That brings up an interesting question. Lets assume this is true for arguements sake.
If you were actually able to warp an "in his prime" Ronnie Allen to today, right in the heart of his truly top gear years (Jay would know that age perhaps, I have no clue), give him a year to prowl around checking out the new equippment, finding a new custom cue he likes, figuring out which fancy new tip he likes, figuring out simonis cloth, the new polymer resin balls. He spends that year watching some accustats, gambling the local talent as it is today, playing in whatever 1-pocket events he can find, ect...
The question I have for you Donny, after that year how good do you think Ronnie would be? Do you think Scott would be into playing him straight up after that year?
Personally, I am guessing Ronnie knew most of the tricks, the few new things that come up would not be something that would take long for a guy with his loads of talent to pick up on, and perhaps then even improve on.
This is kind of my thought on the whole thing. People ask these questions as if they are yanking the older generation player from out of the cold, slapping him down onto a diamond with Simonis and Aramith Pro balls, and saying "OK, play this guy".
Did you watch the IPT Straight Pool match with Sigel and Schmidt? The aftermath and what John had to say says alot about what the pro's of the olden days had to deal with playing with mud balls, technologically inferior rails, and cloth that was not made to the exact standards of today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOlxow0l8bE&feature=channel
For a pro from the 1950's they would have thought this was more the norm of equippment. I have played with the old balls, they play "dead", they dont do bugger all. You have to stroke the ball like crazy to get them to do anything. From video I have seen the cloth is nothing like the slick simonis of today. Players stroke the balls well but the reactions are dull compared to the reactions with todays balls and cloth.
I think that if you grabbed a Mosconi in his absolute prime and his peak level of playing ability and put him against Schmidt immediately in a long set he would be in tough. I think if you brought him into today at his peak and gave him a month to practice and adjust to the equippment he would be the best straight pool player in the world after that month. He simply had that level of natural ability that just warped everyone in a very competitive era of the sport.
These hypothetical debates are interesting. Times do change. But even if a player in the past plays at a lower level in their era if you grabbed that same player and brought them into the present to compete in this era for a full 10 years of their prime I am pretty sure they take in all of todays advantages and end up taking their spot at the top of todays rankings, just like they did in the past.
Keep in mind, Efren at one time did not know how to play 1-pocket. He picked up alot from watching others, he learned some shots, then he went off on his own and revolutionized the game and made it his own, in turn becomming the one now teaching those who he learned from in the past. If Ronnie came into todays world he would already be a master, but anything he learned from the new breed of players would simply be adding more tools to his arsenal and he would then in turn start improvising his own stuff off of that lead and much like Efren leave people going "what the heck is he doin... holy cripe, that was strong".
but, just so you know, from what i saw he shoots like crazy (we all know this), and if on a tight table i thought maybe some brainy players might beat him. i didn't think all that much of his moving compared to other movers, but again, what do i know. the one thing i DO know is offensive players who shoot the lights out tend to miss more when there's a lot on the line, and since they rely on that funny stuff happens. not knocking him just a pattern ive seen.
