sjm said:You made some excellent points. The action players have certainly earned your respect and mine.
Still, when it comes to deciding who's the best, there is only one way. Put all the great players in the same place at the same time and after they all duke it out, find out who's the last man standing. That's what the major tournaments do.
It's a lot easier to wear down even the most worthy opponent in an action situation than it is to knock off champion after champion to win a major title.
Action games give you room for error. Winning five sets out of eight gets it done in action pool but it's not nearly good enough in tournament play. An hour of poor play may or may not bury you playing fifteen ahead.
It's not about the money, otherwise my idol would be the B player who beats another B player out of 5,000,000.
Greatness is about beating the best, one right after another. Only a few are up to this profound challenge, and only they have the right to be called the best.
I admire the action players, and do appreciate that many of them are wonderful and gifted players, but greatness is about sustained excellence, and only a tournament tests one's ability to produce scintillating stretches of sustained excellence.
You make your point quite well and I cannot and will not disagree with your logic. It DOES take a great player to win against the other great players. And in a tournament, you do have to win right now! No room for error. It's always been interesting to me that no matter what the rules are and the conditions, the cream always seems to rise to the top in Pool. Short race, long race, break from the box, break from the side, alternate break, whatever, the best players keep getting there in the end.
My theory is that near the end of a tournament, the pressure is the greatest and the best players have the "heart" to handle it. Other good players may show some weakness as they get close to the goal line. It's almost as if they know they aren't supposed to beat the other guy, so they don't. I've been witnessing this phenomena for a long time.
The best closer I ever saw was Mike Sigel. He knew how to seal the deal. He was at his best under pressure in a big tournament match. Buddy and Earl I would rate tied for second. They all could and would play super with the title on the line.
Over the years my experience was that in any given tournament with 64 or more top players, you could pick the winner from a small group of five or six guys. The rest of the pack was playing to finish high.
Take care and nice chatting with you.