Earl's 5 US Opens vs Shane's 5 US Opens: Who's was more difficult?

Cardigan Kid

Cardigan Kid

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
When taking into account the difficulty of the field/competition....quality of equipment....age....New age 9-ball rules/rack....

Was Earl's 5 US Open titles ('84, '87, '93, '97, '00) more difficult to achieve than Shane's now 5 US Open titles ('07, '12, '13, '14, '16)?

Comparisons and analytics are all we have in pool to keep the fire burning, a good discussion on these is always interesting to me.

Thanks in advance for any responses.
 
JoseV

JoseV

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
JoseV said:
I would say Earl, im not sure of the player field, but equipment wise as far as the newer shafts and tips were not really around and cloth type would be a factor.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...



Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
JoseV

JoseV

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
JoseV said:
I would say Earl, im not sure of the player field, but equipment wise as far as the newer shafts and tips were not really around and cloth type would be a factor.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...



Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
 
W

westcoast

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm not sure which was more difficult- that would be a massive undertaking to analyze all the players entered in each tournament and who each played.

However, I think Shane's victory in this year's Open has to be considered one of the most challenging of all-time- the guys he beat were top notch players- Morra, Dechaine, Hohmann, Deuel, Alex P, Orcullo, Shaw, Chang. Simply amazing.

I wonder if Shane matching Earl's 5th will motivate Earl. Earl still has the skill to win another Open, but he needs to just focus on playing- improve his mental game. I mean, why on earth would you forfeit when you are just down 7-9? Inexplicable.
 
Ken_4fun

Ken_4fun

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I thought about that too.

Maybe some scholars here but it appears that the US Open is more like the World Open now, and I dont think that was that way in the Earl Strickland era.

Thinking the cost to enter the US OPEN has caused less of the "less serious" players to participate.

Never the less, both were amazing accomplishments.

Ken
 
Last edited:
JoeyInCali

JoeyInCali

Maker of Joey Bautista Cues
Silver Member
Earl would.have not won 5 USO against the field Shane had to contend with.
Shafts and tips have no bearing here.
Efren went to the USO finals 4 years in a row on a $15 stick and a production cue.
 
alphadog

alphadog

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
This last Open had what I feel is the toughest field ever.
As much as I like my fellow South Dakotan, he would have a hell of a time winning 5 Opens with this field.
 
JoseV

JoseV

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
JoeyInCali said:
Earl would.have not won 5 USO against the field Shane had to contend with.
Shafts and tips have no bearing here.
Efren went to the USO finals 4 years in a row on a $15 stick and a production cue.
Click to expand...

How many did Efren win out of those four ?

Shafts and tips do have being here the post said equipment, last i knew those items are equipment.

Not talking anything away from Shane, but can he do it with a standard shaft ?

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
JoeyInCali

JoeyInCali

Maker of Joey Bautista Cues
Silver Member
alphadog said:
This last Open had what I feel is the toughest field ever.
As much as I like my fellow South Dakotan, he would have a hell of a time winning 5 Opens with this field.
Click to expand...

He had to.beat 4 world champions and at least 2 ex USO champions. Hell of a fjeld.
 
Celtic

Celtic

AZB's own 8-ball jihadist
Silver Member
Yeah the American contingent in Strickland's era were way tougher (as evidenced by what JJ did this year when he had a flashback, and no offence to JJ but he was never a Sigel, Varner, or Hall level).

But the US Open back then was Americans for the most part and there were maybe 20 guys who could win it and a lot of dead money. The tournament the last few years has become a world event drawing the best players from all over the planet. And when you go down the list of guys that have a chance to win the field is freaking deep. Sure there are still favorites, but there are probably 60+ guys in this year's event that had a legit chance to play their best and win and there were at least 20 guys that are pretty much monsters, world class elites.

SVB is the only top tier pro that exists in America today imo, but if you can only have one he is a pretty freaking good one to have. He does a good job battling the rest of the world and keeping America relevant on the world pool scene. This year he defended the biggest title in the USA against one heck of an onslaught to keep that trophy on American soil.
 
C

Captain18

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Shane has a tougher field but plays on/with better equipment..(tables balls sticks.etc...)
Earl played a weaker field but played on/with worse equipment.....

The fact that Shane won 3 in a row is extremely impressive...

Guess the only way to know is for them to play race to 21 with the old equipment and then again with the new equipment..... and if they split......then FLIP A COIN!!! LOL

Both players are amazing and both deserve credit.

If they took the side pockets off the table and made it 16" long.......EARL ALL DAY!! LOL
 
jay helfert

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
Earl is the only player I remember being as dominant as Shane is today. I would make them equal in that respect. Earl had to win his Opens with Buddy, Sigel, Efren, Varner, Parica, Davenport, Rempe and a few more killers in the field. No easy task for either man.

Earl could string more racks even than Shane! Sixes and sevens were not unusual for him. Just like Shane he would practice his break before each match. The Earl you see today is a shadow of the old Earl from the 80's and 90's. That guy is long gone.
 
MikeyLittle

MikeyLittle

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
You can't bring equipment into this discussion because all players had the same type/level of equipment. There was no one playing with the level of equipment in earls time as we have now and vice versa. I think it comes down to the competition and i don't know enough of the fields that earl played in but the USO that shane just won had, IMO the hardest field i've ever seen, and with the rules regarding the break made it that much more tougher.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Celtic

Celtic

AZB's own 8-ball jihadist
Silver Member
Captain18 said:
Guess the only way to know is for them to play race to 21 with the old equipment and then again with the new equipment..... and if they split......then FLIP A COIN!!! LOL
Click to expand...

1992 Earl would shoot 2016 Earl into a coma. Earl likes to say he is even better today than he was back then, but that is just another sign that Earl today is not all there.

The stroke is still there mostly, but Earl back when he was young and hungry knew how to win, Earl today has mastered how to lose.
 
S

smashmouth

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
prime earl and efren destroy anybody today, none of these "world beaters" including Shane have done anything to make me think otherwise
 
jasonlaus

jasonlaus

Rep for Smorg
Silver Member
Celtic said:
1992 Earl would shoot 2016 Earl into a coma. Earl likes to say he is even better today than he was back then, but that is just another sign that Earl today is not all there.

The stroke is still there mostly, but Earl back when he was young and hungry knew how to win, Earl today has mastered how to lose.
Click to expand...

I believe Shaw plays at least equal to the old Earl as far as shooting and a little better than Shane
 
pt109

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
Earl won his last Open in 2000....I suspect it was the biggest field...286 entries.

but in general, the earlier the win, the easier it was....
...Mike Sigel won the first Open with 27 entries, pretty sure.

So I'm calling Shane's five wins the tougher feat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top