Van Boening vs. Gorst 10-Ball Race to 120, Rematch June 2025 -- General Comments Thread

sjm said:
Worst was a world champion billiards player, but his career as a pool player lasted just from 1963-65. He was ill and died in 1966. If all cue-sports are included in the conversation, he is about as legendary as it gets.

When guys like Jay Helfert tell me that he was, more or less, Luther Lassiter's equal at pool, that carries a lot of weight with me. BCA Hall of Famer Eddie Kelly said something similar about Worst. That said, however, I agree with those who suggest that Worst's pool career was too short to merit mention with the all-time greats. He is one of pool's saddest "what might have been" stories, but the quality of play that he displayed is rightly celebrated.
Click to expand...
The Miz worshipped Harold as a young player….at tournaments when his health started to fade, Steve ran all his errands.
 
sjm said:
I believe Shaw played marathon races against both Bergman and Orcullo, losing both if memory serves.
Click to expand...
With everything that happened around those two matches I doubt Jayson will play either JB or any filipino player for money ever again..
 
Frosty said:
You’re entitled to your opinion, if you saw him play I’m sure you’d think differently.
Click to expand...
1965
1750358852599.png

1750358890915.png

1750358930393.png

1750358964200.png
 
Wayne Crimi said:
I have to wonder how much of that is the more accurate cues, more accurate cloth, lower nap cloth and simply getting used to playing on tighter pockets. I certainly don't know.

With some of the high deflection cues and rugs they used to play with years ago even the slightest accidental English (which even happens to pros often enough to matter) or cue elevation a shot that goes in now could be a miss then due to unwanted deflection or swerve - not to mention the greater adjustments you had to make even when the English was on purpose.

I don't doubt the best players are more accurate now, but I suspect the gap is not as large as it looks. I rarely play now, but when I do, I play on a rug cloth with an old high deflection cue. I miss enough shots that I used to be 98% on in the past to know it's not all decline on my part. Give me a new predator and brand new high quality cloth and my pocketing will go up even if the pockets are tougher than in my peak days.
Click to expand...

i think the cues are overhyped. there are still guys playing with old school maple shafts; ko pin yi, ko ping chung, lee van corteza, mickey krause and probably others. not many wants to take on those guys. ko ping chung beat filler to become world 10-ball champion and he beat fedor gorst to become US open champion just two years ago.

i totally understand the practical argument for cf shafts, but don't tell me there's something a cf player can do that ko or corteza can't do.

as for the level rising. it does in every sport. maybe the closest comparison is snooker. today's players are better, and the field is deeper, but their knowledge acquisition has been easier and they are generally in a better situation with sponsors, practice centers, etc than steve davis or alex higgins
 
Frosty said:
You’re entitled to your opinion, if you saw him play I’m sure you’d think differently.
Click to expand...

the harold worst videos will have to do for those of us who weren’t able to attend his matches in the 50’s and 60’s

if you saw him play i’m sure i’ll think differently
 
sjm said:
There's much wisdom in this post.

Playing conditions haven't changed much in the past twenty years and I'm not convinced that the equipment has advanced very far, either, but to compare the players of this generation to those that played alongside Earl, Sigel, Varner, and Hall is a bit problematic because the game itself has changed.

Last November, Mike Sigel and I had a chat about how the stroke needed to succeed today is different than what was needed some forty years ago. He noted that the short, compact stroke that is in vogue today reminds him of that of Allen Hopkins in his prime. I think that equipment has evolved to suit the players (and strokes) of this generation, and that the equipment of forty years ago was perfect for that generation of players.

All that said, your premise is correct. Ultimately, the comparison across generations is almost impossible, and in the end, excellence can only be measured in the context of how any player performs against his/her contemporaries.

Thanks for your input.
Click to expand...


Interesting that he brought up Hopkins. The first time I saw peak Hopkins play he was playing 9 ball in Queens NY at the Golden Cue. He missed one shot in over an hour of play. He was insanely good that night. I was a teenager at the time and tried to mimic his stroke a little because I personally used a very short bridge and punchy stroke playing mostly 14.1. I felt it was more accurate. I never really stayed with his stroke. It was too extreme. Over time I switched from 14.1 to 9 ball and my bridge length and stroke got longer. But I think there's something to be said for shorter more compact strokes and accuracy. I saw some film of Lassiter one time and it looked like he gripped pretty far forward and had a short stroke also. I'm not going to argue with Lassiter. haha
 
Wayne Crimi said:
Interesting that he brought up Hopkins. The first time I saw peak Hopkins play he was playing 9 ball in Queens NY at the Golden Cue. He missed one shot in over an hour of play. He was insanely good that night. I was a teenager at the time and tried to mimic his stroke a little because I personally used a very short bridge and punchy stroke playing mostly 14.1. I felt it was more accurate. I never really stayed with his stroke. It was too extreme. Over time I switched from 14.1 to 9 ball and my bridge length and stroke got longer. But I think there's something to be said for shorter more compact strokes and accuracy. I saw some film of Lassiter one time and it looked like he gripped pretty far forward and had a short stroke also. I'm not going to argue with Lassiter. haha
Click to expand...
We had a thread in 2012 about Hopkins' stroke. Here's something I wrote at the time:

I have a theory about Hopkins' stroke. The story goes that he has such a short backswing because of too-close walls around his home table when he was a kid.​
​
Well, surely not all of the walls were that close to the table; he must have had plenty of opportunity to develop a longer backswing. And when he began playing outside his home, he wasn't immutably constrained to continue using the same stroke he used to avoid the one (or two?) close walls in his basement.​
​
No, I think he used (and uses) that stroke because he discovered the beauty inherent in it. He undoubtedly tried much longer backswings. But I'm suggesting that he rationally chose the short backswing because he was able to do better with it than with a longer swing. Why would that be? Because ... the short backswing eliminates a lot of space in which the stroke can go off line going either backward or forward. He found that it optimized the accuracy of his stroke.​
​
I'm surprised we don't see more strokes like Hopkins'.​
 
I think what's wrong with Hopkin's stroke is you need a fair amount of <bonehead jock> to muscle ize all the touch memory. Much simpler to relax and stroke at the appropriate speed. You simply don't need to "Mighty Hulk" high stakes pool.
 
AtLarge said:
We had a thread in 2012 about Hopkins' stroke. Here's something I wrote at the time:

I have a theory about Hopkins' stroke. The story goes that he has such a short backswing because of too-close walls around his home table when he was a kid.​
​
Well, surely not all of the walls were that close to the table; he must have had plenty of opportunity to develop a longer backswing. And when he began playing outside his home, he wasn't immutably constrained to continue using the same stroke he used to avoid the one (or two?) close walls in his basement.​
​
No, I think he used (and uses) that stroke because he discovered the beauty inherent in it. He undoubtedly tried much longer backswings. But I'm suggesting that he rationally chose the short backswing because he was able to do better with it than with a longer swing. Why would that be? Because ... the short backswing eliminates a lot of space in which the stroke can go off line going either backward or forward. He found that it optimized the accuracy of his stroke.​
​
I'm surprised we don't see more strokes like Hopkins'.​
Click to expand...

there's lee van with his version of a jab stroke. i guess the way you put it there's some merit to it. i've always put them in the keith / bustie / mike davis / mo soufi - "box of weird strokes that somehow works"
 
I watched an interesting videography of the top 20 baseball players of all time. Babe Ruth was voted the best. The reason was he revolutionized the game and his records have stood the test of time. But his accomplishments are well documented and statistically available for scrutiny. Conversely, Harold Worst doesn't have the same type of data available so mostly we have to rely on first hand accounts. His very short career essentially from post Korean war to 1966 only includes 3C and then pool. Sadly he just didn't get much of a chance to display his talents before he was taken away.
 
sjm said:
I'm in in the large camp here on AZB that believes Shane plays as well today as he ever did but that the standard has risen. Hence the comparison of the 31-year-old Shane to Josh and Fedor is exactly the same as with the 41-year-old Shane.

I'm tiring of the "he's older and less motivated" excuses that I keep reading around here. On the contrary, he has never played 9ball at the level Josh and Fedor are displaying today, not even during his undeniable peak of 2014-2016. Filler, in particular, has changed my view of what level is possible at 9ball, and Fedor is barely behind. You were there at the 2025 Derby City 9ball when Filler turned in two different TPA 1.000 matches in a single session!

There is little doubt in my mind that the hardest titles to come by in men's pro pool are the World 9ball, the US Open 9ball, the China Open, the All-Japan and the World Games. No player has ever won all of them. Shane has six of these (1 World 9ball, 5 US Opens), but, at 27 years old, Filler also has six (1 World 9ball, 1 US Open 9ball, 3 China Opens and 1 gold at the World Games). For the record, Earl has eight (3 modern-era World 9ball and 5 US Opens).

As a collector of the most difficult major titles, Filler is on target to become the most decorated player of the 21st century by far, and I believe that, one day, he'll be remembered as the best player since Mosconi. Still, none of us will sleep on Gorst.

I will not let nostalgia get in the way of giving today's best their proper due. The game of pool is being played at a level we have never seen before.
Click to expand...
What were the two .1000 TPA matches that filler recorded in the session?
 
skogstokig said:
i think the cues are overhyped. there are still guys playing with old school maple shafts;
Click to expand...
Thanks for the flashback. Efren's cue was very interesting in '85, when he first played the Reno Sands tournament. Very similar to the $20 Walmart cue that Drunk Act Kelly played with in Tacoma area. Kelly was a senior player with billiards skills that allowed him to rob B players. (Not Ed Kelly):).
 
Late to follow but seeing "the stroke" probably have over passed Efren's pump handle stroke. What a thing of beauty. The way the fingers applied the final touch to the cueball. Then the cueball talked.
Watching the tip interaction with whitey allows the best read on conditions. What condition My condition was in was read 1, the equipment was read 2. Kinda like watching bowling and watching the bowling ball spin and bite. The ball and cloth interaction needs to be gauged. Made for, well "back in the day", it made for the perfect stall. Going down 35 at 5 per was to be expected. Catching up allowed for bet escalation to 20 and possibly 200 payday. 🤷‍♂️
 
gregcantrall said:
he way the fingers applied the final touch to the cueball.
Click to expand...
I did get the question to Efren in a podcast. The which ball last question got Object ball. Well perhaps I worded the question wrong. Shrug 🤷‍♂️ wink 😉 At impact would be better.
 
AtLarge said:
We had a thread in 2012 about Hopkins' stroke. Here's something I wrote at the time:

I have a theory about Hopkins' stroke. The story goes that he has such a short backswing because of too-close walls around his home table when he was a kid.​
​
Well, surely not all of the walls were that close to the table; he must have had plenty of opportunity to develop a longer backswing. And when he began playing outside his home, he wasn't immutably constrained to continue using the same stroke he used to avoid the one (or two?) close walls in his basement.​
​
No, I think he used (and uses) that stroke because he discovered the beauty inherent in it. He undoubtedly tried much longer backswings. But I'm suggesting that he rationally chose the short backswing because he was able to do better with it than with a longer swing. Why would that be? Because ... the short backswing eliminates a lot of space in which the stroke can go off line going either backward or forward. He found that it optimized the accuracy of his stroke.​
​
I'm surprised we don't see more strokes like Hopkins'.​
Click to expand...
That's an interesting theory there. I'll speculate the short swing/stroke is not looked upon favorably by instructors and coaches, as the line between poking the ball and a short stroke can be thin.

Also a mystery why no basketball player has tried (?) to emulate Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's sky hook, the most unstoppable shot of all time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top