Keith Would have Crushed Them

Keith didn't have that t-shirt say the world except the pinoys get the 8 on a 4x8....It said The world gets the 8 on a 4x8...I would say that's pretty strong.:cool:

Keith played a lot on 4 x 8s when he was coming up because of his guardian, Bob. the first time I played him it was on a 4 x 8 in bob's billiards when Keith was I think 14 years old. He was a sucker then that road players would target in that poolroom. It wasn't more than a year or so later that he was emerging as a world beater at Bellflower billiards.

But he was always broke because of the track. Him and Tony Banks were a trip back then. And then it was the card parlors, anything to gamble at. Actually, at that age he was also a pretty good junior golfer, just a talented kid. Robin Bell was just coming up at the same time in the same area, Westminster, Orange County.
 
BIG HEAVY CUE BALL I'd prefer Matlock in his prime on a box, + he played most his life in damp/humid conditions, playing conditions in Southern California were not as constantly brutal as where David grew up.
 
who will bet 'way more' than 50 dimes and still play the same in regards to todays players? none. cornbread red..eddietaylor,
bugs, freddy? anybody who frequented the rack? yeah, there are wayyy too many to name from the past, but who does that today?

i give tons of props to guys like john schmidt and shane b/c they will step up when TAR puts something on when the oppurtunity comes
up, but how many now can say they hunted for action like keith? maybe shane to a degree. also, guys like keith who can hit that
high gear when they're playing for ridiculous amounts are indeed a rarity, espeically today, so to say that "many a gambler is a better
pool player than Keith by your standards because they will bet way more than $50,000 and play exactly the same"...just aint right.

keith could have a million above the lights and he'd still make it look effortless in his day. not too many can say that now, although there are a couple exceptions. and that is IMO a valid way to measure a pool player.

keeping your cool under pressure is how you measure just about anyone at a high level of any sport.

And how much did they have when their game went South? 000000000. Johnnyt
 
Keith Would have Crused Them

I agree. Years ago I was on a road trip with Hawaiian Brian through Florida, and that's how he broke down a lot of good players, with his shot-making ability, especially cutting balls in in shoot out. the modern one foul ball in hand is more of an equalizer because of the luck involved.

I agree completely. I can beat a world class player once in a while with one foul ball in hand rules since I can play safe when I get out of line (when I'm not suppose to). I have no chance with roll out rules winner breaks. It is simple as that.

By the way Hawaiian Brian was a monster also. So wash his buddy Howard Iketa (sp).
 
Keith's high run?

I heard he has ran 13 and out in a race to 13 for the cash.

I heard a story once that Keith ran 26 racks of 9 ball on a bar table without missing and ended up loosing at the end of the night. I don't know who he was playing or what the spot was, but can any one out there verify this story of Keith's run of 26 racks of 9 ball on a bar table?

I have not read this whole thread, I only saw 13 racks mentioned above.
 
High Run?

Keith, I see you posting in this tread. Did you run 26 racks on a bar table?
If so who were you playing and what was the spot?:confused:
 
Keith is a legend.... I would have loved to play pool in his era. 2 shot/roll out is the best way I think to play 9-ball. It takes away A LOT of luck and bad rolls. I envy Keith and all who were able to play during his time. I would give anything to have been apart of Camp Reyes when they came over to the states for the first time. I heard Reyes couldn't ever beat Buddy out of the cash anyone else hear/know about this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
Keith is a legend.... I would have loved to play pool in his era. 2 shot/roll out is the best way I think to play 9-ball. It takes away A LOT of luck and bad rolls. I envy Keith and all who were able to play during his time. I would give anything to have been apart of Camp Reyes when they came over to the states for the first time. I heard Reyes couldn't ever beat Buddy out of the cash anyone else hear/know about this?

I think Buddy did beat effie at Red's in Houston in the early eighties, I'm sure Jay H. could comment further.
 
When Keith was 19 I spent over a month with him on a road trip through the south. I can't say what happen later in his life, but at that time he took nothing when playing pool not even a beer.

By any chance, you nickname wouldn't be "Scrawny Ronnie" would it?
 
Most older players that I've talked to, that saw Keith in his prime, tell me that Keith had the highest gear they have ever seen. That includes the players of today.

The real test would be to see how players of today like SVB, Kirkwood, Bowman, etc. would respond to such a ridiculously high gear that Keith had. I don't think they have played anyone just like that yet.

They had a chance too, Efren was that type of player with a ludicrous speed and ability to win. Noone in the 1990's was playing him for cash straight up. SVB can go ahead and play him now, far past Efren's prime, but he would not want anything to do with an Efren 15 years younger. The reality is that noone did.

I think that there is the answer, Kieth was like an Efren level powerhouse, and if he were in his prime around now few players would be stepping up to play him. They would be ducking him or asking for spots just like they do with Orcullo today. Parica in the 1980's, Hall in the 70's and 80's, there are just some players that few players were lining up to play. I don't think most of the players today mentioned would want anything to do with any of them in their prime. Orcullo would, but he is probably the closest thing to a modern day peer of those past players, and he gets little action straight up.
 
Because there are a few videos on the internet of Keith playing in 88 or so. If that is how Keith played in his prime Alex would stick him up playing on a 9 footer.......

Yeah, who is that he is playing anyhow in that one video? Seems to be familiar, think I remember him winning a few world championships and US Opens or something of that sort... nah probably mistaken, just some local bum. Surprising that Keith could let a guy like that get some games let alone win the match. I mean it is a few years after Keith's prime but come on, losing to THAT guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHQw9T5uvyk
 
It's just not that hard....

for anyone to say "with all due respect" when they mention anyone who surely deserves some. And to denigrate someone with profanity is totally unacceptable IMO. I don't care if it's 'free speech' you cling to or not, we live in a society.... that means we all need to be sociable. It really doesn't hurt to be respectful. Unfortunately many of the "youngsters" may need a "Webster's" to understand what that means.

I think Rodney Dangerfield said it best.............:rolleyes:

Have a great day.

td
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
Mentioning Keith going to the race tracks reminds me of a story my buddy Vernon Elliott told me several times about a time that Keith's stake horse (also a dangerous guy) gave Keith some money to play and Keith took off to the race track and lost. Vernon would laugh about that until tears rolled down his cheeks. Keith, why don't you tell us the dtails of that story. Stories are actually what everyone on the forum loves the most. This BS about who is/was the best is like a Christian and Muslim arguing what religion is best. It always ends in a draw with everyone mad and wanting to go to war. By now we all should know the results of that endeavor. Besides, I think Vernon was the best!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
I think Buddy did beat effie at Red's in Houston in the early eighties, I'm sure Jay H. could comment further.

Buddy did beat Efren after the Red's tournament was over. I don't remember the race but I actually served as referee for the match. I do know they bet 5K a side. Efren looked tired after playing night and day for a week. Buddy won but he was not the dominating player you might think. He beat a weak Efren, sorry to say.

I've always felt there may have been other extenuating circumstances involved. Efren and his crew had won well over $50,000 that week in Texas and there was some grumbling and hard feelings. A small loss might have been the smart move at that point. The way Efren played in his tournament matches and after hours games Buddy would have been no match for him. Efren was simply the best player in the world right then, by a wide margin. Except for Parica of course, who we had not seen yet.
 
They had a chance too, Efren was that type of player with a ludicrous speed and ability to win. Noone in the 1990's was playing him for cash straight up. SVB can go ahead and play him now, far past Efren's prime, but he would not want anything to do with an Efren 15 years younger. The reality is that noone did.

I think that there is the answer, Kieth was like an Efren level powerhouse, and if he were in his prime around now few players would be stepping up to play him. They would be ducking him or asking for spots just like they do with Orcullo today. Parica in the 1980's, Hall in the 70's and 80's, there are just some players that few players were lining up to play. I don't think most of the players today mentioned would want anything to do with any of them in their prime. Orcullo would, but he is probably the closest thing to a modern day peer of those past players, and he gets little action straight up.

You're right, no one in the 90's (and beyond) would play Efren ONE POCKET for the cash. At least not even. At 9-Ball he had several takers, including CJ Wiley who chased him all over the country putting a hurt on him.

In the 80's thru the beginning of this decade the most feared money player (by everyone) has been Parica. He beat everybody that tried to play him for 15 years. Great players (including CJ, Mark Tadd, Johnny, etc.) just left him alone. Very alone!
 
Buddy did beat Efren after the Red's tournament was over. I don't remember the race but I actually served as referee for the match. I do know they bet 5K a side. Efren looked tired after playing night and day for a week. Buddy won but he was not the dominating player you might think. He beat a weak Efren, sorry to say.

I've always felt there may have been other extenuating circumstances involved. Efren and his crew had won well over $50,000 that week in Texas and there was some grumbling and hard feelings. A small loss might have been the smart move at that point. The way Efren played in his tournament matches and after hours games Buddy would have been no match for him. Efren was simply the best player in the world right then, by a wide margin. Except for Parica of course, who we had not seen yet.

I do remember now about Efren being worn down, Efren went through Danny Medina easily as I recollect, and Danny was playing pretty well at the time, tho Danny was a Monster on the bar table till he crossed over to the 9' tables. Danny was one of thee best bar table players in his era, probably/easily the top ten/top 5? at one time, his bar table style is reflected in his big table play, he was always too far away from the next shot was his only weakness, he should of beat Sigel in the finals Reno/Vegas?? had it not been his cue ball position.
 
In the 80's thru the beginning of this decade the most feared money player (by everyone) has been Parica. He beat everybody that tried to play him for 15 years. Great players (including CJ, Mark Tadd, Johnny, etc.) just left him alone. Very alone!

I heard that about Parica, supposedly there was a long long time when noone in the world would even try him.

The very sad thing is that Parica is somehow going to get the short end of the stick in the history books and be overshadowed by the memory of Efren, Strickland, Archer, Keith, and many other players that seem to be more front and center in the memory of people.

It must be because he is short.
 
I think you can't compare eras in any sport.

Discussions are fun but the same equipment, rules and levels of competition to push someone to become better would have to be the same.

Michael Jordan is called the best basketball player but he didn't have to face a Wilt Chamberlain or a Dr J. He can be called best for his era but the best of all time would be fantasizing. Look how much trouble players had when they changed the basketball.

Didn't Efren Reyes start dominating (I don't know) only after Mike Sigel, Buddy hall and Nick Varner stop competing?

I think structured competition like tournaments can be the only measure of greatness because gambling involves different dramas that have nothing to do with playing the game. Factors like gambling with Samoans and not knowing if you're going to leave alive would be an example of the drama.

Didn't Mike Sigel say we all think we played better than we really did?
 
Buddy did beat Efren after the Red's tournament was over. I don't remember the race but I actually served as referee for the match. I do know they bet 5K a side. Efren looked tired after playing night and day for a week. Buddy won but he was not the dominating player you might think. He beat a weak Efren, sorry to say.

I've always felt there may have been other extenuating circumstances involved. Efren and his crew had won well over $50,000 that week in Texas and there was some grumbling and hard feelings. A small loss might have been the smart move at that point. The way Efren played in his tournament matches and after hours games Buddy would have been no match for him. Efren was simply the best player in the world right then, by a wide margin. Except for Parica of course, who we had not seen yet.


I always thought Parica was the leader of the invasion. Are you saying that Efren was the first Filipino player to "conquer America" ??
 
Back
Top