Of course Scott is one of the best ever. It's all relative. What we don't have much of from the past is video records certainly action players never had anything filmed. So, its word of mouth that keeps the great ones from the past alive. Every era has a great player to raise the bar for everyone to shoot at. Right now it is clearly Alex who is the best player but I still keep seeing those banners in the rafters at Derby City who say Efren is the best ever.
Scott Frost, one of the greatest ever? ...or just another great player?
- Thread starter Triple Smart
- Start date
Triple Smart
Verified Member
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2015
- Messages
- 77
Its hard for me to imagine anyone playing any game better than Efren. As far as Alex goes....im not sure if he just plays that much better than Scott or if he just knows HOW to beat Scott?
petie
Verified Member
That is a distinction without a difference.
lll
Verified Member
petie
i think there is a distinction of difference
you see/hear it all the time
i beat player B and cant beat player C
yet player C beats player B
sometimes certain players just have another players number
in the case of alex/frost
i think
right now
ALEX PLAYS BETTER THAN SCOTT
and KNOWS HOW TO BEAT SCOTT
jnho
icbw
Jimmy B
Verified Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,923
Sure. Conners could beat McEnroe regularly. But Borg would beat Conners about 9 or 10 matches in a row. Then McEnroe would beat hell out of Borg. That's high level competition. Frost is a fantastic player and his rotation game is great also. Most of the people knocking him and giving him loads of advice don't know jack shit (not you, Larry). Frost would bend them over and have their addlepated assholes singing Moon River so loudly. lol.
LSJohn
Verified Member
That has absolutely nothing to do with the ability -- or lack of it -- to intelligently analyze his game and see flaws.
You can certainly disagree with their conclusions, but you're way off base thinking that someone has to be a better player than he to form a reasonable opinion about his game... like you have apparently formed an opinion about how solid it is.
And, BTW, I didn't see anyone offering Scott advice... just offering an answer to the thread question.
So, bottom line, Kiss my addlepated ass.
Jimmy B
Verified Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,923
That has absolutely nothing to do with the ability -- or lack of it -- to intelligently analyze his game and see flaws.
You can certainly disagree with their conclusions, but you're way off base thinking that someone has to be a better player than he to form a reasonable opinion about his game... like you have apparently formed an opinion about how solid it is.
And, BTW, I didn't see anyone offering Scott advice... just offering an answer to the thread question.
So, bottom line, Kiss my addlepated ass.
Point out the spot, cause you're ass all over. Fckk you..
LSJohn
Verified Member
You're obviously a very high class guy
, but you might want to brush up on your smiley-interpretation skills.
Triple Smart
Verified Member
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2015
- Messages
- 77
It just happens that way between some players. I personally think that Alex has his number. Knows how to play him. Not saying that he is a better player but that he knows exactly how to play him and keep him struggling. All the players that mess up and let him out of a pressured game. Get beat! If he unlocks and goes into stroke mode, that is where he is most dangerous. Alex doesn't allow for him to do that. Thats all im saying. I admire both players skills.
I won't speak to the two guys in question, but I will say this -- in my experience, it is not uncommon for a perceived "better" player to get consistently beat by a perceived "inferior" player...because the inferior player just "has his number" so to speak.
I've seen the inferior player take the better player out of his element, out of his game, and neutralize his game. Whatever the better player's strengths are, the inferior player renders them less effective or perhaps even ineffective -- at least to the extent that the better player simply can't win because he is better. The inferior player takes those strengths, and renders them so that they are no longer the strengths that would normally and simply assure the win. Those strengths are now far more harmless and ineffective.
I've seen the inferior player take the better player out of his element, out of his game, and neutralize his game. Whatever the better player's strengths are, the inferior player renders them less effective or perhaps even ineffective -- at least to the extent that the better player simply can't win because he is better. The inferior player takes those strengths, and renders them so that they are no longer the strengths that would normally and simply assure the win. Those strengths are now far more harmless and ineffective.
Jimmy B
Verified Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,923
You're obviously a very high class guy
I will. I see you chose to use another shocker eek emoticon to hurl another thinly veiled insult. By the way, I notice how high class you are too. I recall some of your jokes concerning the hog eating babies and especially the one about smelling pussy and the tennis shoes joke. Real high speed there, chief.
My little post consisted of a very short anecdotal comment about the tennis players that emphasized Larry's post. And then I made three short sentences about Scott Frost which were nothing but solid undeniable facts and then you attacked me and told me to kiss your ass. What the fukk did you think I was going to do??
Sure. Anybody can criticize and or critique Frost's game all they want to. It's still a half ass free country (not for long). You can do so even if you have never played any pool if you want to. I'm sure lots of folks gave Crane and Mosconi advice and criticism all the time about how to play straight pool. WORTHLESS IGNORANT FEEBLE MINDED KNOCKING INSIGNIFICANT CREEPS..FOR THE MOST PART.
ps. Where did I say someone had to be a better player to form a reasonable opinion blah blah bhah?? Nowhere..
petie
Verified Member
petie
Verified Member
That has absolutely nothing to do with the ability -- or lack of it -- to intelligently analyze his game and see flaws.
You can certainly disagree with their conclusions, but you're way off base thinking that someone has to be a better player than he to form a reasonable opinion about his game... like you have apparently formed an opinion about how solid it is.
And, BTW, I didn't see anyone offering Scott advice... just offering an answer to the thread question.
So, bottom line, Kiss my addlepated ass.
I agree, John. Can all coaches in all sports beat their team members?
petie
Verified Member
Look, before we get to arguing about how many angels fit on the head of a pin, I'd like to say the following: Winning in a close matchup is about finding a way to win. Alex has found it. You may call it, "having Scott's number," but it sounds like the same thing. I believe Alex shot Scott through the heart by his relentlessly solid game. He made Scott want to quit by never letting Scott's head out of the water. In my opinion he could concentrate better because he was more sublimely motivated. He didn't have his mind muddled with thoughts of. "How am I going to spin this defeat for my fans?" When I was a kid if I got in a fight, I knew very well my job was to 'clean the guys clock.' Not to punish him, not to be known as the best fighter of my age on the block, not to look good but to 'clean his clock.' If you think about this analogy you will see that it involves much more than throwing punches. So does winning at any contest unless you are mismatched.
LSJohn
Verified Member
Yeah, I'm sure you didn't intend this: "Most of the people knocking him and giving him loads of advice don't know jack shit (not you, Larry). Frost would bend them over and have their addlepated assholes singing Moon River so loudly. lol."
to insult anybody. I wonder why you thought you needed to say "(not you Larry)".
You probably don't know why you say half of what you say. What did you think "Frost would bend them over" meant relative to the value of criticism directed at his game?
Looks like you're another one of those "That's my story and I'm stickin' to it" guys.
Anytime you want to know what something means, PM my adelpated ass and I'll see what I can do for ya. I'll type real slow.
tylerdurden
Verified Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2011
- Messages
- 1,959
Scott could not be beaten for a while.
I have a different outlook on things. People are allowed to think what they want, and that is what these forums are for, but for me it just isn't enough to be called the best. It just isn't.
I have always said the same thing. Until the day comes when these guys are playing for real money and a real living, it's all just tossing coins to me. Put some golf tournament money in a few pots and then we'd see the true top. The same guys would be there of course, but I bet one or two would really shine. You just can't expect these guys to dedicate everything to a sport that gives next to nothing. Right now maybe Alex is especially motivated for whatever reason, good for him. But to me, it does not mean much. Now take a field of guys who have been doing all they can to get in and stay in stroke for some real money that real professionals should make, then I take those results to heart.
I have a different outlook on things. People are allowed to think what they want, and that is what these forums are for, but for me it just isn't enough to be called the best. It just isn't.
I have always said the same thing. Until the day comes when these guys are playing for real money and a real living, it's all just tossing coins to me. Put some golf tournament money in a few pots and then we'd see the true top. The same guys would be there of course, but I bet one or two would really shine. You just can't expect these guys to dedicate everything to a sport that gives next to nothing. Right now maybe Alex is especially motivated for whatever reason, good for him. But to me, it does not mean much. Now take a field of guys who have been doing all they can to get in and stay in stroke for some real money that real professionals should make, then I take those results to heart.
Very good points about the game, the current landscape, money, etc.
Unfortunately, the industry doesn't work together with collective and unified visions and efforts. The money is out there -- but the sport needs to be re-invented. Similar to what poker did many years ago. Yes, the table camera was key, but pool can be a very marketable sport, unlike any other, because anyone can go out and play! The industry can create a lot of interest and excitement, similar to what poker has done. We have the people and the product. It needs to be re-invented as a product and made marketable.
androd
Verified Member
Poker is popular because everyone thinks they can play ! They always know what to do.
They forget they're are seeing everyone's hole card. :frus
The game was made for tv, constant action.
lfigueroa
Verified Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2004
- Messages
- 2,540
Poker is popular because everyone thinks they can play ! They always know what to do.
They forget they're are seeing everyone's hole card. :frus
The game was made for tv, constant action.
While that may in fact be true, it's not the only reason for success vis a vis poker, or some potential failure vis a vis pool. It's not about why poker is popular. My point was that poker did it. You don't look to one thing and say well it's because.
In my opinion, pool can absolutely be far more today than it is. A few years before he died, I met with Mosconi and his son (who was handling his father's business) to discuss some business matters. I am a good friend of Mosconi's son -- not from pool, but from other business interests. He had a long and well known career in the nonprofit/education world. Anyway, Mosconi and his son had been contacted by a few manufacturers in the industry, with several ideas -- a series, marketing, a tournament, etc. Sure, it was a lot of talk -- but it probably started with the wrong people (the manufacturers), but that's another story, LOL. While nothing ever got off the ground, it wasn't due to not having good ideas.
Pool can certainly be made for TV -- but the entire landscape needs to be reinvented. It's happened with other sports, entertainment, etc. Sure, each one is different, but it's strategic, it's tactical. For this game, it's not an action, one step, one thing; it's strategic planning and reinvention -- not the game, but the business and the marketing of it.
JMHO, but then again, to what end as no one will take the bull by the horns.
Good thread everyone.