Bump

Ah, c'mon ppl, don't argue over a silly definition! Matchroom calls their event a major to make them differ from their own tour's 'minor'. As such, for their WNT any event with a prize fund over 200K is a major. Regardless of the field strength. Of course there were, and are, major tournaments other than Matchroom operated events, as simple as that. Just recently sjm and jbart65 had a little conversation where the former provided a pretty neat list.

i like that one local player goes by the name rizky rizky.

ameer ali is one to look out for. not only has he shown what he can do in WPC but he plays 8-ball well too (heyball)

Obviously it's more statement furniture than pool table.

With that website I recommend checking reviews and GOOGLE searches on the auction house/company.

JV

Poolplaya9 said:

Who produced an event has about as much to do with whether something is a major or not as what color of shoelaces a player is wearing has to do with how great of a player they are. What makes for a major are things like current and historic field strength, current and historic prize fund, length of history of the event, and the like. Who produces an event is immaterial.

Click to expand...

i tend to agree here. philippines open has a meager prize fund, hasn't even happened, and florida is brand new, so i wouldn't call them majors. let's see if they stick around. the peri open had a tough field and paid well, it took some serious steel to win that. and international has been around longer than every MR open except the US open and WPC (which is invitational, but anyway)

xX-Wizard-Xx said:

bumpers protect the end of the cue .... i wouldnt consider a cue without some sort of bumper

Click to expand...

even experienced players drop the butt.
I know I did

sjm said:

The Peri is not part of the WNT tour and neither is the International, but each, through Matchroom affiliation, offers plenty of money and Matchroom ranking points, making them important. If you want to call such events majors, I'm OK with it, but they are not WNT majors.

Click to expand...

I wasn't offering an opinion one way or the other on whether they are majors or not, and whether they are or not would have nothing to do with what you said or my response to what you said.

You said that they, and by implication any other events, can't be majors because they are not produced by Matchroom (...but they are not Matchroom produced events and are therefore not majors"). My assertion is simply that this claim is quite obviously silly, and I have almost no doubt that you know that as well so I'm not quite sure why you said it anyway. Perhaps you just had a momentary brain fart like we all get on occasion, or perhaps you were actually trying to say something else and just used really poor wording.

sjm said:

As you know, Emily is very stringent when it comes to whether the top players will play in all the WNT majors, and missing the WNT majors, as we have seen, has consequences. Emily has never insisted that the top WNT roster players participate in the other WNT ranking events like the Peri or the International. That's always optional and the players pick and choose when it comes to those ranking events.

FYI, the 2025 Matchroom majors making up the WNT Tour are UK Open, European Open, US Open 9ball, World 9ball, Florida Open, Hanoi Open, and Philippines Open. Miss those and you'll rub Matchroom the wrong way and it may disqualify you from WNT Invitationals (like PLP, Mosconi Cup or Reyes Cup). Miss anything else and Matchroom does not care.

Click to expand...

None of this has anything to do with my response or point. I was just pointing out that an event from a promoter other than Matchroom can in fact be a major, and any claim to the contrary like you made (hopefully due to poor wording or brain fart) is just incorrect. Now there can certainly be a major that Matchroom doesn't care about, but that doesn't change whether it is a major or not as it is whatever it is.

Stellar1024 said:

I feel like I'd trust an aluminum pin much more than a hollow stainless pin...

Click to expand...

I have a MALI , the bolt is 6 1/2in long and weighs a ton, I'm going with aluminum.
Joint pin also aluminum.
Hits better, balances better, turned out to be my daily, everything better.
(thanks to this forum for helping)

Cartune said:

that is a 3/8-10 modified

Nice looking cue BTW

Click to expand...

Thank you

Osarah Custom Cues
Pete Tascarella Sr made the shafts and finished it. Brand new condition.

L'epine said:

I am sure those who really know will know just by looking at them.

In ancient Japan, early sword makers did not sign their works. It seems
that idea that those who know would recognize the master who created
the work. To sign a work meant that the sword was not outstanding enough
to identify itself.

View attachment 837680View attachment 837681

Click to expand...

These both are Superb cues!
I would be very happy owning and playing with the cue on the right...
I Like the layout, and veneers... black, mahogany, Light blue, Natural
thanks for the post!

Bob Jewett said:

Did you want to do rack your own or opponent racks?

Click to expand...

Rack your own.

Do that random generator so there's no pattern racking.

Like I said, the slashing cueball is just silly. Scratch off balls or go off a ball to the end rail. Just wild.

Here nice video from master himself. Boost learning from masters easy advice. I found this channel recently and i gonna deep dive all his lessons!
Login to view embedded media They mostly speak english...

sjm said:

FYI, a simultaneous hit is a foul under the rules. It was an awful, indefensible, call.

Click to expand...

Stu, let me add this modest piece to your immense knowledge of the pool world.

That's an extract from WPA Regulations, effective as of March 2016. I mean, it is not a novelty, so has nothing to do with recent (2025) updates to official Rules and Regs of the game.



It has been like than for more than two decades at least.

(Attn. copy @ctran )


Also, the rules of pool require any referee (even Marcel) to be 100 percent sure about the foul for them to make such a call. Meaning, if a ref is only 98 percent sure he is supposed to stay away from calling a foul. (The afore-mentioned benefit of a doubt)