Shane and mike updates

Celtic said:
Indeed. It is kind of comical that when asked why he would not bet his own cash against SVB he stated that this was how he makes his living, his "job", but what he needs to comprehend is that a job is something that everyone has to actually "work" at and if he is not putting his 40 hours a week+ into the game then he is not truly treating pool like a career.
Click to expand...

I need to watch the tarcast I guess. Mike said he would not bet on himself? Maybe he should have and then he would have been more motivated. So is Mike done with gambling? Is he now going to be like Ralf Souquet and fully committed to a professional career free of "action". Somehow I doubt it. I am pretty sure that if I wanted to play Mike for $5000 then he would want to cover all of his side himself.

If I don't bet on myself then it's because I know I am in for an ass whooping. Seems like Mike knew it as well.
 
JB Cases said:
Actually, Mike doesn't yet have the firepower to handle anyone in the world.

SVB has played Busty and Orcullo many times. He doesn't duck anyone. He has lost some and won some.

Mike needs to reall commit to the game and put in the hours that Shane does. The comment about working 10 hours on the break is correct. Shane once made a comment that he worked one day 18 hours straight on his break. Obviously that kind of fanatic devotion pays off.

Walter Lindrum the greatest English Billiards player who ever lived spent the first three years of his training only allowed to use ONE BALL. He had to be able to put that one ball any where on the table with pinpoint precision. The result was that he was so far ahead of his opponents that he had to spot ALL the other world class players big blocks of points just to make the games fair.

Now, Shane isn't that far above the other world class pool players like Orcullo but he is that far above all the US players in his age bracket.

Mike simply doesn't have the same skill set. Yet.
Click to expand...
They certainly are at different places in their development. Look up Mikes player profile. Less than 10 years sgo he was B player. I think hes come pretty far. Shanes game is more solid over the past few years no doubt. He used to have a little dog in him, I dont see that anymore.
10 ball and 9 ball are really too easy of a game for the best players. I mean break make a ball or two, look at the table and your out. Its like playing 8 ball on a barbox, just getting way too easy.
Thats why they keep making tables bigger, pockets smaller and alternating breaks. What needs to change is the game.
 
The break has become too much of a factor.

cueporn said:
They certainly are at different places in their development. Look up Mikes player profile. Less than 10 years sgo he was B player. I think hes come pretty far. Shanes game is more solid over the past few years no doubt. He used to have a little dog in him, I dont see that anymore.
10 ball and 9 ball are really too easy of a game for the best players. I mean break make a ball or two, look at the table and your out. Its like playing 8 ball on a barbox, just getting way too easy.
Thats why they keep making tables bigger, pockets smaller and alternating breaks. What needs to change is the game.
Click to expand...

The break has become too much of a factor. I'd like to see a mandatory roll out after the break so at least there's some "moving" for the first shot. When you make 3 balls on the break every time and the ones by the corner it makes it like a "carnival game". The Game's just way too easy with the "magic rack," especially if........well, if you know how to use it. ;) 'The Game is the Teacher'
 
I just watched the post-match interview. I think after Mike acknowledged he couldn't fade Shane's break, Justin should have asked him how he felt he matched up with other aspects of Shane's game. There was a past alex/shane TAR where the break was clearly the factor. Jay asked Alex in the interview whether he thought the break was the factor. Alex glared at him like "Really?" It was obviously the factor. In this match I think it clearly wasn't the factor.
 
CJ Wiley said:
The break has become too much of a factor. I'd like to see a mandatory roll out after the break so at least there's some "moving" for the first shot. When you make 3 balls on the break every time and the ones by the corner it makes it like a "carnival game". The Game's just way too easy with the "magic rack," especially if........well, if you know how to use it. ;) 'The Game is the Teacher'
Click to expand...

Exactly. I mean even I broke and ran a race to 7 twice in my life and I'm nobody.

Its just too easy for top players. Like playing barbox 8 ball race to 2.

I agree magic rack is too predictable, only makes the game easier.

SVB's break is just unbeatable. Hes on the 1 ball after making a ball nearly 70% of the time. He has put in the hard work and is very deserving. I just want pool to be more competitive. It cheats us all to make it too easy.
 
JB Cases said:
Is he now going to be like Ralf Souquet and fully committed to a professional career free of "action". Somehow I doubt it.
Click to expand...

I for sure doubt it, Ralf strikes me as someone who puts some time into the game. Mike stated clearly that he practices for about a day or two before a big event or match, other then that when he is not playing he is hanging out with friends, golfing, slacking off and not focusing on actually "being" a professional pool player.

Mike met a actual professional pool player this weekend, hopefully he learned something about the actual commitment it takes to be an actual pro with world class level speed, because Mike flat out ain't there and he never will be with his slack attitude and part time play schedule.
 
It might be too easy for SVB because of his break but that’s because he puts the time in. I saw the 3-day TAR match at Amsterdam Billiards where he beat Mika. A couple of hours before the start of the match he was on another table, practicing one thing – his break. Over and over and over and over again. Break/re-rack, break/re-rack… That’s discipline – racking is boring. If Mike, who has a very strong break, really thinks it’s just a breaking contest (which in this case it wasn’t), why doesn’t he go break-re-rack, break re-rack for a few hours a day like Shane does instead of whingeing about it.
 
Looking back at AtLarge's stats (thanks as always for posting those), I noticed Mike's breaks are actually not far off from Shane's. In fact that may be the one part of his game that kept him competitive. Out of anyone, his breaks look the most like shane's, same power, same hop-back-and-squat cueball action.

Shane -
Made a ball and didn't foul 43/54 breaks (79.6%)

Mike -
Made a ball and didn't foul 23/29 breaks (79.3%)

So, Mike has the same opportunities after the break, and with the push-out option he can win the rack if he out-thinks shane. If anything, the break wasn't the problem, it was everything that comes after the break that killed him. For example shane missed ZERO regular (non-bank) shots out of probably almost 500 balls.
 
Last edited:
CreeDo said:
Looking back at AtLarge's stats (thanks as always for posting those), I noticed Mike's breaks are actually not far off from Shane's. In fact that may be the one part of his game that kept him competitive. Out of anyone, his breaks look the most like shane's, same power, same hop-back-and-squat cueball action.

Shane -
Made a ball and didn't foul 43/54 breaks (79.6%)

Mike -
Made a ball and didn't foul 23/29 breaks (79.3%)

So, Mike has the same opportunities after the break, and with the push-out option he can win the rack if he out-thinks shane. If anything, the break wasn't the problem, it was everything that comes after the break that killed him. For example shane missed ZERO regular (non-bank) shots out of probably almost 500 balls.
Click to expand...

The numbers don't tell the whole story here. Shane was quite often playing 6 ball after the break. The action of the balls was very uniform and he often made multiple balls and no clusters....but in the end he simply outplayed Mike.

Nick
 
master_cueist said:
What I am wondering is...Does Mike have the mental ability to overcome this? Given it obviously is not the first time he has been beat, but like many, I truly believe that he thought he was going to beat Shane this weekend. I truly believe he thinks he is the best player in the United States and possibly world. So does he have the ability to get a horse f***ing like that and realize that he is not even close to the best in the states and learn from it, or will he go into a long and possibly permanent "give up" mode? Many many many greats in all walks of life and many different talents go away early because someone just totally and completely out-classed them at what they thought they could not be out-classed in and they just give up and become chumps. In this instance a quote from Pool Hall Junkies comes to mind even thought I obviously am not calling Shane a chump but when Nick says "pretty soon the only people that you will be able to beat, are people who think they are bigger losers than you". If Mike doesn't try to over-come this really quickly, I don't think he has the mental strength to get over it in the long run.
Click to expand...

Mike doesn't think he's the best in the country or world. He knew he was jumping in the deep end with Shane. But Mike will get over this loss quickly. He took a lot of heat after dogging his brains out on the Mosconi team, the bounced back and had a strong finish at Turning Stone. He will go to this next event and play fine.

Mike is young and has shown moments of amazing and moments of bad. But end of the day, Mike is a top American player and he will play any other American for the cash.
 
Mike lost to the best player in America and maybe in the world. What's the big deal. If you're not losing, once in a while, you're not playing very good players. He'll be just fine.
Shane is in a class of his own, has a lot to do with the time that he puts in practicing. Could any of you spend 18hrs breaking and racking.

Quit your *****ing and go get some practice, Mike want a piece of you.


You go Mike
 
Like Jay-Z says, if I shoot you I'm brainless but if you shoot me then you're famous

SVB won, where's the story in that? Outside of Archer which American is he not going to be massively favored against? Favorites win most of the time, that's why they are the favorites.

Dechaine had good shooting stats which as painful as it sounds, supports his argument about the break contest.

I will say Mike probably learned something from the match, I'm sure he'll be on to tell us what. SVB played really good shape, got the rolls, and is flat out stealing on making balls on the break. He broke and ran 50% of the time literally, I don't think anyone could have beaten him this wknd if he shot like that.
 
Nick B said:
...Shane was quite often playing 6 ball after the break. ...
Click to expand...

Shane made 4 balls on the break (without fouling) just twice; he won one of those games and lost one of them. He made at least 3 balls on the break (without fouling) 9 times, or 17% of his 54 breaks. Mike did so 5 times, or 17% of his 29 breaks.

Here's more detailed info on the distribution of the number of balls made on the break: http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4019920&postcount=6
 
Last edited:
cueporn said:
Exactly. I mean even I broke and ran a race to 7 twice in my life and I'm nobody.

Its just too easy for top players. Like playing barbox 8 ball race to 2.

I agree magic rack is too predictable, only makes the game easier.

SVB's break is just unbeatable. Hes on the 1 ball after making a ball nearly 70% of the time. He has put in the hard work and is very deserving. I just want pool to be more competitive. It cheats us all to make it too easy.
Click to expand...

Shane practices his break so he got good at it. Maybe it's time for other pro's to take note and practice. All I hear are complaints about how great Shane breaks. If that's the case, it sounds like break practice time, right:). They aren't going to change all the rules because Shane breaks good, lol.....:grin-square:
 
AtLarge said:
Shane made 4 balls on the break (without fouling) just twice; he won one of those games and lost one of them. He made at least 3 balls on the break (without fouling) 9 times, or 17% of his 54 breaks. Mike did so 5 times, or 17% of his 29 breaks.

Here's more detailed info on the distribution of the number of balls made on the break: http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4019920&postcount=6
Click to expand...

Oh I was just talking in generalities. I watched both nights at least twice. From Mike's chair it felt like 6-Ball. SVB played great. MD missed too many balls either way to beat Shane in Top-Gear. I believe that only Earl in his prime had that Ultra High-High Gear.

What we watched on Saturday might be as well as anyone can play 10-ball. If he didn't get to close on a ball (I think the six) and then just watch as the 9ball didn't quite make it to a hanging pocket it could have been worse. Or if he makes a ball on his final break the score is really unflattering.

Nick
 
cleary said:
Mike doesn't think he's the best in the country or world. He knew he was jumping in the deep end with Shane. But Mike will get over this loss quickly. He took a lot of heat after dogging his brains out on the Mosconi team, the bounced back and had a strong finish at Turning Stone. He will go to this next event and play fine.

Mike is young and has shown moments of amazing and moments of bad. But end of the day, Mike is a top American player and he will play any other American for the cash.
Click to expand...

After reading that Mike wouldn't bet his own against Shane and reading you saying Mike knew he probably couldn't win (my take on your statement) then I have to say I also wish for the old TAR format where money is put up and one man gets the cash and the other guy gets nothing.

If, as you say, Mike knew he couldn't win then I have to say it was a pure freeroll and that is unfortunately not really "action".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top