skogstokig said:

yep, i was watching oi and souto playing battle of the bull one pocket earlier. it's on railbirdstv and sharkstream, fedor is streaming too. good stuff.

Click to expand...

They have definitely built a brand at the Battle of the Bull and the players have a lot of nice things to say about the event. I know they filled the field in the upcoming Battle of the Bull 9ball event, as Eklent Kaci told me that he tried to get in and was told that no spots remained.

Granted the ref had the exact worst vantage point and shooter was right over the shot but the ref awarded the point a second time after watching the replay.

Who won the match? I'll go by that.

Black-Balled said:

Ok, cranky chuck.

You might follow the discussion and realize the context frames a discussion about appropriate respondents to officiated scenarios

Additionally, logic says that if one cannot call a foul on his opponent then he cannot call one on himself.

Click to expand...

Here's what I'll do, with You or Anyone in this thread.

I'll Bet a Minimum of $500.00 USD on this statement!

"A UMB Referee 'Can Not inform/Advise' the Shooter that they are about to 'Shoot the Wrong Ball'!

"The Opponent, if He chooses 'May or May Not' inform the player before He shoots!"

Any takers?

straightline said:

Login to view embedded media
It doesn't mash the nose but it clearly grazed the face of the cushion and changed direction.

Click to expand...

It didn’t. It is kind of interesting that we are watching the same video and seeing different things. There is always a gap between the nose of the cushion and the spinning ( wobbling/ rolling off) ball.

JPB2 said:

There was no point. The cue ball wobbled near the rail.

Click to expand...

Login to view embedded media
It doesn't mash the nose but it clearly grazed the face of the cushion and changed direction.

straightline said:

What a drama queen. Point was good.

Click to expand...

Post reported.

kingwang said:

Much worse for shorter players. The cue length should be relative to your height. A longer cue won't help much with reaching shots because the extra length goes to the back of the cue, not the front, because you can't magically start playing with a 24" bridge. All it does is cause the cue to be super back weighted and really unwieldy.

Click to expand...

Coincidentally, Samm Diep uploaded this video this week explaining exactly what I mean: Login to view embedded media

TDF is great but the ultimate test is whether or not you run out more. That may capture total table difficulty better than just pocket dimensions as our psychology can determine how we attack a table.

JPB2 said:

It never got the third rail. It was near the rail and wobbled. 2 rails only. Zanetti knew and the video is clear.

Click to expand...

It never hit 3rd rail before contact with 2nd ball, to further clarify.

In men's pool, I would change the way the players dress.

I'm sure that a lot of sponsorship dollars are gained from the deals made with companies like Onboard, who put out a nice product and are a positive force in the game. Right now, they dress like pro bowlers, who are similarly fighting for attention. The Hustlin' clothing brand is a good one, but does it serve the game's best interests when a player competes wearing that brand in major competition? I don't think so.

Old timers like me remember how guys like Jim Rempe and Kim Davenport dressed and how they always displayed the latest fashions. I'd like to see today's top men given a similar opportunity to express themselves through their choice of clothing.

The appearance of the players in top level competition affects the game's image. The argument that you can only shoot straight in the most informal clothing has long been disproven by the top snooker players, the straightest shooters of them all.

The women pros take their appearance more seriously, often wearing nice clothing and presenting themselves with a tasteful elegance.

fastone371 said:

The white ball hit 3 rails after contact with red and before contact with yellow then hit the rail again after contact with yellow, that's not a good shot??

Click to expand...

(What happens after contact with the 2nd ball is immaterial)

fastone371 said:

The white ball hit 3 rails after contact with red and before contact with yellow then hit the rail again after contact with yellow, that's not a good shot??

Click to expand...

It never got the third rail. It was near the rail and wobbled. 2 rails only. Zanetti knew and the video is clear.

mr3cushion said:

Entirely different situation!

UMB Refs make mistakes, especially in the 'Prelims' of World Cups and Grand Prix event!

MZ called a 'No point scored' on Himself!

Click to expand...

Ok, cranky chuck.

You might follow the discussion and realize the context frames a discussion about appropriate respondents to officiated scenarios

Additionally, logic says that if one cannot call a foul on his opponent then he cannot call one on himself.

TDF aside...I'd still say the first setup plays easier. You just have to understand the conditions you're playing under. Leave yourself thinner cuts into the larger pockets to avoid the rattled balls. That coupled with the larger target for all the object ball near mid-table shots, makes the setup easier in my book. A lot of the OLD Gold Crowns play like this and they are way easier to maneuver around than a harder table, even if they rattle a few balls here and there. Plus cross side banks into cavernous side pockets is an easy way to get out of trouble on such tables.

straightline said:

You can see the phantom bounce just before it feathers the point.

Click to expand...

There was no point. The cue ball wobbled near the rail.

JPB2 said:

Clearly only 2 rails.

Click to expand...

The white ball hit 3 rails after contact with red and before contact with yellow then hit the rail again after contact with yellow, that's not a good shot??