Shane Has Won World Titles

[JB Cases]

That means pretty much nothing. There are any number of reasons a matchup like that might not happen. A lot of Euro players don't gamble. Some players might be risk-averse. Some might not have backers. And then there's problems with negotiations, etc. For an Asian player to come to the US just to play Shane, that requires a flight and expenses. If there's a backer involved, then the backer is already laying odds because the player gets paid out of the winnings. So the expected chances of winning have to be well over 50% in order to make it a profitable venture.

What determines the best player is actual play, not woofing.

If Ko and Shane race to 100, I'd bet on Ko. Not because I'm sure that Ko is the better player, but because the evidence (limited as it is) suggests it's more likely that he would win.

What evidence? The results of two short sets?

If they wanted to play Shane they could have the past August. They don't want to play and that is the simple fact.

I mean that is the bottom line. They had every chance to bet 50k or more and the answer was no. They wanted nonpart of playing Shane a long race. And there might have been 20k bet on the race to 21 but it is 100% that Shane didn't bet anywhere near that nor did his backers.

So Ko can get played anytime. When the opportunity and momentum was on his side they ducked.

 

[BeiberLvr]

What evidence? The results of two short sets?

If they wanted to play Shane they could have the past August. They don't want to play and that is the simple fact.

I mean that is the bottom line. They had every chance to bet 50k or more and the answer was no. They wanted nonpart of playing Shane a long race. And there might have been 20k bet on the race to 21 but it is 100% that Shane didn't bet anywhere near that nor did his backers.

So Ko can get played anytime. When the opportunity and momentum was on his side they ducked.

I'm not saying Shane can't beat Ko, but how do you know he or his backers offered to play him?

You say it as though it's an indisputable fact, but I'm interested in knowing your source(s).

 

[ineedaspot]

What evidence? The results of two short sets?

If they wanted to play Shane they could have the past August. They don't want to play and that is the simple fact.

I mean that is the bottom line. They had every chance to bet 50k or more and the answer was no. They wanted nonpart of playing Shane a long race. And there might have been 20k bet on the race to 21 but it is 100% that Shane didn't bet anywhere near that nor did his backers.

So Ko can get played anytime. When the opportunity and momentum was on his side they ducked.

Those sets (I watched one of them, impressive), along with the generally high level of pool coming out of Asia, and the fact that Shane hasn't done great in tournaments with all the world's best players in attendance. Like I said, the evidence is limited, but that's what the evidence is.

I don't really put much stock in stories about who ducked who or why. I've read here Ko's backers took 20k of side action, so there's that, but who knows. The whole system of backers and woofing is kind of primitive and not worthy of world champions IMO.

So, yeah, I'd bet on Ko. There's not enough evidence to say who's better with too much confidence, and hey, maybe I'd lose. Wouldn't be the first time.

 

[OLD NO 9]

Those sets (I watched one of them, impressive), along with the generally high level of pool coming out of Asia, and the fact that Shane hasn't done great in tournaments with all the world's best players in attendance. Like I said, the evidence is limited, but that's what the evidence is.

I don't really put much stock in stories about who ducked who or why. I've read here Ko's backers took 20k of side action, so there's that, but who knows. The whole system of backers and woofing is kind of primitive and not worthy of world champions IMO.

So, yeah, I'd bet on Ko. There's not enough evidence to say who's better with too much confidence, and hey, maybe I'd lose. Wouldn't be the first time.

I have news for ya Justin Hall, Justin Bergman, Mike Dechaine and soon Skylar Woodward could compete with half your super strong European field and Asian fields.

 

[spartan]

The average winning margin is larger in winner break format, yes, but it still doesn't change the odds of either player winning.

Speculation about mental game is just that. Honestly, I don't find your amateur psychology much more persuasive than your amateur math. Winner breaks favors one kind of mental game over another. I think alternate break probably requires more mental toughness. In winner break, if you get down, you can always tell yourself, well when I get to the table, I'll run a bunch of racks. In alternating breaks, you don't have that.

Also, in general, the existence of momentum and rules that emphasize it will tend to favor the weaker player, not the stronger. The reason being that the stronger player wants more independence between trials, to let the law of averages take effect, and momentum is in effect a dependency between one trial and the next.

In the end, winner and alternating breaks are equally valid formats mathematically. One format might favor one kind of player over another, but there's no fundamental reason that one is "better". Personally, I prefer to watch winner breaks, but that's just my preference.

Those sets (I watched one of them, impressive), along with the generally high level of pool coming out of Asia, and the fact that Shane hasn't done great in tournaments with all the world's best players in attendance. Like I said, the evidence is limited, but that's what the evidence is.

I don't really put much stock in stories about who ducked who or why. I've read here Ko's backers took 20k of side action, so there's that, but who knows. The whole system of backers and woofing is kind of primitive and not worthy of world champions IMO.

So, yeah, I'd bet on Ko. There's not enough evidence to say who's better with too much confidence, and hey, maybe I'd lose. Wouldn't be the first time.

+1 Good stuff. Cannot argue with facts, stats and objective analysis.
All the woofing, barking and macho gambling stuff is just hot air.
Multiple sets of short races are good enough to give idea of better player
Which really is Head to Head of tourney results (H2H) over time. Sports like tennis rely on and compile database of H2H to give idea of who is better player
https://matchstat.com/tennis/head-to-head

So really it is enough to look at past head to head results ( short tourney races) to get an idea of who is better player. But of course the sample size must be big enough

 

[SakuJack]

I've got a degree in Economics and the worlds largest online pawn business.

looooool, excellent.

 

[arps]

corvette, do you have any connections with Shane? you talk a lot, it seems that you are friends with him or probably you can finance the guy. anyway, Carlo Biado's new backer is looking for big money challenges here in the Philippines. if you're the one he should talk to about a match with Shane, i could refer you.

 

[BeiberLvr]

the fact that he has made it known that he will take on anyone in the world in a long race (spread out over several days so it's not a question of endurance as some of these braniacs keep saying) and nobody will play tells me all I need to know and lets you know what the players think. Any of these so called world champions could make more than they'll make in the next 5 years if they could get there.

SVB only beat Shaw 100-93 when they played, and could have easily lost by the same score.

So what makes you so confident that Shane would destroy others, who obviously play much better than Shaw, in a race to 100?

 

[corvette1340]

corvette, do you have any connections with Shane? you talk a lot, it seems that you are friends with him or probably you can finance the guy. anyway, Carlo Biado's new backer is looking for big money challenges here in the Philippines. if you're the one he should talk to about a match with Shane, i could refer you.

I've only met Shane a few times and most of those were several years back when I was actually betting on the other side of his action when he was just coming on the scene. I actually had part of Corey in Atlanta in '06 when he gave Shane the 8 in rack your own 9 ball. In fact I used to bet against Shane a lot until I realized that I was losing every time. I've now come to appreciate the fact that he is indeed the best player on earthor at least from a gambling stand point he is, because he will take on all comers. I do know his main backer though and have actually thought about getting in touch with him about issuing a formal challenge, with Shane's input of course.

Aside from that I've just said that I'll put up at least $10,000 if anyone would match up with him in a long race, but nobody wants to gamble with him anymore, and rightly so.

 

[one stroke]

What evidence? The results of two short sets?

If they wanted to play Shane they could have the past August. They don't want to play and that is the simple fact.

I mean that is the bottom line. They had every chance to bet 50k or more and the answer was no. They wanted nonpart of playing Shane a long race. And there might have been 20k bet on the race to 21 but it is 100% that Shane didn't bet anywhere near that nor did his backers.

So Ko can get played anytime. When the opportunity and momentum was on his side they ducked.

When was the mystery bet that no ones heard about till this thread ,,what game how much when and Where ,, before or after he felt like they got hosed ,, all factors ,, did Shane offer to go there ,,

The only thing we know for sure is Ko won the match going away and was the better player,,

1

 

[JB Cases]

When was the mystery bet that no ones heard about till this thread ,,what game how much when and Where ,, before or after he felt like they got hosed ,, all factors ,, did Shane offer to go there ,,

The only thing we know for sure is Ko won the match going away and was the better player,,

1

The one thing you know for sure is that Ko beat Shane by a score of 21-17. The other thing you know for sure is that for all of Shane's career he has never refused to play any other player heads-up 10 ball long sets for lots of cash.

Whenever Shane has been beaten he has been eager to get back in the box and play again. That much we have seen over and over for the past 8 years.

And unfortunately for you and the rest of the voyeurs on AZB you don't actually hear about all the action that is proposed nor even that which actually goes down. There is a "darknet" of information that you are not privileged to and which some of us aren't even fully in the loop either. Sorry but The Action Report is misnamed because they don't provide you with the gossipy details you crave.

But if you would bet on it I am confident that Team Shane could and would post a huge chunk of money 20k+ at the minimum to bet against Team KoBros. I am pretty sure Shane doesn't feel like it's more than a coin flip at worst against either Ko and probably tilted in his favor if they play a race to 100.

 

[one stroke]

The one thing you know for sure is that Ko beat Shane by a score of 21-17. The other thing you know for sure is that for all of Shane's career he has never refused to play any other player heads-up 10 ball long sets for lots of cash.

Whenever Shane has been beaten he has been eager to get back in the box and play again. That much we have seen over and over for the past 8 years.

And unfortunately for you and the rest of the voyeurs on AZB you don't actually hear about all the action that is proposed nor even that which actually goes down. There is a "darknet" of information that you are not privileged to and which some of us aren't even fully in the loop either. Sorry but The Action Report is misnamed because they don't provide you with the gossipy details you crave.

But if you would bet on it I am confident that Team Shane could and would post a huge chunk of money 20k+ at the minimum to bet against Team KoBros. I am pretty sure Shane doesn't feel like it's more than a coin flip at worst against either Ko and probably tilted in his favor if they play a race to 100.

Their were plenty people on this site and on Jimbo's site who were there and in the loop
A blanket offer ,,, I will play anyone in my house my game my fans is not a bet offer ,

1

 

[Baby Huey]

To the Snooker fans on this latest thread: Guess what, your snooker players are very fortunate to have legalized gambling (betting) on sports in the UK. Otherwise your great game wouldn't be very much right now. It's because of the legalized gambling that your players can afford to train and to cultivate new blood for your sport. The prize funds are just much better. So when you knock American pool, one well placed new anti gambling law in the UK could end your great game.

 

[Ron Swanson]

To the Snooker fans on this latest thread: Guess what, your snooker players are very fortunate to have legalized gambling (betting) on sports in the UK. Otherwise your great game wouldn't be very much right now. It's because of the legalized gambling that your players can afford to train and to cultivate new blood for your sport. The prize funds are just much better. So when you knock American pool, one well placed new anti gambling law in the UK could end your great game.

Who perpetuates this drivel? Snooker's heyday was a long time ago, when betting was a 50p each way on the old nags. Legalised gambling has little or nothing to do with it.

Snooker was/is popular because - do listen carefully - it's a good game, with depth and substance. It's also insanely difficult to master, with audiences knowing full well there's no way they could ever do what they are watching.

 

[Ron Swanson]

looooool, excellent.

I have a degree in economics as well, sorta, but not one in online pawn. I may do my Masters in that.

 

[JB Cases]

Their were plenty people on this site and on Jimbo's site who were there and in the loop
A blanket offer ,,, I will play anyone in my house my game my fans is not a bet offer ,

1

No. They weren't.

 

[JB Cases]

To the Snooker fans on this latest thread: Guess what, your snooker players are very fortunate to have legalized gambling (betting) on sports in the UK. Otherwise your great game wouldn't be very much right now. It's because of the legalized gambling that your players can afford to train and to cultivate new blood for your sport. The prize funds are just much better. So when you knock American pool, one well placed new anti gambling law in the UK could end your great game.

Snooker was fortunate that the BBC used snooker for a lot of its programming. Essentially a government subsidy. Ray Reardon has written of the lean times when snooker was paying about what pool pays.

 

[JB Cases]

Who perpetuates this drivel? Snooker's heyday was a long time ago, when betting was a 50p each way on the old nags. Legalised gambling has little or nothing to do with it.

Snooker was/is popular because - do listen carefully - it's a good game, with depth and substance. It's also insanely difficult to master, with audiences knowing full well there's no way they could ever do what they are watching.

And all billiards games are insanely difficult to master. Anyone who can play at all knows this.

 

[Jaden]

your post is ridiculous...

I have a degree in economics as well, sorta, but not one in online pawn. I may do my Masters in that.

I have an MBA and I say you're so full of shit, I'm surprised you don't have to carry a roll of toilet paper cause your ears are constantly leaking.

No game is popular or has money in it because it is a good game or difficult for the masses, any game is difficult for the masses when looked at from the highest levels (tic tac toe, being one of the few exceptions)...

It is popular because of proper marketing and building of public interest, and there's money in it because it's popular.

Jaden

 

[JB Cases]

I have an MBA and I say you're so full of shit, I'm surprised you don't have to carry a roll of toilet paper cause your ears are constantly leaking.

No game is popular or has money in it because it is a good game or difficult for the masses, any game is difficult for the masses when looked at from the highest levels (tic tac toe, being one of the few exceptions)...

It is popular because of proper marketing and building of public interest, and there's money in it because it's popular.

Jaden

I am sure Thaiger has a perfectly good explanation as to why Hot Dog Eating is popular on tv as well. Being that it's such a deep and interesting sport and impossibly insane to master.