Matthew Sherman, About.com Guide
Definition: Bangers is one of a number of derogatory terms better pool players use to remark on their neophyte colleagues. A new player can only "bang the balls around" rather than find the pocket consistently.
Ok, I rarely start new threads myself; rather, I prefer to make my little sometimes (what I hope will be considered) witty commentary on threads already started and developed by others. However, every now and then I get intrigued by something that I can’t really find out about by using the search function on AZB or by Googling it.
Such is the case with this one.
Because the word “banger” is used so regularly within AZ threads, trying to search out a thread defining the word “banger” could easily be 34 pages down the list. But during my last 3 years of reading AZ Forums, I can’t recall a thread dealing directly with this topic. One thread in the recent past was zapped by the Mods about “bangers” but I couldn’t tell what that thread was really about, since posters only referred to it as a thread that was zapped by the Mods for one reason or another.
Over the last 3 years or so, I have read the word “banger” used in ways that imply the word has many different definitions to many different people. As a result of starting playing pool in middle age for the first time, while I doubt if many would consider me a “banger” anymore, I’m not that distant timewise from being looked on as a “banger”.
There seems to be two different schools here in terms of defining a “banger” on AZ. One is that some use the word to classify a players technical ability to pocket balls as Matthew Sherman’s definition refers to and the other seems to be those who imply a “banger” might be someone who lacks the attitude, perspective, or respect of the game that they would prefer those “bangers” to have or acquire.
If it’s based on the ability to pocket balls, does that mean the player with permanent physical disabilities or diminished skills due to age is also a banger?
What about the player who has been away from the game for 30 years and returns to occasional past-time play? Is he or she a “banger” until they improve enough or somehow show enough of a serious renewed commitment to the game to again separate themselves for the “banger” category?
Can a good player with a lot of natural talent (stroke and mechanics) who never practices or even really cares about the game but can still get a good run going occasionally still be labeled a “banger”?
Or, as it appears to me to be with some AZ’ers, is someone a “banger” because that type of person just plain doesn’t perceive and play the game the way you prefer it to be perceived and played? They don’t practice with purpose, they don’t have the proper competitive drive or pool doesn’t have the proper elevated importance in their lives that it should have.
Is someone who loves the game, respects its tradition, plays with sportsmanship and integrity, puts in the table time, does all the right things to improve their game, but still plays at a very mediocre level rarely stringing more that 3 balls or so on a nine-footer because of poor stroke, mechanics, or aim still be considered a banger?
So if you believe that someone can be classified as a “banger” for whatever reason, then what does it take for someone to be classified as a “real” pool player and what in fact distinguishes the one from the other?
:tongue:
