Video of "The Shot" on The Action Report

If I was betting money on this, I would say you have to run the first 4 balls, and get underneath the 2 ball as Mike did on the first shot.

Thanks to JCIN & everyone for 'exposing' the difficulty of this shot. The closeup shows the one ball was not frozen to the rail.
 
JamieMcWhorter said:
Jay where does my cue ball need to be to be considered good shape or at least as good as he got??

How bout the tables there you have never answered that??
Is it the same conditions??????

I dont have 2 million but I will gladly win the max you are willing to lose on this...........
Click to expand...


We can get a Valley Cougar table with Simoniz cloth. Good clean balls also. Your position needs to be in the same area that Mike was in or better. If you fall short, or get out of line, you didn't get there. You don't have to make the two ball either.

ALL YOU CAN EAT BABY!
 
crosseyedjoe said:
I disagree, HONEST EFFORT also applies to not giving up on the table layout for the fear that you will just open up the table. This is what James Walden was a little upset about. Every player SHOULD attempt a run-out.

What happened in there was OK, but in the gambling world specially if you want to the play same player in the future, there are just some de-quorum that need to be followed.
Click to expand...

Well all I can say is that I have played in more ring games than I can remember as high as 200/400 and the ONLY time I ever quit one was when a guy played a deliberate safety. All those other times I never once had or saw an argument for passing a shot back after a foul no matter HOW GOOD the table looked. Sure, we would cry and moan if someone passed a shot that we all wanted to take.

But we never told someone they were cheating if they didn't try and run out by passing on a shot.

I think I have more than enough experience in the gambling world to know what's what, especially in ring games. I might have have played more types of ring games than anyone on this board.

I guess we can disagree about what honest effort means and I can agree that it would be better if players HAD to shoot at open balls. But historically in ring games honest effort has applied only to the player who is taking the shot. There was no cowardice in Shane's decision, it was 100% the right move to make and the PRO decision.
 
John Barton said:
Well all I can say is that I have played in more ring games than I can remember as high as 200/400 and the ONLY time I ever quit one was when a guy played a deliberate safety. All those other times I never once had or saw an argument for passing a shot back after a foul no matter HOW GOOD the table looked. Sure, we would cry and moan if someone passed a shot that we all wanted to take.

But we never told someone they were cheating if they didn't try and run out by passing on a shot.

I think I have more than enough experience in the gambling world to know what's what, especially in ring games. I might have have played more types of ring games than anyone on this board.

I guess we can disagree about what honest effort means and I can agree that it would be better if players HAD to shoot at open balls. But historically in ring games honest effort has applied only to the player who is taking the shot. There was no cowardice in Shane's decision, it was 100% the right move to make and the PRO decision.
Click to expand...

I can attest to the fact that this guy has a lot of gamble in him, and he didn't always have to have the best of it either. Right John?
 
John Barton said:
Well all I can say is that I have played in more ring games than I can remember as high as 200/400 and the ONLY time I ever quit one was when a guy played a deliberate safety. All those other times I never once had or saw an argument for passing a shot back after a foul no matter HOW GOOD the table looked. Sure, we would cry and moan if someone passed a shot that we all wanted to take.

But we never told someone they were cheating if they didn't try and run out by passing on a shot.

I think I have more than enough experience in the gambling world to know what's what, especially in ring games. I might have have played more types of ring games than anyone on this board.

I guess we can disagree about what honest effort means and I can agree that it would be better if players HAD to shoot at open balls. But historically in ring games honest effort has applied only to the player who is taking the shot. There was no cowardice in Shane's decision, it was 100% the right move to make and the PRO decision.
Click to expand...


I guess the game dynamics really change depending on who are playing, and what level they are playing. Just imagine a player like Efren passing back that shot.
 
jay helfert said:
We can get a Valley Cougar table with Simoniz cloth. Good clean balls also. Your position needs to be in the same area that Mike was in or better. If you fall short, or get out of line, you didn't get there. You don't have to make the two ball either.

ALL YOU CAN EAT BABY!
Click to expand...

Tell me where does the cue ball need to be for you to say i have good shape or better????????
 
monkey lover

i knew you couldnt leave us monkeys alone! jamie if it would have been corey,gabe and dennis in the final 3 are you going to seriously tell us that corey and gabe let dennis end up with 2nd place? pleeeeeeeeeez,you take the same offense then? pleeeeeez they did nothing that your hero corey wouldnt have done ,its business jamie and youre taking it personal.relax,have a cold one and get out to vegas:eek:
 
Maybe in this kind of format the 2 players with the lowest amount of chips when they get down to 3 players play a set and the winner takes on the chip leader this way there is no teamwork and the chip leader gets a buy to the finals for being in the lead.
 
MrSchon9 said:
Maybe in this kind of format the 2 players with the lowest amount of chips when they get down to 3 players play a set and the winner takes on the chip leader this way there is no teamwork and the chip leader gets a buy to the finals for being in the lead.
Click to expand...

Good suggestion.
 
It is a good suggestion. but I think it is unfair for the chip leader because he has to sit and possibly get "cold" while the other two players play their set. I personally don't see anything wrong with the format at all. It was well played and played professionally. Rules are rules - everyone knows them when they start so don't ***** when it is over. If you don't like the rules then don't play. JMHO

BVal
 
JamieMcWhorter said:
Tell me where does the cue ball need to be for you to say i have good shape or better????????
Click to expand...

Just as close to the Two as Mike got it, and still in line. If it's real close, we'll give it to you. This is not complicated. If you make the One and draw position, you got there!

Are you coming, or are you going on the stall now? Come get the money SONNY!
 
Last edited:
BVal said:
It is a good suggestion. but I think it is unfair for the chip leader because he has to sit and possibly get "cold" while the other two players play their set. I personally don't see anything wrong with the format at all. It was well played and played professionally. Rules are rules - everyone knows them when they start so don't ***** when it is over. If you don't like the rules then don't play. JMHO

BVal
Click to expand...

Better rules are not for people to know and understand the rules, it's for people who don't get it. Yes, you can say "that's how it is," but wait until you hear a "parking lot negotiation" just to clear-up the rule. Then you will start thinkin' that the rules could have been better.
 
John Barton said:
I don't like the pass forward - because it completely skips the player who has a choice.
Click to expand...

??? What do you mean by this?

With pass FORWARD (typically on a foul or perhaps even on a safety): if the incoming doesn't like it, he can pass. It goes to the next player. If he doesn't like it, he passes, and it contues forward until the ring is complete. If it gets back to the original shooter, he has to take it.

-td
 
a quibble

jay helfert said:
Just as close to the Two as Mike got it, and still in line. If it's real close, we'll give it to you. This is not complicated. If you make the One and draw position, you got there!

Are you coming, or are you going on the stall now? Come get the money SONNY!
Click to expand...


Jay,

Your call of course but I would specify equal or better shape on the two ball to play the two in the same corner pocket as the shape on the original shot. If I had a few weeks to practice I would be much more willing to gamble on making the one and getting shape to make the two ball in the same pocket, proven by making the two.

Jamie is a guy that is more into playing games making games than he is into playing pool according to what I see on this forum.

Hu
 
ShootingArts said:
Jay,

Your call of course but I would specify equal or better shape on the two ball to play the two in the same corner pocket as the shape on the original shot. If I had a few weeks to practice I would be much more willing to gamble on making the one and getting shape to make the two ball in the same pocket, proven by making the two.

Jamie is a guy that is more into playing games making games than he is into playing pool according to what I see on this forum.

Hu
Click to expand...


He can practice all he wants. I already have a line on him and know he is a good player. The money is here. All he has to do is come and get it.
Woof! Woof!
 
nfty9er said:
He knows as long as DO is in the game he can win. The man is one of the best in the world and can run a 6 pack or more in a heartbeat. Whats his name would rather he remain playing as long as possible.
Click to expand...
Thanks...I think I get it now.
 
Still wondering

rackem said:
It was a fine tournament and I did then and still do feel that everything was on the up and up. Unfortunately there was one particular mouthy fan that is trying to spoil it. I think he was spectating with his wallet and not his heart.:p
I may have missed it, but thru all this I am still wondering who had DO in the calcutta. :confused: Is it possible that McWoof had some of it also?
Click to expand...
Does anyone know who bought DO in the calcutta?
 
td873 said:
??? What do you mean by this?

With pass FORWARD (typically on a foul or perhaps even on a safety): if the incoming doesn't like it, he can pass. It goes to the next player. If he doesn't like it, he passes, and it contues forward until the ring is complete. If it gets back to the original shooter, he has to take it.

-td
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get it. So in a four player game. Player A plays safe. Player B passes to Player C and Player C passes to Player D, Player D takes the shot and sells out to Player A who then runs five racks and eliminates Players B and C. Real fair.

In the PASS BACK method the ONLY two people confronted with a bad situation are the player who created it and the player with the choice. The player with the choice then can GIVE IT BACK to the player who created it and hope for a better situation.

PASS FORWARD presents the incoming player with a truly crappy choice - take a bad shot or LOSE YOUR TURN for who knows how long.

So why should the incoming player be punished like that for something the player before them did?

Plus on the subject of cutting people up PASS FORWARD opens it up to more cutting people up and collusion. With LOSE YOUR TURN (Pass Forward) rules the incoming player's chances go down the toilet.

It's a bad rule that will cause more hardship and hard feelings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top