Could Willie make the team?

Zerksies said:
I guess you didn't watch the video. The route choices was not optimal
Click to expand...
I did end up going back and watching the first two racks. The first rack I thought Wille ran the balls the way that gave the best chance to win. He kept the CB at the rack end of the table, and shot the balls in the head end pockets, even though that made the shots harder. One of those shots he hit fat (but it fell), and that gave him a bit of a steeper angle on his next shot. So it looked funny, but that was an execution error not a decision error. Staying at the rack end and zig zagging back and forth like he did took colliding with the OB's out of the equation. He did have the option to switch to the other side of the balls at one point and chose to stay on the rack end of the balls for that reason.

The second rack beginning was weird. I couldn't tell if the camera skipped some shots, but the CB would end up on the head end of the table a couple shots with nothing near it to shoot. IDK what was going on. But towards the middle and end of the rack, Mosconi picked a winning pattern.

I did not watch any other racks (except years ago).
 
iusedtoberich said:
There is not a championship caliber straght pool player in the past 50 years that is "also" not a championship caliber 9 ball player. The other way around is not true, however. When the professional game switched from straight pool to 9 ball, Sigel, Rempe, Mizerak, etc, were the top 14.1 players, and they were also the top 9 ball players. Straight pool is a harder game. If you excel at it, you will excel at any pocket billiards game. Perhaps the one exception is bank pool.

The era does not even matter in Willie's case, because besides tournament wins, which is relative performance, we have absolute performance of balls made. By all accounts of people who saw him in person, he ran 100 and out in every single exhibition. Would you bet money Shaw or Thorston could do that in every room around the country on command? By my logic, if Mosconi is a better straight pool player than Shaw or Thorston, he'd also beat them in 9 ball.
Click to expand...

If you are arguing balls pocketed than I will argue scratches.

Today's equipment is tougher because the cloth is faster. The number of scratches in 14.1 is higher, does it meant he players are weaker or does it mean the table conditions are tougher?

I dont doubt Mosconi was amazing, but there is myth and there is fact.
 
xradarx said:
Todays 14.1 Continuous Billiards Pocket Pool player is use to being catered to for their offensive skills, same as in most all professional sports. Offense pays the bills. Defense wins you championships.
Todays players will splay the cueball allover and around the table.
Mosconi controlled the cueball and seldom, if ever just fired away at anything.

Here’s another little known fact for you, Greenleaf and Mosconi, were not self-taught 14.1 Continuous specialists. They both had the same instructor/teacher of the game, during some of their time together at Brunswick.
Click to expand...

If players can cheat the rack in 9 ball in 14.1 its even easier.

Were they playing the exact same rack everytime?

Today's players play the rack but not the exact same way like back then.
 
iusedtoberich said:
There is not a championship caliber straght pool player in the past 50 years that is "also" not a championship caliber 9 ball player. The other way around is not true, however. When the professional game switched from straight pool to 9 ball, Sigel, Rempe, Mizerak, etc, were the top 14.1 players, and they were also the top 9 ball players. Straight pool is a harder game. If you excel at it, you will excel at any pocket billiards game. Perhaps the one exception is bank pool.

The era does not even matter in Willie's case, because besides tournament wins, which is relative performance, we have absolute performance of balls made. By all accounts of people who saw him in person, he ran 100 and out in every single exhibition. Would you bet money Shaw or Thorston could do that in every room around the country on command? By my logic, if Mosconi is a better straight pool player than Shaw or Thorston, he'd also beat them in 9 ball.
Click to expand...
I think a convincing argument could be made that Mosconi was a better 14.1 player than Shaw or Thorsten, but highly doubtful for 9 ball- especially regarding Shaw
 
Looking at those records i'm assuming that the word 'Mosconi' must have given poor ol' Irv nightmares. Talk about being the bridesmaid.
 
xradarx said:
Todays 14.1 Continuous Billiards Pocket Pool player is use to being catered to for their offensive skills, same as in most all professional sports. Offense pays the bills. Defense wins you championships.
Todays players will splay the cueball allover and around the table.
Mosconi controlled the cueball and seldom, if ever just fired away at anything.

Here’s another little known fact for you, Greenleaf and Mosconi, were not self-taught 14.1 Continuous specialists. They both had the same instructor/teacher of the game, during some of their time together at Brunswick.
Click to expand...
Who might that be?
When Mosconi and Greenleaf went on their 100 game tour Willie said he studied Greenleaf and made note of all his mistakes and learned from it.
If memory serves me right I think the final score was Willie 47 VS Ralph 53 wins.
Willie was a much better 14.1 player after his tour with Ralph.
 
justnum said:
If you are arguing balls pocketed than I will argue scratches.

Today's equipment is tougher because the cloth is faster. The number of scratches in 14.1 is higher, does it meant he players are weaker or does it mean the table conditions are tougher?

I dont doubt Mosconi was amazing, but there is myth and there is fact.
Click to expand...
There is myth if you never saw him play.
I played Willie an exhibition in 1964 and he was amazing.
Willie would go to a new room and play his exhibition on tables he never played on before and run 100's like it was nothing.
I saw in person most of the top 14.1 players during the early '60's when I lived in N.J. which was littered with great and near great players.
Willie was a notch above all of them.
 
justnum said:
If players can cheat the rack in 9 ball in 14.1 its even easier.

Were they playing the exact same rack everytime?

Today's players play the rack but not the exact same way like back then.
Click to expand...
Screenshot_20221207-130712.jpg
 
justnum said:
If you are arguing balls pocketed than I will argue scratches.

Today's equipment is tougher because the cloth is faster. The number of scratches in 14.1 is higher, does it meant he players are weaker or does it mean the table conditions are tougher?

I dont doubt Mosconi was amazing, but there is myth and there is fact.
Click to expand...
The bolded sentence makes it crystal clear you are not a very good player, and prolly have not spent a lot of time competing against good players on slow cloth. BOTH straight pool AND 9 ball are MUCH easier on fast cloth. Every 80s era player who also played well after the switch to Diamond tables will tell you this. One can get a nonoptimal angle on fast cloth, and still get out. On slow cloth, if you end up with a poor angle, you are now required to come with a MONSTER stroke to get out, or the run is over.

SAFETIES are almost much harder on slow cloth, as you can't just edge a ball at the other end of the table, move it two inches, and go three rails to the other end of the table and get behind blockers. Your lack of pool knowledge, plus your self assurance that you are correct, is embarrassing.
 
measureman said:
Who might that be?
When Mosconi and Greenleaf went on their 100 game tour Willie said he studied Greenleaf and made note of all his mistakes and learned from it.
If memory serves me right I think the final score was Willie 47 VS Ralph 53 wins.
Willie was a much better 14.1 player after his tour with Ralph.
Click to expand...
Willie's autobiography has it at 57-50 in Greenleaf's favor, with Willie writing "... but most of my wins came during the final month. I guess I had learned my lessons well."
 
AtLarge said:
Willie's autobiography has it at 57-50 in Greenleaf's favor, with Willie writing "... but most of my wins came during the final month. I guess I had learned my lessons well."
Click to expand...
Willie also says that he took Ralph's system of close position and improved on it by a factor of two. Being closer to the object ball makes both the shot and the position easier. Another area Willie mastered -- according to Jimmy Caras -- was the pattern on the last five. Jimmy thought Willie jumped up a level when he perfected that.

Oldtimers at The Palace (SF) agreed that in a long match Willie was favored over everyone by about 30% of the match length. The scores above confirm that.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Willie also says that he took Ralph's system of close position and improved on it by a factor of two. Being closer to the object ball makes both the shot and the position easier. Another area Willie mastered -- according to Jimmy Caras -- was the pattern on the last five. Jimmy thought Willie jumped up a level when he perfected that.

Oldtimers at The Palace (SF) agreed that in a long match Willie was favored over everyone by about 30% of the match length. The scores above confirm that.
Click to expand...
Willie beat me 100 to 15 in the exhibition game I played him in '64.
I was tough enough to deny him his 100 and out ,the best he could do against me was 85 and out.
But I did rack the balls better than him.
 
mizerack was the only one i know that looked and planned out more of the rack than willie.

and both would most times come out where they planned.
 
justnum said:

Based on Jump shots in 2019, unless Mosconi had a gift for masse curves, Mosconi wouldn't even hit these shots without a jump cue.

The Jump Defense is the gold standard against players of Mosconi's era. Would Mosconi be proficient at the Jump Stick? That is a point of controversy. Based on these table layouts it would take a DrDave level analysis to find a carom or kick. Is Mosconi as clever at table analysis as DrDave?

More questions than answers, but based on the table layouts, how would you kick or carom in those positions? It can't be done that is why a jump cue exists. Layout 3 seems the easiest to kick in.

View attachment 674476
Click to expand...
You put a fair amount of work into this post. Your reaction score will reflect this soon.
Thanks.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Willie also says that he took Ralph's system of close position and improved on it by a factor of two. Being closer to the object ball makes both the shot and the position easier. Another area Willie mastered -- according to Jimmy Caras -- was the pattern on the last five. Jimmy thought Willie jumped up a level when he perfected that.

Oldtimers at The Palace (SF) agreed that in a long match Willie was favored over everyone by about 30% of the match length. The scores above confirm that.
Click to expand...

I wonder if Willie meant twice as close to the next object ball or he was positioning the cue ball twice as precisely? Maybe both. I found when I started playing for shape 12-16 inches from the next object ball or even closer my shape had to be very precise. It didn't take much to be on the wrong side of the object ball or have other problems like extreme angles. Still easy to pocket the next ball but shape tended to get harder and harder in a hurry if a recovery shot wasn't possible. It was much easier to play 16-20 inches out and have a little more margin for error on shape. It took a lot less mental energy to run a rack from a little further out.

Hu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top