If not for the antics by Earl.... Would Shane have won?

[slyfox]

Simple question.

No doubt Earl played good and beat Shane. The question is though....
If Earl hadn't played up the antics the way he did.... would Shane have beaten him?

Earl still had the advantage on that table... no doubt.

But without the antics could SVB have beaten Earl?

 

[JAM]

In a word -- NO.

Earl has experience playing on the 10-foot tables. He has played snooker in his younger life, and he also used to hit balls in Detroit on a 10-footer. It is easier for a player with Earl's experience to adjust to strange equipment, too.

 

[supergreenman]

Shane is a professional and can fade antics worse than that.

So, no, he just got outplayed.

 

[jersey jer]

No.

Shane flat out stated he could not beat earl on that table.

Shane's got class

 

[Blackjack]

No.

Shane flat out stated he could not beat earl on that table.

Shane's got class

Agreed.

.
.
.
.

 

[RobertR]

Shane is a professional and can fade antics worse than that.

So, no, he just got outplayed.

Fair enough.

It could also be argued that blatant sharking was a part of the game plan from the start.

The cueball is over the line ? Get the f*** outta here with that BS.

EDIT: to the Earl fans in general:

And dammit, for the last time, stop calling them 'Antics'. It's sharking and cheating and if Earl were to go to a poolroom in say Compton and pull that BS, it wouldn't end well.

 

[u12armresl]

Where is the antic at?

If you believe the cueball is over the line do you just sit and watch it, or do you go and check on it. He didn't do it every time, and by your logic if it was sharking he would have done it every time. He did it the times HE thought the cueball was over the line.


Oh, and a poolhall in Compton attached with the ever so nice line "it wouldn't end well" I know just like Mars said you aren't saying anything physical would happen you're just saying it wouldn't end well, like Earl might find no ice in his water type end well, or he gets beat up ends well? Which kinds of not ends well do you mean?

Fair enough.

It could also be argued that blatant sharking was a part of the game plan from the start.

The cueball is over the line ? Get the f*** outta here with that BS.

And dammit, for the last time, stop calling them 'Antics'. It's sharking and cheating and if Earl were to go to a poolroom in say Compton and pull that BS, it wouldn't end well.

 

[Blackjack]

Fair enough.

It could also be argued that blatant sharking was a part of the game plan from the start.

The cueball is over the line ? Get the f*** outta here with that BS.

EDIT: to the Earl fans in general:

And dammit, for the last time, stop calling them 'Antics'. It's sharking and cheating and if Earl were to go to a poolroom in say Compton and pull that BS, it wouldn't end well.

Shane's job is to get the balls in the holes, and he had a very tough time doing that. FWIW, I'm pretty sure Shane could give a rat's ass what Earl said or did. The man said "I can't beat him." He didn't cry foul or blame Earl, he placed the responsibility of the loss on his inability to deal with the table size and the table conditions. That pretty much says it all right there.

 

[RobertR]

Where is the antic at?

If you believe the cueball is over the line do you just sit and watch it, or do you go and check on it. He didn't do it every time, and by your logic if it was sharking he would have done it every time. He did it the times HE thought the cueball was over the line.

Split hairs all you want. Do I really need to point out all the other BS moves that were beatdown worthy in other poolrooms ?

I'll say this, both Justin & Schmidt commented openly that Earl sharks *every* time his opponent is shooting in his direction. Schmidt said something like "if other players did to earl what he does to them, he'd decapitate them".

 

[jay helfert]

Shane's job is to get the balls in the holes, and he had a very tough time doing that. FWIW, I'm pretty sure Shane could give a rat's ass what Earl said or did. The man said "I can't beat him." He didn't cry foul or blame Earl, he placed the responsibility of the loss on his inability to deal with the table size and the table conditions. That pretty much says it all right there.

David, that is because unlike Earl, Shane has CLASS! He will not complain publicly, even though he feels totally disrespected by Earl, someone he thought was a friendly rival. Yes, Earl's behavior got to Shane. He is human after all, not a robot. All of you, ask yourself, would you play pool with someone who acted this way?

 

[Blackjack]

Split hairs all you want. Do I really need to point out all the other BS moves that were beatdown worthy in other poolrooms ?

I'll say this, both Justin & Schmidt commented openly that Earl sharks *every* time his opponent is shooting in his direction. Schmidt said something like "if other players did to earl what he does to them, he'd decapitate them".

You can even ask John Schmidt, in my avatar picture, Earl is sharking me. FWIW, I made the shot and smiled right at him.

 

[RobertR]

Shane's job is to get the balls in the holes, and he had a very tough time doing that. FWIW, I'm pretty sure Shane could give a rat's ass what Earl said or did. The man said "I can't beat him." He didn't cry foul or blame Earl, he placed the responsibility of the loss on his inability to deal with the table size and the table conditions. That pretty much says it all right there.

Yes, Shane had far too much class to say openly that Earl sharked him. That doesn't mean it didn't affect him.

I recall one point in the match where Shane was making a mini-comeback (won 4 in a row) and after earl hung up a ball, Shane had to WAIT 3 minutes for the ear muff demolition & cleanup. Shane may have been smiling on the outside, but was probably seething on the inside.

 

[master9baller]

Shane's play

Besides playing badly and dogging several easy balls (even on this table), the worst part of shane's game was the mental aspects. All he needed was to with a few more games to put pressure on Earl. Day three he gave away 6-7 easy games as he was running out, leaving 2-3 balls on the table. He was in stroke for a game or two, but then missed and fell apart again and again.

 

[Blackjack]

David, that is because unlike Earl, Shane has CLASS! He will not complain publicly, even though he feels totally disrespected by Earl, someone he thought was a friendly rival. Yes, Earl's behavior got to Shane. He is human after all, not a robot. All of you, ask yourself, would you play pool with someone who acted this way?

Jay,

IMO, Shane just wasn't feeling it. The last time I saw Shane play that bad was at the 2007 World 10 Ball in Jacksonville. He played a horrible match against Danny Harriman and Danny just tore through him like a hot knife through butter. It was hard to watch, and I remember telling Jerry Forsyth that Shane wouldn't lose another match - and he didn't.

FWIW, Shane pulled it together and went on to win the tournament.

This is just a bump in the road for him. Shane knew who and what he was up against. Everybody that's played Earl know how he acts and what he says - you can either let it get to you, or you can learn to ignore it. Of course Earl pisses everybody off, but Shane has said himself that he was just outplayed this past weekend.

 

[Mr Hoppe]

On day 1, Earl was definitely acting up and it was hard to watch. However, once he put those earmuffs on for days 2 & 3, I think there were hardly any antics. Shane didn't manage to overcome Earl's 11 game day one lead in the next 65 games over two days. I think we saw who was the better player on that equipment, on that weekend. End of story.

 

[xianmacx]

I haven't really heard anyone mention the rules as part of the equation.

I think the atypical rules played a bigger part in the outcome than most think. I think the whole, shoot again if you miss, rule would make a guy gunshy on marginal shots. I think if it was more standard 10 ball rules, Shane would have gotten closer, probably still not won though.

 

[12squared]

Simple question. But without the antics could SVB have beaten Earl?

Hard to know, the 1st day was brutal for Shane as Earl went ballistic from the gun, even threatening to quit when it 4-3 or 4-4. And it only got worse. Earl acted like a spoiled little kid the whole day: throwing things; slamming his stuff on the ground; talking and moving when Shane was shooting; slamming his fists on the table; berating the crowd; on & on...it never ended.

And, that stool they made Shane sit in was a joke in my opinion, he never looked comfortable. Sheesh, they play 7-8 hours a day and make him sit in the kiddy chair - classless.

Maybe if the 1st day was different, Shane may have adapted to the table better an got into a rhythm like he did the 2nd day to get within 5. We'll never know.

With that said, Earl played great & outplayed Shane, but we will never know if you were to take away the baby Earl factor if things would have been different. It was sure entertaining though.

Thanks TAR!

Dave

 

[cory bourque]

Simple question.

No doubt Earl played good and beat Shane. The question is though....
If Earl hadn't played up the antics the way he did.... would Shane have beaten him?

Earl still had the advantage on that table... no doubt.

But without the antics could SVB have beaten Earl?

all i can say is bet more an see what happens!!!!! JUST SAYING...

 

[mosconiac]

FWIW, I think these antics are (partially) an act to weaken the opponent's resolve. Whether you want to argue that Earl does it intentionally or subconsciously, he acts that way on purpose.

Did anyone else notice how Earl was chummy with SVB until they lagged. Laughing, joking, "we're friends"....shake hands & lag...Earl immediately started in with the crowd & even hit himself in the head by game 2.

I also noticed that Earl would saunter (slowly) back to his seat after missing & slam his cue around and toss chalk/muffs/ass-weights while SVB was attempting to shoot. Especially when SVB was aiming in his direction.

Standing to the side of the table to monitor the CB while SVB broke is just another tactic.

In the end, Earl was the beneficiary of LOTS of turn-overs with 2, 3, & 4 balls on the table. That doesn't mean Earl wasn't running out, he played great! Couple his great play with gobs of late-rack turn-overs & he couldn't lose.

JMHO...1) if Earl acted like a pro, the match would have been very close. 2) SVB isn't a runaway favorite in this game.

 

[stick8]

earl-shane

Simple question.

No doubt Earl played good and beat Shane. The question is though....
If Earl hadn't played up the antics the way he did.... would Shane have beaten him?

Earl still had the advantage on that table... no doubt.

But without the antics could SVB have beaten Earl?

why do people start threads like this?? earl just handed shane his ass, and shane took it like a mad. END OF STORY!!!!:angry: