Why don't you explain how to "rack them properly" to make the corner ball every time. Then it will be the same for everyone and things will have to change. The "Magical Rack" is a joke, the corner ball goes like it has eyes.....but how, Danny, do you rack them to make the corner ball go with a regular rack?
Inquiring minds want to know
There is a man, this man's name is JOE TUCKER!! This man will show you the light
I'm not that good of a player, but I study the rack enough (Joe Tucker racking secrets), to have a very good idea what the rack is going to do! Again, there's a lot going than just the balls, but for the most part, if you rack a certain way on any given table, you can make the wing ball! I'm a B player myself, I've ran 11 racks on my table 9ft GC3 with 4&3/8 pockets WITH THE MAGIC RACK! And yes, I was pattern racking and soft breaking! What I learned from that session is if you rack the balls consistently, you can get a desired action. Now, I'm not saying anything bad or good or mean or nice here, but the truth is, if you "know" how to rack,,,, "the rack is the teacher"!
What are the factors for calculating Earls odds?
- Thread starter (((Satori)))
- Start date
Why don't you explain how to "rack them properly" to make the corner ball every time. Then it will be the same for everyone and things will have to change. The "Magical Rack" is a joke, the corner ball goes like it has eyes.....but how, Danny, do you rack them to make the corner ball go with a regular rack?
Inquiring minds want to know
There is a man, this man's name is JOE TUCKER!! This man will show you the light
I'm not that good of a player, but I study the rack enough (Joe Tucker racking secrets), to have a very good idea what the rack is going to do! Again, there's a lot going than just the balls, but for the most part, if you rack a certain way on any given table, you can make the wing ball! I'm a B player myself, I've ran 11 racks on my table 9ft GC3 with 4&3/8 pockets WITH THE MAGIC RACK! And yes, I was pattern racking and soft breaking! What I learned from that session is if you rack the balls consistently, you can get a desired action. Now, I'm not saying anything bad or good or mean or nice here, but the truth is, if you "know" how to rack,,,, "the rack is the teacher"!
That's a pretty strong run there for a B player.
I'm wondering how many chances you would have to have a go at, your table, you racking for yourself, pattern racking and soft breaking, before you would be able to do that again?
Quoting Earl from the article cited in post #8: "I think it was interesting that I did it on a table with 4 1/2-inch pockets. But I tell you, it was one of those days. Every ball rolled just perfect."
Edit: Rockin' Robin posted this in 2009: "I arrived a day or two before the show started, and sweated "Big Dave" assembling the black Gold Crowns. The pockets were shimmed to 4 and 3/8 inches ..."
Last edited:
"tighter than a clam with lockjaw"
Like I said they were slightly over 4.25 ....what don't you understand about "slightly over"? Is it not specific enough or is it an anal fixation?***
Do we really think Earl OR Robin actually measured them? Jerry F. said they were extremely tight in an article he wrote (I've posted that one if anyone remembers).
Be that as it may, they were "tighter than a clam with lockjaw" (how's that?) and I happen to have that exact table in my teaching facility.....and it's still "tighter than 20 coats of paint" :groucho:
***
• ANAL PERSONALITY (noun)
The noun ANAL PERSONALITY has 1 sense:
1. (psychoanalysis) a personality characterized by meticulous neatness and suspicion and reserve; said to be formed in early childhood by fixation during the anal stage of development (usually as a consequence of toilet training)
Like I said they were slightly over 4.25 ....what don't you understand about "slightly over"? Is it not specific enough or is it an anal fixation?***
Do we really think Earl OR Robin actually measured them? Jerry F. said they were extremely tight in an article he wrote (I've posted that one if anyone remembers).
Be that as it may, they were "tighter than a clam with lockjaw" (how's that?) and I happen to have that exact table in my teaching facility.....and it's still "tighter than 20 coats of paint" :groucho:
***
• ANAL PERSONALITY (noun)
The noun ANAL PERSONALITY has 1 sense:
1. (psychoanalysis) a personality characterized by meticulous neatness and suspicion and reserve; said to be formed in early childhood by fixation during the anal stage of development (usually as a consequence of toilet training)
The Million Dollar Challenge Documentary "the rest of the story"
It was the most amazing thing I've ever seen. The documentary we did shows "the rest of the story"........if all goes well it will be on TV within the next few months.
It was the most amazing thing I've ever seen. The documentary we did shows "the rest of the story"........if all goes well it will be on TV within the next few months.
It was the most amazing thing I've ever seen. The documentary we did shows "the rest of the story"........if all goes well it will be on TV within the next few months.
10 in a row, especially under those conditions, are still long odds by my standards. And considering the long odds, whatever they were, and the money involved, I can only imagine the excitement that was growing with each new rack.
I'm going to have to get that documentary.
Am I reading this correctly that you believe the actual odds of Earl running 11 racks in a row were 12 to 1 ?
I saw somewhere earlier in the post you said the odds of running out for a pro were 40%?
Last edited:
takeitdown
Banned
It's really the odds of him making a ball on the break and having a shot. After that you have to decrease the odds of him running out a little with each consecutive rack. When Earl gets on a roll he runs out like nobody on the planet.
THIS is a fascinating thread. Lots of information and insight. Thanks. I'm going to have to get that DVD.
The Million Dollar Challenge "the rest of the story" on DVD
Yes, on each game, each shot, each decision the pressure exponentially increases in the situation Earl was in.
It's like the "Break and Run" contests that you only win if you don't miss......so each shot you have the option of quitting and keeping the money you won.
In this scenario (playing 9 Ball) Earl would have been playing for approximately $130,000 A BALL!!! The reason the odds were 7.8 Million to 1 (and I have that documented in the documentary from the SMU Professor of Statistics) is not just because of running racks under NORMAL conditions......it's 7.8 Million under the MILLION DOLLAR CONDITIONS> 'The Pressure is the Teacher'
click pic
This is the 67 Minute Documentary of what happened behind the scenes of the Million Dollar Challenge with interviews, and many video clips from the greatest single feat in pocket billiard history.
With one million dollars on the line, on April 10, 1996 Earl "the Pearl" Strickland did the unimaginable. He ran 11 racks of 9-ball at the inaugural event of the PCA Pro Pocket Billiards Tour. While it was a miraculous feat, it simultaneously dealt a fatal blow to the new Pro Pocket Billiards Tour and gave a death strike to what might have been the rise of televised table pool as a mainstream sport. CJ Wiley had spent years preparing a new tour to showcase the sport, using a million dollar prize as the main draw. His goal was to breakout pool as a mainstream sport.
Through an in depth interview you will hear how Earl trained to achieve this incredible level of performance, the legal battles that eventually vindicated CJ Wiley, and accounts of the following two-plus years to honor the prize through the accounts of CJ Wiley, Tournament Director Jay Helfert and many more. It is a tale of struggle for the game and a telling of the greatest achievement in the history of pool.
Directed by Mary Avina
Yes, on each game, each shot, each decision the pressure exponentially increases in the situation Earl was in.
It's like the "Break and Run" contests that you only win if you don't miss......so each shot you have the option of quitting and keeping the money you won.
In this scenario (playing 9 Ball) Earl would have been playing for approximately $130,000 A BALL!!! The reason the odds were 7.8 Million to 1 (and I have that documented in the documentary from the SMU Professor of Statistics) is not just because of running racks under NORMAL conditions......it's 7.8 Million under the MILLION DOLLAR CONDITIONS> 'The Pressure is the Teacher'
click pic
This is the 67 Minute Documentary of what happened behind the scenes of the Million Dollar Challenge with interviews, and many video clips from the greatest single feat in pocket billiard history. With one million dollars on the line, on April 10, 1996 Earl "the Pearl" Strickland did the unimaginable. He ran 11 racks of 9-ball at the inaugural event of the PCA Pro Pocket Billiards Tour. While it was a miraculous feat, it simultaneously dealt a fatal blow to the new Pro Pocket Billiards Tour and gave a death strike to what might have been the rise of televised table pool as a mainstream sport. CJ Wiley had spent years preparing a new tour to showcase the sport, using a million dollar prize as the main draw. His goal was to breakout pool as a mainstream sport.
Through an in depth interview you will hear how Earl trained to achieve this incredible level of performance, the legal battles that eventually vindicated CJ Wiley, and accounts of the following two-plus years to honor the prize through the accounts of CJ Wiley, Tournament Director Jay Helfert and many more. It is a tale of struggle for the game and a telling of the greatest achievement in the history of pool.
Directed by Mary Avina
Yeah, we've been around on this before. For a while last year you were saying they were "just a hair over 4". At least we got you away from that. I just don't like exaggeration, CJ, particularly when it is related to historical events. I fully acknowledge that the table had "tight" pockets. And, as we know, the size of the mouth opening is only one factor in determining how difficult a pocket plays. Since you have redone that table's pockets, I doubt we'll ever know the actual specs from 1996 (unless "Big Dave" is still around and knows for sure). Earl may have just stuck two balls in the jaw and called it 4½. From all indications, they may have been a bit smaller than that.
You are incorrect, and no you did not.