Snooker vs Pool players - More fuel for the fire

[Fred Agnir]

As for the snooker player missing pots, Im not sure where this comes from.

Video proof. Ronnie O'Sullivan. Stephen Hendry. Steve Davis, Karen Corr, the entire English World Team at the World Team Billiards. Missing Easy Pots. Did you not see the very clear and concise posts? They miss easy pots on pool tables.

Oh and I think Raj was also a snooker player before he took up 9 ball, he told me he had his first 100 break at 13 years old.

This is where you've completely gone off the deep end, Craig. I knew at some point you'd try to claim Raj, since you tried to claim Alex and Efren as anthying other than full-time pool players (they are pool players). Raj is a pool player. Nothing but a pool player. Just because he's from England doesn't mean he's a snooker player. That man is a pool player, and damned fine one. I'll let other snooker players confirm this.

Fred

 

[TheOne]

Video proof. Ronnie O'Sullivan. Stephen Hendry. Steve Davis, Karen Corr, the entire English World Team at the World Team Billiards. Missing Easy Pots. Did you not see the very clear and concise posts? They miss easy pots on pool tables.





This is where you've completely gone off the deep end, Craig. I knew at some point you'd try to claim Raj, since you tried to claim Alex and Efren as anthying other than full-time pool players (they are pool players). Raj is a pool player. Nothing but a pool player. Just because he's from England doesn't mean he's a snooker player. That man is a pool player, and damned fine one. I'll let other snooker players confirm this.

Fred

Nice selective editing fred, or maybe I didn't explain it properly. Everyone misses easy balls of course, the point I think I made was that that isn't becuase they've just played on a snooker table. I've never heard any serious player say that playing on a snooker table shortly before playing a pool player doesn't help their potting - makes them miss? OMG!

As for Raj, is this another one of your Efren stories LOL? I got a lift back to the hotel with him On Sunday night, we where talking about him possbily playing SVB, I told hime that Shane was a great bar box player and he prob shouldn't play him on a bar box. I also said something along the lines of but he's jumping up to a 9ft and is still learning that game although he is still a great player. I said but I assume you have a snooker background and you're going down to 9ft's so probably have a slight advantage there. He said too right about my reference to snooker background and told me had his first century when he was 13, but he indicated that he gave it up around 16. I gather after this is when he took up 9 ball. Oops, its like the Efren whipes the floor with Ronnie and Jimmy for millions of pounds story all over again lol

 

[Fred Agnir]

Nice selective editing fred, or maybe I didn't explain it properly. Everyone misses easy balls of course, the point I think I made was that that isn't becuase they've just played on a snooker table. I've never heard any serious player say that playing on a snooker table shortly before playing a pool player doesn't help their potting - makes them miss? OMG!

Why do I bother? Read the half dozen other posters, please. They all answered your question.

As for Raj, is this another one of your Efren stories LOL?

My stories??? Are you that thick? It wasn't my story. It was Darryl Peach's story. And I followed up. It answered many questions, and laid to rest any inaccuracies the snooker contingent on this board (who didn't believe the story) brought forth. It also put to rest you claim as to who would adapt quicker, even though it obviously seemed the snooker players had the better shot at it.

He said too right about my reference to snooker background and told me had his first century when he was 13, but he indicated that he gave it up around 16. I gather after this is when he took up 9 ball.

What I really think is that you asked a loaded question, and no matter what he answered, your take on his answer was the same. It seems to be your MO. You can see him shoot. He's a pool player. Do you agree or disagree? He's not 13 or 16. He's a grown man. Is he a pool player or a snooker player? How does shooting snooker many years ago give someone an advantage today? If you truly play both disciplines, you know damned well that whatever you did last week is all but forgotten today. Raj doesn't shoot with snooker mechanics, mechanics that have been specifically honed for potting balls. His mechanics are pool mechanics. How again do you make the leap that he "was a snooker player" and that he "has an advantage on a 9' table"?

And as a snooker player that lost two-and-out, you of all people should have the integrity to admit the difficult transition. You admittedly missed shots. You said so yourself. If your snooker background gave you a potting advantage, why did you miss so many shots?

Oops, its like the Efren whipes the floor with Ronnie and Jimmy for millions of pounds story all over again lol

Wonderful strawman tactics. Why have a real debate with facts when you can introduce mockery and lies, right? The Efren story, with all it's fact should have given your side the humility to step back and rethink your side of the debate. In fact, it did. But two or three of you didn't see the truth in it. I'm am stunned you are still asking and saying the same two statement, even though they've been shown numerous times to have holes.

Fred

 

[TheOne]

Why do I bother? Read the half dozen other posters, please. They all answered your question.

My stories??? Are you that thick? It wasn't my story. It was Darryl Peach's story. And I followed up. It answered many questions, and laid to rest any inaccuracies the snooker contingent on this board (who didn't believe the story) brought forth. It also put to rest you claim as to who would adapt quicker, even though it obviously seemed the snooker players had the better shot at it.


What I really think is that you asked a loaded question, and no matter what he answered, your take on his answer was the same. It seems to be your MO. You can see him shoot. He's a pool player. Do you agree or disagree? He's not 13 or 16. He's a grown man. Is he a pool player or a snooker player? How does shooting snooker many years ago give someone an advantage today? If you truly play both disciplines, you know damned well that whatever you did last week is all but forgotten today. Raj doesn't shoot with snooker mechanics, mechanics that have been specifically honed for potting balls. His mechanics are pool mechanics. How again do you make the leap that he "was a snooker player" and that he "has an advantage on a 9' table"?

And as a snooker player that lost two-and-out, you of all people should have the integrity to admit the difficult transition. You admittedly missed shots. You said so yourself. If your snooker background gave you a potting advantage, why did you miss so many shots?

Wonderful strawman tactics. Why have a real debate with facts when you can introduce mockery and lies, right? The Efren story, with all it's fact should have given your side the humility to step back and rethink your side of the debate. In fact, it did. But two or three of you didn't see the truth in it. I'm am stunned you are still asking and saying the same two statement, even though they've been shown numerous times to have holes.

Fred

LOL, you're just too easy Fred, its no fun! Sorry I didn't realise this was such a touchy subject too you. I'm sorry that Efen didnt say what you wanted him too, but I did admire the fact that you posted it no matter.

Despite what you may think I wasn't speaking to Raj in anticipation of this Forum, it didn't even cross my mind, it was just a normal conversation. If it had crossed my mind I would have asked him further questions but I thought this debate had finished. I'm sorry if you don't like the answer Fred, but I can't do anything about that, don't shoot the messenger. I don't understand why you get so upset about the fact that Raj might have been a snooker player before, so what? As for me LOL, I was a full time snooker player from 1990-91, I really wish that would have helped me in virginia lol but I think it was a little too long ago! Funny thing though no matter where Ive been this year people still say, you play snooker don't you! Raj is 23 now so it wasn't that long ago he gave up snooker, actually half the time I did but people still notice I did as I did Raj, its bloody obvious!

Fred it is pretty obvious that you've never really played snooker to any decent standard so I guess Im wasting my time as others have said. Still I tried

 

[Fred Agnir]

LOL, you're just too easy Fred, its no fun! Sorry I didn't realise this was such a touchy subject too you. I'm sorry that Efen didnt say what you wanted him too, but I did admire the fact that you posted it no matter.

What are you talking about??? Did you not read what he had to say? I didn't think so. YOU said he played lots of snooker. YOU were wrong. Colin Colenso said, if he truly ran X amount of centuries, then he truly is a Magician. He did, and he is. YOU say that a snooker player can adapt to pool quicker than a pool player can to snooker, one reason of which is that the pockets are bigger for a snooker player and smaller for the pool player. Yet, this insignificant match that put the snooker player and pool player on a table that had bigger than normal snooker pockets ended up favoring the pool player. The pool player got the award for "fastest" century (first century) of the tournament. Is all this lost on you? Is there nothing here that will make you admit the errors of your thinking?

'm sorry if you don't like the answer Fred, but I can't do anything about that, don't shoot the messenger. I don't understand why you get so upset about the fact that Raj might have been a snooker player before, so what? As for me LOL, I was a full time snooker player from 1990-91, I really wish that would have helped me in virginia lol but I think it was a little too long ago!

Here's where you contradict yourself again. Does playing snooker several years ago help you or not? Was Raj's background an advantage for him "going to a 9' table" or not? Sounds like it was'nt for you, because it was too long ago, but it was for him, because it was 6 years ago! You're making this up as you go along, just so you can't admit to being wrong.

Was Raj "a snooker player" or not? You say he is. He isn't. He may have played snooker. He may have gotten a century. Steve Mizerak, Mike Massey, David Howard, Efren Reyes, Alex Pagulayan, all have centuries. None of them are snooker players. Your own eyes should show you that Raj isn't a snooker player. You sure you know what a snooker player looks like?

Fred it is pretty obvious that you've never really played snooker to any decent standard so I guess Im wasting my time as others have said. Still I tried

No, you failed. It's a wonderful insult, but I've already said that I've only played snooker a handful of games. But, you can't keep changing your argument. Stick with one. I know something of snooker. There are 12' Canadian snooker tables in my state. My mentor had a tight one in my home pool hall. Canada still has 12' snooker tables, and I live 5 hours away. I've spent months in Europe as a world traveler, having the privilege of watching 100's of hours of Crucible and other tournament action, and playing on snooker tables in Germany and England. I have had the privilege of playing snooker player with century breaks under the belt at 8-ball and 9-ball, happily showing them the errors of their assumption that pool is somehow an easy transition. In a phrase, they sucked, even if they had the beautiful snooker mechanics. Just as if I tried to play snooker, they would see that I suck, with my pool mechanics. This is not a new argument that I just picked up yesterday.

I have hours upon hours of footage of snooker players flailing away when playing pool, while they're introduced as the "so-and-so 9-ball champion." There's just too many documented cases to show that you're wrong, but you want to be arrogant, dismiss them, and dismiss our (yes, there's more than just me) reports. Fine. You fail.

Enough people in England and Canada on these boards have pointed out the errors of your thinking. You only are arguing with me because in your mind, I know nothing of snooker. What about all your snooker compadres on this board that are telling you that your statements are not correct? I know enough of snooker to respect it. I've never disrespected it. You are a cross-over player that has the audacity to dismiss the difficulty of that transition to pool. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Fred

 

[TheOne]

What are you talking about??? Did you not read what he had to say? I didn't think so. YOU said he played lots of snooker. YOU were wrong. Colin Colenso said, if he truly ran X amount of centuries, then he truly is a Magician. He did, and he is. YOU say that a snooker player can adapt to pool quicker than a pool player can to snooker, one reason of which is that the pockets are bigger for a snooker player and smaller for the pool player. Yet, this insignificant match that put the snooker player and pool player on a table that had bigger than normal snooker pockets ended up favoring the pool player. The pool player got the award for "fastest" century (first century) of the tournament. Is all this lost on you? Is there nothing here that will make you admit the errors of your thinking?

Wow, are you always right on everything Fred even when youre wrong? Its a little hard to debate with somebody that thinks like that? I like many other people on this board thought the Peach story sounded a little fishy, what I thought was funny was the fact that time and again you didn't question it, you took peach's words as gospel and flogged them to death. Then when you go ask Efren it turns out is was as many suspected not quite what happened. Yes it sounds like Efren did ok but as probably Efren's number one fan (someone who travelled to Manila to play him!) Im not suprised. After all he won the Asian snooker tourny didn't he? Even when Efren himself says he's not good enough to compete at snooker you still insist he is?

Here's where you contradict yourself again. Does playing snooker several years ago help you or not? Was Raj's background an advantage for him "going to a 9' table" or not? Sounds like it was'nt for you, because it was too long ago, but it was for him, because it was 6 years ago! You're making this up as you go along, just so you can't admit to being wrong.

Wow, I thought you was clever enough to connect the dots and fill in the blanks, obviously not. I think the little difference is that I had ten years out, not playing at all! Raj probably hasn't stopped hitting balls since he quit snooker! Raj is a great potter and he likes tight pockets, yes I put that down to his snooker background, you of course won't understand that, but most will.

Was Raj "a snooker player" or not? You say he is. He isn't. He may have played snooker. He may have gotten a century. Steve Mizerak, Mike Massey, David Howard, Efren Reyes, Alex Pagulayan, all have centuries. None of them are snooker players. Your own eyes should show you that Raj isn't a snooker player. You sure you know what a snooker player looks like?

I didn't realise they all look the same Fred, Im sure some of them have different hair color? See youre doing it again Fred, I'm just telling you what Raj said, RAJ SAID HE WAS, you don't like that and are saying he isn't? WOW, sounds like your'e saying you know Raj more than he does LOL! Anyway like I said I didn't go into details but thats the impression he gave me, that he gave snooker up for other reasons. BTW, you don't have a century at 13 if you wasn't a very serious snooker player, but again you wouldnt understand that.

No, you failed. It's a wonderful insult, but I've already said that I've only played snooker a handful of games. But, you can't keep changing your argument. Stick with one. I know something of snooker. There are 12' Canadian snooker tables in my state. My mentor had a tight one in my home pool hall. Canada still has 12' snooker tables, and I live 5 hours away. I've spent months in Europe as a world traveler, having the privilege of watching 100's of hours of Crucible and other tournament action, and playing on snooker tables in Germany and England. I have had the privilege of playing snooker player with century breaks under the belt at 8-ball and 9-ball, happily showing them the errors of their assumption that pool is somehow an easy transition. In a phrase, they sucked, even if they had the beautiful snooker mechanics. Just as if I tried to play snooker, they would see that I suck, with my pool mechanics. This is not a new argument that I just picked up yesterday.

Changing my argument, what is my argument Fred? It took my pages to spell it out in the other thread, I think you just like arguing with me. I notice you didn't reply to the other thread once pretty much everyone agreed that its easier for a snooker player to convert to pool than visa versa, let me guess, you still dont agree with this despite all the evidence?

I have hours upon hours of footage of snooker players flailing away when playing pool, while they're introduced as the "so-and-so 9-ball champion." There's just too many documented cases to show that you're wrong, but you want to be arrogant, dismiss them, and dismiss our (yes, there's more than just me) reports. Fine. You fail.

What am I wrong about? I don't know what youre arguing with me about this time?

Enough people in England and Canada on these boards have pointed out the errors of your thinking. You only are arguing with me because in your mind, I know nothing of snooker. What about all your snooker compadres on this board that are telling you that your statements are not correct? I know enough of snooker to respect it. I've never disrespected it. You are a cross-over player that has the audacity to dismiss the difficulty of that transition to pool. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Fred

So you've called me thick, arrogant, I should be ashamed of myself. I shall try not to do the same but I do wish I had listened to everyone in the other thread who said I was wasting my time!

You didn't have to list your snooker CV (or lack of it) its so obvious you know nothing about snooker! Its like somebody arguing that America is better than Canada even though they live in America and have only seen a postcard of Canada! LOL

I'll say it again is there anyone in here that has played pool AND snooker to a high level that thinks snooker is easier to convert to than pool?

 

[Buckster_uk]

Boy is this ever going to stop?!

 

[LowEnglish]

Video proof. Ronnie O'Sullivan. Stephen Hendry. Steve Davis, Karen Corr, the entire English World Team at the World Team Billiards. Missing Easy Pots. Did you not see the very clear and concise posts? They miss easy pots on pool tables.





This is where you've completely gone off the deep end, Craig. I knew at some point you'd try to claim Raj, since you tried to claim Alex and Efren as anthying other than full-time pool players (they are pool players). Raj is a pool player. Nothing but a pool player. Just because he's from England doesn't mean he's a snooker player. That man is a pool player, and damned fine one. I'll let other snooker players confirm this.

Fred

And Tony Drago has been playing 9-ball for 8 years now. He had been playing for 6 years, 6 hours a day, every day, when he won the World Pool Masters.

 

[wayne]

So far I have yet to hear of ONE player who played both Pro snooker AND pro level pool that has said pool is more difficult to play than snooker? I would be interested to know the thoughts of Pro's who have played both at a high level? Personally even the Pro pool players I have spoken to seem to realize how much more difficult snooker is. If you can't pot balls it doesn't matter what English you can put on the cue ball!

Snooker is more difficult than 9-ball, not necessarily more difficult than pool (this includes straight pool, 8-ball, rotation, 1-pocket, banks).

The problem with Snooker for most Americans is they don't like it = too boring.

A game they do play in America on the Snooker table is Liability (3 cherries only) and this would be the equivalent of 9 ball in difficulty. A challenge between the best in both countries in 9-ball and Liability would be a toss up but with the full 15 reds the Brits have a big advantage.

Americans (for the most part) don't have the mindset to play with the 15 reds, too boring, the Brits can do this forever and are used to doing the same thing over and over. That is the reason the Yankees kicked the Brits butts during the American Revolution, the Brits (who had the superior forces, the better training, the better equipment) just did like they always did and marched in formation while the Yankee frontiersman hid behind trees and picked them off like turkeys (anyway I digress),

To determine the best cueman in the world you can't throw in a game where it is a dead lock for one side. I think a really good challenge would be to play 3 games on each table, for example, Liability, Golf and 15 ball rotation (with snooker sized balls) on the Snooker table and 9-ball, 8-ball, and 15 ball rotation on the pool table. Work out a fair scoring system and then you will be able to crown the greatest cueman. Maybe someone could set this up between Efren and Ronnie O'Sullivan, my money would be on Efren.

Wayne

 

[wayne]

And as a snooker player that lost two-and-out, you of all people should have the integrity to admit the difficult transition. You admittedly missed shots. You said so yourself. If your snooker background gave you a potting advantage, why did you miss so many shots?
/QUOTE]

Now Fred you get a low blow warning for the two-and-out comment. Anyone following his recent travels would be very impressed with his results. He obviously plays very good 9 ball. Anyone who plays 9 ball knows there are going to be days (or tournaments) like this and normally we don't need reminders.

Wayne

 

[JLW]

As for the snooker player missing pots, Im not sure where this comes from. I don't know any pool or snooker player ever that hasn't agred that playing on a snooker table shortly before playing 9 ball helps your game?

Absolutely. I know a guy (now a pro) who used to prepare for pool matches by playing on a snooker table. And my experience has been that when I go from snooker to pool, the pockets look huge and all of the shots feel like gimmes. And, of course, I notice the opposite to be true. When you go from pool to snooker, the balls and pockets look tiny. You will notice some difference in angles. But, honestly, to me it's not enough to be a big deal. I will say though, that I think anyone who is a decent pool player can probably become a pretty decent snooker player. After all, it's a cue sport. If you have good fundamentals, you can learn the nuances of the game.

To me, one of the main differences between playing snooker and pool is that there are gimme pool shots that become extremely low percentage shots on a snooker table- long shots down the rail, for example. One of the benefits of playing a lot of pool vs snooker is that you get into the habit of using more of an all around game. In snooker, you really don't want to get too fancy; make the ball and get decent postion.

 

[LastTwo]

And Tony Drago has been playing 9-ball for 8 years now. He had been playing for 6 years, 6 hours a day, every day, when he won the World Pool Masters.

This is quoted from Tony Drago on this website from 2003 right when he had won the World Pool Masters.

"I've been playing 9-ball for six years now and I just love the game. When I'm not playing snooker I practice six hours a day and I'm a real 9-ball player."

 

[LastTwo]

Lets try to start this argument over. Isn't it fair to say that snooker players miss more often when they have to use alot of sidespin playing 9-ball? From matches I've seen of Jimmy White, Steve Davis, etc playing 9-ball, mainly the shots they missed were shots with alot of sidespin.

 

[unknownpro]

I'll say it again is there anyone in here that has played pool AND snooker to a high level that thinks snooker is easier to convert to than pool?

Me. There are not as many shots in snooker as in 15 ball rotation, or one-pocket.

unknownpro

 

[Fred Agnir]

And as a snooker player that lost two-and-out, you of all people should have the integrity to admit the difficult transition. You admittedly missed shots. You said so yourself. If your snooker background gave you a potting advantage, why did you miss so many shots?
/QUOTE]

Now Fred you get a low blow warning for the two-and-out comment. Anyone following his recent travels would be very impressed with his results. He obviously plays very good 9 ball. Anyone who plays 9 ball knows there are going to be days (or tournaments) like this and normally we don't need reminders.

Wayne

Good call Wayne. Thanks. I understand what you're saying , but it's the heart of Craig's argument, and I felt I had to go there. He admitted to missing shots, but he says that a snooker player will have an easier time to adapt to playing pool. It seems that he's a walking contradiction that if he actually looked at what he was saying like (results in major tournaments matter), then I would think he would have the humility to re-examine his hardened opinion. Isn't he his own proof that he's incorrect?

What level of snooker did Craig have before (he implies a high level) and what level of pool has he attained? Is it fair to say he's gained about the same level? Isn't that what I've been saying?

Fred

 

[TheOne]

Good call Wayne. Thanks. I understand what you're saying , but it's the heart of Craig's argument, and I felt I had to go there. He admitted to missing shots, but he says that a snooker player will have an easier time to adapt to playing pool. It seems that he's a walking contradiction that if he actually looked at what he was saying like (results in major tournaments matter), then I would think he would have the humility to re-examine his hardened opinion. Isn't he his own proof that he's incorrect?

What level of snooker did Craig have before (he implies a high level) and what level of pool has he attained? Is it fair to say he's gained about the same level? Isn't that what I've been saying?

Fred

Fred, you've really lost the plot and now that you have finally said that you don't agree with what Ive been saying (that its easier for snooker players to convert to pool than visa versa) then I think you pretty much stand alone.

Thanks Wayne, it was a pretty sad and ridiculous thing to say but in Fred's last few posts he's resorted to name calling and low blows, I wonder why?.
I think after 10 years of no more than playing the odd social night of pool or snooker to come back and have the results I've had these past few months is about as much proof as anyone could need that snooker is a harder game to compete in than pool. I wonder what chance I would have had if I had decided to try and turn pro at snooker LOL (that would have lasted about 1 week I think LOL!)

 

[Fred Agnir]

Fred, you've really lost the plot and now that you have finally said that you don't agree with what Ive been saying (that its easier for snooker players to convert to pool than visa versa) then I think you pretty much stand alone.

I've put up a new thread.

Thanks Wayne, it was a pretty sad and ridiculous thing to say but in Fred's last few posts he's resorted to name calling and low blows, I wonder why?.

He who has not sinned cast the first stone. You mocked me. You made false assumptions about me. You used strawman tactics. Not exactly innocent, Craig.

Nothing I say will change your thinking. And obviously, this is long debate that I've had the pleasure of partaking in many for many years, so I've heard all of what you have to offer and more.

If I can get a handful of snooker players to stop and think about how misleading their (your) statement is, then I'm comfortable with that. I know that I've accomplished that. I see more and more snooker players seeing my side of the debate than just last year (or last week). Good.

I hope you read Wayne's post. It was right on the money. Unknownpro's? Shortshooter's? JLW? The Haze? Celtic? Any and all of those together paint what I've been talking about.

We haven't even brought up runlengths yet.


Fred

 

[TheOne]

I've put up a new thread.


He who has not sinned cast the first stone. You mocked me. You made false assumptions about me. You used strawman tactics. Not exactly innocent, Craig.

Nothing I say will change your thinking. And obviously, this is long debate that I've had the pleasure of partaking in many for many years, so I've heard all of what you have to offer and more.

If I can get a handful of snooker players to stop and think about how misleading their (your) statement is, then I'm comfortable with that. I know that I've accomplished that. I see more and more snooker players seeing my side of the debate than just last year (or last week). Good.

I hope you read Wayne's post. It was right on the money. Unknownpro's? Shortshooter's? JLW? The Haze? Celtic? Any and all of those together paint what I've been talking about.

We haven't even brought up runlengths yet.


Fred

I shall still resist calling you names even though your long thread probably merited it, I notice nobody has replied to it yet?

I seem to recall somebody having a go at you in the sysytems thread, calling you fast larry because of the way you got angry and preached to people who didn't come around to the world according to Fred? I think it was you, if Im mistaken I apologise?

As much as I love pool Fred I'm not going to bury my head in the sand and ignore the facts.

- The top female snooker players converted to pool and dominated.

- The "failed" snooker players have dabbled with pool and had some impressive results with minimum effort.

- No pool player has ever had any success in snooker.

Like it or lump it, you can't argue with it (well unless your name is Fred!)

 

[Bobby]

- The top female snooker players converted to pool and dominated.

- The "failed" snooker players have dabbled with pool and had some impressive results with minimum effort.

- No pool player has ever had any success in snooker.


That's the truth in a nutshell. Everyone else
ignores the facts. No pool player has ever done
a damn thing in professional snooker...ever.
I knew all along that the Reyes/O'Sullivan story
was not true.

 

[Fred Agnir]

I shall still resist calling you names even though your long thread probably merited it

My thread merited people calling me names? Why? Did I insult someone? I didn't think I did. I'll check again. It certainly wasn't my intentionto insult anyone on that thread.

, I notice nobody has replied to it yet?

It's too long. It needs to be printed out. And maybe everyone agrees.

I seem to recall somebody having a go at you in the sysytems thread, calling you fast larry because of the way you got angry and preached to people who didn't come around to the world according to Fred? I think it was you, if Im mistaken I apologise?

It was me. And it was Stephen Joyce. And he quickly apologized. And I told him he didn't have to. And I never get angry (except to Qtec and Whitewolf). I just type. Anyone who knows me and listens to me talk will hear the same words, but they wouldn't mistake my intonation as anger. And you're mocking me again.

- The top female snooker players converted to pool and dominated.

- The "failed" snooker players have dabbled with pool and had some impressive results with minimum effort.

- No pool player has ever had any success in snooker.

Like it or lump it, you can't argue with it (well unless your name is Fred!)

Does Efren's Asian games medal not count? Or is he not included as a pool player? Or are those players not included as snooker players? Or was the competition not counted as snooker? And your mocking me again.

Fred