Best pool player in the world???

[sliqueshot]

I think Strickland has better repertoire than Archer so in my opinion he's arguably the best 9 ball player. I dunno about Mike Sigel best all around in tournament but I believe won Efren had won every major tournament from 9ball, 8ball to 1 pocket except the bank pool. The rest I wold agree but I have to add Efren Reyes the best 8 ball player ever and no doubt the best in 15 ball rotation. Keith McCready was a freak on bar box that Efren would not even try to gamble against him

 

[JLW]

It's good to see Nick Varner's name mentioned. He's an extremely well rounded player, excelling in many different games. I think he gets way too little respect.

 

[sonia]

henho

vapoolplayer, I am not a poolplayer, I enjoy pool and play for fun but would not consider myself a player. (I also have zero respect for the character type that is often admired in pool circles as being hardy, road-worn, and tough. I am sure you know the type, their deliberate, even artificially gruff mannerism is considered cute or admirable.) (You objected to my gruff manner. hence your harsh response to me.) (You said I made a valid point and a thread on differences between old vs new players and whether fundamentals have evolved would be interesting) (I never mentioned a pissing war, you did. Was that not inflamatory?) (You said there are more intelligent and less confrontational ways to pose the question, and I don't give a crap) Is that inflamatory MR. henho. You said "pissing war", not I. You wrote "crap" not I. You wrote "needling" "woofing" not I. The incendiary words are yours, Mr. HENHO. You lost your temper. I did not.You were the child in a tantrum. I never said any of your type words in my post. I asked you where you got the evidence about the differences between past and present players, and you came apart. You said, "there are more intelligent and less confrontational ways to pose a question", Should that not also be my response to your answer? The reason I asked those questions of you, was because I am curious to hear what present players think about players from the past. I am from that bygone era. That is why I asked.

Have a nice day.

 

[efirkey]

I'd say Wu

 

[Boro Nut]

I'd say Wu

Most Americans do. We just shake hands and say 'Thanks for the game'.

Boro Nut

 

[LastTwo]

> Back in those days,the World tournament was usually a double round-robin or better,with maybe 16-32 players,and took several months to complete with 125 point games. In ONE tournament,Mosconi ran 125 and out 17 times. You could challege the eventual champion to a 3000 point match,played over several days and in several different cities. Willie won or defended HIS World title 19 consecutive times from 1941-1956,and I think he won a title in 1967,several years after his stroke. Back in those days,no one ever showed up from a different country and beat everyone like Efren did in 1985,or Jose Parica had done several years earlier,the best players in the world were clearly American. Every one in the World tournament back then was a stone cold champion,all very capable of running 2-300 balls from practically anywhere. Willie also had a 13 rack unfinished run playing 9-ball,after some guy walked up to him and Andrew Ponzi woofing about a game while they were eating,Willie tried repeatedly to get Andrew up to play,but Willie stepped up and beat his brains out,winning quite a bit before the non-participatory players backer pulled up. Even with these imposing stats,I still honestly feel Sigel is the man. Willie dominated his era with absolute authority,Sigel was even more dominant in his,despite the different equipment and even the primary game. Ask yourself this question,which accomplishment would YOU rather have on your resume,15 documented World Championships,and few others,or 103 major titles including 7 World titles,and the distinction of being the winningest player EVER? I would even pick Sigel over Efren to this day if they played an all-around consisting of 9-ball,race to 50,14.1 to 300 points,and a race to 11 one-pocket. As far as a pure 9-baller,I'd have to take Sigel and Buddy Hall,along with a calm and focused Earl Strickland. Sigel and Buddy played FAR better position,BUT in his prime,Earl's break,shotmaking,and his intensity made him the most imposing offensive threat the game has probably ever seen. These are ALL based on tournament pool alone,for the cash no one with any sense can dispute that Buddy was untouchable. Tommy D.

Efren vs Sigel in an all around, Efren would win the 9-ball and the one-pocket, Sigel would win the 14.1.

The two best 9-ball players on earth are Strickland and Reyes. Sigel, Hall, Varner, Archer, and the rest of the greats are all on one level right below Earl and Efren. My question to you is, have you ever seen Earl and Efren in dead stroke? I've seen tapes of Sigel in dead stroke and let me tell you that watching Sigel was like watching any other professional in dead punch. Earl and Efren, that was some supernatural shit man. I am talking about these two guys running out racks that Sigel would have pushed or played safe on. I cannot even count how many times Earl runs out when he doesn't have a shot on the one. All of a sudden he caroms a ball across the table in, or kick-banks it in and he's out. Just unbelievable shit that Mike wouldn't do. Efren is the same exact thing. Don't get me wrong, Mike is one of the best players who ever lived, but he is not on the same level in 9-ball as Earl and Efren, and DEFINATELY not even in the same boat with Efren in one pocket. I highly doubt you've ever seen Efren in the zone if you think Sigel would win....

And what in the hell are you talking about saying that Sigel and Hall played 'FAR better position' than Strickland? Are you insane? I wonder if you've only seen Earl play when his temper gets the best of him and he plays bad. Have you ever seen him in stroke? Yes or no. His position play is immaculate when he's in the zone.

Just out of curiosity, have you watched the entire color of money match race to 120 with Efren vs Earl?

 

[Opie]

I can't believe it. This thread is on page 5 and is still basically on topic.

 

[Celtic]

Sigel, Hall, Varner, Archer, and the rest of the greats are all on one level right below Earl and Efren. My question to you is, have you ever seen Earl and Efren in dead stroke? I've seen tapes of Sigel in dead stroke and let me tell you that watching Sigel was like watching any other professional in dead punch.

Cannot agree with that in the slightest. I have seen alot of tapes of Sigel, some he gets close to his peak and he is virtually unstoppable. I have huge respect for Earl, he is indeed a phenom but if he and Sigel are both in dead stroke shooting their absoloute best Sigel will win the lag by pasting it to the rail and Earl will never see a ball the entire set. Sigel had a complete 9-ball game, he did not have the powerstroke speed pool thing of Earl but when Sigel shot his best his opponent never had a hope or saw a ball.

Efren and Sigel in their prime playing 9-ball I am taking Sigel all day, he had as good a safety game, ran out as good, and had a WAY better break. Plus he knew how to win like no other pro in history, noone these days wins 90%+ of the finals they play in, Mike did, and it was against younger Varner, Hall, Strickland, Rempe, Reyes, and other players mulling around in the 80's. I think you are selling Sigel WAY short Lasttwo.

 

[sliqueshot]

Top pros have said that Efren Reyes is the best and greatest that they have ever seen. Earl Strickland, Johnny Archer and Ralph Soquet. From playing position to cue ball control and ability to make tough shot, Efren has the vision and creativity while most are just basics. I know Celtic will keep bringing this tournament major and all that but it's undeniable, no one will play Efren in money unless he give them a spot. You know tournament is kinda short but in money it's a long game and when luck evens out, Efren will get the best of everybody. That's why they don't play him even. He even beat Cliff Joyner giving a ball in one pocket. Gambling is always big part of billiards and if nobody will play Efren even then all of you can shut up now.

 

[dogginda9]

Pre-Texas Express rules

Just imagine how tough Efren would be if they still used the old 9-ball rule of all balls spotting on a scratched break shot! The way he billiards balls and thins balls is pretty amazing. It would be pretty tough to out-move him in those situations I would think.

 

[sjm]

Cannot agree with that in the slightest. I have seen alot of tapes of Sigel, some he gets close to his peak and he is virtually unstoppable. I have huge respect for Earl, he is indeed a phenom but if he and Sigel are both in dead stroke shooting their absoloute best Sigel will win the lag by pasting it to the rail and Earl will never see a ball the entire set. Sigel had a complete 9-ball game, he did not have the powerstroke speed pool thing of Earl but when Sigel shot his best his opponent never had a hope or saw a ball.

Efren and Sigel in their prime playing 9-ball I am taking Sigel all day, he had as good a safety game, ran out as good, and had a WAY better break. Plus he knew how to win like no other pro in history, noone these days wins 90%+ of the finals they play in, Mike did, and it was against younger Varner, Hall, Strickland, Rempe, Reyes, and other players mulling around in the 80's. I think you are selling Sigel WAY short Lasttwo.

Tap, tap, tap. For the record, when asked a couple of years ago who the best nine ball player he'd ever seen was, Earl Strickland said "Mike Sigel".

I'm taking Mike in his prime all day over Efren in his prime in 9-ball. I've always rated each of Sigel, Hall, Lassiter, Archer and Earl over Reyes in nine ball.

Mike was the most dominating player I've ever watched, beating many a fiield into submission.

Finally, I'm not sure who posted it, but I concur that Earl's position play, though solid, is not nearly on a par with Sigel or Reyes.

 

[LastTwo]

Cannot agree with that in the slightest. I have seen alot of tapes of Sigel, some he gets close to his peak and he is virtually unstoppable. I have huge respect for Earl, he is indeed a phenom but if he and Sigel are both in dead stroke shooting their absoloute best Sigel will win the lag by pasting it to the rail and Earl will never see a ball the entire set. Sigel had a complete 9-ball game, he did not have the powerstroke speed pool thing of Earl but when Sigel shot his best his opponent never had a hope or saw a ball.

Efren and Sigel in their prime playing 9-ball I am taking Sigel all day, he had as good a safety game, ran out as good, and had a WAY better break. Plus he knew how to win like no other pro in history, noone these days wins 90%+ of the finals they play in, Mike did, and it was against younger Varner, Hall, Strickland, Rempe, Reyes, and other players mulling around in the 80's. I think you are selling Sigel WAY short Lasttwo.

Correct me if I'm wrong but someone who was big on the pool scene told me it is widely known that Sigel wouldn't play Efren 9-ball for money.

I don't think I'm selling Mike short, because I've watched so many matches of all three of them and I was most impressed by Efren and Earl. You are over-exaggerating by saying Sigel would win the lag and Efren or Earl would just sit in their chair the whole time. Did you know that Efren and Earl have done that to opponents also?

Every single famous player had an era in pool where they just absoloutely dominated. Remember when Nick Varner was winning everything? Buddy Hall dominated for a long time I heard. For some players it was a short while, for Bustamante when he was hitting balls his best in 2001-2002, he was the most feared player on the planet. Sigel's era of domination was an incredible one, but Earl Strickland has been playing great pool for decades. He won the WPC in 2002, that was his 3rd time, am I right? That is WITHOUT A DOUBT the toughest competition to win, with the best of the best players from all around the world, and Earl has won it multiple times.

So what is the difference between these three? Efren is around 50 and just won the DCC all-around, which is without a doubt the toughest venue in the United States. Efren has been in his prime ever since he came to the united states, and he continues to be in his prime.

Celtic if the entire world says Efren is the best ever and you say Sigel, who do you think is the more plausible choice?

 

[PoolBum]

Well, I must say that I enjoy these conversations about who is the greatest player of all time. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Earl said Sigel was the best player he ever played. I know Buddy Hall and Efren both have said it. If all three players are in their prime and in dead punch, there are still lots of factors that would go into who might win a given match or set of matches among these great champions (talking nine-ball). For example, other things being equal, if the table breaks difficult and Earl's break is on, I would say he has the advantage. Earl's break at its best was awesome.

Here's how I would rate my picks as the top three nine-ball players ever (with apologies to Wimpy Lassiter) in various categories:

Break: 1. Strickland 2. Sigel 3. Reyes
Position play: 1. Sigel 2. Reyes 3. Strickland
Safety play: 1. Reyes 2. Sigel 3. Strickland
Ball-pocketing ability: 1. Sigel tie w/Reyes and Strickland
Top Gear (stringing racks): 1. Strickland 2. Reyes 3. Sigel
Kicking ability: 1. Reyes............................2. Sigel 3. Strickland
Creativity: 1. Reyes 2. Strickland 3. Sigel
Consistency: 1. Sigel 2. Reyes 3. Strickland

Final Ranking:

1. Sigel
2. Reyes
3. Strickland

It sounds insane to list Earl Strickland as third in anything concerning nine-ball, but I think the consistency of the other two players, especially of Sigel, give them the edge, and Reyes just has those intangibles that make him a genius at the table. Take each of these guys in their prime and put them on ten different types of equipment under varying conditions, to play ten different round-robin tournaments, and that's my ranking.

 

[sliqueshot]

Well I know a lot of you especially Americans would rank Efren behind Sigel and Strickland in 9 ball but to be honest, neither of them two will play Efren even for money and because most of you seen Reyes came to the US in his 30s past his prime especially in 9 ball . And also considering most of the major tournament are played in the US. I believe that if those tournaments are held in Philippines, Reyes would have won more than Sigel and Strickland and this is his weakest game the 9 ball. I also believe you would see more of a player in money game than tournament because tournament especially the 9 ball, luck is really a big factor. But in money which is a long game game, usually luck evens out. And in money, there's more pressure not to lose because you also lost you money. Parica easily beat Sigel in 15 ball rotation in money so obviously Sigel is not as skilled as Parica but Sigel is way better 9 ball player then Parica. THE THREAD IS ABOUT WHO IS THE BEST POOL PLAYER, NOT THE BEST 9 BALL PLAYER AND OBVIOUSLY REYES IS THE BEST.

 

[sjm]

THE THREAD IS ABOUT WHO IS THE BEST POOL PLAYER, NOT THE BEST 9 BALL PLAYER AND OBVIOUSLY REYES IS THE BEST.

Agree strongly with this conclusion, but just as strongly disagree that gambling should be the true measuring stick of a player's pedigree. In a tournament, you must knock off champion after champion to win, and five shots played poorly may spell the end of your chance to win. A poor stretch of play can be overcome in action pool, but tournaments are won by those who don't have poor stretches of play.

When it comes to measuring the best ever, I wouldn't even concede that action pool is relevant. Greatness is measured on the biggest stages in the sport, and it is on this basis only that I agree that Efren is the greatest ever, as he has won in so many different disciplines over the green felt.

 

[Tommy-D]

> Yes,I've seen ALL of them in dead stroke,dating back to 1985,when Earl was dominating the Akron Open and Ohio State Open at Starcher's on Arlington Road. I saw Sigel play 15 times from 1985 to 1994,plus taped every TV match he ever played. I watched Earl gamble one time in about 1986-7,giving a strong player from Cleveland the 6,7,8 and 9,and utterly destroyed him,and have watched him play probably 20 times in person the last 20 years. I didn't get to see Efren play in person until 1990,but have watched him play 30 times,in 9-ball as well as one-pocket and full rack rotation,often watching everything he did all day long. I also had every Accu-Stats tape involving all 3 of these players at one time,and must be crazy,because I still believe Sigel was the better of the 4,including Buddy,in all areas except for the cash. I may be wrong,but not convinced of it. Just a different opinion,Tommy D.

 

[TATE]

I just wanted to know who is the best pool player in the world? If there is already a thread similar to this one, I would like to know what the outcome was. If not please reply. Give me your honest and unbiased opinion. Celtic seems to think that Earl or Sigel should have top honors over Efren. I know you are gonna say that I am playing favorites just cause I'm filipino, but I just so happen to think that Efren is the best pool player in the world.

I think Johnny Archer is the most accomplished player in the world and his career is far from over. He has been overlooked in this thread. Just look at what he's done. 7 time Player of the Year. Player of the Decade. 4 time World Champion. US Open Champion. Over 40 pro event wins so far.

He has the best credentials and is still competitive. He gets my vote.

Chris

 

[sliqueshot]

Bustamante beat Archer when they played 9 ball for money in a set of 13. Busta won the first set then Archer was smoking running out like 13 racks and a row in a second set that Busta was stuck in the table. What a freaking show that was. The funny thing was Busta did not give a crap, everyone was thinking he's gonna give up and shake Archer's hand but hell no he asked Archer to double the bet. Surprisingly, Archer who was freaking on fire was reluctant to do so and Busta beat him 13-11 on the last set placing the same bet. That's what I am talking about. My feeling was Busta was confident he's gonna beat Archer and Archer probably felt he cannot be that lucky.
Tommy D, Sigel would not be the best damn pool player especially after Parica beat him so badly in 15 ball rotation when they played money. 15 ball rotation is game of skills, and Parica may not be on the same breath with Sigel on 9 ball, But Parica has more skilled. You know 9 ball is basic compare to 15 ball rotation.

SJM I think gambling is a big part of pool. In other sports, they do not gamble like in pool and so you can use the tournament as the true measuring stick. But in pool there's more action, when they money which is a long run, luck evens out and obviously the better player comes on top. In tournament a neverheard can get hot and beat anybody but in money, those neverheard will never play these top pros even. You know why because they have more to lose. There's more pressure because you bet your money but in tournament they can play loose because have nothing to lose plus they are the underdogs. That's why Strickland and Sigel does not want to play against Efren in money. I think that's a true measuring stick. Plus when you have seen Efren in his 20s and back in 1970s, you just seen the half of his game.

 

[sjm]

SJM I think gambling is a big part of pool. In other sports, they do not gamble like in pool and so you can use the tournament as the true measuring stick. But in pool there's more action, when they money which is a long run, luck evens out and obviously the better player comes on top. In tournament a neverheard can get hot and beat anybody but in money, those neverheard will never play these top pros even. You know why because they have more to lose. There's more pressure because you bet your money but in tournament they can play loose because have nothing to lose plus they are the underdogs. That's why Strickland and Sigel does not want to play against Efren in money. I think that's a true measuring stick. Plus when you have seen Efren in his 20s and back in 1970s, you just seen the half of his game.

Actually, slique, I agree with much of what you've written. The subject of tournaments vs gambling has often been considered on the forum, and we always reach the conclusion that that they represent two different types of pressure, and we all admire those who excel at either, but hold those who excel at both in the highest regard.

I still say if you want to find out who is best, you need to assemble all the great ones in one place at one time and let them duke it out until just one of them is standing. That's what tournaments, and only tournaments, do.

 

[Williebetmore]

I still say if you want to find out who is best, you need to assemble all the great ones in one place at one time and let them duke it out until just one of them is standing. That's what tournaments, and only tournaments, do.

SJM,
Perhaps race to 5 in 9-ball will not give you the results you desire. Are we positive that short race 9-ball is the truest test of "who is best"????