My primary pool hall wanted to start up a weekly or monthly tournament. Last night was the first go at it. $20 entry and $100 guaranteed added. Unfortunately only 4 of us entered. It was to be a race to 3 in 9ball, single elimination, even. I suggested to our TD (our bartender that's been around a bit) that we play double elimination, race to 5, or it would be over in a blink. He agreed we should make the matches longer.
BTW, we decided we’d pay out 3 places: $90, $60 and $30. I said up front I did not want to participate in any splitting of places - Ie. I would play for the money as agreed to and respect the owner that put up $100 for just 4 of us.
Anyway, another player insisted we play a round robin. After the only round, the best 2 records would then play a race for 1st and 2nd place money, and the worst two records play for 3rd place $. He was adamant we play a round robin. He's been around the horn longer than I. I tried to think through if this format would work, and wrongly determined we could not have 3 or 4 people tied after the round. We agreed to play it this way. Races to 5.
As it would turn out, 3 of us ended up with 2 wins and 1 loss. Ahhh hell… So we had to discuss how to do a tiebreaker.
(BTW, the 3 of us that had tied all play each other a lot, and there’s not a hair’s difference between us. No one had the nuts.)
I said we should play a tiebreaker somehow. Anything, something short. After some discussion the other player (that insisted on the round robin) said no, he would not play in any tiebreaker scenario and instead offered:
1) Pull pills to see who plays for 1st and 2nd. To which I said no, I wasn’t in a tournament that would be decided in great part by a random pick.
2) Tiebreaker to be determined by who lost the most games in the completed round robin. To which I said no, because I lost one more game than the other two. That’s totally unfair to make this up after the fact.
3) Split the money 3 ways. To which I said no. This is a tournament, however small, it’s a tournament. Play for the money, earn it and feel good about it or take your lumps.
We asked the 3rd, mostly silent player what his input was (he just didn’t want to get into the heat – and I don’t blame him). Anyway, he was flexible – split it or play for it was ok. After all this tense dialogue I asked the TD what his input was. He said we should play something short as a tiebreaker. The other player then unscrews. This was @ 2hours after we racked our first rack. Playing for a tiebreaker was not an option for him. He got $30 from the TD (which I realize today was not his to get) and subsequently departed.
What do you make of this chain of events? Did I have a right to say I wouldn’t split money? Did I have the right to insist we play to break the tie? What else jumps out at you?
Thanks in advance for helping me dissect and learn from this tournament.
BTW, I played the other guy and won 5-4. :thumbup: Drinks were on me!
BTW, we decided we’d pay out 3 places: $90, $60 and $30. I said up front I did not want to participate in any splitting of places - Ie. I would play for the money as agreed to and respect the owner that put up $100 for just 4 of us.
Anyway, another player insisted we play a round robin. After the only round, the best 2 records would then play a race for 1st and 2nd place money, and the worst two records play for 3rd place $. He was adamant we play a round robin. He's been around the horn longer than I. I tried to think through if this format would work, and wrongly determined we could not have 3 or 4 people tied after the round. We agreed to play it this way. Races to 5.
As it would turn out, 3 of us ended up with 2 wins and 1 loss. Ahhh hell… So we had to discuss how to do a tiebreaker.
(BTW, the 3 of us that had tied all play each other a lot, and there’s not a hair’s difference between us. No one had the nuts.)
I said we should play a tiebreaker somehow. Anything, something short. After some discussion the other player (that insisted on the round robin) said no, he would not play in any tiebreaker scenario and instead offered:
1) Pull pills to see who plays for 1st and 2nd. To which I said no, I wasn’t in a tournament that would be decided in great part by a random pick.
2) Tiebreaker to be determined by who lost the most games in the completed round robin. To which I said no, because I lost one more game than the other two. That’s totally unfair to make this up after the fact.
3) Split the money 3 ways. To which I said no. This is a tournament, however small, it’s a tournament. Play for the money, earn it and feel good about it or take your lumps.
We asked the 3rd, mostly silent player what his input was (he just didn’t want to get into the heat – and I don’t blame him). Anyway, he was flexible – split it or play for it was ok. After all this tense dialogue I asked the TD what his input was. He said we should play something short as a tiebreaker. The other player then unscrews. This was @ 2hours after we racked our first rack. Playing for a tiebreaker was not an option for him. He got $30 from the TD (which I realize today was not his to get) and subsequently departed.
What do you make of this chain of events? Did I have a right to say I wouldn’t split money? Did I have the right to insist we play to break the tie? What else jumps out at you?
Thanks in advance for helping me dissect and learn from this tournament.
BTW, I played the other guy and won 5-4. :thumbup: Drinks were on me!
I also don't think he should have gotten the $30.
)
