Shane Van Boening's World Record

[AtLarge]

26 games in a row. SVB did an 8 pack during the 26 games.

Sky got back to the table a few times with only a kick shot. SVB locked him down tight for 26 games
_______

I read it as a ten pack.

According to AtLarge, Shane had ran a 7-pack not an 8 pack. I tend to trust the man's stats and have noticed a number of inaccuracies with the digitalpoolvl stats ...

Van Boening's 26-game winning streak took him from 62-70 behind to 88-70 ahead. He had 20 B&R games during the winning streak, consisting of packages (in order) of 2, 6, 5, 3, 4 -- not 7, 8, or 10.

The 6 games that were not B&Rs took him to total wins of 63, 64, 67, 74, 80, and 84. In those 6 games of the streak, Van Boening's runouts followed a Woodward miss once, a Woodward safety 4 times, and a Woodward return of table to Van Boening after a push out.

​

Shane's largest B&R package of the event was 7 (as was Skyler's), not 8 or 10. And Shane's 7-pack was on Day 3 (taking him to total wins of 115 through 121), not on Day 2 during the run of 26 consecutive game wins.

 

[Get_A_Grip]

Van Boening's 26-game winning streak took him from 62-70 behind to 88-70 ahead. He had 20 B&R games during the winning streak, consisting of packages (in order) of 2, 6, 5, 3, 4 -- not 7, 8, or 10.

The 6 games that were not B&Rs took him to total wins of 63, 64, 67, 74, 80, and 84. In those 6 games of the streak, Van Boening's runouts followed a Woodward miss once, a Woodward safety 4 times, and a Woodward return of table to Van Boening after a push out.

​

Shane's largest B&R package of the event was 7 (as was Skyler's), not 8 or 10. And Shane's 7-pack was on Day 3 (taking him to total wins of 115 through 121), not on Day 2 during the run of 26 consecutive game wins.

I trust your stats the most BTW. I was going by what the commentators were saying. But it's understandable that a commentator is busy analyzing details of play so they might get lost on the stats. Thanks.


_______

 

[AtLarge]

I trust your stats the most BTW. I was going by what the commentators were saying. But it's understandable that a commentator is busy analyzing details of play so they might get lost on the stats. Thanks.


_______

Thanks. Digital Pool was doing lots of stats for this match, and they did a good job -- quickly and mostly accurate. The 10-pack in their system for Shane was said to be a glitch in the system, one that they recognized but did not know how to fix. I believe they did make a few mistakes, but who wouldn't in pushing or clicking buttons for 264 games. I probably did, too, without any buttons.

 

[Jaden]

"When compared to other commercial tables"? What other commercial tables are there in wide circulation? Valley? And to be fair, you have to use 7 footers as your example because that's what is being discussed.

Yet.... it looked PLENTY consistent on the video posted. I'm guessing what is not consistent is your play on a Diamond table. It sounds like you have yourself convinced it's the tables fault when you play poorly on them.

Show me in the video where the table looked inconsistent or "too bouncy" in any way. I'll even give you the entire land of YouTube to show me. What you may be experiencing when you find diamond table not to play well, is what RKC mentioned.... you may be experiencing the mechanic that set it up in the first place.

I believe he was referring to going from table to table, not on the same table, but he can correct me if I'm wrong. I've noticed the same thing, but it's much more common when going from red to blue label, although with 7 footers, I've seen less difference between the rails between blue and red label than I have with 9 footers.

Jaden

 

[jasonlaus]

You're missing the point. I wouldn't beat Shane on 9ft table, why would I beat him on 7ft table and what would that prove? Absolutely nothing. If I listen to some singer sing a song on a radio and I go with "Oh he can't sing that song well" I bet you're the type of guy who will come with a comeback like "Ok then show us you sing it better than him", Do you see where I am going with this? don't be that guy. If I give an opinion of how 7ft isn't helping the game of pool as a whole and that it looks like some kiddo game that doesn't necessarily mean that I am the best 7ft player in the planet, I don't know even where you find this logic.

Pro's shouldn't belittle the game of pool by playing in these barbox. I'm sorry its just not helping our game grow. (Again Get_A_Grip, I hope you got a grip already and don't perceive this as I am saying I can beat shane on barbox, lol).

Belittle the game???
Are bar tables stopping the game from growing? If it wasn't for bar tables we probably wouldn't have Shane or Sky.

 

[buckshotshoey]

The main issue appears NOT to be Diamond tables. It's Pros playing on "toy" boxes.

Well, guess what? Most of the detractors of 7 foot tables here are still living in the billiard past, where 9 foot tables were the norm. I am part of the present. 7 foot tables are the "Present" of pool. Live with it.

The VanBoning/Woodward match is an exhibition. Most of the country plays on 7 foot tables. This match is a reflection of that fact.

I am not trying to say I wouldn't want 9 foot tables to be the norm again. I would. But it's not going to happen. I've dealt with it. Moving on. If anyone out there can change that reality, I'm all for it.

If you keep pushing "only REAL players play on 9 foot tables" on John Q Public....who by the way has probably never seen a 9 foot table in person, let alone played on one.... you alienate those players an push them away.

Pros playing on 7 foot tables is a reach out (or reach around... however you want to look at it) to the common average player. It's been said many times here that average league players dont even know a pro players name. Maybe that can change.

Keep my highlighted paragraph in the subject when you respond.

 

[maha]

when you are not a great player at any sport, all the tremendous things the top players do is astounding to you.
its that simple.

 

[chenjy9]

Easiest solution is to enjoy and prop up the game in whatever form or size it takes place in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AtLarge]

And by the way, ask any top pros, 10-Ball Bar Box is a lot harder than 10-Ball on 9 ft tables. It's the "clusters" that they have to maneuver on the bar box. ...

What is your definition of "harder"?

Based on the stats from Woodward's two long matches in the last few months (with Orcollo and Van Boening) on 7-footers versus the stats from other long matches with top players on 9-footers over the past two years, the 7-footers produced:

a higher average number of balls made on the break​

higher break-and-run rates​

a higher percentage of games ending in the first inning​

a lower rate of misses per game​

​

The top players seem to handle the greater congestion on the smaller tables pretty well.

 

[pt109]

Van Boening's 26-game winning streak took him from 62-70 behind to 88-70 ahead. He had 20 B&R games during the winning streak, consisting of packages (in order) of 2, 6, 5, 3, 4 -- not 7, 8, or 10.

The 6 games that were not B&Rs took him to total wins of 63, 64, 67, 74, 80, and 84. In those 6 games of the streak, Van Boening's runouts followed a Woodward miss once, a Woodward safety 4 times, and a Woodward return of table to Van Boening after a push out.

​

Shane's largest B&R package of the event was 7 (as was Skyler's), not 8 or 10. And Shane's 7-pack was on Day 3 (taking him to total wins of 115 through 121), not on Day 2 during the run of 26 consecutive game wins.

Thanx AtLarge.. it’d be nice if you did commentating also.

 

[AtLarge]

Thanx AtLarge.. it’d be nice if you did commentating also.

Er ... no thanks.

[But I yell at the screen quite a bit, does that count?]

 

[maha]

small table is easier in all respects. you dont miss any shots, position is easy as you dont need to go far,
and balls do get tied up more but you dont have to go far to break them out and the after shots are easy.

 

[ShootingArts]

The barbox, and the nine or ten foot tables offer different challenges. Trying to decide which is hardest includes not just the table but your opponent and the game. As Shane demonstrated, an opponent can keep you tied in knots when they let you swing a stick!

Ronnie Sullivan was probably the greatest cueist on a table with pockets for years. He wasn't going to tackle Shane for a big bet of his own money on any pool table. Likewise, Shane wasn't going to tackle Ronnie on a snooker table betting big with his own money. Ronnie did come over for the IPT, first with a snooker cue then a pool cue. He played respectably but he wasn't the world beater he was on a snooker table. Best I could make of it from watching the American tour I saw him playing around on, he played pool at solid shortstop speed or a bit better a few years later. i watched him on the IPT but I don't remember how he did other than not taking home any major cash I can recall.

There is a bit of a "horses for courses" thing and any nine foot specialist that tackles a bar box monster on a bar box is going to wish he had never seen the short track. A big track player will make mistakes on the short track and they will be severely punished for all of them. A short track specialist is likely to have the same results playing a big track specialist on a big table. They can play well enough to take down a lot of road players but they struggle against the elite players. Years of play are hard to forget overnight for either.

Hu






'

 

[AtLarge]

... Ronnie Sullivan ... i watched him on the IPT but I don't remember how he did other than not taking home any major cash I can recall. ...

O'Sullivan played in just one of the IPT events, the North American Open 8-Ball Championship in Las Vegas in July of 2006, the one that Hohmann won. O'Sullivan won 5 out of 13 matches and 85 out of 171 games, finishing in 58th place for $10,000. Not so hot, but still better than many well known pool players.

[I forget how they determined a precise finishing place for each of the 200 players, with no tied positions. But the money went by groups of players rather than different amounts for each player.]

 

[sjm]

O'Sullivan played in just one of the IPT events, the North American Open 8-Ball Championship in Las Vegas in July of 2006, the one that Hohmann won. O'Sullivan won 5 out of 13 matches and 85 out of 171 games, finishing in 58th place for $10,000. Not so hot, but still better than many well known pool players.

[I forget how they determined a precise finishing place for each of the 200 players, with no tied positions. But the money went by groups of players rather than different amounts for each player.]

I was actually at the IPT Las Vegas event held at the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas in 2006 and got to see Ronnie play, which was a treat even though he looked a bit ill at ease.

Here's what I remember, admitting that things like these are getting harder and harder to recount clearly.

Stage 1
The event began with 200 players who were placed in 40 round robin groups of five, so every player played four matches in Stage 1, one against every other player in their group. If they finished in the top 3 of that round robin group, they advanced to Stage 2, with the 80 players failing to advance tying for 121st place, and all getting paid the same $2,000.

Stage 2
The 120 survivors were placed in 20 round robin groups of 6, so every player played five matches, one against every other player in their group, and the top 3 in each group advanced to stage 3, with the 60 failing to advance tying for 61st place, and all getting paid the same $5,000.

Stage 3
The 60 survivors were placed in 12 groups of 5, so every player played four matches, one against every other player in their group. The top 3 in each group advanced to Stage 4, and the 24 who failed to advance tied for 37th place, and all getting paid $10,000.

Ronnie was among the 24 players who failed to advance past Stage 3 at IPT Las Vegas, so, as you note, he'd have played 13 matches, four in Stage 1, five in Stage 2, and four in Stage 3. Here's a link to the IPT Las Vegas results that corroborates his tied for 37th place finish.

1446 - IPT North American Open Championship 2006

The A to Z of Pool and Billiards Online

www.azbilliards.com

 

[The_JV]

I was actually at the IPT Las Vegas event held at the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas in 2006 and got to see Ronnie play, which was a treat even though he looked a bit ill at ease.

Here's what I remember, admitting that things like these are getting harder and harder to recount clearly.

Stage 1
The event began with 200 players who were placed in 40 round robin groups of five, so every player played four matches in Stage 1, one against every other player in their group. If they finished in the top 3 of that round robin group, they advanced to Stage 2, with the 80 players failing to advance tying for 121st place, and all getting paid the same $2,000.

Stage 2
The 120 survivors were placed in 20 round robin groups of 6, so every player played five matches, one against every other player in their group, and the top 3 in each group advanced to stage 3, with the 60 failing to advance tying for 61st place, and all getting paid the same $5,000.

Stage 3
The 60 survivors were placed in 12 groups of 5, so every player played four matches, one against every other player in their group. The top 3 in each group advanced to Stage 4, and the 24 who failed to advance tied for 37th place, and all getting paid $10,000.

Ronnie was among the 24 players who failed to advance past Stage 3 at IPT Las Vegas, so, as you note, he'd have played 13 matches, four in Stage 1, five in Stage 2, and four in Stage 3. Here's a link to the IPT Las Vegas results that corroborates his tied for 37th place finish.

1446 - IPT North American Open Championship 2006

The A to Z of Pool and Billiards Online

www.azbilliards.com

I really like the mini round robin format of weeding out the chaff. I hope to fall victim to it some day.

 

[sjm]

I really like the mini round robin format of weeding out the chaff. I hope to fall victim to it some day.

Me, too. The pretenders were dismissed with relative promptness when things were handled that way.

 

[The_JV]

Me, too. The pretenders were dismissed with relative promptness when things were handled that way.

What it also does is forgive a 'whoops' set from an otherwise stronger player within the group.

 

[Kickin' Chicken]

"A barbox is not a toy" - Johnnyt

RIP Sir!

 

[Dimeball]

You're missing the point. I wouldn't beat Shane on 9ft table, why would I beat him on 7ft table and what would that prove? Absolutely nothing. If I listen to some singer sing a song on a radio and I go with "Oh he can't sing that song well" I bet you're the type of guy who will come with a comeback like "Ok then show us you sing it better than him", Do you see where I am going with this? don't be that guy. If I give an opinion of how 7ft isn't helping the game of pool as a whole and that it looks like some kiddo game that doesn't necessarily mean that I am the best 7ft player in the planet, I don't know even where you find this logic.

Pro's shouldn't belittle the game of pool by playing in these barbox. I'm sorry its just not helping our game grow. (Again Get_A_Grip, I hope you got a grip already and don't perceive this as I am saying I can beat shane on barbox, lol).

I disagree, in the US, the pro's have to do what they have to do to earn a living. Bar table events are a must. It's not a tradition or magical status just to play on 9' tables, I've seen Earl, Sigel, Hall, etc... matches from over 30 years ago on bar tables. No different for the pros today, just trying to earn a living. I enjoy watching the best of the best, SVB, Ko's, Filler, etc, on any table, there is always something I can learn and take away.
28 straight is amazing. SVB's destruction of Sky is also amazing, a pro of Sky's level not to make a single ball with several looks at the table, is absolutely mind boggling!