It has to be hard to see anyone more deserving than Shannon.
DeeMan
Thanks Deeman.
I been nominating him for the last 5 years or so. As in years past, he'll also get my vote for the Banks division as well.
In any other sport, those inducted into Hall of Fames are selected based on their credentials. Not "Well, so & so is getting old now, so let's make him feel good and pass over guys with multiple World Championships and get him in before he dies." That a popularity contest, not a valid measurement of the actual pecking order.
Gambling is the other criteria for induction here. Well, Shannon's been in action since he was 8 years old. He's 40 now. So he has multiple titles and has been gambling for 32 + years.
Why should he be purposely over-looked year after year because of his age??
He has over 30 years in the sport. He's penalized for starting so young and for being so good so early.
Another thing, he's actually given something back to the sport. He founded the Great Southern Billiard Tour, which gives players the chance to earn more money. Of the men already inducted, only Grady, Allen Hopkins and Bill Staton have ever promoted touraments. I mean, the jansco brothers are actually in the HOF here solely for promoting the JC tournaments.
By the way, the One Pocket division was only 1/4 of the JC tournamnets. It also featured 9B, 14.1 and over-all. So they certainly get a lot of credit, being inducted over players who won World Championships in the discipline.
Some of the nominations and arguments for other players over the years were lower caliber players then guys like Shannon, Joyner and Frost. MOST of the men already inducted rightfully DESERVE to be there because they were GREAT players. But there's a few that, although they were very good players, they couldn't have beat Daulton at the game.
I came to Deeman's post, skipped over every other post and wrote this. After I hit
"Enter", I'll go back and read what you fellas have to say.
This is the ONLY thing that bugs me about this site. Every year, all the excuses come out on why he SHOULDN'T be inducted. None of which, by the way, say he's not a great player.
Seems like some here feel there should be an age requirement to get into the HOF. Like if a guy is over 65 and was a decent player being selected over a guy who has won MULTIPLE major championships along with 30+ years on money match ups.
Being honest, that's not fair and it degrades the more accomplished players who happen to have been over-all much better players, but "they're not old enough yet."
Let me ask a question, of all the guys left who have not been inducted, who would you pick in a calcutta? Which of those not yet inducted would you bet on versus the other players?
Sorry for the rant, but I'll sleep better now.