Well I am someone that raised the question in this thread. I also said he seems like a fine young man & offered congratulations on his win. He is a classy young guy & he may very well have a big table game but he needs to establish that. His history is dominance on a box & I don't feel it's negative to point that out. To some that's an asterisk, I'm one of those, I've given comparisons in my 1st post & I stand by them. You don't see large packages on big tables like on BB's nor do you see balls hit the rail 2 diamonds up get in the hole on large tables. All congrats in the world for his win, he's a nice guy & all that but dominate on a big table and you'll get everyone's attention, it's just the way it is. BB's should be reserved for bars, APA leagues & the like, not for judging champion caliber play, it's simply a different game. Sorry not sorry.
Really?
For nearly a decade, Dave Matlock had a standing offer to play him on BB table for $10K.
For almost all that tried that they didn't like it. But as the champions here noted "almost anyone can get out all the time". Apparently, the champions of Matlock's era wasn't as strong as the today...

.
As far as a different game, I tend to agree. But so is 9 ball verses 10 ball, verses banks, verses 1 pocket verses snooker verses ..... Champions in each of those may or may not be as strong in another "game", but that doesn't mean anyone should discount a tournament win. IMO, it makes you look petty.
To me, for ANYONE on here to say, "Yeah old Skyler won but it was bar box so it doesn't mean much", it a low class backhand.
For me, as a fan, and enthusiast, let me watch Sklyer, Landon, Justin, and all the other classy young guns.
And you can deal with the Rodney's and Earls.
IMO, the right thing to say, "Congratulations Skyler."
Best of rolls to all,
Ken