| |
BGonline.org Forums
Hedge Controversy Resolution
Posted By: David Kettler
Date: Tuesday, 25 October 2011, at 9:53 p.m.
Hedge Controversy Resolution.
I want to thank everyone who participated in this forum discussion. It was a great help in solidifying my own thoughts on the subject. I especially appreciated Chuck’s comments that showed that he was almost as clueless as I was about the tournament structure, and for pretty much the same reasons. It made me feel a little less like an idiot.
First a look at the hive mind. Between the 20 or so people that posted here, and the various other players who’s opinions I valued I collected 26 opinions on how this should be handled. They broke down into three categories. 9 who thought I should pay nothing, 4 who thought I should pay the whole thing, and 13 who suggested some type of compromise. The compromisers fell mostly into 4 categories of their own. 1. Pay half 2. Pay the full amount ($350) if and when I cash. 3. Pay $350/1500 * (net winnings-expenses) 4. Esoteric Formulas
Despite the 2 to 1 margin of no payers over full payers, it was an easy decision to reject the extremes. First of all, there’s Kettler’s Dictum that states, “ In all decisions that matter, when shades of gray exist, black and white are almost always wrong.” In addition, either of those choices leads to some stain on my character. One labels me a cheat and the other labels me a chump. So compromise it is. Now only half the people will think I’m a cheat while the other half will think I’m a chump. I guess I can live with that.
I started by immediately rejecting the esoteric formulas for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that anything involving auctioning off the tournament spot probably wouldn’t be allowed, and they failed to allot any value to the prestige and honor of representing the USA. Another thing wrong with the esoteric formulas is that it would keep me involved with more dealings and agreements with the same individual with which I have already had problems. This fault is also shared with compromise position 3. I want this settled simply and preferably as soon as possible. Compromise position 2 was offered to player A almost immediately and if he had agreed to that, you guys would never of heard about it. I thought it was reasonable under the circumstances. It has the added benefit of meaning that I probably will never have to pay him a dime, since I am a definite long shot to finish in the money. However, it keeps the damn thing hanging around like a dead fish and I want closure, so I have mailed him a check for $175.00 One half of the original hedge amount. One last little interesting tidbit to note in passing. Three of the most definite don’t pay anything votes came from Simborg and the other two tournament directors that I contacted personally. I wondered why that would be. There’s no way of knowing if it’s just an anomaly, but I suspect that years of running tournaments have gotten them used to making black and white decisions that are in favor of one player or the other, and that few, if any, of the decisions that they have to make have compromise solutions. They have become quite good at making quick rulings based on the preponderance of the evidence, but are not as quick to see more nuanced options
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.