Chris you're a pretty smart cookie yourself and a damn good gambler. BUT, you don't know pool quite as well as you think you do. Efren in his prime against Ronnie in his prime would have been no contest. But it wouldn't come out the way you think. Overall Ronnie was the superior player. I won't go into all the reasons why, but he was.
Ronnie claims today that Efren is the best he ever saw, but Ronnie was never one to brag. I will say this, Ronnie knew things about One Pocket that will be lost when he's gone. He had moves to "funnel" balls toward his pocket that no one knows or shoots today. NO ONE! He could escape traps with two and three rail kicks that are never seen or shot at today.
His ability to shoot off angle combinations, find dead balls in the pack, and make crazy billiard shots may never be seen again. No one could read the pack better than Ronnie. Efren isn't even close there. One more big plus was that Ronnie NEVER missed a ball to win a big game or a big match. He was fearless under pressure, the bigger the bet the better he played. You would have really enjoyed seeing him play. You wouldn't be able to take your eyes off him. No one could.
Plus he was entertaining as hell, with a gift of gab unmatched this side of Keith McCready. And when he turned that conversation on, his game went up a ball and his opponents went down a ball. Add all these things up, and you'll see why he was the top dog in One Pocket for twenty years or more.
One last thing Chris, Ronnie was a grinder like you. He was always giving up the nuts, so he had to play a long time to get the money. God bless Efren, but he has some quit in him. I've seen it. Get him down a few games and he's looking for the door. Get Ronnie down and he wants to raise the bet. You would have liked him, a lot! Back then.