Mark Tad?

[hello]

An interesting read on Tadd

https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/65f02e8ba2223cf4780e5fc8/6701e4a7e217276137a98d31_16796553620.pdf

 

[Double-Dave]

Around 15 years ago Mark was on here asking about some new shafts, he had never tried the Predator stuff, this was when he was living in Salt Lake.

I sent him a couple shafts to try out but he didn't really like any of them and sent them back. Who knows what might have been if he had really liked one of them, he wasn't too old at that point to get back in (close to) top gear. Never got the chance to see him play live, but from what I saw in older videos and read on here he could PLAY.

 

[T411]

I have nothing against gambling, and there were and are many greats that did so ''and'' played in tournaments.But I don't see how me not having heard of him Beating Buddy or Earl qualifies me as being naive..(?)He played in tournaments in the 90-ies, as there are accu stats matches with him playing Davenport and Sigel so he could and most likely has encountered other top pros from that era.And cell phones were not necessary to document big matches back then, people were there and would have chimed in by now, I would suspect.I mean, there were no cameras or phones when Archer ran 13 racks against Bustamente but the whole pool world knew very quickly what took place.

And I wasn't trying to be dismissive of his talent at all but was saying that, from what I have seen or read about him that no way was he the best player in the world at any time, tournament play or gambling and until someone credible (Jay Helfert comes to mind, who I am sure has forgotten more about pool than I will ever know) tells me otherwise this will remain my opinion.

That being said, I read that Mark was stricken with a grave illness and I wish him nothing but the very best on his way to recovery.

Peace, love, happiness and most importantly good health to all of us

Okay, fair enough, maybe I read into your post and took it as having something against gambling, mainly because I thought you were being dismissive of how well Mark played and referencing the absence of tournaments history.

I get that when people “rack-n-stack” players, tournament wins are what most go by. That’s what makes the “history books.” The road players, hustlers, and money matches? Those stories fade and that’s my point. Some great players never took the path that leads to the spotlight or the stat sheets, and most of them didn’t care to. Later in life, sure, some wanted recognition that’s human nature. But plenty didn’t. They just loved the game and the hustle, and they were as good as anyone.

Would Jay Helfert say Mark was the best in the world? I doubt it and I’m not saying that either. What I am saying is that Mark was one of the best players in the world at the time, especially when it came to gambling. And if he had ever focused on tournaments, I believe he would’ve been one to succeed at both your definition of “elite” and the ones that don’t meet your definition.

You said “there were and are many greats that did both.” No disagreement here, they absolutely did. In fact just about all of them did but they all didn’t do it equally as well. The gamble is a different animal. The pressure’s different. The mindset’s different. And no, the two don’t always correlate. For some, like Buddy or Efren, and some other sure. But not always.

A lot of that oral history is already fading. And honestly, that’s the part I feel gets lost with your argument. Maybe not intentionally, but it does contribute to erasing a real part of pool’s history. That’s what I’m saying is naive in your take.

So when I push back, it’s not just about Mark. It's about that part of the subculture of pool history of players like Cole Dixon, Wade Crane, Ronnie Allen, Al Romero, Keith McCready, and others whose best days were off camera, but who could flat out play as well as anyone has. Once the Jay Helferts of the world are gone, and the memory of players like Mark fades, what’s left is what you seem to you focus on and only help erase some of the real history of the past even earlier with comments like your earlier post. People like Jay can only tell what they remember and I’m sure Jay would tell you that he wasn’t all places at all times and only now shares the stories that he knows and didn’t real-time because he knows the “etiquette” and he wasn’t going to kill anyone’s action at the time.

I’ve said a version of this in the past - History is clinical and often cruel… pool is no exception. The road players, hustlers, and cash games won’t be remembered, not like the champions with titles. No footnotes for who they beat off record or what life handed them along the way. If you didn’t win on paper, in time those champions will be forgotten… but not with my help.

Just my two cents.

 

[Frosty]

By elite I mean the best players that won tournaments and placed highly in a lot of them.I think Grady mentioned in an accu stats commentary that in the 70'ies Buddy won 12 out of 14 tournaments finishing second in the other two.Thats elite to me.

That seems a rather narrow perspective. There are a gaggle of players in the history of the game that were world class, elite players that were not “tournament players” regularly, if at all. While I won’t denigrate those that choose the path of being tournament players, they’re not the same as high stakes gamblers, it’s a different kind of animal. For you to disregard those that didn’t grind it out on the tournament trail seems a bit short sighted to me, but everyone’s different and you’re entitled to your opinion.

 

[ghost ball]

I was in LA and used to head down to Hardtimes, Bellflower, in its hey day. This was when all top pros were hanging around including the Efren, Parica, McCready, Tang, Janette, etc were all there. Everyone was matching up with everyone. Everyone stayed away from Mark Tad. I remember just watching him on the back table all by himself practicing for hours. I think at the time, Efren was giving away the 8 to anyone except Mark. That speaks for itself.

I feel like he was only around for 2 years… shooting at that high speed. I know nothing about how he got there… other than his ability to focus.

 

[hello]

That seems a rather narrow perspective. There are a gaggle of players in the history of the game that were world class, elite players that were not “tournament players” regularly, if at all. While I won’t denigrate those that choose the path of being tournament players, they’re not the same as high stakes gamblers, it’s a different kind of animal. For you to disregard those that didn’t grind it out on the tournament trail seems a bit short sighted to me, but everyone’s different and you’re entitled to your opinion.

The problem is we can't exactly gauge gambling but we can do so tournament play far easier.Scott Frost (I assume thats not you) said he won 1.2 million in a match.Is he the greatest gambler ever..?

 

[axejunkie]

A thread about Tadd seems to surface every couple years. I've always been intrigued by them. I watched some his accustats match vs. Davenport today again and it's hard not to be almost hypnotized by his talent. Probably fair to say he was something of a pool savant.

 

[hello]

I would agree that Mark Tadd's elite status shined during a very brief window of time but it did shine bright. Look up the LA OPEN I believe it was. Mark beat the best in the world in multiple disciplines. I just don't think his heart was in tournament play. I would ask that you search the forum for threads on Mark Tadd, and then argue that Mark definitely earned his own legendary status within our billiards history since so many people love to share stories of his mythic exploits.

You are correct, he won the 9-ball, banks and was runner up in the 1 pocket division.Certainly no small feat.I would be very interested to see the tournament brackets.

 

[hello]

A thread about Tadd seems to surface every couple years. I've always been intrigued by them. I watched some his accustats match vs. Davenport today again and it's hard not to be almost hypnotized by his talent. Probably fair to say he was something of a pool savant.

He had that fast and loose style, almost like he was just practising...

 

[hello]

Around 15 years ago Mark was on here asking about some new shafts, he had never tried the Predator stuff, this was when he was living in Salt Lake.

I sent him a couple shafts to try out but he didn't really like any of them and sent them back. Who knows what might have been if he had really liked one of them, he wasn't too old at that point to get back in (close to) top gear. Never got the chance to see him play live, but from what I saw in older videos and read on here he could PLAY.

He was the first player I ever saw using a carbon cue (it looked like carbon anyway) in his match against Sigel on accu stats.

 

[hello]

Okay, fair enough, maybe I read into your post and took it as having something against gambling, mainly because I thought you were being dismissive of how well Mark played and referencing the absence of tournaments history.

I get that when people “rack-n-stack” players, tournament wins are what most go by. That’s what makes the “history books.” The road players, hustlers, and money matches? Those stories fade and that’s my point. Some great players never took the path that leads to the spotlight or the stat sheets, and most of them didn’t care to. Later in life, sure, some wanted recognition that’s human nature. But plenty didn’t. They just loved the game and the hustle, and they were as good as anyone.

Would Jay Helfert say Mark was the best in the world? I doubt it and I’m not saying that either. What I am saying is that Mark was one of the best players in the world at the time, especially when it came to gambling. And if he had ever focused on tournaments, I believe he would’ve been one to succeed at both your definition of “elite” and the ones that don’t meet your definition.

You said “there were and are many greats that did both.” No disagreement here, they absolutely did. In fact just about all of them did but they all didn’t do it equally as well. The gamble is a different animal. The pressure’s different. The mindset’s different. And no, the two don’t always correlate. For some, like Buddy or Efren, and some other sure. But not always.

A lot of that oral history is already fading. And honestly, that’s the part I feel gets lost with your argument. Maybe not intentionally, but it does contribute to erasing a real part of pool’s history. That’s what I’m saying is naive in your take.

So when I push back, it’s not just about Mark. It's about that part of the subculture of pool history of players like Cole Dixon, Wade Crane, Ronnie Allen, Al Romero, Keith McCready, and others whose best days were off camera, but who could flat out play as well as anyone has. Once the Jay Helferts of the world are gone, and the memory of players like Mark fades, what’s left is what you seem to you focus on and only help erase some of the real history of the past even earlier with comments like your earlier post. People like Jay can only tell what they remember and I’m sure Jay would tell you that he wasn’t all places at all times and only now shares the stories that he knows and didn’t real-time because he knows the “etiquette” and he wasn’t going to kill anyone’s action at the time.

I’ve said a version of this in the past - History is clinical and often cruel… pool is no exception. The road players, hustlers, and cash games won’t be remembered, not like the champions with titles. No footnotes for who they beat off record or what life handed them along the way. If you didn’t win on paper, in time those champions will be forgotten… but not with my help.

Just my two cents.

Well, some of the younger players probably ''now'' don't even know who Buddy Hall was or what his status in the pool world is...

 

[hello]

I've hear of him, i was told that he was at the u.s open and could get in action .And then something about him playing cards in Cali.But I hear a lot of stories, but never seen him play live.but sound like he can hit them sweet..I'll go out and look for the tapes..

Theres footage of him on youtube..

 

[hello]

For sure he could beat anybody he played in a single match but winning a tournament where you have to beat several
top players consecutively I don't think he was a threat, which his tournament record reflects (could be that he did not play in that many)

I stand corrected based on his LA open wins, which I was not aware of.

 

[hello]

I just watched Davenport-Tadd with Incardona and Jay commentating and they both did not refer to Mark as being the player some here say he was and surely both knew about the caliber of his play.Not putting him down, just sayin'...the match took place in 1992 and in 1993 he did win two out of three divisions in the LA open with with a second place finish in the third.Maybe in that year his game escalated to a higher level..?

 

[AtLarge]

You are correct, he won the 9-ball, banks and was runner up in the 1 pocket division.Certainly no small feat.I would be very interested to see the tournament brackets.

I checked Billiards Digest and Pool & Billiard Magazine. The only matches they mentioned that included Mark Tadd were the following (Tadd's score first in each match):

One-Pocket​

Steve Cook 2-3 (hot seat)​

Dave Matlock 3-1 (semifinal)​

Steve Cook 1-3 (final)​

​

Bank​

Lou Butera 5-1 (hot seat)​

Donnie Anderson 5-2 (final)​

​

9-Ball​

Bill Incardona 11-8 (6th round)​

Roger Griffis 11-3 (hot seat)​

Dennis Hatch 11-5 (final)​

​

For an idea of the field strength, here (from P&B Magazine) are the top 12 finishers in each event:

One-Pocket​

1 Steve Cook​

2 Mark Tadd​

3 Dave Matlock​

4 Jose Parica​

5/6 Jeremiah Johnson, Dan Diliberto​

7/8 James Brown, Cecil Tugwell​

9/12 Jimmy Fusco, Wade Crane, Cole Dickson, Jimmy Reid​

​

Bank​

1 Mark Tadd​

2 Donnie Anderson​

3 Lou Butera​

4 Bill Incardona​

5/6 Tony Fargo, Jose Parica​

7/8 Gary Spaeth, Shannon Daulton​

9/12 James Brown, Larry Humphreys, Tom Hardwood, Morro Paez​

​

9-Ball​

1 Mark Tadd​

2 Dennis Hatch​

3 Roger Griffis​

4 Mike Defino​

5/6 Bill Incardona, Keith McCready​

7/8 Rodney Morris, Jose Parica​

9/12 Grady Mathews, Bill Cress, Tony Fargo, Bill Meachem​

​

Tadd's winnings were $26,000 in total -- $5,000 for 2nd in One-Pocket, $6,000 for 1st in Bank, $10,000 for 1st in 9-Ball, and $5,000 in the Grand Prix (all-around prize)

​

​

​

 

[hello]

I checked Billiards Digest and Pool & Billiard Magazine. The only matches they mentioned that included Mark Tadd were the following (Tadd's score first in each match):

One-Pocket​

Steve Cook 2-3 (hot seat)​

Dave Matlock 3-1 (semifinal)​

Steve Cook 1-3 (final)​

​

Bank​

Lou Butera 5-1 (hot seat)​

Donnie Anderson 5-2 (final)​

​

9-Ball​

Bill Incardona 11-8 (6th round)​

Roger Griffis 11-3 (hot seat)​

Dennis Hatch 11-5 (final)​

​

For an idea of the field strength, here (from P&B Magazine) are the top 12 finishers in each event:

One-Pocket​

1 Steve Cook​

2 Mark Tadd​

3 Dave Matlock​

4 Jose Parica​

5/6 Jeremiah Johnson, Dan Diliberto​

7/8 James Brown, Cecil Tugwell​

9/12 Jimmy Fusco, Wade Crane, Cole Dickson, Jimmy Reid​

​

Bank​

1 Mark Tadd​

2 Donnie Anderson​

3 Lou Butera​

4 Bill Incardona​

5/6 Tony Fargo, Jose Parica​

7/8 Gary Spaeth, Shannon Daulton​

9/12 James Brown, Larry Humphreys, Tom Hardwood, Morro Paez​

​

9-Ball​

1 Mark Tadd​

2 Dennis Hatch​

3 Roger Griffis​

4 Mike Defino​

5/6 Bill Incardona, Keith McCready​

7/8 Rodney Morris, Jose Parica​

9/12 Grady Mathews, Bill Cress, Tony Fargo, Bill Meachem​

​

Tadd's winnings were $26,000 in total -- $5,000 for 2nd in One-Pocket, $6,000 for 1st in Bank, $10,000 for 1st in 9-Ball, and $5,000 in the Grand Prix (all-around prize)

​

​

​

Man, thank you so much for going through the trouble of getting that info Its a bit like I suspected, in that apparently (for whatever reason) a lot of the ''big guns'' did not participate in that event.Where are Varner, Buddy, Sigel, Rempe, Davenport, Earl, The Miz, Efren etc.?I very much doubt that they all had been knocked out in the early stages and while its still a great feat to almost win three divisions in a tournament, now that I see the roster, to me, it becomes less impressive...

 

[AtLarge]

Man, thank you so much for going through the trouble of getting that info Its a bit like I suspected, in that apparently (for whatever reason) a lot of the ''big guns'' did not participate in that event.Where are Varner, Buddy, Sigel, Rempe, Davenport, Earl, The Miz, Efren etc.?I very much doubt that they all had been knocked out in the early stages and while its still a great feat to almost win three divisions in a tournament, now that I see the roster, to me, it becomes less impressive...

The LA Open did not have PBTA sanctioning, and a sanctioned event (the Desert Dust-Off in Phoenix) was going on at the same time. A number of PBTA pros (Hatch, Griffis, Parica, Fusco, Butera) played in LA anyway.

The order of finish at the Desert Dust-Off was:

1 Archer​

2 Sigel​

3 Martinez​

4 Davenport​

5/6 Lebron, Luat​

7/8 Reyes, Ellin​

9/12 Hopkins, Strickland, Rempe, Hall​

Others in the Phoenix event: Bustamante, Potier, Breedlove, Varner, Wiley, Andam, Dominguez

 

[hello]

Ok, now we ''know'' how Tadd was able to produce his run ;-)

But how do you know all this?? Are you a pool historian or did AI assist..?

Either way, stupendous work, Sir

 

[AtLarge]

Ok, now we ''know'' how Tadd was able to produce his run ;-)

But how do you know all this?? Are you a pool historian or did AI assist..?

Either way, stupendous work, Sir

As I mentioned, I just consulted (hard copies) Billiards Digest and Pool & Billiard Magazine.

 

[AtLarge]

Here's another source; article on page 16 of the magazine (page 18 clicking to get there): https://www.azbilliards.com/publication/national-billiard-news-october-1993/

The National Billiard News, 1964-2007, can be found by clicking the "Goldmine" link on the main page of azbilliards.com.