The Brass Rail in Durham BITD was full of characters. Most of them were just cushion beaters, but the room was air conditioned and it was a good place for the "Students of Life" to hang out and avoid real work. There was an old shoeshine chair right near the entrance where a guy named Wayne Dixon used to hold court and make comments about everyone who walked through the door.

One afternoon a road player walked in with his cue, a rarity in that room where most everyone played with house cues. That caught Wayne's attention, and he shouted out "Hey, buddy, you like to gamble?" And the guy says "Yeah, maybe. What game and for how much?"

Wayne then says "a hundred dollars", and that got the road player even more interested. "What's your game?" he asks.

Wayne just gave him a hard stare and replied, "I'll bet you a hundred dollars that my d*ck is littler than yours."

Funny, but nobody ever took him up on his bet.

George the Greek said:

The same with the finger tapping in snooker that started long before most of the players on tour were born. I read or heard someone say it helped with their timing..

Click to expand...

Sigel.

Hell of a run and finals by John Morra. Well deserved win

This puts me at an awkward loss of smilies.

Is it 'of' or 'for' ? Words would be "for" I think. Any grammatical rule for smilies?

ghost ball said:

Whiskey is a solution to most problems.

Click to expand...

Whiskey is definitely a solution of water, alcohol and various fusel oils.

It is only a solution to "human" problems.

Whats in common?
You own them ….

ghost ball said:

Whiskey is a solution to most problems.

Click to expand...

To quote Homer Simpson: "To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems,"

Bump.

Bump.

Taxi said:

First time I even knew about this stupid rule was when Karl Boyes pulled it against Shannon Daulton in the 2015 U. S. Open. It was in one of the early rounds, and Daulton was cruising with a fairly big lead when Boyes called him for putting his cue on the table at the end of a rack that Daulton had won, and stopping a ball which had come within an inch of stopping on its own, nowhere near the pocket.

It seemed like a purely nit move, but it unnerved Daulton, and Boyes came back to win the match and finish runner-up to Kevin Cheng in the whole tournament. I've always liked Boyes as a player, but this nit move dropped him in my esteem.

"Rules are rules", but sometime the rule is just an ass.

Click to expand...

I saw that one recently as well and thought it was a terrible move.

Shannon would never have done that had the roles been reversed.

First time I even knew about this stupid rule was when Karl Boyes pulled it against Shannon Daulton in the 2015 U. S. Open. It was in one of the early rounds, and Daulton was cruising with a fairly big lead when Boyes called him for putting his cue on the table at the end of a rack that Daulton had won, and stopping a ball which had come within an inch of stopping on its own, nowhere near the pocket.

It seemed like a purely nit move, but it unnerved Daulton, and Boyes came back to win the match and finish runner-up to Kevin Cheng in the whole tournament. I've always liked Boyes as a player, but this nit move dropped him in my esteem.

"Rules are rules", but sometime the rule is just an ass.