Billy Who??
Bigfoot Final 8
- Thread starter PoolBum
- Start date
Billy Who??
Billy Incardona
I rather listing to Billy than Danny. Danny needs to go, seriously outdated & makes mistake after mistake. The constant heavy breathing does not help either.
I thought Danny Diliberto was doing the big foot matches with Mark not Billy.
They switch others in and out-Danny can't do them all.
Billy didnt even know who Chang was until that match but anointed him by game 3. He could be right however-hehe.
Last edited:
Well, I have to make what may be an unpopular statement, but..
Chang is a better overall player than Shane.
I watched this match while chatting with one of our non-posting AZ members, and we were discussing this very fact, and I see Shane with a nice easy shot with position on a low ball.. I fully expect Shane to get out smoothly, as this rack had no big issues, no balls close to each other to interfere with position paths..
We are chatting, and I look back, and see Shane with a very off angle 6 ball, and I actually say to myself, "How the heck did Shane manage to get that out of line in just a few balls?"
And thinking back, I do remember thinking that Shane often times accepts sub-optimal position and then uses finesse/big strokes to make the ball and get acceptable position in the rest of the rack.
Hillbilly Bryant was watching the match and chatting with us when Shane blew the 2 ball in the final rack. Shane was about 9 feet away from the 2 ball, and tried to smooth draw the cue ball two rails out of the corner, and Hillbilly immediately said, (paraphrasing) "Shane should have hit a natural outside spin shot on that and let it spin/follow naturally 4 rails under the 3. The worst that could happen is that he runs into the 3, but he'll be close, no matter what. What Shane tried is not possible on a 10 foot shot. You can't skid the cue ball that far and keep the correct action on the ball."
And sure enough, after Shane lost, he put the same shot up again and hit it like Hillbilly said, and got perfect results.
Having watched a significant portion of Shane's matches, I'm just gonna reiterate what a lot of people have said. Shane is over reliant on his break, and many aspects of his game are inferior to those of players like Orcollo, Chang, the Ko brothers, and Wu Cha Ching.
Shane's focus lets up at critical times, and a lot of times, those let ups are against the highest caliber players. His decision making is suspect at times, where he chooses a shot selection that is at the borderline of what is feasible/high percentage, and relies on his stroke to pull him out of the fire.
Compared to Dennis Orcollo, who I watched for quite a few hours against Little John this trip. Granted, Orcollo was massively outbreaking Little John, running lots of 2's and 3's, so in that way, he's like Shane, but the CLEANESS of his outs cannot be understated. Minimal english, which leads to much better speed control. Lots of natural stun angles. It was very frustrating for John, because John probably felt that he needed to run a 4 pack himself in one go, as Dennis might only let him see a 1 ball twice a set, with only 1 of those two makeable.
Don't get me wrong.. Shane is a great champion, and can really bring it at critical moments. He hit an absolute monster 2 ball in the match with Chang where the only path to the 3 required EXACTLY 1/2 tip draw and EXACTLY the correct mix of smooth/stun draw to get to any kind of workable shot on the 3. And Shane hit it perfectly.
But one of the things I see about Shane is that he sometimes has negative emotions rolling around in his head that shave off a little bit of his focus and concentration, leading to a missed shot or sub optimal position. He looks a little lackadaisical at times, and then "wakes up" when he gets down a game or two, then often overpowers his opponent.
The thing about that temporary let off is... You can win a lot of matches based on pure talent, but you don't win World Championships. You keep giving one extra chance a match, and one of those beasts is gonna run a five pack on you and then freeze you in between two balls.
Compare to Earl Strickland and Johnny Archer in their primes... They had absolutely no off switch. They went balls to the wall from the lag until the last ball pocketed.
So in summary.. I do believe that Shane has the tools to win multiple world championships, but he is massively handicapped by three things..
1. Lack of competition in the U.S., which makes him overly reliant on his break to win. If he lived in China, with his work ethic, he would probably be EASILY the best player in the world. He's already very close, with zero competition at home to sharpen him.
2. Lack of dedication to simplification of his game. I can see how very hard Dennis Orcollo has worked on this, and if Shane combined his break with Dennis's play, his international opponents might get the shakey arm syndrome more often when playing him.
And finally, 3. an inconsistent mental game. In a lot of matches, Shane "zones out" for a game or two. This might manifes as a missed shot/position, or maybe he just doesn't really try as hard as he can on a kick to come up with a real plan on how he wants to kick a ball to give me the best chances of a positive result, building in a little allowance for a slight mishit.
So was it Billy Gibbs? I cannot imagine anyone no liking Billy Incardona's commentary I think it is up there with the very best.
-don
Jeremy Jones is, by far, the best available commentator in all games. He knows and can communicate all the high level concepts, which is supposedly why we watch Accu-Stats video. Technical commentary has devolved in recent years to little more than "He's gonna draw off the 1 to get to the 2."
NO Billy I!-Gibbs has not made an appearance. I think Billy may have had a drink-Something had him off to the races from the beginning.
Thank God no Gibbs has been heard from.
Hey Russ, it was great seeing you here at the Derby.
Wow, that's a great post. I already thought Chang to be a better player than Shane before last night, but last night's effort reconfirmed it for me. The pool played by JL Chang last night was some of the best I've ever seen and his .986 through he first 12 racks was almost unfathomable. Shane should be commended for fighting so hard and giving himself a chance, but he, quite obviously, was not the better man in this one.
I believe that the biggest difference between Chang and SVB is, just as you suggest, in pattern play. Shane missed some position lines last night but was quite fortunate a few times when he ran into balls. As you also note, Shane occasionally picks the wrong path.
The three best (nine-ball era only) technical position players, in terms of angle management, that I've ever watched are Buddy Hall, Ralf Souuqet and Wu Jiaqing. Chang is nearly their equal and his name is not at all out of place among them.
Watching Chang is almost like taking a lesson in offensive execution. Now let's not suggest that as a tactician Chang is even close to any of Reyes, Pagulayan, Orcullo, Bustamante, Varner or even Filler (whose tactical IQ is the highest I've seen from a European player in a very long time), nor is Chang one of the most elite when it comes to kicking, but Chang is a world beater of the highest order.
I'll probably root for Fedor Gorst to beat Chang in he semis, but I'll give Chang his due. What a player!
Thanks to Jay Helfert for putting this magnificent field together. This is the best Bigfoot we've ever had, and today's champion will have outlasted as elite an invitational field as I can ever remember in our sport.
Last edited:
It sure beats dinky ass 9 Ball any day.
I'm still mad about them not showing much bank pool, but I went ahead and got the stream anyway.
You're right, it's been amazing watching the 10-ball, glad I bought the stream.
Almost makes up for missing the bank pool!
Judging from the commentary, I'm excited to soak all this Bigfoot action up once it hits the on-demand service that accu stats has on vimeo.
Right now, I'm going through the matches that were just added from the International 9 ball Open, with JJ commentary....lesson and entertainment all in one!
Thanks Sjm and Shortbuss for narrowing the focus on observing the finer elements of upper echelon rotation players.
I'll be paying close attention to Chang matches as he had a ton of exposure in last year's International Open. I've also noticed he has one of the most compact and repeatable strokes-shorter bridges, minimal upper arm movements on the warm up strokes....in fact I think with age and years...these strokes hold up well. Carlo Biado also has a compact stroke, with shorter bridge length.
In a world of fast cloth and cushion, it seems that when the dust settles, these types of players will be around for a while.
(On a side note, I thought I noticed Thorston changed his bridge to a shorter distance and shorter stroke...I was wondering did anyone else notice him do this as he moves into the advances stages of his career?)
Right now, I'm going through the matches that were just added from the International 9 ball Open, with JJ commentary....lesson and entertainment all in one!
Thanks Sjm and Shortbuss for narrowing the focus on observing the finer elements of upper echelon rotation players.
I'll be paying close attention to Chang matches as he had a ton of exposure in last year's International Open. I've also noticed he has one of the most compact and repeatable strokes-shorter bridges, minimal upper arm movements on the warm up strokes....in fact I think with age and years...these strokes hold up well. Carlo Biado also has a compact stroke, with shorter bridge length.
In a world of fast cloth and cushion, it seems that when the dust settles, these types of players will be around for a while.
(On a side note, I thought I noticed Thorston changed his bridge to a shorter distance and shorter stroke...I was wondering did anyone else notice him do this as he moves into the advances stages of his career?)
