Las Vegas Open 10-ball

I've talked to quite a few pros this week (SVB, Mika, Fedor) and haven't found one who is a fan of the shootout. The races are so short and a spot shot is just not the same as playing a race.

At least the pros are being taken care of if they do well but I don't think this format is the answer. Just play best 2 of 3 sets.
 
Dead Money said:
Yes- The ones on Youtube get a bunch of folks that have played pool once and "know it all" which makes it worse. Then you have Mr. shot Predictor guy or girl who is always wrong. Probably the worst are the ones that know a lot about the game that argue with each other and try to correct the others from the first two groups. I always hide it now no matter what it takes to do it.
Click to expand...
My favorite are the "this is an amateur table?" or "this is amateur tournament right?" guys when someone misses a shot. Then someone else will say no, it's a professional tournament, which inevitably turns into a snooker vs pool debate. And also inevitably, someone will claim that it's impossible to miss shots on a pool table because the pockets are so big!
 
Yes I get tired of the snooker snobs. Pool and snooker are two different games. I don't understand why they are watching pool if they think so little of it. Why aren't they watching snooker. Maybe start a troll coalition and get in the comments section of every snooker match and talk about how snooker is a joke and pool is better.
 
FunChamp said:
Yes I get tired of the snooker snobs. Pool and snooker are two different games. I don't understand why they are watching pool if they think so little of it. Why aren't they watching snooker. Maybe start a troll coalition and get in the comments section of every snooker match and talk about how snooker is a joke and pool is better.
Click to expand...
If they were right, then Judd would've dominated when he played in the pool tournament he played in.

Jaden
 
Jaden said:
If they were right, then Judd would've dominated when he played in the pool tournament he played in.

Jaden
Click to expand...
Exactly. You didn't hear much from the snooker-snobs after that. Its a different game. Quit trying to compare it.
 
iusedtoberich said:
It’s probably not even the good snooker players, but rather snooker “bangers”, or whatever the equivalent term is. Just like good pool players know how hard snooker is, I’d bet it’s the same in the opposite direction.
Click to expand...
I grew up playing snooker and wasn't too bad at it and have a big respect for good pool players. In snooker you can play safety after safety and wait for a shot or step out and hope you can pot it. In pool the safeties are tougher and with the chance of giving up ball in hand and losing the game is greater.
 
Jaden said:
If they were right, then Judd would've dominated when he played in the pool tournament he played in.

Jaden
Click to expand...
I honestly thought Judd was going to be a potting machine in that U.S. Open, but he had several bad misses.

Not saying I thought he would go particularly deep or anything, but I didn't think shotmaking would trouble him much. But he looked like a mid-600s Fargo in his accuracy.

I would imagine that the difference in pool table height, ball size, pocket facing/cut, table size, cloth speed, etc., all combine to make things seem very weird when you don't have much experience with them. He also may have simply not given the shots the same amount of focus he does in snooker because to him, everything looked easy in comparison.
 
BlueRaider said:
I honestly thought Judd was going to be a potting machine in that U.S. Open, but he had several bad misses.

Not saying I thought he would go particularly deep or anything, but I didn't think shotmaking would trouble him much. But he looked like a mid-600s Fargo in his accuracy.

I would imagine that the difference in pool table height, ball size, pocket facing/cut, table size, cloth speed, etc., all combine to make things seem very weird when you don't have much experience with them. He also may have simply not given the shots the same amount of focus he does in snooker because to him, everything looked easy in comparison.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with you. I didn’t expect Trump to play flawless patterns but I did expect him to pot everything and he simply didn’t.
 
Snooker is harder than pool. No top pro pool player has ever been able to switch to pro snooker and compete successfully with the best snooker players. No, not even Rempe.

On the other hand, on the women's side, snooker converts (Allison Fisher, Kelly Fisher, Karen Corr) now own three BCA Hall of Fame spots. At the 1995 Mosconi, Europe, featuring a team that included snooker pros Alex Higgins, Jimmy White, and Steve Davis, beat Team USA. Several years later, snooker pro Mark Gray played on Team Europe at the Mosconi. Similarly, snooker pro Marlon Manalo came within a rack of winning the IPT 2006 Las Vegas Open that carried a $350,000 first prize. Mark Selby has a world championship in both snooker and pool (Chinese 8-ball).

The snooker guys have had more than their share of success at pool and, in many cases, haven't had a very hard time transitioning. Not true for the pool guys who've tried snooker.

Yes, they are two different games and both the snooker guys and the pool guys both deserve maximum respect, but the top snooker pros have better cueing skills than the top pool pros and there's no getting away from it.

I'd agree 100% with those who say that the chatroom "snooker snobbery" described in this thread is uncalled for.
 
Last edited:
BlueRaider said:
I honestly thought Judd was going to be a potting machine in that U.S. Open, but he had several bad misses.

Not saying I thought he would go particularly deep or anything, but I didn't think shotmaking would trouble him much. But he looked like a mid-600s Fargo in his accuracy.

I would imagine that the difference in pool table height, ball size, pocket facing/cut, table size, cloth speed, etc., all combine to make things seem very weird when you don't have much experience with them. He also may have simply not given the shots the same amount of focus he does in snooker because to him, everything looked easy in comparison.
Click to expand...
I think one thing that people tend to forget is how much larger and heavier pool balls are in comparison to snooker balls. The playing surface may be smaller and the pockets larger, but the balls require you to generate much more force to get them to move.

I can play fairly decent snooker with my pool cue(11.2mm shaft), but an ash snooker cue with a brass ferule isn't going to move pool balls around all that easily and adjusting to the additional force required isn't as simple as just stroking regularly (for a snooker player).

They're just different games requiring different skills, not better or worse, just different.

Jaden
 
Last edited:
sjm said:
Snooker is harder than pool. No top pro pool player has ever been able to switch to pro snooker and compete successfully with the best snooker players. No, not even Rempe.

On the other hand, on the women's side, snooker converts (Allison Fisher, Kelly Fisher, Karen Corr) now own three BCA Hall of Fame spots. At the 1995 Mosconi, Europe, featuring a team that included snooker pros Alex Higgins, Jimmy White, and Steve Davis, beat Team USA. Several years later, snooker pro Mark Gray played on Team Europe at the Mosconi. Similarly, snooker pro Marlon Manalo came within a rack of winning the IPT 2006 Las Vegas Open that carried a $350,000 first prize. Mark Selby has a world championship in both snooker and pool (Chinese 8-ball).

The snooker guys have had more than their share of success at pool and, in many cases, haven't had a very hard time transitioning. Not true for the pool guys who've tried snooker.

Yes, they are two different games and both the snooker guys and the pool guys both deserve maximum respect, but the top snooker pros have better cueing skills than the top pool pros and there's no getting away from it.

I'd agree 100% with those who say that the chatroom "snooker snobbery" described in this post is uncalled for.
Click to expand...
Give me a frickin' break. You can have a 605 fargo and be in the top 100 women pool players in the world. It's not a valid comparison.

Snooker is not HARDER than pool. The skillset required to play at the top level in snooker requires more precision and therefore more dedication to fundamentals that is unlikely to be achieved after a lifetime of playing pool. Where as the skillset developed to play top level snooker can translate better to pool and makes transitioning to pool from top level snooker more readily achievable. That's all.

Again, they're just different animals. Not harder, not easier, not better, not worse, just different.

Jaden
 
Jaden said:
Snooker is not HARDER than pool. The skillset required to play at the top level in snooker requires more precision and therefore more dedication to fundamentals that is unlikely to be achieved after a lifetime of playing pool. Where as the skillset developed to play top level snooker can translate better to pool and makes transitioning to pool from top level snooker more readily achievable. That's all.
Click to expand...
Well said, sir.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top