Luther Lassiter's mechanics

[Terry Ardeno]

Hi Terry,

I fully agree with you but all too often players use that logic to avoid going to the time and/or expense of learning "classic" pool mechanics used by the vast majority of top players.

Certainly, there are variations even amoung the majority of players and getting into a discussion of what constitutes "classic mechanics" is beyond the scope of this thread.

But in the case of golfer, Jim Furyk or example, if he ever gets into teaching, I doubt he would EVER recommend his stroke to anyone else.

So, to say (and I know you are not saying) that since Lassiter's mechanics are weird and Hopkins' mechanics are weird...and they are both weird in different ways...therefore, just stroke it any way you want and that's fine.

IMHO, all those attempting to learn to shoot pool need to realize that champions are almost freaks of nature in terms of their eye/hand/muscle coordination and are able to REPEAT even the most strange strokes with amazing consistency.

For the rest of us, learning mechanics that give us the best opportunity of being able to repeat our strokes consistently is why something resembling "classic" mechanics is such a good idea.

Regards,
Jim

I agree.
Look, for example, at the great Fransico Bustamonte's famous (infamous ) "pump handle stoke". He's a wonderful player, but NOBODY can emulate that stroke with the efficency he displays. That stroke works for him and nobody else that I'm aware of. Keith McCready has that side arm delivery that works perfect FOR HIM. So, as I said, I agree with the good points you made here.

I think that we all develop our strokes that work best for us. If we are stuck at a plateau and can't seem to get to the next level in our development, then it would be wise to ask if that stroke that works FOR US doesn't also LIMIT us.

I would venture a guess that only 1% of all pool players ever get formal lessons on stroke delivery, so, we each build our stroke on our muscle memory, whether it be good or bad.

This is an interesting topic.

 

[Gunn_Slinger]

Jay, I agree with most of what you said. I was a regular at bennies place for 71-80 and at guys and dolls in the 60"s and got to see all the great players. But I do believe you missed the greatest all around player aka Eddy Taylor. i saw him beat every player you mentioned except worst ( never got to see him ). If Eddy could have stayed sober, he would have won many many tourneys. I never saw him lose sober. If you look at his mechanics ( which started this thread ) i think you will find they look a lot like ....guess who....Efren...same up and down pump warm up stroke, though not as pronounced, last stroke smooth as glass. Eddy and efren....the two best players I have ever seen.
Thanks for your post. You know your players

 

[cuetechustla]

Cuetechustla,

You asked a very good question and I would like to explain why, in my opinion, Lassiter was the best at 9 ball.

First, Lassiter was born on Nov 5, 1918 and died at age 69 on Oct 25, 1988. He was a great player by the time he was in his 20s, but, in the 1940's and 1950's, there were hardly any major 9 ball tournaments being held. By the time the Johnson City tournaments came into being starting in 1961, Lassiter was already a legendary road player. Starting in 1962 (the 1st Johnson City 9 ball tournament) Lassiter dominated the field and won the first of his 6 World 9 ball championships. These Johnson City and Stardust tournaments were the defacto World Championships and they had fields that included Harold Worst, Ed Kelly, Irving Crane, Joe Balsis, Ronnie Allen, Danny Jones, Eddie Taylor, Larry Johnson, Jim Marino, Buddy Hall and many other great players. Lassiter won titles in 1962, 1963, 1964, 1967, 1969 and 1971. Keep in mind that at this time, he was 44 in 1962 and 53 in 1971....His peak as a player was argueably past, yet he still beat very, very talented players.

Now, not only was he a great TOURNAMENT player, he was also one of the greatest MONEY players that ever lived. His favorite game was "money pool", any game he could bet on. Believe me when I tell you this, his game went UP several notches for the cash. Some players play better in tournaments than they do when they gamble, and others, visa-versa. Lassiter was a better money player than a tournament player.
So, put those two facts together, add in his longevity at the top (30+ years) and I can make a very strong case for him. This of course does not take into consideration his 4 outright World 14.1 Championships, PLUS 5 14.1 Championships at Johnson City, 5 World All-Around Championships and 1 World 1 Pocket Championship and you have a very gifted player indeed.

As for Strickland, I call him the greatest tournament 9 baller since Lassiter and he may in fact be Lassiter's equal at TOURNAMENT 9 ball. His 6 World Championships and 5 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championships is a record that I believe we will not see broken ever. Look how hard it is for anyone to repeat or win those majors more than once. But, Strickland, even though early in his career he did gamble at pool, at GAMBLING he was no match for Lassiter. So, you have two very special tournament players and one of them (Lassiter) also exceled at gambling 9 ball, so the edge, I believe, has to go to Lassiter.

As for Efren Reyes, he also has a special title. The greatest all around player to have ever played pocket billiards. He was a great 9 baller, but not "the GREATEST" and here is what I base that opinion on. In the two major championships at 9 Ball, Efren has 1 World 9 Ball Championship in 1999 and 1 U.S. Open 9 Ball Championship in 1994. Sigel has 4 WC and 4 US Open's, Varner has 3 WC and back-to-back US Open titles. Archer, Hall, Souquet and Allen Hopkins have combined major 9 ball titles greater than Reyes' 2. BUT, Reyes also has 6 World 8 Ball Championships, he is the greatest Rotation player ever, in my opinion the greatest 1 pocket player ever and he is super at 14.1. Overall, Reyes is better than Lassiter and Strickland, but not at 9 ball.

These are just MY opinions and many other fans and historians who love and study the game as much as I do may have differing opinions. But, once I collected all the info that I had on these great players, I feel very confident in my selections of who was better at what.

This is a lot of fun. Don't you agree?

Efren playing Luther 9-ball for the cash: Let's assume that everyone was playing Texas express rules. Not the way they use to play back in they day. Now Efren is a true GAMBLER and is the MAGICIAN. How can you beat magic But either way, I'm sure they both would have had backers so its not like they are going to be playing with their own money. Now what it comes down to is the ROLLS. The ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS will determine the winner. Luther can't make the balls do what he wants to do when Efren's breaking and likewise. I just don't see the MARGINAL difference in how Luther is a better player. You say he steps his play up several notches for the cash? What was Luther's skill level like IMHO, the ONLY way Luther could beat Efren is if he could run 7 racks in a row every time he came to the table to shoot. Every single time. Is this Luther's style of play I think Efren could decimate Luther on the long haul. Look at the lead Earl had on Efren in the Hong Kong challenge and Efren came back to win. I think if Efren and Luther played for the CASH, for a long race of 100 or more, that Efren would win hands down no questions asked

 

[pdcue]

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.

Half right.

I agree with the push out strongly favoring shotmakers part.
That is why it was such a bad way to play.

But Wimpy reached the top LONG before pushout became the norm.

FWIW - Lassiter would barbeque today's players, They could make up
whatever rules they wanted.

Dale

 

[cuetechustla]

Half right.

I agree one the push out strongly favoring shotmakers part.
That is why it was such a bad way to play.

But Wimpy reached the top LONG before pushout became the norm.

FWIW - Lassiter would barbeque today's players, They could make up
whatever rules they wanted.

Dale

Look, what's its going to come down to is the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS. I don't freaking care how good someone shoots If you can't come to the table, you can't shoot. Or better yet, if you come to the table and have no shot, you will most likely NOT run out. And that can happen to anyone on their playing level.

 

[pdcue]

Mechanics.

Granted, Lassiter was not as smooth and graceful as, say,
Mosconi. But I don't think there was anything wrong with his style.
Smooth and graceful doesn't guarentee effective.
And not smooth doesn't hinder it.

As for a stance, as I have said many times, being so low only
means players are more likely to have their eyes in the same relative
position to the shot.

Now if you want to talk blatently flawed mechanics in a great player,
you can't find a better example than Earl Strickland. He does so many
things wrong, that if he forgets to do any of them, he could never make a ball.

Dale

 

[pdcue]

Terry, when you say that Luther was the best 9 baller to play the game, what are you basing your decision on Is this based on quantifying the amount of money he won or the quantity of tournaments he won

When you see people like Efren and Earl play (in their prime), I just can't see how anyone could be play any better

I'm not Terry - but the answer is neither.
First off, there were no tournaments when Lassiter was in his prime.

Maybe it's because no one ever seemed to beat him.

E and E were great players, but beleive this,
neither could have won at 9 ball. Just because you can't see it,
doesn't mean it didn't happen.

For example, do you think any of today's<or any day's> champions
would have a prayer against Mosconi in his prime?

Dale

 

[cuetechustla]

..........

 

[cuetechustla]

I'm not Terry - but the answer is neither.
First off, there were no tournaments when Lassiter was in his prime.

Maybe it's because no one ever seemed to beat him.

E and E were great players, but beleive this,
neither could have won at 9 ball. Just because you can't see it,
doesn't mean it didn't happen.

For example, do you think any of today's<or any day's> champions
would have a prayer against Mosconi in his prime?

Dale

How come? What edge did they have over Earl and Efren? What was it You daggon right E and E could have beat them. So are you telling me they would get all the rolls and E and E wouldn't C'mon who are you fooling. Did you read what said about rolls

 

[pdcue]

Look, what's its going to come down to is the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS. I don't freaking care how good someone shoots If you can't come to the table, you can't shoot. Or better yet, if you come to the table and have no shot, you will most likely NOT run out. And that can happen to anyone on their playing level.

ROLLS will even out over time.
The discussion concerns who is/was the better player.
That is not who won a single match/session.

You have to forget about tournaments for evaluating skill.
Only 14.1 had organized championship tourneys, over a period of
decades, when Luther was at his best. He was first and foremost,
a ROAD player, who only played in tourneys when the action dried up.

Mosconi dominating 14.1 tournaments for years is meaningful.
Joe Blow from Kokomo winning one tourney is not.

Dale

 

[pdcue]

How come? What edge did they have over Earl and Efren? What was it You daggon right E and E could have beat them. So are you telling me they would get all the rolls and E and E wouldn't C'mon who are you fooling. Did you read what said about rolls

Which part of 'he was a better 9 ball player' are you having trouble with?

Dale

 

[cuetechustla]

ROLLS will even out over time.
The discussion concerns who is/was the better player.
That is not who won a single match/session.

You have to forget about tournaments for evaluating skill.
Only 14.1 had organized championship tourneys, over a period of
decades, when Luther was at his best. He was first and foremost,
a ROAD player, who only played in tourneys when the action dried up.

Mosconi dominating 14.1 tournaments for years is meaningful.
Joe Blow from Kokomo winning one tourney is not.

Dale

What about Don Willis? Looks like Luther wasn't all that if he couldn't beat Don Willis link Also read what they say about the unknown player in Honolulu

 

[cuetechustla]

Which part of 'he was a better 9 ball player' are you having trouble with?

Dale

Its simple..explain a situation where he was better. Describe some of his achievements, in the pit of skill opposition, which shows he was a better player than E or E and these accomplishments were unprecedented.

 

[branpureza]

I saw Lassiter many times and he had a goofy stroke. It was like 1 inch long and he did them in little 4 or 5 stroke bursts maybe 4 or 5 times for a total or as many as 25 strokes a shot. It could be awful to watch at times...

haha, he used to call that "getting the dog out of his stroke".

 

[branpureza]

wimpy was the best 9 ball player of his time and efren is too... it's hard to compare the 2 because they played under different rules in different eras. to say one was better than the other is too subjective and pure speculation. although i think no one ever has been or ever will be as good as efren, there's no way to tell that if you stuck those 2 together at the same time which one would step their game up more...

 

[PoolBum]

IMHO, the ONLY way Luther could beat Efren is if he could run 7 racks in a row every time he came to the table to shoot. Every single time.

As great as Efren is, methinks you have a slightly exaggerated understanding of what it would take to beat him. If someone ran seven racks every time they came to the table they would rarely, if ever, lose a single match.

 

[Terry Ardeno]

Wasting away again in AZBilliardville.....

Its simple..explain a situation where he was better. Describe some of his achievements, in the pit of skill opposition, which shows he was a better player than E or E and these accomplishments were unprecedented.

Cuetechustla,

Did you even bother to read my response to your question in post #40???
I took the time to try to enlighten you about Lassiter, since it's so obvious you know NOTHING about him or how he played. And after all that, you come back with 5 posts, each one challenging everybody elses views.

All you can come up with is "ROLLS, ROLLS, ROLLS" This is POOL, not voodoo. If all you can provide to this discussion is "What about the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS?" and then come back with a question like "Describe some of his achievments"...then I'm wasting my time with you.

Why didn't you just tell us all that your mind was made up a long time ago?

You don't have to agree with me or anybody else here. But when you ask a question, at least listen with an open mind if you really want to learn about the history of our sport's great players. If you want to say that the greatest player in history is determined by "the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS", and your other classic "what about the magic?", then I can't help you learn anything about any of the great players. You wouldn't believe it anyway.

And by the way, just because you never heard of Lassiter doesn't diminish what he accomplished on the table. Efren Reyes is not the only great player to have ever lived.

 

[Terry Ardeno]

FWIW - Lassiter would barbeque today's players, They could make up
whatever rules they wanted.

Dale

Dale,

The problem is, some people are brainwashed into thinking that Reyes was the only great player to have ever made a ball.

As much as I love Reyes, as many posts that I written filled with wonderful, glowing accolades on his skill and great accomplishments, as much as we all love to root for him, the fact is he still was not the first man on the moon, he was never president of the USA, he didn't build the great pyamids of Egypt, he did not fly the first aircraft, he did not invent the telephone....but, he does get all the ROLLS, the ROLLS, the ROLLS.

Sorry.....I lost my mind for a second there.

 

[Neil]

............

 

[cuetechustla]

This can only mean that you think Efren runs 6 racks every single time he is at the table. Quick question for you- have you ever seen Efren play?? (by the way, he is out of the WPC now.) I guess he did forgot to run a sixpack every time.

Yeah yeah...I was exaggerating a little IMHO, I think Efren is past his prime in playing 9 ball and it shows I've been watching professional pool pay for the last 20 yrs...attending tournaments and good old accu-stat tapes