Old Players Vs. New Players

[jay helfert]

i will take efren against all other champions of any era :thumbup:

Good call here. Fifty years from now and Efren will be the most talked about player of this era. Just like Greenleaf during his era, Mosconi during his and Lassiter in his. Players like Mizerak, Sigel, Hall and Strickland (definitely Earl) will be considered next to Efren, but not ahead of him. Efren IS the legendary player of our era!

 

[jay helfert]

I have to say there is enough video of Earl shooting back during his prime that I would have to make him a favorite against most of them in tournament format 9-ball as well. He still won a world championship during the era of Alex, Ronnie A, Ralph, and Yang at the least off that list all shooting in what would be considered their primes.

Back when Earl was shooting his best and had a more solid mental focus and killer instinct he was flat out better then those guys at winning tournaments.

I know Chris likes to really push the gambling side of things but he put Ralph on his list which kind of brings up the point that you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Thanks for this Celtic. I've seen 'em all for the last 40+years and if we are talking 9-Ball tournaments, Earl is in a class by himself! Period, Period, Period! There has never been and yet to be a better tournament 9-Ball player than Earl. Not Alex, not Ronnie A., not Ralf, not Mika, not Johnny, not Dennis H. or O., not anyone! No one has found a higher gear than Earl and maintained it for so many years. And remember he did this during Sigel and Buddy's prime. And brought Mizerak down off his high horse first. Plus he had to deal with players like Efren, Parica, Wade Crane, David Howard, Keith, Larry Hubbart, Ray Martin, Jim Rempe, Nick Varner, Allen Hopkins and a whole slew of other good players!

If anyone thinks that today's group of 9-Ball champions have surpassed Earl, they are either kidding themselves or just plain don't know. When Earl was right (which was most of the time in the 80's, 90's and early 2000's), he made a 9' table look like a bar table. Forget the cut break, Earl made balls and ran out so fast his opponent's fell into a stupor. I watched his act for twenty plus years and he was nothing short of amazing. Only Sigel had his number, somehow finding a way to get into Earl's head quite often when they played.

I think Chris B. is an astute observer, but he underestimates Mr. five time U.S. Open champ Earl Strickland. Earl in his prime could beat any of today's top players including Wu in a tournament. Wu is Zen personified, but Earl would run so many racks on young Mr. Wu that he would be heading back to the monastery to study. Once Earl put a seven pack on Wu Cha Ching, you could start calling him Ding Dong Ling! My point being it wouldn't make any difference who he is and what great skills he had. We'd never get to see them, because he would be watching Earl play just like the rest of us. When Earl gave you the chair, it was kind of like when Lassiter was hitting you with back to back to back 90+ runs match after match after match. No one could fade that either.

I saw it for myself, I was there gang. :wink:

 

[Celtic]

Players like Mizerak, Sigel, Hall and Strickland (definitely Earl) will be considered next to Efren, but not ahead of him. Efren IS the legendary player of our era!

I am not totally sure Earl will be remembered as second rate behind Efren. At the end of the day Earl has more top end titles then Efren managed with his US Opens and World Championships.

I dont think either Earl nor Efren did enough to truly be seen as "THE" guy of their era like Greenleaf, Mosconi, or Lassiter. After those 3 guys noone in pool has ever manged to dominate their era like those 3 players did for the periods they did it. When you look at the world championships those 3 players won WAY more then anyone in the modern era has managed.

50 years is a long time, the record books will be the most important thing to people who are not going to be born for another 20-30 years and noone in the era after Lassiter has managed to truly dominate an era to the extent he did.

And I agree with everything you said there Jay BTW. Earl's top 9-ball game was the highest level that game has ever been played at. When Earl was truly on he made every shot no matter how hard it was go in the heart of the pocket and he could spin the cueball any which way he needed to with ludicrous power to get onto the next ball. Also Earl's long corner banking skills when he was shooting at his best would give players of today fits because leaving Earl a long bank for the corner in those days was not even close to safe, it was more of a sell out. Players today don't even play those banks while Earl was a huge favorite to run out from there every time someone left him one.

The first color of money match showed Earl's power when at his peak. He lost that match because of a brutal last day but he was completely dominating Efren up till that last day playing at almost his peak potential, which was too much for Efren to fade. Earl lost that match because he lost that top speed on the last day and it allowed Efren to squeek out the very close win.

 

[jay helfert]

I am not totally sure Earl will be remembered as second rate behind Efren. At the end of the day Earl has more top end titles then Efren managed with his US Opens and World Championships.

I dont think either Earl nor Efren did enough to truly be seen as "THE" guy of their era like Greenleaf, Mosconi, or Lassiter. After those 3 guys noone in pool has ever manged to dominate their era like those 3 players did for the periods they did it. When you look at the world championships those 3 players won WAY more then anyone in the modern era has managed.

50 years is a long time, the record books will be the most important thing to people who are not going to be born for another 20-30 years and noone in the era after Lassiter has managed to truly dominate an era to the extent he did.

And I agree with everything you said there Jay BTW. Earl's top 9-ball game was the highest level that game has ever been played at. When Earl was truly on he made every shot no matter how hard it was go in the heart of the pocket and he could spin the cueball any which way he needed to with ludicrous power to get onto the next ball. Also Earl's long corner banking skills when he was shooting at his best would give players of today fits because leaving Earl a long bank for the corner in those days was not even close to safe, it was more of a sell out. Players today don't even play those banks while Earl was a huge favorite to run out from there every time someone left him one.

The first color of money match showed Earl's power when at his peak. He lost that match because of a brutal last day but he was completely dominating Efren up till that last day playing at almost his peak potential, which was too much for Efren to fade. Earl lost that match because he lost that top speed on the last day and it allowed Efren to squeek out the very close win.

All good points, but remember Earl got started in his early 20's winning championships. Efren never made it over here until he was in his early 30's. Everyone in the Philippines says that Efren's peak years as a player were in his 20's. We never even saw that! How many tournaments would he have won if he came over here ten years earlier? And learned One Pocket at 25 instead of 35.

Efren and Harold Worst before him remain the most amazing players I've ever seen in an era of many great players. Because they could adapt so well to any game and excel at it very quickly. I am convinced there is no game on any table these two men couldn't have been champions at, if they had focused on that one game for an extended period of time.

I saw Worst play top level Straight Pool, One Pocket, 9-Ball and Snooker. Right there with the best in North America. And we already know he was one of the best Three Cushion players by his early 20's. Efren likewise could play any game with the best around. Give him a year playing Three Cushions or Snooker, and he could have competed with the best at those games as well. These two men had something that others didn't. Call it a gift or call it whatever, but they were geniuses on any table with sticks and balls.

 

[enzo]

I have to say there is enough video of Earl shooting back during his prime that I would have to make him a favorite against most of them in tournament format 9-ball as well. He still won a world championship during the era of Alex, Ronnie A, Ralph, and Yang at the least off that list all shooting in what would be considered their primes.

Back when Earl was shooting his best and had a more solid mental focus and killer instinct he was flat out better then those guys at winning tournaments.

I know Chris likes to really push the gambling side of things but he put Ralph on his list which kind of brings up the point that you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

i like the earl comments, and i tend to agree on the sheer level of stricklands 9 ball game, yet i can never get over what he did against reyes in asia. he simply put himself in a place where he could not lose if he threw his stick at the ball (which is mindblowingly great), but he failed. erfren did play great at the end, but he should not havwe been afforded those opportunities,

i think there is a BIG gap in stricklands mental game. i put him a notch below all time great 9 ball players, as crazy as that sounds.... i think strickland is like a tiger woods with a poor mental game (ie he easily could have been the all time best 9 ball player, but couldnt bridge that mental gap).

 

[jay helfert]

i like the earl comments, and i tend to agree on the sheer level of stricklands 9 ball game, yet i can never get over what he did against reyes in asia. he simply put himself in a place where he could not lose if he threw his stick at the ball (which is mindblowingly great), but he failed. erfren did play great at the end, but he should not havwe been afforded those opportunities,

i think there is a BIG gap in stricklands mental game. i put him a notch below all time great 9 ball players, as crazy as that sounds.... i think strickland is like a tiger woods with a poor mental game (ie he easily could have been the all time best 9 ball player, but couldnt bridge that mental gap).

Enzo, respectfully, even with all his mental foibles, Earl was the best tournament 9-Ball player to ever live. As far as his match with Efren was concerned, that was an endurance contest and Earl just ran out of gas and also lost his focus on the final day. He lost and Efren won, it's that simple.

But if these two were to play one Race To Eleven each day in a tournament, I would have bet on Earl every time. I do know their overall record is very close, Earl did not dominate Efren. Even saying that, Earl had a higher gear and even Efren would admit that, and has.

Parica beat Earl for money too, playing Ten Ball. Same thing here though. In a tournament 9-Ball setting, Earl becomes the favorite. I'm not so sure Jose wanted to play Earl 9-Ball. Ten Ball he knew Earl wouldn't run so many racks. Pretty smart little guy. Parica was the best Ten Ball money player of them all. Only Buddy was in his league.