2strong4u
Banned
Shaw had a terrific day 2 versus SVB. Couple stronger safes in the last dozen games and he would have won it.
Bergman vs DeChaine
- Thread starter krelldog
- Start date
Shaw had a terrific day 2 versus SVB. Couple stronger safes in the last dozen games and he would have won it.
That all sounds good .
But there have been sets set up how the public wanted them .
And we still only get the die hard people to watch .
Sky vs Oscar D race to 100 in Vegas Sky won the 1st 6 games had a 6-0 lead.
Then Oscar played great and built up a big lead of over 20 games.
Last part of the match Sky caught a hell of gear and almost came back really exciting match at the end.
Then Oscar played great and built up a big lead of over 20 games.
Last part of the match Sky caught a hell of gear and almost came back really exciting match at the end.
I was there for the Oscar match, he sat there expressionless but inside who knows- Me i would be totally out of sorts and concede at some point around half way and say "Ok you win, Let's do it again" If i thought i could catch a gear. Of course having backers complicates everything.
PS-IMO CB needs to do long races on the same day!! Over multiple days, the grind factor is not nearly as big imo
Last edited:
What is amazing is how long it takes them to say yes.
I'm pretty sure a lot of people would like to bet against you on that statement. He is one of the top Filipinos.
I'd take Ignacio over Dechaine all day long. I don't think there's a single aspect of the game that Ignacio isn't better at.
Ignacio all day long!
Really....
Scott Frost is a good player and I love watching him play. He definitely has a ton of heart. With that said he would be quickly outclassed by either of the two playing 10 ball. This doesnt take away from how good a player Scott is, just the truth about his rotation speed compared to theirs.
If race to 100 proves who the better player is why does the loser ever play the winner again? Why would you ever have a rematch.
All it proves is who got the money this time.
It has little or no bearing on who gets it next time.
More shorter sets is more watchable.
And if the players ever want more money they better hope there are more watchers.
All it proves is who got the money this time.
It has little or no bearing on who gets it next time.
More shorter sets is more watchable.
And if the players ever want more money they better hope there are more watchers.
If I flip a quarter 5 times, I could land on heads 4 or 5 times. At 10 times it may land 7, 8 or even 10. But at 100, the closer to .50/.50 you will be. So the longer the race, the luck of rolls is reduced. Simple statistics.
Second, both players understand this and it allows both the time & confidence to get acclimated to the table and their opponent. They get time to get into stroke and make adjustments. Itp reduces pressure situations.
Simply, you get to see the true talent of both players playing freely. And if one player is better, that player should win. The exception would be an older player without the endurance. In the past many US players have made a living gambling and started slowly out of the gate because of it. Referred to as gamblers. Doesn't mean they weren't the best player in the world. The Keither and Tadd come to mind.
I will agree with this, the short races can show you which player deals with stress better. Because having to perform right out of the gate is stressful. Adjustments immediate. But that still doesn't mean the best player will win because 1 or 2 rolls can alter the outcome.
The Mix Up
Players and backers are making games that favor them. There is litte reason to match up thinking of how the viewers are going to react to the match taking place. There just simply isnt enough money presented to the players coming from the ppv audience. Most of you are thinking of this from your viewpoint and viewing preferences, take a momment to think of it as the player and it clears up this misunderstanding.
Then wouldn't this be true with the shorter sets as well?
POPPEYCOCK!!!
If you don't think guaranteed PPV money is important to the player ask the loser.
If you don't think guaranteed PPV money is important to the player ask the loser.
Your argument makes no sense so no you're gonna get nasty?
Didn't mike come on here saying he would play Shane 5-10k 10 ball ... I believe Shane was in town doing some challenge match.'maybe against shaw or earl.... Something like that.