Old 9-ball players vs the New

[Johnnyt]

This is just my opinion…I know it can’t be proven one way or the other.
After watching the best 9-ball players from 1950-2010 live and on film and stream I feel that only a very few of the players from the 1950’s through the 1980’s could beat today’s top players.

Both old and new players could/can make balls, but today the game is played on much tighter pockets. Only a few of the older generation had good consistent breaks, making the same ball and parking the QB in the middle of the table with a shot on the next lowest ball a big % of the time (think Mills, SVB, Corey). The rest from that era sucked at breaking by today’s pro standards. The break in 9-ball is a major part of the game…you can’t play top tier 9-ball today w/o a great break. Outside of Johnny Archer and a very few more, the top players of today would be favorite over the older generation IMO. Johnnyt

 

[ironman]

This is just my opinion…I know it can’t be proven one way or the other.
After watching the best 9-ball players from 1950-2010 live and on film and stream I feel that only a very few of the players from the 1950’s through the 1980’s could beat today’s top players.

Both old and new players could/can make balls, but today the game is played on much tighter pockets. Only a few of the older generation had good consistent breaks, making the same ball and parking the QB in the middle of the table with a shot on the next lowest ball a big % of the time (think Mills, SVB, Corey). The rest from that era sucked at breaking by today’s pro standards. The break in 9-ball is a major part of the game…you can’t play top tier 9-ball today w/o a great break. Outside of Johnny Archer and a very few more, the top players of today would be favorite over the older generation IMO. Johnnyt

It is a bold statement and one not popular with many. Many consider Luther the best, I nver did, but that has just been my opinion. I guess I will hang onto what I saw Buddy do countless time during the 70.s.
The pockets are tighter, no doubt and that negates the stroke many had back then. I'm not saying today's players don't have it, they just don't have to turn it loose as in older days or equipment.
As for the break, some of that old shag carpet could be pretty tough to break on. I think Luther and gang would have figured it out though. Maybe that is just what I want to believe.

 

[real bartram]

This is just my opinion…I know it can’t be proven one way or the other.
After watching the best 9-ball players from 1950-2010 live and on film and stream I feel that only a very few of the players from the 1950’s through the 1980’s could beat today’s top players.

Both old and new players could/can make balls, but today the game is played on much tighter pockets. Only a few of the older generation had good consistent breaks, making the same ball and parking the QB in the middle of the table with a shot on the next lowest ball a big % of the time (think Mills, SVB, Corey). The rest from that era sucked at breaking by today’s pro standards. The break in 9-ball is a major part of the game…you can’t play top tier 9-ball today w/o a great break. Outside of Johnny Archer and a very few more, the top players of today would be favorite over the older generation IMO. Johnnyt

very good post

the break safes and kicks today are way more powerfull.

now take those guys from the past put them today diff story cause they would know how to kick break and play safe like todays players.
so yes i think todays players would win if the old guys played like they did.
but im sure they would pick up on todays game.

 

[Ken_4fun]

very good post

the break safes and kicks today are way more powerfull.

now take those guys from the past put them today diff story cause they would know how to kick break and play safe like todays players.
so yes i think todays players would win if the old guys played like they did.
but im sure they would pick up on todays game.

Well, I watch older top players and new top players play one pocket. To me 9 ball is one thing but show me an old school player and he played the pack better.

Ronnie Allen was the pied piper of power one pocket, and most today play his style of one pocket, but you watch old school players and you never got a shot, and most of the time you were tied up in the pack.

Ken

 

[real bartram]

Well, I watch older top players and new top players play one pocket. To me 9 ball is one thing but show me an old school player and he played the pack better.

Ronnie Allen was the pied piper of power one pocket, and most today play his style of one pocket, but you watch old school players and you never got a shot, and most of the time you were tied up in the pack.

Ken

you could be right.
just going by what i saw.
from tapes players get better over time its not just pool .

its just the way it is.

 

[Rich93]

I agree. 30+ years of nine ball being the predominant game have caused players to develop and hone skills beyond what the old-timers needed to play with their competition back then.

Straight pool, I think, is another matter. The game has declined in popularity and tournament play and I doubt that players today are better than in the past. But rotation games, yes.

 

[ccshrimper]

I think if you played the old rules, 2-foul push-out the players of old would win against the new generation but with today's texas express rules the new generation kicks/safes so much better. You don't see packages these days like you used to. Earl might put a 6-pack on someone in every tournament he played, sometimes more than 1 opponent. The game is much more controlled now, people don't take the chances to keep a package going. I believe the shotmaking was better in the past but the game is much smarter now and the players know many more shots.

 

[real bartram]

I agree. 30+ years of nine ball being the predominant game have caused players to develop and hone skills beyond what the old-timers needed to play with their competition back then.

Straight pool, I think, is another matter. The game has declined in popularity and tournament play and I doubt that players today are better than in the past. But rotation games, yes.

i think you are right on there.
i dont know many players who play 14.1.

 

[qbilder]

Different game now. Back then it was slow cloth. The precision breaks guys have today wouldn't work on that cloth. The speed of the table changes the entire dynamics of the game so much that it's like a different game. Put today's players on those old tables with those old balls & big pockets & they'll quickly adapt to playing the game just like they played it back then. And likewise.

 

[Island Drive]

The slower cloth of years ago demanded the player to develop a more powerful swing. If you got on the wrong side of the ball the equipment back then also allowed the player to consider going the other way around. Conditions on some tables today don't allow this type of play, what I've also noticed, I don't see allot of players (tho I'm not out there like I was for 35 yrs) catching a second and sometimes third gear and smoothing out. Table conditions on some 9' tables nowadays seem to make players less agressive and more defensive....rotation pool should be a very agressive, Vivian Villareal type of game. There's nothing better than seeing a player way down in the score, catch a gear/smooth out and beat his opponent while also making him fold under the pressure of your calmness.

 

[RiverCity]

If you look at several players from the 70s and 80s, most of the top guys could definitely hang with the top guys today if you are comparing prime to prime. Mike Sigel, Buddy Hall, Nick Varner, Jim Rempe. There were several guys who played from that era into the simonis, tighter pocket days of the 90s and beyond.
As far as the cloth goes, thats not that much of an adjustment going from slow to fast, because their stroke is pure. Fast to slow is the bigger adjustment because of the extra ooomph required to move the white ball. And for the top guys from pretty much any era..... the center of the pocket is the center of the pocket.
Chuck

 

[JAM]

...its just the way it is.

So true. Pool used to be a game of skill. The young players of today might have a tough time hanging with the old-school players if they had to actually execute difficult shots in the hole as opposed to rack-rigging and slop.

Today's pool is more a game of luck than skill. It's nice to be a young player today when the game is more luck than skill.

 

[pooljunkie4ever]

Really don't think you can compare players from different eras easily. The cloth and rules have changed in a way to speed up the game and in effect make it easier. Also what has changed is the number of players playing today, countless more playing at a top levele than before.

 

[JAM]

Really don't think you can compare players from different eras easily. The cloth and rules have changed in a way to speed up the game and in effect make it easier. Also what has changed is the number of players playing today, countless more playing at a top levele than before.

Rep to you. You are EXACTLY right.

This topic is brought up ad nauseum on this forum over and over and over and over and over again. I think it gives some people pleasure, and I am not sure why. It's the same people, too!

 

[real bartram]

So true. Pool used to be a game of skill. The young players of today might have a tough time hanging with the old-school players if they had to actually execute difficult shots in the hole as opposed to rack-rigging and slop.

Today's pool is more a game of luck than skill. It's nice to be a young player today when the game is more luck than skill.

wow you really dont know much about pool.
now its 10 ball and call shot most of the time.

 

[JAM]

wow you really dont know much about pool.
now its 10 ball and call shot most of the time.

Au contraire, my young friend. It is *you* who don't know much about pool. If you did, you would realize that the game has evolved into something completely different than it was 20 years ago.

Old school players could run a dozen racks or more with a warped house cue on inferior equipment. Today's young guns are picking lint off the table, arguing about cracks in the rack, and negotiating handicapped locks in order for them to win.

To say that young players of today are better than old-school players is either complete and unadulterated ignorance or it's an antagonistic slight.

Sometimes people need to put down others in an effort to elevate their own self-worth.

 

[joelpope]

So true. Pool used to be a game of skill. The young players of today might have a tough time hanging with the old-school players if they had to actually execute difficult shots in the hole as opposed to rack-rigging and slop.

Today's pool is more a game of luck than skill. It's nice to be a young player today when the game is more luck than skill.

wow.... "back in the day when i was doing it we were the best, now everyone is just lucky"

that is like closing the patent office because all the good ideas have already been had



the top players from any period could be the top players today, and, the reverse is true.

they were at the top of their field because they had the skills, heart and mind to rise above the rest of the competition, I believe that is pretty timeless

 

[real bartram]

Au contraire, my young friend. It is *you* who don't know much about pool. If you did, you would realize that the game has evolved into something completely different than it was 20 years ago.

Old school players could run a dozen racks or more with a warped house cue on inferior equipment. Today's young guns are picking lint off the table, arguing about cracks in the rack, and negotiating handicapped locks in order for them to win.

To say that young players of today are better than old-school players is either complete and unadulterated ignorance or it's an antagonistic slight.

Sometimes people need to put down others in an effort to elevate their own self-worth.

so is that why you put down todays players?

i guess your going to say keith can beat the pinyos
lol lol
or ralph souqet
or svb
or johnny archer
or mika
you might noe know but there are tapeswe watch of the old players.

 

[JAM]

wow.... "back in the day when i was doing it we were the best, now everyone is just lucky"

that is like closing the patent office because all the good ideas have already been had



the top players from any period could be the top players today, and, the reverse is true.

they were at the top of their field because they had the skills, heart and mind to rise above the rest of the competition, I believe that is pretty timeless

Good point and well said.

 

[JAM]

so is that why you put down todays players?

i guess your going to say keith can beat the pinyos
lol lol
or ralph souqet
or svb
or johnny archer
or mika
you might noe know but there are tapeswe watch of the old players.

Please don't drag Keith's name in this thread. :angry:

I should be able to convey my opinion without having his name brought up.

As far as tapes go, you had to have been there to see them play, which you were not. You are too young. For you to say you are basing your opinion on tapes is quite revealing and, thus, explains why I believe your opinion seems flawed.

There are not many tapes in existence showcasing players of yesteryear, like there are today. You didn't see them run 15 racks in a row with a metal cue on a crappy table, did you?