Luther Lassiter's mechanics

Terry Ardeno

Terry Ardeno

I still love my wife
Silver Member
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game. In my opinion, the top 3 are Lassiter, Strickland & Sigel. (For best all around to have ever played, Reys & then Varner get my vote). Anyway, back to Lassiter...

I have tapes of him in those "Legends" matches from the early 1980's. He was 63 when he was playing on the one I'm referencing. At 63, his shotmaking was still sharp. His stroke and mechanics look so awkward, yet, because he's ingrained those particular mechanics into his muscle memory, he has what's called a repeatable stroke. His is not one that most instructors would teach. He has a short back stroke, but not as short as Hopkins'. When he shoots, he has the unique habit of very quickly twisting his bridge up up and out to his left from the table. In other words, instead of his head jumping up, his bridge hand jumps up! He addresses the ball rather high by today's standards, where lots of players have their chin resting on the shaft during their strokes. On his break, he appears to lose his balance and again, his arm flings out to his left. And his bridge consists of what appears to be a very looping and loose finger barely around the shaft of his cue. Yet, despite less than perfect mechanics, he hardly ever misses a ball.

I have watched these tapes so many times over the years. I love seeing how the pros shoot and approach their shots. I can hardly imagine how great a shot maker he was in his prime, say the 1940's-1970.

I think what made him great was he really loved pool. He also built his game around action, ie, if he missed, he didn't eat or pay his bills. I think beside honing his game, that constant tension may have made him have some of the physical quirks and nervous habits that he and any other player accumulates or develops over the years. But, he had a repeatable stroke that he trusted in.

Another quick point here is look at all the unique strokes that the various pro players have. If you could somehow darken them out and just show their silhouettes, I think many of us could recognize who was shooting just by their particular mechanics and strokes.

So, as far as strokes go, one size does not fit all. But, we already know that, right? :)
 
i used to try and shoot like you see some pros, chin on the cue, and my back was killing me and my game rollercoastered (im 6 3", so i can get down there but it aint natural). It was actually a tape of lassiter playing i watched that helped me trust in not being down on the cue and just taking a stance that felt comfortable with, and i built my game around that, a better game and a happier back followed.
 
Terry Ardeno said:
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game. ...
Click to expand...
About Lassiter's form from another thread:

In 1969 I got to see my first major tournament, the US Open 14.1 in Las Vegas. I got there the night before play started, and there was a sparse crowd in the lobby/sales area and a couple of practice tables. On one table was a shabby-looking older guy trying to practice. He was always out of position, never satisfied with what he did, had to bank about a ball per rack at 14.1, and looked horrible at the table. When he shot left handed, he would just slide his grip hand up the cue, still with the whole fist encircling the shaft - a pure hick move. He didn't miss much, but I was about ready to ask him what he was doing on the table, or maybe to ask him to play some nine ball, but I just let him be. Of course, that was Lassiter practicing. He won that tournament. If he ran 80, there would be three banks in the run.
​
 
Terry, on the matter of whether Lassiter was the best nine-baller ever, I've heard many suggest as much over the years. Nonetheless, I wonder, and doubt, whether he'd have been as elite a nine-baller in the Texas Express era. Lassiter is, in the eyes of more than a few, the best ball pocketer ever, and I feel that the one shot shootout version of nineball gave the great pocketers a greater advantage than in Texas Express, as they would frequently push out into really difficult shots that they could make, but few others could. One shot shootout is the best format for the great pocketers.

My sense of all this is that Lassiter was the best one shot shootout player ever, but I don't think hecan be compared to today's superstars, as he played a far different version of nine ball.
 
sjm said:
Terry, on the matter of whether Lassiter was the best nine-baller ever, I've heard many suggest as much over the years. Nonetheless, I wonder, and doubt, whether he'd have been as elite a nine-baller in the Texas Express era. Lassiter is, in the eyes of more than a few, the best ball pocketer ever, and I feel that the one shot shootout version of nineball gave the great pocketers a greater advantage than in Texas Express, as they would frequently push out into really difficult shots that they could make, but few others could. One shot shootout is the best format for the great pocketers.

My sense of all this is that Lassiter was the best one shot shootout player ever, but I don't think hecan be compared to today's superstars, as he played a far different version of nine ball.
Click to expand...

I suspect that if he had grown up playing the modern version of the game he would have adjusted just fine. That reminds me of something. I never got to see Louie play because I didn't get into pool until I retired, but I asked a pool room owner about Louie one day. His reply was that he would push out to a tough cut shot knowing that he could make it but the opponent probably couldn't. At the time I didn't realize there used to be a different version of 9 ball.

I've had three different people in three different areas, two former pool room owners and a third guy who worked in a pool room, tell me Louie was the best shot maker they ever saw.
 
I could be very wrong because I started playing during the shoot out era (late 60's) but alot of the old farts lamented about the good old days when you had to hit the ball. They thought it very unfair that you got those freebie pushes and that would have been the era Lassiter played his best.
 
Terry Ardeno said:
I've stated on here many times that in my opinion, Luther Lassiter was the best 9 baller to have ever played this game.
Click to expand...


:eek: :eek:
And just what about a certain cat named Harold Worst
Beard, back me up on this one
 
sjm said:
Terry, on the matter of whether Lassiter was the best nine-baller ever, I've heard many suggest as much over the years. Nonetheless, I wonder, and doubt, whether he'd have been as elite a nine-baller in the Texas Express era. Lassiter is, in the eyes of more than a few, the best ball pocketer ever, and I feel that the one shot shootout version of nineball gave the great pocketers a greater advantage than in Texas Express, as they would frequently push out into really difficult shots that they could make, but few others could. One shot shootout is the best format for the great pocketers.

My sense of all this is that Lassiter was the best one shot shootout player ever, but I don't think hecan be compared to today's superstars, as he played a far different version of nine ball.
Click to expand...

SJM,
I very much appreciate your input and insights here. I've carefully considered and thought out what you said. However, I still have to wonder what if Lassiter DID compete under the modern rules? What makes it possible for him to excel in one era but not in another? Simply rules? Were not all those he competed against also under the same rules at the time he was? And he still dominated.

Then it becomes a matter of modern day players BEING BETTER PLAYERS BECAUSE THEY HAVE DIFFERENT RULES? And try as I may, I can't correlate the two. How a set of rules makes for better players but, bringing another era's players into that same grouping with the newer / modern rules and they CAN'T excel? That's the part I'm stuck on.

In other words, why should we think that if Lassiter was afforded the same rules , i.e., (Texas Express), that he would not be the player he was under the former rules? I feel that I'm missing something in your thinking or I'm not fully grasping what you're trying to convey. I think you're saying that Lassiter's forte was shotmaking and he would need better position skills to comepete with those modern players who have shotmaking and positional skills. BUT, Lassiter also never played on Simonis 860 and these great modern tables. He was great with clay balls and knappy clothe. I would think his game would step UP a notch with an upgrade in playing equipment. And, that's not conceeding that his positional skills were below par. Remember, in addition to his dominance in 9 ball, he also won 4 World 14.1 Championships, a U.S. Open 14.1 Championship and the infamous Mosconi-less "World 14.1 Championship" in 1954. Not to also mention the 5 World All-Around Championships he won in the Johnston City and Stardust Open Championships. Surely, without exceptional over-all cueing abilities, Lassiter would not have been able to so thoroughly dominate these other great players, right? He had to be doing something other than just great shotmaking.

Lastly, this is all subjective opinions. Who's to say (or really know) who would have been like what had they been transposed into a different era? Nonetheless, it sure is fun to opine on these type of musings. As always Stu, I have the upmost respect for you and your very learned opinions and educated thoughts.
 
bigskyjake said:
:eek: :eek:
And just what about a certain cat named Harold Worst
Beard, back me up on this one
Click to expand...


bigskyjake,

I think Harold Worst is better suited to be in the catagory of best all around player, lumped with the Reyes, Varner's and Boston Shorty's, rather than as an elite 9 ball champion. Here's why...In 1964 he won the 14.1 and snooker titles in the Michigan state tournament. (This after he had much success in 3 cushion billiards) But, staying with pocket billiards, he also won the 1965 Stardust Open 1 pocket and All-Around titles. Also in 1965, he won the Johnston City 9 ball, 14.1 and All-Around titles. So, 1965 was a fabulous year for Worst!

Here's the tragedy...Harold Worst died of cancer on June 16, 1966 at the young age of 37, arguably at his peak as a player. We'll never know to what heights he could have ascendeded. What I do know is that those are all the major championships he's won. So, winning the 1965 World 9 Ball Championship does not stand up against Lassiter, Strickland or Sigel's credentionals. Harold Worst is better suited for consideration in the "who the best all around champions" catagory rather than to consider him the greatest 9 baller ever, don'y you agree?
 
You're probably right Terry
It's hard as hell to say since he died so young what he would have done. When you stack up his single year accomplishments against other greats best single years he pretty much had the nuts
 
alstl said:
I suspect that if he had grown up playing the modern version of the game he would have adjusted just fine. That reminds me of something. I never got to see Louie play because I didn't get into pool until I retired, but I asked a pool room owner about Louie one day. His reply was that he would push out to a tough cut shot knowing that he could make it but the opponent probably couldn't. At the time I didn't realize there used to be a different version of 9 ball.

I've had three different people in three different areas, two former pool room owners and a third guy who worked in a pool room, tell me Louie was the best shot maker they ever saw.
Click to expand...




Had the pleasure of watching Louie play many times when he was at the height of his powers. Although he was a wonderfull shot maker I'm not sure if he was the best when you consider the full spectrum of shots which were reqd when playing 2 shot foul. Back in the day a young SEARCY and McCREADY would, IMO, have proven to be better all-around shot makers esp. when factoring in playing shape via non-traditional patterns.

What Louie did better than any human was fan balls in (he'd cut em thin to win) that were on the short rail while whitey was WAY down table. He would often roll out for those shots while most of the other champions would roll out from them.

His battles with McCready were epic combining salesmanship (Louie forming corporations to get staked), woofing, sharking, the unknown (who had a better mix and how long would it last), humor and drama. Would pool be where poker and golf are today if the censors would have allowed the masses to be exposed to the "real deal"?

20/20 hindsight tells me YES.....


20/20 hindsight also tells me that Buddy has been the best 9 ball player for greater periods than anyone since the early 70's. Others, including Incardone, Searcy, Roberts, Segal, Strickland, Varner, Reyes, Souquet, etc. may have been the best at any given time but Buddy was either there or knocken at the door. Using this criteria my real close runner-up is Earl.

Never saw Wimpy play when he was in his prime. It's obvious that the players of his era thought he was the best so he prolly was. It also appears he beat most of them before they lagged for the break. Wish I could have seen him play when he was the MAN.....
 
Last edited:
Terry Ardeno said:
I think you're saying that Lassiter's forte was shotmaking and he would need better position skills to comepete with those modern players who have shotmaking and positional skills.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that the increased number of pushouts permitted, and the way they utlilized them, gave the greatest shotmakers an even bigger edge than they have today in winning control of the table. Just like today, the first guy winning control of a runnable rack would, generally, run out.

Not saying that Wimpy wouldn't have been best today, but skills like safety play, kicking and jumping were not nearly as important back then as they are in Texas Express. In addition, the break, critical in both Texas Express and one shot shootout, is even more critical today. Today, a scratch means ball in hand any where, whereas in one shot shootout it only meant ball in hand in the kitchen, which is far less valuable to the incoming player.

What I'm saying is that one shot shootout is different enough from Texas Express that Wimpy should be viewed as the greatest ever at that version of the game, and the nine ball players of the last 25-30 years should probably only be compared with each other.
 
Okay, here we go.

First of all, "Push Out 9-Ball" was a tougher game, so the better players had more of an advantage. All balls spotted up, and on a foul you shot from behind the line. Much tougher game that way. You didn't have to jump or kick at balls because you could roll out for a shot. Banking ability was paramount because often you would roll out for a bank. With the advent of "One Foul BIH" kicking and jumping ability became far more important than before.

Louie Roberts was the greatest pure shotmaker I ever saw. He could cut a ball that was one eighth inch off the rail all the way down the table, and it would stay one eighth inch off the rail all the way to the pocket. He hit everything on a straight line! Richie Florence was the second best shotmaker, and the best ever for the cash. He could run out rack after rack of 9-Ball and be out of line on half the shots. If he could see it, he could make it!

Harold Worst was the best pool player I ever saw and Jose Parica may have been second. Worst excelled at all games and possibly could have beaten Ronnie if he ever learned how to play One Pocket. Jose was the best I ever saw for money and Buddy may have been second. No one would play Worst for money, although he was quite willing. Buddy played the best patterns and had the nicest cue ball control in 9-Ball. Nobody knows more about how to play pool than Buddy, and no one knows more shots. Only the great 14.1 players like Mizerak and Sigel understand the stack better. In One Pocket no one knew as much as Ronnie ever, especially how to play the stack.

No one ever controlled the cue ball better than Efren, and it really shows up in One Pocket. Wilie Mosconi was the best straight Pool player I ever saw and Mizerak was second. Mosconi's cue ball was equal to Efren's at this one game. In tournament 9-Ball, Strickland stands alone. But if they both got to the finals, Sigel was the best under pressure. Lassiter missed the fewest balls in his era and Sigel missed the least during his era. No one (except Worst) was willing to play Lassiter 9-Ball for money for over 20 years. He had a short choppy stroke like Hopkins, but rarely missed a ball and played flawless position. His patterns were not like Buddy's. Luther did not move the cue ball any more than necessary. Only Don Watson also played this way, and was nearly as good. He might miss a ball once every hour. Luther would not!

Ed Kelly was the greatest all around player when he was playing and had the purest stroke ever. But he couldn't beat Lassiter at 9-Ball, Ronnie at One Pocket or Mizerak at Straight Pool. Sigel was the greatest all around player of his generation and he might beat anyone at any game! Except he couldn't beat Parica for the cash at 9-Ball, Ten Ball or Rotation. Efren remains the best player at two of the most difficult games there are, Rotation and One Pocket.

One caveat. For a few years, Denny may have been right there with Buddy playing for money. He did things with the cue ball that I never saw again until Efren came along.
 
Last edited:
Hi does anyone know Jimmy Reid's email, i want to get those DVD's.

Thanks
Vijesh
 
jay helfert said:
Okay, here we go.

First of all, "Push Out 9-Ball" was a tougher game, so the better players had more of an advantage. All balls spotted up, and on a foul you shot from behind the line. Much tougher game that way. You didn't have to jump or kick at balls because you could roll out for a shot. Banking ability was paramount because often you would roll out for a bank. With the advent of "One Foul BIH" kicking and jumping ability became far more important than before.

Louie Roberts was the greatest pure shotmaker I ever saw. He could cut a ball that was one eighth inch off the rail all the way down the table, and it would stay one eighth inch off the rail all the way to the pocket. He hit everything on a straight line! Richie Florence was the second best shotmaker, and the best ever for the cash. He could run out rack after rack of 9-Ball and be out of line on half the shots. If he could see it, he could make it!

Harold Worst was the best pool player I ever saw and Jose Parica may have been second. Worst excelled at all games and possibly could have beaten Ronnie if he ever learned how to play One Pocket. Jose was the best I ever saw for money and Buddy may have been second. No one would play Worst for money, although he was quite willing. Buddy played the best patterns and had the nicest cue ball control in 9-Ball. Nobody knows more about how to play pool than Buddy, and no one knows more shots. Only the great 14.1 players like Mizerak and Sigel understand the stack better. In One Pocket no one knew as much as Ronnie ever, especially how to play the stack.

No one ever controlled the cue ball better than Efren, and it really shows up in One Pocket. Wilie Mosconi was the best straight Pool player I ever saw and Mizerak was second. Mosconi's cue ball was equal to Efren's at this one game. In tournament 9-Ball, Strickland stands alone. But if they both got to the finals, Sigel was the best under pressure. Lassiter missed the fewest balls in his era and Sigel missed the least during his era. No one (except Worst) was willing to play Lassiter 9-Ball for money for over 20 years. He had a short choppy stroke like Hopkins, but rarely missed a ball and played flawless position. His patterns were not like Buddy's. Luther did not move the cue ball any more than necessary. Only Don Watson also played this way, and was nearly as good. He might miss a ball once every hour. Luther would not!

Ed Kelly was the greatest all around player when he was playing and had the purest stroke ever. But he couldn't beat Lassiter at 9-Ball, Ronnie at One Pocket or Mizerak at Straight Pool. Sigel was the greatest all around player of his generation and he might beat anyone at any game! Except he couldn't beat Parica for the cash at 9-Ball, Ten Ball or Rotation. Efren remains the best player at two of the most difficult games there are, Rotation and One Pocket.

One caveat. For a few years, Denny may have been right there with Buddy playing for money. He did things with the cue ball that I never saw again until Efren came along.
Click to expand...


Buddy Hall says in the book "Rags to Rifleman" that Lassiter was the best 9 baller he ever saw.

Also, there is so much to your post that I would like to comment on. I'll just ask this one question regarding Jose....he "may have been the 2nd best pool player" you ever saw? Huh??? Better than Strickland, Sigel, Efren??? Based on what, Jay? List his tournament credentials with the other super-star players. His don't match up at all. Gambling? You would take Parica over, say, Willis, gambling at 9 ball? Unless you were there for every match he ever won, you and I both know that gambling stories often grow to gambling legend and folk lore over time. Not diminsihing Parica's skills at all, but 2nd G.O.A.T is really flattering, don't you think? Nick Varner has WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS in 14.1, 9 ball, 8 ball, one pocket and banks. Yet, you have Parica better than even Nick?

It's been a long, long time since I disagreed with you my friend, but wow!
I'm having chest pains :eek:

By the way, would you rank Lassiter in the top what of all time 9 ballers?:confused: :confused: :confused:

(Where is Fatboy when I need him....:) )
No, even better than that (they may be in cahoots:D ), I can't wait till Freddy wakes up...
How about this...let's start a poll on a new thread. "Who was the better pool player, Lassiter or Parica?" But that may not work either because so many probably don't even know who he was. Which is very sad.
 
I know that I don't know much compared to you real old skool guys, but I have really hard time believing that anyone's A-game could match Efren's A-game at 9-ball - especially with tight equipment. And I know, and even as a relatively young man myself I do it also, nostalgy is a thing which makes us remember old times with golden frames.
I know Efren's break is not there with the modern era players, but you guys are talking about old skool players, whose breaks were not too evolved either.
There has been different rules back then, so the game has been different.
Efrens kicking, safety game and cueball control are something special, so I doubt the others could have matched him at his/theirs best.
And remember, I'm talking about the A-game, which Efren produced much later than Sigel, Buddy and Earl, even he's about the same age with Mike and Buddy and older than Earl. (I'm more talking about the Killer Instinct - Efren has said he played his best at the seventies..)

The pockets used to be much bigger, rules where different etc.. so the comparison may be too difficult, but if you watch Efren beating Earl at the Color Of Money, or for example Efren beating Mika 7-0 and Baraks 7-1 at the DCC 2005 9-Ball semi + final, which was played on a tight table, after Efren, 51yrs of age, had been 13th at Banks, 1st at One-Pocket, all the fields 400+, played lots of money games during the week, etc..

I know Earl used to win tournaments and run racks like crazy, Mike's record at the finals were unbelievable, Buddy was too strong for the money, but also the level was not the same as it has been lately - when Efren still constantly beats them all (at least until recently..).

Also I believe that Earl himself and at least Nick Varner have stated that Efren is the best player of all time, and they are talking about 9-ball now..





BTW, who is this 'Denny' fellow then?

jay helfert said:
One caveat. For a few years, Denny may have been right there with Buddy playing for money. He did things with the cue ball that I never saw again until Efren came along.
Click to expand...
 
Actually, I believe that all this "greatest of all time" discussion is only a discussion for the sake of discussion and for the sake of nostalgy and remembering 'the good old days'.


I believe, that Mosconi was the greatest 14.1 player. About the greatest Bank Pool player I don't know.

Otherwise, Efren is the best from all the rest. Period.


Only some modern era players like Yang can challenge him at 9-ball, because of the break and the jump cue factor, but even still, when Efren gets his Magic from his bag, he's the best again.
It just might be that those days are over, and we have to wait for a couple of decades, when the discussion about the G.O.A.T 9-Baller is ALL Efren.. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top