Official Entry Thread for 2018 onepocket.org Member's Tourney

[Scrzbill]

Chris has been a member since 2011 with six posts. I agree it may be a little late but if it does not fill up, it is up to Steve until we get some more defined rules.

It would be nice to see you Keoneyo. This discussion only affirms my decision to quit wasting my time on an organization that has no loyalty to its so called members. Six post in seven years John DOES NOT make someone a verified member. I am glad to hear your one of the arbitrators for who gets in, when did we vote for a sub committee? This is the first I have heard of three people deciding who gets to play. What happened to all the discussions last year? I’ll tell you, down the fking drain. I am sure if we looked hard enough, we could find where Chohan was a member for three days, I’ll put up his entry fee. OK? We went through this crap last year with someones favorite being let in or someone’s friend of a friend. It is not the California Billiards tournament or the POV tournament, it’s The Who do You Know tournament. Guys like me who are middle of the road players want a chance, you don’t care who plays because you can beat almost everyone at one time or another. There are more middle of the road players than there are champions but if you put eight champions in a game of 32, the odds go down fast. And the guys who are dead money quit showing up, quit participating. It won’t make any difference to me but it is part of the reason I am fed up with the different interpretations of who can play and then to have pressure from the room owner of how to run the OPOrg MEMEBERS TOURNAMENT is too much. What’s next after replacing our stream team, replacing our tournament director Matt? Replacing the Auction director, Steve? FK IT. I am sorry I ever got involved in promoting this tournament. It’s nice your sticking up for Cruz, why didn’t you stick up for me when I was down there last time and got crapped all over? As far as recruiting, I told as many people as I could last year to sign up and what do we have. People coming in at the last moment because they know someone.

 

[Kybanks]

this might be a crazy idea
so its ok if its shot down
although i have not attended any of the events
i have been around the site for along time and do my best to contribute and promote onepocket.org
i too always had the feeling that the members tournament was really for the active guys to meet the person behind the screen name
play some onepocket /bs alittle /and have a good time (and some bragging rights )
to me if you dont get a full field so what??
if the payout isnt alot because of number of participants
most of you know how to get after hours money....
and if there are less players there should be time for more unstructured play time and getting to know you time
the less active members and want to become members can come to the tourney and as dustin has said mingle with the members...play them some for money or not
i am sure the members will still play someone who doesnt gamble
idea being let us get to know you....
then join the site and contribute by posting and whatever you can afford
for the various functions that onepocket.org hosts/sponsors
if you are on hard times then dont contribute financially
thats my 2 cents
thanks for listening

Good post Larry!

 

[crabbcatjohn]

this might be a crazy idea
so its ok if its shot down
although i have not attended any of the events
i have been around the site for along time and do my best to contribute and promote onepocket.org
i too always had the feeling that the members tournament was really for the active guys to meet the person behind the screen name
play some onepocket /bs alittle /and have a good time (and some bragging rights )
to me if you dont get a full field so what??
if the payout isnt alot because of number of participants
most of you know how to get after hours money....
and if there are less players there should be time for more unstructured play time and getting to know you time
the less active members and want to become members can come to the tourney and as dustin has said mingle with the members...play them some for money or not
i am sure the members will still play someone who doesnt gamble
idea being let us get to know you....
then join the site and contribute by posting and whatever you can afford
for the various functions that onepocket.org hosts/sponsors
if you are on hard times then dont contribute financially
thats my 2 cents
thanks for listening

That is how this tournament was originally designed. I think everybody who is confused about this should re read the first thread created by Jeff in which all this was discussed and then re-read the rules of participation in the first members tournament thread which clearly states "ACTIVE VERIFIED MEMBERS ONLY". Our members views who were interested in participating in this tournament were clearly stated and agreed upon in that first thread by Jeff. Its has morphed into something different now.
Steve how can you not understand interest among the active members is declining when the format is now changed as you just stated "to welcome new members" and is no longer for active verified members only as the original tournament was designed and agreed upon by the interested members in the first thread.
Whats surprises me most is YOU were the one that said you would use a hands off approach so the active members themselves could hash out the tournament guidelines so it could be a members tournament put on by the members. That was done by the us and it worked well.
But now you have back tracked on that hands off approach to change the members tournament put on by the members into the one pocket. org tournament in which you are now creating the guidelines. Very disappointing if you ask me.

 

[keoneyo]

I think everone should just take a breath and calm down. Errors happen and mistakes occur. What we can do is correct them. Its almost June and looks to be a great event. Im sure theyre will be some more positive things than negative. And we can learn from it.
Now that we have let our opinions and rants out we can try to make a better system for the future.
Its not the friggin' end of the world.
Lets work to make it better.

 

[lll]

I think everone should just take a breath and calm down. Errors happen and mistakes occur. What we can do is correct them. Its almost June and looks to be a great event. Im sure theyre will be some more positive things than negative. And we can learn from it.
Now that we have let our opinions and rants out we can try to make a better system for the future.
Its not the friggin' end of the world.
Lets work to make it better.

keone
you usually are the voice of reason....
larry

 

[Masta Cruz]

I never wanted a scene caused about whether I qualify to enter or not. I PM’d steve a week and a half ago for clerification because I had booked a hotel a month ago in anticipation. I didn’t get an answer however. But I fully understand the desire for simply active member entrants only and I have no problem with it. I just needed clerification on whether I could play or not. Now that I have a definitive answer, please refund my friend Howard’s money and that’s the end of it. Zero hard feelings whatsoever.

I may have been a member but I fully understand that I’m not active. I honestly haven’t had much to contribute over the years on top of everyone else’s knowledge. I come here to learn. If I had anything half intelligent to add to any topics I would’ve but I don’t want to post hot air just for no reason. Me and John H. discuss forum topics in person all the time when sit down between tournament matches the last several years.

I enjoy coming here the last almost decade and reading everyone’s thoughts and ideas on everything one pocket. You guys have helped my game tremendously.

I don’t want to butt into your tournament. I just needed a clear answer on the qualifications to participate. If I was allowed I’d play. If not I’ll come watch or go do something else.

I’ll still come by to meet some of you that I’ve read about all these years and say hello. And try some friendly cheap gambling to test my skill against those who are willing. I’m still looking forward attending the members event even if I don’t get to play it. During the daytime I’ll take my mother around the Bay Area to see the ocean, go to some places etc. And come sundown I’ll see you guys in the pool room Friday and Saturday night.

 

[lll]

I never wanted a scene caused about whether I qualify to enter or not. I PM’d steve a week and a half ago for clerification because I had booked a hotel a month ago in anticipation. I didn’t get an answer however. But I fully understand the desire for simply active member entrants only and I have no problem with it. I just needed clerification on whether I could play or not. Now that I have a definitive answer, please refund my friend Howard’s money and that’s the end of it. Zero hard feelings whatsoever.

I may have been a member but I fully understand that I’m not active. I honestly haven’t had much to contribute over the years on top of everyone else’s knowledge. I come here to learn. If I had anything half intelligent to add to any topics I would’ve but I don’t want to post hot air just for no reason. Me and John H. discuss forum topics in person all the time when sit down between tournament matches the last several years.

I enjoy coming here the last almost decade and reading everyone’s thoughts and ideas on everything one pocket. You guys have helped my game tremendously.

I don’t want to butt into your tournament. I just needed a clear answer on the qualifications to participate. If I was allowed I’d play. If not I’ll come watch or go do something else.

I’ll still come by to meet some of you that I’ve read about all these years and say hello. And try some friendly cheap gambling to test my skill against those who are willing. I’m still looking forward attending the members event even if I don’t get to play it. During the daytime I’ll take my mother around the Bay Area to see the ocean, go to some places etc. And come sundown I’ll see you guys in the pool room Friday and Saturday night.

thanks for posting chris
coming to meet the guys is a great first step..
dont feel you have nothing to add because some of us (not me ) have played forever and play great
what gets confused in the wwyd is ww YOU do vs what do you think the pro shot
so since most on the site are not pros
you get to learn what would a mortal do and what is the best shot if your execution skills can handle it
and what can your mouse do....:heh
so i invite you with welcome arms to participate more
and if you ever get to florida near me lets play and have a drink...
larry

 

[rnewkirk]

Here is my thoughts. Whatever Steve says, goes.

I have enjoyed being the winner of our 2nd annul tourney, even though I have had to correct a lot of people that it wasn't a SENIOR tourney. I feel really lucky to have won, since every match, except one went hill hill .

As a nearly 70 year old man, and a great lover of 1-pkt who is still working, this is maybe the only tourney that I really enjoy and can feel competitive in.

The camaraderie and friendliness at our tournaments so far have been the best.Small money matches are readily available with pretty good players.

That being said, I feel like Howard is trying to sneak in a ringer. Who knows ?
Put up a hundred to split 8 or 9. No offense is meant towards Howard, who I do not know. I also have no idea how Chris Cruz plays. But, is he a verified member ?

Looking forward to seeing the ones that show up and mixing it up. With players like Hendy, Nick, Tom, Babyhuey, J.R., and 12Squared, it is a toss up. Don't forget FrankA and is Wayne going to play ?


Onepocket.org is a great site and I am grateful for it, Steve. But, if the champs start showing up, it may hurt in the future.

 

[jay helfert]

As far as I'm concerned, as long as they are not recognized pros and have contributed with some posts on here then I say let them play. Once upon a time I was a good One Pocket player. I still dream of those days and am trying to recapture some of that magic I once had. I just want to compete again and see how I do.

P.S. I also have contributed to the HOF dinners and attended several of them. And bought a few shirts!

 

[Nick B]

As far as I'm concerned, as long as they are not recognized pros and have contributed with some posts on here then I say let them play. Once upon a time I was a good One Pocket player. I still dream of those days and am trying to recapture some of that magic I once had. I just want to compete again and see how I do.

P.S. I also have contributed to the HOF dinners and attended several of them. And bought a few shirts!

I tend to always think Jay is right...but on this I disagree. Not specific to Chris or anyone else. In the future we should have a rule set like this.
1. Membership for at least one year
2. Minimum number of post (lets call it 20). Give the lurkers a chance to play
3. Fargo rating of less than 730 or know Pro

Sorry Jay...I'm still your biggest fan. In the end I won't be offended regardless of decision.

 

[LSJohn]

Whatever Steve says, goes.

I've got a lot of ideas and opinions about the tournament, the HOF, the sponsored player, "verified" members, etc. but they all end at "Whatever Steve says, goes."

Ive been participating and observing here for about 5 years, and beyond my appreciation for what Steve has done to make this place and make it what it is, I admire the judgment he has shown on several tough calls.

Complaining about a moving target on who can play and what constitutes a "verified member" and how important it is to fill the tournament, or keep it to 32, etc. shows, I think, a lack of understanding the difficulty of herding cats.

Here's my suggestion if Chris is capable of it and has time (and not because I give a shit how any of the questions are settled, but to make life easier for Steve):

Create a tool that tracks the number of posts each player has made in each of the last 4 calendar quarters and record that number automatically on each player's profile page. (Another tool would be nice if its possible to generate a list of players who have made X posts in Y period) Then Steve can easily establish a number of posts over a specific time period as a completely objective way of determining verified status. That should eliminate any complaints about "verified."

I figure I'm dead money anyway, so who plays won't affect my results. But I agree that it would undermine the spirit of the thing if people felt a ringer had weaseled his way in.

Just in case I haven't brown-nosed enough yet, it bothers me to see people question Steve's judgment and/or blame him in a way that sounds angry for mistakes made by people to whom he's delegated authority. I never see anything wrong with questioning and suggesting, but, those should be able to be done calmly and politely, as most of you have done.

Alright, Chris, get off your ass and get those ones and zeros crankin'.

 

[cincy_kid]

Some very good posts here and I can see that, at the very least, we have some passion about this game we all love.

I was going to post something the other day but figured since I was not attending this year, I would refrain. However, it seems a lot of people are posting their ideas/suggestions so I will chime in with my opinions too.

I wont be attending the event, not because I don't want to but it just isn't in the cards this year. I sure hope I can next year, the first 2 were awesome and I will miss seeing some of the friends I have made since joining the site and some new ones I look forward to meeting someday!

I agree with Keoneyo that this is only our 3rd tournament and we are learning as we go, so nothing to go crazy about, let's take notes and make it better moving forward.

It's true that no hard guidelines have been put in place other than "verified member" and "more coming soon" but it was something we said we would hash out later. Probably something good to address before the 4th tournament as it will only grow in popularity.

For what it's worth, I personally would love it if Chohan or any other top pros would join the site and actively post, I could think of nothing better! After all, we are all trying to learn and get better so sharing their knowledge or expertise or insight would be very helpful to most of us imo. And if that were the case and they wanted to play in our tourney after being an active participant on the site, I say heck yea, I dont care how well they play, anyone can lose a race to 3.

However, if it's someone who joins just to play and knock us all off, well then I would say they shouldn't be able to play. Kind of like Miller said, it's almost like you have to "pay to play". Whether that means pay with real money through sponsoring a player, buying HOF tickets, grabbing some merchandise or any other monetary contribution. You can also pay with your time and post on the forums, become an active part of the community and engage with us! Some of us try to do all of the above but I think they are equally important.

John, the calculations of posts all come from VBulletin software that make up the forums. I will have to double check but it "should" not only have total posts but maybe somewhere also have "average posts per day" or a similar matrix. I think coming up with a number that seems fair to all would be a good solution for part of our "active member" issue.

At the end of the day, I am here to help support Steve and onepocket.org the best ways I can. That will probably involve a lot of posts from me (sorry I get to multitask at work all day, lol) and helping with the website stuff as I can.

My hope is that onepocket.org will always be a good resource for those wanting to learn the game or improve their current game as well as a place where like-minded individuals can come together and talk about this great past-time of ours!

I know the tourney is going to be a blast for all who attend and I also know that with every tournament we will learn something that will help for the following year.

Have fun and play well, I look forward to seeing some of you on the stream!!

 

[Masta Cruz]

thanks for posting chris
coming to meet the guys is a great first step..
dont feel you have nothing to add because some of us (not me ) have played forever and play great
what gets confused in the wwyd is ww YOU do vs what do you think the pro shot
so since most on the site are not pros
you get to learn what would a mortal do and what is the best shot if your execution skills can handle it
and what can your mouse do....:heh
so i invite you with welcome arms to participate more
and if you ever get to florida near me lets play and have a drink...
larry

Thank you Larry if I ever get out that way you’ll be first to know

I've got a lot of ideas and opinions about the tournament, the HOF, the sponsored player, "verified" members, etc. but they all end at "Whatever Steve says, goes."

Ive been participating and observing here for about 5 years, and beyond my appreciation for what Steve has done to make this place and make it what it is, I admire the judgment he has shown on several tough calls.

Complaining about a moving target on who can play and what constitutes a "verified member" and how important it is to fill the tournament, or keep it to 32, etc. shows, I think, a lack of understanding the difficulty of herding cats.

Here's my suggestion if Chris is capable of it and has time (and not because I give a shit how any of the questions are settled, but to make life easier for Steve):

Create a tool that tracks the number of posts each player has made in each of the last 4 calendar quarters and record that number automatically on each player's profile page. (Another tool would be nice if its possible to generate a list of players who have made X posts in Y period) Then Steve can easily establish a number of posts over a specific time period as a completely objective way of determining verified status. That should eliminate any complaints about "verified."

I figure I'm dead money anyway, so who plays won't affect my results. But I agree that it would undermine the spirit of the thing if people felt a ringer had weaseled his way in.

Just in case I haven't brown-nosed enough yet, it bothers me to see people question Steve's judgment and/or blame him in a way that sounds angry for mistakes made by people to whom he's delegated authority. I never see anything wrong with questioning and suggesting, but, those should be able to be done calmly and politely, as most of you have done.

Alright, Chris, get off your ass and get those ones and zeros crankin'.

This sounds like a solid course of action in determining eligibility. But also I see the specialness of the community and the desire to keep outsiders out of your annual tournament to preserve what it is for. Makes perfect sense.

 

[NH Steve]

I think everone should just take a breath and calm down. Errors happen and mistakes occur. What we can do is correct them. Its almost June and looks to be a great event. Im sure theyre will be some more positive things than negative. And we can learn from it.
Now that we have let our opinions and rants out we can try to make a better system for the future.
Its not the friggin' end of the world.
Lets work to make it better.

I like it

 

[NH Steve]

It is a difficult balancing act between being welcoming to new members and protecting our regulars, if you ask me. And both are important. I think we all agree in no way shape or manner do we want onepocket.org to be a stagnant group, limited to an intimidating clique of our most active members that is a turn off to newcomers.

When I do have to make a decision, it is often not easy and I know I have made plenty of mistakes, but I do listen to all the comments, and I respect the concerns. I am just trying to balance and also think ahead as best I can.

I like Nick's suggestions below. The 20 post threshold is a nice easy one to implement in our software, BTW. But for the Verified, I have always mixed in other considerations. The first and foremost being, I or a fellow trusted member knows for sure who the User Name actually is -- this being the internet and thus very easy to have phony registrations, alternate or multiple identities, etc. That has always been my biggest consideration. Also, members definitely contribute in different ways -- some do not post much or at all, because that is simply not their style, but they do contribute in other ways, such as HOF, local One Pocket promotion, donations, etc. Then there are some who have posted quite a bit, yet I have no idea who they are or if they are a real person that is not already a member, but likes to have an alternative personality. So in some ways, having a lot of posts is actually the least reliable way for me to know "who someone is". Is it a little arbitrary at times? Yes it is, because it basically comes down to my judgment.

Just for examples, Greg Sullivan is a member here, but has never posted once. When he has something he wants us to address he calls me and I pose the question. Obviously he does tons for One Pocket, and also our HOF. So zero posts and a Verified member. There are others like that. On the flip side, sometimes I totally and accidentally overlook a member who has plenty of posts and might even meet other considerations, and I have not noticed and have failed to "Verify". I feel bad about that, and PLEASE hit me up if you are in that boat or know another member who I have neglected!

Likewise when new people register, I manually decide whether to approve their initial sign-up. The software obviously can do that for me, but it is way to easy for spammers, or people with off topic agendas to slip through if I was to leave it to the software -- believe me, because it was that way for years before I realized it was better to try to nip them in the bud. You guys have hopefully noticed, we get very little totally off topic spam here -- well over 99% of posts are pretty reasonably on topic -- I believe that is largely because of that diligence.

But if we can come up with clear guidelines for who gets to play in our tournament that would make my job, Matt's, the host room's, and our local member/promoter/representative's job easier. But PLEASEI am going to want our guidelines to be a balance between inviting new players to be more active, and rewarding our long-standing members.

Keep you ideas coming, and of course -- "FOR A GREAT TIME", GET OUT THERE TO "YOUR" TOURNAMENT IF AT ALL POSSIBLE!!!

 

[keoneyo]

When the World Series of Poker instituted a Womans Only tournament some wise guys would sign up and wear a dress as a lark and play. The WSOP not able to deny participation by race or gender had to let them play. But they figured a way out of it in the end.
They could charge men a different rate than the women. So now women pay $1000 and any men wanting to play had to cough up $10,000. This put a stop to it except for the rich nose bleed stakes guy who wanted to play a joke on the crowd.
There could be a different entry rate for those who are not Verified Members. With having to wait if there are any extra spots. Not 10 times the amount but say double. Or we could extract a percentage of any winnings (25%) from those non members and send it back to the Organization to pay for the awards dinner or room rentals at the Derby etc. That way those who are not in for the money but just want to participate can make their positions clear. They are committed to the group not only in name but in money.
I think its easier than to keep a census on the whole population.

 

[crabbcatjohn]

One thing we have done the past two is to pay down a lot of places so there is less at the top.......

 

[jrhendy]

One thing we have done the past two is to pay down a lot of places so there is less at the top.......

We paid eight places last year in the player auction and as far as I know, will do the same this year.

 

[12squared]

One thing we have done the past two is to pay down a lot of places so there is less at the top.......

Hoping you have a change of heart and decide to come this year - we still the same org you know and love.

 

[NH Steve]

When the World Series of Poker instituted a Womans Only tournament some wise guys would sign up and wear a dress as a lark and play. The WSOP not able to deny participation by race or gender had to let them play. But they figured a way out of it in the end.
They could charge men a different rate than the women. So now women pay $1000 and any men wanting to play had to cough up $10,000. This put a stop to it except for the rich nose bleed stakes guy who wanted to play a joke on the crowd.
There could be a different entry rate for those who are not Verified Members. With having to wait if there are any extra spots. Not 10 times the amount but say double. Or we could extract a percentage of any winnings (25%) from those non members and send it back to the Organization to pay for the awards dinner or room rentals at the Derby etc. That way those who are not in for the money but just want to participate can make their positions clear. They are committed to the group not only in name but in money.
I think its easier than to keep a census on the whole population.

Interesting idea -- I kind of like the idea of say 25% of non-verified winnings going towards the HOF. But I still don't like the idea of letting an unverified member swoop in and snap off the tournament. I am definitely listening to those of you who are concerned about that possibility, and I am trying to strike a balance between encouraging new members but not letting that happen -- even if our HOF would benefit, lol.