cmon yall its just sticks propelling balls on a table once SVB or any other good player got used to playing on the table they could compete with Osulivan,hes not a god,and neither is SVB anybody that lives to be the best at their given talent and puts in the time playing it van be good at it,if they have the mental apptitude and some athletic ability,they are not Gods peeps....SVB puts in more time into his game then 90 percent of the players out there and thats why he is winning,no different then all the greats that did the same in the past,hes just the flavor of the week,when i am in the zone i run racks too,and it doesnt matter who i am playing,you are just in the zone.
Top Level Snooker vs Pool?
- Thread starter Push&Pool
- Start date
Oh my God back again to the troll! Now i think you really have never seen a snooker table ever and just pulling our legs into this troll!! get real, please. We are not talking casual play here one that shoots couple of shots and leave the table to go to pool table; we are talking breaks of 80 or more, of which very rare from a pool player "pro"; As good as Dennis O, and as poor as he is; would't you think he would love to earn $500k or half a year; do't you think Shaw the "young" guy that fires balls on a pool tables; likes to be one of the last ones on the the earning list in Snooker; also Alex P, fact is they cannot they do not have the concentration or focus required for the game for the long hall. Bottom line, there is not much luck in snooker, it is skill 90% of the times.
Here is something to discuss i find interesting:
http://www.worldcrunch.com/dying-sp...igh-class-home-in-china/c3s4878/#.UxcRwPldVn4
Last edited:
TheThaiger
Banned
Today? SVB.
I don't think anyone is suggesting the top snooker players could beat the top pool players overnight. It'd take a year or two to adjust, without doubt. But the point is this: it takes EVERYONE years and years to become even mildly proficient at snooker. That does not apply to pool.
TheThaiger
Banned
Your premise is completely flawed. Getting to be number one in any given sport depends on how many people play it, obviously, and to suggest all sports are equally difficult to master is absurd.
It is NOT POSSIBLE to become even a good snooker player without years and years of dedicated practice from a young age, and many can fail to achieve adequacy within a lifetime, myself included.
Snooker means as much in the US as soccer and soccer means nothing to 99.999999999% of the population. True Billiards fans know who Ronnie O'Sullivan is just like we all know who Rooney and Beckham are/were, but we still couldn't care less about the sport in general. And it matters even less if people from England think snooker is harder/better than American pool.
TheThaiger
Banned
Yes it is. That's exactly what it is.
..............
Last edited:
SVB wins 8b and Ronnie O wins the snooker.
Madness.. LOL.
How hard is it to "master" the 100m sprint?
Solve that conundrum and you will have your answer
TheThaiger
Banned
Depends entirely on what your priorities are. If you're happy with being a nation of 30 million pool players, and not generating many decent players, then fine. If you think this is embarrassing, and want to do something about it, they you should listen to the rest of the world and learn from them.
And please, never get into football. That is unthinkable. If you want to talk stats, 95% of the world's population love the game.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=242685&highlight=football
Snooker coverage on Eurosport
http://tv.eurosport.co.uk/search.shtml?query=snooker
Viewing on the Web
http://www.frombar.tv/c-11.html
http://www.stopstream.tv/
http://www.hahasport.com/
http://cricfree.tv/
http://www.time4tv.com/
http://www.worldsnooker.livesport.tv/
http://tv.eurosport.co.uk/search.shtml?query=snooker
Viewing on the Web
http://www.frombar.tv/c-11.html
http://www.stopstream.tv/
http://www.hahasport.com/
http://cricfree.tv/
http://www.time4tv.com/
http://www.worldsnooker.livesport.tv/
Let's call it Street Bi-Athalon and introduce it at the next X-treme Games. It will become a medal sport in the 2024 Summer Olympics.
Freddie <~~~ read it here first
TheThaiger
Banned
Madness.. LOL.
How hard is it to "master" the 100m sprint?
Solve that conundrum and you will have your answer
I mastered the 100m sprint by 5 years old. I can still do it to this day, with only a couple of stops to catch my breath. It's easy.
But the analogy isn't a good one. It is physically impossible for Mo to beat Bolt (and vice versa), but it is not impossible for, say, an English pool player to beat an American pool player - otherwise, how do you explain the success of Darren Appleton? English 8 ball (1.75" CB) to American 9 ball (2.25" CB) within a year or two. Different game, different table, different ball size. When you can cue a ball the discipline is irrelevant. So the question is, can American pool players cue as well as snooker players?
Understand that and you will have your answer.
That 95% of the world doesn't matter to me. Seriously, I think the US should invade all other nations and take their natural resources, just like the aliens in Independence Day. Then we could get rid of soccer, snooker, and everything else that has no real relevance. At least if the entire world was the US then all of these illegals and foreignors would stop trying to come and live here, they would already be there/here!
Last edited:
Wow, you were an international sprinter with world cup winning form at 5 years of age?
Amazing..
But the analogy isn't a good one. It is physically impossible for Mo to beat Bolt (and vice versa), but it is not impossible for, say, an English pool player to beat an American pool player - otherwise, how do you explain the success of Darren Appleton? English 8 ball (1.75" CB) to American 9 ball (2.25" CB) within a year or two. Different game, different table, different ball size. When you can cue a ball the discipline is irrelevant. So the question is, can American pool players cue as well as snooker players?
Understand that and you will have your answer.
It is not a perfect analogy but a damn good one. I had to simplify it because you were having trouble understanding.
That appears to remain the case.
There are many different skills that are required to play any cue discipline.
There's banking balls, playing safe, shooting caroms, kicking, breaking, shooting combinations, and on and on it goes.
There is one skill that is supreme and that is straight cueing. This skill and only this skill, directly translates to any game that is played with a cue.
So ultimately, the player that cues the straightest will have the easiest time transitioning to a different discipline.
We all know which players cue the straightest. To think, that someone that has focused their entire life on straight cueing could ever be out cued by someone that hasn't is ridiculous.
Carry on
There's banking balls, playing safe, shooting caroms, kicking, breaking, shooting combinations, and on and on it goes.
There is one skill that is supreme and that is straight cueing. This skill and only this skill, directly translates to any game that is played with a cue.
So ultimately, the player that cues the straightest will have the easiest time transitioning to a different discipline.
We all know which players cue the straightest. To think, that someone that has focused their entire life on straight cueing could ever be out cued by someone that hasn't is ridiculous.
Carry on
Trying to make a point using logic and rationality? Maybe even common sense? What's going on here?
TheThaiger
Banned
what about...
Suppose you took the top 10 snooker players in the world -who had no significant prior experience at pool- and let them focus and work on pool games for 2 years (8b, 9b, 10b, 1p, etc...). Similarly, let's suppose you took the top 10 pool players in the world (again having no significant snooker backgrounds) and let them study/practice snooker for 2 years.
At the end of the two years, how do you think each group would perform in their newly chosen disciplines?
If you think one group would fare much better than the other? why? which skillsets could or could not be learned by which group? and why or why not?
Several times "cueing" has been mentioned as the all important skill that cannot be learned/improved after a certain age....why not?
(I'm specifically choosing 10 players to shift this from a discussion around Ronnie vs Shane into one around snooker vs. pool player.)
Suppose you took the top 10 snooker players in the world -who had no significant prior experience at pool- and let them focus and work on pool games for 2 years (8b, 9b, 10b, 1p, etc...). Similarly, let's suppose you took the top 10 pool players in the world (again having no significant snooker backgrounds) and let them study/practice snooker for 2 years.
At the end of the two years, how do you think each group would perform in their newly chosen disciplines?
If you think one group would fare much better than the other? why? which skillsets could or could not be learned by which group? and why or why not?
Several times "cueing" has been mentioned as the all important skill that cannot be learned/improved after a certain age....why not?
(I'm specifically choosing 10 players to shift this from a discussion around Ronnie vs Shane into one around snooker vs. pool player.)
Last edited:
If snooker had the same arrangement and popularity in the US as it does in the UK, you would see one helluva lot of world class US snooker players. Since it does not even approach a sniff of that on either score, you will probably never see a world class US snooker player.
And that's a pity. The rest of the discussion here is pretty much wishful thinking, IMO.
And that's a pity. The rest of the discussion here is pretty much wishful thinking, IMO.