Just spoke to Danny briefly... he says he lost two out of three. Won the 2nd game handily, then lost the third and pulled up.
I might get more details later...
- Steve
I might get more details later...
- Steve
orcullo vs. Barouti in straight pool. Ur thoughts
- Thread starter NYC cue dude
- Start date
Update:
I got the story wrong on the 2nd game. Dennis needed 15 and had a wide open rack. You guessed it, he left both the cueball and the last object ball in the rack area and tried to shoot it. Danny informed him, of course, that this wouldn't quite work out the way Dennis intended it, because the last object ball would have to be re-racked with the cueball behind the line.
Danny needed 35 at this point, Dennis obviously needed one. Danny beat him to the shot and ran out.
Dennis is too familiar with the game for this to be blamed on inexperience. I don't know what this is, but it cost him a thousand dollar swing.
- Steve
I got the story wrong on the 2nd game. Dennis needed 15 and had a wide open rack. You guessed it, he left both the cueball and the last object ball in the rack area and tried to shoot it. Danny informed him, of course, that this wouldn't quite work out the way Dennis intended it, because the last object ball would have to be re-racked with the cueball behind the line.
Danny needed 35 at this point, Dennis obviously needed one. Danny beat him to the shot and ran out.
Dennis is too familiar with the game for this to be blamed on inexperience. I don't know what this is, but it cost him a thousand dollar swing.
- Steve
Fragged said:
I disagree... I've played with numerous champion-caliber players and I've seen some of them just not pay close enough attention to the score when they are close to being out.
Recently, I played with someone who spent the last 6 shots at the table trying to manufacture a break ball, taking some lower-percentage shots along the way, when there was no need to create one. He only needed what was on the table.
NYC cue dude
Banned
I also just spoke to Danny. In game 2, Dennis only needed 1 (i think that is what danny said). Barouti then ran out the 25 (?) he needed for the win.
All in all, 9 hours for the games, the pace was brutally slow.
SJM, yes, that table is the tightest in the room, triple shimmed.
As far as Orcullo's brain lock, he is well aware of this rule, as it was discussed in the players meeting at the world straight pool championships held last month.
rg
All in all, 9 hours for the games, the pace was brutally slow.
SJM, yes, that table is the tightest in the room, triple shimmed.
As far as Orcullo's brain lock, he is well aware of this rule, as it was discussed in the players meeting at the world straight pool championships held last month.
rg
Steve Lipsky said:
This is a fundamental error! It clearly shows how little 14.1 Dennis has played. How good a player is he? He doesn't even know the rules and he is playing an old hand at 14.1, and still winning.
With Dennis' cue ball control, I could see him running hundreds someday, if he ever pursued the game seriously. This game is made to order for him.
Steve Lipsky said:
This shows some heart by Danny, to run out with Dennis in the one hole.
This thread reminded me of a post that was a reply to one of my posts in a thread dealing with last year's World Straight Pool Championships...
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=369750&postcount=57
Lol. I must have been smoking some fine stuff back then.
Though, I never did imply back then that Dennis was a better straight pool player than Barouty. But now, after Dennis has beaten Danny four out of the last six games (which include both tournament and gambling matches), that is now definitely debatable. More straight pool knowledge?...no question Danny has the nuts. But straight pool player?...you really can't question the match outcomes. They need to play more. 
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=369750&postcount=57
Lol. I must have been smoking some fine stuff back then.
Though, I never did imply back then that Dennis was a better straight pool player than Barouty. But now, after Dennis has beaten Danny four out of the last six games (which include both tournament and gambling matches), that is now definitely debatable. More straight pool knowledge?...no question Danny has the nuts. But straight pool player?...you really can't question the match outcomes. They need to play more. 
Well, at DCC in 2006, there were two hundred-ball runners who seemed to be unaware of the balls-in-the-rack rules, as I pointed out in a BD article. I think it is fair to ascribe the errors to lack of recent 14.1 experience.Steve Lipsky said:
As for players knowing the rules in general, my experience is that even if you cover things in the players' meeting, what you say does not always sink in. If you do not play 14.1 regularly, what happens with the final ball is confusing. I suspect that only half of the participants at the recent WC could list all of the possibilities with the correct placements.
I understand everyone's points, but I would just counter by saying that even in Dennis' "inexperience", he's probably played 1,000 frames of straight pool at the least. At the end of every single one of them, cueball and object balls stay in position unless one of them is in the rack. Then different stuff happens. Even if you don't know all the variations, you know you're not going to get to shoot from position.
You can say it's inexperience. But that would imply he's assuming, because he only needs 1 ball, that the rules somehow become different... I mean, I think it's a clear mental error.
- Steve
You can say it's inexperience. But that would imply he's assuming, because he only needs 1 ball, that the rules somehow become different... I mean, I think it's a clear mental error.
- Steve
Steve Lipsky said:
That only means he's human and prone to error for sometime, no matter how silly or unimaginable as it may seem. even old-timers who played cutthroat way back tend to forget the rules, so much is it for players who only began playing and know and memorize the rules in an instant. Too bad Dennis ain't no computer who could just simply input everything. oh wait a minute, computers also encounter some memory problems from time to time. lol !
Seems like people would rather discuss Orcullo's mistake rather than the fact that he beat a world-class straight pool player 2-1 in a gambling match in straight pool, which he really should have won 3-0.dmgwalsh said:
I would rather find out from the people who have witnessed the match if Orcullo's straight pool play is getting more "textbook" the more he plays straight pool, or if his patterns are still unorthodox and that of a rotation player. Obviously from his flub, he still needs to get the rules ingrained in his noggin.
jsp said:
probably that is the only criticism can be said of Orcullo. nobody questioned his pocketing skills on a tight table or let's say his ability to run a century in straight pool. in short, that is the only mistake he made during that game.