I was there!
Hopkins vs. Sigel.. SandsRegent
- Thread starter garczar
- Start date
I think it took 50 years for camera crews to learn to shoot pool. I just watched an Earl Efren ESPN match from the mid 90's and it was horrible. They still had the camera following the CB around the table. And there was an overhead camera that was spinning the table like a disco ball. The 80's Mosconi matches were even worse. Same with the super old matches from the 60's. This one was actually a bit better, but still the crew knew nothing about pool. Thanks to Pat for starting Accu-stats and doing his own filming.
Again, who fkng cares???? It was entertaining pool. Who gives a shit how big the pockets were?????
Well, clearly I care because the point interested me. Sorry that offended your feelers to this degree.
Who won the final
Mike
Anyone who thinks prime Sigel and prime Mizerak wouldnt be a world class champion in today’s field are nutz. It’s not like they would have forgotten how to play. Mizerak played snooker with his pool stick and (claimed) century runs. Sigel won that Peter Vitalie open, and the Peter Vitalies I shot on were difficult tables.
The other thing is that the slowness of the tables in those years…. that made the game harder. You had to always stroke the ball. I think anyone given the choice between fast 4.5” pockets and slow 4.75-5” pockets would choose fast every day.
At no time did I claim otherwise. I simply stated that tighter equipment = fewer number of racks run.
They would still be the highest level players on the planet, they would just have a lower pocketing percentage.
Some of the best players in the world play in MC and there were certainly fewer racks run this year than a couple years ago when the pockets were enormous and took anything close. Break boxes affect run out % too, but the shooting % seemed to be lower as well this year. To say pocket size does not affect pocketing success is also "nutz".
You see guys today running that many racks. You’re implying something. If it’s unclear, then be explicit please.
My comment was directed at everyone who for some strange reason that the best players of previous decades wouldn’t be the same caliber player in today’s game. Did you specify 4” Mosconi pockets? You said, “a Diamond.” He would have been just fine. For you to think otherwise is strange.
Regardless, Sigel and Mizerak would have been fine. To think otherwise is truly nutz. I didn’t say it wouldn’t affect them. But there are so many other things that make the game easier today, so there’s positives about today’s game.
In my opinion. Filler is the modern day prime Sigel. I don’t see anything that Filler does that is better than Sigel, aside from jump cue shots since that wasn’t part of the game back then. I’m 100% sure Sigel would have figured that out too. There’s no reason not to think that.
We get your point. Believe me, we get it. Every time an older match comes up its the same tired old story: they wouldn't have played well on tighter modern tables. AGAIN, who gives a shit?????????????
Didn’t all the pool rooms before Diamonds came out have the front few tables triple shimmed? That’s where all the player’s practiced and gambled. The back bucket tables were for the bangers. That’s how it was anyway in the early 90’s when I started playing. How was it in the 60’s 70’s 80’s?
Yep. Every room back in the day had a tighter 'action' table. To say that players from back then would not have played well today is ridiculous.
You and iusedtoberich are right. I always had the best and the toughest table right by the bar in my poolrooms, and the other "softer" tables in back. Most room owners who were pool players did the same thing. They wanted a good table for themself to play on, and still be able to keep an eye on the counter and the bar area.
I damn sure didn't want to be in the back of the poolroom when it was busy. If a player tried to get me to change tables I would tell him after we close at 2 AM I'd be willing to move to a back table. Did that several times. The cops would go by and see us playing in there and shine a light in and I would wave at them and they would go on their way.
I damn sure didn't want to be in the back of the poolroom when it was busy. If a player tried to get me to change tables I would tell him after we close at 2 AM I'd be willing to move to a back table. Did that several times. The cops would go by and see us playing in there and shine a light in and I would wave at them and they would go on their way.
I think it's still pretty common for rooms to follow this general concept that didn't (or couldn't afford to) purchase Diamonds. And you know how a triple shim pocket plays compared to an extended rail after the cloth breaks in.
Thank you for clarifying without getting all emotional.
Have a great weekend.
Very good point. I purchased the money table from the owner of the last pool hall in town when it finally shut its doors.
The pockets were 3 15/16ths.
I will share a story from a departed friend who owned that last remaining pool hall in town. Bobby Hunter was playing pool with the owner, on the very table I mentioned.
They were discussing the straight pool high run in the room. When the owner told Bobby what the house record was, Bobby snapped, "Not on this table."
The owner then told him that it was on a table with standard pockets. The fact that BH didn't find it probable that a run that high was done on that table shows he feels pocket size affects overall pocketing percentage too.
That is the opinion I was attempting to convey.
Those players would still be the world's best players.
Remain calm.
In my last poolroom, the corners were about the same with corresponding tight side pockets. We never had a 14.1 money game so that was no issue. Tony Annigoni decided he would set a record for that table and played for several hours and his best run was an 88. Bob Hunter was not able to beat that run, although he only tried a few times and quit in frustration. Of course, this table was set up for One Pocket, and I was the King in there until a young Tony Chohan came in their and cleaned my clock!
David was the one who got eaten in the finals.
Two tournaments a year almost until the end of their run around 2010 or 11. They continued to support the U.S. Bar Table held there once a year. I discovered that Reno was a better venue for pool tournaments, as many casinos up there were very happy if you brought them 500 or more guests, who stayed for several days. Not like Vegas, that's for sure, who wanted all big ticket events. I held tournaments at the Sands, the MGM Grand by the airport, and the Flamingo Hilton downtown. All went well with them.
I hired a local production crew that specialized in making commercials for the casinos. We spent one day training the cameramen and our director was a friend of mine (Nick ?) who had done TV shoots (mostly Westerns) in L.A. He loved pool and wanted to help. We got things sorted out pretty good and I was satisfied with the results. When the next big tournament came up in S. Carolina (The Rak'm'Up Classic), Pat called me and asked if I was going to do the same thing there, and I told him I could not take the time off again so soon after Reno. He asked if I would mind if he did it instead and I told him to go for it. The new Accu-Stats was born! Thank God, I had no inclination to travel all over the country and find, hire and train a TV crew in each location. Pat solved that problem early on. He brought his own equipment and crew.