Earl Shane II
- Thread starter gulyassy
- Start date
i would hope not,but i would not bet on it.
The thing is this. It's probably the funding of Mike G., and the other backer, that makes things happen, and until one or both are ready to post the monies ahead of time, well, then it's a moot point. We can all wish it to happen!
These events do cost a large chunk of cheese to become a reality. When the dust settles, not very many people appreciate the guts it took for some to post the five-figure sums. These are working people that are the stakehorses, and they can only post when it is logistically convenient for them as well as financially. :wink:
The thing is this. It's probably the funding of Mike G., and the other backer, that makes things happen, and until one or both are ready to post the monies ahead of time, well, then it's a moot point. We can all wish it to happen!
These events do cost a large chunk of cheese to become a reality. When the dust settles, not very many people appreciate the guts it took for some to post the five-figure sums. These are working people that are the stakehorses, and they can only post when it is logistically convenient for them as well as financially. :wink:
Only problem is Mike G. hasn't even acknowledged that Shane will get the re-match when that was a stipulation before the first match. If he said it will take a minute to organize a rematch because both Shane and Earl have busy schedules, but it will definitely happen in the near future, that would be understandable. Anybody could understand that. They're both busy guys.
However, he's come on here and posted about the match or the DVD's of the match a few times, and every time the issue of the rematch (which was agreed upon before the first match) comes up, he magically disappears. That's the issue I think everyone is currently having an issue with.
Last edited:
I hope you are treated with a little dignity in the future after posting up your hard-earned dough, so that the masses can be entertained. I'm sure there are some railbirds, like myself, who appreciate your efforts.
It leaves a sick feeling in one's stomach when you pour your heart and soul into an endeavor only to be kicked in the teeth down the road. Some folks in the pool world have selective memories.
When you're winning, everybody is your friend, as long as you offer an opportunity for others make money; thereafter, though, you end up the doormat and the butt of jokes, sometimes by the very ones you've helped in the past.
Bottom line -- and I'm sure you know this -- don't ever forget who you are. I wish you much future success and opportunities to capitalize on *your* assets.
Welcome to the wonderful upstanding world of pocket billiard railtards. However I think you know my comment there quite well without explanation. :wink:
It's an easy game woofing from the sidelines. Funny thing is they both had the "same chance", on the "same table". I do think if Shane had practice time on the 10' he would likely win that match, BUT kudos to Earl for showing just how great a shot maker he is making it look easy on the BIG table. To compete at that level at almost 50 is a feet most don't accomplish.
I would look forward to seeing another match on a 9 or 10' between these two anyday.
Last edited:
It ended up being 11 discs. Price will be $99.95.
I kind of have my hands full at the moment but the discs are almost ready to go. The first 100 sets are all burned and printed they just need to be assembled and shipped.
Well, word of mouth is actually hearsay, and it does mean nothing. You're right about that!
An oral contract is worth something, but in the case of this match, there was no date certain set by either side.
If somebody other than Mike G. would like this to happen immediately, like some of the posters to this thread want, then it might be a possibility for them to ask Mike G. if they can provide the funding for the match now, so that plans can then be forthcoming. It's only a mere $10,000 or so to get this baby going.
I don't know if Mike G. wants to include anybody else in the funding, but it's worth a shot if folks want this match to happen right now. They can come up with the funds, ask Mike G. if he's interested, and then go from there.
Since Mike G. is the money man and no date was agreed upon between either side, then it truly is Mike G.'s right to set the match when it is comfortable financially for him as well as logically convenient for Earl. He doesn't owe anybody an explantion of a date certain. It's his money; it's his business.
The key thing there is the loser has "the option" to get a rematch the very next weekend.
Who knows why it didn't take place that next weekend?
Maybe Shane decided he didn't want to deal with Earl's behavior again so soon.
Or Shane just had other plans.
The only way anyone can blame Mike or Earl is if Shane wanted that rematch & they turned Shane down. (and that probably didn't happen)
Who knows why it didn't take place that next weekend?
Maybe Shane decided he didn't want to deal with Earl's behavior again so soon.
Or Shane just had other plans.
The only way anyone can blame Mike or Earl is if Shane wanted that rematch & they turned Shane down. (and that probably didn't happen)
Thats what I'm talkin about.
Thanks for the link!
I guess the only people who know what happened after the match when Earl defeated Shane is Shane, Earl, and their stakehorses. I'm not sure if anybody else is involved in the funding of this event, though.
Maybe I am looking at this in a different light than most, but I don't think the parties involved -- stakehorse/backer and players -- owe it to the members of this forum to keep them apprised of the conversations that have taken place. I could be wrong.
I can't remember when this happened. Did it occur in February? We're in May now, so that's three months later.
Thanks for the link!
I guess the only people who know what happened after the match when Earl defeated Shane is Shane, Earl, and their stakehorses. I'm not sure if anybody else is involved in the funding of this event, though.
Maybe I am looking at this in a different light than most, but I don't think the parties involved -- stakehorse/backer and players -- owe it to the members of this forum to keep them apprised of the conversations that have taken place. I could be wrong.
I can't remember when this happened. Did it occur in February? We're in May now, so that's three months later.
I think a little more is owed to the railtards on the forum. Some people made string bets on this match that included the rematch on the 4.5x9 table. If Shane didn't want to play, then it is what it is. However, it appears as though it's not the case. I can see why some people who bet on Shane would be very angry (those who also had the follow-up bet on the 9'er).
I like all the parties involved-- Mike/Marsman/Shane/Earl. They're all good people. Someone of the 4 should say why the follow-up match wasn't played since: 1) Mike said there was the option and 2) Quite a few people had the follow-up bet going based on what Mike said and are stuck money.
So, that's why a lot of people are dogging the point.
I'm curious as to what is customary with online betting on a pool forum. I never bet on pool on the Internet, so I'm a little green in this department.
Should the backers -- Mars/Mike -- base their efforts on the wishes of AzBilliards forum members? I'm not sure I agree with this, but again, I could be wrong in my thinking.
When I'm staking a pool player in a match, I don't give two sheets to the wind what the rail is doing if my money is not involved. If my horse wants to play all night, then so be it. If my horse is weak and wants to call it a night, then he's entitled to make that move. If my horse wants to quit winner, then giddyup. If my horse wants to play the next week and changes his mind, then that's okay by me.
If the rail isn't funding my horse, I don't think they should have any say in the logistics of any match I'm staking. Maybe the motto should be "BETTOR BEWARE." :grin-square:
Thanks for the link!
I guess the only people who know what happened after the match when Earl defeated Shane is Shane, Earl, and their stakehorses. I'm not sure if anybody else is involved in the funding of this event, though.
Maybe I am looking at this in a different light than most, but I don't think the parties involved -- stakehorse/backer and players -- owe it to the members of this forum to keep them apprised of the conversations that have taken place. I could be wrong.
I can't remember when this happened. Did it occur in February? We're in May now, so that's three months later.
Jam if thats the case and they didnt want to get the forums involved they should of pm each other,then none of us azer would not of supported it via pay per view and with the dvd sales,so in realality if they want a CHANCE to make any money they have to inclued us the public or no money!