StevenPWaldon said:
Okay, he played good, world class even. My point however still stands. Back then, it was not a world championship. And number 8 on the list back then, unimpressive.
Nick Varner vs Grady Mathews Video!
- Thread starter Fast Lenny
- Start date
Okay, he played good, world class even. My point however still stands. Back then, it was not a world championship. And number 8 on the list back then, unimpressive.
RunoutalloverU said:
RunoutalloverU,
I do give you credit for sticking to your guns. This despite all the other well written posts in this thread advising you otherwise.
I would like to add something for you to think about. 25 years from now, if other countries in the world develop pro football teams, and say for example, Russia fields an undefeated team that ends up beating the USA's "Super Bowl Champions" to win the World Football Championships in the year 2033.
Does that mean that people who are alive at that time can look back and say stuff like "The New England Patriots didn't really win a world championship back in the 2000's because it was not really a "world's championship." ???
Also, there were 45 different countries represented in the 2007 World 9 Ball Pool Championship. There are 195 recognized countries in the world.
That's roughly 23% of the world's countries represented. According to your way of thinking and according to your own reasoning, Daryl Peach, Ronnie Alcano, Chia Ching Wu, etc can not really be called "World Champions" because the whole world is not represented in the tournament.
But guess what? Back in the 1960's and 1970's, the only really great pool player from the Philippines was Boy Bical. Russia (Soviet Union) didn't HAVE pool players. Same with China. And so my point is that when all the greats won their championships in years past, they competed against and won against THE BEST THAT PLAYED AT THAT TIME.
If you had the same crew that I mentioned in my earlier post to you and ADDED say another 128 players from all over the world, whether they knew how to play or not, whether they were any good or not, THAT would appease you so it can rightfully have been called a "world championship"?
Name the great player from anywhere else in the world who was not present during the tournaments of the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's and should have been.
That's my point.
Fast Lenny said:
Gotcha. Yes it was a great accomplishment to get that far but your post suggested that great pool is what was contained in the clip.
As I stated, I meant no disrespect to Grady who is a great pool champion who didn't play well at all in THAT rack.
But as his post above confirms, he has a pretty thin skin.
A while ago, he apologized for that sort of thing and said he was going to change is ways...but clearly has not.
Too bad.
Regards,
Jim
Cornerman said:
Fred, of course he played fantastically to get into the finals. I was just commenting on the ONE rack posted and that comment that we were going to SEE great pool from Grady.
Of course THAT RACK was not a great one for him...or anything close.
I SAID I meant no disrespect and even suggested (by inference) that Fast Lenny might have shown some by being sarcastic.
And I agree with the other posters who have commented negatively about runoutalloveryou's view that Grady in his prime was not a champion by today's standards.
To the contrary, as many have pointed out, he has the RECORD to prove that is not true...and further, the constant threads about the new breed being better than the old breed or vice versa are nonsense that can never and will never be proven...so they are just idle speculation and silliness.
Regards,
Jim
av84fun said:
What you mean like publicly....ok guy.
Terry Ardeno said:
Ironically in pointing out to me that im wrong, you came up with the perfect example. The NFL is exactly what im talking about. I can't think of any other sport that is more US centric than football, and yet we call it a world championship.
And I see your point, that there is no exact criteria for how many countries need be present to have a "true" world championship. Its not like there is a standard criteria that says,"ok well you only have 45 countries and you need 46 so sorry, its not a real world championship."
However, that isn't what I said. You don't need every country in the world to be there. Thats just stupid, one for bringing up that ridiculous idea, and two for acting like I was making that my point. Now, you have a point, what is my criteria for having a true world championship? I don't know. But what we have today, is sure a lot closer to one than in the 80s or 90s. 45 to 4 OR 5. I think ill take the former.
Thanks
Thanks for all the positive words. Yes, I have gotten more sensitive over the years. It's very hard to have someone pick your work apart for no good reason that I can think of. Many of my friends have answered this better than I could so I guess I have nothing to say on the subject.
I do thank you, Fast Lenny. I took your post as a compliment. Later, if you gentlemen wish, I'll be glad to relate interesting facts about that event, that are not publicly known.Have a nice day, everyone,
Grady
Thanks for all the positive words. Yes, I have gotten more sensitive over the years. It's very hard to have someone pick your work apart for no good reason that I can think of. Many of my friends have answered this better than I could so I guess I have nothing to say on the subject.
I do thank you, Fast Lenny. I took your post as a compliment. Later, if you gentlemen wish, I'll be glad to relate interesting facts about that event, that are not publicly known.Have a nice day, everyone,
Grady
Grady, I, for one, would love to hear more about that event. Having you on this forum is truly an honor.
I can second the wants to hear all about the tourney Grady.--Leonard
I can remember playing in a few tournaments in the same year (89). Varner won 8 times? He was playing almost perfect pool. As a matter of fact, he travelled to the Phillipines that year and beat Efren in a race to 45 nine ball -and also for cash.
Grady appears to be playing at that level in the video; we only get to watch the very end, where Grady's only open shot was one that Varner left near the side and I believe Grady had to be careful of a scratch.
And yes, he could play with anyone today.
Danny
Grady appears to be playing at that level in the video; we only get to watch the very end, where Grady's only open shot was one that Varner left near the side and I believe Grady had to be careful of a scratch.
And yes, he could play with anyone today.
Danny
I'm going to make some guesses, since those matches were embedded in my brain. I'm guessing that either it rained and someone left open the door, or someone changed the balls prior to the last couple of matches.Grady said:
I say this because things seemed to slow down, and there were some short position snafus from both Grady and from Nick. And both of you were playing such phenomenal position prior.
Fred
We're on the same page here Jim.av84fun said:
I happen to have in my archives both the Grady vs. Kim Davenport match as well as the Grady domination over Jim Mataya. If someone else hasn't put them on Youtube my now, I'll try to get to it, though I can't promise a thing.
Fred
I don't see how your point stands.RunoutalloverU said:
In 1989, at that tournament, the best in the world were represented. In 1989, no other country other than the Philippines and then Canada had a strong enough group of players to compete to win that tournament. Not even Germany which was the next best country, at least not in 9-ball. Not yet. In 1989, the players out of the UK were not at that level. The players out of Taiwan were not of that level.
It wasn't until the mid to late 90's that the rest of the world really caught up in 9-ball. So, the 1989 Brunswick World 9-ball Championship was indeed a true World Championship, just as the 1989 World Snooker Championship held only in the UK was a true World Championship. No other country in 1989 other than Canada could have produced a world caliber champion at snooker.
And, Nick Varner won that tournament. Nobody with any sense of pool history would dare say that Nick Varner wasn't the best 9-ball player on the planet in 1989.
Fred
Last edited:
Thanks Grady and you are a great player and asset to the game,i hope to find more videos but i have searched high and low and this is one of the few i have found,the other i believe is one pocket with Efren.It would be nice if anyone has videos of you to post them online and then you can give us the inside details and what was going on during those matches,sure would be great Grady.Grady said:
Here goes!!!
Hal Mix and Mike Sigel came to me before the match, asking me if I wanted to make a "saver" with Nick. I politely said no, that I'd rather play for all the money. Do you gentlemen think that if I weren't playing as good as anyone in the world, that he would have made such an offer? I was in the unique financial position of: $10,000 wouldn't help me much but $22,500 would. Remember first place was $15,000 and second place was $7,500.
Next, the untelevised matches were two out of three races to 8, a format I liked mightily. The TV matches were one race to nine. Now, with me winning the first 8 games, wouldn't I have won the first set and been down two-nil in the second, under the original format? That would have made me a pretty good favorite, no? Why TV has to change things I'll never understand. I don't see that at other sports.
At that particular time I would have played anyone in the word even 9 Ball, One Pocket or 14.1, especially if they'd go to a back table somewhere and bet their own money. I'm not saying I would have won but I sure would have played. This was also about the same time I was lucky enough to defeat Buddy, 11 to 0.
It was right after this time that I got served with divorce papers and frankly, I was never the same after that. Hope this post clears up some things.
Hal Mix and Mike Sigel came to me before the match, asking me if I wanted to make a "saver" with Nick. I politely said no, that I'd rather play for all the money. Do you gentlemen think that if I weren't playing as good as anyone in the world, that he would have made such an offer? I was in the unique financial position of: $10,000 wouldn't help me much but $22,500 would. Remember first place was $15,000 and second place was $7,500.
Next, the untelevised matches were two out of three races to 8, a format I liked mightily. The TV matches were one race to nine. Now, with me winning the first 8 games, wouldn't I have won the first set and been down two-nil in the second, under the original format? That would have made me a pretty good favorite, no? Why TV has to change things I'll never understand. I don't see that at other sports.
At that particular time I would have played anyone in the word even 9 Ball, One Pocket or 14.1, especially if they'd go to a back table somewhere and bet their own money. I'm not saying I would have won but I sure would have played. This was also about the same time I was lucky enough to defeat Buddy, 11 to 0.
It was right after this time that I got served with divorce papers and frankly, I was never the same after that. Hope this post clears up some things.
Don't Let The B******s Get You Down
Clears it up ?
I've read your book twice and I didn't even KNOW that you were married to Buddy.
Doug
(thank God Randi has filled your void)
Grady said:
Clears it up ?
I've read your book twice and I didn't even KNOW that you were married to Buddy.
Doug
(thank God Randi has filled your void)
Kickin' with Grady
Grady:don't know you/never will. I have several of your instructional tapes/I think they are great. I respect your opinion on anything pool related. Keep on posting. Sorry I missed you a couple of years back when you were at Hardtimes, Bellflower,ca in the spring doing a seminar upstairs.
Thanks again,
3railkick
Grady:don't know you/never will. I have several of your instructional tapes/I think they are great. I respect your opinion on anything pool related. Keep on posting. Sorry I missed you a couple of years back when you were at Hardtimes, Bellflower,ca in the spring doing a seminar upstairs.
Thanks again,
3railkick