Today's pro level versus the pros of 1986

lfigueroa · Jan 23, 2020

I believe some champions of the past would be champions regardless of the era due to sheer, monstrous talent and a drive to win.

I also believe that many “legends” would fall by the wayside against today’s competition. They exploited the larger pockets. And in the case of 1pocket there were a whole coterie or road men that exploited the fact there was a time when the game and its specialty shots and strategies were something of a dark art known to few. Now with streams and DVDs everyone knows the shots.

Of course executing them and knowing when to shoot them is another story.

Lou Figueroa

MitchAlsup · Jan 23, 2020

Cornerman said:
One thing to also consider is the change in cloth.

Do you (or anyone) think this comes about due to::

a) the cloth is fundamentally faster
b) the cloth is fundamentally smoother
c) the cloth is attached to the table better
d) some other property of the cloth?

sjm · Jan 23, 2020

MitchAlsup said:
Do you (or anyone) think this comes about due to::

a) the cloth is fundamentally faster
b) the cloth is fundamentally smoother
c) the cloth is attached to the table better
d) some other property of the cloth?

Definitely yes, but primarily a and b.

It doesn't take the stroke that it took back in the day to get around the table. Mike Sigel made the comment once that "when they switched to Simonis, all of a sudden a lot of guys suddenly played like me."

On a related note, I think 1) the rails today are better, too, and this has made it easier to get around the table and 2) the balls themselves are of higher quality than back then.

The comparison across the generations has always been complicated by the differences in equipment.

HawaiianEye · Jan 23, 2020

sjm said:
Definitely yes, but primarily a and b.

It doesn't take the stroke that it took back in the day to get around the table. Mike Sigel made the comment once that "when they switched to Simonis, all of a sudden a lot of guys suddenly played like me."

On a related note, I think 1) the rails today are better, too, and this has made it easier to get around the table and 2) the balls themselves are of higher quality than back then.

The comparison across the generations has always been complicated by the differences in equipment.

I totally agree.

I usually play on the same table on my one day of play a week on Sunday.

The table I play on is slower than some of the others. When the players who are used to the fast tables come to my table, they usually don't have the "stroke" to hit the power shots that I can.

They say the table is dead.

When I grew up, EVERY table played dead.

That is when you learned how to "stroke" the ball.

JoeyInCali · Jan 23, 2020

sjm said:
Definitely yes, but primarily a and b.

It doesn't take the stroke that it took back in the day to get around the table. Mike Sigel made the comment once that "when they switched to Simonis, all of a sudden a lot of guys suddenly played like me."

On a related note, I think 1) the rails today are better, too, and this has made it easier to get around the table and 2) the balls themselves are of higher quality than back then.

The comparison across the generations has always been complicated by the differences in equipment.

Actually, the rails got worse.
When Brunswick Super Speed started getting made overseas, they became crap.
Many people swear by the old Manhattan Asbestos' cushions. They were made to last forever . The AMF Grand Prix tables had great cushions back then.

PoolBum · Jan 23, 2020

rossaroni said:
I often like to mention Jesse Owens in this conversation. His fastest times would not even be somewhat close to the fastest times today. Based just on his times, he would not even make it to the Olympics, let alone being one of the greatest Olympian of all time. Good thing we can take everything into account, and base the greatness of athletes on how great they were in their era.

The time difference between Owens and the fastest sprinter ever, Usain Bolt, is due mostly to technological advances. Biomechanical analysis of Jesse Owens' stride has shown that Owens' 100m performance at the 1936 Olympics would have gotten him second place at the 2013 100m World Championship, within one stride of Usain Bolt.

jay helfert · Jan 23, 2020

Many factors to consider here. Contrary to what many are saying, there were also some tight pocketed tables in use back then. Most of the best action rooms had a couple of tight tables for the better players to compete on. The 7/11 in Manhattan had a ten footer that could make you weak in the knees. The Peter Vitalie tables we used at the Los Angeles Invitational in 1987 were the toughest I've ever seen in any pro tournament.

As others have said, the biggest difference in equipment is the Simoniz cloth. We played on slow Stevens cloth for the most part, and you needed a powerful stroke to move the cue ball around. That's no longer a factor. In fact, you need a super soft touch to play well today.

All this said, imo there are many more high level players today, and the very best of them are probably better players overall than the best of my generation. I do believe the old time greats could have adjusted to the new conditions and been contenders even today., but we will never know. I have yet to see a better overall One Pocket player than Ronnie Allen. He did things no one else knows how to do, or how he did it. Efren may have been his equal, with a different set of skills. In Banks, there are many great players, but Eddie Taylor was still the best I ever saw in his prime. I never saw him hit a bank bad. If he missed it was close. And he could condistently run 5's, 6's, 7's and 8 and out playing full rack. The only man I have ever seen throw all 15 balls on the table and bank them all! Try it sometime starting with BIH behind the line. I saw him do it twice and he never batted an eye, just threw them up there and kept practicing.

jrctherake · Jan 24, 2020

As a whole, today's pros have a slight edge over the older players as far as shot making. But, we older guys know there are many other things that should also be considered.

I know all of this has been covered many times. Well, so has "what tip is best"...but, that doesn't stop everyone from discussing it three times a week.

Anyways, just like what tip, I feel it is EXTREMELY appropriate to bring up other topics because IMO, these other variables are very relative to shot making.

Ok....Table conditions....

Yep, here we go...lol...but, it's true. Let the youngins try slow rolling all them pocket speed shots on a table from the past. Well, if they did, lol....can we say "no shape" on the next ball?

Did someone mention a Ball? ........

Hmmm, balls didn't react as lively as today's balls do, not even close. Add that to a slower and worn felt and you got to hammer shots that are slow rolled today. <<<<will bring accuracy to the crapper...

Air conditioning and heating......

Lol.....many of us sat and watched players sweat, I'm talking real sweat due to the room being hot and humid......hmmmm, I wonder how that comes into play with shot making? Again, you had to hammer shots to get whitey to do even half of what a slow roll bunt does today. Again, hmmm I bet that makes shot making a little tougher, knowing you can't bunt the ball around and get shape...

Anyways, like Stu said, as a whole, sure...but, the top ten from then vs today? I wouldn't bet the farm on it because I'm not so sure the top ten of today could even match the top ten of then.

Yeah, I'm older but, I'm not living in the past.

What I can say is, I was there then and now so, I feel we (our age group) are in a better position to make a decision.

Data is useless when comparing then to now. Why? Well, as Stu said, they didn't calculate the same variables. So, it's just not possible to go by data alone.

Also,...even if they did use the very same variables, a calculator can't figure in table, ball, heat, humidity and many other conditions that do have a HUGE impact on shot accuracy.<<<<<<<again, apples to oranges.

No matter who calculates the data, it's useless.

Also, I've witnessed to many of today's young guns fizzle out after just a few hours of stressful play.

Lol...I was around to see the older gents that we all admired so much play for two or three days at a time with more or less no sleep and don't even talk about diet and sleeping quarters.......can anyone say fast food and a nap in your car?

Yeah, it rubs me the wrong way when I hear all the goofy comments about today's player vs player's from years ago.

If you want a true comparison, compare the tournaments/players from the last three years or so to what happens at this DCC.

Otherwise, IMO, your pissing up a rope.

Jeff

garczar · Jan 24, 2020

jrctherake said:
As a whole, today's pros have a slight edge over the older players as far as shot making. But, we older guys know there are many other things that should also be considered.

I know all of this has been covered many times. Well, so has "what tip is best"...but, that doesn't stop everyone from discussing it three times a week.

Anyways, just like what tip, I feel it is EXTREMELY appropriate to bring up other topics because IMO, these other variables are very relative to shot making.

Ok....Table conditions....

Yep, here we go...lol...but, it's true. Let the youngins try slow rolling all them pocket speed shots on a table from the past. Well, if they did, lol....can we say "no shape" on the next ball?

Did someone mention a Ball? ........

Hmmm, balls didn't react as lively as today's balls do, not even close. Add that to a slower and worn felt and you got to hammer shots that are slow rolled today. <<<<will bring accuracy to the crapper...

Air conditioning and heating......

Lol.....many of us sat and watched players sweat, I'm talking real sweat due to the room being hot and humid......hmmmm, I wonder how that comes into play with shot making? Again, you had to hammer shots to get whitey to do even half of what a slow roll bunt does today. Again, hmmm I bet that makes shot making a little tougher, knowing you can't bunt the ball around and get shape...

Anyways, like Stu said, as a whole, sure...but, the top ten from then vs today? I wouldn't bet the farm on it because I'm not so sure the top ten of today could even match the top ten of then.

Yeah, I'm older but, I'm not living in the past.

What I can say is, I was there then and now so, I feel we (our age group) are in a better position to make a decision.

Data is useless when comparing then to now. Why? Well, as Stu said, they didn't calculate the same variables. So, it's just not possible to go by data alone.

Also,...even if they did use the very same variables, a calculator can't figure in table, ball, heat, humidity and many other conditions that do have a HUGE impact on shot accuracy.<<<<<<<again, apples to oranges.

No matter who calculates the data, it's useless.

Also, I've witnessed to many of today's young guns fizzle out after just a few hours of stressful play.

Lol...I was around to see the older gents that we all admired so much play for two or three days at a time with more or less no sleep and don't even talk about diet and sleeping quarters.......can anyone say fast food and a nap in your car?

Yeah, it rubs me the wrong way when I hear all the goofy comments about today's player vs player's from years ago.

If you want a true comparison, compare the tournaments/players from the last three years or so to what happens at this DCC.

Otherwise, IMO, your pissing up a rope.

Jeff

They used Centennials then. Balls today are no "livelier". Please.

AtLarge · Jan 24, 2020

jay helfert said:
... In Banks, there are many great players, but Eddie Taylor was still the best I ever saw in his prime. I never saw him hit a bank bad. If he missed it was close. And he could condistently run 5's, 6's, 7's and 8 and out playing full rack. The only man I have ever seen throw all 15 balls on the table and bank them all! Try it sometime starting with BIH behind the line. I saw him do it twice and he never batted an eye, just threw them up there and kept practicing.

How about 37 in succession (plus 2 opening break shots) in a match. That's his best.

Eddie talks about his runs of all 15 and his high run of 37 in a row starting here: https://youtu.be/IcFgsP-u7vA?t=2352

jokrswylde · Jan 24, 2020

So, the "real" pool players around here scoff at normal pockets and say that good players should not play on "buckets". Yet I have never heard one of these folks campaign for the use of shag carpet cloth. Wouldn't a real elite player be more challenged if he had to let his shootin' arm go?

Why aren't pro tourney's played on slower cloth where you have to STROKE the ball to go around 3 rails instead of just a firm hit? To me that would be much more challenging than playing on tight pockets...

jrctherake · Jan 24, 2020

z

jokrswylde said:
So, the "real" pool players around here scoff at normal pockets and say that good players should not play on "buckets". Yet I have never heard one of these folks campaign for the use of shag carpet cloth. Wouldn't a real elite player be more challenged if he had to let his shootin' arm go?

Why aren't pro tourney's played on slower cloth where you have to STROKE the ball to go around 3 rails instead of just a firm hit? To me that would be much more challenging than playing on tight pockets...

Good points. I'm not sure how to answer but, not all the pockets back then were buckets.

There were plenty of tight pockets back then.

Think its tough to play on 4.5" pockets with 860....they should try 4.25 to 4.5" pockets with cloth thats a little slower, rails that are nowhere near as springy and balls that stay cleaner much longer...more lively.

Jeff

alstl · Jan 24, 2020

In the 80's every tournament had a winner just like today. I don't see how today's players are winning more.

The closest today to an 80's player in skill is Shane Van Boening because he can kick at a high level. A lot of today's players rely on the jump cue and 80's players would have an advantage over them if the rules prevented jump cues.

That's one reason a lot of today's great 9 ball and 10 ball players aren't great at one pocket. They can run out but they are out moved by players who don't rely on the jump cue. Case in point Efren recently winning the cash vs a young Mosconi Cup player in one pocket.

jrctherake · Jan 24, 2020

garczar said:
They used Centennials then. Balls today are no "livelier". Please.

Your obviously not experienced in 14.1.

Jeff

Mich · Jan 24, 2020

Just as everyone has mentioned, the big difference is the cloth. And not just for pool, the 3 cushion players playing on UN-heated tables needed monster strokes too. I recall Varner, like Sigel, mentioning the hardest thing to learn when they changed the cloth was getting used to bunting the balls around the table. I would also say the break--now everyone uses the cut break, but back in the 90's it was the power break and this was where Archer was dominant. No one broke the balls like him. When he broke from the rail the wing ball would just fly in! Sometimes he was playing 6 ball and if he could start controlling the 1 ball forget it. This was when they changed over to Texas Express.

nine_ball6970 · Jan 24, 2020

jokrswylde said:
So, the "real" pool players around here scoff at normal pockets and say that good players should not play on "buckets". Yet I have never heard one of these folks campaign for the use of shag carpet cloth. Wouldn't a real elite player be more challenged if he had to let his shootin' arm go?

Why aren't pro tourney's played on slower cloth where you have to STROKE the ball to go around 3 rails instead of just a firm hit? To me that would be much more challenging than playing on tight pockets...

Mark Wilson talks about in his book how much of a better player he became after going to the Phillippines and having to play on slow cloth. Hard strokes reveal weaknesses in your game.

As far as pockets, most pros don't care how big or small the pockets are when they don't catch the points going in anyway. Someone was barking at a friend who is a real strong player. He said I will play you on a tight diamond instead of these gold crowns. Friend said I will play you anywhere because center pocket is center pocket.

DecentShot · Jan 24, 2020

Guys like David Howard, Kim Davenport and Allen Hopkins in their prime playing on Diamonds? Lol, Forget about it. They either played on tough Gold Crowns back then, or some furniture grade Olhausens. Playing on a uniform perfect table like a Diamond? They would be EVERY bit as good as these international boys today.

Cornerman · Jan 24, 2020

I also point to Efren. Everyone who never lived the slow cloth era thinks of Efren as one of the best ever at 9-ball. But in the slow cloth era, Efren was an underdog to the Sigel, Strickland, Varner and Halls when Efren says he was in his prime. To me, that answers the question.

Black-Balled · Jan 24, 2020

DecentShot said:
Guys like David Howard, Kim Davenport and Allen Hopkins in their prime playing on Diamonds? Lol, Forget about it. They either played on tough Gold Crowns back then, or some furniture grade Olhausens. Playing on a uniform perfect table like a Diamond? They would be EVERY bit as good as these international boys today.

I don't see how there is so much debate about this. The best would still have been the best, if they played on the same equipment.

The similarities between the games then and now are far more than the differences

Black-Balled · Jan 24, 2020

alstl said:
In the 80's every tournament had a winner just like today. I don't see how today's players are winning more.

The closest today to an 80's player in skill is Shane Van Boening because he can kick at a high level. A lot of today's players rely on the jump cue and 80's players would have an advantage over them if the rules prevented jump cues.

That's one reason a lot of today's great 9 ball and 10 ball players aren't great at one pocket. They can run out but they are out moved by players who don't rely on the jump cue. Case in point Efren recently winning the cash vs a young Mosconi Cup player in one pocket.

Extreme disagreement over the kicking point. I don't say the opposite: players today kick better than those of yesteryear.

True, they also jump...but the best are choosing the correct shot for the situation, be it a jump or a kick.

Today's pro level versus the pros of 1986

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Older and Wiser

AzB Silver Member

Maker of Joey Bautista Cues

Ace in the side.

Shoot Pool, not people

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Gold Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Cue Author...Sometimes

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member