I don't know, does he?
Mosconi Cup Stats -- Career Records for Players on 2016 Teams
- Thread starter AtLarge
- Start date
I don't know, does he?
Oh I don't know about that, Shane's avaliable, Alex is available, Rodney has issued challenges to any and all European players to match up with him.....so, they have action if they want it.
Again. I said the player pool who will even give them action is small. You named 3 people. I can't tell what point you are trying to make.
Just because Jayson doesn't gamble with three people that you know of doesn't mean he won't gamble. He may have gambled with them and we just haven't heard about it. Who knows. To say he doesn't play as well as them is ridiculous.
You are the one who doesn't think they gamble at all.
Are you just trying to argue? How many times do we have to say they gamble before you make the point you were alluding to?
From what I've been told by more than one European player, gambling is not a big part of the pool culture in Europe. They're more focused on leagues, tournaments, and the pro tour. And they seem to be dominate in the MC.
To me it seems pretty obvious... if the USA wants to get better at handling the kind of pressure you get from a large international tournament in front of a room full of spectators, they should play in more large international tournaments with a room full of spectators.
I don't think it would help them much on trying to get in action more. Different kind of pressure. All that would accomplish is figuring out out who's the third best american, in front of a small group of people.
To me it seems pretty obvious... if the USA wants to get better at handling the kind of pressure you get from a large international tournament in front of a room full of spectators, they should play in more large international tournaments with a room full of spectators.
I don't think it would help them much on trying to get in action more. Different kind of pressure. All that would accomplish is figuring out out who's the third best american, in front of a small group of people.
Only an idiot would try to claim that gambling is a more valid test of pool skill than high-level tournament play. Don't try to put that on "Americans."
And by the way I would also find it idiotic if someone claims Shane's tournament performance isn't up to others' levels because he's only come in 2nd (twice) in the World 9-ball tournament, and only won tons of other major tournaments over the years. I seriously doubt that Shane is the greatest player who has ever lived (that's a pretty high standard), but he's done enough to prove himself as one of the best tournament players in the world right now.
Unfortunately the Mosconi Cup is really the only tournament that fits those criteria. Any other tournament (US Open, World 9-ball, etc.) and the seats are mostly empty, with some scattered sleepy old guys watching.
Bingo! My point has been that when the idiots here on AZB respond to a player wanting to get better at playing pool....it's almost always...."gambling" will make you a better player, but I'm here to tell you that's BS. In almost 50 years of playing pool myself, the hardest games I ever played were for free. In tournaments all the games you play are for free until you've won enough games to get in the money. Concentration is different in tournaments that it is gambling. Does anyone here really believe SVB would play a race to 13 10ball or 9ball against any other top player in the world knowing that was it, one race for all the money, no second chance to break even, no rematch....no nothing? Do you think he could get a backer under those requirements?
The point I'm making is that when you're gambling with someone, you get a chance to coast if you're ahead, a chance to come from behind if you need to, a chance to break even and bail out. If you lose, you play another match, and another and you keep playing until someone throws in the towel and calls it quits. AND, it's generally accepted that the winner can't call it quits, only the loser can, OR the winner gets labeled as a quiter when they're up on the money, thereby hurting his ability to get future opportunities to gamble. The point that I'm trying to make is that when you're gambling, you're either getting paid to pay attention, or paying for NOT paying attention, but either way you're in a dog fight with ONE person until someone calls it quits.
Playing in tournaments is a whole different attention span because you don't have the time to wear down you opponent into submission, so you have to come to the table and focused on every game, every shot....WITHOUT any financial reward per game, nearing you're NOT getting that paid to play incentive.
It's like in Horse Racing, extremely long distance races belong to the Arabian breed of horses, the mile and a little longer belong to the thoroughbreds, and the 1/4 mile and shorter belong to the 1/4 horses. Gamblers unlike the thoroughbreds and the Arabians, they like to match up and wear down their opponents. The true tournament Players, the non gamblers, or like the quarter horses, fast out the gate, fast to the finish line. Most world championship tournament winners don't want to play a race to 100, most gamblers don't want to play a race to 13 for all the money with no chance of playing again if they lose the first race, yet that's what the format tournaments are based on, short, quick races for all the money at the end of the line, the difference being is holding that level of focused and concentration all the way through a tournament from the first match until the last, because that player knows he don't have the time to really feel out his opponent in a match. That player if he plays 8 matches in a tournament has to approach every match with the mindset that he's up against the winner of the tournament and he has to beat him before he himself gets beat.....or he's OUT!
I've been to a couple of US Opens and while it wasn't a massive crowd, it was certainly standing room only for me (and probably for anyone who hadn't paid for a seat). Of course, we're talking hundreds of people, not thousands. But that's more than you'll see watching pool in any other context.
I definitely think making the US Open finals will make someone feel similar pressure to the mosconi cup. Early stages of the us open, maybe not... but final 4, you gotta feel it.
In fact, I wonder if some people feel it even more intensely when on the verge of winning a world-anything title or us open. The mosconi cup is a free roll and you split the credit with 4 other guys, even if you play great. And joe casual hasn't heard of it. The other events, you might have thousands invested and only one name goes on the trophy.
Here's 3 scenarios for everyone to consider. Let's look at the US Open for this.
What if the US Open was a single race to 21 with a match time limit of 3 hours, alternating breaks, break box, 9 don't count on the break, 4 balls must pass the side pockets for a legal break, who would be your favorite pick to win.
Same US Open format, race to 21, 3 hour time limit per match, winner breaks, 9 on the break counts, break from anywhere, no break requirements....but no racking template, meaning delta 13 rack use only.
No suppose the same US Open was a race to 3 double elimination, alternating breaks.....who would be your favorite player to win then?
What if the US Open was a single race to 21 with a match time limit of 3 hours, alternating breaks, break box, 9 don't count on the break, 4 balls must pass the side pockets for a legal break, who would be your favorite pick to win.
Same US Open format, race to 21, 3 hour time limit per match, winner breaks, 9 on the break counts, break from anywhere, no break requirements....but no racking template, meaning delta 13 rack use only.
No suppose the same US Open was a race to 3 double elimination, alternating breaks.....who would be your favorite player to win then?
In no particular order
1. Wu, Shane, Orcollo, Shaw
2. Same
3. Too much of a crap shoot to pick a favorite.
My point is that with longer races the only players who stand a chance of winning is the best Pros.
But why can't anyone see that with a rating system, therefore a handicapping system for weaker players, 7ft tables, and shorter races is the direction pool is headed unless there is a Pros Only system based first on a players skill set, then on a players ability to compete next? Mark my words, if something is the done soon, there won't be any Professional pool players left in this country....not if they have to move out of country to make a living as a Pro. All we're going to be left with is thousands of league players, and they better hope they have a job because they'll never earn enough money playing in handicapped leagues to support themselves.
Coming at it from a slightly different angle, looking at the Fargo ratings of both teams has them pretty darn close, with a slight edge to Europe.
SVB 823
Dechaine 798
Bergman 796
Morris 781
Skylar 778
Team USA Average 795.2
Feijin 812
Shaw 807
Grey 795
Albin 791
Appleton 791
Team Europe Average 799.2
SVB 823
Dechaine 798
Bergman 796
Morris 781
Skylar 778
Team USA Average 795.2
Feijin 812
Shaw 807
Grey 795
Albin 791
Appleton 791
Team Europe Average 799.2
Yeah, I was exaggerating a bit. It is sad though watching those streams of the World 9-ball Championship when they scan through the 95% empty seats. And I agree that the Mosconi Cup is different, but I bet it does get their competitiveness way up.
I guess you haven't read any of the Shane threads on azb.
Thanks for the update.
I know Mike Z. does not take any bunk from anyone. Not sure what happened, but I hope there's not anger issues with Mike going to represent Team USA. That is my concern. He was distant in England last time, seemed disjointed with the rest of the team. That is no good.
Here's a little Mosconi Cup history that might be of interest.
First 12 years (1994 through 2005)
Last 10 years (2006 through 2015)
All 22 years
Observations:
• Never has a team won the Cup without winning the most games.
• The difference in games won by each team was 3 or less 4 times, resulting in 2 Cup wins for Team USA, 1 for Team Europe, and 1 tie.
• The most games played was 389 in 1995 (Team Europe won the Cup 16-15); the fewest games played was 92 in 2001 (Team USA won the Cup 12-1).
• The average number of games played for the first 5 years of the event was 299 per year. The average for the most recent 5 years was less than half of that -- 140 per year.
• The average margin of victory is 4.4 matches for Team USA in their 11 wins and 4.1 matches for Team Europe in their 10 wins.
[Bases on annual info on Wikipedia and Matchroom Sport websites]
First 12 years (1994 through 2005)
- Cups won -- 10-2 USA
Matches won -- 151-111 USA (+ 40 matches, 57.6% winning percentage)
Games won -- 1,291-1,184 USA (+107 games, 52.2%)
Last 10 years (2006 through 2015)
- Cups -- 8-1 Europe plus one tie
Matches -- 107-74 Europe (+ 33 matches, 59.1%)
Games -- 840-707 Europe (+133 games, 54.3%)
All 22 years
- Cups -- 11-10 USA plus one tie
Matches -- 225-218 USA (+7 matches, 50.8%)
Games -- 2,024-1,998 Europe (+26 games, 50.3%)
Observations:
• Never has a team won the Cup without winning the most games.
• The difference in games won by each team was 3 or less 4 times, resulting in 2 Cup wins for Team USA, 1 for Team Europe, and 1 tie.
• The most games played was 389 in 1995 (Team Europe won the Cup 16-15); the fewest games played was 92 in 2001 (Team USA won the Cup 12-1).
• The average number of games played for the first 5 years of the event was 299 per year. The average for the most recent 5 years was less than half of that -- 140 per year.
• The average margin of victory is 4.4 matches for Team USA in their 11 wins and 4.1 matches for Team Europe in their 10 wins.
[Bases on annual info on Wikipedia and Matchroom Sport websites]
Last edited: