Latest activity

Latest activity

 Social Media Forum list

Breaking - 1990s vs 2026

sjm
Tricky topic. Still, this is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison.

Thirty years ago, there was no break box, the one ball was on the spot, and the wing ball was dead, so players had a better chance to control the cue ball off of the break. As you note, they liked to squat the cue ball near the center of the table. They would love to do the same today, but ....

Today, in WNT play, which is currently the highest level of 9ball competition in the game, there is a narrow break box, the nine is on the spot, and the wing ball is no longer dead. To their credit, today's pro players have devised a cut break that enables them to make the one in the side with relative consistency, but the cut break comes with far less cue ball control. Today, the break that is in vogue in WNT play brings the cue ball to the rail and back through the rack area, so it is much harder to end up with a shot on the two ball after a successful break.

Hence, you are correct. Yesterday's players liked to squat the cue ball, but chiefly because they could under the old break rules. Today's pros, with few exceptions, have determined that they must cut break to ensure that they don't break dry, and in doing so, have ended up with far less cue ball control than their counterparts of yesteryear.
Click to expand...

Was pool better 50 years ago?

HawaiianEye
sjm said:
Adding to Jazznpool's excellent reply to your post, this type of thinking just doesn't work. Yes, give a Filler or a Shane bucket pockets, Simonis cloth, rails and balls with today's quality, jump cues, screw-on extensions, and the better pool tables in use today and they would run a whole lot of racks, but that's not a meaningful comparison across generations.

Today's players play with better tables that have better rails and better ball sets. They all have jump cues. They have screw-on cue extensions that ensure that the bridge need nearly ever be used. Fifty years ago, most players did not even have break cues, never mind jump cues. They played on slow, nappy cloth and some of the positional shots that look routine today were almost impossible back in the day. If you had to play a power-stun shot off a five-degree angle, you had to have huge power to make it happen. Need a long draw off a long shot? Only the best could do it back in the pre-Simonis days. One reason that Strickland and Sigel were the two best 9ball players forty-five years ago, shortly before the switch to Simonis, was that both had an extremely powerful stroke. It's so easily forgotten.

There is little doubt in my mind that, even on the equipment and conditions of yesteryear, a Filler of a Shane would have played at a higher level than their counterparts of fifty years ago, but by less than one might guess.
Click to expand...
The "power" game has all but disappeared.

Today's faster cloth and rails have turned the game into "bunting".

I prefer playing on tables where you have to have a stroke to play instead of a table so fast that you have to convert your stroke into a bunt.

Today's tables remind me of pinball machines or pachinko.
Click to expand...

Was pool better 50 years ago?

jasonlaus
sjm said:
Adding to Jazznpool's excellent reply to your post, this type of thinking just doesn't work. Yes, give a Filler or a Shane bucket pockets, Simonis cloth, rails and balls with today's quality, jump cues, screw-on extensions, and the better pool tables in use today and they would run a whole lot of racks, but that's not a meaningful comparison across generations.

Today's players play with better tables that have better rails and better ball sets. They all have jump cues. They have screw-on cue extensions that ensure that the bridge need nearly ever be used. Fifty years ago, most players did not even have break cues, never mind jump cues. They played on slow, nappy cloth and some of the positional shots that look routine today were almost impossible back in the day. If you had to play a power-stun shot off a five-degree angle, you had to have huge power to make it happen. Need a long draw off a long shot? Only the best could do it back in the pre-Simonis days. One reason that Strickland and Sigel were the two best 9ball players forty-five years ago, shortly before the switch to Simonis, was that both had an extremely powerful stroke. It's so easily forgotten.

There is little doubt in my mind that, even on the equipment and conditions of yesteryear, a Filler of a Shane would have played at a higher level than their counterparts of fifty years ago, but by less than one might guess.
Click to expand...
You had to be careful drawing the big rock, that would kill your action immediately
Click to expand...

FREE Action Stream.......starts tonite

jasonlaus
couldnthinkof01 said:
10 has to be around 700 iirc
Click to expand...
Id say at least 670 but 700 could be correct. That boy was pissed about his $$$ 🤣

The other guy had a bunch of rich people for me to play, I only got to play 1 of them once then left town. That guy barely knew which end of the cue to hold, but his biz was "slightly" illegal so i didn't feel bad, and he did it all to himself, suggested gambling, and kept raising the bet. Lol
Click to expand...

Pallet of new cues for sale at 20 cues per box for $100 ($5/cue) --- Comments?

Paul_#_
fjk said:
It's mind boggling how cheap you can buy Chinese items. Look at this scale for $7. Shipped from China, packaged, marketed, and then sold for a profit...for less than $7.
Click to expand...
I think some of it is that there isn't a profit, it is subsidized, or its a liquidation. The pallet of cues I posted is likely a liquidation item. Something happened to that pallet that caused the cues to be sold to a liquidator. Maybe they got soaked in seawater or a check of a few boxes found warped cues making the whole pallet non-deliverable.

Still, Poolhall60561's post appears to have vendor selling new cues for $1 to $2 a cue --- not a liquidation item. How can that be? I think its impossible to get the parts of a cue for $1 or $2. Maybe its special conditions of getting rid of spare parts or a marketing ploy that sells cues at a loss to get market share or to bury a competitor. In any event, I don't think parts to a cue, even in China, can cost less than $2.

​

Click to expand...
Load more

Filter

Back
Top