Would players of today wipe the floor against past players....
- Thread starter dom_poppa
- Start date
They are great players. The record for high run in the finals of the world championship is Irving Crane @ 150 in 1966. Crane was over 60 years of age and well past his prime when he won a major tournament with all the young "modern" guys in it, I believe it was 14.1 and 9 ball. Ask Mike Sigel if Irving Crane and guys of that era could play. Lou Butera ran 150 in a tournament is something like 17 minutes. Find somebody who can do that today. Mosconi lived until 1993, he saw the "modern players". He said the generation prior to him, Greenleaf and Ponzi were the best.
This reminds me of the people who claimed Babe Ruth couldn't play today. A week before he retired in his only visit to Forbes Field in Pittsburgh he hit a home run over the roof, one of only a few players in history to do that.
Crane and Mosconi didn't gamble but Lassiter would have gladly relieved you of your cash in 9 ball or 14.1 if you didn't think he could play.
Players better today?
Lets see:
Limited deflection shafts
Quick draw cue balls,
Fast felt
One foul ball in hand rules.
You don't need a stroke and you don't have to hit the cue ball as hard to get around the table. Of course there are better players today - the game is much easier.
But wait! Didn't a pro who's better days behind him play a current day pro on a 5 x 10 table and beat him handily to 100? Oh I forgot it was a on gaff table.
The conditions today are much easier and you simply can't compare the different generations because of this.
Lets see:
Limited deflection shafts
Quick draw cue balls,
Fast felt
One foul ball in hand rules.
You don't need a stroke and you don't have to hit the cue ball as hard to get around the table. Of course there are better players today - the game is much easier.
But wait! Didn't a pro who's better days behind him play a current day pro on a 5 x 10 table and beat him handily to 100? Oh I forgot it was a on gaff table.
The conditions today are much easier and you simply can't compare the different generations because of this.
Well said, common sense man. Only a moron would argue with this line of reasoning. John B.
what era
Think anyone today could win 3 cushion billiards ,world snooker tourn., all around pool tourn. 9-ball ,staight pool, one pocket. Not even Efron . Harold WORST .Its a shame he passed so young. PS in his prime Ronnie Allen ran more 8 9 and 10 n outs than anyone including Efron. just sayn.
Think anyone today could win 3 cushion billiards ,world snooker tourn., all around pool tourn. 9-ball ,staight pool, one pocket. Not even Efron . Harold WORST .Its a shame he passed so young. PS in his prime Ronnie Allen ran more 8 9 and 10 n outs than anyone including Efron. just sayn.
Pockets were huge back then. Nowadays its on tight pockets. John B.
So what? The players of yesteryear would still play great on the equipment of today.
yeah, i think the previous generations could definitely compete.
i was under the impression that willie hoppe, is possibly the greatest 3 cushion player to have ever played.
although, i think that the average player today is better than the average player at that time because of the information available today.
but i think a biggest difference is the style of play between generations. pool in general i think went from being more offensive to becoming more defensive.
i was under the impression that willie hoppe, is possibly the greatest 3 cushion player to have ever played.
although, i think that the average player today is better than the average player at that time because of the information available today.
but i think a biggest difference is the style of play between generations. pool in general i think went from being more offensive to becoming more defensive.
Past vs. Present
Just let it go and focus on what we have now.
It is evolution... plain and simple.
You will figure out in the next couple of decades or more, pool will become similar to snooker in the sense of equipment.
Hell, we might even see the day when pool will be obsolete
. **not really, pocket billiards is our form of entertainment when technology will black out**
But on a serious note, one person mentioned about Walter Lindrum. I am going to drop the gauntlet and let you all know that Walter Lindrum is the best cueist to ever set foot on the face of the earth.
Why, you say?
Because he perfected a form of billiards that consist the precision touch of Carom's Freegame billiards + potting from snooker (which, mind you, makes our pool look like buckets making those shots, no matter if the damn pool's pockets were 4.18") + the mental knowledge where those balls were going (regardless if it was going 3 cushions or wherever). He was doing this on a 6' x 12' English Billiard table, breaking tons of records.
Now if Wally Lindrum (at his prime) were to come from the past into what is going on now, I am very sure he will be intrigued by the condition changes and laugh at us.
Just let it go and focus on what we have now.
It is evolution... plain and simple.
You will figure out in the next couple of decades or more, pool will become similar to snooker in the sense of equipment.
Hell, we might even see the day when pool will be obsolete
. **not really, pocket billiards is our form of entertainment when technology will black out**But on a serious note, one person mentioned about Walter Lindrum. I am going to drop the gauntlet and let you all know that Walter Lindrum is the best cueist to ever set foot on the face of the earth.
Why, you say?
Because he perfected a form of billiards that consist the precision touch of Carom's Freegame billiards + potting from snooker (which, mind you, makes our pool look like buckets making those shots, no matter if the damn pool's pockets were 4.18") + the mental knowledge where those balls were going (regardless if it was going 3 cushions or wherever). He was doing this on a 6' x 12' English Billiard table, breaking tons of records.
Now if Wally Lindrum (at his prime) were to come from the past into what is going on now, I am very sure he will be intrigued by the condition changes and laugh at us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kt6rRNANSgI
BTW, Willie was 67 in that video. Efren is 60 atm and we can all see how much his game has suffered as he has aged. Earl is in his 50's and he is a shadow of his former dominant self.
Willie at 67 is actually scary good in that video. Willie in his actual prime was a absolute beast and if anything that video of him being so steady and accurate at such an age WAY past his competitive days makes me even more certain of how dominant he must have been back in the day.
I cannot think of a single player from ANY era who was showing that much speed in their late 60's, especially a player who had not played competitive pool in decades...
BTW, Willie was 67 in that video. Efren is 60 atm and we can all see how much his game has suffered as he has aged. Earl is in his 50's and he is a shadow of his former dominant self.
Willie at 67 is actually scary good in that video. Willie in his actual prime was a absolute beast and if anything that video of him being so steady and accurate at such an age WAY past his competitive days makes me even more certain of how dominant he must have been back in the day.
I cannot think of a single player from ANY era who was showing that much speed in their late 60's, especially a player who had not played competitive pool in decades...
Last edited:
Maybe...
Ok, lets say they were from the same era and had access to the same equipment and they were playing with their own money. I mean lets make it as real as can be. I would go with Efrin. At his age and where he came from he did not start out with good equipment. At one time he could play, 8 or 9 ball, one pocket and rotation with any one on earth. When Earl was in his prime would you really bet against him in a 9 ball game, not me. This SVB guy has not peaked out yet, I know it is hard to believe he will shoot better and get smarter, but he will. Did Mosconi master the game of 14.1, heck ya! With todays small pocket Diamond tables would he run over 500 balls? We will never know. So back to the same equipment and playing with their own money in all the games I listed who would you bet on. A younger Efrin for me as an all around winner.
Ok, lets say they were from the same era and had access to the same equipment and they were playing with their own money. I mean lets make it as real as can be. I would go with Efrin. At his age and where he came from he did not start out with good equipment. At one time he could play, 8 or 9 ball, one pocket and rotation with any one on earth. When Earl was in his prime would you really bet against him in a 9 ball game, not me. This SVB guy has not peaked out yet, I know it is hard to believe he will shoot better and get smarter, but he will. Did Mosconi master the game of 14.1, heck ya! With todays small pocket Diamond tables would he run over 500 balls? We will never know. So back to the same equipment and playing with their own money in all the games I listed who would you bet on. A younger Efrin for me as an all around winner.
Without a Doubt!
If you were to bring the past players via time machine to today they would lose! If you were to time warp today's top to the past they would as you said "Clean their clocks!"
did u notice he is 30-40 years past his prime?
It sounds like we are moving into urban legend territory with this one. Minnesota Fats may not have been a truly world class player but he was a player. Jackie Gleason was an actor and certainly not a "world ranked straight pool player."
I would love to be wrong about this but I don't think I am.
Willie, and guys from his era, ate, drank, slept, and lived nothing but 14.1. They knew more about patterns, small CB movements, bumping balls, combos in the rack, and how to go into the stack and be guaranteed another shot. Those guys were like 11th dan masters. So in 14.1, and probably 8ball, its 1st cousin, Willie wins going away against today's players who do not specialize in 14.1. And no it doesn't matter what the equipment is -- Willie spent years on the road playing in a different room every night and almost always ran 100 in one or two attempts.
As to the rotation games, Wimpy is oft quoted as saying, "I watch a man shoot pool for an hour. If he misses more than one shot I know I can beat him." I'm not aware of any modern era player daring to make the same claim.
In 1pocket, without a doubt, it would have to be Efren.
Lou Figueroa
Old Nine Baller
Banned
Absolutely right. If the players of today had to play on the equipment from the 50's & 60's they would need to hit the balls much harder to move them around the table. The harder you hit a ball the less accuracy you have, generally speaking.
The larger 5 x 10's with slow cloth and clay balls would make modern players crazy until they adjusted to them, which they would. The ability to play great position on a 5 x 10 would kill the modern players, for a while at least.
If you brought players from the past into the present and onto modern tables they would also adjust to them. There's a reason that great players are/were great players; They master any tables and equipment they play on.
The past players who learned on slow tables ,without lively rails, learned how to "force" the cueball to a spot whereas the players of today mostly "roll" the cueball to a spot (comparatively speaking). Either group of players would soon become proficient though, no matter the tables, balls or cloth.
I could be wrong but I believe it's harder for a talented modern player to add speed on every shot than it would be for a talented player from the past to remove speed (on todays equipment). Adding speed hurts accuracy but they would adjust to it.
Guys like Harold Worst and Cornbread Red were known for having powerful strokes that intimidated players in their own eras, could you imagine a player like Shane trying to hit balls hard to move them around on a 5 x 10 with slow cloth & rails? He would adjust though, in time.
The same applies to 4 1/2 x 9's with slow cloth, rails and the old balls. Even newer balls don't move well on a slow table
P.S. There's nothing wrong with this thread's existence.
ONB
I think what the message is that ---
Willie breaks pockets a ball and you have no chance At all.
When you have to win to eat it puts a whole new dimension on the game.
MCP.