remember that one time when the US coach had them out playing tennis together? :thumbup:
The line-up for the US looks like this so far:
1. SVB
2.
3.
4.
5.
The line-up for the US looks like this so far:
1. SVB
2.
3.
4.
5.
SVB's Mosconi Facebook post
- Thread starter Joe_Jaguar
- Start date
Absolutely I was just making the point to HawaiianEye that you can't say one is better than the other, in my example, both are world beaters in their distance, but you can't compare them directly.
In pool I totally agree with you, the best is whoever turns up and delivers for the format being played!
I would add 1 word to the above - " The line-up for the US BETTER look like this so far:".
Anyone who is surprised by Johan Ruijsink building this type of program simply does not understand the philosophies of this man. It is so European, and it has worked with his European teams. What it seems that he hasn't grasped is American players do not have the same makeup as European players. The fact that most European players do not gamble says so much.
However if Ruijsink thinks he can even get the 4th day of competition without SVB, regardless of Shane's Mosconi record, he is a fool. Bottom line - anything less than victory will be Ruijsink's end of him being captain of the US squad. And that's OK.
The event lasts for four days not three and it pays $20,000 if you're on the winning team and $10,000 if on the losing team.
The Facebook post was indeed written by Shane. He asked us to read it through and it was fine.
They are playing for 'actual' money. $20k for winning and $10k for losing. And some would say that a match that takes four days to finish is indeed a long set.
From a fan standpoint, this is, on the surface, disappointing, because it evidences that Team USA isn't willing to do whatever it takes to raise its level of play to that of Team Europe. It is also disappointing in that Shane, as the face of American pool, may be sending the wrong message to other would-be Team USA members .... but, on further inspection, how can one possibly have a problem with Shane's decision. Given his amazing resume in competition and skills that have enabled him to win significant titles year after year, if he doesn't want to do a lot more work for just a little improvement, that's his every right.
These points aside, Team USA going to battle without Shane on the team would, in my opinion, be ridiculous. Lest we forget, Shane came within a hair of beating Jayson Shaw twice in singles in the 2017 Mosconi Cup. I would further argue that were America to go to battle without its best player, it would cheapen an event that Matchroom has so skillfully brought to prominence over the years. Leaving Shane off the team would be brutally unfair to both the American fans and to Matchroom!
To sum, I'm absolutely fine with Shane's decision, although it could have unfortunate consequences.
These points aside, Team USA going to battle without Shane on the team would, in my opinion, be ridiculous. Lest we forget, Shane came within a hair of beating Jayson Shaw twice in singles in the 2017 Mosconi Cup. I would further argue that were America to go to battle without its best player, it would cheapen an event that Matchroom has so skillfully brought to prominence over the years. Leaving Shane off the team would be brutally unfair to both the American fans and to Matchroom!
To sum, I'm absolutely fine with Shane's decision, although it could have unfortunate consequences.
You should save your time responding to this nonsense, these people aren't interested in the truth. They do the same thing to Fargorate.
These are the same people who somehow believe a player with a LOSING record will help a team win - they simply don't understand math or common sense.
Jason
Tiger Woods, best US player in maybe history but definitely this generation, has played on 7 Ryder Cup teams and has a record of 13-17-3. So some of the formats didn't suit him, but he was a no-questions-lock on every team.
SVB, best US player in definitely this generation, has to be a no-questions-lock on every Mosconi Cup team for the foreseeable future. The format might not suit him, but the US is also 1-11 in the last 12 Mosconi Cups, so can you really say that the format suits any of the US players?
Pretty soon they'll need to change the name to the European Beat Down Cup.
SVB, best US player in definitely this generation, has to be a no-questions-lock on every Mosconi Cup team for the foreseeable future. The format might not suit him, but the US is also 1-11 in the last 12 Mosconi Cups, so can you really say that the format suits any of the US players?
Pretty soon they'll need to change the name to the European Beat Down Cup.
Interesting. Perhaps: Wilke, Lombardo, Abraham Lincoln, Tom Brady, and Derek Jeter?
I'm of the opinion that just about any American team without Shane, Bergman, and Dechaine would be a tough sell at the Atlantic Cup, nevermind the MC.
I guess that makes me an anti-math, anti-common sense drooling imbecile.
I guess that makes me an anti-math, anti-common sense drooling imbecile.
I’m not going for this....I believe it was with Shane’s approval...
....but I don’t see a North American writing “programme”....
...to me, there is also the question of where this decision was initiated.
Another thing you fail to make clear....is the price dollars per man or per team?
Per man, they haven't stated it on this thread, but the prize distribution is shown here:
http://www.matchroompool.com/mosconi-cup/
I mentioned it to just point out another example of being careless with information.
Seriously?
Hopefully Matchroom will drop the US from this beating every year and put in the pinoys.
Jason
All we know for sure is Shane has a LOSING record. That is simple math, but some cannot understand that.
Try some new players, or should we continue the insanity?
Yeah, yeah, I know, we cant win without a guy that cant win
Jason
No, the unfortunate consequences concern possible loss of prestige for this fantastic event should it lead to the absence of America's best player. There's no doubt in my mind that this would lessen American interest in the event, and in the worst-case scenario, hurt the event's long-term viability.