Frost vs Alex - 1 Pocket Match on Monday for $40,000

backplaying

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
523
Yep, Alex won 8 to zero -- oh, wait. That's what the score would be of an 8-ahead set. :D

Took less than 10 hours. I'm guessing about 8. Alex was on the hill twice and finally closed the deal.

Scott was heard commenting about the table conditions, but, of course, Alex had to play on the same equipment.

I have noticed that Alex has the knowledge to play all pocket billiard games, to include snooker. He sometimes does not fare well in tournaments, mainly because of their locations in casinos, I think. But Alex has every tournament title there is in pool, so he has nothing to prove.

But where Alex always shines the brightest in pool is his gambling exploits. He's hard to beat. He fares much better in his percentages of winning in action than he does tournaments. I saw him give Keith the 7 on bar table playing with the big cueball, a race to 10, and it was over in less than 20 minutes. He might as well have given Keith the 3 and out. It would not have mattered. And Keith plays extremely well on the bar table with the big cueball.

Alex is a gambling machine. :)

As I'm sure your very aware that Alex might not have liked it playing Keith even in his prime with the big ball, much less with he 7.
 

backplaying

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
523
One thing to note; Scott practiced on the table for 2 hrs. and never missed a ball, Alex practiced for 15 - 20 minutes. I can't see how Scott could complain about the table conditions, if it's true, which someone posted on AZB.

Naturally, Oldschool had to put a NEGATIVE twist on the match with the, "chop suey" comment! :eek: Maybe with guys like this being allowed on public forums, it just may be one of many reasons why professional pool is in the s**thouse! IMHO!

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion
"

I agree. One thing worse than a dumper, is a person who claims it was when it was on the square.
 

backplaying

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
523
It is pretty well known that Scott prefers Diamond tables over Gold Crowns. The tables at Hard Times are tough to play on. While it is true that they both played on the same equipment, Alex just played 20+ hours a few days earlier at Hard Times with one of the best players on the planet for up to 2k a game. He obviously felt more comfortable and relaxed in the surroundings and that was easy to see and the results showed this.

I love the game Alex brings to the table, but he does not always have to win in this spot. I would not be surprised to see them do it again on a Diamond somewhere else.

I think this is spot on. If they had got there at the same time, I think it would have been a different outcome.
 

androd

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
7,502
From
New Braunfels tx.
Anytime good players play, anyone may win. I beat a good player yesterday.
He usually wins, I played well and he was a little off.

There's old guys sitting around the rooms that will tell exactly who has the best of every game (I.E. He can give him the 8 safe, but not the last 2 )
I see a lot of that here. Also some results play.

They're good players, anything may happen,
It may be the same or different next time.
Rod.
 

One Pocket Ghost

Verified Member
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
9,538
From
Ghosttown
I think the time of Power Onepocket as we have known it has come and gone. I think we are in the era of Hybrid Onepocket for lack of a better term. I would define this as very tight old school moves, severe airtight traps, no sellout, no flyer onepocket backed up by world class runnout capability.


Petie, actually, there isn't, and never was, any "time of Power One Pocket"...and your "Hybrid era" has always been here...as for the rest of what you posted...

Yes, I've only been strongly saying/posting similar words on here for years, in several posts...for example...Petie, I can't remember if you have a copied sheet of my One Pocket instructional Manifesto describing optimum/correct One Pocket play, that I give to all who have taken lessons from me, and to some here who have asked me for it by pm...but I address what you've posted above, in two of the early paragraphs of my Manifesto - here is an excerpt of those two paragraphs...




Okay, first off I want to say that I’ve been annoyed for years by all of this clueless debating about which is right, or better, or currently being played - the supposed Chicago/Philly/East coast, strong defense/low risk/squeeze style of One Pocket - or the so-called modern/left coast/aggressive/fire at your hole/run out style of One Pocket...Well, the three reasons this foolish debate annoys me are these...#1. I think this constantly parroted claim of there being a rigid geographic distinction re. the two styles of play, is untrue...and #2. A strong One Pocket player, whether he's from 1973 or 2013 was/is always looking to run out if possible - that's nothing new :rolleyes:. and #3. Because this ongoing debate speaks as if these are the only two philosophies/styles of One Pocket play to subscribe to...when in fact, playing just one of either of these two styles, is not playing optimum One Pocket – why in the world would anyone want to limit themselves to just one of those styles, rather than always employing the full spectrum of productive One Pocket play?...meaning ----->

When playing/thinking at the very highest level of One Pocket, the only correct way to play One Pocket is from within a matrix whereby you are at all times ready and able to draw upon either of the two aforementioned styles: Relentless, aggressive, smackdown, power-offense or lockdown, trapping, coma-inducing, precision-defense...deciding which of these style's to employ will be correctly analyzed and determined in every different inning/shot/game situation of yours when at the table...and many times, like a master alchemist, you will be able to successfully forge both styles together on the same shot - thus creating - One Pocket gold.



- Ghost
 
Last edited:

onepockethacker

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
3,402
The bottom line is there are more good one pocket players today. 30, 40 and even 50 years ago a good "mover" could beat a straight shooting 9 ball player who had no clue about the game. Today between accustats, vides, live streams, youtube, books, etc... everyone now knows all the moves. You have a guy from England!! and guys from the Phillipines playing top one pocket today. Shane is playing as good as anyone in the world also. We live in a different world today compared to years ago. The game has evolved into who executes best. If one pocket REALLY catches on in the PHILLIPINES then nobody is going to like it. It is going to come down to who is the most dedicated and who is constantly in action against tough players.. As far as american pool players Shane is the only one who is constantly battling against world class players. Shane is going to end up (if he already isn't) the top one player in the world. Right now I would bet on Alex against anyone playing one pocket because he is dedicated to pool but it seems his dedication comes and goes where as it looks like Shane is determined to be the best and won't settle for less. Shane practices and plays bank pool very well, where as I do not think Alex puts the same time in on ALL facets of his game anymore. I think Scott knows the game better than both Shane and Alex, but those 2 are just so freaking talented I do not think Scott can fade them in the long run. My opinion is not based in the slightest on the results of the other night because I picked Alex to win before they played so Im not playing Monday morning quarterback nor am I being a prisoner of the moment. If you look at Efren, Parica, Bustamante, they are all great bankers. I think that is one facet that will stop Orcullo from being the best one pocket player. IMO Alex banks better than Orcullo but not as good as Efren, Parica, or Bustamante. Shane is becoming a monster banker really quickly. Maybe after the beating Scott took he will rededicate himself to being the best. The problem Scott will have in the future is that whatever mystique he had or any doubt Alex had is totally gone. One thing you don't want to do is let Alex KNOW he can win. If people think Scott was in a tough game before this match well the rematch will be tougher MENTALLY for Scott to win. If Alex loses the rematch big deal they are 1 and 1 BUT if Scott loses again his title (kinda of self proclaimed) as the best in the world will be long gone
 

jtompilot

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
4,768
From
New Orleans
I would make a little wager that john can get some weight if he wants to play Scott some.

You funny guy. Of coarse John needs weight now, he hardly plays.

What's funny is that every one thinks John is a master at 14.1, but what they don't know is that straight pool is probably johns third best game. When in stroke John would do the same thing to Scott that Alex did.
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,599
From
Dallas Tx.
First I would like to say to Old School that his comment. ( as usual) is wrong and was classless.


When top players play one another the two most important things to have on your side are
#1 suitable conditions
#2 preparation

Alex played on equipment that suited perfectly his style of play. He was also much better prepared to play the match, in terms of action ready and confidence of performing under the conditions that they were playing under. Also he was battle tested after playing 20 plus hours with Shane, two days preceding their match. Bottom line is that Frost and Co. were completely out managed.

Alex was much the better player last night for the reasons that I alluded to. I also believe if the situation was reversed, Frost would of been the winner.
My conclusion is on conditions that are difficult to play under Imo Alex would be the favorite because of hid style of play. On softer conditions Frost would be a slight favorite, but he would have to be at his best.

Dr. Bill
 

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
6,689
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
First I would like to say to Old School that his comment. ( as usual) is wrong and was classless.


When top players play one another the two most important things to have on your side are
#1 suitable conditions
#2 preparation

Alex played on equipment that suited perfectly his style of play. He was also much better prepared to play the match, in terms of action ready and confidence of performing under the conditions that they were playing under. Also he was battle tested after playing 20 plus hours with Shane, two days preceding their match. Bottom line is that Frost and Co. were completely out managed.


Alex was much the better player last night for the reasons that I alluded to. I also believe if the situation was reversed, Frost would of been the winner.
My conclusion is on conditions that are difficult to play under Imo Alex would be the favorite because of hid style of play. On softer conditions Frost would be a slight favorite, but he would have to be at his best.

Dr. Bill

So, Billy, if I understand you correctly, one guy has to have perfect conditions for him and play his BEST. The other player just has to play his normal game, no matter what conditions. Sounds like a NO win for, "the freezer", AKA "the defrosted".

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"
 

tylerdurden

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,959
I would make a little wager that john can get some weight if he wants to play Scott some.

I would make a wager if schmidt got anything, and I never even gamble anymore..... that one would bring me out of retirement though.
 

petie

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,314
From
Citrus Springs, FL
I have a question for Dr. Bill. Billy, it was not very long ago that Scott supposedly scored $700k against Dippy Dave. Why did he need backers for a $20k post against Alex?
 

SJDinPHX

Suspended
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
9,226
I have a question for Dr. Bill. Billy, it was not very long ago that Scott supposedly scored $700k against Dippy Dave. Why did he need backers for a $20k post against Alex?

Petie, Several things you didn't factor in...(1) Exageration..$$$$$$..(2) Net to Scott after "corperation fees"..$$$.. (3)..Net After Tush hog fees to collect..$$ (4) And finally, proximity to Casino...Net for Scott...0

Concensus;..It ain't easy being Scott ! ;)
 
Last edited:

Scrzbill

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
4,050
From
Eagles Rest, Wa
Petie, Several things you didn't factor in...(1) Exageration..$$$$$..(2) Net to Scott after "corperation fees..$$$.. (3)..Net After Tush hog fees to collect..$$ (4) And finally, proximity to Casino...Net for Scott...0

Concensus;..It ain't easy being Scott ! ;)

I hope you got YOUR gravy.
 

fretbored

Active Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
32
Which table was this on at Hardtimes in Bellflower... the one on the front left if you are standing at the counter and looking towards the tournament room (bleachers on the left)?
 

fretbored

Active Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
32
I thought so... that's the first table I played on when I visited there. Lost a race to 3 in one pocket to Filipino Ricky. Luckily I avoided Hawaiian Jimmy! ;)

A nice tight table... it actually didn't feel TOO bad compared to the Diamonds i'm used to playing on in Wheeling, WV... John Schmidt had them installed when he ran the pool room there a few years back.

Is the table on the right side tighter? I watched Moto play some pretty high dollar sets against a young out of towner on it...

It's a great room... wish I had seen it back in the day!
 

Fatboy

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
678
From
Vegas & LA
It's a great room... wish I had seen it back in the day!


its 25% of what it was, still by todays standards a decent room, for the west coast way above average. I been going there since 86 or 87, I dont go often now. Some great guys on the rail for sure.
 
Top