Shane is not better than Earl

"without the roots, there would be no tree.....

jaybanthony said:
Just my opinion based on all the times i've watched them play. Earl plays better position, better cueball control, better safes and kicks better....as for shot making, I'd probably put them even at this point.......again, just my opinion. Feel different? let me know why.
Click to expand...

===========================================

....and don't get me talkin bout the Acorn

(that would all new school players,for those of you who cant keep up)
 
Another enlightening Earl thread. He certainly is an interesting one. We all know that he can still find a gear that is mind-bendingly strong. He just can't find that gear nearly as often as he did when he was in his prime.

I'd be genuinely happy for him if he snaps off something big in the next year, but have to wonder whether he still has the pedigree to beat champipon after champion aftr champion, as one must to win a major title.
 
The match on the stream just demonstrated why it is hard for Earl to win tournaments now. One, he isn't as good as his prime in terms of talent. Two, guys are just mentally tougher than him- especially Souquet. It seems like Ralf always beats him.
 
He's playing Shane next (Turning Stone) after losing 5 straight games to Ralf. Earl was up 6-4, and loses 9-6.
 
Also, I cannot believe they are going to put Shuff and Klatt on the stream instead of Earl-SVB. I know Earl doesn't want to be on the stream, but come on!
 
westcoast said:
Also, I cannot believe they are going to put Shuff and Klatt on the stream instead of Earl-SVB. I know Earl doesn't want to be on the stream, but come on!
Click to expand...

Just another reason to root for Shane in this match. Why should the game's fans be denied a chance to watch the most intriguing matchups in each round?

As usual, Earl puts himself above the interests of the fans and of those that sponsor the stream. After 140 racks on the TAR table, he suddenly can't handle being streamed.

Shuff/Klatt or Shane/Earl. No so tough to work out what the fans would like to see and what the sponsors of the stream would prefer.
 
sjm said:
Yes, especially those who played 60 years ago, when the governing bodies of the sport last thought such equipment to be appropriate for finding out who's the best.

Someone with a little more insight would say that a player that demands to have the equipment his way, the rules his way, the balls racked his way, and can't help but continually shark and show disrespect for his opponent knows just how little chance he'd have using standard euqipment, normal rules, balls racked the normal way, and sitting still and shutting up while his opponent shoots.
Click to expand...

OK I can over look a ton of assumptions and comments made from points not based in actual knowledge but the first statement is completely clueless....

The change in table size was not because they thought that the 9 foot tracks were appropriate but because of simple economics... Same reason you find bar box rooms now... smaller tables means you can stack more of them into a location and thereby increase revenue... This was why the 10footers slowly fell by the wayside... Fewer and fewer rooms had room for them so the demand fell to nothing...

Many of those 10ft champions looked on the change to 9footers exactly the same way that I would look at the US Open on being played on 7ft diamond bar boxes next year.... You shrink the table and you increase the number of players that can compete for a championship....

Earl owned Shane on the 10footer... The precision and power combo required on the 10ft track was just not something most players today will have without spending some serious practice time re-honing their skills.....

Pure talent with the cue Earl wins hands down... Talent is only part of the equation tho so for right now I think Shane may indeed be slightly better than Earl...

If Earl ever tames his demons tho all bets are off... No one would be better.....

Hell he might be 70 before that statement is no longer true.....
 
Celtic said:
I don't really care how good the guy plays if he is saying



he is clueless.

I have known alot of REALLY good pool players who are not that smart and simply have natural talent and the eyes for the game and who also don't have to worry about their brain getting in the way of their success, he sounds like one of them. Anyone who can watch Earl's pattern play and the way he shoots pool and could say the above seriously has no clue what they are talking about, whether they can shoot pool or not.
Click to expand...


Thank you...finally someone that makes sense!:thumbup:
You don't have to be Efren reyes to know when the game is being played well. Too many Earl haters in AZB
 
The Renfro said:
The change in table size was not because they thought that the 9 foot tracks were appropriate but because of simple economics...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the education. I didn't realize that.

What you say has some merit. Earl's weak mental composition holds back a player that still has a whole bunch of talent. Still, there's no reason to believe he'll ever conquer his demons. Sad but true.

His place in the annals of the game is assured, but Earl's day has passed. I'd love to see him win another significant event, but I don't see it happening. Hope I'm wrong!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDB
jaybanthony said:
Very well put, skill wise there is no comparison. I'm not knocking Shane I just don't believe he is as skilled as Earl, Even the Earl of today......Antics aside of course..........Did anyone see the whooping he put on Johnny at Turning stone yesterday?.......where's shane at?..:cool:
Click to expand...
Where's Shane at? Hmm, Shane just gave Earl a 9-4 thumping. :cool:
 
sjm said:
Just another reason to root for Shane in this match. Why should the game's fans be denied a chance to watch the most intriguing matchups in each round?

As usual, Earl puts himself above the interests of the fans and of those that sponsor the stream. After 140 racks on the TAR table, he suddenly can't handle being streamed.

Shuff/Klatt or Shane/Earl. No so tough to work out what the fans would like to see and what the sponsors of the stream would prefer.
Click to expand...

sjm -- I think it was Jerry Forsyth who said on the stream that, at Turning Stone, they have always given the players the right to decline to play on the streamed table. Of course, that can't be granted all the way to the end of the tournament. Apparently, Earl agreed to play on the streamed table if he made it to Sunday.

Shane beat Earl 9-4 tonight, knocking Earl out of the event, so we won't be seeing him.
 
The Renfro said:
The change in table size was not because they thought that the 9 foot tracks were appropriate but because of simple economics... Same reason you find bar box rooms now... smaller tables means you can stack more of them into a location and thereby increase revenue... This was why the 10footers slowly fell by the wayside... Fewer and fewer rooms had room for them so the demand fell to nothing..
Click to expand...

I agree with you on this Renfro but what the people making the decisions did not take into account was how the change to the smaller tables would affect the respect for the professional game that the fans had. I have seen really old footage of Ralph Greenleaf shooting pool on a 10-foot and not only was the table large, but the pockets were quite small. It looked like a tough table to shoot on. When pool was in it's golden era and when it had a decent following of fans and respect the game was played on tough equipment.

When they changed to the smaller tables for the sake of bars and pool rooms cramming more tables into a smaller space they should have had some forethrought on what that might do to the professional game as far as the spectators were concerned. Generally speaking people don't want to watch professional calibre players play sports on amatuer level fields. They want the pro sized baseball fields, they want the Augusta level difficulty courses, and when pool went and changed things they screwed up because they changed the tables the pro's played on in essence destroyed the respect for what the pro's were doing out there.

The 10-foot tables never should have been removed from the pro level of competition. If the pool rooms wanted 9-foot table they can go ahead and put them in instead of 10-foots, but the tables the pros played on should have remained 10-foots. Pretty much exactly at the same time they changed the table size the professional pool game started to lose it's fanbase and attraction as a spectator sport. Is it a coincidence? I am not so sure.

Economics in the pool hall industry might have said "go to smaller tables" and that is great for the pool halls, they can go ahead and do that. But economics for the professional ranks relies on fans and spectators and when they changed to the smaller talbes they lost a slew of their fanbase and pool went underground and has remained their ever since. IMO pool at the pro level would have ALOT more money in it today had they stuck with 10-foot tables at the pro ranks for the last 50 years.
 
sjm said:
Yes, especially those who played 60 years ago, when the governing bodies of the sport last thought such equipment to be appropriate for finding out who's the best.

Someone with a little more insight would say that a player that demands to have the equipment his way, the rules his way, the balls racked his way, and can't help but continually shark and show disrespect for his opponent knows just how little chance he'd have using standard euqipment, normal rules, balls racked the normal way, and sitting still and shutting up while his opponent shoots.
Click to expand...

oh come on, how do you really feel??/ Stop holding back!! LOL!
 
Re: the comments about the 7' tables, I think another factor is they
generally play easier (bigger pockets) so the turn over is greater.
A lot of the 7' players would struggle on a tight 9' table.
Remember we're talking the average player who shoots once a week or so not the die hards.

I enjoy watching both Earl and Shane play, really don't like it when Earl gives up, JMO.
 
Earl better in his day

jaybanthony said:
Just my opinion based on all the times i've watched them play. Earl plays better position, better cueball control, better safes and kicks better....as for shot making, I'd probably put them even at this point.......again, just my opinion. Feel different? let me know why.
Click to expand...

Earl might have been better in his day than Shane is now. In fact, the Earl of 20-30 year ago could maybe spot today's Shane the last two or maybe the call 8.

Earl might be the best 9 ball player ever. But that was back in the day. Now Earl can't stick with Shane. Not because of his playing abilities but because of the mental side of the game. Shane is just mentally tougher. That is a huge part of the game.

As far as wanting to watch them play, I would 10 times rather watch Earl play than Shane. Earl always made it look easy and natural. Like he was born and raised on a pool table.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top