Darren Appleton on snooker

[His Boy Elroy]

I'm a newbie and not allowed to post links yet, but Darren Appleton says on TAR podcast 36, about 30:30 minutes into it that if O'Sullivan and Bustamonte played pool on a nine foot table with snooker balls and snooker cues, that Bustamonte would come out on top. I'll assume, therefore, that he believes the opposite is true - if they played pool on a twelve foot table with pool balls and pool cues, O'Sullivan would win. Hmm, let's think about this. What I think he is saying is that the adjustment to shooting different sized balls is not as drastic as some believe it to be. The only times I've ever watched snooker is on You Tube, but it seems to me that those guys can see the shot a whole lot more often than in pool. When the have to sit down it's usually because they miss a shot they were able to see. So does it all boil down to the fact that while pool players are far more versatile in their skills than snooker players, that snooker players are far superior in pure shotmaking - shotmaking defined as shooting the cue ball into the object ball into the pocket without combo's, kisses, banks, or kicks? It sure sounds to me, if Appleton is to be believed, that's the gist of it.

 

[markjames]

appleton on o'sullivan

i thought appleton said that if o'sullivan had bustamante breaking for o'sullivan, that he, appleton, would still beat o'sullivan in pool.

 

[Zerius]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=sTSA_sWGM44#t=39s

 

[Cornerman]

I'm a newbie and not allowed to post links yet, but Darren Appleton says on TAR podcast 36, about 30:30 minutes into it that if O'Sullivan and Bustamonte played pool on a nine foot table with snooker balls and snooker cues, that Bustamonte would come out on top. I'll assume, therefore, that he believes the opposite is true - if they played pool on a twelve foot table with pool balls and pool cues, O'Sullivan would win. Hmm, let's think about this. What I think he is saying is that the adjustment to shooting different sized balls is not as drastic as some believe it to be. The only times I've ever watched snooker is on You Tube, but it seems to me that those guys can see the shot a whole lot more often than in pool. When the have to sit down it's usually because they miss a shot they were able to see. So does it all boil down to the fact that while pool players are far more versatile in their skills than snooker players, that snooker players are far superior in pure shotmaking - shotmaking defined as shooting the cue ball into the object ball into the pocket without combo's, kisses, banks, or kicks? It sure sounds to me, if Appleton is to be believed, that's the gist of it.

You can't say "if Appleton is to be believed" when most of your post is based on an assumption of his belief. And two assumptions at that, both of which seem very non sequitur.

He only said one thing about one set of circumstances per your own message.

Freddie <~~~ and he said, "pool."

 

[His Boy Elroy]

i thought appleton said that if o'sullivan had bustamante breaking for o'sullivan, that he, appleton, would still beat o'sullivan in pool.

Yeah. after viewing it a few more times - your right. Thank you. I find some english accents a bit hard to understand sometimes. It doesn't change my point though.

 

[naji]

I'm a newbie and not allowed to post links yet, but Darren Appleton says on TAR podcast 36, about 30:30 minutes into it that if O'Sullivan and Bustamonte played pool on a nine foot table with snooker balls and snooker cues, that Bustamonte would come out on top. I'll assume, therefore, that he believes the opposite is true - if they played pool on a twelve foot table with pool balls and pool cues, O'Sullivan would win. Hmm, let's think about this. What I think he is saying is that the adjustment to shooting different sized balls is not as drastic as some believe it to be. The only times I've ever watched snooker is on You Tube, but it seems to me that those guys can see the shot a whole lot more often than in pool. When the have to sit down it's usually because they miss a shot they were able to see. So does it all boil down to the fact that while pool players are far more versatile in their skills than snooker players, that snooker players are far superior in pure shotmaking - shotmaking defined as shooting the cue ball into the object ball into the pocket without combo's, kisses, banks, or kicks? It sure sounds to me, if Appleton is to be believed, that's the gist of it.

Busty and Appleton know pool, and cannot play or learn snooker not even if they try. O'Sullivan on the other hand, knows snooker, and certainly will loose to both on a pool table; but give O'Sullivan few month practice on a pool table, no one will beat him, his cuing skill far exceeds anyone, plus he is enjoying the $ 300k he just pocketed, and would not bother with 20k in a pool tourney.

Now SVB is good, and i hope someone invest in him to learn snooker and compete in these big events. He got the concentration and focus and determination required for snooker which is 80% in snooker, all he has to do is shorten his stroke a bit. Alex is good, but looses concentration and focus in a long match; sure he wins in the US but mainly because his opponents deteriorate more than he does, with exception to SVB, plus there is more luck in pool than snooker anyway.


.

 

[Cornerman]

2005: "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."


That will take time.

 

[His Boy Elroy]

You can't say "if Appleton is to be believed" when most of your post is based on an assumption of his belief. And two assumptions at that, both of which seem very non sequitur.

He only said one thing about one set of circumstances per your own message.

Freddie <~~~ and he said, "pool."

Geez! Has anyone ever told you that too much analysis can lead to paralysis. My premise is that nine ball is a shotmakers game. I don't care how well a player strategizes, plays safeties. banks, kicks, breaks up clusters etc., if a player is not an excellent shot maker, he is not going to be an excellent nine- ball player. If Appleton theorizes that he could beat O'Sullivan in nine ball using snooker balls, he must mean that he, Appleton, is superior in the non - pure shotmaking skills previously mentioned. Why - because all of these non- pure shotmaking skills, while employed in snooker, are not employed nearly as much as they are in pool. But, as anyone who has made 6673 posts in this forum probably knows, nine ball is a shot makers game. Now this is my opinion here, but I'm going to say that no matter how good a players' non - pure shotmaking skills are in nine ball, those skills are not going to make him better than his opponent unless his pure- shot making skills are at least equal to that of his opponent. That, in my opinion, must be the case before his non- pure shot making skills put him over the top. So, again, in my
opinion, what Appleton is saying is that his shot making skills are equal to OSullivans' on a nine foot table with pool sized pockets. So here is my conclusion. Since Appleton does not claim to be able to beat O'Sullivan with snooker balls on a 12 foot table, what he is doing is conceding that O'Sullivan is a better pure shot maker and that O'Sullivans superior pure- shotmaking skills, while not being revealed on the 9 foot table, become clearly evident on the twelve foot table with smaller pockets. This leads to my conclusion that Appleton believes snooker players are superior pure-shotmakers and pool players are better in the non- pure- shotmaking skills and that's what it all boils down to.....Whew!

 

[Cornerman]

Geez! Has anyone ever told you that too much analysis can lead to paralysis. !

I assume you're talking to a mirror. Either that or you don't quite know what that saying means.

Freddie <~~~ isn't making analysis or conclusions

 

[Fatboy]

adjusting to the smaller balls is VERY difficult, adjusting to larger balls is much easier.

 

[Scaramouche]

shotmaking defined as shooting the cue ball into the object ball into the pocket without combo's, kisses, banks, or kicks?

The name of the game is Snooker.
Getting out of snookers requires skills beyond "shotmaking".

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=265993

If U.S. players have the talent, and want money and recognition they should be in the UK playing snooker.
Fact is, none are.
Other professional athletes move to get the best opportunities.
For example, jockey Steve Cauthen moved to the UK, had a bit of success, and even acquired an English accent.

Great Britain
1,000 Guineas - (1) - Oh So Sharp (1985)
2,000 Guineas - (1) - Tap on Wood (1979)
Ascot Gold Cup - (2) - Gildoran (1984), Paean (1987)
Champion Stakes - (2) - Cormorant Wood (1983), In the Groove (1990)
Cheveley Park Stakes - (1) - Desirable (1983)
Coronation Cup - (3) - Time Charter (1984), Triptych (1988), In the Groove (1991)
Coronation Stakes - (1) - Chimes of Freedom (1990)
Derby - (2) - Slip Anchor (1985), Reference Point (1987)
Eclipse Stakes - (1) - Pebbles (1985)
Falmouth Stakes - (2) - Meis El-Reem (1984), Chimes of Freedom (1990)
Fillies' Mile - (2) - Invited Guest (1986), Diminuendo (1987)
International Stakes - (3) - Cormorant Wood (1984), Triptych (1987), In the Groove (1990)
July Cup - (1) - Never So Bold (1985)
King George VI and Queen Elizabeth Stakes - (1) - Reference Point (1987)
King's Stand Stakes - (2) - Indian Ridge (1989), Elbio (1991)
Lockinge Stakes - (2) - Motavato (1982), Cormorant Wood (dead heat 1984)
Middle Park Stakes - (4) - Creag an Sgor (1983), Gallic League (1987), Balla Cove (1989), Zieten (1992)
Nassau Stakes - (1) - Nom de Plume (1987)
Nunthorpe Stakes - (2) - Sharpo (1982), Never So Bold (1985)
Oaks - (3) - Oh So Sharp (1985), Diminuendo (1988), Snow Bride (1989)
Prince of Wales's Stakes - (2) - Kind of Hush (1982), Stagecraft (1991)
Racing Post Trophy - (2) - Be My Chief (1989), Peter Davies (1990)
St. James's Palace Stakes - (2) - Horage (1983), Shavian (1990)
St. Leger - (3) - Oh So Sharp (1985), Reference Point (1987), Michelozzo (1989)
Sun Chariot Stakes - (1) - Cormorant Wood (1983)
Yorkshire Oaks - (1) - Diminuendo (1988)

France
Grand Prix de Paris - (2) - Risk Me (1987), Saumarez (1990)
Grand Prix de Saint-Cloud - (2) - Diamond Shoal (1983), Acatenango (1986)
Prix de l'Abbaye de Longchamp - (2) - Committed (1984), Keen Hunter (1991)
Prix de Diane - (1) - Indian Skimmer (1987)
Prix d'Ispahan - (1) - Indian Skimmer (1989)
Prix Jacques Le Marois - (1) - Lirung (1986)
Prix Jean Prat - (2) - Lapierre (1988), Kitwood (1992)
Prix du Jockey Club - (1) - Old Vic (1989)
Prix Maurice de Gheest - (1) - Never So Bold (1984)
Prix Royal-Oak - (1) - El Cuite (1986)
Prix Saint-Alary - (2) - Indian Skimmer (1987), Rosefinch (1992)

Germany
Aral-Pokal - (1) - Almaarad (1988)
Bayerisches Zuchtrennen - (1) - Imperial Fling (1979)
Grosser Preis von Baden - (2) - Diamond Shoal (1983), Gold and Ivory (1985)
Preis von Europa - (1) - Gold and Ivory (1984)

Republic of Ireland
Irish 1,000 Guineas - (1) - In the Groove (1990)
Irish Derby - (1) - Old Vic (1989)
Irish Oaks - (2) - Diminuendo (dead heat 1988), Possessive Dancer (1991)
Irish St. Leger - (1) - Mashaallah (1992)
Moyglare Stud Stakes - (1) - Chimes of Freedom (1989)
Tattersalls Gold Cup - (1) - Opera House (1992)

Italy
Derby Italiano - (1) - Hailsham (1991)
Gran Criterium - (1) - Tanque Verde (1985)
Gran Premio di Milano - (2) - Diamond Shoal (1983), Mashaallah (1992)
Gran Premio d'Italia - (1) - El Cuite (1986)
Gran Premio del Jockey Club - (1) - Gold and Ivory (1984)
Premio Roma - (1) - Orban (1987)

United States
Kentucky Derby - (1) - Affirmed (1978)
Preakness Stakes - (1) - Affirmed (1978)
Belmont Stakes - (1) - Affirmed (1978)

 

[RunoutJJ]

B but give O'Sullivan few month practice on a pool table, no one will beat him, his cuing skill far exceeds anyone, plus he is enjoying the $ 300k he just pocketed, and would not bother with 20k in a pool tourney.



.

That's some major brass man. I think Ronnie is a god in cue sports but if you really think that he would beat SVB, Archer or Earl then you have another thing coming. He may be god in Snooker but ive seen him play pool and he's not in the same league as these guys. The rail fouls alone would bury him.

 

[Pathetic Shark]

adjusting to the smaller balls is VERY difficult, adjusting to larger balls is much easier.

Couldn't disagree more. The bigger ball is the main reason snooker players take a long time to adapt to pool - playing with a smaller, light ball is easy once you're used to playing with 2.25" pool balls.

 

[naji]

That's some major brass man. I think Ronnie is a god in cue sports but if you really think that he would beat SVB, Archer or Earl then you have another thing coming. He may be god in Snooker but ive seen him play pool and he's not in the same league as these guys. The rail fouls alone would bury him.

Ok, you an i agree that Ronnie can pocket balls, so in this department he only need very short time to get adjusted to larger balls, i used to play snooker and pool 20 some years ago, it is not big deal switching. What is big deal is learning patterns and position play of which will take him i'd say 6 months continuous practice he will get there. My only issue how can i down size him to a $20k match after winning a $ 300k match? The only way is to send SVB over to learn snooker since he will have some motive to look for $$$$$$ and hope he makes it.

 

[CJ Wiley]

Snooker and Pool are very different games, like tennis and ping pong.

That's some major brass man. I think Ronnie is a god in cue sports but if you really think that he would beat SVB, Archer or Earl then you have another thing coming. He may be god in Snooker but ive seen him play pool and he's not in the same league as these guys. The rail fouls alone would bury him.

I've played against Ronnie and Steve Davis and they certainly pocket balls well. However, in pool there's many factors that require years of training to master involving pattern and position play. The heavier balls require a different type stroke, power is essential, especially in the break shot.

Snooker and Pool are very different games, like tennis and ping pong.

 

[Scaramouche]

The snooker ranking list - total 98 players
http://www.prosnookerblog.com/rankings/201213-rankings-pages/201213-official-rankings-end-of-season/
has players from:

England
Scotland
Ireland
Wales
Northern Ireland
Canada
Australia
India
Thailand
Hong Kong
China
Belgium
Norway
Malta
Egypt
Iran

Nobody from U.S.A.

 

[Fatboy]

The snooker ranking list - total 98 players
http://www.prosnookerblog.com/rankings/201213-rankings-pages/201213-official-rankings-end-of-season/
has players from:

England
Scotland
Ireland
Wales
Northern Ireland
Canada
Australia
India
Thailand
Hong Kong
China
Belgium
Norway
Malta
Egypt
Iran

Nobody from U.S.A.

your not surprised, are you???:smile:

 

[sjm]

Busty and Appleton know pool, and cannot play or learn snooker not even if they try. O'Sullivan on the other hand, knows snooker, and certainly will loose to both on a pool table; but give O'Sullivan few month practice on a pool table, no one will beat him, his cuing skill far exceeds anyone, plus he is enjoying the $ 300k he just pocketed, and would not bother with 20k in a pool tourney.

.

I watched O'Sullivan play at IPT Las Vegas, an event that had a first prize of $350,000. He was unimpressive and was a total nonfactor.

The transition is harder than most people think. I agree that Ronnie has the cueing skills to be a great pool player, but I think it would take a couple of years of playing nothing but pool for him to excel at world class level.

Certainly, Allison Fisher, Karren Corr and Kelly Fisher have demonstrated that the transition from snooker to pool can be a smooth and successful one.

 

[Slasher]

I watched O'Sullivan play at IPT Las Vegas, an event that had a first prize of $350,000. He was unimpressive and was a total nonfactor.

The transition is harder than most people think. I agree that Ronnie has the cueing skills to be a great pool player, but I think it would take a couple of years of playing nothing but pool for him to excel at world class level.

Certainly, Allison Fisher, Karren Corr and Kelly Fisher have demonstrated that the transition from snooker to pool can be a smooth and successful one.

It has to be something you truly "want" to do not just for a lark. Peach, Drago, Melling all have won World, pro and major events and they were not even top ranked players. This would never happen the other way round, never.