Did this cat catch a gear this week or WHAT??? Wow. Impressive doesn't begin to describe his play at this event. His two turn destruction of Alex in the final was epic. The whole event was great with hi-level play on display everyday. I don't play it much but i learned a few moves that i have to go try out. Later folks................
All hail Ruslan.....
- Thread starter garczar
- Start date
Yes, his play was superb, but I'm taking it a step further.
It's no secret that Ruslan is among the world's straightest shooters. He has shown it for a few years now. I have watched him in the 14.1 challenge at Derby City numerous times. He has often used his special pocketing skills to produce long runs in 14.1, but has tended to get in and out of trouble.at times in managing the racks, recovering with otherworldly pocketing.
He put in one hell of a week in American 14.1 Championship, but found a new level in the final, not in pocketing but in technical excellence.
In the final, he played the game of 14.1 the way the old masters did.
Pattern Play
His patterns were very elegant and he, resultingly, rarely had any tricky layouts to navigate in the end rack. His pattern play in the final was reminiscent of the great Jim Rempe.
In the final, Ruslan observed some of the most basic principles of straight pool pattern play: a) clear the rails earlier rather than later, b) clear balls beneath the rack and those in the kitchen earlier rather than later, and c) save the balls that are productive in the end rack.
Attack Angles
Ruslan nearly always left the perfect angle on the primary break shot. He passed on some inferior secondary break shots and proceeded to find shape onto something that had better prospects. He used the right stroke and speed selections on the break shots to accomplish two things: a) hitting the most productive part of the pack/cluster to spread the balls and b) ensuring that the cue ball angle off the pack/cluster was a productive one.
In this regard, it's worth comparing the play of Ruslan to that of another player who shined with glowing excellence in the American 14.1 Championship --- namely third place finisher Marco Teutshcer. Marco's often inferior attack angles in the semifinal caused him to have to navigate difficult positions. To his credit, he nearly always worked his way out of trouble, but he demonstrated how much harder you have to work when your attack angles aren't best.
Conclusion
It is easy for the untrained eye to marvel in the excellence of anyone who gets to 175 in two innings, but Ruslan's effort in the final was a shining example of technical excellence as much a display of superior pocketing. During the final, commentator Mika Immonen found himself saying "that was textbook" several times, and with good reason!
It's no secret that Ruslan is among the world's straightest shooters. He has shown it for a few years now. I have watched him in the 14.1 challenge at Derby City numerous times. He has often used his special pocketing skills to produce long runs in 14.1, but has tended to get in and out of trouble.at times in managing the racks, recovering with otherworldly pocketing.
He put in one hell of a week in American 14.1 Championship, but found a new level in the final, not in pocketing but in technical excellence.
In the final, he played the game of 14.1 the way the old masters did.
Pattern Play
His patterns were very elegant and he, resultingly, rarely had any tricky layouts to navigate in the end rack. His pattern play in the final was reminiscent of the great Jim Rempe.
In the final, Ruslan observed some of the most basic principles of straight pool pattern play: a) clear the rails earlier rather than later, b) clear balls beneath the rack and those in the kitchen earlier rather than later, and c) save the balls that are productive in the end rack.
Attack Angles
Ruslan nearly always left the perfect angle on the primary break shot. He passed on some inferior secondary break shots and proceeded to find shape onto something that had better prospects. He used the right stroke and speed selections on the break shots to accomplish two things: a) hitting the most productive part of the pack/cluster to spread the balls and b) ensuring that the cue ball angle off the pack/cluster was a productive one.
In this regard, it's worth comparing the play of Ruslan to that of another player who shined with glowing excellence in the American 14.1 Championship --- namely third place finisher Marco Teutshcer. Marco's often inferior attack angles in the semifinal caused him to have to navigate difficult positions. To his credit, he nearly always worked his way out of trouble, but he demonstrated how much harder you have to work when your attack angles aren't best.
Conclusion
It is easy for the untrained eye to marvel in the excellence of anyone who gets to 175 in two innings, but Ruslan's effort in the final was a shining example of technical excellence as much a display of superior pocketing. During the final, commentator Mika Immonen found himself saying "that was textbook" several times, and with good reason!
Last edited:
He definitely has a knack for this game and he makes shots.
I was a little surprised about the re-rack at the beginning of the match.
My interpretation is that a re-rack is optional only after a "breaking foul".
Alex drove two balls and the cue to rails and then scratched. The rules
don't seem to specify that as a "breaking foul". Or am I missing something?
I was a little surprised about the re-rack at the beginning of the match.
My interpretation is that a re-rack is optional only after a "breaking foul".
Alex drove two balls and the cue to rails and then scratched. The rules
don't seem to specify that as a "breaking foul". Or am I missing something?
Rules
4.10 Breaking Foul
A breaking foul is penalized by the loss of two points as mentioned under 4.3 Opening Break Shot, as well as a possible re-break. If both a standard foul and a breaking foul happen on one shot, it is considered a breaking foul.
A scratch is a standard foul.
4.10 Breaking Foul
A breaking foul is penalized by the loss of two points as mentioned under 4.3 Opening Break Shot, as well as a possible re-break. If both a standard foul and a breaking foul happen on one shot, it is considered a breaking foul.
A scratch is a standard foul.
Rules
6.6 OPENING BREAK
Starting player must either (1) designate a ball and a pocket into which that ball will be pocketed and accomplish the shot, or (2) cause the cue ball to contact a ball and then a cushion, plus cause two object balls to contact a cushion. Failure to meet at least one of the above requirements is a breaking violation. Offenderís score is assessed a 2-point penalty for each breaking violation. In addition, the opponent has the choice of (1) accepting the table in position, or (2) having the balls re-racked and requiring the offending player to repeat the opening break. That choice continues until the opening break is not a breaking violation, or until the opponent accepts the table in position. The three successive fouls rule does not apply to breaking violations. If the starting player scratches on a legal opening break, he is charged with a foul and assessed a one point penalty, which applies toward the "Successive Fouls Penalties". The incoming player is awarded cue ball in hand behind the head string, with object balls in position. q
6.6 OPENING BREAK
Starting player must either (1) designate a ball and a pocket into which that ball will be pocketed and accomplish the shot, or (2) cause the cue ball to contact a ball and then a cushion, plus cause two object balls to contact a cushion. Failure to meet at least one of the above requirements is a breaking violation. Offenderís score is assessed a 2-point penalty for each breaking violation. In addition, the opponent has the choice of (1) accepting the table in position, or (2) having the balls re-racked and requiring the offending player to repeat the opening break. That choice continues until the opening break is not a breaking violation, or until the opponent accepts the table in position. The three successive fouls rule does not apply to breaking violations. If the starting player scratches on a legal opening break, he is charged with a foul and assessed a one point penalty, which applies toward the "Successive Fouls Penalties". The incoming player is awarded cue ball in hand behind the head string, with object balls in position. q
That bugged me too, and I think they racked in error. Not a huge deal though, I don't think it changed much with regard to the end result.
You were the one who brought up the "textbook play" comment by Mika. It obviously
wasn't by the textbook. And it is appalling to me that it could happen in a World Championship tournament, let alone the World Championship match.
Look at the tape. Ruslan had no shot after the first break, but did on the second break.
Ruslan played great, but you have to have a shot to get started, and rules are rules.
Pretty!
I haven't watched anything but the finals but they were sure pretty! It was Ruslan's day and I doubt seriously that Alex could have derailed him. Hopefully this ignites his career.
Hu
I haven't watched anything but the finals but they were sure pretty! It was Ruslan's day and I doubt seriously that Alex could have derailed him. Hopefully this ignites his career.
Hu
You cannot say Ruslan was dominant in the event. He was dominant in the final in spades, and yes, it was one of the more impressive single match performances of the last twenty years.
About five years ago, Appleton ran 200 and out in the Dragon 14.1 event in a run of great technical elegance. I witnessed that run.
In the Dragon 14.1 event in, I'm guessing, 2010 at Comet Billiards in New Jersey, Oliver Ortmann ran 125 and out in three consecutive matches. Yes, I was there for that tournament, too. These were races to 125 and Ortmann went 375 balls without a miss against three different opponents on three different tables.
Perhaps even more amazing was a performance for which I was not present, namely Thorsten Hohmann's effort at the 2005 European Straight Pool Championships, in which he averaged about 50 balls per inning for the entire event on the way to victory,
Others can chime in and add to, or disagree with, these choices but for me, those were the best performances in 14.1 in recent times.
Last edited:
Sometimes, we probably need to be reminded that (much like accepting the 16 point penalty for an intentional 3rd consecutive foul), it is likely always better to ‘bite the bullet’ and repeatedly commit a breaking violation than to disturb the rack (thus making something dead) or leave any makable shot to someone capable of running 150 & out.
Yes I would agree with your assessments on more recent dominant 14.1 performances. I also witnessed the Appleton 200 run and the Ortmann performance in NJ. this was when I lived up North. I also was in CHICAGO IN1989 at the US OPEN 14.1 which Ortmann burst on the scene in the U.S to take that tournament. I believe that I saw Seigel run 150 and out against Rempe that year too.
Me thinks I just did(!). Hail Ruslan!
That was a fantastic semi-final match. Understandably taxed by that effort, he lost the final, as I recall.
This performance by Ortmann was the one that came to mind for me, too. I can't remember, do he go on to win the event? I could be mistaken, but I didn't think so.
Yes, I would be interested to hear from our European friends re: comparing Ruslan's week with the many European Championship titles by the likes of Feijen, Souquet, Ortmann, Hohmann, Engert, van den Berg, etc.
Hail Ruslan!
Ortmann lost in the semifinals that year. Stephan Cohen won the title, rallying from over 100 balls behind to beat Mika Immonen in the final.
This is correct (except it wasn't a world championship event).
There is absolutely no way to tell how the match would have gone if the correct rule for the opening break had been observed. Yes, how Ruslan played in that match was just fantastic and deserves loads of praise. But that doesn't mean he would have won if the rule had been called correctly. Ruslan lost an earlier match in this event 0-125, despite how well he played throughout the event. Any player in the final 16 of this event was capable of beating anyone else in a game to 150 or 175 if things went right for him.
For years I have pointed out the fact that scoring errors have been frequent in the big 14.1 events. And nearly any scoring error or rules blunder can potentially affect who wins these matches. It's really a shame that they aren't played under more professional conditions.
Last edited:
Not knowing the rules for the opening break.
On the opening break, Pagulayan scratched (a 1-point standard foul) but did not commit a breaking foul (failure to drive the CB and 2 OBs to a rail, a 2-point foul). The scratch should have sent Chinakhov to the table with ball in hand (behind the line). Instead, they made Pagulayan break again, which is an opponent's option only if it is a breaking foul. Chinakhov did not seem to have a shot after the first break, but he did after the second break and proceeded to run 99.
I know this is going to be an inflammatory comment, but this is the first time I’ve watched an event played on a 9foot pool table and experienced similar feelings of awe and respect as compared to watching impressive performances on a snooker table. While I regularly experience feelings of “that’s why they’re pros and I’m not” while watching snooker, I rarely have that feeling watching pool. I think it’s just an inevitable result of the size of the table and the nature of the game. Snooker lends itself more readily to impressive feats.
SJM, with regards to impressive performances, didn’t Ruslan make two 125 and outs, a 150 and out, a 141, and then 99 and 76 in the finals? Did they actually collect all the stats for this event? I obviously didn’t see all the round robin matches, just those streamed.
And I absolutely agree with you regarding the manner in which he played. It wasn’t the numbers that impressed me, it was the ease and fluidity with which he made those numbers.