Who You Got? Mike Sigel or Nick Varner

Who You Got? Mike Sigel vs Nick Varner

  • Mike Sigel

    Votes: 26 38.2%
  • Nick Varner

    Votes: 42 61.8%

  • Total voters
    68
I was not aware of that. My only exposure to Efren was in Reno starting in 85 and once a year for a while. Never saw anyone even come close. Well Ed did get to 7 going to 9....once. 🤷‍♂️ Efren absolutely changed the way the game of 9 ball was played. His billiards skills were so ...uh well nobody realized how important they could be until Efren showed them how to put the handcuffs on. The one finals playing Earl he broke and ran 4 then after the break over cut the 1 ball to leave it in the middle of the footrail. Whitey glided around the table and found the back of the ball sitting closest to the headrail and got married. Ball in hand allowed Efren to run 4 more and then do it again. Middle of the footrail and married to the back of the ball closest to the headrail. Earl's reaction was Priceless. The gallery coaxed him with, "break it! Break your cue!".
In tournament play, Efren wasn’t even in the conversation. I’m Filipino, and I followed his game . He wasn't in the conversation.
 
Nick is pulling ahead.

60 - 40

Better call all Mike's fans and get them to vote.

There's a lot riding on this. I haven't shared all the behind the scenes goings-on but I've heard all those who cast a vote will be placed in a raffle, with the winner getting 50 percent off a AZ Billiards Silver Membership!

You heard it here first folks. Get your vote in.
These two are two of the players that I point to as to why I even play this game. Nick was my favorite player growing. So when he his astonishing year in 1989, I was stoked!

Who would I pick? The records speak for themselves. Nick was not in the conversation from 1981-1987 or so. Yes, he won tournaments, but wasnt one of the top winners until ‘88. Nick had a lot of 2nd places to Sigel, including probably the most important Last Call for 9-ball, the tournament that was for all intents and purposes, the “interview” that got Sigel the Color of Money gig.

In my opinion, it’s not close between these two close friends and former business partners. Sigel.
 
Just my opinion based on watching them both play A LOT. It took Efren a while to get comfortable in the U.S. tourney environment. He seemed to thrive AFTER his original opponents retired or faded. As it's just my intuitive sense, I could be wrong.
The facts and timelimes say you are correct. Even Nick thrived after Sigel retired or was on the retirement slide. Efren says in his Panozzo interview on youtube - Earl became the best, but because there was no more Sigel.
 
Yup, you are certainly entitled to feel that way, but why should a pro spend much time on straight pool when there are just a couple of important straight pool events a year. Same thing with 8ball. Unless you are American, same thing with banks and one pocket.

I think I'm probably influenced by both the billiards media and the BCA Hall of Fame.

The billiards media stresses accomplishments in the discipline of the day which, up to about 1983 was straight pool and has been 9ball ever since.

The BCA Hall of Fame, similarly, focuses hall of fame blurbs on the dominant discipline of the days in which the inductees participated.

As one who attends most BCA Hall of Fame dinners, I assure you that little is ever said about the fringe games when the players are introduced or when they address the gathering. Should I care a lot about a player's 8ball speed when there is one 8ball major each year and about 25 9ball majors.

Another problem is that some of the fringe games are played in very few places. Bank pool is very rarely played outside of Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio and a couple of other states. In New York City, it is virtually never played. In Europe and Asia, few people even know that the game exists. It is only in America that all-around competitions exist. Johnston City and the Derby City Classic are the two prime examples.

Thanks for sharing your view here. There is certainly room for debate on this point.
Our sport is called pool, not 9 ball for a reason 🤯🙃. Seriously though it's the suite of games that make pool great imo, not just 9 ball. 9 ball is fine and all, but onepocket has me rewinding the tape to rewatch shots more often than 9 ball ever could.

But please note that I respect your opinion.
 
Our sport is called pool, not 9 ball for a reason 🤯🙃. Seriously though it's the suite of games that make pool great imo, not just 9 ball. 9 ball is fine and all, but onepocket has me rewinding the tape to rewatch shots more often than 9 ball ever could.

But please note that I respect your opinion.
One pocket is my favorite event at Derby City, the one time each year that I get to see it played. The Derby is just four weeks away!
 
One pocket is my favorite event at Derby City, the one time each year that I get to see it played. The Derby is just four weeks away!
I think I'll be at the Derby next month, at least for a day. If I make it, mind if I said hello?
 
Found this list:

Billiards Digest Players of the Year
MEN

1980 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1981 Mike Sigel (Towson, Md.)
1982 Buddy Hall (Paducah, Ky.)
1983 Steve Mizerak (Spring Hill, N.J.)
1984 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1985 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1986 Mike Sigel (Towson, Md.)
1987 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1988 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1989 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1990 Kim Davenport (Modesto, Calif.)
1991 Buddy Hall (Metropolis, Ill.)
1992 Johnny Archer (Twin Cities, Ga.)
1993 Johnny Archer (Raleigh, N.C.)
1994 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1995 Efren Reyes (Manila, Philippines)
1996 Johnny Archer (Raleigh, N.C.)
1997 Jose Parica (La Puente, Calif.)
1998 Francisco Bustamante (Kiel, Germany)
1999 Johnny Archer (Marietta, Ga.)
2000 Earl Strickland (Greensboro, N.C.)

Is it possible that neither Sigel nor Varner were as dominant during their careers as we recall?
 
Sigel, by a long shot. Straight pool championships in what, 1980, 1989, 1992, and maybe another year? Something like over 100 tournament wins. Varner, great player, but I'm not aware that his record was anywhere near Sigel's.
 
Once again I agree with your assessment on these players particularly with regard to Buddy and Rempe. On Rempe, I've always loved his game the essence of elegance. I remember reading some of the top players who were asked about Rempe's game saying that Jimmy always chose the correct shot in a particular situation. He also the was the one who crossed the pond to play in British snooker tournaments from time to time.

All great players and I can consider myself fortunate to have seen these guys multiple times during the past!
Jimmy said something once that I never forgot. He said, "It's not the choice of shot that's most important. It's the execution of the shot you choose."
 
Found this list:

Billiards Digest Players of the Year
MEN

1980 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1981 Mike Sigel (Towson, Md.)
1982 Buddy Hall (Paducah, Ky.)
1983 Steve Mizerak (Spring Hill, N.J.)
1984 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1985 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1986 Mike Sigel (Towson, Md.)
1987 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1988 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1989 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1990 Kim Davenport (Modesto, Calif.)
1991 Buddy Hall (Metropolis, Ill.)
1992 Johnny Archer (Twin Cities, Ga.)
1993 Johnny Archer (Raleigh, N.C.)
1994 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1995 Efren Reyes (Manila, Philippines)
1996 Johnny Archer (Raleigh, N.C.)
1997 Jose Parica (La Puente, Calif.)
1998 Francisco Bustamante (Kiel, Germany)
1999 Johnny Archer (Marietta, Ga.)
2000 Earl Strickland (Greensboro, N.C.)

Is it possible that neither Sigel nor Varner were as dominant during their careers as we recall?
FYI, by 1980, Sigel already had a World 14.1 championship and 2 US Open 9ball titles. You've missed some of his prime in your post. Similarly, Sigel's participation was declining by 1990. Your list shows what most of us have opined, and that is that Nick never mass-produced major titles at the rate of Sigel, Earl or Archer.

At least speaking for myself, I haven't forgotten what I saw up close from Sigel in 1976-1990.
 
Last edited:
FYI, by 1980, Sigel already had a World 14.1 championship and 2 US Open titles. You've missed some of his prime in your post. Similarly, Sigel's participation was declining by 1990. Your list shows what most of us have opined, and that is that Nick never mass-produced major titles at the rate of Sigel, Earl or Archer.

At least speaking for myself, I haven't forgotten what I saw up close from Sigel in 1976-1990.
Looks like 1980 is the first year for their Player of the Year Award. I just posted it for the record.

I looked up the World 14.1 Championship and this what I found:


Sigel won:
1979
1981
1988
2nd Place:
1980

Varner won:
1980
1986
2nd Place: 1981

The US Open 14.1 results in Wikipedia look suspect. They only list Sigel winning in 1992.


I'm really not discounting your personal experience. I'm just looking around to see what other data is out there.

Wonder if anyone has a proper list of U.S. Open 14.1 winners.
 
I once asked Pat Fleming who he thought the better all-around player was, Mike Sigel or Nick Varner, and without hesitation he said Nick Varner.
I'm not one to argue with my friend Pat Fleming, but.....Mike was the better player at grinding through tournaments and finishing on top. Someone on here said earlier that Mike could come with the big shot when everything was on the line (after all the moaning, head shaking, etc.), whereas Nick might duck and play the percentages. I won't fault either one here, but suffice to say they had two different attitudes and styles of play. Nick wanted to bury all the balls up table in One Pocket and Mike liked to open them up and run out. So there's that too. Same thing in 14.1, faced with a difficult combo to continue a run Mike would go for it if he felt like he could make it, and he usually did. Nick would play a safety if he didn't like his choices. The little things in pool make a big difference in the end.

Then there was Steve Mizerak! HE was the best player of his generation, until he put on too much weight. Yes, better even than Mike or Nick. His cue ball control was superb, his ball pocketing perfection and he had the most powerful stroke of them all. At the same time he could caress those balls ever so gently if need be. Steve in his prime was something to see. Impressed me even more than Mosconi, who never got an inch out of line. Like Willie, pressure never bothered Steve. He took it as a challenge to show how truly great he was. 9-Ball was child's play to him and One Pocket was a challenge to his creativity, and did I tell you how smart he was. He came up with Efren type shots before there was an Efren! Steve understood playing the pack second only to Ronnie Allen. IMO he was better at all three games than either Mike or Nick. At least for several years he was (1970's until early 80's). He was still acknowledged as the best 9-Ball player until Earl came along and dethroned him. Steve went downhill after that.

Where does Buddy fit in? He was right there with Steve and Mike as being the favorites in any 9-Ball tournament they played in. Buddy won as many or more during his prime. Plus he was the dominant bar table player for more than two decades, winning anywhere and everywhere he went. I've often said Buddy Hall won more pool tournaments than anyone else. Additionally he was long considered our best money player. Even after Earl emerged in the 1980's Buddy never slowed down and kept right on winning his share, along with Mike and Earl. Of course there were many other excellent players they all had to deal with, Nicky at the top of that list. Hopkins could beat any one of them on a given day and so could Kim Davenport or David Howard. Rempe always went deep but rarely won, although he did make some memorable scores. Efren faded after Houston for several years, a strong contender but rarely a winner. The other top guys got comfortable playing him due to his inability to string racks.

Then there was Jose Parica, the best 9-Ball or Ten Ball player of his generation! No one could beat him for the cash. He might lose a Race to Eleven, but not Ten Ahead! Jose did win a tournament here and there, but not as many as he should have won. That's for sure. I'm not sure what to attribute that too other than staying up late in the practice room giving someone the six out!
 
Last edited:
I'm not one to argue with my friend Pat Fleming, but.....Mike was the better player at grinding through tournaments and finishing on top. Someone on here said earlier that Mike could come with the big shot when everything was on the line (after all the moaning, head shaking, etc.), whereas Nick might duck and play the percentages. I won't fault either one here, but suffice to say they had two different attitudes and styles of play. Nick wanted to bury all the balls up table in One Pocket and Mike liked to open them up and run out. So there's that too. Same thing in 14.1, faced with a difficult combo to continue a run Mike would go for it if he felt like he could make it, and he usually did. Nick would play a safety if he didn't like his choices. The little things in pool make a big difference in the end.

Then there was Steve Mizerak! HE was the best player of his generation, until he put on too much weight. Yes, better even than Mike or Nick. His cue ball control was superb, his ball pocketing perfection and he had the most powerful stroke of them all. At the same time he could caress those balls ever so gently if need be. Steve in his prime was something to see. Impressed me even more than Mosconi, who never got an inch out of line. Like Willie, pressure never bothered Steve. He took it as a challenge to show how truly great he was. 9-Ball was child's play to him and One Pocket was a challenge to his creativity, and did I tell you how smart he was. He came up with Efren type shots before there was an Efren! Steve understood playing the pack second only to Ronnie Allen. IMO he was better at all three games than either Mike or Nick. At least for several years he was (1970's until early 80's). He was still acknowledged as the best 9-Ball player until Earl came along and dethroned him. Steve went downhill after that.

Where does Buddy fit in? He was right there with Steve and Mike as being the favorites in any 9-Ball tournament they played in. Buddy won as many or more during his prime. Plus he was the dominant bar table player for more than two decades, winning everywhere and anywhere he went. I've often said Buddy Hall won more pool tournaments than anyone else. Additionally he was long considered our best money player. Even after Earl emerged in the 1980's Buddy never slowed down and kept right on winning his share, along with Mike and Earl. Of course there were many other excellent players they all had to deal with, Nicky at the top of that list. Hopkins could beat any one of them on a given day and so could Kim Davenport or David Howard. Rempe always went deep but rarely won, although he did make some memorable scores. Efren faded after Houston for several years, a strong contender but rarely a winner. The other top guys got comfortable playing him due to his inability to string racks.

Then there was Jose Parica, the best 9-Ball or Ten Ball player of his generation! No one could beat him for the cash. He might lose a Race to Eleven, but not Ten Ahead! Jose did win a tournament here and there, but not as many as he should have won. That's for sure. I'm not sure what to attribute that too other than staying up late in the practice room giving someone the six out!
Hey Jay, thank you for the post. You saw this first hand and I have only seen select videos so my views are obviously not as sharp. I appreciate you filling us in.

One thing I wanted to share is I feel that Nick is unfairly pegged as a bit cautious. I think this is because of his nonchalant demeanor, and because he had one famous one pocket 'wedge game'.

Nick did commentary once and said it bothered him that he was known for the wedge. He said he plays really offensively and tries to blitz his opponents and find a way to run 8 and out. He said he played one rack where the balls went up table and someone called it the "Nick Varner Wedge" and it stuck and it always bothered him.

As for 9 ball, Nick really went offensive. When people would push he would always take on the shot if it was remotely reasonable, having unwavering faith in his abilities and wanting to control his destiny. He banked as well as anyone and would often shoot bank shots where most players would duck. I wouldn't call him reckless, but he was definitely very offensive minded. I just think he fooled people into thinking he was cautious because he wasn't flashy about it.

I also think his come from behind skills and mental game were exceptional. The years around 1990 I heard a number of people talking about how many of his matches he was down 3-5 racks going to 11 and they felt like Nick was even money, that he stole more sets from down 10-6 or 10-7 than anyone they knew. He never complained, always tried hard, and never gave up. I felt his mental game and heart were some of his super powers, along with shotmaking, patterns, cue ball, safeties, and game management.

As for Mike, I know he had more tournament wins. I believe he might have had a better tournament rhythm than Nick, or maybe he just believed things were supposed to go his way so deeply. Someway, somehow he won more than his share when he got into the finals. Many players go through streaks of really high confidence where they just play at a peak level, and Mike seemed to maintain that through his entire career. As I said in my earlier posts I think Nick hit that gear for 2-3 years a couple of times, whereas Mike seemed to live there.

So I'm not discrediting Mike's achievements. I just don't like people to get the idea that Nick was tentative. The videos are all online, pull one up and try to find a spot where he ducks where you think he's supposed to shoot, then look at how often he shoots when you would have ducked. ;)

Thanks brother. Glad to hear from you and know you are doing well. Merry Christmas!
 
Is it possible that neither Sigel nor Varner were as dominant during their careers as we recall?
Sigel was the Billiards Digest Player of the Decade for the 1980's, and voted the greatest living player by Billiard's Digest in 2000. I started playing pool at age 15 around 1980, and followed pro pool closely throughout the decade. My personal perception was always that Sigel was the best tournament player in the world for that decade.
 
All I know for sure is that I watched all of these guys play for 30 or 40 years, every tournament I could get to. Also many big money matches.
Some of this stuff I am reading, I have to wonder where it came from? You could not have been there, and so must have gotten it second hand, from someone who got it second hand or something. The only other alternative is that I am nuts, probably 50/50.
My pool career began when Lassiter was still unbeatable. Then Mizerak took over for a while, Hopkins was a force for a while but not long enough to become a household name . Rempe was somewhere about that time I remember a hustler brought him to Columbus and he was only 17 and he played great, within 2 years he was KIng James that was about 1970? , for several years he beat everybody like a drum, David Howard won several big tournaments but I never thought he was the same calibre of player as any of those guys. Varner then took over , then he and Sigel were the clear favorites . But I thought Buddy played better than both of them, Parica was in there also but my time line on him is all screwed up. I remember he beat almost everybody for money, and would have probably won a lot of tournaments , but as someone said, the money was in the after hours , and he was usually in it. I had seen him beat almost everybody he played gambling, and one night someone said" I'll play you one handed jacked up, "
Parica ran out like he was playing 2 handed. I never saw anyone play like that jacked up, before or after.
Then along came Earl ! To me , he was the best nine ball player I ever saw, especially on the old equipment, pre 1986 or so ? He was intimidating, and he had every move in the world . Up to that point Sigel was king of the moves . Lint picking and pointing at pockets, lol Sigel would be practicing on the table he was getting ready to play a match on and start talking about one certain corner pocket, usually at the head of the table. he would roll the ball at it , shoot hard into the rail at it and say , look at that, {there was nothing wrong} but somewhere in the match his opponent would mishit a ball , thinking about all that bull shit he laid down. lol he was a dandy. Efren who some of you say couldn't play was usually right in the middle of things and he did a lot of playing at night too! I don't see how these guys did it, unless they took something, which I knew some who did, but I never heard about Efren being involved., Then Earl shoots everybodys liver out, then Johnny Archer starts playing good. Then he starts playing real good. It was just a matter of one tournament he was a 700 Fargo {it didn't exist at the time ,but if it had , thats about where he would be , then 2 tournaments later, nobody can beat him , he's 780 or 800. He just gets out every time it's his shot. I'm probably missing someone , but this is what I remember. I have what I think is a funny Varner, Sigel, Archer story. I was at a tournament standing next to Varner and Sigel talking after the days regulation play ends. { I heard this with my own ears } it's not a story from the pool room 40 years later .
Sigel says to Varner, very quietly , I heard Archer came down to your place for a week or two and donated some money playing cheap straight pool . Varner says ....yeahhhh , all drawn out with pride and the glow of getting his money, and Sigel says , I heard at the end he was playing way better than he did at the beginning, yeahhhhh, he caught on pretty quick.
Sigel's demeanor changed ,and without raising his voice, he snaps at him , why don't you invite him down to play some 5 dollar one pocket for a couple of weeks , then we won't be able to beat him at anything. Then he storms off . Varner looked like his mom slapped him, and it was all I could do, to not bust out laughing.
In my mind Efren is the greatest of all time for many reasons but the main 1 that I have never heard anyone else mention, again I might be nuts, but if you eliminate straight pool , which was pretty much dead as far as I know after 1970, except in New York, Efren was the best at the transistion to new equipment, some guys never could do it. Efren was one of the best on the old equipment and was even better on the new. imo
I think the new equipment killed Sigel, he could no longer slide the balls down the rails and he saw the writing on the wall.
Earl had to change his game , he could no longer make a lot of power shots he used before, it also hurt Archers game , Nick was not affected by it as much and neither was buddy , because they played such great position. imo
I am not as familiar with anything after 2000 I was too sick to be involved much, but from the mid 60s to the mid 90s, that's how I remember it,
That's how I saw it, what do you think?
Oops I forgot , the question was Varner or Sigel, too close to call , but I will always be a fan of Nick.
 
Last edited:
Found this list:

Billiards Digest Players of the Year
MEN

1980 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1981 Mike Sigel (Towson, Md.)
1982 Buddy Hall (Paducah, Ky.)
1983 Steve Mizerak (Spring Hill, N.J.)
1984 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1985 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1986 Mike Sigel (Towson, Md.)
1987 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1988 Earl Strickland (Houston, Texas)
1989 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1990 Kim Davenport (Modesto, Calif.)
1991 Buddy Hall (Metropolis, Ill.)
1992 Johnny Archer (Twin Cities, Ga.)
1993 Johnny Archer (Raleigh, N.C.)
1994 Nick Varner (Owensboro, Ky.)
1995 Efren Reyes (Manila, Philippines)
1996 Johnny Archer (Raleigh, N.C.)
1997 Jose Parica (La Puente, Calif.)
1998 Francisco Bustamante (Kiel, Germany)
1999 Johnny Archer (Marietta, Ga.)
2000 Earl Strickland (Greensboro, N.C.)

Is it possible that neither Sigel nor Varner were as dominant during their careers as we recall?
If they awarded Player of the Year in the 1970's, Mizerak would have won it five or six years.
 
Back
Top