Pool and Tennis -- Which is Touger?

[predator]

Tennis is tougher due to sheer number of players in the world. People say that pool pays very little and tennis pays big. That's true, but in tennis you got to be in ATP top 500 to make a living. First round exit at US Open will get you 18500$ which is nice, but you have to be damn good to get even near qualifying stages of a Grand Slam event. There are far far more serious tennis players than there are serious pool players in the whole world. It is not easy out there for the tennis guys either.
I have played both and it is true that in tennis you couldn't possibly lose a match to a guy that plays "nowhere near your speed"...to use a bit of pool terminology. In pool tournament matches with very short races, you could lose to a total hack.

From a mental aspect pool might have the edge because it can be brutal with that luck factor and the fact that one can never really control what happens on that table.
But from a physical side tennis is far tougher even if you ignore all the running. Tennis technique is very complicated with a lot more moving body parts.

Anyway, both great games. My two favourite sports.

 

[Travis Bickle]

First round exit at US Open will get you 18500$ which is nice, but you have to be damn good to get even near qualifying stages of a Grand Slam event. There are far far more serious tennis players than there are serious pool players in the whole world. It is not easy out there for the tennis guys either.
I have played both and it is true that in tennis you couldn't possibly lose a match to a guy that plays "nowhere near your speed"...to use a bit of pool terminology. In pool tournament matches with very short races, you could lose to a total hack.

I've got to agree that just getting to the point where you could be admitted to the qualifying tourney for the Open is a "tougher" process than you'd face in pool. You'd have to play damned well in a good number of sanctioned USTA tourneys just to get your ranking high enough to get in the draw.

Every year I head out for some free spectating at Flushing Meadows and watch the qualifiers ... it's totally brutal, even thinking about what you'd have to do to your body to win a single point vs. these guys!

But the precision and knowledge you'd need in high-level pool has got to be higher. The margin for error is a great deal less and the variety of strokes and choices a little larger, I think. Tough call, very different games.

As somebody who was probably the equivalent of a B+ tennis player (till family time and a neck injury slowed me down) and a pool player who's a couple balls below that, all I can say is that it would super tough to break through to anywhere near pro speed in EITHER game. Many hours and years, and a terrific will to succeed and ability to learn.

 

[Black-Balled]

... Maybe when I see someone run a 10 pack using only kickshots I'll think about it...

Maybe when I see someone run a 10 pack using only kickshots I'll think about it

 

[2rgrbn]

I read this whole post and now my eyes hurt, The question is somewhat mundane if you substitute any two sports in either spot for comparison then you still have legitimate arguments either way. Nobody can say which is harder as a whole only which is harder for them personally. After thought.....The complexities of pool there just like I am sure they are in tennis I have studied the game for many years and don't know what I don't know. After 23 years of playing and studying I am still learning.

 

[9BallPaul]

Terrific responses

Gratifying to see this thread has produced some super-intelligent responses, in both directions. Here's my take:

Mosconi set his record in 1956. Until someone breaks it -- and does it in public -- they can't possibly claim to play 14.1 better than that. And many of Willie Hoppe's records, both in balkline and in three cushion, were set nearly a century ago.

Other sports are continously breaking new ground. Why not cue sports? The only answer I can fathom is that we've reached the outer edge of what humans are capable of on a field of green.

 

[CrownCityCorey]

Just finished watching the Nadal--Federer confrontation at the Australian Open. Gotta say these two guys played points that have never been played befofe. Behind the back, deep below the basline, unblieveable saves on what should have been cross-court winners.

I became a tennis fan back in the era of Conners, McEnroe and Borg. Great as they were, their games never held a candle to what's being played now.

Yet when I look at pool, many of us oldtimers would argue that Luther Lassiter was the greatest nine-baller ever, and he's been gone for more than a half-century.

Mosconi's record in 14.1 was set what, two centuries ago? And even Eufenia's supposed higher run was so last century.

The biggest package in 9ball that I've ever heard is Earl's 10 (or was it 11) set at least 10 years ago.

So my qustion is, does the space restriction of a pool table mean that at some point the game just can't be played better? For example, there's a limit to how fast a human can cover 100 meters. But that record keeps getting broken.

Has pool maxed out it's potential for perfectioin?

I watched that match too. Awesome! The angles at which they hit the balls now is nuts!

Tennis is tougher due the sheer numbers in competition.

Bottom line, their is more $$$ in Tennis so it draws more competitors (like Golf, kids getting groomed at 2 years old and such).

Also, since their is more $$$, the Tennis players have access to the best: Coaches, Trainers, and equipment. Unlike poolplayers.

Pool has plenty of room to grow. We all have no idea of how well pool games can really be played at. We only get glimpses here and there.

 

[JB Cases]

Gratifying to see this thread has produced some super-intelligent responses, in both directions. Here's my take:

Mosconi set his record in 1956. Until someone breaks it -- and does it in public -- they can't possibly claim to play 14.1 better than that. And many of Willie Hoppe's records, both in balkline and in three cushion, were set nearly a century ago.

Other sports are continously breaking new ground. Why not cue sports? The only answer I can fathom is that we've reached the outer edge of what humans are capable of on a field of green.

No way that we have. Billiards is incredibly diverse. I think that there are more championship caliber players today then in any era in the past. If there were any billiard discipline that were played consistently for big money then you'd see more incredible performances.

Look at snooker, more players now run centuries than ever before and it's tough to break into the top 100.

I guarantee you that if straight pool were the dominant game then Mosconi's record would fall. That was played on a 4x8 table with big pockets. Not a fluke that he ran 526 but you have to admit that the conditions were much easier than a 5x10 with tight pockets.

All things being equal you'd have to agree that Engert's, Hohmann's, and Schmidt's 400+ ball runs on 9ft tables are proof enough that Mosconi's record run could fall if they were serious about it.

Straight pool probably did reach it's peak though in Mosconi's era due to the fact that it was the dominant professional discipline for pocket billiards.

Billiards is tougher because pool has so many different disciplines and playing surfaces to master.

I honestly would be surprised to find that there are more "serious" tennis players than pool players in the world. Pool, while being the tougher activity to master and the tougher one to dominate in, has a much lower barrier to entry. It can be played in all climates at all times of the year, all of the equipment to play it at a high level is provided by most venues for a very small amount of rental fees. Instruction and coaching is in abundant supply at inexpensive rates.

In the USA around 150,000 people play competitive pool in leagues and tournaments each week. I bet that in any given city there are more places to play pool casually and competitively than there are to play tennis.

Who has the stats on Tennis?

 

[Cameron Smith]

No way that we have. Billiards is incredibly diverse. I think that there are more championship caliber players today then in any era in the past. If there were any billiard discipline that were played consistently for big money then you'd see more incredible performances.

Look at snooker, more players now run centuries than ever before and it's tough to break into the top 100.

I guarantee you that if straight pool were the dominant game then Mosconi's record would fall. That was played on a 4x8 table with big pockets. Not a fluke that he ran 526 but you have to admit that the conditions were much easier than a 5x10 with tight pockets.

All things being equal you'd have to agree that Engert's, Hohmann's, and Schmidt's 400+ ball runs on 9ft tables are proof enough that Mosconi's record run could fall if they were serious about it.

Straight pool probably did reach it's peak though in Mosconi's era due to the fact that it was the dominant professional discipline for pocket billiards.

Billiards is tougher because pool has so many different disciplines and playing surfaces to master.

I honestly would be surprised to find that there are more "serious" tennis players than pool players in the world. Pool, while being the tougher activity to master and the tougher one to dominate in, has a much lower barrier to entry. It can be played in all climates at all times of the year, all of the equipment to play it at a high level is provided by most venues for a very small amount of rental fees. Instruction and coaching is in abundant supply at inexpensive rates.

In the USA around 150,000 people play competitive pool in leagues and tournaments each week. I bet that in any given city there are more places to play pool casually and competitively than there are to play tennis.

Who has the stats on Tennis?

By 2002 there were just over 6 million male tennis players and 5 million female tennis players. I don't know how many of them were serious competitive players.

Although Pool has 60 million players per year, the vast majority of them only play once a year and in bars at that.

As far as snooker is concerned, here is the list of players who have made over 100 century breaks in competition. You will notice that only players from the 80's on this list are Steve Davis, John Parrott Jimmy White and Willie Thorne and of course Stephen Hendry. Everyone else started playing in early to mid 90's or early 2000's. Snooker is a different beast now a days.

1 Stephen Hendry 718
2 Ronnie O'Sullivan 535
3 John Higgins 375
4 Steve Davis 312
5 Jimmy White 260
6 Ken Doherty 254
7 Peter Ebdon 252
8 John Parrott 220
9 Mark J Williams 212
10 Anthony Hamilton 183
11 Matthew Stevens 164
12 Marco Fu 153
13 Alan McManus 143
14 James Wattana 140
15 Stephen Lee 135
16 Stephen Maguire 130
17 Willie Thorne 126
18 Shaun Murphy 122
19 Ding Junhui 120
20 Ryan Day 118
21 Paul Hunter 114
22 (tied) Robin Hull 111
22 (tied) Darren Morgan 111
24 Dave Harold 108
25 Andy Hicks 107
26 Stuart Bingham 101

 

[9BallPaul]

I guarantee you that if straight pool were the dominant game then Mosconi's record would fall. That was played on a 4x8 table with big pockets. Not a fluke that he ran 526 but you have to admit that the conditions were much easier than a 5x10 with tight pockets.

All things being equal you'd have to agree that Engert's, Hohmann's, and Schmidt's 400+ ball runs on 9ft tables are proof enough that Mosconi's record run could fall if they were serious about it.

If that were so, Engert, Hohmann, etc., would be foolish not to break the record in a public setting. If that would happen, the national press would take notice. Mosconi is still the biggest name in pool, after all these years. That national media would take notice.

Then the player could break free of the tournament grind and begin scheduling exhibitions from city to city. And he'd be free to take on all comers in private action.

 

[Cameron Smith]

If that were so, Engert, Hohmann, etc., would be foolish not to break the record in a public setting. If that would happen, the national press would take notice. Mosconi is still the biggest name in pool, after all these years. That national media would take notice.

Then the player could break free of the tournament grind and begin scheduling exhibitions from city to city. And he'd be free to take on all comers in private action.

I disagree, I doubt the press would take any notice. Furthermore billiards events typically don't advertise or market themselves well enough for it to become a big deal.

Besides it's not that simple. They just held a high run competition at the Derby, and I believe the high run was 150something. Even if the tables were easier, I doubt they would have managed more 200.

 

[9BallPaul]

I disagree, I doubt the press would take any notice. Furthermore billiards events typically don't advertise or market themselves well enough for it to become a big deal.

Besides it's not that simple. They just held a high run competition at the Derby, and I believe the high run was 150something. Even if the tables were easier, I doubt they would have managed more 200.

Well, I just emerged from my basement after running 736 balls. And damn if my video camera hadn't jammed up. Lost the whole thing. Stinking technology.

 

[gunzby]

Maybe when I see someone run a 10 pack using only kickshots I'll think about it

Are you replying from a cave on LSD cuz I see an echo.

 

[2rgrbn]

Maybe when I see someone run a 10 pack using only kickshots I'll think about it

I am not siding nor do I wish to get involved in much banter but wouldn't running a ten pack kicking every ball in be about like 50 100MPH Ace serves using a wooden spoon for a racket. Just a thought

 

[gunzby]

I am not siding nor do I wish to get involved in much banter but wouldn't running a ten pack kicking every ball in be about like 50 100MPH Ace serves using a wooden spoon for a racket. Just a thought

He was replying to what I said, but he only quoted exactly what I said. I was replying to someone who felt that the ceiling has been reached in pool with how good you could be. I said that when I see someone run racks using only kickshots I will think about it.

 

[JB Cases]

If that were so, Engert, Hohmann, etc., would be foolish not to break the record in a public setting. If that would happen, the national press would take notice. Mosconi is still the biggest name in pool, after all these years. That national media would take notice.

Then the player could break free of the tournament grind and begin scheduling exhibitions from city to city. And he'd be free to take on all comers in private action.

The thing is that Mosconi wasn't trying to break any records. He was encouraged by the audience to keep going and he did until 526. It just happened to be at an exhibition and there just happened to be people there able to document it. It could very well have not happened. I think it's pretty well known that both Irving Crane and Mike Eufemia have higher runs that were not notarized. Mosconi had ample opportunity to be the one to set this record in public because he did 10 solid years of up to four exhibitions a day for most of the days in those years. Talk about a road warrior! There might honestly never be another person who played as many straight pool matches in as many different places as Mosconi did.

The biggest name in pool is "that Asian chick in the black dress" People don't even know her name. She is closely followed by Minnesota Fats, a guy who has been out of the public spotlight for more than 25 years.

The National Media could care less about pool. There was a time when it was a big thing and that time was before television, cable and reality TV and before suburbia. Now pool is to diverse and relegated to being just a niche activity amongst other exciting things on ESPN like hotdog eating contests and spelling bees.

 

[Celtic]

In order for pool to be played at a higher level and show continued growth the game itself must change.

9-ball and even 10-ball are simply too easy and have too much luck built into the games to allow for the cream to rise to the top. This is why in any world title level event there are 30 people who are all pretty much even money to win.

This is not the case in tennis as well you know. Nadal and Federer are both recognized as the best players in the world and more times then not we see their names as the tournament comes to an end.

Pool at one time also allowed for more dominance in the game, this was in fact back in Mosconi's era when straight pool was the game of choice. Straight pool was a far better test of skill then 9-ball or even 10-ball that you see today. The reason is that straight pool does not put all the weight on a single ball, each ball made is worth one point, a person running 14 balls and missing the 15th does not lose everything to a person making a ball that hung up in the jaws.

Furthermore, pool had alot more interest back in the straight pool days because hearing about the high runs was a far better way to market the sport then talking about 9-3 scores in matches today. The general public will be more interested in a 150-68 score then a 9-3.

What needs to take place is a shift to a different game, and that game should incorperate a scoring system similar to straight pool (1 point per a ball) with a 15 ball rotation format to the game. Rules would be similar to 9-ball except that all shots but the break would be called and jump cues would need to be made with your main playing cue (this would place a strong emphasis on accurate kicking and learning to jump with a full length cue). Races for a pro event would likely work as races to 75 points or so, you could go more or less.

The game above would also morph very well into local league play and smaller tournaments where you can just make a race shorter, such as 30 points. It also makes ALOT more sense for the bars where noone ever caught on to 9-ball because people paying a dollar for a game of pool were not going to start using only 9 of the balls.

The above game would need to be marketed right, someone with the connections, money, and talent at running events would need to start doing events and getting the game on video and getting the players to start playing it and see how they like it and how it works as a tournament game.

I do feel if it was all done right a game such as the above could turn pool around and I honestly feel that if the game sticks to 9-ball or even 10-ball we are forever relugated to the sad state pool is in now for the forseeable future.

 

[Mowem down]

I am not siding nor do I wish to get involved in much banter but wouldn't running a ten pack kicking every ball in be about like 50 100MPH Ace serves using a wooden spoon for a racket. Just a thought

I was realy LOL that was awsome... wooden spoon for a racguet, I just happened to hve been a semi pro level racquetball player way back, some were in time..

 

[CrownCityCorey]

Nadal and Federer are both recognized as the best players in the world and more times then not we see their names as the tournament comes to an end.

Not to discount their talent and skill, but having an organized tournament schedule (tours) and seeding has a lot to do with the above being true.

 

[JB Cases]

In order for pool to be played at a higher level and show continued growth the game itself must change.

9-ball and even 10-ball are simply too easy and have too much luck built into the games to allow for the cream to rise to the top. This is why in any world title level event there are 30 people who are all pretty much even money to win.

This is not the case in tennis as well you know. Nadal and Federer are both recognized as the best players in the world and more times then not we see their names as the tournament comes to an end.

Pool at one time also allowed for more dominance in the game, this was in fact back in Mosconi's era when straight pool was the game of choice. Straight pool was a far better test of skill then 9-ball or even 10-ball that you see today. The reason is that straight pool does not put all the weight on a single ball, each ball made is worth one point, a person running 14 balls and missing the 15th does not lose everything to a person making a ball that hung up in the jaws.

Furthermore, pool had alot more interest back in the straight pool days because hearing about the high runs was a far better way to market the sport then talking about 9-3 scores in matches today. The general public will be more interested in a 150-68 score then a 9-3.

What needs to take place is a shift to a different game, and that game should incorperate a scoring system similar to straight pool (1 point per a ball) with a 15 ball rotation format to the game. Rules would be similar to 9-ball except that all shots but the break would be called and jump cues would need to be made with your main playing cue (this would place a strong emphasis on accurate kicking and learning to jump with a full length cue). Races for a pro event would likely work as races to 75 points or so, you could go more or less.

The game above would also morph very well into local league play and smaller tournaments where you can just make a race shorter, such as 30 points. It also makes ALOT more sense for the bars where noone ever caught on to 9-ball because people paying a dollar for a game of pool were not going to start using only 9 of the balls.

The above game would need to be marketed right, someone with the connections, money, and talent at running events would need to start doing events and getting the game on video and getting the players to start playing it and see how they like it and how it works as a tournament game.

I do feel if it was all done right a game such as the above could turn pool around and I honestly feel that if the game sticks to 9-ball or even 10-ball we are forever relugated to the sad state pool is in now for the forseeable future.

The fact that there are 30 people as you say in any given pro tournament who can win it is testament not to how easy the game is but instead to how hard it is to win consistently.

Ralf Souquet just won back to back EuroTour events and he stated that in each EuroTour even there are 256 players and 40 of them can win the event. I'd like to see how dominant Federer and Nadal would be if at every Tennis event there were 40 players equally as good.

Tennis has always had it superstars. From the time I was a kid it's been Lendl, Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Sampras, Agassi, and others that don't come to mind right now. But it's always been just a handful of dominant player among thousands.

Billiard sports on the other hand has in it's multiple disciplines dozens of world class players per generation making it that much more remarkable when some are able to dominate (seemingly) for short periods of time. Now it's harder than ever because there are simply more good players.

It takes a hell of a lot more talent and nerves to compete and win against 30 other champions than it does to compete and win against players who aren't as strong or as fast or don't have the best training. Tennis is set up to find the exceptional talent and promote it. It has a clear path to becoming a professional tennis player and anyone who shows promise will be supported.

Pool has nothing of the sort and yet it still manages to produce world class players with exceptional skill.

9 and 10 ball are not easy. Pros have a habit of making it LOOK easy. Any of us that are decent B to A level players know what it really takes to consistently run racks and how much pressure makes the pockets tighter and the stroke shorter.

How did this morph into another "what pool needs" type of thread?

What pool needs to do is settle on one game and promote the hell out it and take either golf or tennis and copy their model verbatim with a clear path from amateur to pro.

THEN in ten years when we have a worldwide rank list based on consistent and recognized events all played under the same rules on equipment that is in the correct specifications we can have this discussion as to which activity is tougher.

Right now, being a professional pool player is certainly a tougher way to make a living.

 

[Celtic]

Ralf Souquet just won back to back EuroTour events and he stated that in each EuroTour even there are 256 players and 40 of them can win the event. I'd like to see how dominant Federer and Nadal would be if at every Tennis event there were 40 players equally as good.

We see things differently. I do think pool has it's players that are the best, a little better then the rest, much as Nadal and Federer are. The difference is that in a set of tennis the skill becomes the major factor in who moves on because there is minimal luck and each player gets ample opportunity to make their skill determine the outcome.

Pool on the other hand atm is far to dependent on luck, a player like Dennis Orcollo can play against someone who is of lower level yet still a pro and lose a match because in a race to 9 or 11 a pro level player can keep Orcollo in his seat if the break is working and give him little chance to succeed. One player breaking well, while another gets the cueball kissed into a pocket after a perfect break where he parked the cueball in the center of the table, this stuff as often as not determines pool matches.

In the case of pool the game is too easy in that a pro can with a little fortune on the break beat a stronger player in a race to 9 or 11 and there is little the stronger player can do to stop it. In tennis this is not the case at all.

The key to stopping this in pool is to create a game where both players are going to have ample opportunites at the table and it becomes very hard to sit a player in a seat and control a whole match. With both players getting to the table more often the players are able to actually joust back and forth more like tennis allows and as such the better player has the better chance for his higher skill to determine the outcome.

I have beaten alot of players far better then me simply by running a 4 or 5 pack in a set, having them break dry a couple times, and getting to the 9 games first. And while I shot well in those sets regardless at the end of the set the weaker player (me) won. This would have been alot less likely in a game such as above because I am not going to run multiple racks, I am not going to be able to just keep my opponent off the table and nullify their higher skill like I have done in the past.

What it comes down to is that alot of pro pool is played against the ghost more then an opponent. The trick is to simply keep breaking and running racks and then it does not matter in the slightest how good your opponent is, if they don't shoot they cannot win. And in pro level 9-ball this is a common problem and the reason that people cannot rise to the top of our sport. Beating the 9-ball ghost is something that alot of pro's can do and at that point luck on the break allowing you to keep control of the table is what wins matches. There is no jousting, the best played matches are played alone and that is not a formula for a successful sport.