American Pool vs Snooker

The Break (particularly in 9 ball) is a huge factor in the result of the rack compared to snooker where the break is *almost* insignificant. Agree / Disagree ?

Is this possibly 1 factor of many that may have a bearing on the appeal between the 2 games ?
 
Bob Dixon said:
Heh. You're being too coy by half. You know what I'm talking about. This:


http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4483540&postcount=387

In American parlance that's "calling you out". That means challenging you to put your game where your mouth is. At the EASY game of pool. Should be a snap for you, a highly accomplished snooker player. But you suddenly think there aren't enough doors in this place. LOL.
Click to expand...

Au contraire. I am more than happy to play a game of pool with JAM. She is more than welcome to join me next time I go for a game. Bit of a commute, mind.

BTW I am a terrible snooker player - why do you think I play pool?
 
Bob Dixon said:
You aren't even insightful enough to recognize that position play in snooker is more simple than it is in a game where you DON'T have numerous balls to choose from for your next shot and where a lot of them aren't always in the exact same place. And that's a partial explanation for why snooker players DON'T do that well when they play pool against pro-level pool players.

So, yes- snooker is easier to understand for someone who would never want to actually play any cue sport. You don't have to be a genius to recognize that.
Click to expand...

Snooker players fair better playing pool than pool players do playing snooker



1
 
Bob Dixon said:
"needs them all to win" is something about snooker that I have a high appreciation for. That's something you can't get in a single game of rotation but it does come up in a "race to x", long or short.

On the other hand, safety play in pool is far more interesting, and difficult, than safety play in snooker. You can often get a pretty good safe in snooker by just getting it to the other end of the table. That doesn't always do the trick in pool.
Click to expand...

Snooker safety is more analogous to one pocket. Many of the individual shots are not particularly hard, but there are a lot of nuances involved. Simply getting the ball to the other end of the table may get you another turn, but a good tactical player will tighten noose until you have no shot other than to take on a long pot that doesn't even give you position on a colour. As an aside, I recently lent a one pocket dvd to one of our local snooker players and he really enjoyed it.

I truly believe pool can achieve snookers level of success with proper marketing. I remember watching the Corey Deuel/John Schmidt 8 ball match, and I dunno what it was...but I found it every bit as engaging and entertaining as any match I've seen in cue sports.
 
Bob Dixon said:
That isn't a "get out" clause but, as I said earlier, you aren't very insightful.

You named a bunch of people who aren't snooker players. They're pool players. The fact that they played snooker in the past doesn't make them "failed snooker pros". That's as simpleminded as saying that Albert Einstein was a failed patent examiner which is what he did after two years of efforts to get a job as a teacher failed.

That's "strategic order" nonsense. Most of those millions of snooker followers are watching someone pocket a red, then pocket a color, and then do the same thing again, while they hope that the hometown lad wins it so they can win their 20 pound
bet.
Click to expand...

Actually Melling Peach and Drago are "failed Pro's" Although Drago had some minor success but never won anything.
 
Bob Dixon said:
For example ________________. Insert the name of a top snooker pro who has won a major pool tournament. No, I'm not talking about the Mosconi Cup.
Click to expand...

There are no top pro's that have taken up the game seriously.
Only the lowly ranked likes of Drago that won the Pred 10 ball in Vegas oh and Peach that won the Worlds.
 
Last edited:
Much less people around the globe play Snooker than Pool, and even less Carom games.
Carom games are tough to watch for someone that doesn't know a few things about them, Snooker is even watched by people that never held a cue and will pay for tv coverage or a spectator seat.
This was not achieved without effort or fast.
It was done by treating the game seriously, establishing rules applied for everyone-no exceptions, promoting a professional image and playing conditions in every way, even extensive training of tv coverage was done in order to bring out the best of it.
If Pool was to follow the same style it could be huge, however Pool's nature is different and Pool's world (everybody involved with a few exceptions) doesn't really want to go into that direction for a number of reasons...
So the main difference is serious organization and everything related to it.
Petros
PS Even Carom games have managed to survive with so few people involved compared to other cue sports just by being serious about the game..
 
Bob Dixon said:
They're pool players who also could probably beat any top snooker player in the . . . remember . . . EASY game of pool.
Click to expand...

The running out part is mostly easy that's why Davis made the semis of the worlds.
It's the break, kicking and some strategies that take a bit of dedication to learn.
You simply can't argue with the physics of longer distances and smaller pockets, only an idiot would try.
 
I don't know the answer, but I do know that snooker is a game of beauty and delicate finesse.
 
Bob Dixon said:
For example ________________. Insert the name of a top snooker pro who has won a major pool tournament. No, I'm not talking about the Mosconi Cup.
Click to expand...

What you are really asking:

Is there any top snooker player sufficiently stupid to ignore the rich prize structure of the World Snooker Tour to play in a pool tournament offering far less money?

The answer is NO

Mark Selby won about $100,000 for potting 36 balls at the UK Championship last week, not to mention another $120,000 for finishing second in the tournament.
No pool tournament offers that kind of payoff.

What kind of pool player asks such a question?
Go look in the mirror.

Selby won the 2006 WEPF World 8-Ball Championship but I don't imagine that you would classify it as a "major" pool tournament.:grin:
Beat some guy named Appleton who isn't much of a pool player.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uSgGTvWzBk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6IhEF2G5so&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htBeN3QcSLc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXgOM84zgAM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fFG2SD9nAs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZvLFjoTHsw&feature=related
 
Last edited:
Bob Dixon said:
Hey- don't get me started on why pool tables are bigger than snooker tables.
Click to expand...

Okay I won't lol.
Consider this though on safety play before you make an assumption, the top level of the game requires hitting the thin edge of balls consistently over long distance, often with english and or from tight under the bottom cushion, that my friend is a great skill and what often separates the Pro's from the Am's. Playing this high level of safety and long potting is what gets you chances in the modern game, coupled with the ability to kill off frames consistently in one visit makes for a very tough game.

If you have the time to watch this match you will understand what top level safety is all about.

http://youtu.be/masM2PF5URE
http://youtu.be/wqMX36NS3Xg
 
Last edited:
Bob Dixon said:
I can understand how what you're saying could be true but I really haven't seen it in the snooker I've watched on YouTube. What I see are zone safeties 90% of the time. I will, however, watch your videos later. And don't make the mistake of thinking that I'm dismissing the skills of snooker players. Not at all.

I do, on the other hand, think it's laughable that you can just roll up to the rack or against another ball to play safe.
Click to expand...

Of course many are playing into a zone it's a freeking big table, it's how you get there that is the skill, 99% of the players on here couldn't hit that 12ft thin ball 3 times in a row and return past the balk line not even CJ.
 
Last edited:
Bob Dixon said:
For example ________________. Insert the name of a top snooker pro who has won a major pool tournament. No, I'm not talking about the Mosconi Cup.
Click to expand...

Tony Drago - 2003 World pool masters (was ranked 10 in the world at snooker
too old now though).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Pool_Masters_Tournament


The only top snooker player that i am aware of that had a good go at pool
probably due to his decline in snooker ( age related).
 
Bob Dixon said:
I did and what I saw was someone who thinks that if snooker players want to claim that they are more accomplished at cue sports and that pool is a much EASIER game than snooker then they should be willing to prove it or shut up.
Click to expand...

Are snooker players actually saying that though, or is it just the fans?

I'd imagine snooker pro's have some respect for pool pro's and vice versa, you do see the odd snooker player watching the Mosconi cup and I'm sure some pool pro's watch live snooker...however...

Snooker is fundamentally a harder game, that's not a discussion topic, its simple physics and therefore fact...but...

That's not to say its easier to win one world championship over the other, after all with pool being an easier game, there are more top players, therefore arguably as a top player your odds of winning are lower as anyone from a field of say 32 can win, whereas in snooker, realistically its very unlikely anyone outside the top 16 will win the world championships in any given year.
 
vjmehra said:
Are snooker players actually saying that though, or is it just the fans?

I'd imagine snooker pro's have some respect for pool pro's and vice versa, you do see the odd snooker player watching the Mosconi cup and I'm sure some pool pro's watch live snooker...however...

Snooker is fundamentally a harder game, that's not a discussion topic, its simple physics and therefore fact...but...

That's not to say its easier to win one world championship over the other, after all with pool being an easier game, there are more top players, therefore arguably as a top player your odds of winning are lower as anyone from a field of say 32 can win, whereas in snooker, realistically its very unlikely anyone outside the top 16 will win the world championships in any given year.
Click to expand...


"At the moment I am an awful pool player. I have got to get used to heavier balls, different angles from the cushions, things like that.
"Snooker players are perfectionists but in pool you leave yourself with shots you would not dream of taking on the snooker table like potting balls off cushions. There is a diamond system to the table which is simple if you know how to work it. If you don't it isn't.
"That's why snooker players get thrashed by American pool players because it is not as easy as it looks. I think there is more luck involved in pool than snooker but I still think there is a tremendous skill level in pool that goes unseen.
"Once I started playing pool over the last couple of weeks I have realised it is a very difficult game and there is an art to it. If you compare it to snooker, with big holes in pool surely you shouldn't miss but it is not as simple as that. There are a lot more tactics to the game - which I need to learn and that will take time." - Ronnie O'Sullivan, 2005

http://www.guffoo.cz/danny/ronnie/index.php?nid=1380&lid=cs&oid=171207
 
Bob Dixon said:
This is where you're wrong. Some aspects of snooker are fundamentally harder than pool and some aspects of pool (depending on the particular game) are fundamentally harder than snooker.

If someone has to start practicing at age 12 to be able to reliably sink a ball from 11 1/2' on a snooker table at age 25, that's interesting, but meaningless. During those 13 years that player DIDN't learn a lot of things about pool that are absolutely essential to play pool and that is exactly what has shown up when top level snooker players have shown up expecting to beat the pants off pro pool players at the easy game of pool.

The bottom line is that they are just two different games. There isn't any "one is harder than the other". That's only true if you're talking about the same game played on a smaller table, or a table with bigger pockets, or both.
Click to expand...

No sorry, as I said its physics nothing more. A snooker table is bigger, therefore the game is fundamentally harder, regardless of how much you practice etc.

Of course if you play snooker regularly you are likely to be better at that than pool and vice versa and as I say its not necessarily easier to win at pool than snooker, however its not even a discussion topic to suggest pool as a standalone game is harder or equal to snooker.

In simple terms take any player in the world, whether they have played cuesports or not and see if they can pot more balls on a pool table or a snooker table.

From a 5 year old to Stephen Hendry the answer will always be the pool table, hence it is fundamentally easier.

As I said before that's not to say its easier to win, merely that the game itself is easier.

Again that's physics not opinion.
 
Seeing as how this thread degenerated in to a snooker VS pool debate that never go anywhere lets get back on to the OP's question.
Simply fact is it's a better game to watch, it has the drama and flair that pool does not and the skill involved is obvious and appreciated. When UK audiences first saw pool on TV the reaction was that it was joke of a game with balls dropping that were bashed into the rail 2 ft from the pocket, it has never regained it's credibility.
Say what you will but it will continue to be respected as a "Sport" and provide a good living for many pro players and make a few quite well off.
As they say in sport the cream always rises and in the free world market forces determine the worth.
 
The snooker world championships somehow have a great atmosphere and the latter stages especially for some reason always seem to be really exciting viewing.

That said I actually prefer watching 9-Ball, I like the faster pace, its still very tactical, but not so drawn out. Also the break is a lot more exciting and it feels like anyone has a chance to win.

I actually really miss the 9-Ball world championships being live on tv here in the UK :-(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top