snooker or pool?

[DangerousDave]

Although bankshots are norm of the pool and seldom used/seen in snooker, that one on youtube was nothing of the sort that would make a player like Ronnie crouch for getting lessons.

Definitely the shot in that video couldn't have been more obvious. As banks go it's really a hanger and the clear shot to play in that situation.

That's not to say that if Ronnie crossed over to pool he couldn't do with a banking lesson - with the differences in how the cushions react at different paces and with variations of sidespin to snooker he would more than likely benefit from being shown a few things by someone like Varner.

 

[gromulan]

Although bankshots are norm of the pool and seldom used/seen in snooker, that one on youtube was nothing of the sort that would make a player like Ronnie crouch for getting lessons. Confidently, I can assertain that snooker players may be "weak" at breaking and most likely at jump shots, which are never experienced in snooker. Myself being reasonably good at both snooker and pool games, I've never once tried a jump (used only cushions or massé shots) but pretty good at breaks and banks.

I'm only repeating what Nick said to me. Interpret it any way you want.



Also that shot is a good example of a 'shot to nothing' in nine ball. If Nick had missed he'd have had three balls blocking Ronnie from the one ball.

 

[Jason Robichaud]

I don't believe the Nick story for a second... Ronnie is one of the best bankers in snooker and that shot is beyond easy. Fact is, Ronnie is so far beyond anyone holding a cue, he resorts to playing the best cuemen in the world wrong handed. People in north america keep trying to change games 8, 9 and 10 balls on 7' 8' or 9' ft and some wanting 10ft tables... this cloth or that. The true test of skill on a table with pockets is snooker. All these other games are for gambling and a quick buck not a test of skill.

my high runs:

9 ball - 8 racks (in practice 7 playing someone)
8 ball - 12 racks (in tournament)
14.1 - 6 racks (didn't keep ball count during practice rarely play)
snooker - 142. (in practice only 94 against someone)

Before I quit playing, I would love nothing more than to have a 100+ break in snooker during a tournament or money match.

There is something about the game of snooker and hitting that 100. 14.1 is close to the same rush, but you need luck on breaks to keep going, that is the reason I can't get into the game.

 

[Philthepockets]

What rubbish, I can't bear pool players demeaning snooker players alleged shortcomings to somehow "prove" pool players are not 2nd rate cueists. Protest too much me thinks ?

 

[gromulan]

I don't believe the Nick story for a second... Ronnie is one of the best bankers in snooker and that shot is beyond easy.

You know, I'm fine with you calling me a lousy poster or stupid or whatever, but calling me a liar is pretty uncool. Obviously you didn't consider that the match in question was 13 years ago when O'Sullivan was only 21 and that it was close to his first encounter playing pool against an American, or that Nick and I know each other and have played many times but whatever, I'm probably just making the whole thing up just to win an argument on the Internet.



Meanwhile, here are the words of Daryl Peach - one of your own UK boys - talking about Efren:

7. Who, in your opinion, was the greatest ever to pick up a cue (snooker, pool, whatever)?

Snooker: Ronnie O'Sullivan

Pool: Efren Reyes

Overall: Efren because I saw him play Jimmy White and Ronnie O'Sullivan 6 years ago, at snooker best of 5 for £100 each if I remember rightly: he beat both of them with his pool cue, and he made 3 centuries!! Now that's special.

You can find the entire interview here: http://9ballpool.co.uk/interviews/daryl_peach_240604.html

Of course Daryl could be lying too. Who knows...

 

[DangerousDave]

You know, I'm fine with you calling me a lousy poster or stupid or whatever, but calling me a liar is pretty uncool. Obviously you didn't consider that the match in question was 13 years ago when O'Sullivan was only 21 and that it was close to his first encounter playing pool against an American, or that Nick and I know each other and have played many times but whatever, I'm probably just making the whole thing up just to win an argument on the Internet.

Can't you see why someone might think this? The shot could not have been more straightforward, and O'Sullivan won his first UK Championship before he turned 18 - by 21 he could definitely play a little. There is no way in the world that shot took Ronnie by surprise.

Meanwhile, here are the words of Daryl Peach - one of your own UK boys - talking about Efren:

Isn't Jason Canadian?

Of course Daryl could be lying too. Who knows...

Daryl was just offering his opinion. If you mean his account of the match, then I think this has been disputed, and he did say "if I remember rightly". In any case, this argument seems to have turned into 'who's better?', and that's pretty subjective if you're comparing Efren and Ronnie, or even snooker players and pool players. In this case, I think Daryl would get closer to Efren playing nine-ball than he would to O'Sullivan playing snooker, and he started his career playing the latter game.

 

[Brozif]

Well it was bound to happen. Snooker players VS Pool players who's better and which one takes more skill? The simple answer is this. Snooker players are better at snooker and pool players are better at pool. That is why they are playing the games that they are playing. You don't see anyone trying to play both and consistently doing well. Each player knows which one their game is and that's the one they should stick to!!

But if we have to have silly squabbles about who's better and act like kids, then here's my statement as a pool player...We got bigger balls and thicker sticks! NA NA NA NA NA!!:grin:

 

[Jason Robichaud]

You know, I'm fine with you calling me a lousy poster or stupid or whatever, but calling me a liar is pretty uncool. Obviously you didn't consider that the match in question was 13 years ago when O'Sullivan was only 21 and that it was close to his first encounter playing pool against an American, or that Nick and I know each other and have played many times but whatever, I'm probably just making the whole thing up just to win an argument on the Internet.



Meanwhile, here are the words of Daryl Peach - one of your own UK boys - talking about Efren:



You can find the entire interview here: http://9ballpool.co.uk/interviews/daryl_peach_240604.html

Of course Daryl could be lying too. Who knows...

Not calling you any of the above or trying to attack any posters character. I am just defending my choice for best cuesport and players. I'll send you some green.

It is an interesting thread and I just think the story may have been skewed over the years. Maybe he was surprised that Nick took the shot on because a miss, Ronnie would win. Ronnie could run 100+ at 11 or something and has the most agressive game in snooker. That type of bank comes up often in snooker. Only difference is, its to the side. One thing I could never understand about pool vs snooker is the age to dominate the sport. 35 in snooker you are washed up, pool you are ready for your 1st Major.

 

[gromulan]

Can't you see why someone might think this? The shot could not have been more straightforward, and O'Sullivan won his first UK Championship before he turned 18 - by 21 he could definitely play a little. There is no way in the world that shot took Ronnie by surprise.

And yet, that's exactly what O'Sullivan said to Nick, at least according to Nick. Maybe Nick was lying too. More likely is that at 21 Ronnie didn't see as many shots as he does now. Also in '96 how much exposure to American pool did anyone in the UK have? That shot comes up in snooker precisely never, by the way.

Isn't Jason Canadian?

I'm well aware of that, I was referring to Phil and the other narrow-minded UK snobs who talk like they know the game inside out and probably couldn't play dead in a low-budget western.

Daryl was just offering his opinion. If you mean his account of the match, then I think this has been disputed, and he did say "if I remember rightly".

Sure, Daryl was probably mistaken. Reyes probably lost both matches and couldn't make better than a 20 break. Give me a break. No one who was there disputes his account of the match though, I can promise you that.


And for the record, I was never trying to turn this into a 'who's better' discussion. I originally posted to let some of the snooker player know that they could vastly improve their safety play by experimenting with some other games and got attacked from all sides for it. The whole discussion about Efren came from someone claiming that Tony Drago could give any of the pool players 60 points, when in fact there are probably a LOT of pool players - Efren included - that he probably couldn't beat playing EVEN.

 

[DangerousDave]

And yet, that's exactly what O'Sullivan said to Nick, at least according to Nick. Maybe Nick was lying too. More likely is that at 21 Ronnie didn't see as many shots as he does now. Also in '96 how much exposure to American pool did anyone in the UK have? That shot comes up in snooker precisely never, by the way.

If you think Ronnie couldn't see that shot - with a natural angle into the pocket and to the two ball - I really don't know what to say to that. You'd have to be insanely dense not to see the shot and Ronnie O'Sullivan hardly falls into that category when it comes to balls and sticks. If Ronnie asked for a banking lesson, I would bet my life that it had nothing to do with that shot blowing his tiny mind. Other banks maybe, and he could definitely have learned from Nick in this area as I've already stated, but that was such a natural shot I hardly see how this can be disputed.

I'm well aware of that, I was referring to Phil and the other narrow-minded UK snobs who talk like they know the game inside out and probably couldn't play dead in a low-budget western.

It's often the case that snooker fans who dismiss pool player's abilities outright can't play the game, I'll agree with that, but I don't think I've seen any of that in this thread so far.

Sure, Daryl was probably mistaken. Reyes probably lost both matches and couldn't make better than a 20 break. Give me a break. No one who was there disputes his account of the match though, I can promise you that.

All I said was that Daryl himself indicated that his account was not set in stone, and it's still just anecdotal evidence for an argument no one else was really starting. It's dishonest to suggest that because I didn't take Peach's (admittedly fallible) recollection as fact that I'm saying Efren lost both matches and couldn't string six balls together.

The whole discussion about Efren came from someone claiming that Tony Drago could give any of the pool players 60 points, when in fact there are probably a LOT of pool players - Efren included - that he probably couldn't beat playing EVEN.

I'll back Drago against Efren all day if this match ever happens. Drago played the game at the top level for years, is still just about hanging on to his place on the main tour and is a bit younger than Efren as well.

 

[Philthepockets]

Peach is partly to blame for making this silly statement and the Efrenites are partly to blame for believing it and then preaching it as gospel. No way no how, It did not happen. And I wasn't there either

the original question was about learning something from another discipline, yes you could learn a bit, execution on the other hand needs to be practiced within the realm for which it is intended. "Vastly improve" I very much doubt it.

 

[DaddysVisa]

Peach is partly to blame for making this silly statement and the Efrenites are partly to blame for believing it and then preaching it as gospel. No way no how, It did not happen. And I wasn't there either

the original question was about learning something from another discipline, yes you could learn a bit, execution on the other hand needs to be practiced within the realm for which it is intended. "Vastly improve" I very much doubt it.

Phil, are you saying the match never actually happened or that it happened but Efren didn't actually win? When you actually read the interview, Peach's qualifier "if I remember rightly" clearly looks like it refers to his recollection of the amount wagered and the number of games. I seriously doubt that he would be mistaken about who won, Efren using his pool cue or the that Efren ran some centuries. Peach has always seemed like a straight up genuine guy, so I am surprised you doubt the veracity of his story.

 

[TheBrain]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2Ye61WiLMk
Ronnie vs Wu
Snooker vs Pool

Ronnie's break is so bad. And Wu can't shoot straight.
This hurts me, really. When I first started playing pool I thought all professional players need to have very good fundamentals. Becuase you need a straight, smooth and level stroke in order to pot the balls consistently and to control the cueball, right? But the more videos I've watched the more I've learned that, in fact most (if not all) professional pool players can't deliver their cue on a straight line. They are steering, jumping up, their cues are all over the place. I was and still am disappointed, because I expect a professional to have good fundamentals, so I can appreciate it.

Watch the video! You can see it best when the camera angle is in line with the shot. Although Wu is relatively harmless compared to other pros like Souquet or Varner, you can clearly see the difference between his stroke and Ronnie's. Look at Ronnie's long pots. Everything is going into the center of the pocket.
That's the reason why pool players have a hard time adjusting to snooker. I can't imagine Efren Reyes making a century with his wavy stroke. I'd like to see a video of him playing snooker, because I could only find some videos of Jeremy Jones, and they didn't look very promising...

Now, I'm not saying, that pool sucks and snooker is for real men. Not at all. I love pool. It's just the mentality I don't understand.

:speechless:

 

[Philthepockets]

Phil, are you saying the match never actually happened or that it happened but Efren didn't actually win? When you actually read the interview, Peach's qualifier "if I remember rightly" clearly looks like it refers to his recollection of the amount wagered and the number of games. I seriously doubt that he would be mistaken about who won, Efren using his pool cue or the that Efren ran some centuries. Peach has always seemed like a straight up genuine guy, so I am surprised you doubt the veracity of his story.

What I am saying is if I had witnessed a miracle I would not need a proviso in my statement. I also suspect Peach was having a lark. I don't believe he was even there.

 

[drsnooker]

I figured I'd weigh in, since the video of Jeremy Jones playing snooker was against yours truly, and now mentioned twice. I must say we both put on a pretty poor performance, with a highest break of 30+ in 5 frames.

From the youtube clip of Ronnie vs Nick where Ronnie misses a long distance plant (combo) and leaves a double (bank shot), I am pretty sure anybody who's ever played pool or snooker knows that shot. Snooker is evolving in that more and more doubles are executed during pro games, usually as shots-to-nothing, because the odds of making it are much smaller than on a pool table.

I personally prefer snooker over pool because of the challenge and the less dependence of the random luck factor. When have you ever seen pool players exchanging safeties and snookers for more than a few shots, before some lucky roll lets the other player in and he continues to run the table and a couple more racks. Because potting balls is much harder in snooker it is much easier to leave your opponent a shot with less than 50-50 odds. However that does not mean playing safe in snooker is as easy as just putting the cue ball on the bottom rail. Just watch a frame when a red strays into the baulk area and the players now have to defend against the long red to the yellow or green pocket or a bank-to-nothing to the center. The sad part is most of those safety battles are not on youtube. You've got to watch that live or else you'll miss it.

Anyway, improving in any cuesport requires table time. It doesn't matter which. The more you play, the better you'll get. The specialization that eventually occurs causes one to get better in that particular variant. Americans usually don't have a choice between snooker and pool, so if you do, count your blessings and play both, see what you prefer. Neither of them will hurt your game. It only takes me about 30 minutes to adjust to the size of the balls, especially on long (or long-ish on a pool table) shots.
But do focus on your technique. I was at the Galveston World classic and only a handful of pro pool players have a textbook cue action. Most of the others seem to be self taught and fallen into some sort of motion that allows them to make balls Alex Higgins style. But I truly believe that amateur players should start with getting the mechanics right. Pool is very forgiving when it comes to that. Any flaw in your stroke will show up magnified on a snooker table.

So that's my two (or three) cents.

And just to stir the pot.... I'll take Mark Williams or Steve Davis in a safety battle against any pool player in any cue sport.

 

[gromulan]

And just to stir the pot.... I'll take Mark Williams or Steve Davis in a safety battle against any pool player in any cue sport.

If that extends to one-pocket then you can pretty much bust the universe if Davis or Williams wins. I mean just on my own I'll bet my first born child. Who knows what kind of action you can get in America. I'm sure the number runs into the millions of dollars - maybe even billions - and that's no joke! If it extends to three-cushion billiards then I'd bet on either of them to win the goddamn Tour de France before they can out-safe a pro player at that game. It's just impossible.



What I find amazing is that there are 10 and 11-year-old kids in the UK who can run centuries at snooker and yet you guys refuse to believe that the best pool player who's ever lived can do it. That smacks of some pretty heavy denial even ignoring the fact that several people have seen it happen. I think the likely truth is that most of the UK posters in this thread couldn't find their way to a century break with a six-man search party. No wonder they have trouble believing that Efren can do it.

Personally I can kind of relate to your denial. I would have sworn to all gods holy that no living human could give Cliff Joyner 9-7 playing one-pocket and yet Efren did it and beat him easily. I actually SAW that and still have trouble believing it.

 

[Cameron Smith]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2Ye61WiLMk
Ronnie vs Wu
Snooker vs Pool

Ronnie's break is so bad. And Wu can't shoot straight.
This hurts me, really. When I first started playing pool I thought all professional players need to have very good fundamentals. Becuase you need a straight, smooth and level stroke in order to pot the balls consistently and to control the cueball, right? But the more videos I've watched the more I've learned that, in fact most (if not all) professional pool players can't deliver their cue on a straight line. They are steering, jumping up, their cues are all over the place. I was and still am disappointed, because I expect a professional to have good fundamentals, so I can appreciate it.

Watch the video! You can see it best when the camera angle is in line with the shot. Although Wu is relatively harmless compared to other pros like Souquet or Varner, you can clearly see the difference between his stroke and Ronnie's. Look at Ronnie's long pots. Everything is going into the center of the pocket.
That's the reason why pool players have a hard time adjusting to snooker. I can't imagine Efren Reyes making a century with his wavy stroke. I'd like to see a video of him playing snooker, because I could only find some videos of Jeremy Jones, and they didn't look very promising...

Now, I'm not saying, that pool sucks and snooker is for real men. Not at all. I love pool. It's just the mentality I don't understand.

:speechless:

Watch their follow through, not the backstroke. Wu pulls the cue off line on the back stroke, but by the time he returns to the cue ball it is as straight as Ronnie's, but his timing isn't as good. But then who's is?

 

[predator]

The whole discussion about Efren came from someone claiming that Tony Drago could give any of the pool players 60 points, when in fact there are probably a LOT of pool players - Efren included - that he probably couldn't beat playing EVEN.

Like myself, you are just a nick name on an internet forum with no name. What we share is obvious passion for cue sports. We also have about the same credibility.

Now, what Tony told me is that he gave 60 point start to Corey. I admit I assumed perhaps wrongly that he could give that much to any pool player. Don't know about Efren or Alex P., but I doubt he could give 60 start to english pool players who have plenty of snooker experience. But he would have to give some for sure...there is a sizeable difference between players that play on Main tour this moment (Tony is there) and very good amateurs.

One thing I would be willing to bet my house on. There's no way any pool player could live with him on a snooker table playing EVEN. Even very good snooker players not on the Main tour couldn't do that. If you believe otherwise, that's fine.

If I remember correctly, you also wrote that Tony couldn't beat the very best at 10ball race to 100. I have no problem with that at all. But, you know what? Tournament races are never going to be that long. He is a threat to win any pool tournament he enters, even if he may not be the very best...remember Predator 10ball? 3rd place at WPC? Eurotour wins? Those results are no accident...

Cheers.

 

[DangerousDave]

Watch their follow through, not the backstroke. Wu pulls the cue off line on the back stroke, but by the time he returns to the cue ball it is as straight as Ronnie's, but his timing isn't as good. But then who's is?

I think the point was that very few snooker players' cues visibly go off line during their stroke, which it does a lot more often with pool players.

The reason's pretty obvious; if the cue is not in line at the end of the backswing, by the time you hit the cue ball you have to compensate to some extent on the delivery to get the cue back on line. The first example that comes to mind from snooker is Jimmy White - Steve Davis described his action as "cueing round the corner!"

I think that around the time of winning the World Championships in 2005, Shaun Murphy altered the backswing in his cue action for this reason.

 

[Cameron Smith]

I think the point was that very few snooker players' cues visibly go off line during their stroke, which it does a lot more often with pool players.

The reason's pretty obvious; if the cue is not in line at the end of the backswing, by the time you hit the cue ball you have to compensate to some extent on the delivery to get the cue back on line. The first example that comes to mind from snooker is Jimmy White - Steve Davis described his action as "cueing round the corner!"

I think that around the time of winning the World Championships in 2005, Shaun Murphy altered the backswing in his cue action for this reason.

I certainly agree, I consider the backswing to be one of the most over looked aspects of the stroke by amateurs. However thebrain was stating, as many people assume, that Wu and other pool players can't stroke in a straight line which is absolutely false.

The thing is that most pool players are self taught and pool admittedly doesn't punish players initially for less than accurate deliveries, not to the extent of snooker. As a result a lot of players just keep using a crooked stroke until they can repeatedly return it to the line of the shot.