Fedor Vs Tony 1 pkt

Well, then, Jack Cooney is our greatest ever pool player. Many have scored over and over in the action room, often exceeding the earnings of the best pros, but it is those that mix it up with all the great players at once and beat them over and over that are remembered.

Don't do that.

I did not say after-hours action determined the penultimate player(s) only that there are other yardsticks to consider. In our sport there are many accounts of players that frozen ice-block solid in a tournament environment but thrived playing after-hours matches against the same guys they could not hit the end rail playing in a tournament.

Lou Figueroa
 
Personally, I don't care if any of them they ever gamble. They all have ample opportunity to show their greatness on the tournament trail and every one of them is found in the field of every major. SVB's win at the 2022 World Championship was his only major in the last seven years. By comparison, Filler has won the China Open, the UK Open, the US Open, the World Championship and the gold medal at the World Games in that same period.

Shane's, still one of the truly elite, is not the best anymore, and he knows it. In my opinion, Fedor would demolish him at one pocket in any long race. Two-time World 10-ball champ Kaci would easily beat him at 10-ball, and Filler would school him in a long 9ball race.

Luckily for Shane, he is smart enough to steer clear of today's best in action. Greatness is measured in titles, and the title count in recent years tells us what we already know about Shane. He's not prevailing over the toughest fields very often anymore.
Kaci's worst game is not beating Shane.....on a bad day Shane can still get there.

If you want a long race 1P.....that's gambling.
 
Greatness is measured in titles, and the title count in recent years tells us what we already know about Shane. He's not prevailing over the toughest fields very often anymore.
I disagree.

When the tournaments in the U.S. pay so poorly, the would-be best players have no choice but to pursue other avenues for making a living.
 
Don't do that.

I did not say after-hours action determined the penultimate player(s) only that there are other yardsticks to consider. In our sport there are many accounts of players that frozen ice-block solid in a tournament environment but thrived playing after-hours matches against the same guys they could not hit the end rail playing in a tournament.

Lou Figueroa
We'll have to agree to disagree. Those that can't validate their credentials against all comers in the toughest competitions are not the greats in the eyes of this fan.
 
I'd take Fedor over Alex playing any game at this point. Sure -- Alex MAY be able to out move him for a bit, but the Alex of the past few years misses too many balls to hang with Fedor.
 
Kaci's worst game is not beating Shane.....on a bad day Shane can still get there.

If you want a long race 1P.....that's gambling.
Agreed, if Kaci brings his "C" game, there might be 25 guys that can beat him even in a longish race, but he can beat almost everyone with his average game and, at 10-ball, he's the best in the world right now.

I don't want a long one pocket race. In fact, I have never watched one in its entirety, but I've watched hundreds of hours of one-pocket, and in a long race, I'd predict Gorst 30 Shane 21. That said, Fedor is the favorite in a one pocket race of any length against Shane.
 
Agreed, if Kaci brings his "C" game, there might be 25 guys that can beat him even in a longish race, but he can beat almost everyone with his average game and, at 10-ball, he's the best in the world right now.

I don't want a long one pocket race. In fact, I have never watched one in its entirety, but I've watched hundreds of hours of one-pocket, and in a long race, I'd predict Gorst 30 Shane 21. That said, Fedor is the favorite in a one pocket race of any length against Shane.

Gee, would those be money matches?

Lou Figueroa
 
Of course you know and whether you’d be watching is immaterial.

Lou Figueroa
not all about you
Action pool just isn't the kind of pool that I often get excited about. You are the opposite, and that's just fine. I'll watch what I enjoy and you can do the same. Now that you've chosen to make our debate personal, leave me alone!
 
Where does Kaci fall in these contest, I think he beats Filler and Shane in rotation games
Kaci would hang in there at some point in the match, then his inconsistency would crop up, and Filler would drill him. I think he stands a "good chance" against SVB playing rotation games, but is by no means a lock. But I would bet against him versus Filler in ANY game except snooker.
 
Do we think Alex has reached Efren ability in one pocket? Or since Efren has gotten older, Alex is the last man standing (but did not close the gap to Efren’s best). The reason I ask is Efren manhandled Alex many times at the DCC. One year when he won the whole thing he beat Alex 3-1 and 3-0 I believe.
I think Pagulayan never reached Efren's top level of One pocket play. He doesn't have the 3 cushion chops had, that got Efren out of some truly awful traps.
 
Ronnie Allen, Cliff Joyner, Grady Mathews, Efren Reyes, all great one-pocket phenoms who were in different eras. The Ronnie Allen of 1965 could beat anybody on the face of the planet in 2023 in one-pocket. The Ronnie Allen of 2005, not so much.

Each pool player has streaks of greatness, some longer than others. In one-pocket, there are quite a few super stars, but none greater than Ronnie, Cliff, Grady, and Efren in their primes.
Cliff was definitely a talent. Unfortunately, at his best, he was still playing 1/2 to a full ball under Efren, who was also at his best..
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
Cliff was definitely a talent. Unfortunately, at his best, he was still playing 1/2 to a full ball under Efren, who was also at his best..
I've heard this type of comparison since the 70s but never delved into what the terms actually meant; ball above/under etc. Just now it occurs to me that with 1 hole you could average the the ball counts of various players and compare. Is this it? I've also heard this applied to 9 ball and figured it had to do with who gave what to who. What confuses me is how one arrives at these handicaps.
 
If they play 1P....Fedor isn't a favorite

9 ball he might be...in winner break, Shane can take over long raves.

10 ball might be closer.


Kills me when these guys don’t match up to determine where they stand. When they do, they both risk losing status....which is silly if they are only betting backer money.

I tried my best to get a few big matches at my room. Made it as easy as possible.....and I never hosted a long race.

We may never see a meaningful long race with
Fedor vs Shane or Fedor vs Filler or anyone else
....because when he wins it means he's the better player.
Why should a single race to 30 be more determinative about "where they stand" than an examination of their performance in dozens of public, high stakes tournaments in a variety of settings over a period of months and years?
 
I've heard this type of comparison since the 70s but never delved into what the terms actually meant; ball above/under etc. Just now it occurs to me that with 1 hole you could average the the ball counts of various players and compare. Is this it? I've also heard this applied to 9 ball and figured it had to do with who gave what to who. What confuses me is how one arrives at these handicaps.
In 9 ball "a ball better" means to give the 8. 2 balls better is the 7. In one pocket 1 ball means to give 9-8, and 2 balls means to give 9-7. At least that's how it was in Philly in the 90s:)
 
I've heard this type of comparison since the 70s but never delved into what the terms actually meant; ball above/under etc. Just now it occurs to me that with 1 hole you could average the the ball counts of various players and compare. Is this it? I've also heard this applied to 9 ball and figured it had to do with who gave what to who. What confuses me is how one arrives at these handicaps.
It's basically an average of how many balls the lesser player would need to pocket in order for the win rate to be "roughly" 50%, over a number of games. It takes into account moving, shot execution, who lags the ball to their pocket better, etc. Also, how many balls a player runs on average.

The difference between players like Efren and Cliff may be indistinguishable from a lesser player's perspective, but the differences are there, and they are real. Efren was a slightly better ball runner, so Cliff would sometimes run 6 balls and then miss, and Efren had much better odds of running 8 and out from difficult positions, as compared to his peers. So, if Cliff had run "7" balls, instead of 6, he dramatically increases his chances of winning the game. But he left that extra ball on the table too often, leading to him "needing a ball" from Efren. Though I think Cliff ran balls just fine, and most of that ball difference was Efren's phenomenal moving.

As for where these spots come from, there are breakdowns on here in old posts of One Pocket handicaps, that go from some spot that barely proffers any advantage at all, to those where the better player will need to run 6+ balls on a regular basis, while giving the opponent very little to shoot at for multiple innings at a time.
 
It's basically an average of how many balls the lesser player would need to pocket in order for the win rate to be "roughly" 50%, over a number of games. It takes into account moving, shot execution, who lags the ball to their pocket better, etc. Also, how many balls a player runs on average.

The difference between players like Efren and Cliff may be indistinguishable from a lesser player's perspective, but the differences are there, and they are real. Efren was a slightly better ball runner, so Cliff would sometimes run 6 balls and then miss, and Efren had much better odds of running 8 and out from difficult positions, as compared to his peers. So, if Cliff had run "7" balls, instead of 6, he dramatically increases his chances of winning the game. But he left that extra ball on the table too often, leading to him "needing a ball" from Efren. Though I think Cliff ran balls just fine, and most of that ball difference was Efren's phenomenal moving.

As for where these spots come from, there are breakdowns on here in old posts of One Pocket handicaps, that go from some spot that barely proffers any advantage at all, to those where the better player will need to run 6+ balls on a regular basis, while giving the opponent very little to shoot at for multiple innings at a time.
Very enlightening. Thanks.
 
In 9 ball "a ball better" means to give the 8. 2 balls better is the 7. In one pocket 1 ball means to give 9-8, and 2 balls means to give 9-7. At least that's how it was in Philly in the 90s:)
I kinda half assumed this but was always vague on where the numbers come from. It's like those handicap charts that detail what letter gives and gets what but little else. lol
 
Back
Top