Kid took 5 seconds to consider the shot, and then just drilled the red closest to the rail into the heart of the pocket.

A tournament director should watch these kind of shots. The other player had zero interest in having someone watching the shot.

Rocket354 said:

Rubilen, who had looked fantastic for so long, has looked really out of character the last couple tournaments. She's looked so bad at times that I wonder if she's let a kink into her mechanics.

Click to expand...

Yes, with the notable exception of the WPA sanctioned World Team Championships in February, in which Rubilen's fine play helped Team Philippines win the gold medal.

Jaden said:

But because of the nature of handicapped tournaments, those other inputs will keep the better player artificially low and the lower player artificially high.

Click to expand...

that doesnt seem right jaden. for good mathematical reasons.

but if it was so it can explain lots of strange events.

What is a 'micro-stroke'? Why would you want to use a micro stroke?

When I'm playing my best, I don't even look at the cueball after setting my to on the table. I take 0-2 practice strokes generally.

So much of the recommended psr stuff is just noise that interfers with playing well. Minimize the psr to the only things you need. See shot, align cue, relax, shoot. That is all you need. It isn't helping to chalk exactly six times, inspect the cueball, shake your left leg, shrug your shoulders, bob your head, etc.. See shot, aim shot, shoot shot.

iusedtoberich said:

Was this the first Women's US Open in 10 years or so? I saw something suggesting that on FB. I know the WPBA scaled way down to about 2 events for a few years when the economy was bad, but I seem to recall the US Open is one they kept during those years. This is from memory, I might be way off.

Click to expand...

Yes, it has been a while since there was a women's US Open. I can't say when the last one was, but it may well have been a decade ago.

but if he had played to his fargo rate he almost certainly would not have won.

but he played to a much higher almost impossible level at 714 over 100 points higher.

that is the major point. fargo rate does not mean you will shoot to that level of play each and every day.
or that your opponent will shoot to his level.

white1 said:

Found one. Sent you message

Click to expand...

Where and how much ? Thanks

Lowell said:

Where would you place Jasmin Ouschan and Seo Seoa?

Click to expand...

I mostly agree with sjm, although I'd move Rubilen and Kelly into the top-5. I haven't seen enough of Shasha or a couple other Chinese players to really judge. Seo and Jasmin are definitely top-10. Seo might be top-5, or will be soon, if she keeps going as she has.

Rubilen, who had looked fantastic for so long, has looked really out of character the last couple tournaments. She's looked so bad at times that I wonder if she's let a kink into her mechanics.

fuggles said:

Agree with everything except the bolded. If you are 100 points above your opponent but you are winning 80% of the games, then your fargo will go up.

Click to expand...

Here let me explain it again. It has nothiing to do with the fact you're mostly playing lower skilled players, it has to do with the formatting when you're playing against lower skilled players. You're almost exclusively playing handicapped tournaments at the lower levels, and they are designed to even the playing field. So if you're opponent only has to go to say 3 games to your 6 or 7, they will often get to that 3 or 4 games before the opponent gets above 2,3 or 4 games. This artificially creates an input into fargo that makes the higher rated player appear lower than they actually are. You may 99 out of 100 times if playing the full race to 6 or 7 end up 7-2 or 6-3. If those scores are inputted iinto fargo, the fargo will remain accurate.

But because of the nature of handicapped tournaments, those other inputs will keep the better player artificially low and the lower player artificially high.

Much better

my deadly accurate is accurate. but of course any prediction of events need a big enough sample to determine the outcome.

short matches give a direction but not a definitive prediction.

let a 600 player play a 650 for an all day session like in the pool room and you can bet your sweet ass you know who will win.

in a tournament you can bet that the top fargo players will take off most or all the top money on the average. if they are significantly higher than the field behind them.
and of course there will be an occasional outlier that sneaks in for some reason.

uk_9_ball_convert said:

Accents are ridiculously regional in Scotland. Higgins is from Wishaw (hence the Wizard of Wishaw nickname) which isn't that far from Glasgow, but I'd say the accent is still subtly different from a true Glaswegian accent.

I don't actually think McManus sounds that Glaswegian either, didn't realise he was from Glasgow. But feel like he's probably toned his accent down for the media a lot more than Higgins.

Click to expand...

McManus is completely comprehensible to my North American ear. Higgins is far more of a challenge.

Hendry of course is not an issue.

Let’s go Class of 92. Two into the second round already.