Thoughts on TAR 21
- Thread starter BasementDweller
- Start date
Shane has shown that level of frustration on looser pocketed tables. Everyone says that they want big packages but when they get them then they complain and call it a result of a gaffe.
I guess everyone needs to be reminded of all the negativity surrounding all the break and runs that Donny Mills made when he played Shane on 4.5" pockets. At first no one was congratulating him and everyone was crapping all over it like it was too easy.
And you notice in that match Shane ALSO came through with his big break and showed heart and nerves and skill.
Honestly IF the pockets had not even been mentioned then we would all be talking about this match way differently.
What were the pocket sizes for the Efren/Earl match?
Exactly.
No one knows without having to dig it up.
No question that the tight table affected the way both players played this weekend. We talked about it constantly on the first day. Billy kept referring to "the table" over and over again, as if it was a player in the match. I even said we should have three names on the scoreboard; Shane, Alex and Diamond, because some games were won by the table. :smile:
That said, Alex wanted it tight to try to minimize Shane's break. It worked for a while. I think we were all amazed when Shane began making multiple balls anyway and his seven rack run was a real eye opener. I would have bet the farm no one would run five racks, let alone seven. It's not just his power either. Shane "figures out" the optimum break shot, the correct angle and where to hit the head ball and just how hard to hit it, and what English to use. He doesn't just get up there and whack them.
Personally I would have preferred to see 4.25" pockets, that extra eighth inch would make a difference and it would still play very tough. But it's not my money, so it's not my call. I actually think Alex would have a better chance on a slightly looser table. He likes to "work" his cue ball around the table, and some shots were cut off for him.
Anyway, some good points are being made on this thread, but when it comes to gambling, the players (and their backers) will always make the rules. I do think the best player won this week and I look forward to number three in this trilogy. Alex isn't done yet!
That said, Alex wanted it tight to try to minimize Shane's break. It worked for a while. I think we were all amazed when Shane began making multiple balls anyway and his seven rack run was a real eye opener. I would have bet the farm no one would run five racks, let alone seven. It's not just his power either. Shane "figures out" the optimum break shot, the correct angle and where to hit the head ball and just how hard to hit it, and what English to use. He doesn't just get up there and whack them.
Personally I would have preferred to see 4.25" pockets, that extra eighth inch would make a difference and it would still play very tough. But it's not my money, so it's not my call. I actually think Alex would have a better chance on a slightly looser table. He likes to "work" his cue ball around the table, and some shots were cut off for him.
Anyway, some good points are being made on this thread, but when it comes to gambling, the players (and their backers) will always make the rules. I do think the best player won this week and I look forward to number three in this trilogy. Alex isn't done yet!
Last edited:
Firstly I apologize to every one that I couldn't finish the match with Jay doing the commentary. The race to 100 on 4-1/8'" pockets was entirely too long for me and it was too hard on my back. I was in pain the following day and on Sunday I intended to get to the studio at 9 oclock to finish the match doing commentary. At 8:30 I talked to Dippy and he said that Shane had 92 games so I felt that by the time I got there the match may have been over, so I decided not to go.
Now I would like to comment on the match and the players in addition to the equipment.
I thought that the players played great and found very little difference in the level of play from either player. Shane won the match but imo Alex played as well as Shane and the difference was Shane's break. I can't see anyone being a favorite against Shane playing 10 ball because of the way he breaks. I have played and watched pool being played for over 55 years and can't remember anyone breaking with the efficiency that Shane has. He may not hit the balls as hard as some players but he hits the break squarely with power, and his consistency is insanely absurd. With this understanding I thought that Alex held up as good as anyone could have playing this champion with his monster break.
I agree with most that a race to 100, especially on tight tables is entirely too long, and the viewers will lose interest. Not only that but who can stay up for 7 to 9 hrs to watch the segments? I believe the best format in terms of keeping fans interested would be multiple sets of shorter distances. Example, two out of three sets race to 20 games. Or you can design the length of the sets to fit into the allotted time allowed.
Here's another idea of a possible format. There's no race or ahead set, it will be played like football and basketball. There will be a time set for the length of the match with a shot clock. For instance, the match will be a three hr match with a 24 second shot clock between shots. Each player will be allotted a certain number of extensions. This type of format will give the viewers an exact time of the length of the match and for marketing purposes it should be better received. Can you imagine the excitement of a close match with say 5 minutes left in the match? Once the 3 hr. clock expires the match is over, regardless of where in the rack the player is on. If the player is shooting the 8 ball and time expires, the match is over.:yeah:
I think that TAR has done an outstanding job in doing what they do, and that's bringing the best of the best to us, at a reasonable price. Plus the production is first class. Keep up the good work.:thumbup:
DON'T FORGET ABOUT MY PROPOSED FORMAT ABOUT THE LENGTH OF THE MATCH JUDGED BY A TIME ALLOTTED INSTEAD OF A RACE.:wave3:
Billy I.
almost all the tables in taiwan, china and some of japan have 4 inch pockets taiwan and china are the up and coming pool super powers. if you expect americans to keep up with the competition they have to play on tighter tables, i play on 4 inch - 4 1/4 inch pockets max. and i can tell you that they are not hard tables to play on. bigger pockets may be better for you bangers who wobble balls in down the rails. but most pros prefer tight table pockets. with bigger pockets u get more break and runs but then again it will be just like 9 ball, whoever has the better break wins.
Here in Xiamen we have about 100 pool rooms that qualify as "real" pool rooms with decent to very good 9ft tables. In all of them most of the tables are 4.5" pockets with a few set up for the better players at 4.25". Then in a few rooms they will have maybe one table with 4-4.125" pockets for the house pro to practice on.
The first couple times I played on the super tight tables they are very intimidating but after a couple hours it's fine. The only thing that bothers me is that many of them are improperly cut so they spit balls out when they shouldn't. That's the real problem with small pocket tables is that they can be done in such a way that they reject balls too much. And in fact a lot of the 4.5" tables here are like that too. They really have a lot to learn about getting all the angles matched up properly when setting up tables here.
Another thing about China in particular is that up in the North they play mostly Chinese 8 Ball on 9ft tables with pool balls but with snooker pockets. Those pockets are 4" or less. A lot of China's premier players grew up on that equipment and they are run out players on it. I got my ass handed to me by a woman who flat out RAN OUT rack after rack on that table and who felt she wasn't good enough to play in the main 9 Ball event. I mean she really was that good that I would bet on her against ANYONE who posts on AZB including the professional players at the game of Chinese 8 Ball.
Anyone who plays good on those tables becomes a superb potter. From there to learning how to work your cue ball is not as tough as learning to pot on small pockets if you aren't trained on them.
This was asked as a question by someone who gave me some rep.
Mosconi ran 526 balls on a 4x8 with bucket pockets. That stands as the official record but most people feel that all the 400+ runs on larger tables with smaller pockets are worth more. Reportedly Irving Crane ran 400+ on a 5x10 with small pockets.
Would you prefer to watch a tennis match where one guy dominated with all aces because the court was made 2ft bigger on each end?
The fact of it is that the tables were run PLENTY of times in the 186 games. The table didn't make the players miss the shots - THE PLAYERS made themselves miss the shots. Shane shot one ball down the rail and actually hit the second diamond high he dogged it so badly.
I wish that the statistician would have kept track of how many medium to easy shots were missed where the ball rattled the pocket. I will be willing to bet that in 186 games which means about 6-10 shots average per game. Let's say 8 shots per game - that's 1488 shots there were not more than 20 total of such shots missed. Now track the amount of medium hard to hard shots that were missed vs the amount that were made???
Yes, the table was tight but it was not too tight. Just like Fatboy said it plays right. If you miss then it's because you missed not because the table spits balls out at funny angles.
The players simply dogged many shots because they dogged them. On the other hand they came with a LOT of incredible shots as well. Both players did. I saw real pool played the right way. I didn't see anyone afraid to shoot. I did see Alex shoot up in the air at times trying to do something crazy that would have had little chance on 4.5" pockets. On those occasions he didn't miss because of the table, he missed because he went nuts and whacked at the ball a hundred miles an hour.
I might have to buy the DVD just for debating purposes
Mosconi ran 526 balls on a 4x8 with bucket pockets. That stands as the official record but most people feel that all the 400+ runs on larger tables with smaller pockets are worth more. Reportedly Irving Crane ran 400+ on a 5x10 with small pockets.
Would you prefer to watch a tennis match where one guy dominated with all aces because the court was made 2ft bigger on each end?
The fact of it is that the tables were run PLENTY of times in the 186 games. The table didn't make the players miss the shots - THE PLAYERS made themselves miss the shots. Shane shot one ball down the rail and actually hit the second diamond high he dogged it so badly.
I wish that the statistician would have kept track of how many medium to easy shots were missed where the ball rattled the pocket. I will be willing to bet that in 186 games which means about 6-10 shots average per game. Let's say 8 shots per game - that's 1488 shots there were not more than 20 total of such shots missed. Now track the amount of medium hard to hard shots that were missed vs the amount that were made???
Yes, the table was tight but it was not too tight. Just like Fatboy said it plays right. If you miss then it's because you missed not because the table spits balls out at funny angles.
The players simply dogged many shots because they dogged them. On the other hand they came with a LOT of incredible shots as well. Both players did. I saw real pool played the right way. I didn't see anyone afraid to shoot. I did see Alex shoot up in the air at times trying to do something crazy that would have had little chance on 4.5" pockets. On those occasions he didn't miss because of the table, he missed because he went nuts and whacked at the ball a hundred miles an hour.
I might have to buy the DVD just for debating purposes
I was about to refer to that poster and say that those tables are not diamonds
This was asked as a question by someone who gave me some rep.
Mosconi ran 526 balls on a 4x8 with bucket pockets. That stands as the official record but most people feel that all the 400+ runs on larger tables with smaller pockets are worth more. Reportedly Irving Crane ran 400+ on a 5x10 with small pockets.
Would you prefer to watch a tennis match where one guy dominated with all aces because the court was made 2ft bigger on each end?
The fact of it is that the tables were run PLENTY of times in the 186 games. The table didn't make the players miss the shots - THE PLAYERS made themselves miss the shots. Shane shot one ball down the rail and actually hit the second diamond high he dogged it so badly.
I wish that the statistician would have kept track of how many medium to easy shots were missed where the ball rattled the pocket. I will be willing to bet that in 186 games which means about 6-10 shots average per game. Let's say 8 shots per game - that's 1488 shots there were not more than 20 total of such shots missed. Now track the amount of medium hard to hard shots that were missed vs the amount that were made???
Yes, the table was tight but it was not too tight. Just like Fatboy said it plays right. If you miss then it's because you missed not because the table spits balls out at funny angles.
The players simply dogged many shots because they dogged them. On the other hand they came with a LOT of incredible shots as well. Both players did. I saw real pool played the right way. I didn't see anyone afraid to shoot. I did see Alex shoot up in the air at times trying to do something crazy that would have had little chance on 4.5" pockets. On those occasions he didn't miss because of the table, he missed because he went nuts and whacked at the ball a hundred miles an hour.
I might have to buy the DVD just for debating purposes
So you're saying the table didn't slow down the players pace at all?
My thoughts were it's a shame the general public can't see things like this to raise the interests in pool in general.
I couldn't watch it because it was PPV and most others coulldn't or wouldn't either, so things like this do nothing to advance the sport.
Sort of a shame most people never even see mens pro cue sports in the US at all anymore... I doubt the average espn viewer even knows who's playing any more on the mens side.
I couldn't watch it because it was PPV and most others coulldn't or wouldn't either, so things like this do nothing to advance the sport.
Sort of a shame most people never even see mens pro cue sports in the US at all anymore... I doubt the average espn viewer even knows who's playing any more on the mens side.
Last edited:
Billy, just in seeing the earlier posts on the match, I totally understand your back situation, and was surprised you lasted as long as you did.
Put the shot clock in, and you may have a good point, only consideration I have is someones ability to somehow stall with this put into place when they have a lead nearing the end of the three hours.
Would like to see a STANDARD pocket size world wide for professional play, gambling a different story. But, packages of two's and threes (or break and run the set out) and, loser racks/winner breaks with the Majic Rack, sets race to five, each set begins with the other player breaking first (alternate who breaks first in each set, with winner breaks), best five out of nine sets with a tie breaker set if both are at 4 sets a piece (Lag for final break) would be like tennis, in the fifth set, race to 7, alt brake, win by two, and/or first to eleven games. Time for commercials between sets, time to get a snack and time to use the restrooms. It would be Fast and Loose like rotation play Must be to be accepted by the Public and programming, which is eventually where the true dollars will come from to bring our sport to where it NEEDS to be for success and for the players and their families.
Last edited:
I don't think the target audience for the TAR matches will ever be the general public. At this point, I'm guessing they just need to see the pool players here in the states show more interest by tuning in. Then if they can get some of the players from overseas (Europe & Asia) to tune in - that would be a pretty large potential audience. One that is actually growing too. That's why I would think if they could get one of the Champions from Asia to come over and play in a TAR match it could be successful. (I know they would have to deal with the whole time difference thing).
These are just the random thoughts of a guy that has no inside knowledge of what it takes for the TAR streams to happen - so take it for what it's worth.
YouTube has hundreds of hours of all the professional pool anyone could ever consume for free. Not only that it also has dozens of hours of mind blowing trick shots, dozens of hours of instruction, good and bad.
There is plenty of pool to raise awareness of pool as a sport available for free. PPV should not be made out to be "bad" because they charge to watch it.
I can guarantee that even if Joe Rogan had promoted the TAR21 on his blog then it wouldn't have much much difference in the paying viewers. TAR matches are for the hard-core pool fan and no one else.
There is plenty of pool to raise awareness of pool as a sport available for free. PPV should not be made out to be "bad" because they charge to watch it.
I can guarantee that even if Joe Rogan had promoted the TAR21 on his blog then it wouldn't have much much difference in the paying viewers. TAR matches are for the hard-core pool fan and no one else.
They are marketing TAR matches to... wait for it: The Rail Birds. The guys shelling out the money for the PPV have every right to voice their opinion.
Lou Figueroa
I know everyone is twittering about Shane's 7-pack on a tough table, but I have to wonder out loud whether the buzz might have even been even greater if he had laid out a 10, 12, or 14 pack -- if the pockets had been just a tad more normal.
Small pockets, no matter how well constructed, changes the nature of the game. Once they get too small it stops being pool and starts being something else. Put another way: if you want to play snooker with pool balls then do it right and go get yourself a snooker table.
IMO, pool is about working the cue ball, at least in part because the pocket tolerances allow you to do that. Take that away and the strategy and nature of the game is changed, no matter how good the players.
Lou Figueroa
Small pockets, no matter how well constructed, changes the nature of the game. Once they get too small it stops being pool and starts being something else. Put another way: if you want to play snooker with pool balls then do it right and go get yourself a snooker table.
IMO, pool is about working the cue ball, at least in part because the pocket tolerances allow you to do that. Take that away and the strategy and nature of the game is changed, no matter how good the players.
Lou Figueroa
Can you explain this statement further? I don't understand what your saying.
This could actually be a great idea.
Did you watch the match? Shane's 7 pack featured plenty of working the cue ball. Alex worked the cue ball on almost every shot.
Again, I will bet big that if we take this match and strip out all the commentary and allow two commentators who don't have any clue as to the pocket size to commentate on the match then you will hear a completely different view on the match. And if you were to somehow find an alternate planet with another AZB that hadn't already formed a million preconceived notions based on endless speculation about the pocket sizes you would see also a completely different discussion regarding this match.
It's all pool. The nature of the game was not changed. I saw pool being played the right way. The pockets were fine and the players ran out A LOT on them.
Good thoughts, we just need to keep trying different things till one works and then go from there. In my last post on this thread, if the public lets say, on ESPN, watched one of the race to five sets of a production where one opponent broke and ran 5 racks in less than 10 min air time>commercial, then they cut to another segement with his opponent doing something similar, then with highlights utilizing the hill game set up the end of programming of the 30 min show, it might be recieved well by the public, and generate dollars for TAR and its players. Have a China vs USA type match, they do it ALL the time in tennis, the Argentine vs the Croatian.....and so forth.