Are you sure these guys are "Amateurs"?

Happy Friday everyone :)

The US Bar Table Championships is an Open event, not strictly an "Amateur" tournament.

With 128 players in the Men's / Open 9-Ball, arguably there are about 20 players in this field that can or could win it. Some of the other strong names out there are Ellerman, Chau, Butler, Engel, big "O" Dominguez, Moore, in addition to the men that have already been discussed, Tourangeau, Atwell, Morris and SVB.

This is one of the strongest and toughest open bar table tournaments in the North America. On one hand it can be argued that 9-Ball on a 7' table "favors a weaker player" but I disagree, in a longer race, alternate breaks, any mistakes can be very costly...so less forgiveness on the table in this situation. Once you get to the top 32 and definately top 16 of this field, the player's in each match have to consistantly bring their top (over Accu-Stats .900) game to even have a chance. That does not bode well to the "weaker player" at all.

Years ago when I competed as a teen in golf, there was a missconception that a par-3 course was easier than a regulation course. However that is not true as it does not reflect the whole picture. It is a different game, but in pool as in golf, it is most often the nuance shots that make or break the player.

Very exciting week in Reno, enourage ya'll to watch the stream www.theactionreport.com

Have a great weekend!
 
I find these amateur versus professional discussions very interesting. For anyone who wants to understand a bit about the origins of these classifications I recommend watching the movie "The Greatest Game Ever Played"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Greatest_Game_Ever_Played for a bit about the movie, a fact based account of the 1913 US Open (golf). The difference between a professional and an amateur of the day is illustrated in several ways, a very worthwhile movie imo.

Dave
 
easy-e said:
For the record...

In Shane's loss to Stan on the winner's side, it was hill/hill, and Shane played a great safety on the 4 ball. Stan had only one option, a one rail kick to the top side of the table. He hit it nicely, and left Shane some distance and a tough cut. Shane took the shot and missed. Shane had at least 3 unforced errors in that set and he knows it. I highly doubt Shane blames anyone but himself for losing that set.
Click to expand...

The side of the ferrule aiming on thin cut shots is fallible.:frown:
 
there is a significant eqalizing factor.[/QUOTE]

So just to agree to disagree if it's "significant" why would most consider SVB a clear cut favorite on the bar box over anyone in the US? Wouldn't the "significant equalizing" factor make any pro at least a 50/50 shot to beat him on the box then?

And I do think Shane made his amateur comment tongue in cheek because being from SD he's well aware of how the Canadian Stan T plays.
 
StrokeofLuck said:
there is a significant eqalizing factor


So just to agree to disagree if it's "significant" why would most consider SVB a clear cut favorite on the bar box over anyone in the US? Wouldn't the "significant equalizing" factor make any pro at least a 50/50 shot to beat him on the box then?

And I do think Shane made his amateur comment tongue in cheek because being from SD he's well aware of how the Canadian Stan T plays.
Click to expand...

We'd need to check your math...what numbers- and where did you get them- are you using in your determination?
 
The funny part is that people are referring to Stan as an amateur yet for as long as I've known him(25+ years) he's made his living playing pool, not sure what makes you a "pro" but I'm pretty sure he's one...
 
SpinDoctor said:
The funny part is that people are referring to Stan as an amateur yet for as long as I've known him(25+ years) he's made his living playing pool, not sure what makes you a "pro" but I'm pretty sure he's one...
Click to expand...

Yes. I watched Stan snap off a good number of 8 and 9 ball tournaments all over Western Canada back in the 90s, including a few in the hall where I worked. Good to hear that he is still playing well.
 
I always wondered who negative political ads fooled

Now I know. The same people in this thread who believe SBV said anything at all about the field. Come on sheep, move along.

I am apparently a master propagandist.:smile:
 
Stan has been a top player in the PNW for at least 25 years. He has won many tournaments, and almost always cashes in anything he plays in. He comes down to the MT tournaments all the time.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

brandoncook26 said:
I know Stan does well, I just don't recall him ever being that deep in. I didn't consider him on the same threat level as Glenn. Wouldn't be the first time I was wrong though. I will refer to your judgment as you have been there playing multiple times and I am sitting on my couch.

Stan plays good. I drew him in the one pocket a few years ago at derby and he squeaked out a victory. I had no idea who he was, so I looked him up after the match. Pretty good player.
Click to expand...
 
Slh said:
i saw the music city open some day ago and they were using the magic rack for 9 ball on a barbox. Also the format was winner breaks and rack your own LOL.
The magic rack for 9 ball is stupid, but also winner breaks and rack your own in a barbox is even more! I could have run packages on that tournament and I'm a banger lol..
Click to expand...

The pockets at the Music city are buckets as well even I can make a ball:smile:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top