Flip the coin to the other side..
MULLY
all that much. I'm sure he's a nice guy and all, but I just don't get into
him. Not too fond of Sigel either.
MULLY
Jimbo Ct
and not like 2 classy guys like Archer and Sigel.
JIM <-----Likes em all cept Strickland
SuccesWare
>Mully you would like a BOOB like that fiberglass sellout crybaby
Strickland,
>and not like 2 classy guys like Archer and Sigel.
MULLY responded:
>I don't dislike them as people. I'm just not too fond of their playing.
>MULLY
>Strickland rules!!!
I have to agree, Strickland is one hell of a player and, for my money, he's the
most exciting player to watch. However, it would be nice if he grew up.
Although I don't know how that might affect his play. He feeds off of
confrontation and controversy -- but sometimes that hurts him too. Take a look
at the 13th and final tape of the Hong Kong Challege match available from
Accu-stats (www.accu-stats.com). Reyes plays incredible pool making up a late
match 17 game deficit to win 120-117. Plus, IMO Earl makes a complete fool of
himself -- and I'm a fan.
One thing that I find odd is that tennis became very popular in the 70s when
McEnroe and Connors were pulling their garbage. I don't like it, but it's
possible that Strickland's junk actually has the potential to make pro pool
more popular.
Jeff G.
sam
Ralphie Valaderez to whip up through the middle. Are you old enough to
remember watching Lord Byron and Gorgeous George in the ring? And what the
heck is "rassling"? Ha Ha Sincerely, Sam
Gordon Matheson wrote in message <01be2a13$6ddd08a0$16044f0c@10>...
>
>
><succe...@aol.com> wrote in article
>> I have to agree, Strickland is one hell of a player and, for my money,
>he's the
>> most exciting player to watch. However, it would be nice if he grew up.
>> Although I don't know how that might affect his play. He feeds off of
>> confrontation and controversy -- but sometimes that hurts him too. Take
>a look
>> at the 13th and final tape of the Hong Kong Challege match available from
>> Accu-stats (www.accu-stats.com). Reyes plays incredible pool making up a
>late
>> match 17 game deficit to win 120-117. Plus, IMO Earl makes a complete
>fool of
>> himself -- and I'm a fan.
>>
>> One thing that I find odd is that tennis became very popular in the 70s
>when
>> McEnroe and Connors were pulling their garbage. I don't like it, but
>it's
>> possible that Strickland's junk actually has the potential to make pro
>pool
>> more popular.
>
>>
>
>Jeff, you said it before,
>
> "> I have to agree, Strickland is one hell of a player and, for my money,
>he's the
>> most exciting player to watch. However, it would be nice if he grew up.
>> Although I don't know how that might affect his play. He feeds off of
>> confrontation and controversy --"
>
>It's the same as McEnroe and Conners. All 3 are great players you love to
>hate. They are exiting to watch because you don't know what outrageous
>thing they will do next, so there is a gratifying sense of anticipation of
>seeing the bad boy get away with it as well as they were /are all great
>"go for it all the time" guys. Be honest, what's more fun to watch,
>someone who always get perfect position and makes the resulting easy shots
>or plays safe or someone who gets out of line and makes a few spectacular
>shots. Same with tennis. Sampras is probably the best player ever but
>boring as hell to watch. I bet those network announcers who used to cluck
>over McEnroe wishes Sampras would scream at a ref every once in a while. I
>know I watched tennis a whole lot more when McEnroe or Conners was playing.
> I wish I got to watch Earl more.
>
>Anyway, I think you may have hit the nail on the head. I read an article in
>the paper last week about bring back the roller derby to cable TV. The
>story mentioned that 3 out of 5 of the top rated shows on Cable are
>rassling and they feature big time evil bad boys vs. the good as gold boys.
> The fans love it and they HATE the bad boys. Personally I like "The
>Undertaker" because of his cool threads :-j. Earl and the Black Widow are
>pros you can build some anticipation around.
>
>G. - going to watch my Earl/Efren tape again and dust off my Black Widow
>coffee table book.
>
>
sam
caught". How can we have villains and heroes with this attitude. Is
Clinton a hero for balancing our budget or a villain for violating our
trust? Etc. Etc. The worst thing I saw in Pro Wrestling was when Hulk
Hogan after attracting the good little boys and girls for most of his
career, joined the NWO. (OK I know wrestling is an act but he still let our
kids down). When I was a child, God, Country, your fellow man, honor, and
dignity, were worth more than YOUR LIFE. Today, YOUR LIFE and the quality
of it, is worth more than ANY cause (IMO). I don't agree with this, but I
see it every day on TV, newspapers and in life itself. Yes, I agree. That
50x100 playing surface can be a wonderful escape into a world of honesty and
performance. Maybe that's why I love it.
Sincerely, Sam
Ron Shepard wrote in message ...
>In article <01be2a30$4ccc3240$99014f0c@10>, "Gordon Matheson"
><GO...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>> sam <s...@lasercom.net> wrote in article <3679a...@news.compuvar.com>...
>> > Gordon, I don't know if you could bring back roller derby without
having
>> > Ralphie Valaderez to whip up through the middle. Are you old enough to
>> > remember watching Lord Byron and Gorgeous George in the ring? And what
>> the
>> > heck is "rassling"? Ha Ha Sincerely, Sam
>>
>> Actually, half the first season of Roller Jam is already taped. It
debuts
>> Jan. 15 on TNN. I remember Lord Byron from English 101. Gorgeous George
>> was my neighbors huge white Persian cat in the late fifties. Biggest cat
I
>> ever saw. How do you know about him? WAIT A MINUTE! ARE WE CHATTING?
>> never mind
>>
>> G. _ I said notheeenng
>
>You guys have hit one one of my pet theories about the decline of
>civilization as we know it. When I watched rasslin' as a kid in the 50's
>and 60's, there were "good" guys and there were "bad" guys. The bad guys
>cheated, and the good guys didn't, plain as that. They would hide pieces
>of pipe in their shorts, they would pull hair, they would hit with a
>closed fist, they would throw their opponent over the top rope, they would
>grap their opponent's shorts, there was no end to what the bad guys would
>do to win. The crowd and the TV cameras could see this of course, but the
>referee never did, he always seemed to turn his head at just the wrong
>time. Even when the good guys were down, you could see the anguish on
>their faces about whether they should cheat back. You would see their
>hand reach up about to grab their cheating opponent's hair, it would pause
>in midair, and sometimes even shake as the good thoughts pulled one way
>and the evil thoughts pulled the other. But they were good guys, and in
>the end they would choose not to cheat. Good would win over evil in their
>minds. And they usually won even without cheating. Afterwards, they were
>modest and humble in their victory. And the crowd loved it, and a couple
>of generations learned, pro rasslin' style, about moral decisions, and
>right and wrong, and sacrifice and reward.
>
>Nowdays, all pro wrestlers cheat. There is nothing that separates the
>"good" guys from the "bad" guys. They all woof at their opponents, they
>all brag, they all are arrogant, and worst of all, they all cheat.
>
>Pool is different in some ways. Pool is a real sport, difficult and
>challenging. You can ignore the personalities of the players and just
>watch how they move the balls.
>
>$.02 -Ron Shepard
MULLY
Jimbo Ct wrote in message <19981217041147...@ng-ch1.aol.com>...
>Mully you would like a BOOB like that fiberglass sellout crybaby
Strickland,
>and not like 2 classy guys like Archer and Sigel.
Ron Shepard
Mike Page
she...@tcg.anl.gov (Ron Shepard) wrote:
>
> You guys have hit one one of my pet theories about the decline of
> civilization as we know it. When I watched rasslin' as a kid in the 50's
> and 60's, there were "good" guys and there were "bad" guys. The bad guys
> cheated, and the good guys didn't, plain as that. They would hide pieces
> of pipe in their shorts, they would pull hair, they would hit with a
> closed fist, they would throw their opponent over the top rope, they would
> grap their opponent's shorts, there was no end to what the bad guys would
> do to win. The crowd and the TV cameras could see this of course, but the
> referee never did, he always seemed to turn his head at just the wrong
> time. Even when the good guys were down, you could see the anguish on
> their faces about whether they should cheat back. You would see their
> hand reach up about to grab their cheating opponent's hair, it would pause
> in midair, and sometimes even shake as the good thoughts pulled one way
> and the evil thoughts pulled the other. But they were good guys, and in
> the end they would choose not to cheat. Good would win over evil in their
> minds. And they usually won even without cheating. Afterwards, they were
> modest and humble in their victory. And the crowd loved it, and a couple
> of generations learned, pro rasslin' style, about moral decisions, and
> right and wrong, and sacrifice and reward.
>
> Nowdays, all pro wrestlers cheat. There is nothing that separates the
> "good" guys from the "bad" guys. They all woof at their opponents, they
> all brag, they all are arrogant, and worst of all, they all cheat.
>
--
mike page
fargo
Ron Hudson
Yes Mike, but the ref still never sees it.
Ron
-----------------------------------------------------------
What do you want in a pool league?
Take the Survey
http://www.localpool.com
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ron Shepard
<R...@LocalPool.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:27:31 -0600, pa...@plains.nodak.edu (Mike Page) wrote:
>
> >In article <shepard-1812...@anchah.chm.anl.gov>,
> >she...@tcg.anl.gov (Ron Shepard) wrote:
> > >
> >> You guys have hit one one of my pet theories about the decline of
> >> civilization as we know it. When I watched rasslin' as a kid in the 50's
> >> and 60's, there were "good" guys and there were "bad" guys. The bad guys
> >> cheated, and the good guys didn't, plain as that. [...]
> >
> >Wow. This is the saddest little ditty I've read in a long time :-(
>
> Yes Mike, but the ref still never sees it.
If you had asked, I would have told you one of my other theories about the
decline of civilization as we know it. This one is about how everyone is
taught to multiply backwards -- you go through a long procedure, and the
*first* thing you get is the least significant digit, and you don't have a
clue what is even the approximate answer until the very end.
For example, say you are multiplying 99*98. The first thing we are taught
is to compute 9*8=72, write down the "2" and keep the "7" around for
later. THE "2". Who the heck cares about that damn "2" -- that is the
least important thing in the answer. The right way, of course, is to
think of (100-1)*(100-2), and start off with 100*100=10,000. That may be
close enough; if not, then go ahead and subtract off the 300, and add back
the 2 to get the correct reslt of 9,702. It is not just that you can do
this in your head, where most people, including me, need a pencil and
paper to do it the textbook way, it is that you start off with a
reasonable approximation to the answer and then refine it towards the
final correct result. Just like every other thing, you get closer and
closer to the final result, with additional effort. Back in the cold-war
days (when I was watching rasslin' on TV), I figured that this was
probably a communist plot, where some pinko infiltrated the school system
to put this poison into every American's mind. It keeps most of us
mentally handicapped for life.
Good thing you didn't ask, huh? :-)
$.02 -Ron Shepard
sam
x99
882
882
Answer 9,702 and get it exactly correct the first time instead of honing in
on it? Sincerely, Sam
Ron Shepard wrote in message ...
sam
say was simply old fashioned math where 99x98 is stacked and you multiply
9x8 put down the 2, carry the 7, multiply 9x9 get 81 plus the 7 is 88 which
makes 882, then do it again in the proper columns and add getting 9,702. Is
your way new math? My way is ancient. Sincerely, Sam
sam wrote in message <367c8...@news.compuvar.com>...
Michael Page
she...@tcg.anl.gov (Ron Shepard) wrote:
> If you had asked, I would have told you one of my other theories about the
> decline of civilization as we know it. This one is about how everyone is
> taught to multiply backwards -- you go through a long procedure, and the
> *first* thing you get is the least significant digit, and you don't have a
> clue what is even the approximate answer until the very end.
>
sandwich chains for which tens of thousands of people each day would give
all kinds of details about the sandwich they want with the worker standing
there doing nothing--because he doesn't know yet whether you want it on
white or wheat.
Notice too that the first piece of information about our addresses is
useless unless we know the last information...
mike page
2915
Greg Savoie
>MULLY
>Strickland rules!!!
How can you not like the way Archer of Siegel play!!!!!
--
*****************************************************
Greg Savoie
The Billiard Warehouse
http://www.billiardwarehouse.com
toll free: 888-809-POOL
A virtual warehouse of Cues, Cases and Accessories
*****The best selection and prices on the net!!*****
We have over 75 custom cues available starting at $255
plus all the production cues you know and love.
MULLY
Greg Savoie wrote in message <75lpis$3...@nnrp3.farm.idt.net>...
>>I don't dislike them as people. I'm just not too fond of their playing.
>>MULLY
>>Strickland rules!!!
>
>How can you not like the way Archer of Siegel play!!!!!
Don't get me wrong, Greg, I think they are incredible players. I'm just not
fond of the way they play. Archer is too reserved and Sigel seems like a
snob. Strickland just gets in everyone's ass. Buddy Hall is also one of my
favorite players, but seeing as how he's so different from Strickland I
would have to say that seeing Buddy play right in front of your face and
watching that stroke in action would make anyone a believer.
MULLY