Buddy on how he'd stack up with todays players. :-)

sjm said:
Agreed. The comparison is impossible. Asking the question "could Buddy, playing as he did have beaten Filler or Gorst, as they play now?" is totally unfair. I personally think that Fedor and Josh would have demolished him, but so what?

A champion is a champion and one must presume that the greatest champions of the past, if they a) had access to all the learning and instructional resources available today, b) played on/with the equipment in use today, and c) had as many top level events in which to continually hone their skills as today's pros, could have adapted to the playing conditions of this era.

The top-flight BCA Hall of Famers, and Buddy is one of them, would have been among the biggest stars in any era, but as you properly note, even though we have fun with it on the forum, comparison across generations is ultimately impossible.
Click to expand...

sjm said:
Agreed. The comparison is impossible. Asking the question "could Buddy, playing as he did have beaten Filler or Gorst, as they play now?" is totally unfair. I personally think that Fedor and Josh would have demolished him, but so what?

A champion is a champion and one must presume that the greatest champions of the past, if they a) had access to all the learning and instructional resources available today, b) played on/with the equipment in use today, and c) had as many top level events in which to continually hone their skills as today's pros, could have adapted to the playing conditions of this era.

The top-flight BCA Hall of Famers, and Buddy is one of them, would have been among the biggest stars in any era, but as you properly note, even though we have fun with it on the forum, comparison across generations is ultimately impossible.
Click to expand...
I know it’s a small sample size, but look what Francisco Bustamante did in beating Fedor in the Philippines open., even at his age and past his prime. My point being,I think A prime Buddy could absolutely hang with Fedor or Josh! Not saying he’d win, but he’d make it competitive IMO.
 
Discussing AI in a different thread...Let AI settle the argument. AI videos are everywhere. Why not create AI video of Buddy v Filler...
'73 Dolphins v '07 Pats...Jordan v LeBron...match ups would be endless.
 
I dont know so much about pool but the racers of today would smoke the racers of yesterday. 40 years ago racers didnt usually get to the big show until they were mid to late 20's because they didnt start racing until they were of driving age or close to it. Todays racers start when they are 5 years old and face strong competition before they are in their teens are they are the show by the time they are late teens and early 20's. Jeff Gordon first drove a sprint car when he was 13, there are many dudes who race that wouldn't dare even get in one. I think todays racers are far better but I also think if you prepared yesterdays wheelmen like kids today are prepared they would be just as good. So its not the athlete who has improved they just have better preparation.
 
It's not something that can be answered because it's obviously hypothetical with a lot of variables.

Imagine a world where we could see any combination of these matchups in their primes? Sign me up!

Buddy, Sigel, Earl, Parica, Varner, Lassiter
vs.
Shane, Filler, Fedor, Biado, Yapp, Shaw
 
FordSVTCobra said:
It's not something that can be answered because it's obviously hypothetical with a lot of variables.

Imagine a world where we could see any combination of these matchups in their primes? Sign me up!

Buddy, Sigel, Earl, Parica, Varner, Lassiter
vs.
Shane, Filler, Fedor, Biado, Yapp, Shaw
Click to expand...
Comparing eras/generations is fun(for a while) but in the end its a waste of time because it can't be done.
 
fastone371 said:
I dont know so much about pool but the racers of today would smoke the racers of yesterday. 40 years ago racers didnt usually get to the big show until they were mid to late 20's because they didnt start racing until they were of driving age or close to it. Todays racers start when they are 5 years old and face strong competition before they are in their teens are they are the show by the time they are late teens and early 20's. Jeff Gordon first drove a sprint car when he was 13, there are many dudes who race that wouldn't dare even get in one. I think todays racers are far better but I also think if you prepared yesterdays wheelmen like kids today are prepared they would be just as good. So its not the athlete who has improved they just have better preparation.
Click to expand...

I was considering whether to race cars or motorcycles back around 1970 or so. I was at the dirt track when a van pulls up. Out steps a kid five years old, Scooter Stafford, national champion. I realized I was ten or twelve years too late to start racing motorcycles and went with cars, the way I was leaning anyway. They were starting in go carts fairly young even then but motorcycles were ridiculous. You had a longer career in cars too. Partially an older driver and a lot of people marrying pretty young but I raced against a driver and his great grandson!

Hu
 
8intheside said:
I know it’s a small sample size, but look what Francisco Bustamante did in beating Fedor in the Philippines open., even at his age and past his prime. My point being,I think A prime Buddy could absolutely hang with Fedor or Josh! Not saying he’d win, but he’d make it competitive IMO.
Click to expand...
He'd win some, lose some but to say the would be dominated is horse sheeet...
 
8intheside said:
I know it’s a small sample size, but look what Francisco Bustamante did in beating Fedor in the Philippines open., even at his age and past his prime. My point being,I think A prime Buddy could absolutely hang with Fedor or Josh! Not saying he’d win, but he’d make it competitive IMO.
Click to expand...
But, holy cow, did they miss a lot in that match...might be the most misses I've seen among top players...
 
middleofnowhere said:
The first question would be, what can players today do that the players of yesterday couldn't? The actual answer would be nothing, but they just do it better. So now the question becomes, why?
My first answer to that would be their total dedication to the game.
Click to expand...
That's a great question. We always lean towards how would the past stack up against today. One could also ask how today would stack up against the past? Different equipment. Slower cloth. No carbon fiber. Different balls. Certainly less than ideal playing conditions at times. Now days, most everything is absolutely perfect in big tournaments. AND, as you said, total dedication. Not just playing the game, but off the table. Diet. Exercise. Avoiding vices. Proper sleep.

At times today, minimal effort is needed to control the cue ball. Way back when, a great stroke was needed to move the cue ball. Would that increase in effort cause more stroke flaws to be exposed or add pressure to certain shots knowing that max stroke is now needed? I have no idea.

I know we are running on a hamster wheel with this discussion but I still find it interesting.

Personally, I think that both generations could adjust accordingly and top players would be top players. But I also feel like journeyman players like Vickery or someone in that caliber would be dead money more often than not in today's tournaments. The sample size of top players is much larger today. If you were assigning Fargo ratings to players from the past and to the present day players, the gap between number 1 and number 100 today is a much smaller number than if you assigned 1 to 100 in the mid 80's. That's my opinion solely based on perception. We obviously know the number between number 1 and 100 now days. We can only speculate on the past.

I have been watching alot of Accustats videos on Youtube. One thing that jumps out is the low outside english shot to go two rails out of the corner was used way more back then. They would blast it with low outside and get perfect time after time. Now, that shot has to be hit with finesse because it will get away from you. And to me, it seems to be avoided at times because it can get away from you.

From a bar table standpoint, it was a valuable tool on a Valley. Do it on a Diamond and your cue ball gets away from you. Going forward or one rail is used much more on todays equipment.
 
CocoboloCowboy said:
Buddy if he was young guy in and live life style he did in his prime, would second tear player today.
Click to expand...
Screenshot_20250819-152529.jpg
 
billb said:
That's a great...
.. the low outside english shot to go two rails out of the corner was used way more back then. They would blast it with low outside and get perfect time after time. Now, that shot has to be hit with finesse because it will get away from you. And to me, it seems to be avoided at times because it can get away from you.

From a bar table standpoint, it was a valuable tool on a Valley. Do it on a Diamond and your cue ball gets away from you. Going forward or one rail is used much more on todays equipment.
Click to expand...
That is one of my major annoyances with diamond tables...the cb coming out of the corner will hit side pocket.

Not on a gold crown, it won't!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top