Earl Shane II

I thought I mentioned I have no problem with it... I definitely don't, one way or the other. I'm definitely not offended, I was just curious. It sounded (and something likely got lost in translation over the internet) like you were trying to poke into a simple light-hearted comment. I could very well be ignorant of some hidden intention(s) behind his comment, but even so it doesn't seem even remotely worth investigating.

I think (and anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) that the individuals with an actual vested interest in the situation/thread were fed up with the speculation and assumptions that are rampant in this thread. I would have to attribute most of it to you, JAM. Of course you're free to speculate and assume all you like on this fantastic internet discussion forum, but they're also free to respond however they like in turn. If your posts are perceived as "crap", then they're free to express that sentiment.

Mike G tried to call out Shane to play Earl again on a 10'er and individuals with decent memories pointed out the fact that there was supposed to be a follow-up match on a 9'er that never happened. Why it never happened was revealed by Mr. Mars as Mike G refusing to set up the follow-up match. Mike G never responded and therefore his side of the story was never heard. You decided to defend him for some reason, despite the fact that nothing is preventing him from defending himself. In this case, and considering the presented perspectives of those involved, I'd say "crap" might be a little strong, but is certainly the right direction of your posts.

It leads me to believe your intentions for deeply involving yourself in this thread were purely for entertainment. That's just my humble perspective though.
 
Hierovision said:
I thought I mentioned I have no problem with it... I definitely don't, one way or the other. I'm definitely not offended, I was just curious. It sounded (and something likely got lost in translation over the internet) like you were trying to poke into a simple light-hearted comment. I could very well be ignorant of some hidden intention(s) behind his comment, but even so it doesn't seem even remotely worth investigating.

I think (and anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) that the individuals with an actual vested interest in the situation/thread were fed up with the speculation and assumptions that are rampant in this thread. I would have to attribute most of it to you, JAM. Of course you're free to speculate and assume all you like on this fantastic internet discussion forum, but they're also free to respond however they like in turn. If your posts are perceived as "crap", then they're free to express that sentiment.

Mike G tried to call out Shane to play Earl again on a 10'er and individuals with decent memories pointed out the fact that there was supposed to be a follow-up match on a 9'er that never happened. Why it never happened was revealed by Mr. Mars as Mike G refusing to set up the follow-up match. Mike G never responded and therefore his side of the story was never heard. You decided to defend him for some reason, despite the fact that nothing is preventing him from defending himself. In this case, and considering the presented perspectives of those involved, I'd say "crap" might be a little strong, but is certainly the right direction of your posts.

It leads me to believe your intentions for deeply involving yourself in this thread were purely for entertainment. That's just my humble perspective though.
Click to expand...

You are wrong, but it seems like I was good entertainment for you.
 
I just wanted to present my perspective, which you're free to interpret as you please, of course. Thank you for denying my suspicions, it's good to know one way or the other. Like I said, things get lost in translation when reading words vs. speaking with someone in person. I'm sure I would have no trouble interpreting anything in person.
 
Hierovision said:
I thought I mentioned I have no problem with it... I definitely don't, one way or the other. I'm definitely not offended, I was just curious. It sounded (and something likely got lost in translation over the internet) like you were trying to poke into a simple light-hearted comment. I could very well be ignorant of some hidden intention(s) behind his comment, but even so it doesn't seem even remotely worth investigating.

I think (and anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) that the individuals with an actual vested interest in the situation/thread were fed up with the speculation and assumptions that are rampant in this thread. I would have to attribute most of it to you, JAM. Of course you're free to speculate and assume all you like on this fantastic internet discussion forum, but they're also free to respond however they like in turn. If your posts are perceived as "crap", then they're free to express that sentiment.

Mike G tried to call out Shane to play Earl again on a 10'er and individuals with decent memories pointed out the fact that there was supposed to be a follow-up match on a 9'er that never happened. Why it never happened was revealed by Mr. Mars as Mike G refusing to set up the follow-up match. Mike G never responded and therefore his side of the story was never heard. You decided to defend him for some reason, despite the fact that nothing is preventing him from defending himself. In this case, and considering the presented perspectives of those involved, I'd say "crap" might be a little strong, but is certainly the right direction of your posts.

It leads me to believe your intentions for deeply involving yourself in this thread were purely for entertainment. That's just my humble perspective though.
Click to expand...

This is a perfect post and is dead on.
 
Hierovision said:
I thought I mentioned...there was supposed to be a follow-up match on a 9'er ...Mike G refusing to set up the follow-up match. Mike G never responded...I'd say "crap" ...
Click to expand...
wordpress-post-it.jpg
 
And I want to make it known that I'm truly not trying to gather a "bully" group to attack you, JAM. I don't condone bandwagons, but I can't help if others share parts or all of my perspective.
 
JAM said:
I'm sorry that I have offended you or anybody else on this thread.

Yes, I do honestly care what was meant by that comment, which is why I posted.

The thread is not entertaining to me. In fact, it's the opposite. I started out trying to present hypotheticals about why I thought the match might not have gone forth, and Mr. Mars was offended by my posts and called them "crap." I did not mean to offend Mr. Mars. Rather, I was thinking Mike G.'s name getting dragged in the mud. Personally, I don't have an interest in the outcome of the match, one way or the other, especially now.

There was a tone in the comment made by mikeyfrost that I was unclear about. If it was made in jest, then I hope everyone finds the humor in it. I'm still uncertain at the time of this writing what was meant by that comment.

Look, I'm not trying to be argumentative with anyone. In fact, I'm canceling a pool engagement we were invited to in July. Like Mr. Mars, now I'm done with pool myself for sure.

Again, sorry if my post offended you or anyone else.
Click to expand...

I don't want to join the band wagon and bash you JAM, stop giving out free passes though.

My comment, like the vast majority of my comments, was just a comment. No subliminal message there. You don't have to voice record it and play it backwards to understand it, or have it on a repeat loop while you sleep so your subconscious picks up the meaning.

There was a tone in it, so you are correct. You know how you feel when a mosquito is just buzzing around you and trying to get a bite...at first you don't care, then it's annoying, but then you go get the swatter. Well I don't think your posts are crap, however you are giving a great mosquito impression right now.

I didn't respond at first because Hierovision summed up what my response would have been. If you ask twice though, now you get my response.

I'm over the whole SVB Vs. Earl thing...I'd much rather see SVB match up with that Wu fella, he changed his name and I cant remember it, but that would be a heavyweight title fight.
 
cleary said:
Haven't you been done with pool for a while now?
Click to expand...

Yes, for sure. Thanks for your interest. :)

A week or two ago, we were invited to attend a tournament in July, and they asked if we could let them know by the end of May. I called today to let them know we would not be attending. :(
 
mikeyfrost said:
I don't want to join the band wagon and bash you JAM, stop giving out free passes though.

My comment, like the vast majority of my comments, was just a comment. No subliminal message there. You don't have to voice record it and play it backwards to understand it, or have it on a repeat loop while you sleep so your subconscious picks up the meaning.

There was a tone in it, so you are correct. You know how you feel when a mosquito is just buzzing around you and trying to get a bite...at first you don't care, then it's annoying, but then you go get the swatter. Well I don't think your posts are crap, however you are giving a great mosquito impression right now.

I didn't respond at first because Hierovision summed up what my response would have been. If you ask twice though, now you get my response.

I'm over the whole SVB Vs. Earl thing...I'd much rather see SVB match up with that Wu fella, he changed his name and I cant remember it, but that would be a heavyweight title fight.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the reply.

Maybe I'm old school, but when I hear "malt liquor," I think of a Colt .45. Keith just walked in to read this thread and said that I took your comment out of context.

I'm not feeling well in recent times, and little things trigger me lately. I have to have some medical problems taken care of on June 7th, which has me on extreme edge. I'm just a Nervous Nellie. I apologize for not understanding your lingo. I take things to heart a lot, and with all the other things rolling around me, naturally I thought the worst.

Thanks for the reply. :)
 
JAM said:
Thank you for the reply.

Maybe I'm old school, but when I hear "malt liquor," I think of a Colt .45. Keith just walked in to read this thread and said that I took your comment out of context.

I'm not feeling well in recent times, and little things trigger me lately. I have to have some medical problems taken care of on June 7th, which has me on extreme edge. I'm just a Nervous Nellie. I apologize for not understanding your lingo. I take things to heart a lot, and with all the other things rolling around me, naturally I thought the worst.

Thanks for the reply. :)
Click to expand...

It's all good. You are a writer, sometimes you know words can't translate inferences very well. I was just saying time to get drunk and forget about this train wreck. Both parties are probably 1 or 2 convos away from walking away in general. 1 party prob starting to feel hustled and lied to, the other party probably starting to feel harrassed and intimidated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
In the interest of professional billiards I have to wonder why anyone in their right mind would put up with Earl's childish behavior.
That's right he act's just like if not worse then a spoiled, ill-tempered, over-indulged, belligerent child.
He may have skills on a table but certainly not social skills.
What's he going to do on his next match, bring a machinist level and L-square to check the table? I wouldn't put it past him, he's a sensationalist.
In the past it was a gentleman's game. Now it's a mockery.
If it wasn't for my love of the game, he would be a valid reason to give it up as I would not want to be part of anything in anyway, shape or form that would require this sort of behavior from it's "professionals". I find it difficult to include him in that ranking as he clearly doesn't act the part.
I really have a hard time understanding why the IPT, him being a IPT card holder, condones his actions/act, or is that all part of a plan to attract attention.
 
Last edited:
TheMarsMan said:
Shane was promised a match on a 9' table if he lost on the 10' table. Calls were made immediately after the match and Mike G. would never set anything up. Mike G. is only as good as his word and in this instance that isn't very good at all.

JAM it is amazing how much you can crap you can type without any knowledge on a subject.

Earl is a joke and horrible for the sport, he obviously has many mental problems and it is a shame that he doesn't seek help.

I am done with being involved with pool.

Good Luck!
Click to expand...
Hi John, I agree 100% of what you just wrote.It is a real shame that the turn of events soured you on Pool, at any time it would be a great loss to lose someone like you, but at this time it is devastating. I hope at some point you have a change of heart and come back with Shane and knock Earl out Pool and maybe into a mental ward.I just had someone make a very distasteful remark abt. my hearing while playing in a tournament and it makes me wonder if this came from Earl being a low life role model.I hope you at least keep your appreciation of collectable cues an interest, you have some true works of Art and that should not be tarnished by the bottom feeders in Pool. Take care Frank O.
 
JudgeDredd said:
In the interest of professional billiards

... I would not want to be part of anything in anyway, shape or form that would require this sort of behavior from it's "professionals".

... I really have a hard time understanding why the BCA condones his actions/act, or is that all part of a plan to attract attention.
Click to expand...

Not intended as an Earl defense, but:

The BCA is not Professional pool and Pro players certainly do not have the opportunities afforded to most 'professional athletes'.

To hold players to some non-existent standard for a non-existent benefit... now that is crazy.
 
Black-Balled said:
Not intended as an Earl defense, but:

The BCA is not Professional pool and Pro players certainly do not have the opportunities afforded to most 'professional athletes'.

To hold players to some non-existent standard for a non-existent benefit... now that is crazy.
Click to expand...

You can just come right back and say "there are professionals in everything, whether they are certified by an organization or not does not matter; for if they are not the "professionals" of this "sport", then who is?"
 
My bourde, I should have said, he being a IPT card holder instead of tarnishing the BCA. I shall correct that right now.
 
paksat said:
You can just come right back and say "there are professionals in everything, whether they are certified by an organization or not does not matter; for if they are not the "professionals" of this "sport", then who is?"
Click to expand...


There aren't any, compared to hi-profile sports like football, baseball and golf.

Many went before us and still the cries are clear. There is no beauty here, just the stench of wine and beer. We save no souls. We break no promises.- Songwriters: Mark Brzezicki;William Stuart Adamson;Tony Butler;Bruce William Watson
 
Last edited:
I've been following this thread a little bit, watching some of these posts about the match with Earl and Shane. People are complaining about Earl not playing a second set. The bottom line is this. I dreamed I could fly in my dreams, but it doesn't happen in real life.

The real scenario is most thought Shane Van Boening was stealing on any table. If you were worried about Earl playing a second set, you should have put up for two sets, somebody has to win two sets, and flip a coin and see which set is played first. Does that make any sense?

The reality is Shane Van Boening was a 3-to-4-to-1 favorite still, with a 20-game spot going to 100 with the other railbirds. I was on the phone with my friend when they were playing. We both would have bet on Earl with those odds, but we found out about it too late to make a wager. Believe me, I would never, ever bet on Earl playing Shane on any other table but that one. Shane didn't know the strength of going from a 4-1/2-by-9 to a snooker table, more or less. It's not like going from a big table to a bar table and vice versa.

I remember when I was playing on a 5-by-10 and a 6-by-12, I could take a champion that never missed a ball on a regulation table and put them on those two tables right there and just totally steal their money. What I'm trying to say is it's an entirely different game.

There's no doubt in my mind that Shane Van Boening would beat Earl on a regulation table. Earl can think what he wants. He can't win. Why do you think the game hasn't been played?

As far as Mike putting up the money and saying that he would play maybe a week later, he could be a little bit wrong in that spot, but the way you get that done is you put up for both sets. When you give a person time to think about playing Shane Van Boening even and putting up 10,000, I would think about it, too, once you've already won the first 10.

Shane and Earl are both great players, and I have a lot of respect for both of them. As far as the gambling goes, if another match was scheduled, the money should have been posted ahead of time. Since it wasn't, people do funny things when it comes to gambling. Been there, done it, seen it. All I can say is just move on. Shane Van Boening will bust many and many more people down the road. Good luck to all.
 
Keith McCready said:
...Shane didn't know the strength of going from a 4-1/2-by-9 to a snooker table, more or less. ...I'm trying to say is it's an entirely different game.

There's no doubt in my mind that Shane Van Boening would beat Earl on a regulation table.
...As far as Mike putting up the money and saying that he would play maybe a week later, he could be a little bit wrong in that spot, but ...think about playing Shane Van Boening even and putting up 10,000, I would think about it, too,...

...if another match was scheduled, the money should have been posted ahead of time.
...All I can say is just move on. Shane Van Boening will bust many and many more people down the road. Good luck to all.
Click to expand...

Tell'um!!!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top