70s/80s Era Questions

[Pawlowski424]

So, here's my list of questions lol:

What was the general pocket size for pro-speed tournaments?

What were table conditions like?

I've noticed players of this era (Varner, Hall, Sigel, etc) playing with steel joint. What was the belief behind forward balanced/steel joint cues?

Is the information that's available today (pocket lines, cue ball physics, navigating the table, etc. Advanced details, so to speak), the same information as back then? If not, what has changed?

 

[sjm]

A common pocket size back then was 4 3/4", but to make a true comparison to today, you need to take into account that in the 1970's they were still playing on the old nappy cloth and the balls had to be hit harder to get around the table.

No idea about steel joints.

Much more information is available today than back then. Even ignoring the wealth of information now offered on the internet, there weren't many books on pool back then. Back in the day, diagramming/illustrating a shot was hard work, but today it's very easy and putting shots on video is also very easy. The tools of the instruction trade have come a long way.

Perhaps the biggest difference is knowledge of the 9ball break, which was not very developed back then. Position play was more instinctive until Buddy Hall's clock system changed the way most players thought about position play over forty years ago.

... and let's not forget that until the late 1980s, old matches between the legends of the game could not be studied. Accu-stats changed the world and this generation can learn from the last.

 

[maha]

pocket size was generally 4.5 or slightly larger
steel joint had nothing to do with weight forward. balance point was and still is the standard or 1/3 forward from back of the butt.
the players cue has little to do with his success as evidenced by so many different ones being used.

info is much better nowadays but after hitting a million balls you get to automatically do what is right or takes to make the shot.
beginners can improve much faster to their stopping point in ability.

the table conditions varied with the weather and if they had air conditioning or not. and more than a few different brands of tables.
so specialized players didnt do as well as a well rounded player who could adapt.

 

[hurricane145]

I played a lot locally in the 80's. There was no world wide web so info didn't get around very well or fast like today. We had some good books. There may have been some VCR tapes about pool but I never heard of any back then.

I had some steel joint cues back then and still do. If it hits well I don't care about what the joint is made of or the pin size.
Huebler had a problem with some of the white plastic (?) implex joints cracking. I still see them all the time on Ebay. So, a lot of his 80's cues went to a steel joint. Certainly a lot of durability with a steel joint!

Pool is FAR more robust around the PNW now than it was in the 80's. Was mostly weekly $5 tavern tournaments with a few bigger money tavern tournaments during the year. Tables were a quarter too! Only was one pool league around here (Seattle) and it was a struggle to keep it going.

Nonetheless, I had a great time playing back then and made some life long friends although some of them have died.

 

[atlas333]

pocket size was generally 4.5 or slightly larger
steel joint had nothing to do with weight forward. balance point was and still is the standard or 1/3 forward from back of the butt.
the players cue has little to do with his success as evidenced by so many different ones being used.

info is much better nowadays but after hitting a million balls you get to automatically do what is right or takes to make the shot.
beginners can improve much faster to their stopping point in ability.

the table conditions varied with the weather and if they had air conditioning or not. and more than a few different brands of tables.
so specialized players didnt do as well as a well rounded player who could adapt.

Brunswick Gold Crown tables were very close to 5" corners. I really doubt there were any 4.5" pockets back then.

 

[Black-Balled]

Imo;

HUGE difference; many folks who played well below varner/ sigel/ hall were able to squeak out a living through playing the game. Hiding their speed and remaining unsung.

HUGE difference: people carried cash.

 

[MitchAlsup]

So, here's my list of questions lol:

What was the general pocket size for pro-speed tournaments?

What were table conditions like?

I've noticed players of this era (Varner, Hall, Sigel, etc) playing with steel joint. What was the belief behind forward balanced/steel joint cues?

Is the information that's available today (pocket lines, cue ball physics, navigating the table, etc. Advanced details, so to speak), the same information as back then? If not, what has changed?

Cue Ball physics was developed in the 1820s by Coriolis (a French Gentleman and mathematician)

Gaspard-Gustave de Coriolis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Tretis on colliding spheres:: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k29318f.notice

Simonis cloth was available in 1972 when we redid the table in the frat house.

Nose weight on shaft is entirely player preference (and always has been).

Pocket lines and navigating the table was more aligned with 14.1 continuous than 9-ball.
In my youth (50-60) I had books by Hoppe and another by Mosconi doing pretty much what the Byrne series of books did.

Don't know about professions tournament conditions were.

 

[maha]

I played a lot locally in the 80's. There was no world wide web so info didn't get around very well or fast like today. We had some good books. There may have been some VCR tapes about pool but I never heard of any back then.

I had some steel joint cues back then and still do. If it hits well I don't care about what the joint is made of or the pin size.
Huebler had a problem with some of the white plastic (?) implex joints cracking. I still see them all the time on Ebay. So, a lot of his 80's cues went to a steel joint. Certainly a lot of durability with a steel joint!

Pool is FAR more robust around the PNW now than it was in the 80's. Was mostly weekly $5 tavern tournaments with a few bigger money tavern tournaments during the year. Table were a quarter too! Only was one pool league around here (Seattle) and it was a struggle to keep it going.

in the 70"s and 80's the pacific northwest was more bar room pool. most towns had action bars and plenty of ten to twenty dollar 8 ball games
or much higher only in certain towns. oregon was the best action bar action that is ever anywhere for intermediate gambling.
when the timber industry slowed so did tavern pool gambling to an extent.

basically the west coast was growing in all aspects in those years and money flowed around. pool followed it.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... What was the general pocket size for pro-speed tournaments?

What were table conditions like? ...

I think the pockets in pro events played larger than the current Diamond 4.5" standard. I don't recall anyone worrying about pocket size back then. I think it was often possible for two balls to get jammed at the brink of a corner pocket. That's not possible any more due to the reduction in pocket width.

The cloth was slower, but that wasn't necessarily a bad thing. At 14.1 you want to minimize cue ball movement, and slower cloth helps you do that. For the cushions, I recall being able to get five lengths up and down the center of the table on many/most tables. That is really hard now. I think only part of that is me. I think the pockets tended to accept balls better.

 

[maha]

yea they certainly accepted balls better but many also narrowed more in the back which made the pockets not so easy as it may seem.
gold crowns had slightly larger pockets than many of the anniversary tables.
tables werent the same everywhere.
for instance the cue club in vegas in the 70's had tighter tables at least the front ones where the players played, than the bonanza downtown the greek owned.

 

[BasementDweller]

I think the pockets in pro events played larger than the current Diamond 4.5" standard. I don't recall anyone worrying about pocket size back then. I think it was often possible for two balls to get jammed at the brink of a corner pocket. That's not possible any more due to the reduction in pocket width.

The cloth was slower, but that wasn't necessarily a bad thing. At 14.1 you want to minimize cue ball movement, and slower cloth helps you do that. For the cushions, I recall being able to get five lengths up and down the center of the table on many/most tables. That is really hard now. I think only part of that is me. I think the pockets tended to accept balls better.

You're one of the first ones from "back in the day" to admit that the tables weren't really slow. I know that's not what you said, but the implication is that the rails have as much to do with the overall speed of the table as the cloth does. I can't get 5 rails on my table with 760 today in 2024! Yet old matches even going back to the 60's show lively Gold Crown rails, and I suspect they could have gotten 5 rails on those. I know....I know...there were rooms with slow tables. I have seen them. I just don't think it was the norm or as prevalent as many suggest. At least not for tournament matches.

Pocket size started getting talked about quite often in the early 90s during Accu-stats matches. Grady would often refer to them as "cavernous" and his co-hosts would agree that they needed to be smaller. I think that's when the march towards ever decreasing pockets began.

 

[axejunkie]

I've generally read steel joints were common then as synthetic materials weren't as durable. McDermott and South West were some of the makers behind making non-steel joints more common. Ivory joints were more common then too, for some obvious reasons.

 

[jay helfert]

A lot of good posts on here already. Simoniz cloth was rarely seen on Pool tables until the mid to late 80’s. It was primarily Three Cushion cloth. Steven’s cloth was more widely used and yes it played slow. You needed a Stroke to move the cue ball around.

Al Conte set up the Gold Crowns for most of the major tournaments and they played Perfect! Probably around 4 5/8 to 4 3/4 inch straight cut pockets with semi deep shelves. Definitely not buckets, balls did not slide in!

In the 1970’s everybody still played with one cue! Breaking and playing cue were the same. There was no such thing as a jump cue!

The elite players (Buddy, Sigel, Hopkins, Varner, Rempe, Miz) ran racks, often three or four in a row. Then along came Earl in the 80’s and he was running sixes and sevens in every match!

The “feel” players preferred ivory joints and the power players liked steel.

Everybody wanted to have the hardest break possible and make balls on the break. David Howard, Wade (Billy Johnson) Crane, Tony Ellin, Danny Medina had the most powerful breaks, but Earl had the best/most effective break. He studied the art of breaking in 9-Ball!

 

[maha]

l loved ivory joints, but if you were in snow country and took your cue in from the car and didnt wait awhile your joint might crack unless it had warmed up. cracked a few bill stroud josh joints and ferels until i wised up to it.

 

[lfigueroa]

I grew up playing pool as a teenager in the 70's.

I'd often play at The Palace and Cochrans in San Francisco and the pockets on those tables were "generous" and probably in the 5" range with shallow shelves. I recall the cloth being pretty thin and fast. At other rooms the pockets were equally generous. And in recent memory I recall saying out loud that some of the old-time road hustlers oft consider legendary, maybe weren't so great but for their experience and especially their knowledge of 1pocket. (That got me into a lot of trouble on 1pocket.org a few years back, lol). But, champions are champions and many of the greats of old would excel even today.

As to SS joints, well, I believe many cue makers started out with brass and there were the occasional ivory joints. But it wasn't until techniques and the machinery improved that ivory became more common. BTW, I lived in Montana for four years and would take my Gina with ivory ferules out of the trunk of my car after being in way below freezing temps and never cracked a one.

Lastly, there was hardly any instructional info out on the streets. There were Mosconi's two little books, Hoppe's green hardbound, Cottingham, and Sunset-like books from Lassiter and Mizerak. That was it.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Bob Jewett]

As for apparent cushion rebound speed, check out this table which has low rails for the balls. The cloth is pretty slow, but the player gets six widths on a fairly soft shot. (eight ball shot at 1:39:11)

Special Money Game - 8 Ball @ Snooker table - @Joshua Filler vs. Alexander Ursenbacher

Special Money Game - 8 Ball @ Snooker table - @Joshua Filler vs. Alexander Ursenbacher powered by REELIVE10-Jahre Billard Club Flying Balls Innerschweiz

www.youtube.com

 

[Colonel]

I grew up playing pool as a teenager in the 70's.

I'd often play at The Palace and Cochrans in San Francisco and the pockets on those tables were "generous" and probably in the 5" range with shallow shelves. I recall the cloth being pretty thin and fast. At other rooms the pockets were equally generous. And in recent memory I recall saying out loud that some of the old-time road hustlers oft consider legendary, maybe weren't so great but for their experience and especially their knowledge of 1pocket. (That got me into a lot of trouble on 1pocket.org a few years back, lol). But, champions are champions and many of the greats of old would excel even today.

As to SS joints, well, I believe many cue makers started out with brass and there were the occasional ivory joints. But it wasn't until techniques and the machinery improved that ivory became more common. BTW, I lived in Montana for four years and would take my Gina with ivory ferules out of the trunk of my car after being in way below freezing temps and never cracked a one.

Lastly, there was hardly any instructional info out on the streets. There were Mosconi's two little books, Hoppe's green hardbound, Cottingham, and Sunset-like books from Lassiter and Mizerak. That was it.

Lou Figueroa

Oh, but you left out Cool Cat Martins 99 Critical Shots of Pool. I remember when it came out in ‘77, it was like the Holy Grail to me.

 

[lfigueroa]

Oh, but you left out Cool Cat Martins 99 Critical Shots of Pool. I remember when it came out in ‘77, it was like the Holy Grail to me.

I guess I was referring to the early 70's but you are correct about Ray's book when it came out in 1977.

That was a great moment that finally gave pool players a worthwhile book. I had Ray sign my first edition when I took a lesson at his house a bit over 10 years ago.

Lou Figueroa

 

[sjm]

You're one of the first ones from "back in the day" to admit that the tables weren't really slow. I know that's not what you said, but the implication is that the rails have as much to do with the overall speed of the table as the cloth does.

I really don't agree here. In the straight pool era, the nappy cloth meant that you had to hit it harder to get to the rail. The power stun shots back then (such as going to the rail and back out on a five-degree cut with pace) were, to a large extent, the sole domain of the super-elite, a point Mike Sigel has made. In 14.1, the slow cloth meant the balls didn't spread nearly as well on the opening break shot, a shot on which few balls went to a rail. Making a ball on the break in nine ball was also a little harder on the slower cloth.

Yes, the old tables played slow and both the break shot and position play were a little more difficult.

 

[Taxi]

Brunswick Gold Crown tables were very close to 5" corners. I really doubt there were any 4.5" pockets back then.

Not always. Many of the top rooms back then had at least a few tables with tight pockets. I remember the front table at Randolph Hills Billiards in Montgomery Co., MD, where the likes of Geese and Steve Gumphrey hung out, had pockets that you couldn't fit two balls in. The next two tables were also like that, but then the rest of the tables were for the cushion beaters. All of the tables were Gold Crowns.