metallicane said:
I never said Jay was a liar. Jay has forgotten more about the game than I will ever know. I am just saying that I find it hard to believe (never said I did not believe it) that someone as good as Sigel would duck anyone. It seems to be confirmed that Sigel was not the greatest money player, maybe he was just a great tournament player. I have seen Mike play and if I had his ability, I would play anyone.
That's one of the things that separates the truly great players from us mere mortals. They have the ability to just WATCH a player, and analyze their game down to the nuts and bolts.
Mike Sigel won many many many tournaments. That's a given.
Why?
Because he played technically perfect pool, match after match. By this, I mean he played good position, always got out when he was supposed to, and played locakdown safes when there was a doubt.
Mark Tadd? He would just try his best to put a 7-10 pack on you, and had the ability to do so.
Now, imagine fading that kind of heat. You play someone like that a long ahead set, and EVEN IF you are playing the "correct shot" 100% of the time, all it takes is ONE mistake, and the guy might run the set out on you.
The reason some really really really good players ducked Mark Tadd, is he bet as high as you would possibly bet, and then he rarely dogged a shot for that kind of money.
That's the same reason why Mark was respectful of Buddy and Jose back then. Buddy OR Jose were both MORE than capable of playing perfect sets, just like Mark, but THEY were probably a bit more knowledgable on percentages and such.
Playing anyone but Archer, Buddy, Parica, etc.. Mark could get away with running two and safe, and missing the safe slightly. I've seen many matches of Archer, Buddy, and Jose shutting someone DOWN if they are even the slightest bit off. And they played BETTER for the cash.
There are players that are terrific tournament players, and there are people who are terrific gamblers. The tournament players stand up well to tournament pressure, and are able to bring their A game for every match. The gamblers are able to play their A game, or very close to it, for 6-18 hours straight, and can deal well when someone runs 5 racks on them. Some, can do both.
Sigel i don't think was ever known as much of a gambler. Sure, he gambled big sometimes against some of the greats, but I think forst and foremost, he was a percentage player. There's not much positive expectation to playing all-time greats for big money. Not much to be won playing someone who is a threat to run 5 racks EVERY time they come to the table, like Tadd was.
Russ
