US Open greatest player

SVB is the best player in the history of the US Open because he faced the toughest fields and mowed them down. His three year undefeated string at the US Open may never be matched. Count me among those who feel that his failure to win even one WPA world nine ball championship is a blemish on his record, but he's still fairly young and will win one soon.

Sigel was one of the best few at nine ball and surely the best of his era at 14.1, in the conversation for best player of all-time, but not for best player at the US Open.

Earl is also one of the best few ever at nine ball, but his five US Opens don't match the five of SVB because they were against easier (not to be confused with easy) fields.
 
I'm pretty sure Sigel was winning the same tournament before they started calling it the US Open. I think that's why he claims more than three (and rightfully so)
 
JohnnyOzone said:
I'm pretty sure Sigel was winning the same tournament before they started calling it the US Open. I think that's why he claims more than three (and rightfully so)
Click to expand...

Sigel won the first OFFICIAL US Open with a field of 27 players.
Strickland won his last Open with a field of 286.

Should've-beens don't count in records
 
sjm said:
SVB is the best player in the history of the US Open because he faced the toughest fields and mowed them down. His three year undefeated string at the US Open may never be matched. Count me among those who feel that his failure to win even one WPA world nine ball championship is a blemish on his record, but he's still fairly young and will win one soon.

Sigel was one of the best few at nine ball and surely the best of his era at 14.1, in the conversation for best player of all-time, but not for best player at the US Open.

Earl is also one of the best few ever at nine ball, but his five US Opens don't match the five of SVB because they were against easier (not to be confused with easy) fields.
Click to expand...

I'm going with this reasoning.....Shane's five victories were harder come by than Earl's.
....but for who had the heart of a champion....Earl vs Shane = dead heat
 
AtLarge said:
16, apparently: http://www.usopen9ballchampionships.com/history.php
Click to expand...

Color me hard luck.....I was told that at my first Open in 2000.....
...at the old QMasters in Norfolk.

i lost a golf bet once for the same reason.....
...Nelson's four OR eight iron was off-balance.....I read it in a magazine article....
...and it was wrong.....been confused ever since about which club.

i have a pretty good memory....the downside?...I remember the erroneous info also.
 
Johnnyt said:
Mike was one of the best ever. He not only had plenty of firepower, but he also played very smart. I never really cared for him. I played him a race to 20 in 3 cushion billiards for I $50 or $100 at CM Lee's in Seminole, FL. He won 20-17 and refused to give me another game...even though he hung around the hall for another hour at least. Johnnyt
Click to expand...

I agree that Mike was/is an incredible player. I have only met him once at Super Billiard Expo, and he was an incredible a$$. I have heard this from many folks so I know it wasn't the only time or he wasn't just having a bad day.

While Mosconi is worshiped for his ability, I haven't met one old time player that didnt think He wasn't an a$$hole.

I think Earl was an incredible player in his day, and I honestly don't know what happened to him, if it is a medical condition, drugs that fried his mind, or what but to me it really is a shame. I met him 25 years ago, and he was great to me away from table. To me, his legacy is tarnished forever, its really sad. When I go to tournaments people watch Earl like the folks that go to NASCAR races hoping for an incredible crash....:rolleyes:

SVB is a great player and seems to be a great representative and ambassdor for pool. I hope that his legacy is different from Siegal, Mosconi, and Earl. If it is then he would be the greatest US OPEN PLAYER.

Ken
 
Earl is one of my favorite players but I have to say that Shane's wins at the US Open are more impressive considering the level of competition now.
 
one stroke said:
His web site says he has 6 first place finishes....snip...
Click to expand...

AtLarge said:
Nah -- 1976 (the first one), 1980, and 1983 = 3.
Click to expand...

JohnnyOzone said:
I'm pretty sure Sigel was winning the same tournament before they started calling it the US Open. I think that's why he claims more than three (and rightfully so)
Click to expand...

I'm about 90% sure that the additional US Open titles Sigel is counting are his 14.1 US Open wins. Which begs the question, when Mike won the 14.1 titles, was it still the main game, or was 9 ball already the main game? His first 9 ball US Open win was with 16 players. I wonder how large the fields were in the 14.1 US Open during his prime.
 
Last edited:
Celtic said:
If people want to through Worst into the mix all the time on these things how about a player people ALWAYS forget who is almost never mentioned on this forum but was surely extremely dominant in his era, Joe "The Meatman" Balsis.
Click to expand...

Fair point, but only straight pool for the Meatman. No nine ball record.

All the best,
WW
 
iusedtoberich said:
I'm about 90% sure that the additional US Open titles Sigel is counting are his 14.1 US Open wins. Which begs the question, when Mike won the 14.1 titles, was it still the main game, or was 9 ball already the main game? His first 9 ball US Open win was with 16 players. I wonder how large the fields were in the 14.1 US Open during his prime.
Click to expand...

Mike won the US Open Straight Pool Championship just once (1992): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Open_Straight_Pool_Championship. Mike went undefeated with wins over Pete Fusco, Jimmy Fusco, Steve Mizerak, Mike Zuglan, and Dallas West twice. (Billiards Digest, October 1992). The field size was 32.

His BCA Hall of Fame bio says he "won three World 14.1 crowns (1979, 1981 and 1985)..." So perhaps he, or his website author, was counting those. Who knows. Great player.
 
sjm said:
Earl is also one of the best few ever at nine ball, but his five US Opens don't match the five of SVB because they were against easier (not to be confused with easy) fields.
Click to expand...

I do disagree humbly. Earl can only beat who is in front of him as could any other great players of the past. Earl raised the bar very very high. He was the best in his time as is SVB now (or at least one of the very very best!).
 
Regardless of the competition or the tight pockets Earl could string racks together better and more consistently then anybody in his prime. In nineball no matter how strong the opponent if he can't get to the table he can't win.

Having said that Shane and Mike are and were great players, but it's like comparing Brady to Namath or Johnny Unitas. If Brady played in their day he wouldn't haven lasted more than a season or two. He would never have survived the hits Namath took due to the rules back then. Johnny U called his own plays, Sammy Baugh played offense defense and special teams.

When Mike and Earl played the cloth was differentand it wasn't always Texas express- ball in hand anywhere on the table on fouls. I'm not sure there was the three foul rule. Different rules different equipment different competition.

It's hard to compare players from different era's Shane clearly has dominated in a relatively brief period of time - Earl is still capable on any given day to beat anyone after 30 plus years - Mike only played a short amount of time in his prime

You could make a good argument for any of the three. They all were and for the most part still are great players. If Shane can maintain the dominance he has demonstrate in the past for 20 years or more he might stand alone.

Just one mans opinion
 
Dominance of the US Open – Longevity or consecutive becomes the question to me. To have a set of championships span 16 years is pretty dominant. 4 out of last 5 is dominant too. Whichever you choose, neither has a rival other than each other.

Shane, Earl or Mike can only defeat the the player put in front of them. Not a single year could you call the field soft so 5 is going to be better than 3.

Had Sigel skipped the years Hopkins, MIzerek or David Howard(?) won, I think you’d have an argument for Mike.

For now, Shane and Earl stand atop all others. Should Shane be fortunate enough to win again or for that matter its not out of this world to think Earl could grab a 6th, in either case, the other should help the victor don a green, nay, Simonis Tournament Blue jacket.
 
Last edited:
Luther Lasiter

He never played in it until he was old enough to be considered a senior. Won it. No telling but he probably would have won every one he never played in when he and really stroking in his 20's 30's 40's and early 50's!
Tim Scruggs told me the man put on a pair of glasses that looked like Pepsi bottles to read the paper.
OLd man Dominating?
Nick :)
 
Ken_4fun said:
I agree that Mike was/is an incredible player. I have only met him once at Super Billiard Expo, and he was an incredible a$$. I have heard this from many folks so I know it wasn't the only time or he wasn't just having a bad day.


[/B]
Ken
Click to expand...

My dad said the same thing about him. My dad played him in an exhibition back in the early 90's when he was living in Towson, Md and beat him!

It was in 9 ball. Mike was doing an exhibition at a local new car dealership and anyone could play him one game, and everyone got to break. If you beat him you got to chose from one of his videos he was always hawking. Anyway, my old man broke in the 9 ball and said Mike was not all too happy lol. ( I got the trick shot video ��)
 
Last edited:
nick serdula said:
He never played in it until he was old enough to be considered a senior. Won it. No telling but he probably would have won every one he never played in when he and really stroking in his 20's 30's 40's and early 50's!
Tim Scruggs told me the man put on a pair of glasses that looked like Pepsi bottles to read the paper.
OLd man Dominating?
Nick :)
Click to expand...
I had the pleasure of watching wimpy play more than once and he was old then. It's hard to picture anyone much better. Unless of course he was playing the best pool of his life as an older guy. In those days straight pool was played more often for money then nineball. I saw him play some pretty well know players games like 50 no count, and the worst I saw him do was break even. Prettiest stroke I ever saw!
 
AtLarge said:
Nah -- 1976 (the first one), 1980, and 1983 = 3.
Click to expand...

He said in a few interviews that he won the tournament that turned into the US Open before it was called the US Open, so technically he won it more than the official stats for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top