With all due respect, Ken, what does playing Keith on his money or somebody else's money have to do with how strong a player one is on a barbox?
It seems like people are nitpicking pool player's strengths on a barbox in recent threads, though I'm not sure for what purpose.
I can get Keith to post in this thread. He's been wanting to post lately on a few threads he's read on AzBilliards, but I have respectfully requested he remain mum on some topics. Keith isn't as familiar with forum culture as I am, and I don't want to see him paint himself in a corner on the black-and-white.
So having devoted hundreds, if not thousands of hours to the Keith McCready Story, I can definitely say Keith bet his own cash quite often. He used to carry big boodles of cabbage, I think they call it, but he was also staked by stakehorses when he was in his prime because he had a reputation of getting that money. Sometimes Keith would stay up all night gambling and show up at a tournament with no sleep. The tournament winner would win $5,000, but Keith would leave the tournament with 20 large from his action exploits. The tournament venues were oftentimes gathering places for players of Keith's ilk. :tongue:
Another thing that was unique about Keith when comparing him to other action players of his era is that Keith could walk into a joint and get action going, no problem. This still holds today. Some players might shoot lights out, but they have the personality of a gnat and can't get action unless it's handed to them.
The late Geese, may he rest in peace, was a GREAT action player, but he had the personality of a pitbull when it came to getting down. Geese would walk into a pool room and yell out, "Does anybody want to play some 9-ball?" and if there was no response, he'd turn to whoever he was with and say, "Okay, let's go. Nothing happening here." He just didn't have that finesse power or the gift of gab that Keith has.
What separates Keith from the rest is that everybody usually enjoyed the show, win or lose, when playing with Keith. Keith can massage, talk smack, and get down in any venue I've been with him at. Unlike Nick Varner and a few other strategic-type players, Keith had a very, very strong offensive game. You didn't see Keith playing safeties as often as others, much to his detriment sometimes, but when he did pocket that "impossible dream" shot, it was like poetry in motion. It was beautiful.
In a traditional barkfest, some players try to high-roll others players, stating, "Well, I'll play you, but you got to play for $20,000," hoping the pool player would pass if he didn't have the cash.
Well, with Keith, he had a Rolodex of stakehorses around the country who would back him in high-stakes action matches. One time, he got staked over the phone. The stakehorse confirmed with his opponent that he would back Keith, so that they could move forward with the festivities. :grin-square:
I kind of don't like these "Who's the best?" threads because it seems like in order to praise one player, the status quo on this forum is to demean another in doing so. I just don't get it.
JAM -
Bobby made the comment "I can tell you this much for sure, any of these players that played Keith in his prime( and they bet their own cash and most of them would'nt) would have got their nuts shot off !"
I know Buddy RARELY played without a backer.
You have made numerous comments including the most recent one of Keith playing Dave for $10K and then only getting $2K for winning. Following with Keith was pretty disappointed in only getting $2K. Making me wonder, why wasnt that discussion had BEFORE the match, I have never heard of not knowing the distribution BEFORE the match is played, but nevertheless.
I dont think I was out of line at all. If you are saying that Keith ALWAYS bet his own, great. If he sometimes bet his own, great. If he was like Buddy and hardly ever bet his own, thats great too.
Bobby says it makes a difference, (I think it does too). But what the hell does Bobby know.
Ken