Sounds like it wasn't easy to do either.I am reminded of when Warren Kiamco had a qualifying attempt at the DCC 14.1 Challenge. It took him one hour and forty minutes to run 97. It was in about 2010. It was not easy to watch.



Sounds like it wasn't easy to do either.I am reminded of when Warren Kiamco had a qualifying attempt at the DCC 14.1 Challenge. It took him one hour and forty minutes to run 97. It was in about 2010. It was not easy to watch.
That would be a fun and fast finalYes, I think most of us would be very happy if it was Shaw vs Filler in the final of this event.
I watched DeLuna play 9B once and swore I'd never watch him again. When he has to decide which ball to shoot he's 10 times worse.Snooker is not as slow as De Luna plays straight pool*.
* Ebdon excepted.
It's $1000 if someone breaks 330 (Pete Margo's record). High run for the tournament is $500.And Filler gets the high run 126-and-out and then continues to 216. I heard that there's a $1000 for highest continuation run.
Along these lines, the Mario He vs Alcaide match is why I love 14.1. It was not perfect 14.1 by any means - the safety play was pretty bad (but that could be the new cloth - just guessing) with both players selling out a shot trying to bunt the stack often. But David got to like 120-something and missed. Mario ran out from there from about a 30 odd ball deficit. Both players traded runs. The pace was medium - not fast or slow.As one who lived through the straight pool era and attended many straight pool events back then, I think that two of the reasons straight pool disappeared in tournament play were a) the call shot component of the game, and b) the lack of a shot clock, that ensured that an already slow game remained that way. Thankfully, today's pro nine ball game doesn't typically have either of these problems, so it's far more watchable and far more viewer friendly. Still, 14.1 is a beautiful game and I'm glad that Peter Burrows as well as the European Pocket Billiard Federation are not letting the tournament game die, despite the misguided efforts of many to place the greater emphasis on high runs made against the ghost.
Can you imagine Eagle Eye spending 3 hours in a game to 125 with an opponent who scored 10 points? You'd think that wouldn't have taken more than an hour. Maybe Czaplicki is r-e-a-l-l-y good at safety play.There were few matches more than 3 hrs and top 2 longest matches involved Tom Czaplicki. Average number of seconds per ball for top 2 longest matches is 80 seconds. Tony Drago ran out a nine ball rack (8 balls in 52 seconds) against Earl while these boys here took at least 52 seconds just for 1 ball.
View attachment 667727
...
All the tables are being streamedwould appreciate if they put makkonen or zielinski on the stream table, as they seem to be going strong on the outer tables
All the tables are being streamed
That would be the quickest final ever. lolThat would be a fun and fast final
That was correctly handled, as there is no option to accept the table in the case of an unsportsmanlike foul, which is treated like a third consecutive foul. The rules require for a rerack.More three-foul rule/refereeing drama on the main stream again today...
Looks like the ref called some kind of intentional foul/unsportsmanlike conduct on Deuel, and then reracked the balls even though Appleton would have been better off with the balls spread out on the table.
I would agree generally, but alternating between reds and colours makes snooker easier for casual fans to follow. With 14.1, if you don’t know the game, it can look a bit haphazard and random. It doesn’t help when commentators struggle to predict the players patterns. And that is common, because I feel like many commentators are trying to apply classical 14.1 thinking to 9 ball players who have a more unorthodox approach. Personally, I’d hate to commentate 14.1. because the players would make me sound silly.
What did he do?... To me and most of the people watching on the stream it didn't appear Deuel actually did anything unsportsmanlike.
That was correctly handled, as there is no option to accept the table in the case of an unsportsmanlike foul, which is treated like a third consecutive foul. The rules require for a rerack.
Maybe, but that seems to be what they spend most of their time doing.Commentary should make no predictions.