What would YOU do?

[NYC cue dude]

ironman, i agree about the "rock and a hard place" theory.

We on this forum, and friends and family of the players involved know about the non payment issues. I would suggest to you that this is a very small number of people. I suspect that the majority of room owners, casual players, some ipt hopefuls, and even posters on this very forum who do not visit the ipt section, no nothing about the ipt's problems.

Therefore, in reality, it is difficult to assume that room owners have prior knowledge of the ipt's decietful ways. With that said, though, it can't be had both ways, and I suspect many, many qualifying hopefuls don't know anything about it either.

rg

 

[av84fun]

<<but I believe that he was not speaking in legal terms. I believe that he is speaking in ethical terms and to a large degree I tend to lean in that direction myself.>>

Right Jim. I agree with your interpretation and I didn't think otherwise but I still am of the view that the role of the room owners is to host a first class tournament and with minor glitches, I think they did so in the 3 that I witnessed. I think that running good tournaments is the limit of their legal OR ethical responsibility. The room owners have nothing to do with the IPT ownership or management.

I'm trying to come up with a better analogy but the best I can do at the moment is to suggest that Madison Square Garden cannot be legally or ethically challanged because Mike Tyson bit Evander's ear off...or if some fighter takes a dive. Nor should the race track be held accountable if some trainer juices his horse. The Garden and the Track are responsible for providing a quality VENUE for the competitions to take place and I think that is where their responsibility ends.

I respect your views to the contrary however.
Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

<<In other words, for a bit of marketing exposure, these room owners are willing to exploit these players, knowing that 200 players have not been paid for the last event.>>

Hi again RG. I think I've chimed in about as much as I should on this topic but just one more comment. I REALLY think that the players knew or should have known as much about non-payments as the room owners knew and it is up to the PLAYERS to choose whether to risk their money by entering into any additional qualifiers. That is NOT a decision that the room owners should or could possibly make.

All the room owners "promised" was to provide the room and quality tournament supervision and I have heard very, very few complaints about the rooms.

Regards,
Jim

 

[jimmyg]

<<but I believe that he was not speaking in legal terms. I believe that he is speaking in ethical terms and to a large degree I tend to lean in that direction myself.>>

Right Jim. I agree with your interpretation and I didn't think otherwise but I still am of the view that the role of the room owners is to host a first class tournament and with minor glitches, I think they did so in the 3 that I witnessed. I think that running good tournaments is the limit of their legal OR ethical responsibility. The room owners have nothing to do with the IPT ownership or management.

I'm trying to come up with a better analogy but the best I can do at the moment is to suggest that Madison Square Garden cannot be legally or ethically challanged because Mike Tyson bit Evander's ear off...or if some fighter takes a dive. Nor should the race track be held accountable if some trainer juices his horse. The Garden and the Track are responsible for providing a quality VENUE for the competitions to take place and I think that is where their responsibility ends.

I respect your views to the contrary however.
Regards,
Jim

Of course you do, as I do your opinions.

But this is a little different than anything that you describe because of the prior knowledge that the room owners may now have. If one knows that players have not been paid and there is some well deserved doubt that a future tournament may even materialize, how can you accept $2,000 from your customers on behalf of the IPT, inside of your own establishment without, at the very least, making sure that they are also aware?

Not claiming that the "law of agency" applies, but I really do think that a moral responsibility exists because of the prior knowledge.

What would you do, Jim?
Jim

 

[Colin Colenso]

i would have no problem calling for/supporting a global boycott against all room owners willing to associate themselves professionally with the ipt while there still exists so many outstanding unpaid debts.

randy goldwater

That's like shooting the victim.

The room owners are trying to support the sport best they can, based on some faith and hope that the IPT will fulfill its obligations and succeed.

I share your concern about obligations, but I don't think boycotting the rooms is an appropriate response.

Colin

 

[memikey]

..... how can you accept $2,000 from your customers on behalf of the IPT, inside of your own establishment without, at the very least, making sure that they are also aware?....

In the first place not only does the room owner NOT accept $2,000 from his customers on behalf of IPT inside his establishment or outside his establishment for that matter (all entries and payments are made by players direct to IPT exclusively),he doesn't even know who or even how many have entered until IPT inform him very shortly before the tournament start date.......so the room owner is rarely,if ever,going to be in a position to be able to make sure all potential entrants are aware of the IPT non payment issues prior to the individual players concerned having already paid IPT.

Fully agree that the room owner could certainly take the moral high ground and refuse to host a tourney in the first place or once he has decided to host one he could ensure that any regular room users who he thinks might enter are aware of the IPT payment position etc..... but to be fair to room owners that's not quite what you are saying above is it?

 

[jimmyg]

:confused: In the first place not only does the room owner NOT accept $2,000 from his customers on behalf of IPT inside his establishment or outside his establishment for that matter (all entries and payments are made by players direct to IPT exclusively),he doesn't even know who or even how many have entered until IPT inform him very shortly before the tournament start date.......so the room owner is rarely,if ever,going to be in a position to be able to make sure all potential entrants are aware of the IPT non payment issues prior to the individual players concerned having already paid IPT.

Fully agree that the room owner could certainly take the moral high ground and refuse to host a tourney in the first place or once he has decided to host one he could ensure that any regular room users who he thinks might enter are aware of the IPT payment position etc..... but to be fair to room owners that's not quite what you are saying above is it?

Sorry, I stand corrected. What I should have said, which doesn't really change my argument, is: How can a room owner host an IPT qualifier and allow his establishment to be used as a vehicle for KT to collect $2,000 from customers that are potentially unaware that an actual tournament may not even take place in the future? I would feel somewhat responsible and it would make me very uncomfortable.

 

[NYC cue dude]

Jimmyg, exactly. At this point i would be assuming that room owners do have knowledge that the ipt is "non-perfrming" (to use mark trainor's words). If the owners know, than by holding a qualifier at THIS POINT IN TIME, than they are helping facilitate the ipt's agenda of collecting and not paying.

It is the moral obligation of the room owner to not let this happen, imo. In fact, Colin, I feel so strongly about this, I would personally avoid a room that would host such a qualifier (assuming a room owner knew the problems).

Again, ultimately,the reality is that i don't think that very many are aware that these problems exist. Some az memebers know, most likely though half it's memebers don't. I would bet that most memebers that never entered this ipt forum section don't know. Other than players friends and family, the number of people that know, imo, is only in the low thousands. This would explain why there are even some limited numbers of people entering qualifiers.

rg