Billy, You know Red grew up playing One Pocket on that tough 5x10 at 7/11 in New York. Ervolino played good on that table too. He was right there with these guys in One Pocket and gambled better than anyone except maybe Ronnie.
Some of those games between Ronnie and Taylor may have been questionable unfortunately. I loved Ronnie, but he was notorious for working the room to the max if you get my drift. He clued me in several times when to bet and when to keep my hands in my pockets. Ronnie was in it for the money, not the fame!
When I saw Kelly play Ronnie (for real), he was getting 9-8 and losing. If Ronnie tried to give him 8-7 Kelly would win. That's how close they were. Ronnie's One Pocket game came up fast in the mid 60's, as I'm sure you know. I saw Ronnie play Red one time in Vegas (at the Stardust) for 100 a game and give him 9-8 and win (maybe 500). Red had a backer and Ronnie didn't. That was back in 1967 or '68. I never saw them play again, but Red asked Ronnie for the same game he gave Kelly when he saw him in L.A.
By the way, I never saw Ronnie and Taylor play. It's hard for me to believe that Taylor could have beaten Ronnie playing One Pocket jacked up. I did see Ronnie play that way many times and he was UNBELIEVABLE! I also saw Taylor play one handed 9-Ball with Chris Raftis in Dayton and get whipped badly. I would rate Raftis second only to Goosatay. Little Miami refused to play him 9-Ball jacked up. You may not have ever seen Raftis play, because he ran rooms around Ohio and Michigan, but Chris was the real deal. He could spear balls in so good it would make your head spin!
P.S. Billy, you were a lot like Ronnie in my book in that you were there to make money and you usually did. I only saw you gamble once or twice (Johnston City and Vegas) but you had a good gift for making games, kind of like Cardone in that respect. You were very convincing when I saw you discussing a game :wink:. And I don't think you ever played in the tournaments either. You were just there to gamble. Correct me if I'm wrong.