I've noticed that whenever the topic of a true legend comes up, some people will always find a way to say they really weren't as good as is popularly believed while at the same time lavishing praise on a much lesser player with zero titles! Or they'll single out one incident where the legendary champion lost a set of 9-ball for $50 and then say "see, he wasn't that good".
For example I've heard a lot of people (and quite a few old pros) do everything they can to put Mosconi down. A couple of times I've heard the story how Minnesota Fats beat Mosconi by coming up with a gimmick game where they played straight pool but every other ball had to be banked. I don't even know if this match ever happened but people will tell it with glee. I mean come on, Mosconi was a dominant champion over many years. the same with Mike Sigel, Steve Mizerak, Luther Lassiter, Ralph Greenleaf, Efren Reyes, Earl Strickland, etc. I really look up to these players, they consistently won the big tournys over the course of many years. It's that kind of consistency that make them legends.
I remember a few years ago an old timer was going on about a couple of players that gambled in the 1960's (I won't mention names) but he was going on about how great they were, didn't miss a shot, played perfect shape, blah blah. He said nobody wanted any part of them for the cash. So I asked how did they fair against Lassiter? He paused and said "well, they wouldn't play Lassiter, nobody wanted to play Lassiter".
On a recent thread here a few people were saying they didn't think Mosconi could play 9-ball, really? Why would anyone think that? I saw Willie do an exhibition when he was old and well past retirement and not only did he still play top notch straight pool, but he played flawless 9-ball. He had people from the audience come up and played him a rack of 9-ball each and Willie would stand in one place while shooting and run the whole rack from that one place! His cueball control was incredible.
I guess the thing that really gets me is that these players proved many times over how great they were against whole fields of top players, they amassed numerous world titles and in my opinion they shouldn't be compared in the same sentence with gamblers with absolutely no titles!
Okay, i'll get off my soapbox now.
For example I've heard a lot of people (and quite a few old pros) do everything they can to put Mosconi down. A couple of times I've heard the story how Minnesota Fats beat Mosconi by coming up with a gimmick game where they played straight pool but every other ball had to be banked. I don't even know if this match ever happened but people will tell it with glee. I mean come on, Mosconi was a dominant champion over many years. the same with Mike Sigel, Steve Mizerak, Luther Lassiter, Ralph Greenleaf, Efren Reyes, Earl Strickland, etc. I really look up to these players, they consistently won the big tournys over the course of many years. It's that kind of consistency that make them legends.
I remember a few years ago an old timer was going on about a couple of players that gambled in the 1960's (I won't mention names) but he was going on about how great they were, didn't miss a shot, played perfect shape, blah blah. He said nobody wanted any part of them for the cash. So I asked how did they fair against Lassiter? He paused and said "well, they wouldn't play Lassiter, nobody wanted to play Lassiter".
On a recent thread here a few people were saying they didn't think Mosconi could play 9-ball, really? Why would anyone think that? I saw Willie do an exhibition when he was old and well past retirement and not only did he still play top notch straight pool, but he played flawless 9-ball. He had people from the audience come up and played him a rack of 9-ball each and Willie would stand in one place while shooting and run the whole rack from that one place! His cueball control was incredible.
I guess the thing that really gets me is that these players proved many times over how great they were against whole fields of top players, they amassed numerous world titles and in my opinion they shouldn't be compared in the same sentence with gamblers with absolutely no titles!
Okay, i'll get off my soapbox now.
