Robin Hull - Ex-snooker player ran 180 in 14-1

[Roy Steffensen]

Mjantti, I hope it's ok that I stole your post from the 14-1 forum. Thought this could be a nice thread since we are discussing snookerplayer Q. Hann vs John Schmidt. Perhaps a 14-1 match between Hann and Schmidt could be fun and not so one-sided as some people here first thought

(By the way Mjantti, congratulations with your medal)

I haven't broke 40 this year, but I got my first individual Finnish Champ medal in 14.1 two weeks ago, so I'm a happy camper although I didn't play well at all. In the semifinal my opponent EC-medalist Aki Heiskanen ran 118 and 32-out so I couldn't bee too unhappy to lose that

What is discouraging though is that a former Finnish snooker top pro Robin Hull, who reached top 32 in world ranks and was forced to retire this year from his snooker career due to health problems picked up a house cue the other day and ran 180-something in straight pool with hardly any pool experience. Disturbing...

These guys are running centuries left and right and I'm still looking for my 1st... grrr

Just venting, carry on boys

 

[billbOK]

8 ball

Jonni Fulcher, who is an (ex-)amateur snooker player and currently active in the 9 ball European circuit (has also take part in the 2007 US Open and the 2007 WPC) has run 8 packs and out in the QF of the 2007 8 ball Swiss Championships (in a race to 8).

It's not straight pool but I thought this nice performance could be mentionned here !

 

[mjantti]

Roy, thank you for your congratulations. After 17 years of play, that medal is something I've always wanted. Doesn't matter I played like a donkey..

Jonni Fulcher has won an Eurotour event if I remember correctly. No achievement to look down to.

 

[Roy Steffensen]

So the question here is: "When R. Hull can make 180 with a housecue one of the first times he plays the game, how well can Q. Hann play the game after a week practise?"

 

[mjantti]

So the question here is: "When R. Hull can make 180 with a housecue one of the first times he plays the game, how well can Q. Hann play the game after a week practise?"

I'd say "quite well"

 

[JB Cases]

I was watching the China Open two days ago. The players were in a long safety battle. These guys were shooting at balls 11 feet away, nicking the edges and controlling both balls to bring the cue ball back 13 feet to the end rail. Over and over and over.

If anything Snooker is more like straight pool than any other game. Actually Snooker is like a combination of straight pool and 9 ball when it gets to the colors only.

There is NO DOUBT in my mind that any snooker pro who cared to begin playing straight pool would easily run hundreds and hundreds and hundreds.

There is NOTHING about straight pool that is remotely challenging to a Snooker professional. The moves are the same, the pockets are buckets. The only thing that they need to adjust to is the speed of the cloth, the rails and maybe the cue if they choose to use a pool cue.

If Quinten Hann is waffling over playing straight pool then it's only to get the bet right because there is no one on Earth that is a favorite over him if he decides to play 14.1. Not for more than a few games for sure. Any possible move that he doesn't know will be learned and assimilated so quickly that it won't even be funny.

When I watch these guys make the object ball and run into the pack with such control and power in snooker I know that doing the same thing for them in straight pool is child's play to them.

I respect the hell out of John Schmidt as a player and a representative of the sport. He is a big part of people's new interest in 14.1. But he and his fans should not for one second think that because he has accomplishments in 14.1 and Quinten Hann has none that Quinten is the underdog in that game. That would be a huge mistake in my opinon.

As onle who has been fortunate to see top flight snooker players, carom players, and pool players during my time in Europe I can tell you that in pocket billiards a top Snooker player needs to fear no man.

 

[SPINDOKTOR]

The best shot makers on planet Earth are snooker players...no surprise, really, a 12' table would be utter hell for mainstream 9 ball players...without a doubt, snooker and 14:1 are simular, and I agree with you 100%


SPINDOKTOR

I was watching the China Open two days ago. The players were in a long safety battle. These guys were shooting at balls 11 feet away, nicking the edges and controlling both balls to bring the cue ball back 13 feet to the end rail. Over and over and over.

If anything Snooker is more like straight pool than any other game. Actually Snooker is like a combination of straight pool and 9 ball when it gets to the colors only.

There is NO DOUBT in my mind that any snooker pro who cared to begin playing straight pool would easily run hundreds and hundreds and hundreds.

There is NOTHING about straight pool that is remotely challenging to a Snooker professional. The moves are the same, the pockets are buckets. The only thing that they need to adjust to is the speed of the cloth, the rails and maybe the cue if they choose to use a pool cue.

If Quinten Hann is waffling over playing straight pool then it's only to get the bet right because there is no one on Earth that is a favorite over him if he decides to play 14.1. Not for more than a few games for sure. Any possible move that he doesn't know will be learned and assimilated so quickly that it won't even be funny.

When I watch these guys make the object ball and run into the pack with such control and power in snooker I know that doing the same thing for them in straight pool is child's play to them.

I respect the hell out of John Schmidt as a player and a representative of the sport. He is a big part of people's new interest in 14.1. But he and his fans should not for one second think that because he has accomplishments in 14.1 and Quinten Hann has none that Quinten is the underdog in that game. That would be a huge mistake in my opinon.

As onle who has been fortunate to see top flight snooker players, carom players, and pool players during my time in Europe I can tell you that in pocket billiards a top Snooker player needs to fear no man.

 

[john schmidt]

hi

I was watching the China Open two days ago. The players were in a long safety battle. These guys were shooting at balls 11 feet away, nicking the edges and controlling both balls to bring the cue ball back 13 feet to the end rail. Over and over and over.

If anything Snooker is more like straight pool than any other game. Actually Snooker is like a combination of straight pool and 9 ball when it gets to the colors only.

There is NO DOUBT in my mind that any snooker pro who cared to begin playing straight pool would easily run hundreds and hundreds and hundreds.

There is NOTHING about straight pool that is remotely challenging to a Snooker professional. The moves are the same, the pockets are buckets. The only thing that they need to adjust to is the speed of the cloth, the rails and maybe the cue if they choose to use a pool cue.

If Quinten Hann is waffling over playing straight pool then it's only to get the bet right because there is no one on Earth that is a favorite over him if he decides to play 14.1. Not for more than a few games for sure. Any possible move that he doesn't know will be learned and assimilated so quickly that it won't even be funny.

When I watch these guys make the object ball and run into the pack with such control and power in snooker I know that doing the same thing for them in straight pool is child's play to them.

I respect the hell out of John Schmidt as a player and a representative of the sport. He is a big part of people's new interest in 14.1. But he and his fans should not for one second think that because he has accomplishments in 14.1 and Quinten Hann has none that Quinten is the underdog in that game. That would be a huge mistake in my opinon.

As onle who has been fortunate to see top flight snooker players, carom players, and pool players during my time in Europe I can tell you that in pocket billiards a top Snooker player needs to fear no man.

with all due respect john you are way off.ive ran hundreds playing snooker on a 6by12 but believe me i can not win at snooker.because a player runs 180 one time does not mean its even between him and say robles or hohmann etc.i will play any snooker player a 1000 point game but you have to run 100 no count to get there.its a different game trust me ive played them all.

 

[JB Cases]

with all due respect john you are way off.ive ran hundreds playing snooker on a 6by12 but believe me i can not win at snooker.because a player runs 180 one time does not mean its even between him and say robles or hohmann etc.i will play any snooker player a 1000 point game but you have to run 100 no count to get there.its a different game trust me ive played them all.

John I completely understand your position. Since you have run plenty of hundred point (centuries) in snooker, which means that you have run at least 18 balls on super tough conditions (if you are using the same conditions that the UK snooker pros play on), then you understand that they use a lot of the same patterns.

The example given was of a player who picked up an unfamiliar cue and presumably played a game that he had little experience with and ran 180. This player happened to be a former top 32 snooker player.

I also wasn't saying that such a feat makes them even with Robles, Hohmann, or you. But you have to admit that a player who can do that is an impressive player regardless.

What do you think of this challenge?

Take the top ten snooker players in the world and the top ten pool players.

Set up a standard break shot in 14.1 and allow the top ten snooker players ten attempts to make 100 balls.

Set up a standard beginning shot in Snooker to attempt to clear the table for a 147. Allow the pool pros ten attempts to break 100 or even make a 147.

Which group will have greater success at the other one's game?

How much practice do you think it would take for a top snooker pro to excel at 14.1? How about to become top ten in the world at 14.1?

How much practice would it take for a top pool pro to excel at UK Snooker? How about to become top 10?

Johnny Archer once won an All-Around by winning the straight-pool portion . He had started to learn straight pool one week prior to the event. In the finals he ran 150 and out and was encouraged to continue the run and he ran to 200. If a pure 9-ball champion can learn the game to that level inside of a week then what makes you think that a snooker professional cannot do the same?

Do you feel confident to play Quinten Hann five 1000 point blocks of 14.1 for say $10,000 a block? I am NOT trying to set up a game here. I am just saying that this is one of the ways that 14.1 titles were contended in the past and do you think that you would still be the favorite after a teaching Quentin all that you know over a couple thousand points? Do you think that he wouldn't be able to absorb and execute the safeties and patterns you play? There is no shot in 14.1 beside maybe some off-angle banks that aren't standard in snooker, that Quentin does not already know and execute at a world class level.

Anyway that's just my take on it. When it comes down to getting down on the table though my perspective is academic since I have nothing but the barest fraction of yours or Quentin's experience or achievements.

 

[Blackjack]

Mjantti, I hope it's ok that I stole your post from the 14-1 forum. Thought this could be a nice thread since we are discussing snookerplayer Q. Hann vs John Schmidt. Perhaps a 14-1 match between Hann and Schmidt could be fun and not so one-sided as some people here first thought

(By the way Mjantti, congratulations with your medal)

Hey Roy...
I guess he's getting a lot out of the stuff I am posting in the Straight Pool Forum.



(J/K)

Great run!

 

[john schmidt]

hi

John I completely understand your position. Since you have run plenty of hundred point (centuries) in snooker, which means that you have run at least 18 balls on super tough conditions (if you are using the same conditions that the UK snooker pros play on), then you understand that they use a lot of the same patterns.

The example given was of a player who picked up an unfamiliar cue and presumably played a game that he had little experience with and ran 180. This player happened to be a former top 32 snooker player.

I also wasn't saying that such a feat makes them even with Robles, Hohmann, or you. But you have to admit that a player who can do that is an impressive player regardless.

What do you think of this challenge?

Take the top ten snooker players in the world and the top ten pool players.

Set up a standard break shot in 14.1 and allow the top ten snooker players ten attempts to make 100 balls.

Set up a standard beginning shot in Snooker to attempt to clear the table for a 147. Allow the pool pros ten attempts to break 100 or even make a 147.

Which group will have greater success at the other one's game?

How much practice do you think it would take for a top snooker pro to excel at 14.1? How about to become top ten in the world at 14.1?

How much practice would it take for a top pool pro to excel at UK Snooker? How about to become top 10?

Johnny Archer once won an All-Around by winning the straight-pool portion . He had started to learn straight pool one week prior to the event. In the finals he ran 150 and out and was encouraged to continue the run and he ran to 200. If a pure 9-ball champion can learn the game to that level inside of a week then what makes you think that a snooker professional cannot do the same?

Do you feel confident to play Quinten Hann five 1000 point blocks of 14.1 for say $10,000 a block? I am NOT trying to set up a game here. I am just saying that this is one of the ways that 14.1 titles were contended in the past and do you think that you would still be the favorite after a teaching Quentin all that you know over a couple thousand points? Do you think that he wouldn't be able to absorb and execute the safeties and patterns you play? There is no shot in 14.1 beside maybe some off-angle banks that aren't standard in snooker, that Quentin does not already know and execute at a world class level.

Anyway that's just my take on it. When it comes down to getting down on the table though my perspective is academic since I have nothing but the barest fraction of yours or Quentin's experience or achievements.

i would be more than happy to play any snooker player a 1000 point block for 10000 a block put up 5 blocks. also snooker is nothing like 14.1 or vice versa and anyone that thinks they are so similiar does not play great enough at either game to see all the differences involved.the snooker guys would be great eventually at pool.but to make it sound like they play great 14.1 after only a few games is ridiculous.jmho no hard feelings i hope jb

 

[memikey]

...... you have run plenty of hundred point (centuries) in snooker, which means that you have run at least 18 balls on super tough conditions (if you are using the same conditions that the UK snooker pros play on)........

If you know anyone who has made a century in snooker by running 18 balls I suggest you don't play cards with him cos he's a cheat

What do you think of this challenge?

Take the top ten snooker players in the world and the top ten pool players.

Set up a standard break shot in 14.1 and allow the top ten snooker players ten attempts to make 100 balls.

Set up a standard beginning shot in Snooker to attempt to clear the table for a 147. Allow the pool pros ten attempts to break 100 or even make a 147.

Which group will have greater success at the other one's game?

This hypothetical competition would only have any relevance to the subject of making a comparison of abilities if you have already established that making a century break in snooker is a fair and reasonable parallel equivalent to running 100 balls in straight pool. Many past discussions of this same subject suggests that there are very varied opinions on what the snooker break equivalent of a 100 ball run in straight pool is and that equivalent isn't necessarily a century.

 

[Blackjack]

i would be more than happy to play any snooker player a 1000 point block for 10000 a block put up 5 blocks. also snooker is nothing like 14.1 or vice versa and anyone that thinks they are so similiar does not play great enough at either game to see all the differences involved.the snooker guys would be great eventually at pool.but to make it sound like they play great 14.1 after only a few games is ridiculous.jmho no hard feelings i hope jb

JS

This is the same thing you and I spoke about not too long ago.



Nobody is saying that the snooker players cannot play. Many of my high runs have been in practice - which doesn't mean squat when you compare it to a one on one match-up against a guy staring you down from the chair as you both attempt to get to the finish line before the other guy does.

It's apples and oranges in pool and in snooker. I have no doubt that in any context - when you get two champions from either game - the winner will be the guy that has the most experience playing the selected game under the selected terms with the added pressure.

We can make all kinds of comparisons - rugby to football - cricket to baseball - shot put to tossing cow chips -

None of it really makes any sense because the intricacies of these games/activities is what makes them so different.

That is all John is saying, and he is also saying that he believes he has an edge with straight pool against anybody that has little or no experience playing it at his level.

Nobody from pool is going to have a chance against Quinten in his domain either - unless they are acclimated to the snooker competition at that level of play. Its the same with straight pool.

 

[SnookerStar]

Master

Hello boys. Everybody who knows what is real Snooker table like what is used in Main tour. Pockets are tight,not buckets. Its nice John S u have been making centurys but try real table. My best run in five frames are 66,63 -138 71,65 134 and 69,70. Also in ten frames 7times over 80brake.
I think i cant play!!! iIm amateur and have been playing 5 and half year.
Pool potting is easy but i dont understand the game.


Hundreds and hundreds...it matters how u make them and from where!

 

[Marvel]

I was thinking earlier if I should ask from Robin if I can put this to the other thread when people were doubting Quinten cannot play straight pool etc.

Mjantti posted it already, so I can add, that Quinten's experience in Pool is in different level of Robin's. I've never heard of Robin even touch a Pool cue or play Pool before. Also, he didn't just fluke one break, but he played for three days (with a house cue), and scored 150+ every day. Then, three days later, he score 170+.
He told me that the pockets were big (like for the snooker player they are anyway), but another pool player said that they are mediocre+, meaning that they are big, but still shimmed, so not the buckets what for example the non-shimmed Brunswicks have.

You are all right that if you do these runs in practise, it's no match for doing these in tournament or even a money game. But, even it really sounds unbelievable, it really is true that Robin had zero experience in Pool, and that he just picked a house cue. I don't know for fact that how many days he practiced overall and how many days it took to get first to 150, but not long I understood. Quinten's highest snooker ranking was somewhere inside top 16, Robin reached 32. Robin admitted, that to reach top 16, would still have been long long road. Also Robin confirmed, that the stories about Quinten not practicing (almost) at all, were true. (they played at the same hall in London for some time).

In earlier post John admitted, that all his highest breaks were made with big pockets, new cloth, clean balls etc... so, I think, in the end, John was wise not to take Quinten's challenge


My suggestion is that John and Quinten would play both, snooker and 14.1. for a long race and the one who loses his weaker discipline with lesser margin, would win. That is, if Q would win snooker and J would win 14.1. For example 14.1. race 1000, snooker race to 2000 points (not playing frames but only counting the points).

Then we would know who's the better cue artist from those two

 

[instroke75]

I like the 14,1 to 1000, and snooker to 2000! That would be the best way to settle this.
And the notion of setting up a break shot and trying for a 100 in 14.1 being comparable to a 147 in snooker is a joke! A 147 in snooker is a way bigger accomplishment than running 100 in 14.1.
I love both games, and would love to see John and Quintenn match up in the 1000 and 2000 format!
Jeremy

 

[JB Cases]

If you know anyone who has made a century in snooker by running 18 balls I suggest you don't play cards with him cos he's a cheat

My math sucks! I meant at least 23 balls. red/black.

This hypothetical competition would only have any relevance to the subject of making a comparison of abilities if you have already established that making a century break in snooker is a fair and reasonable parallel equivalent to running 100 balls in straight pool. Many past discussions of this same subject suggests that there are very varied opinions on what the snooker break equivalent of a 100 ball run in straight pool is and that equivalent isn't necessarily a century.

I wasn't making that comparison, John was. It is commonly known that a 147 frame is the highest achievement in snooker. John brought up 100-no count as a benchmark that he felt a snooker player had little chance to win if they tried it.

Anyway, I have my opinion based on what I have observed over the years.

Anyone who watches pro snooker cannot say that the snooker players do not play patterns and use spin the same as pool players do. They certainly do and they do it with a lot more accuracy.

There is a reason that no American and no person who started out as a pool player has ever made it on the professional snooker circuit.

I truly believe however that someone like Johnny Archer could possibly make it if he devoted a year or so of his life to practicing nothing but snooker. I don't think that Ronnie O'Sullivan is a better player than Johnny Archer as far as pure talent goes. ( yes, i know Ronnie fans go ahead and flame) But Ronnie is a world class talent in a harder discipline. Pool is easier for him and that is that. Therefore he can compete with Johnny on the pool table credibly right now and is such a superb cueist that he can adapt to any game incredibly quickly, whereas Johnny can't hope to do the same in the same time frame if he tries to play Ronnie at snooker.

These are just the plain facts.

Because IF pool players can make it on the Snooker tour then WHY aren't the backers sending their guys to England to snap it off? Why are they barking for a few thousand when there is still millions in the game of Snooker?

 

[Jaden]

I don't know about that.

The best shot makers on planet Earth are snooker players...no surprise, really, a 12' table would be utter hell for mainstream 9 ball players...without a doubt, snooker and 14:1 are simular, and I agree with you 100%


SPINDOKTOR

Let's see, John has a high run of 403 at 14.1, and a snooker pro the first time he tried 14.1 got 180, less than half of what John has. Ok. I'm couldn't be considered a top pool player, and the second time I ever tried playing snooker and the first time on a 6x12, I had a high break of 68. I have not duplicated that since, but I continue to improve and considering that I have only logged about 20 hours playing snooker I think that it is not unreasonable to say that if an American player seriously focused only at snooker for an extended time fram, they COULD compete. I probably won't be able to, because I can't afford to spend hours and hours on a snooker table. I'm spending more time and my sister is living in England and I may go visit her and my brother in law to get a chance to try my hand at playing in the UK. But I think that it is foolish to say that snooker players can dominate in american pool if they focus but that American players can't hold up their pants playing snooker if they were to try at it.


I had someone say that children in the UK have breaks in the hundreds, but have they only logged 20 hours playing snooker????

 

[raybo147]

Ok first I want to say that Robin Hull is a monster snooker player, if it wasn;t for health reasons I think he could be in the top 16 right now. I am not surprised he could hit these runs right away because I have seen him play and the dude is an animal. I think the snooker players who come on here should really go and try straight pool because the game demands a lot more respect than it is getting right now (I am a snooker player by the way). It is mentally a very tough game and running out game after game for 2 or 3 hours is way tougher than it seems. Snooker players would not be able to just run 500 whenever they felt like it, the game really is not that easy even for a Hendry or somebody like that.

 

[instroke75]

You know I really get sick of hearing this arguement! The ability to pocket balls is the same on both sides of the pond!
There is no magical gene in the UK for pocketing balls better than the US. If you can play, you can play. Ronnie O is one of the best cueist of alltime, and can play any game with a stick and some balls. But so can Efren, and so can SVB, and Corey and even Earl(who is one of the best shot makers in history!).
Also I promise that there are alot of tables over here that play just as hard or harder than a Riley, so don't automatically discount the high breaks of the players over here.
And furthermore, the thing that makes most of the top snooker players great, is precision cueball control, not shot making! Because when they run a 147, almost all the shot are on one half of the table! So essentially they're only playing on a 6 by 6 table most of the time!
Anyway I don't wish to ramble on forever, but I just wanted to say: If you can play, you can play!
Jeremy