Rags died in 1960 at age 40. Harold Worst died at age 37. Pretty sad when you think about it. Two of the best ever gone while still in their prime.
Scott Frost vs The So Called One Pocket Greats
- Thread starter watchez
- Start date
Rags died in 1960 at age 40. Harold Worst died at age 37. Pretty sad when you think about it. Two of the best ever gone while still in their prime.
Wow, what a thread!
Jay,
I wanted to quote all your posts here, all of SJDinPHX's posts as well as Celtic's gem of a post and several other's posts, but there's just too many good posts on this thread to quote them all. You mention good info on SD, so yours wins!
The part the I want to throw in is that Shannon Daulton has accomplished more than any other younger one pocket player has. By far. Tournaments as well as gambling sessions.
I would love to see a challenge match between him and Scott Frost.
I've badgered poor Steve at 1P.org for several years about having Shannon nominated for induction into his One Pocket AND Banks H.O.F.
He is a shoe in, no doubt!
Daulton, Schmidt, Frost, Jeremy Jones. Great players all. Daulton though could retire right now, not play any more 1P and STILL have enough credntials to be enshrined into the 1P H.O.F.
I do have oodles of respect for the "Freezer's" game, gamble and heart!
Lastly, with respect to how many or who of the original list Scott could have beat, great players trade games and sets back and forth. ALL them guys already enshrined could play! Some of them though, ala R.A., Efren, Grady, Ed Kelly, etc had super high octane levels! There are elite, dominant professionals, there are very good professionals and then every kind of level all the way down. Once you start messing with the elite players, you just about have to be a savant to compete with them, let alone beat them on a regular basis.
But I think everybody here already knows that.
***EDITED to add....I wish Grady and Billy would weigh in here. Some excellent points have been made all thru this thread. They, I'm sure, would add even more.
Jay,
I wanted to quote all your posts here, all of SJDinPHX's posts as well as Celtic's gem of a post and several other's posts, but there's just too many good posts on this thread to quote them all. You mention good info on SD, so yours wins!
The part the I want to throw in is that Shannon Daulton has accomplished more than any other younger one pocket player has. By far. Tournaments as well as gambling sessions.
I would love to see a challenge match between him and Scott Frost.
I've badgered poor Steve at 1P.org for several years about having Shannon nominated for induction into his One Pocket AND Banks H.O.F.
He is a shoe in, no doubt!
Daulton, Schmidt, Frost, Jeremy Jones. Great players all. Daulton though could retire right now, not play any more 1P and STILL have enough credntials to be enshrined into the 1P H.O.F.
I do have oodles of respect for the "Freezer's" game, gamble and heart!
Lastly, with respect to how many or who of the original list Scott could have beat, great players trade games and sets back and forth. ALL them guys already enshrined could play! Some of them though, ala R.A., Efren, Grady, Ed Kelly, etc had super high octane levels! There are elite, dominant professionals, there are very good professionals and then every kind of level all the way down. Once you start messing with the elite players, you just about have to be a savant to compete with them, let alone beat them on a regular basis.
But I think everybody here already knows that.
***EDITED to add....I wish Grady and Billy would weigh in here. Some excellent points have been made all thru this thread. They, I'm sure, would add even more.
Last edited:
These are 2 post by Billy Incardone on the subject from over at www.onepocket.org .
wincardona said:
wincardona said:I never played Scott even, he's always spotted me. Our game today is 11/7 and I spot one on his break.
Scott's game is similiar to Ronnie Allen's, but Scott runs more balls than Ronnie did when Ronnie was in his prime.I know i'm going to get a lot of heat with that statement, but that's the way I see it. I really think that it would of been a very exciting and entertaining match, and probably very close but we'll never know.
Todays one pocket is much more of a open agressive style, compared to the 60' and 70's game. Back then the surface was slower which was codusive to not so much of a conservetive movers game, but a game that you had to switch gears depending on the conditions. Reason being that humdity played a bigger role in the way the game was played. It wasn't uncommon to have to switch style of play several times in a long session, because of the way humidity dictated how one should play. Today with the faster surface the game is played with more of an agressive style. Scott Frost plays that particular style as good or better than any player today. Let me offer a bit of creditable facts that confirms my observation. Jay Helfert, last year held a contest at the DCC . The rules were you get to break the balls 5 times and shoot again, the player that ran the most balls after the fifth rack was the winner. Well there were several 50's and I believe a couple of 60's run. Back in the 60's and 70's a run of 40 was remarkable, so based on that contest something tells me that you better play agressively if you want to compete.
So lets say that Ronnie probably would of won back in his prime years, because he would of out managed Frost. But in tdays one pocket it would of been a much more difficult game for Ronnie, and it probably could of gone either way.
As far as rating Scott against all the other top players I already said that Scott plays the agressive game better than anyone, but Gabe Owens plays a very solid all around game, but I still would make Frost the favorite. By the way I bet on Gabe when he played Shohan, but I probably would bet on Frost against Gabe, but I wouldn't be thrilled.
I don't know why I typed in 40's and 50's.I meant late 50's or early
60's.Thanks for the correction Jay.
http://www.azbilliards.com/interviews/edkelly.cfm
'Champagne' Edwin Kelly is one of the few players in the game who can claim titles in four different games. And he won them over four different decades. Kelly has won titles in 9-ball, One Pocket, Straight Pool and 3-Cushion over the length of his career. Edwin was a top player in the sixties, during the days of the Johnston City 'Hustlers' tournaments. He will be inducted into the BCA Hall of Fame this year. We had the honor of conducting this interview with Mr Kelly in early May, 2 weeks after the announcement of his induction...
...I had been a player for 2 years before I ever heard of "pocket apiece" (one pocket).
Later in my career, one-pocket was my game. I learned a lot from Eddie Taylor and Ronnie Allen. One pocket is the best game anyway.
AZB: Why is that?
Edwin: One pocket is much more cerebral. It takes a little of all the other games. 14.1 experience allows you run out, banks experience is obvious, 9-ball experience makes you a shot maker. When you get a chance in one-pocket, you have to come with a shot and experince as a shot-maker helps. Even 3 cushion expereince helps.
One pocket also has it's own moves and shots that are unique to that game. The balls tell you how to play in 9-ball, they don't in one pocket.
AZB: Who was the best one-pocket player you ever competed against?
Edwin: Ronnie Allen was the best one pocket player I ever played, but I don't think he could beat Eddie Taylor. I once lost $2800 to Taylor. He would bank balls in from everywhere and you would just get dizzy watching. He would have beat me out of more, but $2800 was all I had that day....
'Champagne' Edwin Kelly is one of the few players in the game who can claim titles in four different games. And he won them over four different decades. Kelly has won titles in 9-ball, One Pocket, Straight Pool and 3-Cushion over the length of his career. Edwin was a top player in the sixties, during the days of the Johnston City 'Hustlers' tournaments. He will be inducted into the BCA Hall of Fame this year. We had the honor of conducting this interview with Mr Kelly in early May, 2 weeks after the announcement of his induction...
...I had been a player for 2 years before I ever heard of "pocket apiece" (one pocket).
Later in my career, one-pocket was my game. I learned a lot from Eddie Taylor and Ronnie Allen. One pocket is the best game anyway.
AZB: Why is that?
Edwin: One pocket is much more cerebral. It takes a little of all the other games. 14.1 experience allows you run out, banks experience is obvious, 9-ball experience makes you a shot maker. When you get a chance in one-pocket, you have to come with a shot and experince as a shot-maker helps. Even 3 cushion expereince helps.
One pocket also has it's own moves and shots that are unique to that game. The balls tell you how to play in 9-ball, they don't in one pocket.
AZB: Who was the best one-pocket player you ever competed against?
Edwin: Ronnie Allen was the best one pocket player I ever played, but I don't think he could beat Eddie Taylor. I once lost $2800 to Taylor. He would bank balls in from everywhere and you would just get dizzy watching. He would have beat me out of more, but $2800 was all I had that day....
Interesting thread, I'll put in my two cents: Ronnie Allen and Efren Reyes are easily the two best one pocket players I've ever seen. They could both run out from anywhere, both with nerves of steel. I've never seen anyone who I think was within a ball of either one of them.
The comparison between the old and new players will always be a topic and will never be proven one way ar another but you can compare players of today with each other and I really have to say that I rate several players over Scott Frost. I still think Efren Reyes can give Frost 8-7 or even 9-7 for big cash. People say that Frost can beat anyone in a very long set (race to 21 or more) but to me all a marathon set will prove is who can stay standing and awake the longest, not who the better player is.
I'd also take Pagulayan, Deuel, and Gabe Owen over Frost. And Shannon Daulton would need about 2 months of steady practicing to get back in shape and I'd take him all day over Frost.
What would be really interesting is if Someone like Shane Van Boening were to take up the game and get mentored by Artie, He might beat them all!
The comparison between the old and new players will always be a topic and will never be proven one way ar another but you can compare players of today with each other and I really have to say that I rate several players over Scott Frost. I still think Efren Reyes can give Frost 8-7 or even 9-7 for big cash. People say that Frost can beat anyone in a very long set (race to 21 or more) but to me all a marathon set will prove is who can stay standing and awake the longest, not who the better player is.
I'd also take Pagulayan, Deuel, and Gabe Owen over Frost. And Shannon Daulton would need about 2 months of steady practicing to get back in shape and I'd take him all day over Frost.
What would be really interesting is if Someone like Shane Van Boening were to take up the game and get mentored by Artie, He might beat them all!
Last edited:
Watchez, I'm sure in 25,30yrs there will be some young pool playing whippersnappers talking about how that old Efren guy was probably overrated and probably couldn't beat any of the contemporarys. The only problem is there are those of us who have been around to see today's and yesterday's players, not just today's players. I think our opinions should be considered. I'm not sure you are capable of being more respectful either.
I think it also has to do with how well you know your own game -- the components of your stroke. There are a lot of guys out there that have little to no introspection. They're just naturals and play great and don't know why. As they age and their bodies change, or they just lay off for a while, they can't adjust and regain their old form.
The guys that know their own game are the ones that hold up.
Lou Figueroa
I agree with most of what you say, but amongst all the falderal about the ancients vs the modern day players, there has been one topic that has gone unmentioned: how loose the vast majority of tables were "back in the day."
I think a lot of guys back then looked good just because they knew the 1pocket moves that were generally unknown by the majority of the pool hall populace, and the tables were Hoovers. (Nowadays, thanks to Accu-Stats, *everyone* knows the moves. I've heard Ronnie Allen say, "I see 17 year old kids shooting shots now that took me 10 years to learn.") Against today’s hyper-accurate players, I think many of the older generation's players would be toast. The old-timers I’ve spoken to have all pretty much said the same thing: most of the rooms had tables with buckets for pockets. This was especially true at the popular Brunswick bowling/pool hall set ups.
Certainly, that’s not to say that there weren’t some tough tables out there. But that was the exception and very far from the rule. Speaking just from my personal experience, I recall the tables at The Palace and Cochran’s, in San Francisco, as having outrageously loose pockets, with a very shallow slate shelf. Even the 5x10s. If you got it close to the pocket, it was going.
In modern times there’s been the advent of double and triple-shimmed pockets. And now we have the Diamond’s, which are some tough nuts to crack. I think nowadays we have come to expect a 1pocket table to be setup tougher. But in the previous era the equipment the game was played on was frequently loose.
Soooo…. I guess what I’m saying is: *some* of the old guys would have zero chance on today’s tougher equipment. The modern day player has to cope with much tighter equipment, particularly for 1pocket. And, modern day players have adjusted and made a much higher level of accuracy the standard. I think that should be a factor in all these discussions: Efren's doing it on much tougher tables, against fields the equal of, or greater than, all the old fields put together. Just today's Filipino contingent alone could have gone into the Chicago or LA of 40 or 50 years ago and made it look like the St Valentine's Day Massacre, over lumpia and pancit
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
Actually philw, and with all due respect - over at onepocket.org I made the offer to SJDinPHX to bet on the matches of this years one pocket tournament at the DCC. He declined and his reason was "Of the 300-400 players competing there last year, I knew about a dozen of them pretty well, (all over 50) and another dozen by name. Probably 20-30 more that I'd heard of, but forgot".
This shows me that in today's world, those of us that were around to see today's and yesterday's players aren't even looking at today's players.
Why do you think that is? I know the answer.
billingsmtluke
Registered
Lets not forget...
Cole Dickson...Played the best and busted the best. The man has a killer slip stroke and has a great one hole game.
Cole Dickson...Played the best and busted the best. The man has a killer slip stroke and has a great one hole game.
That's a good point, they still use mostly 4 pockets in 14.1 but you are right, the balls didn't open as easily as they do now and they probably play more balls up table now than before.
At one point in Crane's 150 and out from 1966 he slams a ball in the corner pocket and the cue ball leaves the surface of the table and flies into the stack off the long rail to break the balls open and not get stuck in the stack. It is interesting that Crane is famous for that run but the players of his day, from my understanding, said his safety play was what made him most dangerous.
When I get bored some day I will compare Crane's run to the 2009 14.1 world championship between Immonen and Cohen to see how many balls were pocketed up table.
Do you play 14.1 or are you mostly a 9 ball player?
I think 14.1 has changed significantly with the current generation of players. Guys like Hopkins and Sigel picked pieces of the rack apart and moved in a circle a lot more than today's players. Modern players tend to SMAAAAASH the rack at near 9-ball break speeds and then deal with the fallout. Doing so inevitably sends more balls up-table - especially with the Simonis cloth.
I watched the Crane run and it's very, very impressive considering the equipment. Based on what I saw, I think Irving had a very modern style of play - - even way back then. He's one of my very favorite players of his era.
so there you have it billy incardone knows pool today and from the past he knows.
Got any pics of Cole? I haven't seen him in 20 + years... Be nice to see some pics of him thru-out his career. I know he was mostly on the hustle and didn't play in tourneys so much, so might not be alot of them out there, but if you got access to him, maybe he'll let you borrow a few.
I've only ran across 1 or 2 of him that were posted here or at onepocket.org.
Incardona says back in the 60's a score of 40 was amazing, and that was on big buckets. At derby they had a lot of 50's and even a couple 60 on tight diamond tables. See! The bar gets set so high and then a new generation sets it higher.
If I were a betting man I would bet that incardona really thinks that frost is stealing playing ronnie allen (judging by what he wrote here) but doesn't want to say that because he doesn't want heat for it.
ill tellem you are right on.
What year did the crane run take place?