I'm with the rest of the crowd that wants to see Shane/Dennis on this table.
I can honestly say I was "fortunate" to be on here when the announcement was made that day 2 of the Shane/Mike had been uploaded without Justin's consent.
I decided to watch some while my meds kicked in,thinking it would be 45 min to an hour at most.
Danmed if I didn't wind up watching the whole match,because 10 ball at that high of a performance level is just too good to pass up :thumbup:.
By his own admission and according to his standards,Mike played bad.
To this impartial observer,he didn't play bad at ALL.
He had 2 3 packs.
He had to run out every time,because Shane didn't make it easy and leave him simple,Average Joe outs. Some of those outs were tricky enough only someone of his approximate speed could have got there
It's not like Mike missed a ball every game either,to the best of my memory,he only missed maybe 4 balls a player of his caliber is supposed to make,and one of those is that almost straight-in miss on the 8.
Altogether,he made 6-7 unforced errors that I counted,in a race to 27,10 ball,on THAT Diamond. Maybe those of you that play on Diamonds regularly might think that 4 1/2" pockets are buckets. They are NOT.
That's still world-class speed if you broke it down like Accu-Stats.
Even if he got out every time he could have,and the balls didn't cooperate on the break,he'd have still not gotten to 20.
Shane took a completely world-class pro and made it look like he needed signifigant weight.
Putting Shane and Dennis on the same table,with the same conditions might yield the best pool ANYONE has ever seen.
It's gonna take someone like Dennis to beat Shane with him playing like that.
For all we know,either of them could beat the other that bad if they both aren't getting the same results off the break. Tommy D.
