT to date has been the lack of COMMUNICATION, IMHO....

Can you hear me now, Kevin?

JAM

 

[jediphil]

i understand why you want only players to vote however i dont see that being a true reflection of feeling.

there are after all a majority of players who where invited on the IPT including hall of famers who are being given an opportunity to win money again when they would probally not qualify now for other tourneys and they will obviously vote to keep with it

i accept some of these players were once great players but we can all see that is no longer the case.

sigel told everyone who would listen he would beat all comers at the invitational but could not get through round 2 in the other tourneys.

for these players to vote against the ipt would be like turkeys voting for thanksgiving

this is not meant to be disreseptful just an observation

 

[JAM]

i understand why you want only players to vote however i dont see that being a true reflection of feeling.

there are after all a majority of players who where invited on the IPT including hall of famers who are being given an opportunity to win money again when they would probally not qualify now for other tourneys and they will obviously vote to keep with it

i accept some of these players were once great players but we can all see that is no longer the case.

sigel told everyone who would listen he would beat all comers at the invitational but could not get through round 2 in the other tourneys.

I understand where you're coming from.

From the get-go, the selection of the initial 150 IPT members was met with dissent. There are some current so-called "IPT members" who were selected initially based solely on their response to an Internet IPT announcement.

It was THESE interested parties who did follow through and answer via the Internet, providing a short bio and answering a quesionnaire, that got selected.

Some competent players who I think would have been more deserving to be selected didn't respond to the IPT announcement because they, A, did not have any knowledge about an IPT or, B, don't even know how to turn on a computer.

I do agree that some of the pool players that did get selected initially, based on their written Internet e-mail, are not the cream of the crop.

However, if the IPT had moved forward full speed ahead with its "vision," the cream would have risen to the top, based on a legitimate ranking system.

What happened, though, as we all know, is that the tour has come to a halt. The cream hasn't risen to the top quite yet because the ranking system did not play out in its entirety.

...for these players to vote against the ipt would be like turkeys voting for thanksgiving

this is not meant to be disreseptful just an observation

And a very legitimate observation, IMHO!

Though there are some who don't agree with how the 150 members were selected, it was, in fact, a starting platform . In a tour which utilizes a ranking system for its membership, the best players in the world would eventually become members of the tour.

I have witnessed MANY American players who came out of the woodwork to compete in the IPT qualifiers who I would not consider "tournament soldiers." James Walden, Scotty Townsend, and Dave Matlock come to mind. Dave Matlock was very successful last year on the IPT tournament trail, and I believe there are other players just like Dave Matlock who are very deserving to be an IPT member.

If the IPT had continued, I believe the IPT membership would consist of the best pool players in the world.

JAM

 

[!Smorgass Bored]

No. Not until the Reno payouts are paid in full.

Doug
( a member of the I.P.T. - Instant Potatoes Taster )

 

[JimS]

Yes... develop a tour... but scale back so it's do-able... but no more until after payouts are COMPLETE.

Don't expect more cooperation from investors (read members and/or players) until integrity has been exhibited. INTEGRITY is everything.... EVERYTHING!!

 

[cuetique]

I'm the one who put in "Don't change" -- not being sarcastic, I just wanted to be able to see the poll numbers.

 

[!Smorgass Bored]

I Guess We'll Have To Start Over

I'm the one who put in "Don't change" -- not being sarcastic, I just wanted to be able to see the poll numbers.

All you had to do was click on View Poll Results.... now you've gone and skewed the results...
Doug
( dammit, skewed again

 

[JAM]

All you had to do was click on View Poll Results.... now you've gone and skewed the results...
Doug
( dammit, skewed again

Don't stick a fork in the poll quite yet because it ain't done!

When the results become final, within 2 weeks, I will insert the usual poll caveat of: "plus or minus X percent."

JAM

 

[macguy]

Don't stick a fork in the poll quite yet because it ain't done!

When the results become final, within 2 weeks, I will insert the usual poll caveat of: "plus or minus X percent."

JAM

Instead of a poll set up either a web site or you can do it right here. Call it. "Players of the IPT respond.com" Have every player make an entry as to their grievances and what they expect of the IPT. What they expect from the future of the IPT and be sure it is public knowledge. Most all the players I am sure regardless what happened would like to see it continue in some form.

You can't let Kevin later just spin it that the players refused to play and as a result he had no product to market, I.E. tournament matches and TV deals due to no tournaments. What will this accomplish, probably nothing but it will at least keep the record straight. I don't think the players have to be afraid to speak anymore. Get it all out in the open and let the chips fall where they may. Lets hear from KT, Dino and anybody else who there is to speak.

Let them all put their cards on the table and if it is over then so be it. If he is going to pay a percent, let them know and when. So far all the talking has been controlled by KT. The players are the real principles here and they don't have to be puppets on a string, they have a right to speak. All done within the confines of a calm and rational dialog. It may actually lead to something.

 

[Nostroke]

Well, I'm going to go out on a real short limb here and post up an IPT poll.

One of the biggest stumbling blocks of the IPT to date has been the lack of COMMUNICATION, IMHO.

Getting the messages out via the Internet, with no capability to ask questions when questions crop up, is a big problem. When I have e-mailed the IPT in the past, several of my e-mails were not responded to until 2 or 3 weeks later. Sometimes they went unanswered.

Having said that, though, I am posting up an Internet poll. This will be an OPEN poll, with the AzBilliards names of the posters revealed.

I invite all IPT members and IPT players, those who have competed in IPT qualifiers and/or tournaments, to cast their vote.

Thanks in advance to any response. Being that this is an Internet poll, it will be interesting, taking in my above-referenced comments, to see how many votes are actually made.

JAM

'Communication' seems to me to be almost insignificant compared to the real problem. If the players weren't stiffed, i dont think 98% of the players would care about emails. Screw the communication-pay the players on Sunday.

 

[rackmsuckr]

Hey JAM,

I would say the results are skewed if you really wanted only IPT members' opinions. Out of the answers you have, I think only 2 are members, Keith and Buzzer. My answer is not listed, so I did not vote.

 

[JAM]

Hey JAM,

I would say the results are skewed if you really wanted only IPT members' opinions. Out of the answers you have, I think only 2 are members, Keith and Buzzer. My answer is not listed, so I did not vote.

Well, Linda, I tried to post the purpose of the poll in the first post, which initiated the thread.

I do not know who some AzBilliards' members are by the AzBilliards' names.

Thank you for your contribution to the thread as an IPT member.

JAM

 

[memikey]

Sorry JAM/Linda but this exchange between you two only serves to confuse us simple men further

JAM clearly initially posted that apart from "members" she also invited votes from those who had played in qualifiers.Linda posted an answer inferring that she didn't think that is what JAM wanted and that what she actually wanted, or should have wanted, was only "members" opinions. JAM then replies to Linda without making it absolutely clear that her inference is wrong (perhaps out of politeness) and that she did in fact want the opinions of IPT participants other than members.

Some of those who played in qualifiers are therefore now not sure whether they should be voting or not.

Just a thought.......perhaps there should in fact be two separate polls,one for "members" and another for "others" who have invested time,money and effort in IPT by entering and playing in any qualifier or event.It's quite probable that the balance and thrust of opinions between these two groups might be different and realistically it seems fair to say that the opinion of the latter group (and the future potential qualifier entrants whom the view of existing qualifier entrants partly represents) is probably just as important to the IPT business model as the opinion of the former.Without intending to be in any way derogatory and taking a cold hard view the reality is probably that without players willing to invest in qualifiers there could in the medium term be no solvent future IPT. However there could quite conceivably be a solvent IPT without the existing "members"

 

[rackmsuckr]

Sorry JAM/Linda but this exchange between you two only serves to confuse us simple men further

JAM clearly initially posted that apart from "members" she also invited votes from those who had played in qualifiers.Linda posted an answer inferring that she didn't think that is what JAM wanted and that what she actually wanted, or should have wanted, was only "members" opinions. JAM then replies to Linda without making it absolutely clear that her inference is wrong (perhaps out of politeness) and that she did in fact want the opinions of IPT participants other than members.

Some of those who played in qualifiers are therefore now not sure whether they should be voting or not.

Just a thought.......perhaps there should in fact be two separate polls,one for "members" and another for "others" who have invested time,money and effort in IPT by entering and playing in any qualifier or event.It's quite probable that the balance and thrust of opinions between these two groups might be different and realistically it seems fair to say that the opinion of the latter group (and the future potential qualifier entrants whom the view of existing qualifier entrants partly represents) is probably just as important to the IPT business model as the opinion of the former.Without intending to be in any way derogatory and taking a cold hard view the reality is probably that without players willing to invest in qualifiers there could in the medium term be no solvent future IPT. However there could quite conceivably be a solvent IPT without the existing "members"

I know it's confusing. I just happened to see a couple people's names that I know never tried to qualify either, so I was thinking people were missing the point from JAM's intended purpose. But if I misunderstood, I apologize. By all means, qualifiers should absolutely have their say in the future of the IPT!

 

[Tim-n-NM]

I posted here because I spent the 2 grand at the qualifiers. Sorry if I missed the point.
Never made it though.

Tim.

 

[JAM]

I posted here because I spent the 2 grand at the qualifiers. Sorry if I missed the point.
Never made it though.

And your vote, Tim, belongs in the poll.

The poll's original intent was to invite all IPT members and IPT players to vote, those who competed in IPT qualifiers and IPT tournaments.

JAM

 

[JAM]

I received a PM from an AzBilliards member who is helping two IPT players -- one, an IPT member, and the other, an IPT qualifier winner -- to contact Kevin Trudeau about his recent announcement.

It seems that these two fine young pool players, along with MANY other IPT players, do not have access to e-mail. However, they want to send their reply to Kevin Trudeau's recent letter by e-mail through another IPT member. Their voices want to be heard.

Here is an example where word of mouth saved the day. However, there needs to be another form of communication with the IPT and its membership, other than e-mails and Internet.

Can you hear me now, Kevin?

JAM

 

[JAM]

Two days running, and only 17 votes, some of which were not IPT members or IPT qualfier players.

If you know an IPT member and/or IPT qualifier player who does not have e-mail access, please PM me.

If I can verify the IPT player's vote via the AzBilliards member, I can get their vote cast in this poll.

JAM

 

[JAM]

I know it's confusing....

Hope it is not confusing to you anymore, Linda.

I have tried to make the poll as crystal clear as I can.

JAM