WPC 2007 Finals

[BPG24]

It was the luck of the break, not that they weren't playing good enough to get out. There was a time when Gomez strung 4 together and I am sure Peach ran a minimum of 3 if I remember. If you don't get a shot nothing you can do, u must not play much nine ball

Eric.

I would guess I have played at least 10,000 racks of 9ball, probably alot more....

and winning 4 racks in a row is not the same as breaking the balls and running out.... But since you play so much 9 ball, I am sure you already know that......

 

[JoeyInCali]

I hope they cut the finals match down to race to 13.
17 is just way too long. It's brutal . 4 hours of play?

 

[vin]

^4 hours of play for $100,000 isnt bad after all

 

[PoolBum]

Also, someone should list how many break and run outs there were in the whole match... I am sure it was less than 5.....

IMO top notch players should find a way to get out!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sorry if you don't agree

According to the WPC rack-by-rack descriptions Gomez ran out from the break 6 times while Peach ran out from the break 4 times. In addition, Peach twice ran the table after Gomez failed to pocket a ball or fouled on the break, and Gomez ran the table once after Peach failed to pocket a ball or fouled on the break.

 

[cuetechasaurus]

This was grinding and suffering at it's finest! I thought Gomez was playing well below his previous speed, and Peach was playing ok but not great.

The begining/middle of the match was odd. Because of the misses, the rolls came into play. Gomez got a lot of bad rolls in this and he did not or was not able to capitalize on Peach's mistakes. He also started getting on the wrong side of balls in simple posituion play and kept facing awkward situations. He looked pre-occupied.

Peach is the ultimate grinder - makes mistakes but keeps on coming. At the end, Roberto's nerves finally just gave out. He looked as if he was going to burst into tears. I hope he can come back in the future because I really enjoy watching him play when he's relaxed.

Chris

Actually I really think Peach got the majority of the bad rolls. I do recall several times Daryl missing and getting lucky, or kicking and getting lucky. But Gomez still won the majority of those games that Daryl got lucky in, during the middle of the match.

When Gomez was leading 15-12, it was his miss on the 5-ball (might have been the 6) that turned things around. All of his previous misses he left Daryl either safe or pretty tough. But this miss was an easy straight in shot. Looking at Gomez after that, the man was absoloutely shattered with emotion.

When Daryl was finally able to capitalize on his miss on the 5-ball, looking at Gomez I could tell he was sick from the pressure. His eyes were tearing up, he was breathing heavy, slumped in his chair. I think at that point and for the rest of the match, Gomez had more fear of missing another shot with his country watching, than he had will to win. It's incredible what that kind of pressure can do to someone.

The 9-ball he missed when it was 15-15, it was almost like I could see it coming. He shot way up in the air on that, it was like he closed his eyes and poked at it. I feel so bad for him because I know that is going to haunt him forever.

 

[gobrian77]

Do you think the organizers regret changing the playing conditions when it resulted in less than stellar play?

And I found it refreshing to see players at this level feel pressure like the rest of us.

Not at all- in fact, they were both breaking fairly well (getting at least as many shots after the break as in a normal match, if not more)- the poor playing quality was not a result of the break, but rather the player's nerves (imho).

 

[I rack balls]

According to the WPC rack-by-rack descriptions Gomez ran out from the break 6 times while Peach ran out from the break 4 times. In addition, Peach twice ran the table after Gomez failed to pocket a ball or fouled on the break, and Gomez ran the table once after Peach failed to pocket a ball or fouled on the break.

THANK YOU!! haha.

Eric.

 

[ledrums]

You know, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I'm willing to bet that if Peach or Gomez were playing at that "sub-par" level they would still crush the posters that say their play was poor. Sure it wasn't a run-out fest, but it was good tactical pool (like SJM says). I'm not picking any any posters in this thread per se, but you always see people post about how "poorly" a match was played when they are most likely not able to play even close to that level of pool. Just bothers me

 

[gobrian77]

You know, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I'm willing to bet that if Peach or Gomez were playing at that "sub-par" level they would still crush the posters that say their play was poor. Sure it wasn't a run-out fest, but it was good tactical pool (like SJM says). I'm not picking any any posters in this thread per se, but you always see people post about how "poorly" a match was played when they are most likely not able to play even close to that level of pool. Just bothers me

Are you serious? The final match of the WPC is supposed to be a battle for the title of BEST pool player in the world- the winner gets a check for 100K (plus all the sponsorshiip benefits that go along with it)- they are expected to put on a show of the finest kind- one where the fans are dazzled by their brilliance at the table and inspired to try to bring their games to a level that might one day approach theirs (not that that will ever happen...)

Sure they'd crush me- they had BETTER crush me at the level upon which they play- that being said I know good pool when I see it (you don't have to be a great chef to know you're eating a rotten egg- granted, the level of play in the final wasn't "rotten"- it just wasn't up to the standards set by both players in earlier rounds). They played poorly- I can say that because I know the game and I watched the tournament- the fact that they are better than me makes no difference.

Anybody who plays and has a basic knowledge of the game is in the position to comment accurately on the play of others, even if the players they are commenting on play at a much higher level (the same way you can comment on the play in any sport that you are very famliar with- football, baseball, whatever ).

 

[BPG24]

You know, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I'm willing to bet that if Peach or Gomez were playing at that "sub-par" level they would still crush the posters that say their play was poor. Sure it wasn't a run-out fest, but it was good tactical pool (like SJM says). I'm not picking any any posters in this thread per se, but you always see people post about how "poorly" a match was played when they are most likely not able to play even close to that level of pool. Just bothers me

What is the point of comparing people who don't play pool for a living with people who do play pool for a living?


I watched every single shot in this match....
It had some DECENT safety battles.... But neither guy played good or even average..... They both choked on alot of shots... missed safeties, balls missed that were not difficult shots.... ETC ETC...

I'm sorry if you don't think that TOP NOTCH PROS should play better than the average pool player....

 

[crosseyedjoe]

I hope they cut the finals match down to race to 13.
17 is just way too long. It's brutal . 4 hours of play?

1. I think it had something to do with the bad breaks they were getting when 1-ball is always nowhere in potting shot.

2. Peach played a superb safety technique instead of forcing a run-out. He wore out his opponents by playing creative safeties.

To me it was the most thrilling finals I've seen. Although you win by pocketing a ball which tends people to concentrate on pocketing, the other elements of play were highly utilized in that finals.

 

[BPG24]

According to the WPC rack-by-rack descriptions Gomez ran out from the break 6 times while Peach ran out from the break 4 times. In addition, Peach twice ran the table after Gomez failed to pocket a ball or fouled on the break, and Gomez ran the table once after Peach failed to pocket a ball or fouled on the break.

There was a 10 game stretch where no rack was run from the break at all....

 

[ledrums]

Yes, there were some major chokes, but that was better pool than "average" pool players play. There were many racks without an open shot on the one etc etc. Maybe your standard of what good play is differs from mine. Sometimes it just sounds like people are implying that they could have beaten those pros in a match if those pros were playing like that. I know you aren't claiming that, but that's why I get bent out of shape. Kinda like armchair quarterbacks talking crap. It's like "OK, you get out there and play and see how you do buddy"

 

[BPG24]

Yes, there were some major chokes, but that was better pool than "average" pool players play. There were many racks without an open shot on the one etc etc. Maybe your standard of what good play is differs from mine. Sometimes it just sounds like people are implying that they could have beaten those pros in a match if those pros were playing like that. I know you aren't claiming that, but that's why I get bent out of shape. Kinda like armchair quarterbacks talking crap. It's like "OK, you get out there and play and see how you do buddy"

I still don't get why you are comparing the best players in the world with average pool players.......

I said that the PROS played below their average game... Not below the average league players game.....

Some of you guys really seem to take stuff and run wild with it/////

 

[gobrian77]

I still don't get why you are comparing the best players in the world with average pool players.......

Heck, I'd ask for weight if I were playing against the Prince of Brunei.

 

[ledrums]

I just stated that pros are expected to play better than average player's and they DID in this match! What part is not understood??Is Efren's Z shot incredible play, or only a result of him screwing up an easy safety?? So did he play poorly?? You find me a non-pro caliber player who can play safe and kick like Peach and Gomez were that night consistantly and I'll buy you dinner.

 

[BPG24]

I just stated that pros are expected to play better than average player's and they DID in this match! What part is not understood??Is Efren's Z shot incredible play, or only a result of him screwing up an easy safety?? So did he play poorly?? You find me a non-pro caliber player who can play safe and kick like Peach and Gomez were that night consistantly and I'll buy you dinner.

LOL.... Keep the dinner...

The kicking and safeties in that match were not impressive at all, compared to other shots in similar situations by the same players and other pros.....

There were a few that were executed well....

 

[BigCat]

I happen to agree. Yes, there were some unforced errors in this one, but the tactical sequences in this match were, at times, breathtaking, and made for some high theater. For those who only enjoy watching a runout powerfest, perhaps this match didn't deliver.

For those who wanted to see both players tested to the limit in their use of push out, defense, kicking, and two way shots, like SJM for example, this match delivered in a big way.

The irony is that this match was the kind of match in which the Filippinos seem almost unbeatable, as billiard knowledge and speed control are king in such an encounter. Peach showed us he can play the power game in his match with Bustamante, which must go down as one of the greatest ever matches at the WPC. In the final, however, despite only average offensive execution by Darryl's standards, he showed how well he can grind it out in a tactically-oriented match.

I loved the final, and suspect anybody fascinated by the strategic aspects of nine ball loved it, too.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I agree whole-heartedly.

 

[I rack balls]

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that if you were dissapointed in the play during the finals you are at best a D player

Eric.

 

[BigCat]

There was a 10 game stretch where no rack was run from the break at all....

...and the soft break was taken out of the equation for this final match.

You seem to be diffusing the information just given to you, even after your comment about not even 5 racks being run by either players combined.

IMO, this was not as bad a match as you seem to want to make it out to be. SJM is spot on, sometimes there are more tactical matches than run out matches, and this happened to be one of those times.

Especially after a long grueling tournament, where stamina (both physical and mental) come into play. I for one enjoyed the finals and this type of play. Break and run style matches are fun to watch, but don't always happen, even among top notch players. This is a fact. It does not lessen their efforts or demean their level of skill.