Strickland - The greatest ever

[macneilb]

You can like Earl all you want. I do as well. But nahhh lol... Sigel was the better player.

You do not win over 100 major titles without firepower and consistency friend. Actually you really would not even be considered a straight pool player without consistency and firepower. And Mike was a world champion at that as well. As Irving Crane once said, probably the best at it. Mike had it all. Knowledge, Wisdom of the games, Safeties, Breaks, Shot making beyond belief, Made the toughest under pressure shots as good as anyone I have seen, and even lucky. :thumbup:

I can see you are a huge Sigel fan..didn't mean to hit a nerve lol. We all have our favorites. Earl isn't mine, but I respect what he's accomplished. Like I said, Mike is one of the all time greats. No one can or will ever deny that. I also never said he didn't have firepower, he absolutely does...he's a world champion. I just don't think he had firepower like Earl - and I don't think anyone who watched both play in their primes will contest that. Jay, Brumback, and many others pros or have been around a long time agree on that one. When you watched Earl play in dead punch, no other player made it look as easy. It's hard to word it any other way than that. Best comparison I can think of is Matlock on a bartable...that pure dominate-the-table style of play. I agree that Mike is/was absolutely a more well rounded game player, but tournament 9 ball...no one ran people over as often and with as much authority as Earl. As for the last part..making the toughest shots under pressure? Start a poll for best shot maker under pressure - Earl vs. Sigel. I think Earl *may* win

 

[flyvirginiaguy]

I can see you are a huge Sigel fan..didn't mean to hit a nerve lol. We all have our favorites. Earl isn't mine, but I respect what he's accomplished. Like I said, Mike is one of the all time greats. No one can or will ever deny that. I also never said he didn't have firepower, he absolutely does...he's a world champion. I just don't think he had firepower like Earl - and I don't think anyone who watched both play in their primes will contest that. Jay, Brumback, and many others pros or have been around a long time agree on that one. When you watched Earl play in dead punch, no other player made it look as easy. It's hard to word it any other way than that. Best comparison I can think of is Matlock on a bartable...that pure dominate-the-table style of play. I agree that Mike is/was absolutely a more well rounded game player, but tournament 9 ball...no one ran people over as often and with as much authority as Earl. As for the last part..making the toughest shots under pressure? Start a poll for best shot maker under pressure - Earl vs. Sigel. I think Earl *may* win

I am a fan of many players. Mike, Nick, Efren, Buddy, and many others. I think Earl is a great great player as well, no one could argue that. And he is very explosive, that's no secret. I just give due credit where credit is due.

But you are comparing things in your mind. I am comparing reality. Mike's record against Strickland's. Even against one another. And that with Mike in and out of pool during Earl's greatest times. I remember Sigel getting out of pool quite a bit after the Brunswick endorsements etc... in 88-89.

And in one particular gambling session, that Earl spoke of in his video, where Mike had him stuck 100K at 50K a set. I would really like to hear Mike's side of that story personally. Mike come away with 50K, but I would like to hear how it went down from both sides. I would also like to know if this went down in the early 80s or 90s. Because if it went down in the 90s, this was a time Sigel was in pool with a lot less regularity than the 80s. Thus, if it did happen in the 90s and Sigel come away with 50K, imagine what the early 80s would have been like for Earl in that match.

But I certainly do wish Mike would have played much longer, and with more regularity in the 90s, and into the 00s, his record would probably be double what it is now, as great as it is. And pool has been without one of it's biggest draws for a long time. I have not heard Grady Matthews tell to many people (with such reverence), thanks for making our sport so much greater, but he did say that about Mike.

 

[JohnnyP]

I can't remember where I read it, but that was the first time Sigel had met Strickland. It was played in a barn over three days.

Found a match between the two from 1993, Billy and Mark Wilson commentating:
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNTQwMjU1NzMy.html

 

[troro]

Great match, both fantastic players. Hard to argue who the greatest is, guys this talented can win on any given day.

 

[JohnnyP]

The sidebar has a three part match of The Miz vs Earl, but I can't find part one:

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNTAwNjMzMjQw.html

Wow, only 49 views?

The uploader is "nutcasenyc". I see he has uploaded some from Steinway, maybe we can get him to post the link to part one.

 

[flyvirginiaguy]

Great match, both fantastic players. Hard to argue who the greatest is, guys this talented can win on any given day.

Yes, I have this match from accustats. It is pretty good. I love all the classic matches. Nick back then is great to watch as well. Nick kinda took over a bit in 89-90 after Mike departed pool off and on for the rest of his career really.

But the point being, Mike's game went down a bit after 88, due to not being around the pro tour as much. This was a pretty clear fact back then. I believe it is even mentioned by Mark or Incardona in this particular match. And yet he still has the winning record against Strickland in the 90s.

Again, credit where credit is due.

 

[richiebalto]

I will give you a little advantage in the debate. Mike got out of pool around 89ish, when he signed on with Brunswick to do exhibitions etc... Earl's prime was early 90ish and into the 90s. So, go to Earl's prime years, and see what his record is against Mike Sigel. Even after a 5 year hiatus from pool, Mike's record against Earl is history, go discover it...



That is really saying something. 20 years after Mike basically retired from pool, Earl still is not the most winningest player in pool, Mike Sigel is. You could say Mike spotted him 20 years heh... Besides pool really does not pay enough to hold the attention of some of the great players, so that certainly is no way to judge who is the best. Also, you got a long road to haul to consider Earl's career wins against Mike's career wins, in what suppose to be "Earl's" game, 9 ball. 9 ball is not even Mike's best game, yet he has the better record. If we bring straight pool into the mix, it would be a slaughter...

Mike is the better 14.1 player, but he doesnt have to beat Earl, remember Earl high run is over 400 or is it 3 something, what ever it is, when you can run that many no one has to beat you!

So what does that say about Earl, he has a much higher run then Sigel playing 14.1 and that wasnt his best game either!

 

[richiebalto]

z

We certainly agree.

I have been playing and watching pool since around 10 (now 39), and I have never since Mike's time seen anyone so powerful in their game. When it was big money on the line, there was NO other I would have put my money on. Playing the toughest shots in pool like they were hangers for the big cash. The more money and prestige on the line, the better he played, period. There was no beating himself up, throwing attitude, whimpering, he just won.

You cant be serious are you, When Cigar Tom Vanover had Sigel dead beat in the Maryland state finals in the 80s, Sigel was crying like a baby and then some, then Sigel got a crazy roll and every thing was fine!

Mike the mouth, you must of never seen Sigel play much, He was AWESOM when he was winning, but didnt take to losing very well!

 

[Rico]

the best?

It needs to be clarified tourn. play or gambling. For the cash Jose Parica and Buddy are in a class of their own. Even tourns i believe Buddy won like 18 in a row.Gambling for the cash bet high enough they might make Parica wake up.Saw Jose give John Kacuro the 7&8 at the cue club for 5000 after John beat him in the Reno tourn ouch .

 

[flyvirginiaguy]

You cant be serious are you, When Cigar Tom Vanover had Sigel dead beat in the Maryland state finals in the 80s, Sigel was crying like a baby and then some, then Sigel got a crazy roll and every thing was fine!

Mike the mouth, you must of never seen Sigel play much, He was AWESOM when he was winning, but didnt take to losing very well!

So, what does this have to do with anything? No one wins all the time. And you don't think Earl cried and moaned when he has been down at times? They expect better of themselves.

But regardless, do you think Vanover would like to have played Sigel steadily over a course of say a year? :lol: But you have proven nothing except Sigel beat him, even on a bad day. And yes, I have watched him play quite a number of times.

 

[flyvirginiaguy]

Mike is the better 14.1 player, but he doesnt have to beat Earl, remember Earl high run is over 400 or is it 3 something, what ever it is, when you can run that many no one has to beat you!

So what does that say about Earl, he has a much higher run then Sigel playing 14.1 and that wasnt his best game either!

And Strickland won a world straight pool title when? I would not even bring up straight pool. as it would start to dig a deep hole.

 

[sciarco]

Earl Strickland may have a bad attitude but he's the best .

 

[macneilb]

I am a fan of many players. Mike, Nick, Efren, Buddy, and many others. I think Earl is a great great player as well, no one could argue that. And he is very explosive, that's no secret. I just give due credit where credit is due.

But you are comparing things in your mind. I am comparing reality. Mike's record against Strickland's. Even against one another. And that with Mike in and out of pool during Earl's greatest times. I remember Sigel getting out of pool quite a bit after the Brunswick endorsements etc... in 88-89.

And in one particular gambling session, that Earl spoke of in his video, where Mike had him stuck 100K at 50K a set. I would really like to hear Mike's side of that story personally. Mike come away with 50K, but I would like to hear how it went down from both sides. I would also like to know if this went down in the early 80s or 90s. Because if it went down in the 90s, this was a time Sigel was in pool with a lot less regularity than the 80s. Thus, if it did happen in the 90s and Sigel come away with 50K, imagine what the early 80s would have been like for Earl in that match.

But I certainly do wish Mike would have played much longer, and with more regularity in the 90s, and into the 00s, his record would probably be double what it is now, as great as it is. And pool has been without one of it's biggest draws for a long time. I have not heard Grady Matthews tell to many people (with such reverence), thanks for making our sport so much greater, but he did say that about Mike.

I am comparing things with reality. Earl is generally considered the greatest 9ball tournament player of all time, and probably greatest shotmaker the game has produced. That is a generally accepted consensus among pros and long time fans. Reality: he won the U.S. Open 5 times. Mike has won it 3 times. You can always say "well if Mike didn't leave pool, he would have won it 20x....etc." The reality is he didn't, and he didn't. Mike may have never won it again. Only way to have proved it is to have done it. Mike may have a winning record against Earl, does that make Mike a better player? Not in my opinion. Earl has run 400+ ball in straight pool...does that make him a better (or even equal) 14.1 player compared to Sigel? Hell no. Sigel is the greater straight pool player all day. It's about the overall accomplishments over the span of a career, and Earl's career has been longer and more decorated. He's been winning tournaments and running over the highest level of competition here and abroad 20 years longer. That is the bottom line.

That is really saying something. 20 years after Mike basically retired from pool, Earl still is not the most winningest player in pool, Mike Sigel is.

If pool has a "winningest player"...it is probably Efren...

 

[markgw]

I am a fan of many players. Mike, Nick, Efren, Buddy, and many others. I think Earl is a great great player as well, no one could argue that. And he is very explosive, that's no secret. I just give due credit where credit is due.

But you are comparing things in your mind. I am comparing reality. Mike's record against Strickland's. Even against one another. And that with Mike in and out of pool during Earl's greatest times. I remember Sigel getting out of pool quite a bit after the Brunswick endorsements etc... in 88-89.

And in one particular gambling session, that Earl spoke of in his video, where Mike had him stuck 100K at 50K a set. I would really like to hear Mike's side of that story personally. Mike come away with 50K, but I would like to hear how it went down from both sides. I would also like to know if this went down in the early 80s or 90s. Because if it went down in the 90s, this was a time Sigel was in pool with a lot less regularity than the 80s. Thus, if it did happen in the 90s and Sigel come away with 50K, imagine what the early 80s would have been like for Earl in that match.

But I certainly do wish Mike would have played much longer, and with more regularity in the 90s, and into the 00s, his record would probably be double what it is now, as great as it is. And pool has been without one of it's biggest draws for a long time. I have not heard Grady Matthews tell to many people (with such reverence), thanks for making our sport so much greater, but he did say that about Mike.

I have heard a slightly different account of this gambling match with Sigel vs Earl from Bill Incardona on an accu-stats commentary. The way he tells the story is Sigel played Earl a marathon for big money. After 20 plus hours Sigel wanted to quit because he was tired. Strickland was angry and said you can't quit me winner!! Sigel said I will come back and play you tomorrow, I just need to go rest. Strickland said I'm not gonna play anyone who quits me winner and they never gambled again. That is Incardona's version. Also Billy said the pool table was set up in a barn)))

 

[flyvirginiaguy]

If pool has a "winningest player"...it is probably Efren...

Probably? Why not do a little homework concerning it, then you would know who the winnegest player is. It does not make much sense to post well "probably" so and so...

And to let you in on a little something about the Open. Sigel had won it two times before the name change to the "US Open", same tournament. So Mike has actually won that same tournament 5 times. Shall we start listing numbers of tournaments Mike has won that Earl has not? Because this is the example you are giving me.

But again, Sigel came away with 50K of Earl's money, and has the winning record against Strickland in tournament play, and not by the smallest of margins.
So, in the head, you can think as you wish. I stick to facts. If I beat you at pool 8 out of 10 times, would that make me the better player? How else are you going to judge it? heh... You can't judge it by how you "feel".

And speaking of Efren, ask him who he thinks the better player is.

 

[Wedge]

SIgels US Open Victories

Probably? Why not do a little homework concerning it, then you would know who the winnegest player is. It does not make much sense to post well "probably" so and so...

And to let you in on a little something about the Open. Sigel had won it two times before the name change to the "US Open", same tournament. So Mike has actually won that same tournament 5 times. Shall we start listing numbers of tournaments Mike has won that Earl has not? Because this is the example you are giving me.

But again, Sigel came away with 50K of Earl's money, and has the winning record against Strickland in tournament play, and not by the smallest of margins.
So, in the head, you can think as you wish. I stick to facts. If I beat you at pool 8 out of 10 times, would that make me the better player? How else are you going to judge it? heh... You can't judge it by how you "feel".

And speaking of Efren, ask him who he thinks the better player is.

Funny you should mention Mike's 2 other US Open's. I was talking with him a month or so back and he mentioned he won the prior 2 of Barry's US Opens under another tournament name and Barry refused to recognize them. Mike was 20 years old when he won his "Unofficial First" and 22 when he one the first recognized US Open in 1976. If Barry would have counted the first 2 he won 3 in a row!!

 

[markgw]

I am comparing things with reality. Earl is generally considered the greatest 9ball tournament player of all time, and probably greatest shotmaker the game has produced. That is a generally accepted consensus among pros and long time fans. Reality: he won the U.S. Open 5 times. Mike has won it 3 times. You can always say "well if Mike didn't leave pool, he would have won it 20x....etc." The reality is he didn't, and he didn't. Mike may have never won it again. Only way to have proved it is to have done it. Mike may have a winning record against Earl, does that make Mike a better player? Not in my opinion. Earl has run 400+ ball in straight pool...does that make him a better (or even equal) 14.1 player compared to Sigel? Hell no. Sigel is the greater straight pool player all day. It's about the overall accomplishments over the span of a career, and Earl's career has been longer and more decorated. He's been winning tournaments and running over the highest level of competition here and abroad 20 years longer. That is the bottom line.





If pool has a "winningest player"...it is probably Efren...

Strickland has only played in one 14.1 tournament called the Maine Event in Portland Maine in 1995, up until possibly the last couple years. I know he did play Johnny Archer 14.1 in a challlenge match called Bad Blood a few short years back. That was one of the disciplines in which he had 2 innings at the table running 143 his second inning I believe and winning. Mike Sigel was a 14.1 specialist. Earl didn't play 14.1, he plays the rotation games. Earl does however have a high run of 408, because of his ability...

 

[richiebalto]

Strickland has only played in one 14.1 tournament called the Maine Event in Portland Maine in 1995, up until possibly the last couple years. I know he did play Johnny Archer 14.1 in a challlenge match called Bad Blood a few short years back. That was one of the disciplines in which he had 2 innings at the table running 143 his second inning I believe and winning. Mike Sigel was a 14.1 specialist. Earl didn't play 14.1, he plays the rotation games. Earl does however have a high run of 408, because of his ability...

408, THAT IS AMAZING, of all the best 14.1 players of all time, i would have to believe that there is not more then 5 players with a run as high as earls or higher.

And as we all know, 14.1 is not Earls choice of game!

What if it were, Earl would more then probably of beat Mosconi record run!

 

[markgw]

408, THAT IS AMAZING, of all the best 14.1 players of all time, i would have to believe that there is not more then 5 players with a run as high as earls or higher.

And as we all know, 14.1 is not Earls choice of game!

What if it were, Earl would more then probably of beat Mosconi record run!

I believe if somebody said the first player to beat Mosconi's record will receive a check for one million dollars, you might have a better chance at seeing the record broken. I don't believe there is enough insentive for a lot of players to try to break the run. Not to mention 526 is going to be a tough nut to crack!!! That's a hell of a lot of breakballs to get on, and a boatload of things have to go right:grin-square::grin-square::grin-square:

 

[macneilb]

Probably? Why not do a little homework concerning it, then you would know who the winnegest player is. It does not make much sense to post well "probably" so and so...

And to let you in on a little something about the Open. Sigel had won it two times before the name change to the "US Open", same tournament. So Mike has actually won that same tournament 5 times. Shall we start listing numbers of tournaments Mike has won that Earl has not? Because this is the example you are giving me.

But again, Sigel came away with 50K of Earl's money, and has the winning record against Strickland in tournament play, and not by the smallest of margins.
So, in the head, you can think as you wish. I stick to facts. If I beat you at pool 8 out of 10 times, would that make me the better player? How else are you going to judge it? heh... You can't judge it by how you "feel".

And speaking of Efren, ask him who he thinks the better player is.

It still doesn't change the fact that Mike hasn't done much in the last 20 years. Earl has. Earl is still competing with and beating champions. Yes, Mike's accomplishments are legendary. No one will dispute that he is one of the all time greats, but he left the game early. Doesn't really matter the reason. Like I said, greatness is determined by the span of your career, and Earl has been playing at the highest level for 30+ years and continues to beat champions at 52 years old. That, to me, makes him greater than Mike.

Efren has credited several people as being the toughest he's played in different interviews throughout his career...Sigel..Buddy Hall..Nick Varner. The guy plays alot of tough people lol

Best person to ask would be Jay as he's watched them both play more than anybody. However, we can agree to disagree