Klenti Kaci - play faster

I'm just going to drop this here for fun. The rational people will understand why, and the less rational people will probably take issue or believe it isn't directed at them.

After his service in the war, Socrates devoted himself to his favorite pastime: the pursuit of truth.

His reputation as a philosopher, literally meaning 'a lover of wisdom', soon spread all over Athens and beyond. When told that the Oracle of Delphi had revealed to one of his friends that Socrates was the wisest man in Athens, he responded not by boasting or celebrating, but by trying to prove the Oracle wrong.

So Socrates decided he would try and find out if anyone knew what was truly worthwhile in life, because anyone who knew that would surely be wiser than him. He set about questioning everyone he could find, but no one could give him a satisfactory answer. Instead they all pretended to know something they clearly did not.

Finally he realized the Oracle might be right after all. He was the wisest man in Athens because he alone was prepared to admit his own ignorance rather than pretend to know something he did not.

Hope it helps!

KMRUNOUT

BeiberLvr said:

Did I say he doesn't play well?

No.

I said him playing slow is not the reason he plays well. Therefore, he could play a little faster, and still play as well he does.

He's an excellent player.

But it's not because he's a slow player.

Click to expand...

You said (copied and pasted) "The point is, he doesn't play well because of his slow play."

So yes, you did say he doesn't play well, and cited slow play as the reason. You may have *intended* to say something else. I can't read what you intend to say, only what you do say.

I'm not sure why you are clinging to the irrational belief that you somehow know how Kaci would do playing any way other than how he does. Several posters have pointed out to you the error in this line of "thinking".

You like Socrates? I think he's great!

KMRUNOUT

KMRUNOUT said:

You said (copied and pasted) "The point is, he doesn't play well because of his slow play."

So yes, you did say he doesn't play well, and cited slow play as the reason. You may have *intended* to say something else. I can't read what you intend to say, only what you do say.

I'm not sure why you are clinging to the irrational belief that you somehow know how Kaci would do playing any way other than how he does. Several posters have pointed out to you the error in this line of "thinking".

You like Socrates? I think he's great!

KMRUNOUT

Click to expand...

He doesn't play well because of his slow play = His slow play isn't the reason he plays well.

Sorry that was difficult for you to comprehend.


The belief would only be irrational if there wasn't evidence of faster players that were just as good or better than Kaci. It would be irrational if he took a long time on all shots, but he does speed up a bit towards the end of racks. Does he play worse at the end of a rack?

Of course not.

So, rationally, it would make sense that he could play at that slightly quicker pace throughout the rack, and still play great.

BeiberLvr said:

He doesn't play well because of his slow play = His slow play isn't the reason he plays well.

Sorry that was difficult for you to comprehend.

Click to expand...

Comprehension wasn't the problem. Equating the two sentences above says a lot. In fact, pretty sure articulation with the language and rationality correlate strongly.

BeiberLvr said:

The belief would only be irrational if there wasn't evidence of faster players that were just as good or better than Kaci. It would be irrational if he took a long time on all shots, but he does speed up a bit towards the end of racks. Does he play worse at the end of a rack?

Of course not.

So, rationally, it would make sense that he could play at that slightly quicker pace throughout the rack, and still play great.

Click to expand...

You and I have different understandings of "rational". One of us is right, and the other thinks he knows what he does not know. It appears clear that there is no point whatsoever attempting a rational conversation with you. We can leave it for the other posters to contemplate.

Have a good one, at whatever pace you do that.

KMRUNOUT

KMRUNOUT said:

I'm just going to drop this here for fun. The rational people will understand why, and the less rational people will probably take issue or believe it isn't directed at them.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After his service in the war, Socrates devoted himself to his favorite pastime: the pursuit of truth.

His reputation as a philosopher, literally meaning 'a lover of wisdom', soon spread all over Athens and beyond. When told that the Oracle of Delphi had revealed to one of his friends that Socrates was the wisest man in Athens, he responded not by boasting or celebrating, but by trying to prove the Oracle wrong.

So Socrates decided he would try and find out if anyone knew what was truly worthwhile in life, because anyone who knew that would surely be wiser than him. He set about questioning everyone he could find, but no one could give him a satisfactory answer. Instead they all pretended to know something they clearly did not.

Finally he realized the Oracle might be right after all. He was the wisest man in Athens because he alone was prepared to admit his own ignorance rather than pretend to know something he did not.

Hope it helps!

KMRUNOUT

Click to expand...

Diogenes might have a little trouble with what I underlined in red.

skip100 said:

Deep, man... pass the bong.

Click to expand...

No wonder he's so slow.

KMRUNOUT said:

You and I have different understandings of "rational". One of us is right, and the other thinks he knows what he does not know. It appears clear that there is no point whatsoever attempting a rational conversation with you. We can leave it for the other posters to contemplate.

Have a good one, at whatever pace you do that.

KMRUNOUT

Click to expand...

Hey man. You're the one saying a guy that took 5 minutes to run 8 balls on a wide open table doesn't play slow.

And you're the rational one?

"]Hey man. You're the one saying a guy that took 5 minutes to run 8 balls on a wide open table doesn't play slow."



heck even mike sigel would only take 2 minutes tops to run all of these balls out. and even he a lot of people would consider as someone who shot as slow as shitte.

i don't care if this kid has a real high pro-skill level. that pace that he shoots at is just revolting. it would take someone to pay me at least a 100 bucks in order to sit through a whole set. 50 bucks i'll think about it. nah make it a 100.

gordml said:

(snip)

I personally found Kaci slower than Klatt. unbearable and yes unwatchable.

In one match his opponent made a statement by putting his coat on while it took Kaci 6 minutes to run 8 open balls
https://youtu.be/M0mO3owUlUY?t=8483

Click to expand...

lol...that's some funny shit there. I have it on now on a tab and am waiting to hear another shot....oh, there's one.

I'd better read the rest of this thread for coming up with some more 1-p jokes.



Jeff Livingston

One more thing, the difference between Kaci and someone like Soquet is that Soquet follows the same PSR every time. You know he's going to check out his angles in a methodical manner. Kaci doesn't seem to have this part hardwired into his PSR yet so it really stands out. Hopefully, over time he will smooth this out and it will be easier to watch.

sjm said:

Kaci plays too slowly right now, but I'm optimistic. Two players that were renowned for slow play in the decade of 2000-10 were Souquet and Archer, but both, when called on to do so, learned how to play well in events having a shot clock, and each won many titles in events using a shot clock on the stream/TV table.

At the US Open 9-ball, Kaci had to play the final with a shot clock and he got crushed, but I'm guessing that, like Archer and Souquet before him, Kaci will figure out how to play his best when the shot clock is in use. If not, he'll have a hard time winning events like the US Open, the World Pool Masters, the World Cup of Pool and the US Open 9-ball.

I feel strongly that Kaci will figure it out.

Click to expand...

I noticed at the Mosconi Cup that almost every time that Ralf, when in his rhythm, was just pulling back his cue for his stroke, that 3 bell alarm started going off, so his "normal" time for his shot was about 25 seconds. I was wondering if he had practiced with a timer so it wouldn't bother him to hear it during his matches.



Jeff Livingston

pt109 said:

Diogenes might have a little trouble with what I underlined in red.

Click to expand...

Are you saying some people Diodge the point?


Jeff Livingston

BeiberLvr said:

Common sense.

Click to expand...

So... common sense dictates that if he played differently than he does he will still play the same?

There is no slow or fast, there is only slower or faster. He is slower than a lot of other professional players, but he is also finishing better than most of those other players. To say he is too slow means that there is a minimal convention of speed necessary to play this game. In this tournament there was no shot clock and therefore no minimal convention of speed. There is no logical way for him to be too slow, universally.

Now you could say he is too slow for you, and I cannot dispute that. That would introduce the minimal convention of speed that you hold important to play this game, but you are not everyone else and you are certainly not Kaci. The minimal convention of speed that you hold important holds no importance to anyone else except you, and those who happen to agree with you. Claiming that it is common sense that anyone who shoots the way you see it fit for them to shoot should expect the results they would normally achieve shooting the way they have trained themselves to shoot, is illogical and is anything but common sense. Common sense implies a measure of accepted truth, not opinion. Now, might he shoot better if he sped up? Maybe, but holding it as a universal truth is overreaching the boundaries of yours' or anyone else's actual ability to know such things.

I'm not trying to change your mind about how you feel about his pace of play, it is certainly not my place to do such. Just trying to apply a little bit of logic to this argument.

Snooker Theory said:

railbirds/spectators bring money into the sport, players who play slow drive away spectators, and thus hurt the sport overall imo

Click to expand...

Wouldn’t want slow play to run off all this money the spectators bring in to this sport where 40k/year is a lot.

Pretty sure there are bigger problems other than slow play......

sure there are more things that are causing pool's downfall in the public eye.
but adding slow play to something pro pool players need more than anything else is crazy. and the thing they need more than anything else is spectators from the general public..

and when the public gets interested they themselves start playing. and that is how a sport grows.

erhino41 said:

I'm not trying to change your mind about how you feel about his pace of play, it is certainly not my place to do such. Just trying to apply a little bit of logic to this argument.

Click to expand...

Not sure why you would bother trying to change someone's mind on a fact. That would be like trying to convince a bear that it's really a duck.

Here's a thought.

Take the top 50 players in the world (we'll say by Fargo Rate)
Give them all the same set up from the out in this video

I don't think it's unreasonable to say 40/50 would run out with no issue.

So out of those 40 players. How many of them do you think would take > 5 minutes to run out?

erhino41 said:

Now, might he shoot better if he sped up? Maybe, but holding it as a universal truth is overreaching the boundaries of yours' or anyone else's actual ability to know such things.

Click to expand...

I don't believe I ever said he would shoot better if he sped up. I will say, and have said, that he probably wouldn't shoot worse if he sped up.