PDA

View Full Version : Luther Lassiter's mechanics


Terry Ardeno
10-14-2007, 06:41 PM
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game. In my opinion, the top 3 are Lassiter, Strickland & Sigel. (For best all around to have ever played, Reys & then Varner get my vote). Anyway, back to Lassiter...

I have tapes of him in those "Legends" matches from the early 1980's. He was 63 when he was playing on the one I'm referencing. At 63, his shotmaking was still sharp. His stroke and mechanics look so awkward, yet, because he's ingrained those particular mechanics into his muscle memory, he has what's called a repeatable stroke. His is not one that most instructors would teach. He has a short back stroke, but not as short as Hopkins'. When he shoots, he has the unique habit of very quickly twisting his bridge up up and out to his left from the table. In other words, instead of his head jumping up, his bridge hand jumps up! He addresses the ball rather high by today's standards, where lots of players have their chin resting on the shaft during their strokes. On his break, he appears to lose his balance and again, his arm flings out to his left. And his bridge consists of what appears to be a very looping and loose finger barely around the shaft of his cue. Yet, despite less than perfect mechanics, he hardly ever misses a ball.

I have watched these tapes so many times over the years. I love seeing how the pros shoot and approach their shots. I can hardly imagine how great a shot maker he was in his prime, say the 1940's-1970.

I think what made him great was he really loved pool. He also built his game around action, ie, if he missed, he didn't eat or pay his bills. I think beside honing his game, that constant tension may have made him have some of the physical quirks and nervous habits that he and any other player accumulates or develops over the years. But, he had a repeatable stroke that he trusted in.

Another quick point here is look at all the unique strokes that the various pro players have. If you could somehow darken them out and just show their silhouettes, I think many of us could recognize who was shooting just by their particular mechanics and strokes.

So, as far as strokes go, one size does not fit all. But, we already know that, right? :)

scottycoyote
10-14-2007, 07:01 PM
i used to try and shoot like you see some pros, chin on the cue, and my back was killing me and my game rollercoastered (im 6 3", so i can get down there but it aint natural). It was actually a tape of lassiter playing i watched that helped me trust in not being down on the cue and just taking a stance that felt comfortable with, and i built my game around that, a better game and a happier back followed.

Bob Jewett
10-14-2007, 07:03 PM
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game. ...
About Lassiter's form from another thread:

In 1969 I got to see my first major tournament, the US Open 14.1 in Las Vegas. I got there the night before play started, and there was a sparse crowd in the lobby/sales area and a couple of practice tables. On one table was a shabby-looking older guy trying to practice. He was always out of position, never satisfied with what he did, had to bank about a ball per rack at 14.1, and looked horrible at the table. When he shot left handed, he would just slide his grip hand up the cue, still with the whole fist encircling the shaft - a pure hick move. He didn't miss much, but I was about ready to ask him what he was doing on the table, or maybe to ask him to play some nine ball, but I just let him be. Of course, that was Lassiter practicing. He won that tournament. If he ran 80, there would be three banks in the run.

sjm
10-14-2007, 07:16 PM
Terry, on the matter of whether Lassiter was the best nine-baller ever, I've heard many suggest as much over the years. Nonetheless, I wonder, and doubt, whether he'd have been as elite a nine-baller in the Texas Express era. Lassiter is, in the eyes of more than a few, the best ball pocketer ever, and I feel that the one shot shootout version of nineball gave the great pocketers a greater advantage than in Texas Express, as they would frequently push out into really difficult shots that they could make, but few others could. One shot shootout is the best format for the great pocketers.

My sense of all this is that Lassiter was the best one shot shootout player ever, but I don't think hecan be compared to today's superstars, as he played a far different version of nine ball.

alstl
10-14-2007, 08:35 PM
Terry, on the matter of whether Lassiter was the best nine-baller ever, I've heard many suggest as much over the years. Nonetheless, I wonder, and doubt, whether he'd have been as elite a nine-baller in the Texas Express era. Lassiter is, in the eyes of more than a few, the best ball pocketer ever, and I feel that the one shot shootout version of nineball gave the great pocketers a greater advantage than in Texas Express, as they would frequently push out into really difficult shots that they could make, but few others could. One shot shootout is the best format for the great pocketers.

My sense of all this is that Lassiter was the best one shot shootout player ever, but I don't think hecan be compared to today's superstars, as he played a far different version of nine ball.

I suspect that if he had grown up playing the modern version of the game he would have adjusted just fine. That reminds me of something. I never got to see Louie play because I didn't get into pool until I retired, but I asked a pool room owner about Louie one day. His reply was that he would push out to a tough cut shot knowing that he could make it but the opponent probably couldn't. At the time I didn't realize there used to be a different version of 9 ball.

I've had three different people in three different areas, two former pool room owners and a third guy who worked in a pool room, tell me Louie was the best shot maker they ever saw.

Madcity
10-14-2007, 09:10 PM
I could be very wrong because I started playing during the shoot out era (late 60's) but alot of the old farts lamented about the good old days when you had to hit the ball. They thought it very unfair that you got those freebie pushes and that would have been the era Lassiter played his best.

bigskyjake
10-14-2007, 09:22 PM
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game.


:eek: :eek:
And just what about a certain cat named Harold Worst
Beard, back me up on this one

Terry Ardeno
10-14-2007, 09:24 PM
Terry, on the matter of whether Lassiter was the best nine-baller ever, I've heard many suggest as much over the years. Nonetheless, I wonder, and doubt, whether he'd have been as elite a nine-baller in the Texas Express era. Lassiter is, in the eyes of more than a few, the best ball pocketer ever, and I feel that the one shot shootout version of nineball gave the great pocketers a greater advantage than in Texas Express, as they would frequently push out into really difficult shots that they could make, but few others could. One shot shootout is the best format for the great pocketers.

My sense of all this is that Lassiter was the best one shot shootout player ever, but I don't think hecan be compared to today's superstars, as he played a far different version of nine ball.

SJM,
I very much appreciate your input and insights here. I've carefully considered and thought out what you said. However, I still have to wonder what if Lassiter DID compete under the modern rules? What makes it possible for him to excel in one era but not in another? Simply rules? Were not all those he competed against also under the same rules at the time he was? And he still dominated.

Then it becomes a matter of modern day players BEING BETTER PLAYERS BECAUSE THEY HAVE DIFFERENT RULES? And try as I may, I can't correlate the two. How a set of rules makes for better players but, bringing another era's players into that same grouping with the newer / modern rules and they CAN'T excel? That's the part I'm stuck on.

In other words, why should we think that if Lassiter was afforded the same rules , i.e., (Texas Express), that he would not be the player he was under the former rules? I feel that I'm missing something in your thinking or I'm not fully grasping what you're trying to convey. I think you're saying that Lassiter's forte was shotmaking and he would need better position skills to comepete with those modern players who have shotmaking and positional skills. BUT, Lassiter also never played on Simonis 860 and these great modern tables. He was great with clay balls and knappy clothe. I would think his game would step UP a notch with an upgrade in playing equipment. And, that's not conceeding that his positional skills were below par. Remember, in addition to his dominance in 9 ball, he also won 4 World 14.1 Championships, a U.S. Open 14.1 Championship and the infamous Mosconi-less "World 14.1 Championship" in 1954. Not to also mention the 5 World All-Around Championships he won in the Johnston City and Stardust Open Championships. Surely, without exceptional over-all cueing abilities, Lassiter would not have been able to so thoroughly dominate these other great players, right? He had to be doing something other than just great shotmaking.

Lastly, this is all subjective opinions. Who's to say (or really know) who would have been like what had they been transposed into a different era? Nonetheless, it sure is fun to opine on these type of musings. As always Stu, I have the upmost respect for you and your very learned opinions and educated thoughts.

Terry Ardeno
10-14-2007, 09:44 PM
:eek: :eek:
And just what about a certain cat named Harold Worst
Beard, back me up on this one


bigskyjake,

I think Harold Worst is better suited to be in the catagory of best all around player, lumped with the Reyes, Varner's and Boston Shorty's, rather than as an elite 9 ball champion. Here's why...In 1964 he won the 14.1 and snooker titles in the Michigan state tournament. (This after he had much success in 3 cushion billiards) But, staying with pocket billiards, he also won the 1965 Stardust Open 1 pocket and All-Around titles. Also in 1965, he won the Johnston City 9 ball, 14.1 and All-Around titles. So, 1965 was a fabulous year for Worst!

Here's the tragedy...Harold Worst died of cancer on June 16, 1966 at the young age of 37, arguably at his peak as a player. We'll never know to what heights he could have ascendeded. What I do know is that those are all the major championships he's won. So, winning the 1965 World 9 Ball Championship does not stand up against Lassiter, Strickland or Sigel's credentionals. Harold Worst is better suited for consideration in the "who the best all around champions" catagory rather than to consider him the greatest 9 baller ever, don'y you agree?

bigskyjake
10-14-2007, 09:59 PM
You're probably right Terry
It's hard as hell to say since he died so young what he would have done. When you stack up his single year accomplishments against other greats best single years he pretty much had the nuts

Terry Ardeno
10-14-2007, 10:07 PM
When you stack up his single year accomplishments against other greats best single years he pretty much had the nuts


I agree with you there!

klockdoc
10-14-2007, 10:30 PM
Here is a good story as told by Jimmy Reid in his relationship/meeting with Lassiter.

For those of you who haven't read it, it is an enjoyable read.

http://freepoollessons.com/sports/stories3.html

Enjoy

ribdoner
10-14-2007, 10:48 PM
I suspect that if he had grown up playing the modern version of the game he would have adjusted just fine. That reminds me of something. I never got to see Louie play because I didn't get into pool until I retired, but I asked a pool room owner about Louie one day. His reply was that he would push out to a tough cut shot knowing that he could make it but the opponent probably couldn't. At the time I didn't realize there used to be a different version of 9 ball.

I've had three different people in three different areas, two former pool room owners and a third guy who worked in a pool room, tell me Louie was the best shot maker they ever saw.



Had the pleasure of watching Louie play many times when he was at the height of his powers. Although he was a wonderfull shot maker I'm not sure if he was the best when you consider the full spectrum of shots which were reqd when playing 2 shot foul. Back in the day a young SEARCY and McCREADY would, IMO, have proven to be better all-around shot makers esp. when factoring in playing shape via non-traditional patterns.

What Louie did better than any human was fan balls in (he'd cut em thin to win) that were on the short rail while whitey was WAY down table. He would often roll out for those shots while most of the other champions would roll out from them.

His battles with McCready were epic combining salesmanship (Louie forming corporations to get staked), woofing, sharking, the unknown (who had a better mix and how long would it last), humor and drama. Would pool be where poker and golf are today if the censors would have allowed the masses to be exposed to the "real deal"?

20/20 hindsight tells me YES.....


20/20 hindsight also tells me that Buddy has been the best 9 ball player for greater periods than anyone since the early 70's. Others, including Incardone, Searcy, Roberts, Segal, Strickland, Varner, Reyes, Souquet, etc. may have been the best at any given time but Buddy was either there or knocken at the door. Using this criteria my real close runner-up is Earl.

Never saw Wimpy play when he was in his prime. It's obvious that the players of his era thought he was the best so he prolly was. It also appears he beat most of them before they lagged for the break. Wish I could have seen him play when he was the MAN.....

sjm
10-14-2007, 10:57 PM
I think you're saying that Lassiter's forte was shotmaking and he would need better position skills to comepete with those modern players who have shotmaking and positional skills.

No, I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that the increased number of pushouts permitted, and the way they utlilized them, gave the greatest shotmakers an even bigger edge than they have today in winning control of the table. Just like today, the first guy winning control of a runnable rack would, generally, run out.

Not saying that Wimpy wouldn't have been best today, but skills like safety play, kicking and jumping were not nearly as important back then as they are in Texas Express. In addition, the break, critical in both Texas Express and one shot shootout, is even more critical today. Today, a scratch means ball in hand any where, whereas in one shot shootout it only meant ball in hand in the kitchen, which is far less valuable to the incoming player.

What I'm saying is that one shot shootout is different enough from Texas Express that Wimpy should be viewed as the greatest ever at that version of the game, and the nine ball players of the last 25-30 years should probably only be compared with each other.

jay helfert
10-15-2007, 12:11 AM
Okay, here we go.

First of all, "Push Out 9-Ball" was a tougher game, so the better players had more of an advantage. All balls spotted up, and on a foul you shot from behind the line. Much tougher game that way. You didn't have to jump or kick at balls because you could roll out for a shot. Banking ability was paramount because often you would roll out for a bank. With the advent of "One Foul BIH" kicking and jumping ability became far more important than before.

Louie Roberts was the greatest pure shotmaker I ever saw. He could cut a ball that was one eighth inch off the rail all the way down the table, and it would stay one eighth inch off the rail all the way to the pocket. He hit everything on a straight line! Richie Florence was the second best shotmaker, and the best ever for the cash. He could run out rack after rack of 9-Ball and be out of line on half the shots. If he could see it, he could make it!

Harold Worst was the best pool player I ever saw and Jose Parica may have been second. Worst excelled at all games and possibly could have beaten Ronnie if he ever learned how to play One Pocket. Jose was the best I ever saw for money and Buddy may have been second. No one would play Worst for money, although he was quite willing. Buddy played the best patterns and had the nicest cue ball control in 9-Ball. Nobody knows more about how to play pool than Buddy, and no one knows more shots. Only the great 14.1 players like Mizerak and Sigel understand the stack better. In One Pocket no one knew as much as Ronnie ever, especially how to play the stack.

No one ever controlled the cue ball better than Efren, and it really shows up in One Pocket. Wilie Mosconi was the best straight Pool player I ever saw and Mizerak was second. Mosconi's cue ball was equal to Efren's at this one game. In tournament 9-Ball, Strickland stands alone. But if they both got to the finals, Sigel was the best under pressure. Lassiter missed the fewest balls in his era and Sigel missed the least during his era. No one (except Worst) was willing to play Lassiter 9-Ball for money for over 20 years. He had a short choppy stroke like Hopkins, but rarely missed a ball and played flawless position. His patterns were not like Buddy's. Luther did not move the cue ball any more than necessary. Only Don Watson also played this way, and was nearly as good. He might miss a ball once every hour. Luther would not!

Ed Kelly was the greatest all around player when he was playing and had the purest stroke ever. But he couldn't beat Lassiter at 9-Ball, Ronnie at One Pocket or Mizerak at Straight Pool. Sigel was the greatest all around player of his generation and he might beat anyone at any game! Except he couldn't beat Parica for the cash at 9-Ball, Ten Ball or Rotation. Efren remains the best player at two of the most difficult games there are, Rotation and One Pocket.

One caveat. For a few years, Denny may have been right there with Buddy playing for money. He did things with the cue ball that I never saw again until Efren came along.

vijesh
10-15-2007, 12:27 AM
Hi does anyone know Jimmy Reid's email, i want to get those DVD's.

Thanks
Vijesh

Terry Ardeno
10-15-2007, 01:20 AM
Hi does anyone know Jimmy Reid's email, i want to get those DVD's.

Thanks
Vijesh


klockdoc posted his webpage with the ordering info...
http://freepoollessons.com/index.html

Terry Ardeno
10-15-2007, 01:49 AM
Okay, here we go.

First of all, "Push Out 9-Ball" was a tougher game, so the better players had more of an advantage. All balls spotted up, and on a foul you shot from behind the line. Much tougher game that way. You didn't have to jump or kick at balls because you could roll out for a shot. Banking ability was paramount because often you would roll out for a bank. With the advent of "One Foul BIH" kicking and jumping ability became far more important than before.

Louie Roberts was the greatest pure shotmaker I ever saw. He could cut a ball that was one eighth inch off the rail all the way down the table, and it would stay one eighth inch off the rail all the way to the pocket. He hit everything on a straight line! Richie Florence was the second best shotmaker, and the best ever for the cash. He could run out rack after rack of 9-Ball and be out of line on half the shots. If he could see it, he could make it!

Harold Worst was the best pool player I ever saw and Jose Parica may have been second. Worst excelled at all games and possibly could have beaten Ronnie if he ever learned how to play One Pocket. Jose was the best I ever saw for money and Buddy may have been second. No one would play Worst for money, although he was quite willing. Buddy played the best patterns and had the nicest cue ball control in 9-Ball. Nobody knows more about how to play pool than Buddy, and no one knows more shots. Only the great 14.1 players like Mizerak and Sigel understand the stack better. In One Pocket no one knew as much as Ronnie ever, especially how to play the stack.

No one ever controlled the cue ball better than Efren, and it really shows up in One Pocket. Wilie Mosconi was the best straight Pool player I ever saw and Mizerak was second. Mosconi's cue ball was equal to Efren's at this one game. In tournament 9-Ball, Strickland stands alone. But if they both got to the finals, Sigel was the best under pressure. Lassiter missed the fewest balls in his era and Sigel missed the least during his era. No one (except Worst) was willing to play Lassiter 9-Ball for money for over 20 years. He had a short choppy stroke like Hopkins, but rarely missed a ball and played flawless position. His patterns were not like Buddy's. Luther did not move the cue ball any more than necessary. Only Don Watson also played this way, and was nearly as good. He might miss a ball once every hour. Luther would not!

Ed Kelly was the greatest all around player when he was playing and had the purest stroke ever. But he couldn't beat Lassiter at 9-Ball, Ronnie at One Pocket or Mizerak at Straight Pool. Sigel was the greatest all around player of his generation and he might beat anyone at any game! Except he couldn't beat Parica for the cash at 9-Ball, Ten Ball or Rotation. Efren remains the best player at two of the most difficult games there are, Rotation and One Pocket.

One caveat. For a few years, Denny may have been right there with Buddy playing for money. He did things with the cue ball that I never saw again until Efren came along.


Buddy Hall says in the book "Rags to Rifleman" that Lassiter was the best 9 baller he ever saw.

Also, there is so much to your post that I would like to comment on. I'll just ask this one question regarding Jose....he "may have been the 2nd best pool player" you ever saw? Huh??? Better than Strickland, Sigel, Efren??? Based on what, Jay? List his tournament credentials with the other super-star players. His don't match up at all. Gambling? You would take Parica over, say, Willis, gambling at 9 ball? Unless you were there for every match he ever won, you and I both know that gambling stories often grow to gambling legend and folk lore over time. Not diminsihing Parica's skills at all, but 2nd G.O.A.T is really flattering, don't you think? Nick Varner has WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS in 14.1, 9 ball, 8 ball, one pocket and banks. Yet, you have Parica better than even Nick?

It's been a long, long time since I disagreed with you my friend, but wow!
I'm having chest pains :eek:

By the way, would you rank Lassiter in the top what of all time 9 ballers?:confused: :confused: :confused:

(Where is Fatboy when I need him....:) )
No, even better than that (they may be in cahoots:D ), I can't wait till Freddy wakes up...
How about this...let's start a poll on a new thread. "Who was the better pool player, Lassiter or Parica?" But that may not work either because so many probably don't even know who he was. Which is very sad.

Marvel
10-15-2007, 02:03 AM
I know that I don't know much compared to you real old skool guys, but I have really hard time believing that anyone's A-game could match Efren's A-game at 9-ball - especially with tight equipment. And I know, and even as a relatively young man myself I do it also, nostalgy is a thing which makes us remember old times with golden frames.
I know Efren's break is not there with the modern era players, but you guys are talking about old skool players, whose breaks were not too evolved either.
There has been different rules back then, so the game has been different.
Efrens kicking, safety game and cueball control are something special, so I doubt the others could have matched him at his/theirs best.
And remember, I'm talking about the A-game, which Efren produced much later than Sigel, Buddy and Earl, even he's about the same age with Mike and Buddy and older than Earl. (I'm more talking about the Killer Instinct - Efren has said he played his best at the seventies..)

The pockets used to be much bigger, rules where different etc.. so the comparison may be too difficult, but if you watch Efren beating Earl at the Color Of Money, or for example Efren beating Mika 7-0 and Baraks 7-1 at the DCC 2005 9-Ball semi + final, which was played on a tight table, after Efren, 51yrs of age, had been 13th at Banks, 1st at One-Pocket, all the fields 400+, played lots of money games during the week, etc..

I know Earl used to win tournaments and run racks like crazy, Mike's record at the finals were unbelievable, Buddy was too strong for the money, but also the level was not the same as it has been lately - when Efren still constantly beats them all (at least until recently..).

Also I believe that Earl himself and at least Nick Varner have stated that Efren is the best player of all time, and they are talking about 9-ball now..





BTW, who is this 'Denny' fellow then?

One caveat. For a few years, Denny may have been right there with Buddy playing for money. He did things with the cue ball that I never saw again until Efren came along.

Marvel
10-15-2007, 02:11 AM
Actually, I believe that all this "greatest of all time" discussion is only a discussion for the sake of discussion and for the sake of nostalgy and remembering 'the good old days'.


I believe, that Mosconi was the greatest 14.1 player. About the greatest Bank Pool player I don't know.

Otherwise, Efren is the best from all the rest. Period.


Only some modern era players like Yang can challenge him at 9-ball, because of the break and the jump cue factor, but even still, when Efren gets his Magic from his bag, he's the best again.
It just might be that those days are over, and we have to wait for a couple of decades, when the discussion about the G.O.A.T 9-Baller is ALL Efren.. ;)

Marvel
10-15-2007, 02:13 AM
About the greatest Bank Pool player I don't know.

)


Or was it Eddie Taylor?

Bigjohn
10-15-2007, 06:30 AM
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game. In my opinion, the top 3 are Lassiter, Strickland & Sigel. (For best all around to have ever played, Reys & then Varner get my vote). Anyway, back to Lassiter...

I have tapes of him in those "Legends" matches from the early 1980's. He was 63 when he was playing on the one I'm referencing. At 63, his shotmaking was still sharp. His stroke and mechanics look so awkward, yet, because he's ingrained those particular mechanics into his muscle memory, he has what's called a repeatable stroke. His is not one that most instructors would teach. He has a short back stroke, but not as short as Hopkins'. When he shoots, he has the unique habit of very quickly twisting his bridge up up and out to his left from the table. In other words, instead of his head jumping up, his bridge hand jumps up! He addresses the ball rather high by today's standards, where lots of players have their chin resting on the shaft during their strokes. On his break, he appears to lose his balance and again, his arm flings out to his left. And his bridge consists of what appears to be a very looping and loose finger barely around the shaft of his cue. Yet, despite less than perfect mechanics, he hardly ever misses a ball.

I have watched these tapes so many times over the years. I love seeing how the pros shoot and approach their shots. I can hardly imagine how great a shot maker he was in his prime, say the 1940's-1970.

I think what made him great was he really loved pool. He also built his game around action, ie, if he missed, he didn't eat or pay his bills. I think beside honing his game, that constant tension may have made him have some of the physical quirks and nervous habits that he and any other player accumulates or develops over the years. But, he had a repeatable stroke that he trusted in.

Another quick point here is look at all the unique strokes that the various pro players have. If you could somehow darken them out and just show their silhouettes, I think many of us could recognize who was shooting just by their particular mechanics and strokes.

So, as far as strokes go, one size does not fit all. But, we already know that, right? :)

If you look at all the old time players. Lassiter, Mosconi, Fats, Crane etc., they all addressed the ball much higher over the cue than todays players... and personally, I can see the angles better with my head higher.

jay helfert
10-15-2007, 07:53 AM
Buddy Hall says in the book "Rags to Rifleman" that Lassiter was the best 9 baller he ever saw.

Also, there is so much to your post that I would like to comment on. I'll just ask this one question regarding Jose....he "may have been the 2nd best pool player" you ever saw? Huh??? Better than Strickland, Sigel, Efren??? Based on what, Jay? List his tournament credentials with the other super-star players. His don't match up at all. Gambling? You would take Parica over, say, Willis, gambling at 9 ball? Unless you were there for every match he ever won, you and I both know that gambling stories often grow to gambling legend and folk lore over time. Not diminsihing Parica's skills at all, but 2nd G.O.A.T is really flattering, don't you think? Nick Varner has WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS in 14.1, 9 ball, 8 ball, one pocket and banks. Yet, you have Parica better than even Nick?

It's been a long, long time since I disagreed with you my friend, but wow!
I'm having chest pains :eek:

By the way, would you rank Lassiter in the top what of all time 9 ballers?:confused: :confused: :confused:

(Where is Fatboy when I need him....:) )
No, even better than that (they may be in cahoots:D ), I can't wait till Freddy wakes up...
How about this...let's start a poll on a new thread. "Who was the better pool player, Lassiter or Parica?" But that may not work either because so many probably don't even know who he was. Which is very sad.

Sorry to upset you Terry, but it is just that, my opinion. If Strickland, Sigel and Efren had to play Parica for the cash in a long session in the 1980's, he would have devoured them all. He did beat all of them by the way. You could have lined them up and let him play them 1,2,3. He was that strong.
I'm not talking about tournaments here, just who played the best IMO.

Parica did win his share of tournaments back then as well. But he only played a few because of travel restrictions. If you want to know why I feel this way, it is because Jose had cue ball control equal to Efren, had a stroke like Earl, and missed as few as Sigel. He had all their best qualities rolled into one. And he had more heart than all three put together. For the cheese! He had a big break back then too. I love Efren and he is a great, great player, but some of us know how it was between them in the Philipines before they came over here. Jose was "Amang", the MAN!

I saw them all play Terry and I was VERY impressed by what I saw Jose do in the 80's and 90's. Did you know NO ONE would play him for money the first 10 to 15 years he was over here. All the top players KNEW they couldn't beat him. Even Buddy left this one guy alone. Jose barred no one!
He is not my best friend either. I just call them like I see them. Don Willis in his prime would have ducked this guy too. He wasn't a dummy.

Okay, there was two guys who may have played good enough to play Parica if they had lived in the same era. George Rood and Harold Worst. Both played great, never missed and had strong hearts. Lassiter also could play "no miss" 9-Ball. If I could pick one guy to battle Parica it would have to be Worst. He had just as much heart, and an even bigger stroke. He had the ability to raise his game to whatever level he needed to win.

As far as Lassiter goes, he is on my top three or four all time 9-Ballers. He would have played Jose if they had lived in the same era, and could have given him a great game. But Jose had more ability overall IMO. They had very different styles. Jose was more run and gun, and Lassiter was a little more careful. Both worked for them, but in a confrontation, I would have taken Jose. He was scary good!

jay helfert
10-15-2007, 08:04 AM
I know that I don't know much compared to you real old skool guys, but I have really hard time believing that anyone's A-game could match Efren's A-game at 9-ball - especially with tight equipment. And I know, and even as a relatively young man myself I do it also, nostalgy is a thing which makes us remember old times with golden frames.
I know Efren's break is not there with the modern era players, but you guys are talking about old skool players, whose breaks were not too evolved either.
There has been different rules back then, so the game has been different.
Efrens kicking, safety game and cueball control are something special, so I doubt the others could have matched him at his/theirs best.
And remember, I'm talking about the A-game, which Efren produced much later than Sigel, Buddy and Earl, even he's about the same age with Mike and Buddy and older than Earl. (I'm more talking about the Killer Instinct - Efren has said he played his best at the seventies..)

The pockets used to be much bigger, rules where different etc.. so the comparison may be too difficult, but if you watch Efren beating Earl at the Color Of Money, or for example Efren beating Mika 7-0 and Baraks 7-1 at the DCC 2005 9-Ball semi + final, which was played on a tight table, after Efren, 51yrs of age, had been 13th at Banks, 1st at One-Pocket, all the fields 400+, played lots of money games during the week, etc..

I know Earl used to win tournaments and run racks like crazy, Mike's record at the finals were unbelievable, Buddy was too strong for the money, but also the level was not the same as it has been lately - when Efren still constantly beats them all (at least until recently..).

Also I believe that Earl himself and at least Nick Varner have stated that Efren is the best player of all time, and they are talking about 9-ball now..





BTW, who is this 'Denny' fellow then?

I was referring to Denny Searcy.

Good point here. If Efren had played in the "push out" era, no one would have had a chance with him. Maybe only Lassiter and Worst could have won matches with him. It would have been Efren, Worst and Lassiter, and then Kelly, Sigel and Buddy. This is before Earl came along. When Earl started stringing those racks, everything changed!

No question that Efren is and has been the best player for a long time. Best of all time, I'm not so sure. Best ever at One Pocket (modern era) has to be Ronnie and Efren. Best ever at Rotation probably Efren here as well. Best ever at Ten Ball, I call it a draw between Efren and Jose. Best ever at Eight Ball, Efren again.

If you ever saw Harold Worst play (any game) you wouldn't be so quick to rate Efren over him. He was a MONSTER! He might have eaten Efren! We'll never know.

jay helfert
10-15-2007, 08:10 AM
If you look at all the old time players. Lassiter, Mosconi, Fats, Crane etc., they all addressed the ball much higher over the cue than todays players... and personally, I can see the angles better with my head higher.

It's a different game with the fast cloth. You need more accuracy today, and a better touch. Back in the days of slow cloth, a big stroke was required to move the cue ball around. You could muster more power from a slightly more upright stance. On real close or precise shots, the old timers would get down over the cue as well sometimes.

jay helfert
10-15-2007, 08:12 AM
Or was it Eddie Taylor?

Definitely! Mosconi wouldn't have had a prayer with him or Bugs. He wasn't even in the top ten at Banks.

Black-Balled
10-15-2007, 08:22 AM
...regarding Jose....he "may have been the 2nd best pool player" you ever saw? Huh??? ...his tournament credentials with the other super-star players. His don't match up at all. ...

The belt just holds up the pants!

PastPrime
10-15-2007, 08:29 AM
I saw Lassiter play on several different occasions in the 60's and the guy was always on. The only time I remember him losing was when he was frozen out of a rack and didn't get a shot. One of the things that sticks in my mind about him was his arms. His biceps were about the size of a 12 year old girls! He had a little pot belly and didn't look like he could stand up for more than one game but yet he would play all night and be ready to go after a quick nap in a pool room chair.
One year I saw him and every other big name play in some kind of U.S. Championship (?) in Long Beach, California in 1966 (?). I believe Joe Balsis won the 9-ball portion of the tournament and Richie Florence won most of the money in the back room. They had the same tournament two years in a row there and I think it was 66 & 67.
After each tournament we had an influx of big names come through Fresno, California looking for some money. One day I noticed this young guy banging balls around on one of the tables and the poor kid couldn't make a shot. I was thinking I might get him to put up some cash when I finally realized I had just seen him the week before in Long Beach and his name came back to me. It was Richie Florence and when I walked up to him and said it looked like his game had dropped off a little since Long Beach he just laughed and said "you got me" and asked about the action in town. He was a very pleasant guy and came to Fresno several times over the years. Ronnie Allen came through a couple of days later and stayed there for 3 days giving up everything but money. That guy could play everything but his one pocket skills were unreal. For about an hour one day he showed his skills by making or lagging very close every shot for the corner pocket we could think of presenting to him. He did 1-5 rails, caroms, combos, cuts, you name it. I never saw anything like that before and not since then. We had a House Guy named Rocky Antenucci that played everybody coming through from about 1960 until 2005 and held his own with most people on the 9-ball table but fell off somewhat on the other games. He's now 76 years old and has cancer but on some days he's still the baddest man in town. He has some great stories about all these guys that played from the late 50's until the 90's when the traveling hustlers mostly quit the road. I believe that in that period every player that I ever heard of came through Fresno going back and forth from SF to LA and back. It was truly a pleasure to see them play and even to play with them on occasion.

jay helfert
10-15-2007, 08:39 AM
I saw Lassiter play on several different occasions in the 60's and the guy was always on. The only time I remember him losing was when he was frozen out of a rack and didn't get a shot. One of the things that sticks in my mind about him was his arms. His biceps were about the size of a 12 year old girls! He had a little pot belly and didn't look like he could stand up for more than one game but yet he would play all night and be ready to go after a quick nap in a pool room chair.
One year I saw him and every other big name play in some kind of U.S. Championship (?) in Long Beach, California in 1966 (?). I believe Joe Balsis won the 9-ball portion of the tournament and Richie Florence won most of the money in the back room. They had the same tournament two years in a row there and I think it was 66 & 67.
After each tournament we had an influx of big names come through Fresno, California looking for some money. One day I noticed this young guy banging balls around on one of the tables and the poor kid couldn't make a shot. I was thinking I might get him to put up some cash when I finally realized I had just seen him the week before in Long Beach and his name came back to me. It was Richie Florence and when I walked up to him and said it looked like his game had dropped off a little since Long Beach he just laughed and said "you got me" and asked about the action in town. He was a very pleasant guy and came to Fresno several times over the years. Ronnie Allen came through a couple of days later and stayed there for 3 days giving up everything but money. That guy could play everything but his one pocket skills were unreal. For about an hour one day he showed his skills by making or lagging very close every shot for the corner pocket we could think of presenting to him. He did 1-5 rails, caroms, combos, cuts, you name it. I never saw anything like that before and not since then. We had a House Guy named Rocky Antenucci that played everybody coming through from about 1960 until 2005 and held his own with most people on the 9-ball table but fell off somewhat on the other games. He's now 76 years old and has cancer but on some days he's still the baddest man in town. He has some great stories about all these guys that played from the late 50's until the 90's when the traveling hustlers mostly quit the road. I believe that in that period every player that I ever heard of came through Fresno going back and forth from SF to LA and back. It was truly a pleasure to see them play and even to play with them on occasion.


I played Rocky, Courteous Kirk and Little George all on the same day back in the 70's and beat them all. True story! And George was the best of the three. A guy named Jerry Jamison was probably the best player to come out of Fresno. Just ask Rocky about him, before the drugs got him.

macguy
10-15-2007, 08:47 AM
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game. In my opinion, the top 3 are Lassiter, Strickland & Sigel. (For best all around to have ever played, Reys & then Varner get my vote). Anyway, back to Lassiter...

I have tapes of him in those "Legends" matches from the early 1980's. He was 63 when he was playing on the one I'm referencing. At 63, his shotmaking was still sharp. His stroke and mechanics look so awkward, yet, because he's ingrained those particular mechanics into his muscle memory, he has what's called a repeatable stroke. His is not one that most instructors would teach. He has a short back stroke, but not as short as Hopkins'. When he shoots, he has the unique habit of very quickly twisting his bridge up up and out to his left from the table. In other words, instead of his head jumping up, his bridge hand jumps up! He addresses the ball rather high by today's standards, where lots of players have their chin resting on the shaft during their strokes. On his break, he appears to lose his balance and again, his arm flings out to his left. And his bridge consists of what appears to be a very looping and loose finger barely around the shaft of his cue. Yet, despite less than perfect mechanics, he hardly ever misses a ball.

I have watched these tapes so many times over the years. I love seeing how the pros shoot and approach their shots. I can hardly imagine how great a shot maker he was in his prime, say the 1940's-1970.

I think what made him great was he really loved pool. He also built his game around action, ie, if he missed, he didn't eat or pay his bills. I think beside honing his game, that constant tension may have made him have some of the physical quirks and nervous habits that he and any other player accumulates or develops over the years. But, he had a repeatable stroke that he trusted in.

Another quick point here is look at all the unique strokes that the various pro players have. If you could somehow darken them out and just show their silhouettes, I think many of us could recognize who was shooting just by their particular mechanics and strokes.

So, as far as strokes go, one size does not fit all. But, we already know that, right? :)
I saw Lassiter many times and he had a goofy stroke. It was like 1 inch long and he did them in little 4 or 5 stroke bursts maybe 4 or 5 times for a total or as many as 25 strokes a shot. It could be awful to watch at times. Another weird thing, players with strange habits or quirks can be bad to watch. You seem, for some reason, to pick up their habits and your game can go down hill. I was around Danny DiLiberto for a while and in no time I picked up his stroke and funny stance and could not make a ball after a while. I swear, it took me a good month to try to get back to being myself. Allen Hopkins is another good example, you don't want to pick up his fundamentals if you can help it. On the other side of the coin, a player like Ray Martin is so smooth you feel like you can get in stroke by just watching him.

whitewolf
10-15-2007, 09:09 AM
Best shot maker - Kid Cole Dixon
Bust cut shot artist - Kid Cole Dixon
Best at push out - Kid Cole Dixon
Best pure stroke - Kid Cole Dixon
Period. JMHO

daniel
10-15-2007, 10:20 AM
It's Cole Dickson

bigskyjake
10-15-2007, 10:52 AM
It's Cole Dickson

:D :D Rep for that
the guy comes on here with Cole this and Cole that but can't spell his name right:D :D

ceebee
10-15-2007, 11:07 AM
Here's a story about George Rood, talking with a guy at onePocket.org. George Rood is still alive & teaching in Ohio. He is a most fantastic man & a very fine gentleman. He is 90 or more years old.

GR: I played with a lot of all-time great players. I played well, but at other games. I played a lot of times with Mosconi; 11 exhibitions I can remember. I played with Irving Crane, Erwin Rudolph, Joe Procita, Andrew Ponzi, Ralph Greenleaf?

1P: Wow, Greenleaf!

GR: I played with all those top players. We played Straight Pool mostly. I also played Jimmy Caras, Arthur [?Babe?] Cranfield, Andrew St. Jean and Willie Hoppe. One achievement I am very proud of was during a Straight Pool money match. I was playing a weaker player and the spot was that he played regular Straight Pool, while I played ?fifty no count?. Any time I ran less than fifty balls I received credit for none. This particular day I had eleven runs of a hundred or more.

1P: Wow; most of us dream of doing that once in our lifetime! Is, or was, Straight Pool your main game?

GR: No, 9-Ball was. At one time I was considered the best 9-Ball player in the world; that included the guys that you hear about, like Luther Lassiter.

1P: And Eddie Taylor?

GR: I beat both Lassiter and Taylor.

1P: That is pretty heavyweight company.

Pushout
10-15-2007, 04:22 PM
On the other side of the coin, a player like Ray Martin is so smooth you feel like you can get in stroke by just watching him.

Rempe was like that. His basics and stroke were so good, it made you feel like playing just watching him.

cuetechustla
11-05-2007, 02:23 PM
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game. In my opinion, the top 3 are Lassiter, Strickland & Sigel. (For best all around to have ever played, Reys & then Varner get my vote). Anyway, back to Lassiter...

I have tapes of him in those "Legends" matches from the early 1980's. He was 63 when he was playing on the one I'm referencing. At 63, his shotmaking was still sharp. His stroke and mechanics look so awkward, yet, because he's ingrained those particular mechanics into his muscle memory, he has what's called a repeatable stroke. His is not one that most instructors would teach. He has a short back stroke, but not as short as Hopkins'. When he shoots, he has the unique habit of very quickly twisting his bridge up up and out to his left from the table. In other words, instead of his head jumping up, his bridge hand jumps up! He addresses the ball rather high by today's standards, where lots of players have their chin resting on the shaft during their strokes. On his break, he appears to lose his balance and again, his arm flings out to his left. And his bridge consists of what appears to be a very looping and loose finger barely around the shaft of his cue. Yet, despite less than perfect mechanics, he hardly ever misses a ball.

I have watched these tapes so many times over the years. I love seeing how the pros shoot and approach their shots. I can hardly imagine how great a shot maker he was in his prime, say the 1940's-1970.

I think what made him great was he really loved pool. He also built his game around action, ie, if he missed, he didn't eat or pay his bills. I think beside honing his game, that constant tension may have made him have some of the physical quirks and nervous habits that he and any other player accumulates or develops over the years. But, he had a repeatable stroke that he trusted in.

Another quick point here is look at all the unique strokes that the various pro players have. If you could somehow darken them out and just show their silhouettes, I think many of us could recognize who was shooting just by their particular mechanics and strokes.

So, as far as strokes go, one size does not fit all. But, we already know that, right? :)

Terry, when you say that Luther was the best 9 baller to play the game, what are you basing your decision on :confused: Is this based on quantifying the amount of money he won or the quantity of tournaments he won :confused:

When you see people like Efren and Earl play (in their prime), I just can't see how anyone could be play any better :confused:

jwilliams
11-05-2007, 03:06 PM
Terry, when you say that Luther was the best 9 baller to play the game, what are you basing your decision on :confused: Is this based on quantifying the amount of money he won or the quantity of tournaments he won :confused:

When you see people like Efren and Earl play (in their prime), I just can't see how anyone could be play any better :confused:
Lol...All the above! ;)

Not to mention that the opinions of most of the great players of that era who've also played in the current one back up his opinion of Luther being arguably the greatest 9-baller ever.

av84fun
11-05-2007, 03:47 PM
So, as far as strokes go, one size does not fit all. But, we already know that, right? :)

Hi Terry,

I fully agree with you but all too often players use that logic to avoid going to the time and/or expense of learning "classic" pool mechanics used by the vast majority of top players.

Certainly, there are variations even amoung the majority of players and getting into a discussion of what constitutes "classic mechanics" is beyond the scope of this thread.

But in the case of golfer, Jim Furyk or example, if he ever gets into teaching, I doubt he would EVER recommend his stroke to anyone else.

So, to say (and I know you are not saying) that since Lassiter's mechanics are weird and Hopkins' mechanics are weird...and they are both weird in different ways...therefore, just stroke it any way you want and that's fine.

IMHO, all those attempting to learn to shoot pool need to realize that champions are almost freaks of nature in terms of their eye/hand/muscle coordination and are able to REPEAT even the most strange strokes with amazing consistency.

For the rest of us, learning mechanics that give us the best opportunity of being able to repeat our strokes consistently is why something resembling "classic" mechanics is such a good idea.

Regards,
Jim

Island Drive
11-05-2007, 04:25 PM
Rempe was like that. His basics and stroke were so good, it made you feel like playing just watching him.

Rempe stood alone IMHO when it came to cutting a ball along the short rail and going up and down table 4 rails with position within 3 -4" of where he wanted. The ball would usually never touch the rail and he would cut a 70 degree + angle and never miss a one if he played all night. His fundamentals, you could take em to the bank$$$, also, he was good under pressure.

Terry Ardeno
11-05-2007, 11:12 PM
Terry, when you say that Luther was the best 9 baller to play the game, what are you basing your decision on :confused: Is this based on quantifying the amount of money he won or the quantity of tournaments he won :confused:

When you see people like Efren and Earl play (in their prime), I just can't see how anyone could be play any better :confused:


Cuetechustla,

You asked a very good question and I would like to explain why, in my opinion, Lassiter was the best at 9 ball.

First, Lassiter was born on Nov 5, 1918 and died at age 69 on Oct 25, 1988. He was a great player by the time he was in his 20s, but, in the 1940's and 1950's, there were hardly any major 9 ball tournaments being held. By the time the Johnson City tournaments came into being starting in 1961, Lassiter was already a legendary road player. Starting in 1962 (the 1st Johnson City 9 ball tournament) Lassiter dominated the field and won the first of his 6 World 9 ball championships. These Johnson City and Stardust tournaments were the defacto World Championships and they had fields that included Harold Worst, Ed Kelly, Irving Crane, Joe Balsis, Ronnie Allen, Danny Jones, Eddie Taylor, Larry Johnson, Jim Marino, Buddy Hall and many other great players. Lassiter won titles in 1962, 1963, 1964, 1967, 1969 and 1971. Keep in mind that at this time, he was 44 in 1962 and 53 in 1971....His peak as a player was argueably past, yet he still beat very, very talented players.

Now, not only was he a great TOURNAMENT player, he was also one of the greatest MONEY players that ever lived. His favorite game was "money pool", any game he could bet on. Believe me when I tell you this, his game went UP several notches for the cash. Some players play better in tournaments than they do when they gamble, and others, visa-versa. Lassiter was a better money player than a tournament player.
So, put those two facts together, add in his longevity at the top (30+ years) and I can make a very strong case for him. This of course does not take into consideration his 4 outright World 14.1 Championships, PLUS 5 14.1 Championships at Johnson City, 5 World All-Around Championships and 1 World 1 Pocket Championship and you have a very gifted player indeed.

As for Strickland, I call him the greatest tournament 9 baller since Lassiter and he may in fact be Lassiter's equal at TOURNAMENT 9 ball. His 6 World Championships and 5 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championships is a record that I believe we will not see broken ever. Look how hard it is for anyone to repeat or win those majors more than once. But, Strickland, even though early in his career he did gamble at pool, at GAMBLING he was no match for Lassiter. So, you have two very special tournament players and one of them (Lassiter) also exceled at gambling 9 ball, so the edge, I believe, has to go to Lassiter.

As for Efren Reyes, he also has a special title. The greatest all around player to have ever played pocket billiards. He was a great 9 baller, but not "the GREATEST" and here is what I base that opinion on. In the two major championships at 9 Ball, Efren has 1 World 9 Ball Championship in 1999 and 1 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championship in 1994. Sigel has 5 WC and 3 US Open's, Varner has 3 WC and back-to-back US Open titles. Archer, Hall, Souquet and Allen Hopkins have combined major 9 ball titles greater than Reyes' 2. BUT, Reyes also has 6 World 8 Ball Championships, he is the greatest Rotation player ever, in my opinion the greatest 1 pocket player ever and he is super at 14.1. Overall, Reyes is better than Lassiter and Strickland, but not at 9 ball.

These are just MY opinions and many other fans and historians who love and study the game as much as I do may have differing opinions. But, once I collected all the info that I had on these great players, I feel very confident in my selections of who was better at what.

This is a lot of fun. Don't you agree?

Terry Ardeno
11-05-2007, 11:22 PM
Hi Terry,

I fully agree with you but all too often players use that logic to avoid going to the time and/or expense of learning "classic" pool mechanics used by the vast majority of top players.

Certainly, there are variations even amoung the majority of players and getting into a discussion of what constitutes "classic mechanics" is beyond the scope of this thread.

But in the case of golfer, Jim Furyk or example, if he ever gets into teaching, I doubt he would EVER recommend his stroke to anyone else.

So, to say (and I know you are not saying) that since Lassiter's mechanics are weird and Hopkins' mechanics are weird...and they are both weird in different ways...therefore, just stroke it any way you want and that's fine.

IMHO, all those attempting to learn to shoot pool need to realize that champions are almost freaks of nature in terms of their eye/hand/muscle coordination and are able to REPEAT even the most strange strokes with amazing consistency.

For the rest of us, learning mechanics that give us the best opportunity of being able to repeat our strokes consistently is why something resembling "classic" mechanics is such a good idea.

Regards,
Jim


I agree.
Look, for example, at the great Fransico Bustamonte's famous (infamous:eek: ) "pump handle stoke". He's a wonderful player, but NOBODY can emulate that stroke with the efficency he displays. That stroke works for him and nobody else that I'm aware of. Keith McCready has that side arm delivery that works perfect FOR HIM. So, as I said, I agree with the good points you made here.

I think that we all develop our strokes that work best for us. If we are stuck at a plateau and can't seem to get to the next level in our development, then it would be wise to ask if that stroke that works FOR US doesn't also LIMIT us.

I would venture a guess that only 1% of all pool players ever get formal lessons on stroke delivery, so, we each build our stroke on our muscle memory, whether it be good or bad.

This is an interesting topic.

Gunn_Slinger
11-06-2007, 12:04 AM
Jay, I agree with most of what you said. I was a regular at bennies place for 71-80 and at guys and dolls in the 60"s and got to see all the great players. But I do believe you missed the greatest all around player aka Eddy Taylor. i saw him beat every player you mentioned except worst ( never got to see him ). If Eddy could have stayed sober, he would have won many many tourneys. I never saw him lose sober. If you look at his mechanics ( which started this thread ) i think you will find they look a lot like ....guess who....Efren...same up and down pump warm up stroke, though not as pronounced, last stroke smooth as glass. Eddy and efren....the two best players I have ever seen.
Thanks for your post. You know your players

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 09:53 AM
Cuetechustla,

You asked a very good question and I would like to explain why, in my opinion, Lassiter was the best at 9 ball.

First, Lassiter was born on Nov 5, 1918 and died at age 69 on Oct 25, 1988. He was a great player by the time he was in his 20s, but, in the 1940's and 1950's, there were hardly any major 9 ball tournaments being held. By the time the Johnson City tournaments came into being starting in 1961, Lassiter was already a legendary road player. Starting in 1962 (the 1st Johnson City 9 ball tournament) Lassiter dominated the field and won the first of his 6 World 9 ball championships. These Johnson City and Stardust tournaments were the defacto World Championships and they had fields that included Harold Worst, Ed Kelly, Irving Crane, Joe Balsis, Ronnie Allen, Danny Jones, Eddie Taylor, Larry Johnson, Jim Marino, Buddy Hall and many other great players. Lassiter won titles in 1962, 1963, 1964, 1967, 1969 and 1971. Keep in mind that at this time, he was 44 in 1962 and 53 in 1971....His peak as a player was argueably past, yet he still beat very, very talented players.

Now, not only was he a great TOURNAMENT player, he was also one of the greatest MONEY players that ever lived. His favorite game was "money pool", any game he could bet on. Believe me when I tell you this, his game went UP several notches for the cash. Some players play better in tournaments than they do when they gamble, and others, visa-versa. Lassiter was a better money player than a tournament player.
So, put those two facts together, add in his longevity at the top (30+ years) and I can make a very strong case for him. This of course does not take into consideration his 4 outright World 14.1 Championships, PLUS 5 14.1 Championships at Johnson City, 5 World All-Around Championships and 1 World 1 Pocket Championship and you have a very gifted player indeed.

As for Strickland, I call him the greatest tournament 9 baller since Lassiter and he may in fact be Lassiter's equal at TOURNAMENT 9 ball. His 6 World Championships and 5 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championships is a record that I believe we will not see broken ever. Look how hard it is for anyone to repeat or win those majors more than once. But, Strickland, even though early in his career he did gamble at pool, at GAMBLING he was no match for Lassiter. So, you have two very special tournament players and one of them (Lassiter) also exceled at gambling 9 ball, so the edge, I believe, has to go to Lassiter.

As for Efren Reyes, he also has a special title. The greatest all around player to have ever played pocket billiards. He was a great 9 baller, but not "the GREATEST" and here is what I base that opinion on. In the two major championships at 9 Ball, Efren has 1 World 9 Ball Championship in 1999 and 1 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championship in 1994. Sigel has 4 WC and 4 US Open's, Varner has 3 WC and back-to-back US Open titles. Archer, Hall, Souquet and Allen Hopkins have combined major 9 ball titles greater than Reyes' 2. BUT, Reyes also has 6 World 8 Ball Championships, he is the greatest Rotation player ever, in my opinion the greatest 1 pocket player ever and he is super at 14.1. Overall, Reyes is better than Lassiter and Strickland, but not at 9 ball.

These are just MY opinions and many other fans and historians who love and study the game as much as I do may have differing opinions. But, once I collected all the info that I had on these great players, I feel very confident in my selections of who was better at what.

This is a lot of fun. Don't you agree?


Efren playing Luther 9-ball for the cash: Let's assume that everyone was playing Texas express rules. Not the way they use to play back in they day. Now Efren is a true GAMBLER and is the MAGICIAN. How can you beat magic :D But either way, I'm sure they both would have had backers so its not like they are going to be playing with their own money. Now what it comes down to is the ROLLS. The ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS will determine the winner. Luther can't make the balls do what he wants to do when Efren's breaking and likewise. I just don't see the MARGINAL difference in how Luther is a better player. You say he steps his play up several notches for the cash? What was Luther's skill level like :confused: IMHO, the ONLY way Luther could beat Efren is if he could run 7 racks in a row every time he came to the table to shoot. Every single time. Is this Luther's style of play :confused: I think Efren could decimate Luther on the long haul. Look at the lead Earl had on Efren in the Hong Kong challenge and Efren came back to win. I think if Efren and Luther played for the CASH, for a long race of 100 or more, that Efren would win hands down no questions asked :cool:

pdcue
11-07-2007, 12:19 PM
Terry, on the matter of whether Lassiter was the best nine-baller ever, I've heard many suggest as much over the years. Nonetheless, I wonder, and doubt, whether he'd have been as elite a nine-baller in the Texas Express era. Lassiter is, in the eyes of more than a few, the best ball pocketer ever, and I feel that the one shot shootout version of nineball gave the great pocketers a greater advantage than in Texas Express, as they would frequently push out into really difficult shots that they could make, but few others could. One shot shootout is the best format for the great pocketers.

My sense of all this is that Lassiter was the best one shot shootout player ever, but I don't think hecan be compared to today's superstars, as he played a far different version of nine ball.

Half right.

I agree with the push out strongly favoring shotmakers part.
That is why it was such a bad way to play.

But Wimpy reached the top LONG before pushout became the norm.

FWIW - Lassiter would barbeque today's players, They could make up
whatever rules they wanted.

Dale

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 12:27 PM
Half right.

I agree one the push out strongly favoring shotmakers part.
That is why it was such a bad way to play.

But Wimpy reached the top LONG before pushout became the norm.

FWIW - Lassiter would barbeque today's players, They could make up
whatever rules they wanted.

Dale

Look, what's its going to come down to is the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS. I don't freaking care how good someone shoots :rolleyes: If you can't come to the table, you can't shoot. Or better yet, if you come to the table and have no shot, you will most likely NOT run out. And that can happen to anyone on their playing level.

pdcue
11-07-2007, 12:30 PM
Mechanics.

Granted, Lassiter was not as smooth and graceful as, say,
Mosconi. But I don't think there was anything wrong with his style.
Smooth and graceful doesn't guarentee effective.
And not smooth doesn't hinder it.

As for a stance, as I have said many times, being so low only
means players are more likely to have their eyes in the same relative
position to the shot.

Now if you want to talk blatently flawed mechanics in a great player,
you can't find a better example than Earl Strickland. He does so many
things wrong, that if he forgets to do any of them, he could never make a ball.

Dale

pdcue
11-07-2007, 01:02 PM
Terry, when you say that Luther was the best 9 baller to play the game, what are you basing your decision on :confused: Is this based on quantifying the amount of money he won or the quantity of tournaments he won :confused:

When you see people like Efren and Earl play (in their prime), I just can't see how anyone could be play any better :confused:

I'm not Terry - but the answer is neither.
First off, there were no tournaments when Lassiter was in his prime.

Maybe it's because no one ever seemed to beat him.

E and E were great players, but beleive this,
neither could have won at 9 ball. Just because you can't see it,
doesn't mean it didn't happen.

For example, do you think any of today's<or any day's> champions
would have a prayer against Mosconi in his prime?

Dale

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 01:05 PM
..........

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 01:08 PM
I'm not Terry - but the answer is neither.
First off, there were no tournaments when Lassiter was in his prime.

Maybe it's because no one ever seemed to beat him.

E and E were great players, but beleive this,
neither could have won at 9 ball. Just because you can't see it,
doesn't mean it didn't happen.

For example, do you think any of today's<or any day's> champions
would have a prayer against Mosconi in his prime?

Dale

How come? What edge did they have over Earl and Efren? What was it :confused: You daggon right E and E could have beat them. So are you telling me they would get all the rolls and E and E wouldn't :confused: C'mon who are you fooling. Did you read what said about rolls :confused:

pdcue
11-07-2007, 01:20 PM
Look, what's its going to come down to is the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS. I don't freaking care how good someone shoots :rolleyes: If you can't come to the table, you can't shoot. Or better yet, if you come to the table and have no shot, you will most likely NOT run out. And that can happen to anyone on their playing level.

ROLLS will even out over time.
The discussion concerns who is/was the better player.
That is not who won a single match/session.

You have to forget about tournaments for evaluating skill.
Only 14.1 had organized championship tourneys, over a period of
decades, when Luther was at his best. He was first and foremost,
a ROAD player, who only played in tourneys when the action dried up.

Mosconi dominating 14.1 tournaments for years is meaningful.
Joe Blow from Kokomo winning one tourney is not.

Dale

pdcue
11-07-2007, 01:27 PM
How come? What edge did they have over Earl and Efren? What was it :confused: You daggon right E and E could have beat them. So are you telling me they would get all the rolls and E and E wouldn't :confused: C'mon who are you fooling. Did you read what said about rolls :confused:

Which part of 'he was a better 9 ball player' are you having trouble with?

Dale

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 01:28 PM
ROLLS will even out over time.
The discussion concerns who is/was the better player.
That is not who won a single match/session.

You have to forget about tournaments for evaluating skill.
Only 14.1 had organized championship tourneys, over a period of
decades, when Luther was at his best. He was first and foremost,
a ROAD player, who only played in tourneys when the action dried up.

Mosconi dominating 14.1 tournaments for years is meaningful.
Joe Blow from Kokomo winning one tourney is not.

Dale

What about Don Willis? Looks like Luther wasn't all that if he couldn't beat Don Willis :rolleyes: link (http://www.onepocket.org/PatchEyeInterview.htm) Also read what they say about the unknown player in Honolulu :eek:

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 01:31 PM
Which part of 'he was a better 9 ball player' are you having trouble with?

Dale

Its simple..explain a situation where he was better. Describe some of his achievements, in the pit of skill opposition, which shows he was a better player than E or E and these accomplishments were unprecedented.

branpureza
11-07-2007, 01:52 PM
I saw Lassiter many times and he had a goofy stroke. It was like 1 inch long and he did them in little 4 or 5 stroke bursts maybe 4 or 5 times for a total or as many as 25 strokes a shot. It could be awful to watch at times...


haha, he used to call that "getting the dog out of his stroke".

branpureza
11-07-2007, 01:57 PM
wimpy was the best 9 ball player of his time and efren is too... it's hard to compare the 2 because they played under different rules in different eras. to say one was better than the other is too subjective and pure speculation. although i think no one ever has been or ever will be as good as efren, there's no way to tell that if you stuck those 2 together at the same time which one would step their game up more...

PoolBum
11-07-2007, 02:06 PM
[U][B]
IMHO, the ONLY way Luther could beat Efren is if he could run 7 racks in a row every time he came to the table to shoot. Every single time.

As great as Efren is, methinks you have a slightly exaggerated understanding of what it would take to beat him. If someone ran seven racks every time they came to the table they would rarely, if ever, lose a single match.

Terry Ardeno
11-07-2007, 03:32 PM
Its simple..explain a situation where he was better. Describe some of his achievements, in the pit of skill opposition, which shows he was a better player than E or E and these accomplishments were unprecedented.

Cuetechustla,

Did you even bother to read my response to your question in post #40???
I took the time to try to enlighten you about Lassiter, since it's so obvious you know NOTHING about him or how he played. And after all that, you come back with 5 posts, each one challenging everybody elses views.

All you can come up with is "ROLLS, ROLLS, ROLLS" This is POOL, not voodoo. If all you can provide to this discussion is "What about the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS?" and then come back with a question like "Describe some of his achievments"...then I'm wasting my time with you.

Why didn't you just tell us all that your mind was made up a long time ago?

You don't have to agree with me or anybody else here. But when you ask a question, at least listen with an open mind if you really want to learn about the history of our sport's great players. If you want to say that the greatest player in history is determined by "the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS", and your other classic "what about the magic?", then I can't help you learn anything about any of the great players. You wouldn't believe it anyway.

And by the way, just because you never heard of Lassiter doesn't diminish what he accomplished on the table. Efren Reyes is not the only great player to have ever lived.

Terry Ardeno
11-07-2007, 03:43 PM
FWIW - Lassiter would barbeque today's players, They could make up
whatever rules they wanted.

Dale


Dale,

The problem is, some people are brainwashed into thinking that Reyes was the only great player to have ever made a ball.

As much as I love Reyes, as many posts that I written filled with wonderful, glowing accolades on his skill and great accomplishments, as much as we all love to root for him, the fact is he still was not the first man on the moon, he was never president of the USA, he didn't build the great pyamids of Egypt, he did not fly the first aircraft, he did not invent the telephone....but, he does get all the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS.

Sorry.....I lost my mind for a second there.:eek:

Neil
11-07-2007, 03:51 PM
............

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 03:55 PM
This can only mean that you think Efren runs 6 racks every single time he is at the table. Quick question for you- have you ever seen Efren play?? (by the way, he is out of the WPC now.) I guess he did forgot to run a sixpack every time. :D

Yeah yeah...I was exaggerating a little :D IMHO, I think Efren is past his prime in playing 9 ball and it shows :o I've been watching professional pool pay for the last 20 yrs...attending tournaments and good old accu-stat tapes :)

Fast Lenny
11-07-2007, 03:56 PM
If i had to put all my money on either Efren or Wimpy in a race to 100 in 9 ball with no stopping,a straight race to 100 it would be Lassiter,that man played long sessions in a tux with internal bleeding.;) Its all fun to talk and compare these guys and we all have our opinions but you have to know about the players before you can make a good intelligent choice.;)

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 04:01 PM
Dale,

The problem is, some people are brainwashed into thinking that Reyes was the only great player to have ever made a ball.

As much as I love Reyes, as many posts that I written filled with wonderful, glowing accolades on his skill and great accomplishments, as much as we all love to root for him, the fact is he still was not the first man on the moon, he was never president of the USA, he didn't build the great pyamids of Egypt, he did not fly the first aircraft, he did not invent the telephone....but, he does get all the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS.

Sorry.....I lost my mind for a second there.:eek:

What makes Efren a great player is his unique pool play....stuff that I haven't seen any other pool player do. Efren sees things other players don't. I mean, one time in the San Regency Open XXI, Efren was playing Earl and played a 6 rail position play and ran out :eek: Now he was out of line but I've never seen ANYONE ever do this ever until then.

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 04:02 PM
If i had to put all my money on either Efren or Wimpy in a race to 100 in 9 ball with no stopping,a straight race to 100 it would be Lassiter,that man played long sessions in a tux with internal bleeding.;) Its all fun to talk and compare these guys and we all have our opinions but you have to know about the players before you can make a good intelligent choice.;)

Wow, that's a strong comment, I'd love to know more about Wimpy's pool play...care to talk about it :rolleyes:

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 04:07 PM
Cuetechustla,

Did you even bother to read my response to your question in post #40???
I took the time to try to enlighten you about Lassiter, since it's so obvious you know NOTHING about him or how he played. And after all that, you come back with 5 posts, each one challenging everybody elses views.

All you can come up with is "ROLLS, ROLLS, ROLLS" This is POOL, not voodoo. If all you can provide to this discussion is "What about the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS?" and then come back with a question like "Describe some of his achievments"...then I'm wasting my time with you.

Why didn't you just tell us all that your mind was made up a long time ago?

You don't have to agree with me or anybody else here. But when you ask a question, at least listen with an open mind if you really want to learn about the history of our sport's great players. If you want to say that the greatest player in history is determined by "the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS", and your other classic "what about the magic?", then I can't help you learn anything about any of the great players. You wouldn't believe it anyway.

And by the way, just because you never heard of Lassiter doesn't diminish what he accomplished on the table. Efren Reyes is not the only great player to have ever lived.

Terry I read what you posted...I'm just trying to get into the nuts and bolts on HOW good Luther really was. You know, like saying during this one match he did this....and this...but it seems no one is only able to repeat what I can find and read in Wikipedia.

Fast Lenny
11-07-2007, 04:09 PM
What makes Efren a great player is his unique pool play....stuff that I haven't seen any other pool player do. Efren sees things other players don't. I mean, one time in the San Regency Open XXI, Efren was playing Earl and played a 6 rail position play and ran out :eek: Now he was out of line but I've never seen ANYONE ever do this ever until then.
WOW!You must have caught the video on youtube like most people,too bad there arent alot of Wimpy so you could see other great players play the game.Efren made a good shot but set it up 10 times,he might be lucky to make it once,it was a low percentage lucky shot.;)

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 04:14 PM
WOW!You must have caught the video on youtube like most people,too bad there arent alot of Wimpy so you could see other great players play the game.Efren made a good shot but set it up 10 times,he might be lucky to make it once,it was a low percentage lucky shot.;)

FYI....I've had the VHS tape for the longest :p You know what you're right, Efren always says he's lucky :D

That also brings up a good question, where is all the footage of Wimpy's tournament play? Can you actually buy this anywhere? I only have the Challenge of the Champions match with him playing Cowboy Jimmy Moore.

Fast Lenny
11-07-2007, 04:16 PM
Wow, that's a strong comment, I'd love to know more about Wimpy's pool play...care to talk about it :rolleyes:
Since you cant find alot online then buy the book Hustler Days,it will be a wake up for you and alot of info you might be interested in if you love pool when it was raw.Here is an old hard to find clip of Wimpy,enjoy!:)
http://stage6.divx.com/user/PoolRevoluter21/video/1069290/legend-

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 04:24 PM
Since you cant find alot online then buy the book Hustler Days,it will be a wake up for you and alot of info you might be interested in if you love pool when it was raw.Here is an old hard to find clip of Wimpy,enjoy!:)
http://stage6.divx.com/user/PoolRevoluter21/video/1069290/legend-

I've seen this before...I must admit, I was impressed on the two final bank shots to win the match. Wish I could see the entire match.

Sorry to go here again, but If he would scratched on the break playing Efren, it would be all over for that game :D

Fatboy
11-07-2007, 04:33 PM
What makes Efren a great player is his unique pool play....stuff that I haven't seen any other pool player do. Efren sees things other players don't. I mean, one time in the San Regency Open XXI, Efren was playing Earl and played a 6 rail position play and ran out :eek: Now he was out of line but I've never seen ANYONE ever do this ever until then.


If SVB develops Efrens creativity, can you imagine what that would be like?, I have never ever seen anyone seee the things Efren sees, Archeer, Varner, Keith, Earl, Buddy etc. they just dont miss and have perfect CB control grented they all have their own style of play but their styles are similar in certain ways then there is Efren, I dont think he pockets the balls as good as Earl can when Earl is "on" but nobody ever comes up with the creative stuff Efren does and it shows up in 1P the most. WOW. I have been saying this for 20 years.

ironman
11-07-2007, 05:31 PM
:eek: :eek:
And just what about a certain cat named Harold Worst
Beard, back me up on this one

He is the one I would have loved to see play.

Russ Chewning
11-07-2007, 06:00 PM
Cuetechustla,

Did you even bother to read my response to your question in post #40???
I took the time to try to enlighten you about Lassiter, since it's so obvious you know NOTHING about him or how he played. And after all that, you come back with 5 posts, each one challenging everybody elses views.

All you can come up with is "ROLLS, ROLLS, ROLLS" This is POOL, not voodoo. If all you can provide to this discussion is "What about the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS?" and then come back with a question like "Describe some of his achievments"...then I'm wasting my time with you.

Why didn't you just tell us all that your mind was made up a long time ago?

You don't have to agree with me or anybody else here. But when you ask a question, at least listen with an open mind if you really want to learn about the history of our sport's great players. If you want to say that the greatest player in history is determined by "the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS", and your other classic "what about the magic?", then I can't help you learn anything about any of the great players. You wouldn't believe it anyway.

And by the way, just because you never heard of Lassiter doesn't diminish what he accomplished on the table. Efren Reyes is not the only great player to have ever lived.

Terry,

Let's be honest here...Just because Wimpy won a bunch of tournaments doesn't mean anything about how he would match up against Efren.

I'll use a self effacing example. I win ALL the tournaments here in Iraq that I care to participate in. Does that make me an awesome player? Not by default. It just means I can beat all the people I play against regularly.

Now, Wimpy won a lot of the tournaments he played in. Great. What does that mean? It means simply that he could beat that small corp of his generation's tournament players like red headed stepchildren, is all..

What separates Efren from the crowd today is not his run out skills. Lots of players today can run out every time they can see the ball. That's the thing.. Efren doesn't let them see the ball. And when they hook him, a HUGE percentage of the time, he either makes the ball on a kick, or resafes them.

Now, to say unequivocally that Wimpy would have beat Efren, you have to tell us how Wimpy handled situations like these. Did he win a disproportinate amount of racks where he was hooked? If you simply say "He must have! He beat everyone in his generation! Do you think they did not know how to play safe?"

My answer to that would be, "Well, quite frankly, no...I don't.."

The Americans were totally unprepared for Efren and Jose's level of play, the amazing safety and resafety talent. Considering that Wimpy's generation taught THAT generation how to play, then you think that if they would have had any inkling that 9 ball could be played like that, they would have prepared their protege's for it.

Saying, "Well, if Wimpy had grown up in THIS generation, he would have been JUST as dominant..." doesn't hold water, either.. How could one POSSIBLY know that? Yes, Wimpy was great at running racks. YAWN. Efren can spot lots of guys that never miss a ball.. Didn't you know?

So, we say again.. Please give some actual REASONS why Wimpy would dominate Efren. I haven't seen any yet. Wimpy won lots of tournaments. Yippee. So has Efren. Efren has arguably won tournaments where the field was a HELL of a lot deeper than what Wimpy had to face.

Now don't mistake what I am saying here for me declaring that Efren would win that matchup. I'm just saying that you haven't made your argument well enough to come even close to convincing me. Efren has dominated in a generation where any unknown kid is liable to step up and run the first 3 racks on you in a tournament set. I have seen many times on DVD where Efren has had no chance to win for the first 3 or 4 racks in a set, is down 4-0, and then totally blows the dude away.

From what I have been told, Wimpy let his cue ball run around on the break. That right there puts to doubt any declarations that he would have dominated Efren. The way Efren plays, you hook yourself off the break once or twice in a match, and it maight cost you 5-6 games. If Wimpy could fade that, then he really was a monster.

Russ

Russ Chewning
11-07-2007, 06:08 PM
I've seen this before...I must admit, I was impressed on the two final bank shots to win the match. Wish I could see the entire match.

Sorry to go here again, but If he would scratched on the break playing Efren, it would be all over for that game :D

And if Efren already had the 1 ball break in the side down for that table, it quite possibly could have cost him 2 or 3 more racks... :)

Russ

Terry Ardeno
11-07-2007, 06:13 PM
Terry I read what you posted...I'm just trying to get into the nuts and bolts on HOW good Luther really was. You know, like saying during this one match he did this....and this...but it seems no one is only able to repeat what I can find and read in Wikipedia.

cuetechustla,

Here is an excerpt from the infamous post #40....
He was a great player by the time he was in his 20s, but, in the 1940's and 1950's, there were hardly any major 9 ball tournaments being held. By the time the Johnson City tournaments came into being starting in 1961, Lassiter was already a legendary road player. Starting in 1962 (the 1st Johnson City 9 ball tournament) Lassiter dominated the field and won the first of his 6 World 9 ball championships. These Johnson City and Stardust tournaments were the defacto World Championships and they had fields that included Harold Worst, Ed Kelly, Irving Crane, Joe Balsis, Ronnie Allen, Danny Jones, Eddie Taylor, Larry Johnson, Jim Marino, Buddy Hall and many other great players. Lassiter won titles in 1962, 1963, 1964, 1967, 1969 and 1971. Keep in mind that at this time, he was 44 in 1962 and 53 in 1971....His peak as a player was argueably past, yet he still beat very, very talented players.

Now, not only was he a great TOURNAMENT player, he was also one of the greatest MONEY players that ever lived. His favorite game was "money pool", any game he could bet on. Believe me when I tell you this, his game went UP several notches for the cash. Some players play better in tournaments than they do when they gamble, and others, visa-versa. Lassiter was a better money player than a tournament player.
So, put those two facts together, add in his longevity at the top (30+ years) and I can make a very strong case for him. This of course does not take into consideration his 4 outright World 14.1 Championships, PLUS 5 14.1 Championships at Johnson City, 5 World All-Around Championships and 1 World 1 Pocket Championship and you have a very gifted player indeed.

As for Strickland, I call him the greatest tournament 9 baller since Lassiter and he may in fact be Lassiter's equal at TOURNAMENT 9 ball. His 6 World Championships and 5 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championships is a record that I believe we will not see broken ever. Look how hard it is for anyone to repeat or win those majors more than once. But, Strickland, even though early in his career he did gamble at pool, at GAMBLING he was no match for Lassiter. So, you have two very special tournament players and one of them (Lassiter) also exceled at gambling 9 ball, so the edge, I believe, has to go to Lassiter.

As for Efren Reyes, he also has a special title. The greatest all around player to have ever played pocket billiards. He was a great 9 baller, but not "the GREATEST" and here is what I base that opinion on. In the two major championships at 9 Ball, Efren has 1 World 9 Ball Championship in 1999 and 1 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championship in 1994. Sigel has 4 WC and 4 US Open's, Varner has 3 WC and back-to-back US Open titles. Archer, Hall, Souquet and Allen Hopkins have combined major 9 ball titles greater than Reyes' 2. BUT, Reyes also has 6 World 8 Ball Championships, he is the greatest Rotation player ever, in my opinion the greatest 1 pocket player ever and he is super at 14.1. Overall, Reyes is better than Lassiter and Strickland, but not at 9 ball.

Now, for the fresh material....
Consider this....Lassiter won 6 World 9 Ball Championships from the age of 44 till he was 53. He would have won how many more had there been 9 ball tournaments in the 2 previous decades. But there weren't any.
So, if he won 6 World Chamionships 20 years after his prime, what would he have been like from the 1940's to 1960's?

Compare that to Reyes, who has one (1) World 9 Ball Championship, in an era where for 10 plus years, there were 2 "World 9 Ball Championships" available every year! And Reyes has a total of 1. Lassiter, who didn't have tournaments to compete in until he was 44, still won 6 of them. How can that be any clearer???

The simple fact is Reyes was a better 1 pocket, 8 ball and especially Rotation player than he was as a 9 baller.

Luther Lassiter was the better 9 baller of the two of them.

Russ Chewning
11-07-2007, 06:34 PM
cuetechustla,

Now, for the fresh material....
Consider this....Lassiter won 6 World 9 Ball Championships from the age of 44 till he was 53. He would have won how many more had there been 9 ball tournaments in the 2 previous decades. But there weren't any.
So, if he won 6 World Chamionships 20 years after his prime, what would he have been like from the 1940's to 1960's?


And now for the most pertinent question: How many players were in these "World Championships"? And at that time, was one foul, b-i-h the rule of the day? And did Wimpy have to deal with the kids who today will step up and run a few racks right off the starting line?

Face it.. Efren dominated in a time period where information on how to play was easy to get.... As a whole, there are MORE good players you have to get through to win a major today than in Lassiter's time. Heck, I would say even the Sands Regency tournament would be tougher to win today than the "World Championship" in Lassiter's time, let alone the "real" World Championships being held today.. I've seen the stories from Lassiter's time.. If someone ran 8 and out in a tournament, they were almost automatically labeled a good player. Today, Joe Schmoe from Kokomo will run 8 and out on you if you give him a shot.

The level of play is MUCH MUCH MUCH higher today, all around, and Efren dominated as that was coming to be. Lassiter MIGHT have beaten Efren, but you still haven't convinced me.

Russ

hangemhigh
11-07-2007, 06:38 PM
Okay, here we go.

First of all, "Push Out 9-Ball" was a tougher game, so the better players had more of an advantage. All balls spotted up, and on a foul you shot from behind the line. Much tougher game that way. You didn't have to jump or kick at balls because you could roll out for a shot. Banking ability was paramount because often you would roll out for a bank. With the advent of "One Foul BIH" kicking and jumping ability became far more important than before.

Louie Roberts was the greatest pure shotmaker I ever saw. He could cut a ball that was one eighth inch off the rail all the way down the table, and it would stay one eighth inch off the rail all the way to the pocket. He hit everything on a straight line! Richie Florence was the second best shotmaker, and the best ever for the cash. He could run out rack after rack of 9-Ball and be out of line on half the shots. If he could see it, he could make it!

Harold Worst was the best pool player I ever saw and Jose Parica may have been second. Worst excelled at all games and possibly could have beaten Ronnie if he ever learned how to play One Pocket. Jose was the best I ever saw for money and Buddy may have been second. No one would play Worst for money, although he was quite willing. Buddy played the best patterns and had the nicest cue ball control in 9-Ball. Nobody knows more about how to play pool than Buddy, and no one knows more shots. Only the great 14.1 players like Mizerak and Sigel understand the stack better. In One Pocket no one knew as much as Ronnie ever, especially how to play the stack.

No one ever controlled the cue ball better than Efren, and it really shows up in One Pocket. Wilie Mosconi was the best straight Pool player I ever saw and Mizerak was second. Mosconi's cue ball was equal to Efren's at this one game. In tournament 9-Ball, Strickland stands alone. But if they both got to the finals, Sigel was the best under pressure. Lassiter missed the fewest balls in his era and Sigel missed the least during his era. No one (except Worst) was willing to play Lassiter 9-Ball for money for over 20 years. He had a short choppy stroke like Hopkins, but rarely missed a ball and played flawless position. His patterns were not like Buddy's. Luther did not move the cue ball any more than necessary. Only Don Watson also played this way, and was nearly as good. He might miss a ball once every hour. Luther would not!

Ed Kelly was the greatest all around player when he was playing and had the purest stroke ever. But he couldn't beat Lassiter at 9-Ball, Ronnie at One Pocket or Mizerak at Straight Pool. Sigel was the greatest all around player of his generation and he might beat anyone at any game! Except he couldn't beat Parica for the cash at 9-Ball, Ten Ball or Rotation. Efren remains the best player at two of the most difficult games there are, Rotation and One Pocket.

One caveat. For a few years, Denny may have been right there with Buddy playing for money. He did things with the cue ball that I never saw again until Efren came along.
Jay,What about Banks? Mr. Taylor

Terry Ardeno
11-07-2007, 07:27 PM
Terry,

Let's be honest here...Just because Wimpy won a bunch of tournaments doesn't mean anything about how he would match up against Efren.

I'll use a self effacing example. I win ALL the tournaments here in Iraq that I care to participate in. Does that make me an awesome player? Not by default. It just means I can beat all the people I play against regularly.

Now, Wimpy won a lot of the tournaments he played in. Great. What does that mean? It means simply that he could beat that small corp of his generation's tournament players like red headed stepchildren, is all..

What separates Efren from the crowd today is not his run out skills. Lots of players today can run out every time they can see the ball. That's the thing.. Efren doesn't let them see the ball. And when they hook him, a HUGE percentage of the time, he either makes the ball on a kick, or resafes them.

Now, to say unequivocally that Wimpy would have beat Efren, you have to tell us how Wimpy handled situations like these. Did he win a disproportinate amount of racks where he was hooked? If you simply say "He must have! He beat everyone in his generation! Do you think they did not know how to play safe?"

My answer to that would be, "Well, quite frankly, no...I don't.."

The Americans were totally unprepared for Efren and Jose's level of play, the amazing safety and resafety talent. Considering that Wimpy's generation taught THAT generation how to play, then you think that if they would have had any inkling that 9 ball could be played like that, they would have prepared their protege's for it.

Saying, "Well, if Wimpy had grown up in THIS generation, he would have been JUST as dominant..." doesn't hold water, either.. How could one POSSIBLY know that? Yes, Wimpy was great at running racks. YAWN. Efren can spot lots of guys that never miss a ball.. Didn't you know?

So, we say again.. Please give some actual REASONS why Wimpy would dominate Efren. I haven't seen any yet. Wimpy won lots of tournaments. Yippee. So has Efren. Efren has arguably won tournaments where the field was a HELL of a lot deeper than what Wimpy had to face.

Now don't mistake what I am saying here for me declaring that Efren would win that matchup. I'm just saying that you haven't made your argument well enough to come even close to convincing me. Efren has dominated in a generation where any unknown kid is liable to step up and run the first 3 racks on you in a tournament set. I have seen many times on DVD where Efren has had no chance to win for the first 3 or 4 racks in a set, is down 4-0, and then totally blows the dude away.

From what I have been told, Wimpy let his cue ball run around on the break. That right there puts to doubt any declarations that he would have dominated Efren. The way Efren plays, you hook yourself off the break once or twice in a match, and it maight cost you 5-6 games. If Wimpy could fade that, then he really was a monster.

Russ

Russ,
Funny how you finally have time to correspond with me. I have asked you questions on the forum, in PM's and even repped you in the past, and never got any response. Oh wait, I forgot about one comment I did get from you. It was your sarcastic comments when a thread turned towards the subject of God.

Well, first things first. Here is a quote from your post....

Let's be honest here...Just because Wimpy won a bunch of tournaments doesn't mean anything about how he would match up against Efren.

Now, changing that around a little...Just because Efren won a handful of 9 ball tournaments doesn't mean anything about how he would match up against Wimpy.

And also, who is the "WE" you keep refering to? You and Cuetechustla?
Because it sure looked to me that pdcue, Neil and Fast Lenny agreed with Lassiter...

Please wait just a minute until I go to your other post. I'll answer that other priceless question you posed....

Terry Ardeno
11-07-2007, 07:36 PM
And now for the most pertinent question: How many players were in these "World Championships"? And at that time, was one foul, b-i-h the rule of the day? And did Wimpy have to deal with the kids who today will step up and run a few racks right off the starting line?

The level of play is MUCH MUCH MUCH higher today, all around, and Efren dominated as that was coming to be. Lassiter MIGHT have beaten Efren, but you still haven't convinced me.

Russ

Russ,

Lassiter had real weak competion in his day. Probably a bunch of bums you never heard of.....Ed Kelly, Joe Balsis, Irving Crane, Danny DiLiberto, Billy Incardona, Richie Florence, Dany Jones, Larry "Boston Shorty" Johnson, Harold Worst, Jimmy Moore, Cicero Murphy, Jim Mariono, Joe Russo, Al Coslosky, etc. Heck, rumor has it that Lassiter actually got greenhorns just starting out in pool, like Steve Mizerak , Lary Lisciotti, Nick Varner and Buddy Hall, who, by the way, in his biography "Rags to Rifleman" called Lassiter the best 9 baller he ever saw.

Very weak competition indeed.

Russ Chewning
11-07-2007, 07:44 PM
The "WE" I am talking about is all those who, like me, don't believe you have a leg to stand on in saying Lassiter automatically dominates Efren.

And I never made any declaration that Efren would win the matchup.. YOU are the one saying you "know what's what" here. My view is that it would be a close matchup. I personally don't think Lassiter would win in a long matchup, because the game has evolved too much since then. Lassiter did not have to deal with the overall level of safety play that Efren did..

The Filipinos as a whole were much better at safety play than Americans when Efren and Jose came over, and let's not forget... Efren had to pick up 3-Cushion/Balkline in the Phillipines because noone would touch him with a 10 foot pole on a pool table. He came over and saw the Americans as ridiculously easy to beat. He was spotting every American 2-3 games when they were betting on matches in his first tournament over in the U.S.

I am not submitting these examples to say why Efren would beat Wimpy tho.. I am only submitting them as reason why Lassiter would NOT dominate Efren. Would Wimpy in his prime beat Efren in his prime? Maybe.. But it sure would not be by 30 games in a race to 100...

Russ

Russ Chewning
11-07-2007, 08:16 PM
Russ,

Lassiter had real weak competion in his day. Probably a bunch of bums you never heard of.....Ed Kelly, Joe Balsis, Irving Crane, Danny DiLiberto, Billy Incardona, Richie Florence, Dany Jones, Larry "Boston Shorty" Johnson, Harold Worst, Jimmy Moore, Cicero Murphy, Jim Mariono, Joe Russo, Al Coslosky, etc. Heck, rumor has it that Lassiter actually got greenhorns just starting out in pool, like Steve Mizerak , Lary Lisciotti, Nick Varner and Buddy Hall, who, by the way, in his biography "Rags to Rifleman" called Lassiter the best 9 baller he ever saw.

Very weak competition indeed.

Whereas in any ONE tournament Efren won he might have had to play:

Archer, Pagulayan, Van Boening, Immonen, Engert, Hohmann, Davenport, Strickland, Bustamente, Alcano, Yang, Manalo, Orcullo, Ortmann, Souqet, Feijen, oh yeah, AND a "more experienced" Hall and Varner, Chia-Chang Wu, Deuel,

(Wait a second... my fingers are getting cramped... let me take a short break...)

Okay, here we go:

Fong Pang Chao, Rodney Morris, Lee Van Corteza, San Souci, Rempe, Raphael Martinez, Andam, Jeremy Jones, Daulton, Sambajon, Chamat, Medina, (Oh my gosh, how did I forget to put him in WAY DOWN HERE?) PARICA, Tony Drago, John Schmidt, Gabe Owen, Dennis Hatch, Van Den Berg, Luat, (GAH! fingers cramping again!)

Anyways... You get the point.. Let's be clear.. All these guys either ARE, or at one point WERE capable of winning any tournament in the world. Just about every single one of them have won at least 3-4 pro tournaments.

Let's look at your list again... Joe Russo, Al Coslosky???? No offense, but put both players at their prime, and you can put any of my picks above in the ring with them, and I'll bet my house my guy wins.

Larry Lisciotti, Jimmy Marino? Yeah, they are good players. Pick anyone in the bottom 15% of my list, and we'll call it even. Anyone above that, and you can get 6 to 5 on the money. Oh yeah.. And a game on the wire in a race to 11.

Note that I didn't even MENTION the other 200 players on the world scene that are capable of playing a "perfect match" against any of the top dogs on any given day. The pool world is a whole different animal today than it was 40 years ago.

You mentioned about 11 players who I think at their prime would stand a good chance to place in the top ten at a world event, in their prime. Notice I said MIGHT. I think at least 30 on my list have won at least one world class event. Almost everyone else on the list has won at least 3 pro events at least at the level of the Sands Regency. Lee Van Corteza hasn't had the chance to go outside the Phillipines that much.

Not trying to be argumentative here, but I still say Lassiter had nowhere NEAR the level of competition Efren has had. And by the way.. There's lots of people that have won a tournament over Efren that wouldn't play him for cash, even with backer's money!

Russ

Terry Ardeno
11-07-2007, 08:20 PM
The "WE" I am talking about is all those who, like me, don't believe you have a leg to stand on in saying Lassiter automatically dominates Efren.

And I never made any declaration that Efren would win the matchup.. YOU are the one saying you "know what's what" here. My view is that it would be a close matchup. I personally don't think Lassiter would win in a long matchup, because the game has evolved too much since then. Lassiter did not have to deal with the overall level of safety play that Efren did..

The Filipinos as a whole were much better at safety play than Americans when Efren and Jose came over, and let's not forget... Efren had to pick up 3-Cushion/Balkline in the Phillipines because noone would touch him with a 10 foot pole on a pool table. He came over and saw the Americans as ridiculously easy to beat. He was spotting every American 2-3 games when they were betting on matches in his first tournament over in the U.S.

I am not submitting these examples to say why Efren would beat Wimpy tho.. I am only submitting them as reason why Lassiter would NOT dominate Efren. Would Wimpy in his prime beat Efren in his prime? Maybe.. But it sure would not be by 30 games in a race to 100...

Russ

Russ,
In the matter of safety play and kicking at balls, Efren has the HUGE edge.
But, allowing the rules changes that have happened since Lassiter's heyday, what makes you think that if he (Lassiter) could master all that he did, why is it impossible to believe that if he was playing under todays rules, he also would not learn and even master these modern aspects?

In one of your posts, you mentioned that he let the cue ball run around on the break. Did you know why? Lassiter had a break where he would hit the 1 ball, deflect into the side rail and come back again accross the rack, attempting (by design) to hit the 9 ball with the cue ball, getting a lot of extra action on the 9 ball in an attempt to sink it on the break. He was such a great shotmaker that where snow ended up didn't make much difference, as long as he could see the next object ball.

Nowhere did I ever say that Lassiter would win 100-70 in any match up. My choice / pick of the two is Lassiter. Yours is Reyes. We will never know for sure, but like I mentioned in post #40, this is my OPINION and it sure is fun to hear what others think.

And this is so important...NOWHERE did I ever say I "know what's what." I have never, ever stated anywhere that I am the only one who knows anything and I pride myself on trying real hard to be cordial to people who post on our forums. I know stuff you don't know and you know stuff that I don't know and there are others who know what we don't know.

Lastly, I got nothing against you. I very much enjoy discussing and debating about the pro players here. 90% of my posts relate to the pro players. I have no problem with differing views either.

Terry Ardeno
11-07-2007, 08:27 PM
Whereas in any ONE tournament Efren won he might have had to play:

Archer, Pagulayan, Van Boening, Immonen, Engert, Hohmann, Davenport, Strickland, Bustamente, Alcano, Yang, Manalo, Orcullo, Ortmann, Souqet, Feijen, oh yeah, AND a "more experienced" Hall and Varner, Chia-Chang Wu, Deuel,

(Wait a second... my fingers are getting cramped... let me take a short break...)

Okay, here we go:

Fong Pang Chao, Rodney Morris, Lee Van Corteza, San Souci, Rempe, Raphael Martinez, Andam, Jeremy Jones, Daulton, Sambajon, Chamat, Medina, (Oh my gosh, how did I forget to put him in WAY DOWN HERE?) PARICA, Tony Drago, John Schmidt, Gabe Owen, Dennis Hatch, Van Den Berg, Luat, (GAH! fingers cramping again!)

Anyways... You get the point.. Let's be clear.. All these guys either ARE, or at one point WERE capable of winning any tournament in the world. Just about every single one of them have won at least 3-4 pro tournaments.

Let's look at your list again... Joe Russo, Al Coslosky???? No offense, but put both players at their prime, and you can put any of my picks above in the ring with them, and I'll bet my house my guy wins.

Larry Lisciotti, Jimmy Marino? Yeah, they are good players. Pick anyone in the bottom 15% of my list, and we'll call it even. Anyone above that, and you can get 6 to 5 on the money. Oh yeah.. And a game on the wire in a race to 11.

Note that I didn't even MENTION the other 200 players on the world scene that are capable of playing a "perfect match" against any of the top dogs on any given day. The pool world is a whole different animal today than it was 40 years ago.

You mentioned about 11 players who I think at their prime would stand a good chance to place in the top ten at a world even, in their prime. I think at least 30 on my list have won at least one world class event. Almost everyone else on the list has won at least 3 pro events at least at the level of the Sands Regency. Lee Van Corteza hasn't had the chance to go outside the Phillipines that much.

Not trying to be argumentative here, but I still say Lassiter had nowhere NEAR the level of competition Efren has had. And by the way.. There's lots of people that have won a tournament over Efren that wouldn't play him for cash, even with backer's money!

Russ

And that was a good post.
Did you remember that there are now at least three times as many people in the world as there were in the 1960's? So there should be more quality players. And another thing, there are now people all over the world playing. Boy Bical (in Lassiter's days) never came to the USA.
But, Lassiter still dominated what was in front of him.

And I don't think you're being argumentative here at all. If anything, I fired the first snide salvo. I like this kinder, gentler Russ.

I still think Lassiter was the better 9 baller, but we'll never know for sure.

Russ Chewning
11-07-2007, 10:42 PM
Terry,

Just saying "we'll never know for sure." makes me happy with the discussion. I guess I thought you were saying that Lassiter would dominate Efren.. (I know some others were.) And I was just taking offense to the idea that someone from a completely different era with completely different rules could be made a favorite over Efren.. I'm not even saying Efren would be a favorite if Lassiter was able to soak himself in today's pool environment for a few years.. I was just saying we don't know how Wimpy would handle the safeties.

A lot of Efren's excellent safety play comes from his billiards knowledge. I have 3-Cushion DVDs as well as pool DVDs, and I recognize many basic 3-Cushion shots in some of Efren's more spectacular return safeties.

If I had to peg anyone as a direct threat from that era though, it would be much more likely that Kelly or Worst would be a threat to Efren, due to their 3-Cushion play. I think they would have a better chance at recognizing the shots that Efren shoots, and would have the knowledge to pull them off accurately.

Either way, nice talking to you on this. I think we agree, both of these guys played strong enough that neither one is a prohibitive favorite.. If Wimpy could rise to the occasion, he would have a chance at dealing with Efren at his best.

Russ

cuetechustla
11-07-2007, 11:22 PM
Terry,

Just saying "we'll never know for sure." makes me happy with the discussion. I guess I thought you were saying that Lassiter would dominate Efren.. (I know some others were.) And I was just taking offense to the idea that someone from a completely different era with completely different rules could be made a favorite over Efren.. I'm not even saying Efren would be a favorite if Lassiter was able to soak himself in today's pool environment for a few years.. I was just saying we don't know how Wimpy would handle the safeties.

A lot of Efren's excellent safety play comes from his billiards knowledge. I have 3-Cushion DVDs as well as pool DVDs, and I recognize many basic 3-Cushion shots in some of Efren's more spectacular return safeties.

If I had to peg anyone as a direct threat from that era though, it would be much more likely that Kelly or Worst would be a threat to Efren, due to their 3-Cushion play. I think they would have a better chance at recognizing the shots that Efren shoots, and would have the knowledge to pull them off accurately.

Either way, nice talking to you on this. I think we agree, both of these guys played strong enough that neither one is a prohibitive favorite.. If Wimpy could rise to the occasion, he would have a chance at dealing with Efren at his best.

Russ

I agree with you both....we'll never know.....

pdcue
11-08-2007, 03:54 AM
What about Don Willis? Looks like Luther wasn't all that if he couldn't beat Don Willis :rolleyes: link (http://www.onepocket.org/PatchEyeInterview.htm) Also read what they say about the unknown player in Honolulu :eek:

What about Don Willis? They were road partners and Wimpy
was the better player.

Willis would notr even PLAY George Rood. Wimpy would.

Dale

pdcue
11-08-2007, 03:59 AM
Its simple..explain a situation where he was better. Describe some of his achievements, in the pit of skill opposition, which shows he was a better player than E or E and these accomplishments were unprecedented.

I invite you to do the same thing about Earl and Ef vs Wimpy,
whoops, you are completely clueless about Luther's level
of play.
So answer me this.
How can you possibly even think that you know?

Dale

pdcue
11-08-2007, 04:08 AM
Yeah yeah...I was exaggerating a little :D IMHO, I think Efren is past his prime in playing 9 ball and it shows :o I've been watching professional pool pay for the last 20 yrs...attending tournaments and good old accu-stat tapes :)

Twenty years is but the blink of an eye grasshopper.

BTW- -20 to 25 years ago Efren lost many matches to Varner,
Strikland, Hall, et al.

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 05:19 AM
What about Don Willis? They were road partners and Wimpy
was the better player.

Willis would notr even PLAY George Rood. Wimpy would.

Dale

Looks like Wimpy had strong competition...

From the link (Interview w/Jaffar 'Patch Eye' Basheer):

1P: You mean Don Willis?
JB: Don Willis. He played 9-Ball better than Wimpy.

1P: Did you bump into Don Willis?
JB: Yes, I did. He beat me in Cleveland when I first met him. I think they sent for him because I was beating so many people there. How many pool players have been around the world that you can?t beat? For instance, Don Willis and Wimpy Lassiter both went to Honolulu to play a man that I used to play every Sunday because I couldn?t believe what he was doing. I was stationed in Honolulu at the time and I used to go there every Sunday and play that man, a Chinaman. And Don Willis and Wimpy went there and couldn?t beat him. That?s back in the 60?s.

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 06:05 AM
I invite you to do the same thing about Earl and Ef vs Wimpy,
whoops, you are completely clueless about Luther's level
of play.
So answer me this.
How can you possibly even think that you know?

Dale

I asked first...so tell me what you know..or don't ya :rolleyes:

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 06:22 AM
Twenty years is but the blink of an eye grasshopper.

BTW- -20 to 25 years ago Efren lost many matches to Varner,
Strikland, Hall, et al.

He might have lost then, but in his prime, I've never felt that NEITHER one of them could CONSISTENTLY beat Efren on the long haul....

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 06:51 AM
Lets take a slight break from Efren vs Wimpy talk for now :D

Russ brings up a good question...how deep was the competition back then vs now in a 9-ball WPC tournament? I read what Terry posted but I don't see a deep field of players. Was the quality as deep and great as it is today? In his prime, would Wimpy been able to win the 9-ball WPC 4 times in todays era like he did before and dominate the pool world in 9-ball? Could he have gotten through all these player, one by one/race to 13, and did this?

Alex Pagulayan
Buddy Hall
Cliff Joyner
Corey Duel
Dennis Hatch
Dennis Orcollo
Earl Strickland
Efren Reyes
Francisco Bustmante
Gabe Owen
Jeremy Jones
Jim Rempe
John Schmidt
Johnny Archer
Jose Parica
Lee Van Corteza
Marlon Manalo
Mika Immonen
Mike Davis
Mike Sigel
Nick Varner
Ralf Souquet
Raphael Martinez
Rodney Morris
Ronnie Alcano
Rudolpho Luat
San Souci
Shane Van Boening
Shannon Daulton
Thorsten Hohmann

hangemhigh
11-08-2007, 06:53 AM
What about Don Willis? They were road partners and Wimpy
was the better player.

Willis would notr even PLAY George Rood. Wimpy would.

Dale
I think George Rood could probally give all these speculators the 8 TODAY!

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 07:03 AM
I think George Rood could probally give all these speculators the 8 TODAY!

Claims he beat Wimpy...check out this interview

link (http://www.onepocket.org/GeorgeRoodInterview.htm)

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 10:04 AM
So Terry, did you change mind since 2003 :confused: Look what you posted :rolleyes:

link (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/printthread.php?Cat=&Board=ccbboard&main=57677&type=thread)

Quote from Terry Ardeno:

One valid and unbias way to consider who is the G.O.A.T. (Greatest Of All Time) is to compare CREDENTIALS, aka Titles Won.
Let's match up Earl (6/8/1961) vs Efren (8/26/1954) for an example.... Earl has 6 World 9-ball championships & 5 US Open 9-ball championships. Efren has 2 World 9-ball championships & 1 US Open 9-ball title. (His U.S. debut was at "Red's" 9 Ball Open in January 1985, so the excuse that Efren has not had enough time to play in America & thereby accumulate titles is not a valid one) BOTH have won nearly a 100 or so other "minor" 9 ball titles, but these are considered "Major" titles. Something else to consider...Earl is a 5 time Billiard Digest Player of the year, Efren has had that prestigious award bestowed on him ONCE, in 1995. ***So, on this basis (Major Credentials) how could someone argue that Efren is greater than Earl? On alleged money matches & gambling prowness? How could that possibly be fairly measured??? Plus, Earl has given up gambling, so does that mean he is the lesser player? Earl Strickland is, in my opinion (AND on the basis of total MAJOR Championships won) the greatest 9-ball player, ever.
***Now, something else...when speaking of these 2 as who is the greater ALL AROUND champion, on the same basis as that mentioned above, I think Efren has the better credentials.
For example, in addition to those named above, Earl has 1 World 8-ball title on his resume. But, Efren has 4 World 8-ball titles, 1 World 1 pocket championship & 1 US Open 1 pocket title. Earl IS the greatest 9 ball champion ever (in my opinion) followed by my number 2 pick, Luther Lassiter. Efren is a great all around champion, but Nick Varner has the following in his All Around Credentials...3 World 9 ball titles, 2 US Open 9-ball championships, 2 World 14.1 Championships, 2 World 8-ball championships, 2 World 1 Pocket titles & 1 World Bank Pool title. ***Nick is WORLD CHAMPION IN 5 Different pool disciplines (9-ball, 8-ball, 1 pocket, 14.1 & banks) NOBODY ELSE has EVER done THAT!!! This is an amazing accomplishment! Nick is by far the greatest ALL AROUND player when considering major titles.

bigskyjake
11-08-2007, 10:15 AM
Lets take a slight break from Efren vs Wimpy talk for now :D

Russ brings up a good question...how deep was the competition back then vs now in a 9-ball WPC tournament? I read what Terry posted but I don't see a deep field of players. Was the quality as deep and great as it is today? In his prime, would Wimpy been able to win the 9-ball WPC 4 times in todays era like he did before and dominate the pool world in 9-ball? Could he have gotten through all these player, one by one/race to 13, and did this?

Alex Pagulayan
Buddy Hall
Cliff Joyner
Corey Duel
Dennis Hatch
Dennis Orcollo
Earl Strickland
Efren Reyes
Francisco Bustmante
Gabe Owen
Jeremy Jones
Jim Rempe
John Schmidt
Johnny Archer
Jose Parica
Lee Van Corteza
Marlon Manalo
Mika Immonen
Mike Davis
Mike Sigel
Nick Varner
Ralf Souquet
Raphael Martinez
Rodney Morris
Ronnie Alcano
Rudolpho Luat
San Souci
Shane Van Boening
Shannon Daulton
Thorsten Hohmann

Wimpy or Harold would have crushed most of that lineup

Terry Ardeno
11-08-2007, 10:24 AM
So Terry, did you change mind since 2003 :confused: Look what you posted :rolleyes:

link (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/printthread.php?Cat=&Board=ccbboard&main=57677&type=thread)

Quote from Terry Ardeno:

One valid and unbias way to consider who is the G.O.A.T. (Greatest Of All Time) is to compare CREDENTIALS, aka Titles Won.
Let's match up Earl (6/8/1961) vs Efren (8/26/1954) for an example.... Earl has 6 World 9-ball championships & 5 US Open 9-ball championships. Efren has 2 World 9-ball championships & 1 US Open 9-ball title. (His U.S. debut was at "Red's" 9 Ball Open in January 1985, so the excuse that Efren has not had enough time to play in America & thereby accumulate titles is not a valid one) BOTH have won nearly a 100 or so other "minor" 9 ball titles, but these are considered "Major" titles. Something else to consider...Earl is a 5 time Billiard Digest Player of the year, Efren has had that prestigious award bestowed on him ONCE, in 1995. ***So, on this basis (Major Credentials) how could someone argue that Efren is greater than Earl? On alleged money matches & gambling prowness? How could that possibly be fairly measured??? Plus, Earl has given up gambling, so does that mean he is the lesser player? Earl Strickland is, in my opinion (AND on the basis of total MAJOR Championships won) the greatest 9-ball player, ever.
***Now, something else...when speaking of these 2 as who is the greater ALL AROUND champion, on the same basis as that mentioned above, I think Efren has the better credentials.
For example, in addition to those named above, Earl has 1 World 8-ball title on his resume. But, Efren has 4 World 8-ball titles, 1 World 1 pocket championship & 1 US Open 1 pocket title. Earl IS the greatest 9 ball champion ever (in my opinion) followed by my number 2 pick, Luther Lassiter. Efren is a great all around champion, but Nick Varner has the following in his All Around Credentials...3 World 9 ball titles, 2 US Open 9-ball championships, 2 World 14.1 Championships, 2 World 8-ball championships, 2 World 1 Pocket titles & 1 World Bank Pool title. ***Nick is WORLD CHAMPION IN 5 Different pool disciplines (9-ball, 8-ball, 1 pocket, 14.1 & banks) NOBODY ELSE has EVER done THAT!!! This is an amazing accomplishment! Nick is by far the greatest ALL AROUND player when considering major titles.

Cuetecthustla,

This is getting very weird.

One more time, nice and easy for you. IN MY OPINION, Earl Strickland is the greatest 9 ball TOURNAMENT player ever, followed closely by Luther Lassiter. Luther Lassiter is the greatest 9 baller ever based on his superiority at gambling plus his major tournaments won.

Efren Reyes, IN MY OPINION, is the greatest All-Around player ever, followed by Nick Varner. I give Varner the nod over guys like Harold Worst, Ed Kelly, etc based on the longevity of his career.

Since you've been asking some nice questions, I would like to ask you one.
Here goes....If Efren Reyes is the greatest 9 baller of all time, better than Lassiter, Strickland, Sigel, etc....Then why did he only win 1 World 9 Ball Championship? (The post you quoted had a 2 instead of 1-my mis-type)

And why did Lassiter, Strickland and Sigel win so many??

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 10:49 AM
Cuetecthustla,

This is getting very weird.

One more time, nice and easy for you. IN MY OPINION, Earl Strickland is the greatest 9 ball TOURNAMENT player ever, followed closely by Luther Lassiter. Luther Lassiter is the greatest 9 baller ever based on his superiority at gambling plus his major tournaments won.

Efren Reyes, IN MY OPINION, is the greatest All-Around player ever, followed by Nick Varner. I give Varner the nod over guys like Harold Worst, Ed Kelly, etc based on the longevity of his career.

Since you've been asking some nice questions, I would like to ask you one.
Here goes....If Efren Reyes is the greatest 9 baller of all time, better than Lassiter, Strickland, Sigel, etc....Then why did he only win 1 World 9 Ball Championship? (The post you quoted had a 2 instead of 1-my mis-type)

And why did Lassiter, Strickland and Sigel win so many??

Terry you're the one weird. Changing your story 3 yrs later :rolleyes: You wrote it...not me..Go back and read what you wrote :rolleyes:

In the Billiards Digest post NOWHERE did you mention best 9 ball TOURNAMENT player. Its is only now, you TRY to differentiate and add words that wasn't there before. Don't try to back peddle for something you didn't say before. You said it, Earl is the greatest 9 ball champion.

Lassiter, Strickland and Sigel are all great champions. During their era, they dominated the playing field. That's how it was. Their skill level was unprecedented at that time. I'm not sure why Efren didn't win. Maybe I'll ask him one day at a tournament and see what he says. I just don't know...

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 11:07 AM
Terry to clarify what you've been writing, so everyone on this board can see, In your honest opinion, is Earl the 'greatest 9 ball tournament player' or is he 'Luthers equal in 9 ball tournament' :confused:

As for Strickland, I call him the greatest tournament 9 baller since Lassiter and he may in fact be Lassiter's equal at TOURNAMENT 9 ball. His 6 World Championships and 5 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championships is a record that I believe we will not see broken ever. Look how hard it is for anyone to repeat or win those majors more than once. But, Strickland, even though early in his career he did gamble at pool, at GAMBLING he was no match for Lassiter. So, you have two very special tournament players and one of them (Lassiter) also exceled at gambling 9 ball, so the edge, I believe, has to go to Lassiter.

One more time, nice and easy for you. IN MY OPINION, Earl Strickland is the greatest 9 ball TOURNAMENT player ever, followed closely by Luther Lassiter. Luther Lassiter is the greatest 9 baller ever based on his superiority at gambling plus his major tournaments won.

Terry Ardeno
11-08-2007, 11:33 AM
Terry to clarify what you've been writing, so everyone on this board can see, In your honest opinion, is Earl the 'greatest 9 ball tournament player' or is he 'Luthers equal in 9 ball tournament' :confused:


Read 'em all again real slow so you can comprehend what is written at your speed. Nothing has changed. In fact, it really doesn't matter what I write. You're just going to keep it going until you hear what you want to hear. But at the threat of gunpoint, I'm not changing my opinion.

Luther Lassiter was the greatest over-all best 9 baller ever. (Taking into consideration major tournament wins and his gambling ability)

Followed by Strickland. (Equal if not better tournament record, but not as great a money player as Lassiter)

Next comes Sigel.

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 11:43 AM
Read 'em all again real slow so you can comprehend what is written at your speed. Nothing has changed. In fact, it really doesn't matter what I write. You're just going to keep it going until you hear what you want to hear. But at the threat of gunpoint, I'm not changing my opinion.

Luther Lassiter was the greatest over-all best 9 baller ever. (Taking into consideration major tournament wins and his gambling ability)

Followed by Strickland. (Equal if not better tournament record, but not as great a money player as Lassiter)

Next comes Sigel.

Terry,

I don't need to convince you to think Earl or Efren is better than Luther. You've dug your own 'hole' for the forgetfulness in your posts on Billiards Digest vs AZ Billiards...and you keep ducking what you wrote. And now everyone on this board will learn not to have confidence in your opinion. I don't care anymore and it doesn't matter.......

Terry Ardeno
11-08-2007, 11:58 AM
Terry,

I don't need to convince you to think Earl or Efren is better than Luther. You've dug your own 'hole' for the forgetfulness in your posts on Billiards Digest vs AZ Billiards...and your keep ducking what you wrote. And now everyone on this board will learn not to have confidence in your opinion. I don't care anymore and it doesn't matter.......


Cuetechustla,

I'm sorry you're mad at me. I really tried explaining over and over why I have the opinion I do. I don't understand what I can do or say to make you feel better. This is not a matter of life and death, this is pool talk by people who love our great sport. I'm not out to try and prove anyone else wrong or to make them look stupid. But I'm not going to be bullied into changing my opinion just because your's is different than mine.

And for the record, my previous posts speak for themselves as to who I thought was the best and when. The only thing I changed is a 2 into a 1 in the matter of World 9 Ball Championships that Reyes won. I mis-typed 2 instead of a 1.

This forum should help make all of us pals and not foes. We'll interact again in the future and who know, we may even agree on something.

I gave you good / positive rep points as a gesture of peace and best wishes to you. :)

Russ Chewning
11-08-2007, 01:14 PM
Oh yeah? Oh yeah?? Well, I bet Efren is better with the ladies than Wimpy was, so THERE!

(Yayyyy, Russ wins THIS round, no contest, TKO!)

:) :)

Russ

Terry Ardeno
11-08-2007, 01:39 PM
Oh yeah? Oh yeah?? Well, I bet Efren is better with the ladies than Wimpy was, so THERE!

(Yayyyy, Russ wins THIS round, no contest, TKO!)

:) :)

Russ


Right you are Russ. Efren has been married for years with children. Wimpy was a life long bachelor.

If you read the book Hustler Days by R.A. Dryer, there is much info on Lassiter that is great reading and weel researched.

Thanks for making me smile! :)

pdcue
11-08-2007, 03:08 PM
Looks like Wimpy had strong competition...

From the link (Interview w/Jaffar 'Patch Eye' Basheer):

1P: You mean Don Willis?
JB: Don Willis. He played 9-Ball better than Wimpy.

1P: Did you bump into Don Willis?
JB: Yes, I did. He beat me in Cleveland when I first met him. I think they sent for him because I was beating so many people there. How many pool players have been around the world that you can?t beat? For instance, Don Willis and Wimpy Lassiter both went to Honolulu to play a man that I used to play every Sunday because I couldn?t believe what he was doing. I was stationed in Honolulu at the time and I used to go there every Sunday and play that man, a Chinaman. And Don Willis and Wimpy went there and couldn?t beat him. That?s back in the 60?s.

Well it must be true - you read it on the Internet.

To paraphrase the character from TCOM 'Who the he!! are YOU?'.

Russ was right it seems.

Have you ever watched Ef play in person?
Did you ever see Luther play in person?

Did you see Reyes play, and loose, in a tournament
9 ball match twenty years ago - and explain to all his detractors
that tho he wiggled the cue on his warm up, there
was nothing unorthodox on the final stroke when he hit the cue ball?

Did George Rood, who had beat them both, ever tell you
Luther was a better player than Willis?
<George, not only played with one of my cues,>
< he paid me full price for it>

Care to guess who has?

Dale<self proclaimed expert who is way done with this troll>

cuetechustla
11-08-2007, 04:04 PM
Well it must be true - you read it on the Internet.

To paraphrase the character from TCOM 'Who the he!! are YOU?'.

Russ was right it seems.

Have you ever watched Ef play in person?
Did you ever see Luther play in person?

Did you see Reyes play, and loose, in a tournament
9 ball match twenty years ago - and explain to all his detractors
that tho he wiggled the cue on his warm up, there
was nothing unorthodox on the final stroke when he hit the cue ball?

Did George Rood, who had beat them both, ever tell you
Luther was a better player than Willis?
<George, not only played with one of my cues,>
< he paid me full price for it>

Care to guess who has?

Dale<self proclaimed expert who is way done with this troll>

Calm down bro...watch your words...like Terry said, this is a friendly forum...right ;)

I've watched Efren play back in the early 90s at Brass Tap Billiards. That was the first time I've seen him play in person. I've also seen him play in the US open every yr when I lived in VA. So YES, I have seen him. Plenty of times.

I've never seen Luther play in person and couldn't because I wasn't old enough :p

You need to stop this..off the wall conversation and get back to the subject of this thread....you going to make Luther turn in his grave... :D