Old Players Vs. New Players

[measureman]

I'm only going to compare 14.1 players. I've been around pool for 50 years so I have seen players from the Mosconi era to today.The biggest difference I see is that the old timers played a more conservative game. In other words rather then going for a low percentage shot they would rather try to out safe you and make you earn another chance to run balls.
On a side note a very good player and a contemporary of Ralph Greenleaf told me that Ralph didn't play better then everyone else he just out safed them and got the shot more often.

 

[real bartram]

So exactly which current players are going to match up with:

Efren-Buddy-Sigel-Earl-Allen-Varner-Lassiter-Archer-Mosconi-Mizerak-Parica- in their primes? FORGET ABOUT IT............. If you believe current players have the edge- Please name names.....

alex p
svb
ronnie alcano
dennis orcullo
yang
ralph souqet
lee van
i like this list a lil better than yours.

 

[catpool9]

Poolhalls in the past/ poohalls today

I'm not sure I agree with your first sentence. You maybe right due to the leagues, but the one thing you may need to consider is how many pool halls there use to be. I don't know how old you are but back in the day there were 1,000's of pool halls in America. Every small town in America had a least one pool hall (I mean small towns, 2,000 population). The county seat where I grew up had a population of 2,000 maybe 2,500 and that town had 2 pool halls.

Cities like New York and Chicago had hundreds of pool halls. Pretty hard for me to thing that many pool halls across America being supported by less players than we have today.

Now, comparing players from the past to modern players is very difficult. I think Champions from the past would be able to compete with modern Champions. However, I'm not sure all the top players of today would be able to get in the time machine, go back and play with the Champions of the past, some would but not all. I think the difference is equipment.

I think there are more good players (A players and above) today than 80 years ago. I think this is due to better equipment and access to information. Back in the day, information was not shared as freely.

The best player I've ever been around (I play with James Walden, Joey Gray, and Chip Compton) was a man named Joe Reed. Back in 1975, Joe was in his mid to late 70's. Joe was born in an oil field camp in Oklahoma back when Oklahoma was still a territory. Joe might not have even had a birth certificate. Joe was a road hustler from back in the 30's, 40's, and 50's. When Joe was in his late 70's I'm not sure he could even see the end of a snooker table, but I've seen Joe walk over an get a house cue off the wall and run a snooker table.

I truly believe there were great pool players way back that none of us will ever know about. There were many players, like Joe, who never played in Tournament and tried to stay in the shadows.

Steven

When I grew up in the mid- 70's , my home town in Warren, Arkansas had three poolhalls with at least three snooker & three pool tables in each place, and a burger joint that had two pool tabels and a snooker tabel, now there are none (0) in a fifty mile radius, and back at that time they were everywhere, in all small towns, it's a crying shame that techology has taken over for the younger generation, used to be skating rinks, movie theaters, poolhalls, ect. occupied one's mind.

I know times change and I'm getting old , but damn I hate it!, back then there where players that could play with anyone now on the World Stage but were just home town boy's that never went anywhere.

David Harcrow

 

[macneilb]

I'm not sure I agree with your first sentence. You maybe right due to the leagues, but the one thing you may need to consider is how many pool halls there use to be. I don't know how old you are but back in the day there were 1,000's of pool halls in America. Every small town in America had a least one pool hall (I mean small towns, 2,000 population). The county seat where I grew up had a population of 2,000 maybe 2,500 and that town had 2 pool halls.

Cities like New York and Chicago had hundreds of pool halls. Pretty hard for me to thing that many pool halls across America being supported by less players than we have today.

Now, comparing players from the past to modern players is very difficult. I think Champions from the past would be able to compete with modern Champions. However, I'm not sure all the top players of today would be able to get in the time machine, go back and play with the Champions of the past, some would but not all. I think the difference is equipment.

I think there are more good players (A players and above) today than 80 years ago. I think this is due to better equipment and access to information. Back in the day, information was not shared as freely.

The best player I've ever been around (I play with James Walden, Joey Gray, and Chip Compton) was a man named Joe Reed. Back in 1975, Joe was in his mid to late 70's. Joe was born in an oil field camp in Oklahoma back when Oklahoma was still a territory. Joe might not have even had a birth certificate. Joe was a road hustler from back in the 30's, 40's, and 50's. When Joe was in his late 70's I'm not sure he could even see the end of a snooker table, but I've seen Joe walk over an get a house cue off the wall and run a snooker table.

I truly believe there were great pool players way back that none of us will ever know about. There were many players, like Joe, who never played in Tournament and tried to stay in the shadows.

Steven

You're absolutely right, there were many more pool halls in the past than there are today. However, you have to remember who was allowed in those pool halls? Generally, only men who were old enough to drink, with some exceptions like a young person who knew someone in the pool hall, but the majority were men of that age and above. That is a small percentage of the general population.

Plus, if you went to a pool hall, you solely went to play pool. Now, with the advent of leagues and pool tables in almost every bar , a lot more people - men, women, and juniors, can simply stumble into pool without going somewhere to intentionally play pool - and many have. This leads to greater exposure to the general masses than the pool halls of the past.

Although, I will say that the advent of true pool halls of the past probably led to the average player of the past being better than the ones of today. Because all pool halls had for people was pool, that's all you had to do and you got good at it faster. If you're at a bar today, there's a dozen other things to do rather than play pool, so this isn't the case today.

In regards to champions of today vs. champions of the past, I think it's been summed up well. Every champion was as good as the times and equipment allowed them to be. Past champions generally had to play on shoddier equipment than what's used today, and thrived on it. Champions of today play on pristine equipment that in some respects, is more difficult to play on, and thrive on it. One is not better than the other. The only big difference is that the world is a smaller place now, and we now have the oppurtunity to see champions from every corner of the earth.

 

[book collector]

Old Players vs New

I have watched all the old players and most of the new ones, as someone else said "It's a different game" the cloth makes it easier to get around if you get out of line and the jump cue made it a lot different game once people learned how to use them. I think the players of yesterday would play as good as the players of today if they were not 30 years older than them and road weary.
I also think the a lot of young players of today would learn to play with the old equipment and play as good as the old timers did. |
When the pool of top players is large , they push each other to new limits.
I think back in the 70s there were probably less than 100 players all over the country who could beat each other on a given day and now there are probably 500.
In the 20s and 30s there were lots of players also and there were a ton of 200 ball runners at straight pool. If there was a lot of money to be made I think we would see in 5 or 10 years a new level that would be astounding compared to any other time.
Simply because there would be a reason to keep practicing 10 hours a day after you had become a great player instead of not being able to get a game and playing golf instead.{Or poker now}.
I think at the Dayton tournaments there were only about 30 or 40 entries , what about Johnson City?

 

[greyghost]

Freddy The Beard says the players of the depression era would destroy today's players because they had to win so badly just to buy food and such.

He also says the players of the 60's and 70's would destroy the players of today.

i'd have to agree.....b/c of the have to win part.....the top players then thats all they had so they had that brutal determination.

For guys like say cornbread it was either play pool or work the fields........

-Grey Ghost-

 

[jay helfert]

I have watched all the old players and most of the new ones, as someone else said "It's a different game" the cloth makes it easier to get around if you get out of line and the jump cue made it a lot different game once people learned how to use them. I think the players of yesterday would play as good as the players of today if they were not 30 years older than them and road weary.
I also think the a lot of young players of today would learn to play with the old equipment and play as good as the old timers did. |
When the pool of top players is large , they push each other to new limits.
I think back in the 70s there were probably less than 100 players all over the country who could beat each other on a given day and now there are probably 500.
In the 20s and 30s there were lots of players also and there were a ton of 200 ball runners at straight pool. If there was a lot of money to be made I think we would see in 5 or 10 years a new level that would be astounding compared to any other time.
Simply because there would be a reason to keep practicing 10 hours a day after you had become a great player instead of not being able to get a game and playing golf instead.{Or poker now}.
I think at the Dayton tournaments there were only about 30 or 40 entries , what about Johnson City?

Full fields in those events were 64 players. I think they filled the 9-Ball division and maybe had forty to fifty in One Pocket and 14.1. Banks maybe got thirty to forty players in Dayton. So you're not far off in your estimation.

My first big All Around event (the L.A. Open) in 1993 had 128 players in the 9-Ball, 77 in the One Pocket and 44 in Banks. And that's with many of the top players boycotting the event, thanks to Mackey.

 

[PoolBum]

A champion is a champion is a champion.

 

[champ2107]

i will take efren against all other champions of any era :thumbup:

 

[Mr. Wiggles]

Cassius clay

I don't care what anybody says. Ali was the greatest!

Or whatever his name was or is, was a draft dodger. He was the greatest thing for boxing and was the greatest fighter of all time. He was also a jackass. He changed his religion to better suit his draft dodging. Had he gone like lots of others did (drafted) he would have served in special services and put on boxing exhibitions. He refused to serve his country even in that capacity. He was bad for America when he could have had an impact. Greatest boxer, horrible American!

 

[$TAKE HOR$E]

Model-A vs GT-40

..............................:thumbup:

 

[Celtic]

This video here is the one that makes me think that if Mosconi were born in 1980 he would be atm the #1 player in the world or at least "one of" the best.

http://vimeo.com/4957545

He was 67 years old at the time of this video and I think that most people with true knowledge of the game and an eye for skill can tell that this is a guy that was awesome in his prime.

Take a look at the top players of more recent years when they hit their 60's. Jose Parica is barely in his 60's, Buddy Hall is just over 65, Efren wont be 60 years old until 2014 and his game is certainly not what it used to be already, put another decade on him.

Mosconi at 67 years old in that video is shooting THAT good after decades of being out of competition and people think that guy was not as good as his legend would indicate? Give me a freaking break.

If you think that guy would not have been a killer in his 30's and 40's that would have been every bit as dangerous as the players of today I am not sure on the ability you have to truly judge the skill he shows he once had or possibly the honesty of that statement given you luckily wont ever have to back it up.

Most players when they age lose most of their skill. Mosconi is no exception. The player in that video is not as good as the player he was. But he is a hell of alot better then most of todays players are at that age and that makes it very likely that his peak in his prime was every bit as good as his world championships would indicate.

 

[atthecat]

The music comparison is a good one. Music and pool from the 60's and 70's was played by people that were 100 percent committed to the art form. They gave up everything and hit the road. Before anyone heard James Brown, Led Zeppelin, Miles Davis etc, they played 2000 shows. Music (popular) today sucks today because it's done by amateurs. Pool today is NOT played by amateurs, but it is played by people that have spent 14 hours a day on there home table. Maybe becoming a little robotic because they work a ton of hours on technique. I enjoy watching the older players because they seam to have more seasoning and fluidity. More exciting to watch.
Sigel and Strickland are doing very well lately in tournaments. They are hanging in there on 4'' Brunswick and tight Diamonds. The older players would have no problem hangin with todays players.

BTW, John Mayer is an awesome guitar player and writer, but Hendrix and Stevie Ray Vaughn were masters.

 

[macneilb]

Or whatever his name was or is, was a draft dodger. He was the greatest thing for boxing and was the greatest fighter of all time. He was also a jackass. He changed his religion to better suit his draft dodging. Had he gone like lots of others did (drafted) he would have served in special services and put on boxing exhibitions. He refused to serve his country even in that capacity. He was bad for America when he could have had an impact. Greatest boxer, horrible American!

I haaate getting off topic, but you're knocking an American icon. Ali didn't join the draft because he didn't believe in the war. America at the time didn't treat African Americans like himself fairly, so why should he put his lift at risk, or even show any public support, by joining in the war effort. Would you fight for a country that treated you less than that of the general population? - wouldn't let you eat in certain restaurants, use certain bathrooms, sit in certain seats on the bus?

As soon as he got home after he won the gold medal in the 1960 Olympics, representing America, he went to get a cheeseburger and he was refused service at that diner, because he was black. And he JUST won a gold medal - FOR AMERICA. Would you fight for a country that supported that kind of degradation? Doubt it. That was his point at the time, and I completely agree with him. If his country wasn't going to treat him as a human being with dignity and equality, then why should he help his country win a war he didn't even believe in.


I apologize for going off topic guys. I just couldn't not say it

 

[Mike Templeton]

It was just different then....

I was raised in a rural area of SC, and that's all I knew about pool. I didn't know about regional or national tournaments, exhibitions, 14.1, etc...

I just knew 6-ball, 9-ball, 8-ball, and a little 1-pocket. And that from Thursday night till Saturday night at midnight when the bars closed that people were playing for $.50 to $1.00 per game for the regulars, and $5 to $20 per game for the more accomplished players.

There were plenty of road players that came through then. And there was no "spot me this" or "spot me that". We put our best player in town up against him, and they played. Till someone went broke.

As far as who the better players are between people then and now, it's just too hard to say. The games were so much different then. I will say that I can't imagine anybody beating Buddy Hall's game in the 70s at bar table 2-shot foul rules. And I mean nobody from any era. And Ronnie Allen was aggressive at 1-pocket back then, but I think the 1-pocket players today are better. Not because of raw ability, but the more aggressive nature of their games.

Another thing I remember is that almost to a person, everyone drank back then. Alot. Even the Greatest players. There was no workout regimen or health consciousness. That does favor the players of today.

One of the best things for me about pool has been that I have gotten to watch it evolve over the past 40 years or so. I'm 54, and started to get interested in the aura of gambling, seediness, and easy money when I was 15 or 16 in the bowling alley back home. Everybody gambled. Now it seems alot of people will bet money, but nobody likes to gamble.

I'm getting off track reminiscing about the good old days. As far as who were better players, who cares. They both command great respect for their abilities.

Mike

 

[DrawtheRock]

What Games and Tourney or Gambling

alex p
svb
ronnie alcano
dennis orcullo
yang
ralph souqet
lee van
i like this list a lil better than yours.

Chris, a very strong list but I think it depends on what games and whether it is tourney or for cash. I think Effren (who played these guys even when he was past his prime), Parica, and Buddy would be the betting favorites against most on this list in 9 ball and for the cash. I think they would definitely be the favorites against all of them playing one pocket for the cash.

its a tough discussion but a fun one. Pool isnt like other sports where ther athletes have advanced physically (bigger and stronger). The only thing that has changed is that the equipment has gotten better.

My personal opinion is that the the players in the United States were better in the late 60's, 70s, and 80's than the USA players of today. I think they played more than one game very well and did so to make money. They also bet more money then--that is the strange part. Chris you definitely bet a good amount of money when you bet--but think about how much that would be worth in the 1970's when some of the older players had bet the same amount or more

 

[Celtic]

Chris, a very strong list but I think it depends on what games and whether it is tourney or for cash. I think Effren (who played these guys even when he was past his prime), Parica, and Buddy would be the betting favorites against most on this list in 9 ball and for the cash. I think they would definitely be the favorites against all of them playing one pocket for the cash.

I have to say there is enough video of Earl shooting back during his prime that I would have to make him a favorite against most of them in tournament format 9-ball as well. He still won a world championship during the era of Alex, Ronnie A, Ralph, and Yang at the least off that list all shooting in what would be considered their primes.

Back when Earl was shooting his best and had a more solid mental focus and killer instinct he was flat out better then those guys at winning tournaments.

I know Chris likes to really push the gambling side of things but he put Ralph on his list which kind of brings up the point that you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

 

[SCCues]

Tom, I think you are old enough to remember that in talking about the best players of 30+ years ago, we would often refer to who had the best stroke. That is rarely even mentioned today. The equipment in use today, has in some ways made the game easier. No longer is a powerful stroke a necessary attribute to being a top player. Pool remains the same game, with 9-Ball and One Pocket still the most popular versions, just as they were 30 and 40 years ago. But the way the game is played has changed dramatically, for the reasons you stated above.

My own personal opinion is that the best players of yesterday are the equals of the best players of today. I saw great players in the 60's and 70's, a lot of them. The difference today imo is that there are more good players, because of the way the sport has expanded. It used to be a national sport, primarily confined to the USA. No more. Now there are good players everywhere!

I will add this though. I think the best rotation players today at games like 9-Ball and Ten Ball may be playing at a higher level than ever before. I seriously doubt that I've ever seen better pool shot than by young Mr. Wu or his compatriot Yang. Same could be said for the top filipinos, although Dennis looks to me like a young Parica clone, with a very similar style. I would put Parica in the older generation and perhaps Efren as well, and there aren't any current players (other than the two I mentioned) that play any better than these guys.

I still say Ronnie played One Pocket at a higher level than just about anyone I see playing the game today. Ronnie likes to tout the top young players, that's just always been part of his hustle. It comes naturally to him to tell everyone how good they play, just before he beats them. He did that same thing for years. He would tell a guy he plays way too strong for Ronnie to spot him a ball and Ronnie would give him three balls anyway, and "outrun the nuts" as he liked to say. There is not one player today (other than Efren) that can play the way Ronnie did. Of course, Jersey Red, Eddie Taylor and Ed Kelly were not far behind either. Those later three in their prime would give any and all of today's One Pocket heros fits. Yes, Scott Frost has a big game and Gabe is a very clever player, but if you think that they would be the favorites over the best old timers I would have to disagree. Even the best of my generation, Mizerak and Sigel, played exceptional One Pocket even by today's standards. Same for Buddy.

Again this is just my opinion based on what I see and observe. Bottom line, the best players of yesterday were just as good as the best today. There were just fewer of them then. If you could somehow bring Harold Worst back, he would still be a winner. He had talent, heart and character! In large doses I might add. He was the kind of man who would figure out the equipment and how to play within days. He was the "Efren" of his era. And once he got the hang of the game, you were dead! He had more heart in his little finger than any ten players I see today. Parica also had a huge heart. Don't get me wrong, there are players today who exhibit a lot of courage and heart. But none are any better than Harold, Parica or Cornbread. These guys were fearless and embraced all challenges. I never saw any one of them back down from anybody!

Jay, thanks for the insights and the history that most of us don't know about......I love reading about the older players that I never got a chance to see play.

James

 

[real bartram]

Chris, a very strong list but I think it depends on what games and whether it is tourney or for cash. I think Effren (who played these guys even when he was past his prime), Parica, and Buddy would be the betting favorites against most on this list in 9 ball and for the cash. I think they would definitely be the favorites against all of them playing one pocket for the cash.

its a tough discussion but a fun one. Pool isnt like other sports where ther athletes have advanced physically (bigger and stronger). The only thing that has changed is that the equipment has gotten better.

My personal opinion is that the the players in the United States were better in the late 60's, 70s, and 80's than the USA players of today. I think they played more than one game very well and did so to make money. They also bet more money then--that is the strange part. Chris you definitely bet a good amount of money when you bet--but think about how much that would be worth in the 1970's when some of the older players had bet the same amount or more

just watch the old players rack and break.
they would be 2 balls behind just on that.
and yes they cloth was slower but do you know that
thick cloth makes it easy yo pocket balls

 

[AKStickGuy]

Thanks for the link to this video, Celtic. I've never seen Mosconi play before so that was a serious treat for me. I wish I could've been there to watch him run 526 balls.

This video here is the one that makes me think that if Mosconi were born in 1980 he would be atm the #1 player in the world or at least "one of" the best.

http://vimeo.com/4957545

He was 67 years old at the time of this video and I think that most people with true knowledge of the game and an eye for skill can tell that this is a guy that was awesome in his prime.

Take a look at the top players of more recent years when they hit their 60's. Jose Parica is barely in his 60's, Buddy Hall is just over 65, Efren wont be 60 years old until 2014 and his game is certainly not what it used to be already, put another decade on him.

Mosconi at 67 years old in that video is shooting THAT good after decades of being out of competition and people think that guy was not as good as his legend would indicate? Give me a freaking break.

If you think that guy would not have been a killer in his 30's and 40's that would have been every bit as dangerous as the players of today I am not sure on the ability you have to truly judge the skill he shows he once had or possibly the honesty of that statement given you luckily wont ever have to back it up.

Most players when they age lose most of their skill. Mosconi is no exception. The player in that video is not as good as the player he was. But he is a hell of alot better then most of todays players are at that age and that makes it very likely that his peak in his prime was every bit as good as his world championships would indicate.