Sky vs Earl..Score after Day 2?
- Thread starter knicks
- Start date
Scroll down. Another thread on this. 66-25 i think. I quit watchin it.
I just watched an interview with Earl and Sky from earlier today. Earl said he needed 72 more games to win and Sky needed 36. That would put the score at 64-28. 64 seems like a strange place to stop, but maybe time issues or something else stopped it there. Or maybe Earl's memory was off a bit.
This is beginning to sound like just a free pay day for Earl, with nothing on the line.
Do you think there is a comeback in progress? :rotflmao:
.. No.. looking to see if Earl can break 50%.. Getting a gauge on the 'Mental hospital stay' for odds on admission...
I didn't watch this match, but from the other thread there was talk that Earl was in his meltdown mode full force...
Question for Jay or any others that have been around Earl a long time. Did he ever have his "give-up" mode when he was gambling on his own dime? I'm wondering how he would fare today mentally if he played Sky a normal set, lets say race to 11 for 1000, and it was only Sky and Earl putting up 1000 each.
Question for Jay or any others that have been around Earl a long time. Did he ever have his "give-up" mode when he was gambling on his own dime? I'm wondering how he would fare today mentally if he played Sky a normal set, lets say race to 11 for 1000, and it was only Sky and Earl putting up 1000 each.
The Earl of the last turning stone classic is better than Sky. Earl just melts down more frequently and/or just can’t rise to the occasion as consistently as he used to
Sky would have his panties around his ankles crying.
What those who didn't see Earl in his prime missed is that he didn't just mass produce titles, but usually won them undefeated. The other thing worth noting is how often Earl used to crush really top opponents like Sigel, Archer, Reyes, Hall, Rempe and Varner. Of course, they beat him, too, but Earl would so often hang an 11-2 set on them that it was almost ridiculous.
My first reaction is that Earl would be way to much for Skyler as he shoots today, but there's one factor that's hard to account for, specifically that much less was known about the nine ball break back then, but if we ignore that, Earl in his prime beats Skyler in his prime very easily.
Here’s a thread from 2007.
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=71664
And he walked out of a Camel Tour finals when Corey was introducing his break skills.
Last edited:
He's a nut
But, he's a nut nobody is asking to play.
All the shit talk and nobody is looking for Earl on their own dime.
I wish Earl would go back to his true roots, before the clapping that ruined one of the brightest futures in the world EVER!
Earl was a great money player before he ever played in tournaments. He was playing jam up at age 19! That Earl would have wiped the floor with today's Sky. But he is long gone.
But, he lost to Parica ?
I really wonder though how Early would have done against the really good players today on Diamonds with tight pockets.
What are you trying to say? Parica is one of the all-time greats. He led the Pinoy invasion and was one of the best gambling players ever. Earl would have been great on any size pockets. He played on what was around then. Great players, of any era, will adjust to whatever equipment is the norm. Its like comparing top golfers, the best would have been top players regardless of the era or equipment. Mosconi, Caras, et.al. played on BUCKETS but no one seems to knock them for it. Please.
EVERYONE lost to Parica!
No doubt. That's a pretty long list. Earl wasn't the only top player to get a dose of Jose's game.