Comparing Players From Different Eras

Old Nine Baller said:
These comments were taken from the "pool myths" thread.



It apparently was Mark Wilson who made the comment.




When you compare players from different eras you must also take into account the changes in equipment and games played in that era.

Wilson apparently thinks that the oldtimers could become top players but not the elite. That's not fair to them. You must consider the opposite; Put Shane, Corey, Shannon or a few others on the oldtime tables with slow cloth, less-lively rails, "clay" balls, non-air-conditioned rooms, and see how they would perform. Sooner or later they would adapt but not before losing a lot. Their accuracy would also suffer when having to hit balls much harder to move the cueball around the table.

As far as the modern players playing rotation games better and kicking better; How hard is it to see that 9 & 10 Ball have overtaken 14.1 as the preferred games for deciding championships? Of course the players that play these games are going to kick better, the oldtimers played two-foul and pushed-out when hooked or confronted with dangerous situations. Do you think that Shane would automatically know where to push-out playing two-foul 9 ball? Of course not but he would learn because he is a great player.

Finally, to say that oldtime players were just "great pocketers" is to detract greatly from what they were and the legacy they left behind. Many of these guys grew up playing on 5x10's, where position was paramount and "great pocketers" were weeded out from the elite of the era.


Those are my thoughts on the topic, what are yours?

ONB
Click to expand...
if you are great in a certain era you would be gresat in another era
legendary players have that combination of "natural talent" and determination to excel
that trancends generations
jmho
 
bbb said:
if you are great in a certain era you would be gresat in another era
legendary players have that combination of "natural talent" and determination to excel
that trancends generations
jmho
Click to expand...

Good statement.
Does anybody think that a young Arnold Palmer,Ben Hogan or Jack Nicklaus would not be monsters on the golf course in the present era?
 
I don't know that all the players of yesteryear would be great on today's equipment but certainly the elite players would. Guys like Mosconi, Crane, Caras, and Lassiter would adapt and refine.

It really isn't much of a leap when you consider guys like the aforementioned were champions on 5x10s with slow cloth and clay balls. If you can be accurate on that kind of equipment, albeit with larger pockets, then gearing down to a Diamond with Simonis and phenolic balls is more than doable.

Great is great in any era.

Lou Figueroa
 
When Earl/Sigel/Hall/Rempe/Marino/Varner/etc played their best there was none better, and so it goes. Currently....Shane has the playability to get Non players interested because of his great performances. We're very lucky to have him, especially since Efren has been thee most recognizable name for a long time.
 
Champions are Champions, it is a mind game and that is where champions have the advantage the game is just easier for them. If it was not they would not be champions. Willie Mosconi would be a champion today and Shane would have been a champion in any era playing any game if they were born and raised in that era.
 
I am not Mosconis' greatest fan but those people that think he couldn't play 9 ball are simply wrong.

In Philly he gave some of the best players of his day the 5 ball and beat them.

What he had that separated him from all other players was the greatest desire to win of any player I have ever known.

Bill S.
 
I think it's pretty amazing that people would think that the players of yesteryear would not be competitive in todays pool world. Here are some facts. I personally saw Willie Mosconi in the middle 60's put on exhibitions all over the LA area at least a dozen times. In EVERY occasion he ran 100 balls playing straight pool. That's every time. That was playing on felt on Gold Crowns and playing with 21 oz cues. What do you think he'd do with fast rubber, Simonnis Cloth and lighter cues? I could go on about the game more but the players of the past would absolutely compete today and compete well. I am not saying they would dominate but they would be very competitive. I never saw Harold Worst play but I heard he was something else playing pool. Perhaps some of our other old timers could comment on past players.
 
Baby Huey said:
I think it's pretty amazing that people would think that the players of yesteryear would not be competitive in todays pool world. Here are some facts. I personally saw Willie Mosconi in the middle 60's put on exhibitions all over the LA area at least a dozen times. In EVERY occasion he ran 100 balls playing straight pool. That's every time. That was playing on felt on Gold Crowns and playing with 21 oz cues. What do you think he'd do with fast rubber, Simonnis Cloth and lighter cues? I could go on about the game more but the players of the past would absolutely compete today and compete well. I am not saying they would dominate but they would be very competitive. I never saw Harold Worst play but I heard he was something else playing pool. Perhaps some of our other old timers could comment on past players.
Click to expand...

Mr. Huey, I saw Willie play in a tournament in Burbank Ca. back in the sixties. He was well past his prime and there were more spectators watching him warm up in the green room than there were in the tournament room.
He was continuously running over a hundred balls in warm up. In my opinion I think he would have been just as good in these days as he was in his era, maybe even better because of the equipment of today.
 
dabarbr said:
Mr. Huey, I saw Willie play in a tournament in Burbank Ca. back in the sixties. He was well past his prime and there were more spectators watching him warm up in the green room than there were in the tournament room.
He was continuously running over a hundred balls in warm up. In my opinion I think he would have been just as good in these days as he was in his era, maybe even better because of the equipment of today.
Click to expand...

I can never understand why this subject comes up so much, It is such a moot point !.. I agree with you and Jerry, Frank ..It is ludicrous for anyone to infer that Harold Worst, or Jack Nicklaus, or Joe Louis, would have been any less a champion if they were 'time warped' into the present day ! (or even sent backwards)

I firmly believe, those rare individuals among us, were born for greatness, and would have excelled in any era, with whatever equipment was available to them...Isn't it obvious, it is a complete waste of time, and very silly to argue who was best, Mosconi or Efren, or Bobby Jones vs. Arnold Palmer !
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top