Players of the past and their Fargo...

[Wayne Crimi]

I've been around a long time. I saw Mizerak, Hopkins, Sigel, Varner, and Martin at their 14.1 and 9 ball peaks. I saw Mosconi play 14.1 while in his 60s.

There is no doubt in my mind that a 60 year old Mosconi that hadn't been playing competitively for years would have at least hung in there with any of those other guys from the 70s and 80s at 14.1. I also have to assume his peak was quite a bit better than what I saw.

I've seen the best players nowadays also.

I don't think the players today are much better than the best players of the past. I think there are WAY WAY WAY more elite players now than there used to be and they have more diverse skillsets because they play every game.

A guy like Mosconi could dominate 14.1 in his era, but I don't think he would have been as dominant in the 70s and 80s at 14.1 because there were more elite players. And the elite guys from the 70s and 80s would win even less now because there are 50-100 guys up that same level and elite at multiple games. But if peak Sigel was playing now, I think he'd be able to hang with all these guys at 14.1, 8 ball, 9 ball and 10 ball. Hall could hang at the rotation games etc...

 

[9BallKY]

Don't forget Jordan was a lock-down defender too. I believe he was defensive player of the year one year. Stats don't show that.

My point was that Jordan was the best player in that era and now there are 20+ players averaging the same numbers. It just shows the people continue to get better at things.

 

[skogstokig]

My point was that Jordan was the best player in that era and now there are 20+ players averaging the same numbers. It just shows the people continue to get better at things.

at the same time stephen hendry was dominating snooker, raining centuries and picking up every major trophy year after year. king of the crucible. leave an open red off the break and he'd run out. but his style got studied and emulated and now there are 30+ players capable of doing that, probably more. and some of them are doing it even better.

player evolution and improvement happens in every sport. to think pool is an exception is just weird. i'd rather paraphrase that apple dude and say that today's elite pool players are standing on the shoulders of giants.

 

[nicksaint26]

I just pulled up an Accu-Stats Treasures match between McCready and Parica from 2003. All I can say is pool has come a long way in the last 20 years and this was played on newer equipment. From mechanics to position play players today look much different and stronger imo. Not sure how old Parica and McCready were at the time and they may have been past their prime but my point stands. There are 50 guys today who could beat the best from decades past.

And this is not a knock on the two legends McCready and Parica.

 

[Wayne Crimi]

My point was that Jordan was the best player in that era and now there are 20+ players averaging the same numbers. It just shows the people continue to get better at things.

The game is WAY different now. They play at a way faster pace now than in the Jordan era. The defensive rules are different. That leads to more possessions, more points, assists, and rebounds. There's also a better understanding of the value of the 3 point shot now. So they work on it and take more of them. A guy like Bird would shoot 10 3s a game now and easily average 30. We are seeing all these 60-70 point games now because of those two things. Almost impossible to compare.

 

[pw98]

My point was that Jordan was the best player in that era and now there are 20+ players averaging the same numbers. It just shows the people continue to get better at things.

Back then they could mug you now they cant.

 

[pw98]

The game is WAY different now. They play at a way faster pace now than in the Jordan era. The defensive rules are different. That leads to more possessions, more points, assists, and rebounds. There's also a better understanding of the value of the 3 point shot now. So they work on it and take more of them. A guy like Bird would shoot 10 3s a game now and easily average 30. We are seeing all these 60-70 point games now because of those two things. Almost impossible to compare.

The 3 point line is also further back now.

 

[lfigueroa]

I've been around a long time. I saw Mizerak, Hopkins, Sigel, Varner, and Martin at their 14.1 and 9 ball peaks. I saw Mosconi play 14.1 while in his 60s.

There is no doubt in my mind that a 60 year old Mosconi that hadn't been playing competitively for years would have at least hung in there with any of those other guys from the 70s and 80s at 14.1. I also have to assume his peak was quite a bit better than what I saw.

I've seen the best players nowadays also.

I don't think the players today are much better than the best players of the past. I think there are WAY WAY WAY more elite players now than there used to be and they have more diverse skillsets because they play every game.

A guy like Mosconi could dominate 14.1 in his era, but he would not have been as dominant in the 70s and 80s at 14.1 because there were more elite players. And the elite guys from the 70s and 80s would win even less now because there are 50-100 guys up that same level and elite at multiple games. But if peak Sigel was playing now, he'd hang with all these guys.

The problem I have with your point about Mosconi competing against a larger number of elite players is that Mosconi competed against guys who did *nothing* but play 14.1 — guys who were total 14.1 mechanics with a depth of knowledge about the stack, patterns, and micro movements of the CB I doubt many guys have nowadays.

And, he often had to play all of them in championship tournament formats to win another title.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Cornerman]

The 3 point line is also further back now.

Is this true? I remember it being longer, then they moved it closer, then they moved it back longer. I assumed It’s the same distance as when Bird played.

 

[Cameron Smith]

I agree that probably the best way to get an estimate is to somehow input historical matches into the system. I’m guessing if you stuck with the Derby, US Open. Sando Regency and whatever accu-stats have in their classic newsletters that would be enough to connect the eras and get those players “established“.

 

[pw98]

Is this true? I remember it being longer, then they moved it closer, then they moved it back longer. I assumed It’s the same distance as when Bird played.

It was a couple feet closer then. They have moved it out further a few times since the mid 90s.

 

[pw98]

I agree that probably the best way to get an estimate is to somehow input historical matches into the system. I’m guessing if you stuck with the Derby, US Open. Sando Regency and whatever accu-stats have in their classic newsletters that would be enough to connect the eras and get those players “established“.

The problem would be there is no interplay between these players and the modern players at the same ages so there will be no baseline.

 

[AtLarge]

My point was that Jordan was the best player in that era and now there are 20+ players averaging the same numbers. It just shows the people continue to get better at things.

That's a confusing statement. Jordan averaged a tad above 30 points per game for his career, including the last couple of years after he had taken 3 years off and was no longer on the Bulls. Never has there been a year in the NBA when anywhere near 20 players averaged 30 points or more.

 

[AK-Stick]

Doubt they had Fargo points, bet you never heard of Harold Worst!

 

[AK-Stick]

Worst excelled won at all and won at last competing with brain cancer. Had he lived he’d probably out shined all!!

 

[AK-Stick]

Harold Worst: the Best Pool and Billiards Player of All Time?

 

[AK-Stick]

Harold Worst: the Best Pool and Billiards Player of All Time?

 

[tomatoshooter]

This would put them even with Mike Dechaine and Justin Bergman. That doesn't feel quite right to me.

Yeah, didn't Nick Varner have a year where he won like half the tournaments or something as ridiculous as that? And Earl got five US Opens and several world titles. Would peak Earl and Varner average 7 or 8 games in a race to ten against today's best? It's tough to say.

For the Jordan comparisons, it's not only his performance on the court, but his status as an icon that defines his greatness. The NBA was was not on par with the NFL and MLB at one time. Bird and Magic helped propel the league to a higher level of popularity and Jordan pushed it over the top. With the shoe deal and other endorsements he defined the modern NBA player's as a true superstar. Regardless of what another player may achieve, they will never eclipse Jordan's superstar status.

 

[justnum]

Yeah, didn't Nick Varner have a year where he won like half the tournaments or something as ridiculous as that? And Earl got five US Opens and several world titles. Would peak Earl and Varner average 7 or 8 games in a race to ten against today's best? It's tough to say.

For the Jordan comparisons, it's not only his performance on the court, but his status as an icon that defines his greatness. The NBA was was not on par with the NFL and MLB at one time. Bird and Magic helped propel the league to a higher level of popularity and Jordan pushed it over the top. With the shoe deal and other endorsements he defined the modern NBA player's as a true superstar. Regardless of what another player may achieve, they will never eclipse Jordan's superstar status.

Selling a shoe is a $50 billion industry.

Selling proprietary software/hardware for billiards is potentially an application worth $500 billiion with 1% of the labor needed to sell shoes.

I am suggesting billiards is better for engineers and computer scientists than shoe companies.

AI cameras are on the market this past month.

Soon sports investments will go into sports AI camera tech. Invest wisely.

Imagine an NFL or NBA game where fans can tap on their phone to view an angle at any time during a game.

A MIMO camera stream will define the next era of broadcast technology.

 

[Wayne Crimi]

The 3 point line is also further back now.

The 3 point line was shortened for only a very brief time then returned back.