16 minutes of my life wasted.

[Michael Andros]

He wouldn’t have got too many opponents in the action days....
...anybody who took a long time to rack didn’t get played much.

If a guy took sixteen minutes, he would’ve looked up,to see an empty pool hall....

No kidding, huh P... sad state of affairs. fer certin'. And just guessing here but the boy has a few issues besides racking that woulda queered his action too, back then.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I find it interesting how many people know better than one of the top in the world. We didn't see any of his racks close up. We don't know what he knows or sees. Seems people like to assume a lot about him and themselves.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

 

[jrctherake]

I find it interesting how many people know better than one of the top in the world. We didn't see any of his racks close up. We don't know what he knows or sees. Seems people like to assume a lot about him and themselves.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

Don't know about others but, I'm not assuming anything. I'm going by his track record that I've saw in person.

Being a pro doesn't mean your "not" a butt. Just like being an amateur doesn't mean you "are" a butt.

Pros and is alike, are human. Some humans are a55hats and some are not. Pro has nothing to do with it.

 

[jay helfert]

When using a competent referee the way the game should be played: The referee racks the balls, the player inspects the rack, the player breaks the balls. There are NO re-racks! We've done it this way in many major tournaments with no serious issues, other than some minor gripes by certain players (only when they lose! ).

 

[BeiberLvr]

I find it interesting how many people know better than one of the top in the world. We didn't see any of his racks close up. We don't know what he knows or sees. Seems people like to assume a lot about him and themselves.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

Please tell you aren't actually trying to justify Shaw taking 15+ minutes to get a rack that's perfect for him.

A. This isn't a private gambling match. There is an audience (quite a decent one), and I doubt that any of them were loving this bit.

B. You're being ignorant if you don't think any of the previous racks were acceptable.

C. He isn't racking for himself. I'm sure the ref loved taking orders.


Finally, yes...most people do know just as much, if not more than Shaw when it comes to racking. The 9 ball rack has been solved for years now.

 

[Poolmanis]

I lost respect to Shaw when he tried that bullshit against Earl on Charlie´s 14.1 World years ago.
That did tell me enough this man. Everything what happened since then goes on line with that. You just know this type players...Those who are trying every trick and rule what they can find to get edge or throw opponent off.

 

[Maniac]

B. You're being ignorant if you don't think any of the previous racks were acceptable.

Absolutely correct, IMO.

I have a pretty decent 9-ball break. I have worn-out cloth on my table and a Magic Rack that needs replacing. I have to spend no more than 30 seconds getting all the balls tight if they are not already that way from the get-go. Sometimes, when I'm using my Delta-13, because of the worn cloth I get some minute gaps between several balls. Guess what happens when I break these type racks. Yep....I almost always make a ball or two, and sometimes three. And yes...I've even made more than three on occasion.

My point is, the rack doesn't have to be ridiculously tight to make balls. These guys that insist on uber-tight racks want them that way because they have a break method where a certain ball is wired to go in a pocket, and IMO it shouldn't be that way. If they think the table/rack should be pre-wired to where they know what the result of the break will be, why not just hand-place the 9 balls on the table in a pre-determined spot and let them go from there. It's about the same ridiculousness.

Jay had it right in his post just before this one. Inspect the rack, break the rack, no re-racking (in a tournament where a referee is racking).

In a tournament where your opponent racks, I like the idea of the breaker accepting the first rack or making the opponent break that rack. Rules like these are going to bring the purity back to the game and make it worth watching. Today, it's all about the break-and-run. They are an impressive feat for sure, but they take all the joy out of the game in general. Just my opinion.

Maniac

 

[jburkm002]

I may be mistaken as I didn't watch a second time. While this was going on they scanned the audience. It appeared like there were around 4 EURO players sitting in the front row. When Shaw looked over to them. It appeared reading lips, one of the players said "what are you doing". Again I could be mistaken but that was my quick impression.

 

[CreeDo]

I can see why people think shaw's being a jackass, and I get why
they probably should implement a rule allowing at a maximum, 1 rerack.

But here's how I see it -

• There's 0 chance he's looking at a perfectly tight rack and just rejecting it for the hell of it.

• There's 0 chance the racker is looking at a 100% perfect, ungapped rack and
reracking them anyway, just because he said so. Why would anyone do that 7 times?
So she saw the gaps too.

• Why can she not get a perfect, ungapped rack with a TEMPLATE? I mean, for god's sake.
I can understand it being difficult to make the rack 100% frozen with a wooden triangle.
But they have a TEMPLATE. Anyone who's used a magic ball rack knows it's TRIVIAL
to get all the balls frozen, within seconds. On older MBR's, you just need to put the balls
in the right general zip code, and they fall into their divots and even slightly lean against each other.
And the newer, thinner racks and accu-racks don't take much fiddling.

So why are we all mad at Jayson shaw, who is at a point in the tournament where it's basically a race to 4 for $20,000
and wants a TIGHT rack, and not mad at the incompetent woman who can't freeze 9 balls with a TEMPLATE?

Maybe it's not her fault, maybe the turtle rack or whatever it's called is a piece of crap.
Maybe the cyclop balls were out of spec.

But whatever you're gonna blame, it shouldn't be Jayson. He's making a reasonable request.
But for some dumb reason, this tournament can't handle that request. It's like a player asking for a bridge
and they take 20 minutes to find one. It's unacceptable.

 

[simco]

This kind of sharking and delay crap is why pool will never be shown on commercial
television.Good player but displays worst behavior and sportsmanship I have ever
seen.

 

[WoodyMPW]

Pissed when his rack is loose. Pissed when his opponents rack is loose.

https://youtu.be/nLa8P3rOzY0?t=38m26s

He's just a pissed off guy.

 

[pinkspider]

Absolutely correct, IMO.

I have a pretty decent 9-ball break. I have worn-out cloth on my table and a Magic Rack that needs replacing. I have to spend no more than 30 seconds getting all the balls tight if they are not already that way from the get-go. Sometimes, when I'm using my Delta-13, because of the worn cloth I get some minute gaps between several balls. Guess what happens when I break these type racks. Yep....I almost always make a ball or two, and sometimes three. And yes...I've even made more than three on occasion.

My point is, the rack doesn't have to be ridiculously tight to make balls. These guys that insist on uber-tight racks want them that way because they have a break method where a certain ball is wired to go in a pocket, and IMO it shouldn't be that way. If they think the table/rack should be pre-wired to where they know what the result of the break will be, why not just hand-place the 9 balls on the table in a pre-determined spot and let them go from there. It's about the same ridiculousness.

Jay had it right in his post just before this one. Inspect the rack, break the rack, no re-racking (in a tournament where a referee is racking).

In a tournament where your opponent racks, I like the idea of the breaker accepting the first rack or making the opponent break that rack. Rules like these are going to bring the purity back to the game and make it worth watching. Today, it's all about the break-and-run. They are an impressive feat for sure, but they take all the joy out of the game in general. Just my opinion.

Maniac

Ko's break that day was pretty much that. Cut break, make the wing ball and have the one ball almost always head back to the kitchen, while the cue ball almost always came off the rail and back to the centre of the table. because he went easy on the break, there were relatively few collisions.

 

[jrctherake]

I can see why people think shaw's being a jackass, and I get why
they probably should implement a rule allowing at a maximum, 1 rerack.

But here's how I see it -

• There's 0 chance he's looking at a perfectly tight rack and just rejecting it for the hell of it.

• There's 0 chance the racker is looking at a 100% perfect, ungapped rack and
reracking them anyway, just because he said so. Why would anyone do that 7 times?
So she saw the gaps too.

• Why can she not get a perfect, ungapped rack with a TEMPLATE? I mean, for god's sake.
I can understand it being difficult to make the rack 100% frozen with a wooden triangle.
But they have a TEMPLATE. Anyone who's used a magic ball rack knows it's TRIVIAL
to get all the balls frozen, within seconds. On older MBR's, you just need to put the balls
in the right general zip code, and they fall into their divots and even slightly lean against each other.
And the newer, thinner racks and accu-racks don't take much fiddling.

So why are we all mad at Jayson shaw, who is at a point in the tournament where it's basically a race to 4 for $20,000
and wants a TIGHT rack, and not mad at the incompetent woman who can't freeze 9 balls with a TEMPLATE?

Maybe it's not her fault, maybe the turtle rack or whatever it's called is a piece of crap.
Maybe the cyclop balls were out of spec.

But whatever you're gonna blame, it shouldn't be Jayson. He's making a reasonable request.
But for some dumb reason, this tournament can't handle that request. It's like a player asking for a bridge
and they take 20 minutes to find one. It's unacceptable.

Like most, I understand what you mean. But, considering the person in question, not the situation, the history tells all. Especially for those that have seen him in person more than just a few times.

Again, I get your point and for 99% of the pro field you would be correct but, this person is in the 1% that takes the cake. Nitnitnitnitnit...... to the 10th power.

I know he has fans. I happen to think he 8s a good player but, the drama is just to much.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Don't know about others but, I'm not assuming anything. I'm going by his track record that I've saw in person.

Being a pro doesn't mean your "not" a butt. Just like being an amateur doesn't mean you "are" a butt.

Pros and is alike, are human. Some humans are a55hats and some are not. Pro has nothing to do with it.

Right. I don't think being a pro has anything to do with it. That's why I didn't say it did. Were the racks he was given perfect, or were there issues? I personally didn't see them. Did you?

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

When using a competent referee the way the game should be played: The referee racks the balls, the player inspects the rack, the player breaks the balls. There are NO re-racks! We've done it this way in many major tournaments with no serious issues, other than some minor gripes by certain players (only when they lose! ).

Were those the rules in this particular tournament? Not sure how other tournaments do things is relevant here. In this tournament they were using a template rack. That means that all the balls should be totally frozen. The standard is way higher using a template rack.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Please tell you aren't actually trying to justify Shaw taking 15+ minutes to get a rack that's perfect for him.

A. This isn't a private gambling match. There is an audience (quite a decent one), and I doubt that any of them were loving this bit.

B. You're being ignorant if you don't think any of the previous racks were acceptable.

C. He isn't racking for himself. I'm sure the ref loved taking orders.


Finally, yes...most people do know just as much, if not more than Shaw when it comes to racking. The 9 ball rack has been solved for years now.

Interesting perspective.

1) There is only perfect, not "perfect for him". With a template rack, all the balls should be frozen. There are not degrees of frozen. They either are or are not.

A. Right, its not a gambling match. If the ref isn't able to effectively rack the balls in a timely manner, that is an issue with the ref, not the players. They are using a template.

B. Your use of the word "ignorant" here leaves me wondering if you know what that word means. Anyone who did not personally inspect the rack is ignorant about its quality. What is "acceptable"? With a template rack, frozen is acceptable. Not frozen isn't. Anyone who assumes they know the quality of the racks Shaw was offered without seeing them themselves is, by definition, ignorant of the quality of those racks.

C. I don't know what the rules in this event were for accepting racks. Do you? If you're allowed to request a rerack, then the referee's opinions on that are not especially relevant.

Finally, you misunderstood my initial post if you think I said anything about Jayson's knowledge of the rack. What he most certainly has more knowledge about is what those particular racks looked like. He saw them. I didn't. Did you?

In most things, I'd prefer ignorance over blind assumption. Not knowing the quality of the rack is ignorance. I'm saying we are all there. Except the ref, Shaw, and whoever else looked at those racks. For me personally, I'd prefer not to make assumptions about things I know I don't know. Knowledge, not assumptions, is the solution to ignorance.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I can see why people think shaw's being a jackass, and I get why
they probably should implement a rule allowing at a maximum, 1 rerack.

But here's how I see it -

• There's 0 chance he's looking at a perfectly tight rack and just rejecting it for the hell of it.

• There's 0 chance the racker is looking at a 100% perfect, ungapped rack and
reracking them anyway, just because he said so. Why would anyone do that 7 times?
So she saw the gaps too.

• Why can she not get a perfect, ungapped rack with a TEMPLATE? I mean, for god's sake.
I can understand it being difficult to make the rack 100% frozen with a wooden triangle.
But they have a TEMPLATE. Anyone who's used a magic ball rack knows it's TRIVIAL
to get all the balls frozen, within seconds. On older MBR's, you just need to put the balls
in the right general zip code, and they fall into their divots and even slightly lean against each other.
And the newer, thinner racks and accu-racks don't take much fiddling.

So why are we all mad at Jayson shaw, who is at a point in the tournament where it's basically a race to 4 for $20,000
and wants a TIGHT rack, and not mad at the incompetent woman who can't freeze 9 balls with a TEMPLATE?

Maybe it's not her fault, maybe the turtle rack or whatever it's called is a piece of crap.
Maybe the cyclop balls were out of spec.

But whatever you're gonna blame, it shouldn't be Jayson. He's making a reasonable request.
But for some dumb reason, this tournament can't handle that request. It's like a player asking for a bridge
and they take 20 minutes to find one. It's unacceptable.

This. Logic is in short supply here. Stop hogging it all. Lol. Good post.

KMRUNOUT

 

[Maniac]

Right. I don't think being a pro has anything to do with it. That's why I didn't say it did. Were the racks he was given perfect, or were there issues? I personally didn't see them. Did you?

KMRUNOUT

Like I have said before, a non-perfect rack can scatter balls and drop balls too. I have been doing it all of my pool-playing days.

These nitpicking players that want a perfect rack want them because they have a certain ball wired into a certain pocket. Is this good for pool? IMHO it is not. The professionals, especially the top tier ones, make the game easy (i.e. boring) when they're breaking and running every rack.

I sense that you are a proponent of a template rack....maybe not. My thinking is they should never be used in a professional tournament, especially a major.

Regardless what your opinion is, I respect it. Me personally, in my mind he probably could have broken any one of those racks and made balls and got a good spread. The one he finally broke made a ball, but overall it was a pretty sorry break. I bet he wished he'd have accepted one of those he refused.

Once again, just my opinion.

Maniac

 

[BeiberLvr]

Interesting perspective.

1) There is only perfect, not "perfect for him". With a template rack, all the balls should be frozen. There are not degrees of frozen. They either are or are not.

A. Right, its not a gambling match. If the ref isn't able to effectively rack the balls in a timely manner, that is an issue with the ref, not the players. They are using a template.

B. Your use of the word "ignorant" here leaves me wondering if you know what that word means. Anyone who did not personally inspect the rack is ignorant about its quality. What is "acceptable"? With a template rack, frozen is acceptable. Not frozen isn't. Anyone who assumes they know the quality of the racks Shaw was offered without seeing them themselves is, by definition, ignorant of the quality of those racks.

C. I don't know what the rules in this event were for accepting racks. Do you? If you're allowed to request a rerack, then the referee's opinions on that are not especially relevant.

Finally, you misunderstood my initial post if you think I said anything about Jayson's knowledge of the rack. What he most certainly has more knowledge about is what those particular racks looked like. He saw them. I didn't. Did you?

In most things, I'd prefer ignorance over blind assumption. Not knowing the quality of the rack is ignorance. I'm saying we are all there. Except the ref, Shaw, and whoever else looked at those racks. For me personally, I'd prefer not to make assumptions about things I know I don't know. Knowledge, not assumptions, is the solution to ignorance.

KMRUNOUT

You're right. It's good to not make assumptions about things you don't know. What I do know, however, is that taking 16 minutes to accept a rack is not good for the game.

 

[AtLarge]

This. Logic is in short supply here. Stop hogging it all. Lol. Good post.

KMRUNOUT

From the day of the match:

... As for Shaw's complaints, should a player keep his mouth shut if he feels that things aren't being done properly? If there are gaps in the rack, it makes a huge difference at nine ball. I thought everyone knew that by now. He's playing for real money -- the difference between $40,000 and $20,000. If he sees gaps that hurt his chances is he supposed to just suck it up and hit the balls a little harder? The real problem is that they're playing nine ball. (Where's Paul S. when you need him?)