Pool Was More Exiting Back in the day because

Johnnyt

Johnnyt

Burn all jump cues
Silver Member
Don’t get me wrong, I know that playing the percentages like the pros of today do is the best way to win in the long run. Years ago before there was good kicking, lock up safes, and no jump cues the players went for a lot more low percentage shots making the matches much more exiting (for me anyway). Johnnyt
 
If you want to go that far back::

Pool was a lot more exciting when it was 14.1 continuous. You could feel the tesion in the room as players went over 30 shots in a row; the crowd sensing history in the making.
 
1996 Pro Tour Archer vs Efren Hill-Hill game on the loser's side, lots of safeties, yet was very exiting. At the end the crowd gave them a standing ovation.

... there I double posted in your double-post ;)
 
Johnnyt said:
Don’t get me wrong, I know that playing the percentages like the pros of today do is the best way to win in the long run. Years ago before there was good kicking, lock up safes, and no jump cues the players went for a lot more low percentage shots making the matches much more exiting (for me anyway). Johnnyt
Click to expand...


I agree! I don't know if you are talking about when they used "two shot rollout" rules, or not, but I always thought it was more entertaining when more of the difficult shots were attempted. When you play "two shot rollout", it "encourages" more difficult shots to be attempted because if you miss your position, you always have the "option" of rolling out into a defensive position and hoping you have a "better" idea of what to do because your opponent could always hand it back to you.
 
I agree with you 100%. I think one of the reasons pool has become less exciting is that the equipment has become tougher. You mentioned pros used to go for more low percentage shots. In my view it is true, because the equipment was easier and if a low percentage shot was made, then the pro would win.

Now with tough Pro-Cut Diamond tables, players are taking a more conservative approach. Don't get me wrong, I think Diamond tables are great, but I think it is important to recognize that they have changed the game or at least made a significant contribution to a change in the game.

The Diamonds tables have upsides. For one, I think better players win more consistently because the table is more demanding. If you are into a meritocracy, then this is good. Diamonds are remarkably consistent from location to location and because of that, lend themselves well to fair tournament play.

Personally, I would like to see tournaments played on Diamonds without the pro-cut pockets. I want to see pros let their stroke out.

Just my 0.02

kollegedave
 
HawaiianEye said:
I agree! I don't know if you are talking about when they used "two shot rollout" rules, or not, but I always thought it was more entertaining when more of the difficult shots were attempted. When you play "two shot rollout", it "encourages" more difficult shots to be attempted because if you miss your position, you always have the "option" of rolling out into a defensive position and hoping you have a "better" idea of what to do because your opponent could always hand it back to you.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was talking that far back and I agree with what you said. Johnnyt
 
kollegedave said:
I agree with you 100%. I think one of the reasons pool has become less exciting is that the equipment has become tougher. You mentioned pros used to go for more low percentage shots. In my view it is true, because the equipment was easier and if a low percentage shot was made, then the pro would win.

Now with tough Pro-Cut Diamond tables, players are taking a more conservative approach. Don't get me wrong, I think Diamond tables are great, but I think it is important to recognize that they have changed the game or at least made a significant contribution to a change in the game.

The Diamonds tables have upsides. For one, I think better players win more consistently because the table is more demanding. If you are into a meritocracy, then this is good. Diamonds are remarkably consistent from location to location and because of that, lend themselves well to fair tournament play.

Personally, I would like to see tournaments played on Diamonds without the pro-cut pockets. I want to see pros let their stroke out.

Just my 0.02

kollegedave
Click to expand...

Diamond tables with the pro-cut pockets have a lot to do with it...I agree. Johnnyt
 
This is why it's so much fun to see the Pros play on Bar boxes. They go for it more often.

Ray
 
Bigtruck said:
This is why it's so much fun to see the Pros play on Bar boxes. They go for it more often.

Ray
Click to expand...

I agree with this also. I don't know why there are not more BB 10-ball tournaments and action matches. Johnnyt
 
"Pool Was More Exiting Back in the day because..."

People played to win , not to not lose.

Losing with integrity was better than winning like a dirtbag.

You dressed to impress, played with manners and if you lost you typically learned a valuable lesson.

You could actually get shot or stabbed if you did it wrong.

You talked far less smack yet you often said so much more.

There was no internet.



I guess it depends on how far back in the day you go. :)
 
I think you guys need to take a step back and see the big picture here.

Pool is just as "exciting" as it has always been.

It is the audience that has changed.

"Back then" you didn't have television with 100s of channels. You didn't have football in HD where you can hear and almost feel the hard hits. You didn't have MMA and the UFC showing knock-outs up close and personal.

Society has changed, not pool. And, like it or not, most people would rather watch a guy get his hand get bitten off my an alligator than a guy poke balls into a hole with a stick. The size of the pockets, jump cues, and push-outs are really irrelevant to anyone who doesn't already have a strong understanding of the game.
 
RRfireblade said:
"Pool Was More Exiting Back in the day because..."

People played to win , not to not lose.

Losing with integrity was better than winning like a dirtbag.

You dressed to impress, played with manners and if you lost you typically learned a valuable lesson.

You could actually get shot or stabbed if you did it wrong.

You talked far less smack yet you often said so much more.

There was no internet.



I guess it depends on how far back in the day you go. :)
Click to expand...

You had to kill animals to get fur for clothing, yet there were no millionaire actors complaining about it.

Living to see 40 was a good life.

These new people with something called bronze keep killing your friends and taking their stuff.

Too far back?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top