Not on the pro level. Lol. But yes
Can someone explain shot to me?
- Thread starter Positively Ralf
- Start date
Not on the pro level. Lol. But yes
Not necessarily. I have seen guys slop in the 9 and it was their only shot that game. But, what does any of that have to do with whether Sigel was going for that shot or not?
If all I do is troll, the troll patrol should be comforted by the fact that I've only posted in 10 threads so far in 2016! .....and Neil! Jeeze! I haven't made the veins stick out in your neck by talking about T.O.I. In any of 'em!
Alright all.....I wouldn't have posted anything if I didn't read Ghost Ball write that Sigel said making the 8 was his backup plan. Then I watched it closely. Play it in slow motion. See if you don't think Sigel intended for those 2 balls to be heading towards the end rail hugging each other in that exact position, with the ball behind spinning clockwise.
Stop the video as the balls are halfway to the rail. Pretend you haven't seen the outcome yet. Try and predict what's gonna happen when they hit the end rail. Remember; the ball behind has clockwise spin on it. I really can't see how posters with a high level of skill and experience aren't saying to themselves......"HOLY COW!"
So is anyone gonna say that Sigel got lucky when those 2 balls decided to take off towards the end rail hugging each other in that position, with the ball behind spinning clockwise. You don't think Sigel deliberately sent them down the table in that manner?
How much do you suppose Sigel gets for the highlight reel shot vs winning the tournament? I suppose if he made double off of that one shot than he gets for winning the tournament then I guess I have to agree with you. That was 1988 ? Wasn't that before the inter-web? My guess is if that shot is replayed on a highlight reel most people will think he got lucky on that shot, especially because everyone's social circle was extremely small back then compared to now with us having the privilege of debating this shot not only with people at the pool hall but also people on the other side of the globe. For Sigel to be concerned with a highlight reel shot I think he would have had to have the vision to foresee the invention of the inter-web on that very day also besides the outcome of that shot.
Can someone explain shot to me?
He simply played the ball he struck first into the corner, and added extreme topspin to button hook and slice the eight in the same corner. The extreme top was simply to warp the angle and avoid the scratch. He was playing the eight, just not with a "High Top Triple kiss". The triple kiss was luck, but he was probably trying to slice the eight as a backup. The reason in attempting it this way is because it simply has the highest likelihood of avoiding a scratch while pocketing his primary target.
He simply played the ball he struck first into the corner, and added extreme topspin to button hook and slice the eight in the same corner. The extreme top was simply to warp the angle and avoid the scratch. He was playing the eight, just not with a "High Top Triple kiss". The triple kiss was luck, but he was probably trying to slice the eight as a backup. The reason in attempting it this way is because it simply has the highest likelihood of avoiding a scratch while pocketing his primary target.
So much misinformation in this thread.
He's playing the 4 in the top right corner. He's using follow to rub off the 8 ball, and go two rails to play the 5 in the bottom left. It's the right shot, if you're in stroke, and can hit the shot. Drawing off the 8 brings the side pocket into play. I trust Mike, one of the best straight pool players ever, to judge the carom off the 8 ball. It's basically a breakout ball that's close to the rack. He just hit the 4 thick, and managed to ride the 8 in. He had absolutely no intention of caroming the 8 in. If you've ever seen Mike fluke a ball, he has a certain reaction. He has the same reaction here. When he's shooting one of his "highlight reel" shots, he's usually doing running commentary while he's at the table. He knows he shit the 8 in.
He's playing the 4 in the top right corner. He's using follow to rub off the 8 ball, and go two rails to play the 5 in the bottom left. It's the right shot, if you're in stroke, and can hit the shot. Drawing off the 8 brings the side pocket into play. I trust Mike, one of the best straight pool players ever, to judge the carom off the 8 ball. It's basically a breakout ball that's close to the rack. He just hit the 4 thick, and managed to ride the 8 in. He had absolutely no intention of caroming the 8 in. If you've ever seen Mike fluke a ball, he has a certain reaction. He has the same reaction here. When he's shooting one of his "highlight reel" shots, he's usually doing running commentary while he's at the table. He knows he shit the 8 in.
Wrong.........
Oh boy Elroy, if you had any idea of Mike Sigel's personality, you would recognize my post was a joke. Sigel happens to be most cockiest SOB on earth, he gives Kanye West the 7 ball and the breaks when it comes to being conceited.
But, you certainly made this thread very funny. :thumbup:
I knew SOMEONE was joking. I thought it may have been one of those things where he turned to the crowd and said, "Dat's exactly how I planned it. Puuurrrrfect", the way only Mike can do it.
Lol. Love it!
When posting in this thread, I think I violated a rule I made for myself about a year ago. I told myself anytime I had an idea that I believed other posters might find a bit " Off the wall," wait a day before scribbling!
As Ronnie O'Sullivan was quoted saying in a "New Yorker magazine profile a few years ago, "It's a f*****g eccentric game!" Yep...goes for pool too! Yesterday I wrote a post for this thread where I speculated that when Sigel got down on that shot, got up, and got down again, he was struggling with what his conscious mind was telling him vs. what his subconscious mind was telling him. I went into detail with my speculations too.
For some damn reason, when I was through writing and I pushed " Submit," some kind of error message appeared and I lost the whole post. It never appeared in the thread. A day later, after recalling what I wrote, I'm thanking God for his intervention. He must think I'm on enough posters " Ignore " list already!
So....please allow me to make one last "Go" at Sigel's shot. I think maybe we can come to some kind of consensus here.
Alright......having watched the shot now over, and over, and over......Alright: let's set up the 4 ball and the 8 ball and the cue ball as they sit on that table. We're not playing 9 ball anymore, and there are no other balls on the table. Let's invite a handful of pro players over. Let's tell the pro's to tell us how they would go about kissing the cue ball off the 4 ball and making the 8 ball in the corner. Let's listen to them laugh and say, " Get outta here! You can't be serious!"
Let's then tell each pro we'll pay them $200 an hour if they can provide a plan to get the 9 ball as close to the corner pocket as possible. We'll show up at the end of every hour. If they say, " This is as close as I can get it, their payday is done as soon as they're through telling us their plan.
If when we come back at the end of a certain hour and they tell us they're not through...they can get it even closer, they get paid for at least another hour. I'm guessing they'll end up telling us the most efficient way of making that ball is to make it EXACTLY the way Sigel DID make it......by making the cue ball hug and nudge the 8 ball all the way down to end rail before the 8 bounces off the rail and the cue ball sends it into the corner pocket.
We'll then ask for a volunteer among them to try it. We'll the listen to groans and cries of " No way. I'm not gonna embarrass myself! The execution would have to be ABSOLUTELY PERFECT!" Maybe if there's an old timer among the pro's he or she might comment, "In 70 years of watching and playing pool, I've never seen a shot made that required such exquisite execution!"
....You guys can then pay the pro's!
So let's get back to Sigel, and the 9 ball match and the other 3 balls on the table. Let's assume Sigel was not trying to pocket the 8 ball in the corner. (As it seems every poster in this thread believes except me!) So let's put our thinking caps on folks! You're all telling me Sigel was trying to do this and that and go here and there and do ANYTHING but try and pocket the 8 ball in the corner; but, he failed? He failed big - time too according to some of you!
.....and in the process of failing he just happened (maybe he miscued?) by chance, mind you, to shoot a shot that followed PRECISELY the plan the pro's devised. ........So let's keep those thinking caps on, shall we? What are the chances of Sigel being able to deliberately make a shot that required such an astounding degree of skill and execution. You all say zero.
OK! Let's say we assembled our team of pro's and we set up that shot and they came up with their plan before that nine ball match commenced. Then the exact same shot came up in the nine ball match. What are the chances of Sigel failing big time, as many of you contend, and in the process of failing, shooting a shot that followed PRECISELY the plan the pro's devised?
At this time, I can't see how it's possible that anyone cannot think that Sigel was trying to pocket that ball in the corner pocket by nudging it over and nudging it over until it finally went in!
Having made this point, I'll have to concede that while posting in this thread, I didn't always have my thinking cap on straight!
By speculating that the great ones are able to " Pull rabbits out of their hat" at times, I was going too far. Sigel could very well have benefitted from luck on that shot. In fact; it's possible he could have benefitted from an astounding degree of luck! When a pro basketball player takes a 70 foot shot and he aims for nothing but net, and GETS nothing but net, I think on most occasions, it's a combination of skill and astounding luck!
I come in peace...really! Are we coming to a consensus. You're simply all gonna have to admit that Sigel was trying to pocket the 8 ball in the corner. I'm gonna have to admit that, while this is certainly the case, it's possible that luck was involved and a lot of it! I'll also concede it was wrong of me to claim FOR CERTAIN that elite pro's sometimes come up with stuff so amazing they don't understand it themselves.
This being the case, can you guys just make one last concession? Can you concede that MAYBE elite pro's come up with stuff so amazing they don't understand it themselves.? Can you concede that MAYBE they pull rabbits out of their hat at times? Can you concede that MAYBE on a handful of moments in their career, before they shoot a particular shot, they chalk up with magic dust?
As Ronnie O'Sullivan was quoted saying in a "New Yorker magazine profile a few years ago, "It's a f*****g eccentric game!" Yep...goes for pool too! Yesterday I wrote a post for this thread where I speculated that when Sigel got down on that shot, got up, and got down again, he was struggling with what his conscious mind was telling him vs. what his subconscious mind was telling him. I went into detail with my speculations too.
For some damn reason, when I was through writing and I pushed " Submit," some kind of error message appeared and I lost the whole post. It never appeared in the thread. A day later, after recalling what I wrote, I'm thanking God for his intervention. He must think I'm on enough posters " Ignore " list already!
So....please allow me to make one last "Go" at Sigel's shot. I think maybe we can come to some kind of consensus here.
Alright......having watched the shot now over, and over, and over......Alright: let's set up the 4 ball and the 8 ball and the cue ball as they sit on that table. We're not playing 9 ball anymore, and there are no other balls on the table. Let's invite a handful of pro players over. Let's tell the pro's to tell us how they would go about kissing the cue ball off the 4 ball and making the 8 ball in the corner. Let's listen to them laugh and say, " Get outta here! You can't be serious!"
Let's then tell each pro we'll pay them $200 an hour if they can provide a plan to get the 9 ball as close to the corner pocket as possible. We'll show up at the end of every hour. If they say, " This is as close as I can get it, their payday is done as soon as they're through telling us their plan.
If when we come back at the end of a certain hour and they tell us they're not through...they can get it even closer, they get paid for at least another hour. I'm guessing they'll end up telling us the most efficient way of making that ball is to make it EXACTLY the way Sigel DID make it......by making the cue ball hug and nudge the 8 ball all the way down to end rail before the 8 bounces off the rail and the cue ball sends it into the corner pocket.
We'll then ask for a volunteer among them to try it. We'll the listen to groans and cries of " No way. I'm not gonna embarrass myself! The execution would have to be ABSOLUTELY PERFECT!" Maybe if there's an old timer among the pro's he or she might comment, "In 70 years of watching and playing pool, I've never seen a shot made that required such exquisite execution!"
....You guys can then pay the pro's!
So let's get back to Sigel, and the 9 ball match and the other 3 balls on the table. Let's assume Sigel was not trying to pocket the 8 ball in the corner. (As it seems every poster in this thread believes except me!) So let's put our thinking caps on folks! You're all telling me Sigel was trying to do this and that and go here and there and do ANYTHING but try and pocket the 8 ball in the corner; but, he failed? He failed big - time too according to some of you!
.....and in the process of failing he just happened (maybe he miscued?) by chance, mind you, to shoot a shot that followed PRECISELY the plan the pro's devised. ........So let's keep those thinking caps on, shall we? What are the chances of Sigel being able to deliberately make a shot that required such an astounding degree of skill and execution. You all say zero.
OK! Let's say we assembled our team of pro's and we set up that shot and they came up with their plan before that nine ball match commenced. Then the exact same shot came up in the nine ball match. What are the chances of Sigel failing big time, as many of you contend, and in the process of failing, shooting a shot that followed PRECISELY the plan the pro's devised?
At this time, I can't see how it's possible that anyone cannot think that Sigel was trying to pocket that ball in the corner pocket by nudging it over and nudging it over until it finally went in!
Having made this point, I'll have to concede that while posting in this thread, I didn't always have my thinking cap on straight!
By speculating that the great ones are able to " Pull rabbits out of their hat" at times, I was going too far. Sigel could very well have benefitted from luck on that shot. In fact; it's possible he could have benefitted from an astounding degree of luck! When a pro basketball player takes a 70 foot shot and he aims for nothing but net, and GETS nothing but net, I think on most occasions, it's a combination of skill and astounding luck!
I come in peace...really! Are we coming to a consensus. You're simply all gonna have to admit that Sigel was trying to pocket the 8 ball in the corner. I'm gonna have to admit that, while this is certainly the case, it's possible that luck was involved and a lot of it! I'll also concede it was wrong of me to claim FOR CERTAIN that elite pro's sometimes come up with stuff so amazing they don't understand it themselves.
This being the case, can you guys just make one last concession? Can you concede that MAYBE elite pro's come up with stuff so amazing they don't understand it themselves.? Can you concede that MAYBE they pull rabbits out of their hat at times? Can you concede that MAYBE on a handful of moments in their career, before they shoot a particular shot, they chalk up with magic dust?
Last edited: