I don't see any posts by JAM today and that's just not like her. Her input to this forum is outstanding and I think some of us owe her an apology. She goes out of her way with her articulate style to bring us readers to the feeling of being on the rail at every match. She is at every event with Keith and shares stories with us that we would otherwise never hear about. I realize that some of the things that were said were not intended to be hurtful, but nevertheless, they did. Keith tries to win every time he gets to the table and his style of play is fast and loose so sometimes it does backfire on him. But look at his accomplishments, it works for him. Peace.
Come Back JAM, please!
- Thread starter Rude Dog
- Start date
OldHasBeen
Tom Ferry
JAMnKEITH ARE WHAT WE NEED!
OUR GAME NEEDS MORE LIKE JAMnKEITH NOT LESS.
Anyone who thinks Keith dogged it in any match, should try to exploit his weeknesses by playing him some $100 Nine Ball. Put up r shut up.
TY & GL
OUR GAME NEEDS MORE LIKE JAMnKEITH NOT LESS.
Anyone who thinks Keith dogged it in any match, should try to exploit his weeknesses by playing him some $100 Nine Ball. Put up r shut up.
TY & GL
Hear, Hear!!!
Keith is one of the funnest players to watch. At times, he can also be one of the funniest (remarks to crowd, himself, opponent, etc...) but that is not what I am talking about. He has a style that has worked for him and he will not be duplicated. JAM is the best at giving us the details regarding tourneys, the business and/or insights.
I hope she has just not had time to chime in.
Keith, we look forward to seeing you, and rooting you on whenever we can.
Jerry
Keith is one of the funnest players to watch. At times, he can also be one of the funniest (remarks to crowd, himself, opponent, etc...) but that is not what I am talking about. He has a style that has worked for him and he will not be duplicated. JAM is the best at giving us the details regarding tourneys, the business and/or insights.
I hope she has just not had time to chime in.
Keith, we look forward to seeing you, and rooting you on whenever we can.
Jerry
Ditto.. anyone that could slam Jam or Kieth has a real gear loose. I musta missed the thread as I don't read em all. Jam & Kieth have always shared and are very helpful with any Q they can help you with! I don't like certain players but, would never think to slam them. I just hope everyone can just get along and if someone sez somthing that sticks in your crawl.. please... just move on and ignore it! 
You guys are the best! 
And, John, no apologies are warranted, especially from y'all. It's not the questioning of the 2-9 combo that sits in my crawl, as Cut Shot so eloquently states (
). When the match concluded, several of us on the rail asked Keith the same exact question verbatim as Rude Dog: "Tell us what you were thinking, Keith!" 
Seeing it again on TV, the side-armed player claims he'd shoot it exactly the same way. Those who are familiar with Keith's shooting style know he is a combo man.
I'd be lying of I said the recent buzz about the Skins tourney isn't vexing, but on the other hand, I can't expect others to feel the same way as me. I am disappointed, I guess, that the discussions centering around the Skins Billiards Championship on the various pool-related websites have focused on controversial matters and, in some instances, unfounded incinuations, especially the topics centering on speculations about dumps, intentional missed shots, and poor old Earl Strickland.
To me, it's sickening to see Earl Strickland take this kind of beating on the various forums. Maybe Earl didn't see the foul, maybe he did, but the final ruling must come from the ref; in this instance, Scott Smith. I’m not really good friends with Earl, but I do know the man a little. He’s not the big monster some folks make him out to be. On the offs, he’s got a great personality and a good sense of humor. He is in my opinion one of, if not the, best American players of all time, and guess what, with all of his talent and multiple national/international championship titles, that and a nickel won’t even buy him a cup of coffee. He’s struggling out there just like every single other professional pool player. Being a pool champion isn't very rewarding in the United States in terms of income.
Now, in fairness to Scott, he had his hands full with the stopwatch, timing every shot for a 30-second duration, and he was the designated racker for all games, no questions asked. Also, something Scott is really good at, he had to announce the scores and money amounts after each game, as well as work in tandem with the ESPN guys. At the players meeting, every competitor knew that his rulings, rackings, and timings were NEVER to be questioned. How unfortunate it is that he happened to be standing behind Earl in this one instance with Charlie. If Scott saw it, he would have called it.
I would like to see pool advance to the next frontier. Events like this Skins Billiard Championship is a good thing for the sport, and after it makes its grand debut on national broadcast, no less, the majority of the feedback from those within pool’s very subculture is quite negative. It’s truly a shame (IMO).
JAM
And, John, no apologies are warranted, especially from y'all. It's not the questioning of the 2-9 combo that sits in my crawl, as Cut Shot so eloquently states (). When the match concluded, several of us on the rail asked Keith the same exact question verbatim as Rude Dog: "Tell us what you were thinking, Keith!" Seeing it again on TV, the side-armed player claims he'd shoot it exactly the same way. Those who are familiar with Keith's shooting style know he is a combo man.I'd be lying of I said the recent buzz about the Skins tourney isn't vexing, but on the other hand, I can't expect others to feel the same way as me. I am disappointed, I guess, that the discussions centering around the Skins Billiards Championship on the various pool-related websites have focused on controversial matters and, in some instances, unfounded incinuations, especially the topics centering on speculations about dumps, intentional missed shots, and poor old Earl Strickland.
To me, it's sickening to see Earl Strickland take this kind of beating on the various forums. Maybe Earl didn't see the foul, maybe he did, but the final ruling must come from the ref; in this instance, Scott Smith. I’m not really good friends with Earl, but I do know the man a little. He’s not the big monster some folks make him out to be. On the offs, he’s got a great personality and a good sense of humor. He is in my opinion one of, if not the, best American players of all time, and guess what, with all of his talent and multiple national/international championship titles, that and a nickel won’t even buy him a cup of coffee. He’s struggling out there just like every single other professional pool player. Being a pool champion isn't very rewarding in the United States in terms of income.
Now, in fairness to Scott, he had his hands full with the stopwatch, timing every shot for a 30-second duration, and he was the designated racker for all games, no questions asked. Also, something Scott is really good at, he had to announce the scores and money amounts after each game, as well as work in tandem with the ESPN guys. At the players meeting, every competitor knew that his rulings, rackings, and timings were NEVER to be questioned. How unfortunate it is that he happened to be standing behind Earl in this one instance with Charlie. If Scott saw it, he would have called it.
I would like to see pool advance to the next frontier. Events like this Skins Billiard Championship is a good thing for the sport, and after it makes its grand debut on national broadcast, no less, the majority of the feedback from those within pool’s very subculture is quite negative. It’s truly a shame (IMO).
JAM
> WORD! Hopefully,the whole world had gotten over my indiscretion here recently. While some obviously thought I did this on purpose,she didn't but let me know it wasn't cool,so she has my respect. What I'd like to know is how Keith and her met,and are there anymore just like you at home? LOL Tommy D.
Thanks for the detailed info JAM, I know I always enjoy your posts even if I don't always agree with your opinion on some things. I know we disagreed on what televised tournament formats would help the sport grow a few weeks ago, and I was resevering some judgement having not seen the Skins tournament at the time.
Having now watched it there are definately some attractive aspects to the format, especially when competing with the current boom in televised Poker. Seeing large cash sums being listed on every game certainly gets the attention of even the most casual viewer. I found the challenger break format a little distracting to me, as it did not feel to me I was watching the players' best games, just them sitting around waiting for a lucky roll. I think I would have preferred a winner breaks format but with more games required for a skin, 5 seems to me a good target.
In the KM semi-final I was annoyed the ESPN audio was not picking up the comments very well, they kept tuning them out to listen to the commentators tell you what they had just said. Although I am still not entirely convinced such "color" is the way forward, if it is going to be allowed in the format then the TV audience should be able to hear it or it is just annoying. I also had an also issue with a point at which KM was conferring with Luc Salvas over the table layout whilst his opponent was shooting. In some circumstances this could be considered illegal coaching. Was this mentioned in the players meeting before the match as being OK in this format?
FWIW I thought the 2-9 combo was a fair choice for a good combo player, but that KM had not taken quite enough time to line it up right. Certainly with that format the earlier you finish the rack the less chance there is of something else going wrong in the rest of the run. Perhaps playing with Luc Salvas around is a bad influence on his shooting pace?
As for the Strickland "unseen" foul, it is hard to see how any contact between the shaft/ferrule and a ball like that would go unfelt by any player, even if it was not seen because they had their eyes firmly focused on the object or cue ball. However if the ref says the hit was good it was good, end of story. I didn't see CW making any issue of this once it was clear what the ref's call was. I agree Scott Smith was overloaded, next time they should have at least one more person on hand to cover part of the responsabilities. It also seemed to me that Strickland was trying to explain what he thought had happened at the end of the match, but again the ESPN coverage drowned his voice so you could not tell what he was saying. Were you close enough to hear?
Having now watched it there are definately some attractive aspects to the format, especially when competing with the current boom in televised Poker. Seeing large cash sums being listed on every game certainly gets the attention of even the most casual viewer. I found the challenger break format a little distracting to me, as it did not feel to me I was watching the players' best games, just them sitting around waiting for a lucky roll. I think I would have preferred a winner breaks format but with more games required for a skin, 5 seems to me a good target.
In the KM semi-final I was annoyed the ESPN audio was not picking up the comments very well, they kept tuning them out to listen to the commentators tell you what they had just said. Although I am still not entirely convinced such "color" is the way forward, if it is going to be allowed in the format then the TV audience should be able to hear it or it is just annoying. I also had an also issue with a point at which KM was conferring with Luc Salvas over the table layout whilst his opponent was shooting. In some circumstances this could be considered illegal coaching. Was this mentioned in the players meeting before the match as being OK in this format?
FWIW I thought the 2-9 combo was a fair choice for a good combo player, but that KM had not taken quite enough time to line it up right. Certainly with that format the earlier you finish the rack the less chance there is of something else going wrong in the rest of the run. Perhaps playing with Luc Salvas around is a bad influence on his shooting pace?
As for the Strickland "unseen" foul, it is hard to see how any contact between the shaft/ferrule and a ball like that would go unfelt by any player, even if it was not seen because they had their eyes firmly focused on the object or cue ball. However if the ref says the hit was good it was good, end of story. I didn't see CW making any issue of this once it was clear what the ref's call was. I agree Scott Smith was overloaded, next time they should have at least one more person on hand to cover part of the responsabilities. It also seemed to me that Strickland was trying to explain what he thought had happened at the end of the match, but again the ESPN coverage drowned his voice so you could not tell what he was saying. Were you close enough to hear?
JAM provides us with so much good information and nice posts it's overwhelming... keep 'em coming JAM and ignore the mean posts !
And JAM has a point, Earl is being judged by his not always so nice antics at the table. What I've heard he is very friendly off table and he's delighted to talk with his fans. I have to somewhat agree with Earl, he has been saying that he's just a misunderstood player with a big heart. A great player indeed... Also have to add, that Earl is the most talented pocketing machine I've seen. The last couple of racks in the 2002 WPC final against Bustamante he had many difficult balls but he shot them like they were hangers.
And JAM has a point, Earl is being judged by his not always so nice antics at the table. What I've heard he is very friendly off table and he's delighted to talk with his fans. I have to somewhat agree with Earl, he has been saying that he's just a misunderstood player with a big heart. A great player indeed... Also have to add, that Earl is the most talented pocketing machine I've seen. The last couple of racks in the 2002 WPC final against Bustamante he had many difficult balls but he shot them like they were hangers.
Jam, you are such an asset to this board! I love to read your posts because they are not only informative but they are so well written. The tone of your posts are always well-meaning and sincere. Whatever was said in a previous thread or post, I'm positive that what I said above is shared by 99% of all the posters here.
As for Earl, I think he's a great player and like most people with that much talent, he has some quirks. Those quirks can be troublesome and should be controlled. I don't think this is something that Earl has to do alone. I think the tournament directors should be more assertive when it comes to enforcing their rules irregardless of who is breaking them. If they did, Earl would refrain from some of his antics if he got bounced out of a tournament or two. From what I hear, away from the table, he's evidently a very nice guy. On the table, he's a perfectionist with a low level of tolerance for anything that gets between him and a win. That makes him fairly normal when you look at all the participants in all the other sports.
As for Keith, I don't know him but I have seen him play in person and on TV and he's a thrill to watch. He is also one of the most generous pros on this board. I for one really appreciate the posts that he has made on this board. Thank you both for making this board such a pleasure to visit!!
As for Earl, I think he's a great player and like most people with that much talent, he has some quirks. Those quirks can be troublesome and should be controlled. I don't think this is something that Earl has to do alone. I think the tournament directors should be more assertive when it comes to enforcing their rules irregardless of who is breaking them. If they did, Earl would refrain from some of his antics if he got bounced out of a tournament or two. From what I hear, away from the table, he's evidently a very nice guy. On the table, he's a perfectionist with a low level of tolerance for anything that gets between him and a win. That makes him fairly normal when you look at all the participants in all the other sports.
As for Keith, I don't know him but I have seen him play in person and on TV and he's a thrill to watch. He is also one of the most generous pros on this board. I for one really appreciate the posts that he has made on this board. Thank you both for making this board such a pleasure to visit!!
AuntyDan said:
The players' meeting occurred the night before the event at 8:00 p.m. I didn't know if they'd let me sit with Keith and listen, but they did. Mike Lebron was there, too. Allen Hopkins and Matt Braun went over all the rules and then invited questions. The skins format for the break was the challenger has the option, and Scott Smith was the designated racker for all games, which I thought was excellent, no bickering at the table. I'm sure some of the power breakers like Johnny, Corey, Rodney, and Earl would have liked the winner-break format a lot better. I'm not sure if it was the equipment or what, but Larry Nevel was kicking himself in the rear for allowing that cue-ball to fly off the table, the way it did several times when he broke.
Aunty Dan said:
I think the promoters desired chitchat by the players. There was no mention at the players meeting about players conversing on the side, i.e., coaching. I heard Keith's mumbles in the background a couple of times. ESPN missed the best part, I think, right before the 12th (last) game of the Keith's set. Hohmann had two games under his belt and needed this game to earn a skin. If he didn't get it, then all four players in the group would have battled it out in sudden death for all the cheese. The only person who could stop the German was Keith. Right before he got ready to break the balls in the challenger-break format, Luc Salvas and Rodney Morris were giving Keith a back massage, hoping he'd thwart the German's advance. It was kind of funny.
Aunty Dan said:
LOL. I've seen Keith and Luc battle it out on several occasions, and it's always entertaining. At last year's Valley Forge pro event, Keith and Luc were in the pit, and Luc won. It was a close match. When the match concluded, the scores on the other tables of the competitors were like 2 to 1, 1 to 0, and one table hadn't even finished ONE game yet.
Keith said by Luc missing an 8-ball earlier in the set, it put all the pressure on Keith (LOL). I think he was feeling the heat of the 30-second shot clock, his extension already used, and he went into cruise control. He plays combos better than anybody I've ever seen, to his credit, and if he had to do it all over again, I believe he'd shoot it again, but I sure do wish he had gone for the run-out.
Aunty Dan said:
I didn't hear Earl's words at the time of the incident. I did hear him talking about it after the fact. It's kind of interesting to hear the variety of viewpoints. I'm afraid to post the consensus of the majority of pool players I've spoken to about that foul, but at the risk of providing an opposing view, the players themselves say they WOULD NOT HAVE CALLED A FOUL on themselves and only would have conceded the foul if it was called by the ref. The spectators, railbirds, and pool fans, though, believe that Earl should have called it on himself since it was on TV. Having heard both sides of the argument, I tend to go with the players' opinion that Earl did exactly what they would have done and abided by the referee's call. At the players' meeting, it was made clear that the referee was the final authority on all matters.
That TV table is difficult to play on, too. The lights are extremely bright. There's TV cables all over the floor, you have to make sure you don't trip on when you're walking around the table. Luc Salvas almost got hit in the head by a boom camera (LOL). The hardest part, though, is when the players line up for a shot, the camera is right in front of the pocket they're aiming for in their IMMEDIATE line of vision, making zooming in-and-out noises. Talk about a table shark!
At the finals between Hall of Famer King James Rempe and Canadian Danny Hewitt at the Trump Marina 10-Ball Challenge in Atlantic City, Rempe was getting ready to fire a ball in the corner pocket. He actually stopped mid-stroke and walked over to a lady railbird seated approximately 20 feet from the table and asked her to move because she was in his line of vision.
JAM
Last edited:
JAM said:
Thanks for the detailed reply JAM. I think this puts the issue in a nutshell. A Professional in a refereered match has the right to leave the call to the referee and profit from anything he does not see, but to do so when you know the incident is being filmed for broadcast on national TV is to invite harsh criticism.
AuntyDan said:
Competitive integrity is a way of life for those with the right value systems. Maybe I just have too much respect for the pro pool playing community, but I don't think it's beyond their capabilities to hold themselves fully accountable for rules infractions, those seen and not seen. The continual abundance of apologists for those who, by failing to compete with dignity, disgrace themselves and their sport is both surprising and disheartening.
And so I'll say it once again. Allen Hopkins was absolutely right when, through his commentary, he took great exception with Earl for his lack of competitive integrity.