Mike beat Dennis fairly easily in their TAR match. Oh yeah, and he crushed Earl a couple of nights ago by 21-11. It takes players better than these to challenge Mike.
Mike Dechaine. America's Second Best Player
- Thread starter sjm
- Start date
Mike beat Dennis fairly easily in their TAR match. Oh yeah, and he crushed Earl a couple of nights ago by 21-11. It takes players better than these to challenge Mike.
Well, I guess if you beat the 2nd best player 2 sets in a row, you're the best player??!! Look out Shane!...lololol
takeitdown
Banned
Congrats Joe Dupuis
A great up and coming talent. Beat Dechaine 9-6 in 2nd finals set. Great shooting.
A great up and coming talent. Beat Dechaine 9-6 in 2nd finals set. Great shooting.
Yep. Mike just got bumped out of that spot. LOL.
Is it just me or does Dechaine come off as a little smart-ass? Could be wrong but he would stand at the second diamond watching me rack for about one minute before he's told to sit.
This isn't advanced trigonometry or some shit like that, it is actually fairly simple. Mike is one of the 3 or 4 best 9 ball players (on standard equipment, in a tournament setting) playing in the US right now. To argue that is pretty pointless, his results are backing this up.
Now where the argument gets a little murky is when you start talking about who is the overall better player (rotation only). Mike has basically perfected the 9 ball rack/break and he shoots straight as an arrow. On standard equipment that is huge advantage. On tighter equipment other aspects of the game become more important such as kicking, safety play and most importantly.....patience.
I made this longwinded reply to simply say that in a race to 9/11 at Derby or the Open Mike is a force and is one of the best. The flipside to that is that if he plays on a snug table without brand new cloth his vulnerabilities will show up. Playing well in short races/new cloth/ polished balls/manipulating the rack is great but it does not demonstrate him to be a superior player overall. Mike has dedicated himself to becoming great at that game much like Donny Mills did.
Comparing Mike to JA is undestandable, they are both one trick ponies (rotation players). Johnny A is a superior player to MD, he demonstrated why I say that against SVB. On tough equipment that will force decisions and reward superior execution, JA would handle Mike rather handily I believe. I also think that if neither were allowed to touch or inspect the rack they could play on any table between here and Mars and I would bet on JA.
Very long story very short.... JA is a better player than Mike IMO.
Now where the argument gets a little murky is when you start talking about who is the overall better player (rotation only). Mike has basically perfected the 9 ball rack/break and he shoots straight as an arrow. On standard equipment that is huge advantage. On tighter equipment other aspects of the game become more important such as kicking, safety play and most importantly.....patience.
I made this longwinded reply to simply say that in a race to 9/11 at Derby or the Open Mike is a force and is one of the best. The flipside to that is that if he plays on a snug table without brand new cloth his vulnerabilities will show up. Playing well in short races/new cloth/ polished balls/manipulating the rack is great but it does not demonstrate him to be a superior player overall. Mike has dedicated himself to becoming great at that game much like Donny Mills did.
Comparing Mike to JA is undestandable, they are both one trick ponies (rotation players). Johnny A is a superior player to MD, he demonstrated why I say that against SVB. On tough equipment that will force decisions and reward superior execution, JA would handle Mike rather handily I believe. I also think that if neither were allowed to touch or inspect the rack they could play on any table between here and Mars and I would bet on JA.
Very long story very short.... JA is a better player than Mike IMO.
I can't say that I agree entirely with this post, but it's pretty good. When JA played Shane, that wasn't a very good Shane. He was FAAAAAAAR from his top gear, if even in gear at all. JA caught SVB on the right weekend and took him off. If that match happens a week earlier, or 2-3 weeks later, it's not even close.
All that being said, I think if Mike D. doesn't let it get in his head that he's playing JA, I think it's a tight set. I think JA still pulls it down, but not handily. I think JA is a little better than MD right now. JA in his prime would DESTROY MD, but right now, maybe a ball or two better at most. (I'd love to be proven wrong on this, but I seriously doubt that will happen.)
Either way at the moment, I think I'd throw MD in the top 3-5 American tournament players, and overall skill. If he learns to check his ego, and play nice with others, he's a shoe in for Mosconi.
All the best,
You guys argue as Christians vs. Atheists would.
In the end, it's a race to 5. Anyone can win. By tournament finishes, Mike is probably not the 2nd best player, but definitely in the top 5. There's no arguing that. Bergman is not the 4th best player in the U.S. Though he is progressively getting a lot better, and that's the truth.
Talk with facts, people. Please.
In the end, it's a race to 5. Anyone can win. By tournament finishes, Mike is probably not the 2nd best player, but definitely in the top 5. There's no arguing that. Bergman is not the 4th best player in the U.S. Though he is progressively getting a lot better, and that's the truth.
Talk with facts, people. Please.
Absolutely not! This is the internetz!!!!
right you watch shane an appleton play on that table.niether one could make balls they loosed the pockets on that table for shane.johnny could beat shane again on that table if they tighten the pockets back.
You'd win my money...
I totally agree with the sentiment, talk with facts!
Hard statistics tell the story.
So, going back to the very first post:
By big tournament finishes, Mike is pretty clearly the 2nd best player.
By money, we have 5 players finishing ahead of Mike - Shane, a four hall-of-famers.
Subtract the $10,000 those players got just for showing up to the Mosconi Cup,
and two of those HoF players (Earl and Johnny) finish below Mike.
That's in 2013. In 2012, only Johnny and Shane finished ahead of MD.
Speaking of money...
A lot of people keep mentioning Bergman. I think it's a flavor-of-the-week thing.
I don't understand why anyone would mention him ahead of Hall.
Are people getting them confused lol?
Yes, he won a DCC 1-pocket and that's extremely strong.
But what else has he done in the past 5 years?
He had a magical year in 2008. But the stats seem to show that was kind of a fluke.
Which one of these 2 looks more tournament-seasoned and consistent?
