This is about Shane

corvette1340 said:
No, tourneys like this are structured for maximum viewing pleasure and not to decide who is the better player. The majority of the players want longer races with winner breaks. It's already been pointed out that a lot were in agreement of this directly after the tourney. It's a crapshoot the way the format is now. To try and explain it any differently shows your lack of comprehension. I don't begrudge you guys for it because I now understand it's simply above your intelligence level.
Click to expand...

Wrong again seems to be a theme of yours ,, no pool tourneys are structured for the viewer ,, and certainly not to bare out who the best player is ,, they are structured to have one person standing at the end after a reasonable test of all around skill in a reasonable amount of time,,
I know this is a concept that you can't grasp ,,
Races to 9, 11 and 13 provide that ,, the only ones that seem to be crying are Shane fans


1
 
Last edited:
corvette1340 said:
This statement right here shows that you'll never understand the term no matter what juvenile terms I explain it in.
Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic. Variance has zero to do with him dogging that out

Therefore you can't only blame variance for his loss.
 
one stroke said:
Wrong again seems to be a theme of yours ,, no pool tourneys are structured for the viewer ,, and certainly not to bare out who the best player is ,, they are structured to have one person standing at the end after a reasonable test of all around skill in a reasonable amount of time,,
I know this is a concept that you can't grasp ,,
Races to 9, 11 and 13 provide that ,, the only ones that seem to be crying are Shane fans


1
Click to expand...

They only cry about tournament format when Shane loses. The W9-Ball is the most recent example, before his match with Yu Lung and when Shane was on a winning streak, not one of them complained. :thumbup:
 
one stroke said:
Wrong again seems to be a theme of yours ,, no pool tourneys are structured for the viewer ,, and certainly not to bare out who the best player is ,, they are structured to have one person standing at the end after a reasonable test of all around skill in a reasonable amount of time,,
I know this is a concept that you can't grasp ,,
Races to 9, 11 and 13 provide that ,, the only ones that seem to be crying are Shane fans


1
Click to expand...

No one is crying. Just explaining the facts that tournaments are not set up to determine the best player. If they were then all players would play all other players. Tournaments are set up to provide entertainment and random matchups in a short space of time. The professional players have very little say in how tournaments are structured so they simply have to accept the conditions and hope that they both play good AND get the rolls.

No one will win a world championship playing badly on luck alone. And no one in the history of pocket billiards has ever won a World 9 Ball title without getting fortunate rolls throughout the event - some of which could have easily turned a spot in the finals into an early trip home but for a fraction of an inch.

That's the drama in the game. A pro has to overcome a lot to hoist the trophy and all those variables don't always align for whomever is a heavy contender for the title.

Of course one can really go deep and analyze the unforced errors vs. rolls and of course those unforced errors are often also pivotal. We can play if/then scenarios all day.

The only constant is that in LONG RACES in ten ball, which the pros consider the better game to test pros, Shane is far and away the best against WORLD CLASS competitors. He has proven that beyond any doubt to the people who matter most, his peers.
 
TheThaiger said:
And who, outside of your own mind, would be interested in such a thing? :confused:
Click to expand...

There's an easy answer to this, it's a no brainer<<<< NO ONE. No European player is going to get in the box with Shane Van Boening. The stars haven't lined up for him in the world tournament yet but I'm sure they will eventually. The only time I've ever beaten people I'm not supposed to beat were in short race formats. Put me in with one of those players in a race to 25 or even 15 and I have no chance. What Euro would you stake against SVB, just curious and I am sure they are too:thumbup:
 
TheThaiger said:
And who, outside of your own mind, would be interested in such a thing? :confused:
Click to expand...

There's an easy answer to this, it's a no brainer<<<< NO ONE. No European player is going to get in the box with Shane Van Boening. The stars haven't lined up for him in the world tournament yet but I'm sure they will eventually. The only time I've ever beaten people I'm not supposed to beat were in short race formats. Put me in with one of those players in a race to 25 or even 15 and I have no chance, just ask Nick. What Euro would you stake against SVB, just curious and I am sure they are too:thumbup:
 
strokin'myshaft said:
They only cry about tournament format when Shane loses. The W9-Ball is the most recent example, before his match with Yu Lung and when Shane was on a winning streak, not one of them complained. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

I am not complaining. Everyone knows the format and that one "bad" match and it's over. Same thing applies to every player.

We - count me among Shane fans - are only explaining that Shane has the same odds to win as any other top player - say that there are 20 players with a real chance to win based on their skill out of the final 64 and the other 44 are capable of beating ANY top 20 player in any given set to 11..... well that is where the odds are slim that any of those 20 players will win it. They all face tough opponents in short sets.

Which means they must not only play well, BUT also get the rolls.

All the times Efren said he was lucky to win after a big event......he was right.....on top of of incredible skill a player MUST get lucky rolls to win a short set event.
 
JB Cases said:
We - count me among Shane fans - are only explaining that Shane has the same odds to win as any other top player - say that there are 20 players with a real chance to win based on their skill out of the final 64 and the other 44 are capable of beating ANY top 20 player in any given set to 11..... well that is where the odds are slim that any of those 20 players will win it. They all face tough opponents in short sets.
Click to expand...

What kind of length is reasonable in your mind? Is a 10 ball match winner breaks race to 11 too short ? Longer matches would be impossible imho for tournament play.... they would take waaaay too long. Even with a shot clock in place i think.
 
corvette1340 said:
No, tourneys like this are structured for maximum viewing pleasure and not to decide who is the better player.
Click to expand...

If tournaments were really structured to find out who the best player is, they would be reasonably long races in multiple formats, all around.

Since the real world has to intervene, and there are limits on time to actually finish these things, there will always be a format and/or race combination that can favor one player over another. Thing is, most of these guys are so good that the real thing is to master the format at hand, at that time.

Shane will win one someday. Likely more than one. Likely in the near future. Doesn't mean he's a lesser player, and it doesn't mean that Neils and the others at the top are lesser players cuz they don't play races to 100, either.
 
justadub said:
If tournaments were really structured to find out who the best player is, they would be reasonably long races in multiple formats, all around.

Since the real world has to intervene, and there are limits on time to actually finish these things, there will always be a format and/or race combination that can favor one player over another. Thing is, most of these guys are so good that the real thing is to master the format at hand, at that time.

Shane will win one someday. Likely more than one. Likely in the near future. Doesn't mean he's a lesser player, and it doesn't mean that Neils and the others at the top are lesser players cuz they don't play races to 100, either.
Click to expand...

Slight disagreement.

IF you have a player, any player, who stands up and says I will take on all comers and no one steps up....then that means that the other players don't like their chances because they don't feel as strong.

Ralf Souquet did put it to me this way though and it makes great sense.

He said tournaments ARE tougher than gambling or long races ONLY because you don't have time to find your stride. You have to bring your A-game right out of the gate every set because there is no second or third set to hit your gear.

And that I can respect tremendously. When it's crunch time you have to bring it regardless of how you got there.
 
Tiger is the best golfer but won't win every tourney, just like Shane is the best pool player but won't win everytime. But he's always right there in the mix.

Thats what makes these tourneys so exciting, you never know who's gonna win.
 
JB Cases said:
No one is crying. Just explaining the facts that tournaments are not set up to determine the best player. If they were then all players would play all other players. Tournaments are set up to provide entertainment and random matchups in a short space of time. The professional players have very little say in how tournaments are structured so they simply have to accept the conditions and hope that they both play good AND get the rolls.

No one will win a world championship playing badly on luck alone. And no one in the history of pocket billiards has ever won a World 9 Ball title without getting fortunate rolls throughout the event - some of which could have easily turned a spot in the finals into an early trip home but for a fraction of an inch.

That's the drama in the game. A pro has to overcome a lot to hoist the trophy and all those variables don't always align for whomever is a heavy contender for the title.

Of course one can really go deep and analyze the unforced errors vs. rolls and of course those unforced errors are often also pivotal. We can play if/then scenarios all day.

The only constant is that in LONG RACES in ten ball, which the pros consider the better game to test pros, Shane is far and away the best against WORLD CLASS competitors. He has proven that beyond any doubt to the people who matter most, his peers.
Click to expand...

Yes not in one tournament but when you take them all in consideration and take those finishes collectively then you most certainly come up with who the Best Tournament player is ,, you can also with in those determine who plays better or worse in bigger eor smaller events ,that's how you come up with rankings,

The sample size of Shane's long races on his tables is much to small to draw any conclusion other than he's a favorite on his home table ,, I'm pretty sure there are others who can set of their tables in their confront zone and enjoy similar success


1
 
JB Cases said:
Slight disagreement.

IF you have a player, any player, who stands up and says I will take on all comers and no one steps up....then that means that the other players don't like their chances because they don't feel as strong.

Ralf Souquet did put it to me this way though and it makes great sense.

He said tournaments ARE tougher than gambling or long races ONLY because you don't have time to find your stride. You have to bring your A-game right out of the gate every set because there is no second or third set to hit your gear.

And that I can respect tremendously. When it's crunch time you have to bring it regardless of how you got there.
Click to expand...

I agree and said what Ralf has said for yrs and many just don't see that light

1
 
If we're talking only about tournament results and not just wins. Then Shane is definitely the best player.
 
Shane finished fifth in China and fifth in Qatar. Did anyone finish ahead of him in China and Qatar was 1 through 4 all different names in each tournament?

So would Shane be master of the table if you included best finishes of all world tournaments for the year?

I do like how Derby city does that.
 
one stroke said:
Yes not in one tournament but when you take them all in consideration and take those finishes collectively then you most certainly come up with who the Best Tournament player is ,, you can also with in those determine who plays better or worse in bigger eor smaller events ,that's how you come up with rankings,

The sample size of Shane's long races on his tables is much to small to draw any conclusion other than he's a favorite on his home table ,, I'm pretty sure there are others who can set of their tables in their confront zone and enjoy similar success


1
Click to expand...

Like Nick the Greek? Oh wait, he got throttled 50-21 at his own room , on his own table, in his own country. It would be the same at any other spot in any other country against any other player. The only question is what would be the right number of games that Shane would need to spot for anyone to bet on the other guy.
 
Cardigan Kid said:
Shane finished fifth in China and fifth in Qatar. Did anyone finish ahead of him in China and Qatar was 1 through 4 all different names in each tournament?

So would Shane be master of the table if you included best finishes of all world tournaments for the year?

I do like how Derby city does that.
Click to expand...

Yu Lung would be your master of the table followed by Biado and then you have Shane in 3rd.
 
JD_Hogg said:
Tiger is the best golfer but won't win every tourney, just like Shane is the best pool player but won't win everytime. But he's always right there in the mix.

Thats what makes these tourneys so exciting, you never know who's gonna win.
Click to expand...

Tiger is no longer the best golfer but when he was, he won lots of majors.

I would compare Shane to Colin Montgomerie. A great player who absolutely destroyed the European Tour but never won a major championship. He finished 2nd in a major five different times. People tend to remember the fact he never won a major instead of his career as whole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top