Legends - Yesterday vs Today

M.G. said:
I stand by my assessment.
14.1 is easy, except the break shots, due to the fact that you'll only play 1/2 to 1/3 of the table for distances. The CB shall not move around that much, that's the tactic.

He was a great player, but not even close to the machine players we have today.
The long reds Snooker players do - not even the slightest chance.

And for the records, I know the old equipment. I had the not-joy to play on a very old unmodifyed Brunswick and it was the easiest table there was. Pockets like buckets, as one wrote, and as soon as a ball was only near the pocket it would fall in.
In contrast I play on a normal table where rattle will accur frequently when played with force and not exact. Also pockets are so deep that a ball in a pocket get difficult to shoot.

Get over it, it's normal. Other people come and will be better and different.

Cheers,
M
Click to expand...


14.1 easy? Well I guess compared to space travel, yes.

You would only have to shoot 1\3 to 1/2 the table if you were shooting against yourself.

" not even close to the machines we have today..." ?
Granted, the snooker players are some of the best shooters on the planet, but you really can't speculate on how good or bad mosconi would have been at snooker had he chosen that game. Or Greenleaf, or Caras, or Taberski or Alfredo DeOro, or Hoppe, or the Schaefer family.

How many beloved " machines" of today have world titles in 3 or 4 disciplines?
How many have 12 or more world titles?
How many have ever struck an ivory ball on napped cloth on a 12 table?

Your so-called machines of today play boutique pool.

As for the equipment, you are only seeing half the picture. There has always been tables with buckets, then and now. There have always been large and small tables.
But in the U.S., the standards set for 14.1 Championship level play, ( from the 1880s to 1948) was a 10ft table with 4.5" pockets.

Read that last part again real slow.
Then go look up Alfredo de Oro.
Then come back and tell us which one of today's machines has a record that can vaguely be compared to that of Mosconi or de Oro.

Cheers
 
SJDinPHX said:
Lou, I can't believe that you, (or anyone else) once they became a fan of one pocket, would ever even want to sweat another game of straight pool, much less play it!..There is no comparison between the diversity and skill required to play them!..That is why 1P is now the dominant gambling game, among the top players, and 14.1 has become ancient history!..The recent rash of 'rule changes', have even succeeded in making 8,9, or 10 ball, much less exciting games than they used to be! :rolleyes:

PS..Whenever I'm trying to sleep, and can't..I just pop a 14.1 video in the old laptop, and I nod off in 2 minutes! :boring2: :boring2: :boring2:
Click to expand...


Hasnt 1P been the dominate gambling game forever?

Ken
 
Ken_4fun said:
Hasnt 1P been the dominate gambling game forever?

Ken
Click to expand...

'Best' and 'Dominant' are two different things Ken..For serious gamblers, one pocket has only fairly recently replaced 9ball..This is no doubt due to the fact, that it requires ALL levels of pool skills, to excel at 1P!..I am surprised it took the games best player's, so long to figure that out! :cool:

PS..I guess we are lucky they finally accepted the fact, otherwise we might still be playing one dimensional games like straight pool, and billiards! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
lfigueroa said:
Dick, you know how there are always a few guys talking about how boring 1pocket is? It's usually the guys who don't play it well or don't play it all.

Same with 14.1 ;-)

True, 1pocket is like a beautiful woman but 14.1 is a great cigar :-)

"And a woman is only a woman, but a good Cigar is a Smoke."
Rudyard Kipling

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

Back in my gambling days I played all games and all comers known or unknown.
14.1-9 ball-8 ball-6 ball-1 pocket-keno-Chicago(1 &5)-golf-pill pool and a few I probably forgot.
What ever it took to get some action.
I found 1 pocket to be boring as hell. Too many safes and moves.
Just my opinion.
 
Rico said:
What game is Efren the all time greatest?
Click to expand...

Efren has been the 'all around' best player, for some years now!,,However, despite his outstanding DCC record, I have never felt one pocket was his best game..Top 1P players would quite often fold against him, because of his other exceptional skills (ball running, cue ball control, etc.)..I believe he, himself considers his best games to be rotational. (9/10 ball, etc)..Not straight pool or one pocket!
 
measureman said:
Back in my gambling days I played all games and all comers known or unknown.
14.1-9 ball-8 ball-6 ball-1 pocket-keno-Chicago(1 &5)-golf-pill pool and a few I probably forgot.
What ever it took to get some action.
I found 1 pocket to be boring as hell. Too many safes and moves.
Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

This just tells me, that whatever your skill level is, you have the same attitude as Archer or Strickland!..They never took the time to learn one pocket, because they simply did not like the game..Look at all the action they have missed, and are missing out on now! ;)

PS..I used to play almost all games myself!..But the 'boredom' factor, has a whole lot to do with the $$$ size of the wager!..Put 20K on the line, like Alex or Scott often do, and you won't consider 1P boring at all! :embarrassed2:
 
Last edited:
mikemosconi said:
To say that equipment or generational changes doe not matter in sports when comparing players 60 years or more apart is just insane--look at Babe Ruth's swing- he ran up out of the batter's box half the time- no way does he get around on the average 94 MPH pitch today with that batting style. Just the same- look at older Brunswick tables - the pockets were absolute buckets with very short shelve distance from pocket opening to slate edge- today's Diamond pro cut pockets together with the cloth speed imparted by modern pro cloth and aramith balls requires a COMPLETELY different stroke and accuracy ability than the "GOLDEN ERA" of pool.

I firmly believe that you cannot compare Mosconi or Crane to what we see today- that is not to diminish their abilities and accomplishments- but to speculate on how well they would stack up makes no sense with the game being so changed by the equipment today.
Case in point- Oliver Ortmann went undefeated to win the 14.1 US OPEN in 1989 and in my opinion this was a "changing of the guard" event in pool where Oliver demonstrated "modern era" dominance over Mizerak and others by playing 14.1 in a way that was - to date - unconventional from a U.S. standard - he was clearly playing a new game designed for faster cloth and different results on the table that even DiLiberto, as commentator admitted- "I have no idea what this guy will do next on the table"-- you can hear this on the old Accustat tapes from that US Open event in Chicago.
Click to expand...

Fyi, George Fels and yours truly did the commentary on this match.
 
SJDinPHX said:
This just tells me, that whatever your skill level is, you have the same attitude as Archer or Strickland!..They never took the time to learn one pocket, because they simply did not like the game..Look at all the action they have missed, and are missing out on now! ;)

PS..I used to play almost all games myself!..But the 'boredom' factor, has a whole lot to do with the $$$ size of the wager!..Put 20K on the line, like Alex or Scott often do, and you won't consider 1P boring at all! :embarrassed2:
Click to expand...

I don't care how many times you denigrate straight pool etc. One pocket is BY FAR the most boring game on the planet to watch. If you put it on tv, you'd instantly kill whatever network was crazy enough to allow that to happen. It may have some interest in playing, but watching it is like watching paint dry. Efren is, no matter how many times you try to put him down, the only player that I (or any other pool player I know) will actually take the time to watch play one pocket! I'd watch Efren play any cue game.

You honestly think ANYONE would find the Varner wedge entertaining to watch? Watching a two hour game (to pocket 8 balls), that's a spectacular game for you?

The gambling aspect is completely unintersting! Of course you'll bloody watch if you bet on it. I'd watch any sport I bet on, if nothing else to see if I win or not, that's got nothing to do with the sport itself, does it? If you have to gamble on pool to find it interesting, you're not a pool enthusiast at all! You're just a gambling addict using pool to feed your habit (even if you are good at the game itself). Why not play cards, then? You'd make a lot more and have more opportunities to make money as well. Pool has got to be one of the worst choices for actually gambling. Play on the horses, dogs, cards or even golf..You can find action every day. You don't have to woof for 8 hours, then go home without gambling at all.
 
Last edited:
?

MODERN,1P RONNIE ALLEN no one ran out more than Ronnie.14.1 MR STEVE Mizerak. 9ball Buddy Hall ,Luther Lassiter .Then all around Varner ,Siegel, West,Hopkinswere all great all around players. Dallas ran 100 on 9 different tables one after the other.And at last dont forget Mr Worst.Talk about all aroud.
 
TheCutShot said:
Just for fun, If the Legends of Yesterday like Willie Mosconi & Irving Crane were alive today and in their pool playing prime, how do you think they would fare against today's top players?

Can you imagine Willie Mosconi vs Efren Reyes both in their prime! how much would you pay to see that!!!! Who do you think would win? Playing 9 Ball & 14-1
Click to expand...

Watch Crane's 150 against Balsis. Two things stood out to me. 1,,,he cowboys the first few racks, and for a legendary position player his racks weren't overwhelmingly impressive. 2,, the announcer waxes glowingly about position play like he never seen it before.

Like any game, there's simply more to build on today than back then. The game was played differently back then. Different type balls, different cues, different tables, different cloth, different pool zeitgeist. 14.1 was bigger back then. Stories that come out of the past seem to be shrouded in heresay - guys like Don Willis for example. The general narrative was that he was one of the greatest, but the narrative also says no one ever REALLY knew how good he was...just stories. Today, everything is in the open,,,there probably ain't no willis out there who is utr. Seems though, that a player needed broader pool knowledge, while today the approach is more specialized. Maybe not apples and oranges, but maybe galas and goldens.

For 14.1, what's "good" straight pool is a bit of a sticky wicket since there are two thoughts on the subject. 1 is judged by high runs - that's where you get the bs "offensive straight pool", which is more like home run derby. 2 is like the beauty of 14.1 played in the classic way of massaging the table. The other games are more straight forward to me. NO ONE is gonna convince me that there was someone out there better than Reyes. They can talk all they want about guys like Allen

Your choice.
 
Last edited:
mikemosconi said:
...Case in point- Oliver Ortmann went undefeated to win the 14.1 US OPEN in 1989 ...
Click to expand...

jay helfert said:
Fyi, George Fels and yours truly did the commentary on this match.
Click to expand...

Apparently:
• Mizerak beat Ortmann 150-55 prior to the finals and then Ortmann beat Mizerak 200-186 in the finals.
• The commentators were Incardona and DiLiberto for their first match and Incardona, Mathews, and DiLiberto for the finals.

http://www.1vshop.com/Accu-Stats/st...98785&PNAME=Steve+Mizerak+vs.+Oliver+Ortmann*
http://www.1vshop.com/Accu-Stats/st...teve+Mizerak+vs.+Oliver+Ortmann*+(2-Disk+DVD)
 
Straightpool_99 said:
I don't care how many times you denigrate straight pool etc. One pocket is BY FAR the most boring game on the planet to watch. If you put it on tv, you'd instantly kill whatever network was crazy enough to allow that to happen. It may have some interest in playing, but watching it is like watching paint dry. Efren is, no matter how many times you try to put him down, the only player that I (or any other pool player I know) will actually take the time to watch play one pocket! I'd watch Efren play any cue game.

You honestly think ANYONE would find the Varner wedge entertaining to watch? Watching a two hour game (to pocket 8 balls), that's a spectacular game for you?

The gambling aspect is completely unintersting! Of course you'll bloody watch if you bet on it. I'd watch any sport I bet on, if nothing else to see if I win or not, that's got nothing to do with the sport itself, does it? If you have to gamble on pool to find it interesting, you're not a pool enthusiast at all! You're just a gambling addict using pool to feed your habit (even if you are good at the game itself). Why not play cards, then? You'd make a lot more and have more opportunities to make money as well. Pool has got to be one of the worst choices for actually gambling. Play on the horses, dogs, cards or even golf..You can find action every day. You don't have to woof for 8 hours, then go home without gambling at all.
Click to expand...

Sorry to have 'denigrated' your favorite game, sir!..I'm also sorry I am a gambling addict, but anyone who doesn't gamble at pool or golf, should be arrested and imprisoned!..I have said many times, I am well aware one pocket is not a spectator friendly sport..There are just too many people like yourself, who cannot grasp the complexity of the game.

I do agree, sweating a 'Varner wedge' game, is far from exciting. (unless of course you have major $$$ riding on it)..But the main reason for the current popularity of 1P, is many fold...First of all, no other pool game offers such a variety of different ways to match up a fair game..It also can be a very enjoyable partner game!..Yes, it does require a certain level of understanding, to enjoy watching, but for most of us pool degenerates, it is way ahead of 14.1 for spectating!

One thing for sure, don't go on the road hustling straight pool..You will go for months without finding a $5 game. (the usual 150 pt. 14.1 wager.:sorry:)..Also, (except for casinos) very few places have card rooms, even fewer yet will have race tracks!..But on the other hand, there is not a city or town in the country, where you cannot find a 1P game, usually for decent stakes..;)
..I would suggest you read Freddy the Beards take, on traveling his 'one and only time' to the northeast, looking for pool action!..Also, his take on Efren's 1P game, is almost identical to mine!..His website is still up and running, take a look!

http://bankingwiththebeard.com/ ..Check out his blogs on the right..Good reading for anyone!

PS.. I'm sure thankful I missed straight pool's exciting 'heyday'!..Even 60 years ago, you could only find a 14.1 game in NYC! (usually for the time :o)
 
Last edited:
One pocket would be a lot more exciting to watch if it was played using a short rack (9 balls), and you had to make them in order. Oh, and you have to use all 6 six pockets.
 
AtLarge said:
Apparently:
• Mizerak beat Ortmann 150-55 prior to the finals and then Ortmann beat Mizerak 200-186 in the finals.
• The commentators were Incardona and DiLiberto for their first match and Incardona, Mathews, and DiLiberto for the finals.

http://www.1vshop.com/Accu-Stats/st...98785&PNAME=Steve+Mizerak+vs.+Oliver+Ortmann*
http://www.1vshop.com/Accu-Stats/st...teve+Mizerak+vs.+Oliver+Ortmann*+(2-Disk+DVD)
Click to expand...

We can bet on it. Fels and Helfert worked the Finals for a local TV network. I have a copy of this on DVD. Its possible Accu-Stats also did a simultaneous video. Of that I'm unsure.
 
LAlouie...That's not exactly true about Willis. He had a standing offer to play ANYBODY for $25K, if you came to Canton to play him. That offer stood strong for 20 years...nobody came to play. Willis showed up in Johnston City every year...not to play in the tournament, but to bet with the players. He was a master proposition man (like Titanic Thompson), and a true con man. He was a master player at any game with sticks and balls, he was a champion gin player, a champion at horseshoes, very strong ping pong player, expert craps player...and many more. My mentor, Jack White, spoke of traveling with Don Willis, and the one thing he learned was ...NEVER BET AGAINST DON! lol Pretty sure Don has a nephew that posts here occasionally.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

LAlouie said:
Stories that come out of the past seem to be shrouded in heresay - guys like Don Willis for example. The general narrative was that he was one of the greatest, but the narrative also says no one ever REALLY knew how good he was...just stories. Today, everything is in the open,,,there probably ain't no willis out there who is utr. Seems though, that a player needed broader pool knowledge, while today the approach is more specialized. Maybe not apples and oranges, but maybe galas and goldens.

.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I'll be honest with you buddy, your posts always make me laugh.


BeiberLvr said:
One pocket would be a lot more exciting to watch if it was played using a short rack (9 balls), and you had to make them in order. Oh, and you have to use all 6 six pockets.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top