PDA

View Full Version : Big Apple Clarifications



9 Ball Girl
08-14-2005, 09:00 PM
First, I'd like to congratulate Neils Feijen for a superb job! He has a lot of heart and showed it this weekend in the tournament.

Now, about the "organization" of this tournament.

First, Jose Burgos got into it last minute and I have to say that he pulled it off swell being that it was his first promotional event (and I'm not saying that 'cause he's my friend either). Unfortunately, he did not have the control that he wanted to have throughout the tournament.

It's very hard to work with someone who is constantly thinking of money and how to get more. The owner of the room started the door fees at what I think was supposed to be $15/session. On Thursday, it started at $25/session. By Friday, the price was jacked up to $40/session and $60 for the whole day. The same went for Saturday and by Sunday, I don't know if this is true or not, but I heard someone say that they paid $100 to get in--and that was to watch just 2 matches--the semifinals and finals. That's another thing, the tournament could've been finished by Saturday night but the owner wanted to stretch it out to Sunday to rake in on some more door fees (this is why there were only 2 matches on Sunday and I hope it answers someone's question from a previous post). The owner collected about $10K from door fees if not more. It's his room and whatever he makes from door fees is his, but jacking the prices up? You can pay $10-$15 a day at the U.S. Open and that's 100+ players you get to watch!

I'm not going to get into specifics on how much money was taken out of the players' fees by the owner (something like $40 out of each player's $250 entry fee) but I can tell you that after all was said and done, he had at most $6,000 for himself. WTF? Meanwhile, a 5/6th place finish payout was only $1,000? Well, now you know why. That doesn't include food and beverages, buffet food that I think was catered, and he actually charged a friend of mine on Saturday for playing on a practice table on Friday that EVERYBODY plays on behind the curtains.

There was a lot of grumbling going on and displeasurement and those that did, know that Jose and his staff (that would include me) had nothing to do with what we had no control over. This tourney almost didn't happen this year because of something similar to this happened last year.

Kudos to Jose Burgos for pulling it off in the short amount of time that he had and for having the patience of a saint. He is one honest and standup guy.

cueball1950
08-14-2005, 10:28 PM
It is always a shame when something like this happens. it appears to me that the owner wanted to recoup some the the $$$$$ that he was paying out. But $100.00 to get in Sunday, and just for 2 matches. ridiculous. They has better hope that if they have it next year they will get any big name players. Just sorry that you and the other help/volunteers had to go thru this..........................mike

RailbirdJAM
08-15-2005, 03:21 AM
Mike, you hit the nail on the head. After all of the time and effort put into getting the Big Apple off the ground, when it finally does come to fruition, the complaints come forth, always targeting a wrongdoer in the eyes of those NOT in the know.

There are MANY things that go into a tournament such as this. You wouldn't believe how many players DEMAND a free entry fee and lodging in exchange for their participation. This, too, cuts into the purse, but sometimes tournament organizers will try to accommodate some players in order to get some super stars and/or name-brands in attendance, hoping to provide a good show for the public.

IMHO, this field was topnotch consisting of international and national players. This is a good thing. However, the monies expended to the players who did receive free entry fees and 4 days of lodging in NYC came out of the total purse. This is the norm, and it's the cost of doing business in today's pool world.

BTW, 9BallGirl provided some GREAT updates. Thanks, Wendy! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Room owners who agree to host pool happenings, whether $15,000 such as the 4-day-long Big Apple or $1,000 for a 1-day regional tour event, of course, are looking to make a profit. In most instances that I have experienced, they are lucky to break even. A host room owner is entitled to try to get back some of their added monies. Why in the world would they agree to add, as in the Big Apple example, $15,000? It would be financial suicide.

Speaking from the pool player's point of view, though, it is financially difficult to attend a multiple-day event in New York City with lodging expenses exceeding $120 per day and all of the rest of the associated costs getting there. Jose the TD did get a pool player's rate for La Quinta Inn located across the street from Masters of $116 plus tax per night. Otherwise, pool players could look forward to paying $200-plus per night in NYC. Even the Federal Government gives a HIGH per diem to those who have to travel to NYC. It is notorious for being EXPENSIVE.

Tony Crosby came in fourth place and received $1,500 for his fine performance. Coming from Florida, I'm not sure Tony made a profit, but he may have broke even. The rest of the pool players, save the four top winners, are stuck at least $1,100 to $2,000, except the local NYC residents.

Until the pool payouts get bigger, some players have to pick and choose their tournaments. Unless you are backed or sponsored or get a free ride from the promoter, it is economically impossible to attend as many as one would like.

BTW, 2 years ago at Big Apple, the foreign players had a third of their monies taken out by the TD for Uncle Sam, unless you had a Social Security number. I cannot imagine what the international players had to cough up for expenses, but if they are backed/sponsored and had a third taken out for taxes and then half going to their backer, the player him- or herself is stuck big time for the trip.

So who wins? The room owner? The tournament director? The pool player? The railbird spectator? This is the sad state of affairs relating to pool in the United States of America, and the nightmare continues to get worse. I do not know where the blame lies, but it ain't the host room owner, the TD, the promoter, the pool player, or the railbirds. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

My eyes are glued to the IPT. With this kind of dough, it will give the players something to look forward to: FINANCIAL SECURITY. As it stands today, a pool player may win one tournament and be broke at the next event It's a Catch 22. Pool players today are giant alligators running as fast as they can in a gerbil wheel, NEVER getting ahead.

RailbirdJAM

CarolNYC
08-15-2005, 04:09 AM
[ QUOTE ]
congratulate Neils Feijen <hr /></blockquote>

I second that!

[ QUOTE ]
Jose Burgos got into it last minute <hr /></blockquote>
I spoke to a guy named 'William"

[ QUOTE ]
owner of the room started the door fees at what I think was supposed to be $15/session. On Thursday, it started at $25/session. By Friday, the price was jacked up to $40/session and $60 for the whole day. The same went for Saturday and by Sunday [ QUOTE ]

Thats ridiculous!

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know if this is true or not, but I heard someone say that they paid $100 to get in--and that was to watch just 2 matches <hr /></blockquote>
They shouldve just entered the tournament and played for the helluva it-it woulda been cheaper!

[ QUOTE ]
something like $40 out of each player's $250 entry fee <hr /></blockquote>
When I inquired about playing, I was told the entry fee is NOW "$300.00!"

I think the anticipation of a 128 field and ONLY HALF the field showing up , has something to do with all the money changes,which is sad,especially for NYC,its expensive as is, why make it worse? To break even? Shame,shame,shame!
Also, conflicts in scheduling!

Take care,Wendy! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Carol~(with sarcasm) Way to go,NYC! /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Steve Lipsky
08-15-2005, 07:58 AM
Hi Wendy. Thanks for the information.

There were some things about this tournament that I did not understand, and to be honest, still don't. I don't know who's fault any of it was, and I'm really not looking to point fingers... I just hope that maybe next year's event might come off smoother.

First, why did this tournament need Scott Smith? I happen to love Scott, and think he's a tremendous tournament director/announcer. But he (rightly so) doesn't work for free. This tournament did not have a big enough prize pool to justify his fee. Scott is most needed and appreciated at a tournament with a ton of spectators, such as the US Open. I must say I was shocked when I saw him there.

The calcutta was a total mess, and I didn't even stay to watch it, lol. I told Finnegan right before it started that he has to announce how many places it would pay, because that will affect people's bids. Then I suggested that he extend the calcutta payouts to 16 (he only wanted 8), because that would stimulate bids on players like me, who with a good tournament might come in the top 16, but not really the top 8. Paying the top 8, nobody gets bid except the superstars.

So what does he do? He announces 8. Fine. Then what does he do? After the calcutta, he changes it to 4. I spoke to Nostroke, who was furious. He bid some sleepers who might've had a chance to make the top 8, but not the top 4. So Finnegan then changed it to 6. Very professional, obviously.

What was up with the nameplates for the matches? All were done by hand. Some in calligraphy, some in regular print, some in boxed letters. Some had first names, some had first initials, some had only last names. And Nostroke and I both noticed that someone spelled EFREN'S name wrong. "Efran". That is egregious. Nostroke apparently pointed it out to Finnegan, who said he'd change it but never did. Finally Nostroke took matters into his own hands and did it himself. Good for him. What an insult to a great player, as Nostroke put it.

Another thing that upset me was the table assignments. One of the managers at Amsterdam, a good up-and-coming player, was TWICE relegated to one of the back tables (i.e., a table that had no spectator seating at all.). He played two of his three matches where none of his friends could watch him. Was his money not as good as everyone else's? These tournaments are supported by the players that don't have much chance to cash, but would like the opportunity to play in front of a crowd. They should get that chance.

I guess my final point is why weren't the spectator fees listed on the flyer, with the amount Jose and Mr. Min originally agreed upon? This would have tied Mr. Min's hands as the tournament progressed; how could he have spontaneously raised it if the prices were already in print?

Anyway, I'm just venting. I enjoyed playing, but things could've been better.

- Steve

9 Ball Girl
08-15-2005, 08:34 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Steve Lipsky:</font><hr>First, why did this tournament need Scott Smith? I happen to love Scott, and think he's a tremendous tournament director/announcer. But he (rightly so) doesn't work for free. This tournament did not have a big enough prize pool to justify his fee. Scott is most needed and appreciated at a tournament with a ton of spectators, such as the US Open. I must say I was shocked when I saw him there.<hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue">Scott was brought in by Jose out of his personal pocket because Jose felt Scott would be the much more experienced professional announcer/ref.</font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Steve Lipsky:</font><hr>The calcutta was a total mess, and I didn't even stay to watch it, lol. I told Finnegan right before it started that he has to announce how many places it would pay, because that will affect people's bids. Then I suggested that he extend the calcutta payouts to 16 (he only wanted 8), because that would stimulate bids on players like me, who with a good tournament might come in the top 16, but not really the top 8. Paying the top 8, nobody gets bid except the superstars.<hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue">From what I understand, Scott was supposed to do the calcutta again because of his professionalism and experience. Scott was running a little late (he was driving in from Pittsburgh) and Finni had the mike. When Scott got there, he sort of took over but then I remember Finni taking it back towards the end. I'm not really sure what happened there.</font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Steve Lipsky:</font><hr>So what does he do? He announces 8. Fine. Then what does he do? After the calcutta, he changes it to 4. I spoke to Nostroke, who was furious. He bid some sleepers who might've had a chance to make the top 8, but not the top 4. So Finnegan then changed it to 6. Very professional, obviously.<hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue">That I actually remember him being told to do the sleepers in groups. I can't remember how many but I know it wasn't 4.</font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Steve Lipsky:</font><hr>What was up with the nameplates for the matches? All were done by hand. Some in calligraphy, some in regular print, some in boxed letters. Some had first names, some had first initials, some had only last names. And Nostroke and I both noticed that someone spelled EFREN'S name wrong. "Efran". That is egregious. Nostroke apparently pointed it out to Finnegan, who said he'd change it but never did. Finally Nostroke took matters into his own hands and did it himself. Good for him. What an insult to a great player, as Nostroke put it.<hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue">Yeah! I couldn't help but snicker at the different "fonts" being used for the name plates. There were nameplates done with the players names typewritten on them and for some reason "he" took them to the counter and they were never seen again which prompted the wacky handwritten ones (I don't know who "he" is but that's what I kept hearing). It sort of reminded me of the binoculars being "misplaced" from the Crow's Nest on the Titanic! I agree with you and Dave.</font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Steve Lipsky:</font><hr>Another thing that upset me was the table assignments. One of the managers at Amsterdam, a good up-and-coming player, was TWICE relegated to one of the back tables (i.e., a table that had no spectator seating at all.). He played two of his three matches where none of his friends could watch him. Was his money not as good as everyone else's? These tournaments are supported by the players that don't have much chance to cash, but would like the opportunity to play in front of a crowd. They should get that chance.<hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue">I couldn't agree with you more on that one. From what I can remember, Min only wanted the "known" players playing up front. I remember on several occasions he requested table changes because of that.</font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Steve Lipsky:</font><hr>I guess my final point is why weren't the spectator fees listed on the flyer, with the amount Jose and Mr. Min originally agreed upon? This would have tied Mr. Min's hands as the tournament progressed; how could he have spontaneously raised it if the prices were already in print?<hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue">Jose wasn't the intended TD for this event. He came into it about a month ago and I think the flyers were already done up and distributed. Jose was taken aback when he found out the prices were being jacked up. Jose also had special passes for spouses but Min wasn't having that so that was the end of that.</font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Steve Lipsky:</font><hr>Anyway, I'm just venting. I enjoyed playing, but things could've been better.<hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue">You're entitled to vent just as I and Jose kept venting to each other all weekend! Next year's will be much better.</font color>

Nostroke
08-15-2005, 11:18 AM
Steve- it gets even worse- I was told on saturday after Thomas Engert had reached the final 6 at worst, that he had bought half himself (from me) in the calcutta and that they hadnt seen me or JK on Friday to tell us. Of course i was there all day Friday and even spoke to everyone running the Calcutta -most of them twice.

Then on Sunday when Engert is in the finals, someone comes up to me who i will call WF and says. "l'M sure you are happy now that you got what you wanted and we are paying the final EIGHT!!!!!!!!"

He said it had been posted so i go over to the board and there is nothing posted of course- I had been looking and asking for it all week. I see Jose and eventually he goes over to some zippered case and pulls out something saying they are paying 8!!

Each day they looked for a way to screw people and adjusted things accordingly. I actually have found it quite humorous. I cant help but laugh when i tell the story-Such a regal in-your-face screwing.

Obviously my Calcutta days are over with this group. Truly amazing they are. Im not including Scott. He didnt seem to be involved other than as Emcee for a while.

Steve Lipsky
08-15-2005, 12:10 PM
Nostroke,

What do you mean, you were "told" he bought half? By whom were you told this? It is not surprising he wanted half himself AFTER looking at the draw... his first three matches were against clowns (me being one of those clowns).

If he really wanted half himself immediately, he'd have given the money to the TD on Friday morning, who would've given it to you whenever he saw you.

And why the hell were the "Friday entrants" (i.e., those who were playing in the Challenge of Champions) allowed to buy half themselves? Unless they verbally agreed by phone right after the calcutta, they would've received the benefit of deciding AFTER the draw - a benefit none of the other players received.

As to paying 8 spots, who came in 7th/8th? Might be interesting to see who bought these players, and what ties they have to whoever was running the calcutta.

Wow.

- Steve

9 Ball Girl
08-15-2005, 02:02 PM
Complete Results:
1st Niels Feijen $10000
2nd Thomas Engert $5000
3rd Ralf Souquet $2500
4th Tony Crosby $1500
5th/6th Danny Basavich, Robb Saez $1000
7th/8th Jose Parica, Earl Strickland $700
9th/12th Johnny Archer, Efren Reyes, Alan Rolon, Gabe Owen $500
13th/16th Danny Harriman, Francisco Bustamante, Jason Cruz, Sean Morgan $250

When it comes to Calcutta, I walk around with a big question mark above my head. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Nostroke
08-15-2005, 06:38 PM
Also, Do you think i would have been told Sat nite that he had bought himself if he gone two or three and out?

Everything you say is right- there can be no good answers to those questions Steve. I was actually kinda surprised i got paid at all. I thought they were going to say there was a break-in or something and all the Calcutta money was gone.

I dont need to look any deeper- I know what happened to me and they wont get me again.

Harold Acosta
08-15-2005, 07:04 PM
Hmmm, with this payout, the tournamet was $8,150 added, not the $15,000 that was promoted....

Therefore, the room owner made a "few bucks"....and Jose Burgos will probably get all the blame for the failure of the event. This could mean some problems for next year's event.

Jose should really "think about it" for next year.....

9 Ball Girl
08-15-2005, 08:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Harold Acosta:</font><hr> Hmmm, with this payout, the tournamet was $8,150 added, not the $15,000 that was promoted....

Therefore, the room owner made a "few bucks"....and Jose Burgos will probably get all the blame for the failure of the event. This could mean some problems for next year's event.

Jose should really "think about it" for next year.....


<hr /></blockquote>There are a couple of us already thinking about it for next year...

CarolNYC
08-16-2005, 03:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
(me being one of those clowns).
<hr /></blockquote>

Hey,hey,hey,NONE OF THAT!!!!
Remember the word of the day..............."GIZMO!" /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
love ya,Steve!
Carol /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif