Scott Frost vs The So Called One Pocket Greats

[Fast Lenny]

This has turned into a good thread, one thing I think Billy is overlooking is this, if the old timers were able to adjust to modern equipment why couldn't the players of today adjust to the tables of yesteryear? I would not say its for lack of ability at all. Also Billy, how do you think you and Scott would have matched up in the 80's?

 

[Terry Ardeno]

Out of sight is not out of mind

Wow!! Grady and hopkins woulda just flat out heisted scott frost!!

Donny,
Grady has 4 World One Pocket Championships AND he's been in big action for 40+ years. Are you saying that Grady, in his prime, would get run over by Frost? I respect you a lot for posting here, but nowhere did anyone say that Frost was getting "heisted", just that there were some very, very formidible players in years gone by. I know you weren't really saying that, but don't object so strong when an old timer's exploits or credentials are enumerated. Said another way, no matter how great Scott Frost plays, shouldn't nobody diminish the great exploits of the greats of yesteryear.

Hopkins would have been another handful for anybody when he was in his prime.

All the old timers were a lot better than they're getting credit for being.

***Diminishing them now is like somebody saying 20 years from now that Efren, Shannon and Scott Frost were bums compared to whoverer would be at the top then.

 

[watchez]

OK, I gotta know, I would bet my entire roll on Nevel.

Would I have been eating steak at Delmonio or foot long heart attacks on a bun at Slot of Fun?

You would be outside with the drunks and a few homeless guys @ Slots of Fun. Don't look at them directly and they will leave you alone.

I thought Nevel myself but Whitey Walker pulled me aside and told me to unload on Kucharo. It wasn't even close. Kucharo beat him each time by at least half the table in distance. The last bet, Kucharo used a house cue.

 

[punter]

I didn't change my mind, what I was trying to convey is the difficulty in making a comparison with so many intangibles that are relevant to make an intellegent decision.

Lets take a horse race for example, one horse ( Ed Kelley) runs regularly in the mud and is considered a good mudder but also can run on the fast track, where another horse (Scott Frost )never runs in the mud but has excellent times on the fast track. Now if you would take Frost and match him up against Kelley on a muddy surface, that wouldn't be a fair contest, would it?:sorry: But then again if you were to put them both on the fast track it would be more interesting, wouldn't it? We know Kelley can run well on the fast track, but Frost doesn't have a track record on the mud. Who would you bet on in the mud? and why.

How well did Scott's sire run in the mud. And what's his Tomlinson number?

 

[Terry Ardeno]

THAT, my friend, is a picture of YOU!

what the hell is that?

Chris,
That is one dude ain't nobody should mess with. Name's Disco. Dereck Disco. Also known as one of the most talented graphic design guys you don't ever want photo-shopping you!

Just let it alone. Don't rile 'em up any more or things might really get ugly.
He's like a mad scientist, only triple smarter. He's got some powers, man. You should just drop it while you're still dressed nice in that photo....and only holding a little silky heart. Dude can make you appear holding anything. ANYTHING! Best to just let it go.

:grin::grin::grin:

 

[Celtic]

You would be outside with the drunks and a few homeless guys @ Slots of Fun. Don't look at them directly and they will leave you alone.

I thought Nevel myself but Whitey Walker pulled me aside and told me to unload on Kucharo. It wasn't even close. Kucharo beat him each time by at least half the table in distance. The last bet, Kucharo used a house cue.

Wow, I seriously would have not seen that coming, not from a mile away. I saw Kucharo practicing in the Cue Club at his peak, just before Jose Parica neutered him and Jon could play, and I mean PLAY. But when it came to pure power stroking a ball better then Nevel, I never would have guessed it.

That is impressive, and sad to think a guy that had THAT much stroke and game was sneaking into mini tournaments last year in Vegas and getting action with players of only decent open status and losing. He has taken the biggest and fastest fall I have ever seen in pool.

 

[watchez]

Wow, I seriously would have not seen that coming, not from a mile away. I saw Kucharo practicing in the Cue Club at his peak, just before Jose Parica neutered him and Jon could play, and I mean PLAY. But when it came to pure power stroking a ball better then Nevel, I never would have guessed it.

That is impressive, and sad to think a guy that had THAT much stroke and game was sneaking into mini tournaments last year in Vegas and getting action with players of only decent open status and losing. He has taken the biggest and fastest fall I have ever seen in pool.

I saw Jon play a few weeks ago in a tournament and he was hitting them pretty good. Granted it was a bar table. I like his demeanor at the table and off while his opponent is shooting - calm and focused.

 

[Celtic]

I saw Jon play a few weeks ago in a tournament and he was hitting them pretty good. Granted it was a bar table. I like his demeanor at the table and off while his opponent is shooting - calm and focused.

Back when I saw him ages ago he was like a cross between Mika and Earl. Most of the stroke and some of the intensity reminding me of Earl, yet more calm and methodical timing like Mika.

He might be hitting them "good" on a box but that is a guy that I watched shoot about 10 games in practice on a tight gold crown running rack after rack and thinking to myself "that guy is gonna be a serious champ for the next few decades". I was expecting him to be one of the best players in the USA up there with Corey and SVB.

 

[jay helfert]

Wow, I seriously would have not seen that coming, not from a mile away. I saw Kucharo practicing in the Cue Club at his peak, just before Jose Parica neutered him and Jon could play, and I mean PLAY. But when it came to pure power stroking a ball better then Nevel, I never would have guessed it.

That is impressive, and sad to think a guy that had THAT much stroke and game was sneaking into mini tournaments last year in Vegas and getting action with players of only decent open status and losing. He has taken the biggest and fastest fall I have ever seen in pool.

He shouldn't have messed with Parica. I tried to warn him. :frown:
In his day, Parica gave every top player the cure! At least those that tried to play him.

 

[cuetechasaurus]

I saw Jon play a few weeks ago in a tournament and he was hitting them pretty good. Granted it was a bar table. I like his demeanor at the table and off while his opponent is shooting - calm and focused.

Lots of people say Kucharo had the hardest break ever. Him and Nevel should have had a break speed contest also. I would have picked Kucharo.

 

[enzo]

the talk about equipment is no doubt the strongest points discussed in the thread. against the top 5 or 6 guys in history scott may win on this table, but not on "that" one. the less the game becomes about shooting, the less he wins i think. but as pointed out, if equipment was designed differently nowadays, he'd probably play differently, so it's hard to take anything away from him.

 

[donny mills]

No, I don't get it. One thing I've noticed is that faster tables make everyone play a little bit better. So the advantage of being able to play shape correctly on a slow table is lost. I'm not talking about the power of someone's stroke, that poke stroke comment was just for fun. Faster tables and quick cloth lend themselves to more offense, even if the shooter is getting out of line.

The high one pocket run was 50 to 60 at derby, the high run in the old days was 40. So if it's easier to run balls on newer cloth then it seems to run 600 in straight pool is impossible.

All I know is i've played my best pool on slow cloth and slow rails... bouncy stuff gets you out of line.

 

[donny mills]

I also said that it stands to reason that todays players are as good or better than players in past generations. Reason being that todays players are more informed, and there are more players playing seriously around the world. Information is more readily available in todays pool nation compared to past generations when you had to usually experience things in order to learn.

But that doesn't necessarily hold true playing games that are not popular around the world, like one pocket. One pocket has only been popular for about the last 10 or so years, so when you sell the older more experienced players short you're making a mistake.

The game of one pocket has evolved into more of a shooting game today, and the modern day one pocket players are behind in knowledge but it's ok because they compensate with their ability to perform. I know this from first hand experience, because I played several top players under wet conditions and they didn't like it. But on a dry table where they could do their thing I didn't like it.:frown:

Today humid conditions make it very bouncy and you cant control the cueball. I'm curious to what humid conditions did to the nap cloth tables.

 

[bud green]

Did some C player on here piss off Freddie the Beard so bad he hasn't chimed in by now? WTF, this thread seems perfect for his or Grady's input.

 

[donny mills]

Its more due to a lack of clarity in your post.



I will grant that you might have meant that, but the brevity that you used will lead people to a different understanding of what your point actually was.

But, I will say again, if we are going on draw shots "ect" aka the entire shooting package, making those key shots. Earl 15 years ago was doing it better then anyone today. The guy ran a bloody 11 pack for what he thought would be 1 million dollars, that is high offense under an insane amount of pressure. Noone has reached his level of a powerful stroke and accuracy that he had. And the other guy in this video, he does not suck either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4XlfiAa-lo

That said, Mika has nowhere near the powerful stroke that SVB has, and yet he has been a heck of alot more successful on the tournament trail of late. Dennie Orcullo has nowhere near the power of SVB in moving the ball, but he plays far more accurate cueball placement and angles then SVB. Those power shots are only part of a very big package of required skill sets. Mosconi could draw the ball, could be power stroke it like Earl? Probably not, but he was probably a more accurate potter because he was not playing those huge stroke shots and he probably played alot better angle based shape then anyone on the planet given the particular game he dominated.

Moving the ball is not the only thing, you know that better then anyone Donny. You know full well you don't shoot as well as SVB yet you have a chance to beat him in a race to 100 in 9-ball rack your own because SVB's powerful stroke is NOT the only factor in play. You are the perfect example of how different skill sets in pool come into play and give guys a chance to win.

I don't care about all that. I've seen the tables that they used to play on... and those tables are so soft!! All I know is I've watched players play ( in their prime) in the 80's and I think people have them overrated. I'd also say I'm pretty accurate about it with my 30-3 win loss ratio.

 

[gulfportdoc]

Lots of people say Kucharo had the hardest break ever. Him and Nevel should have had a break speed contest also. I would have picked Kucharo.

I agree. Danny Medina and Jon Kucharo had the most consistently powerful breaks I've ever seen. ~Doc

 

[donny mills]

Nah, it is all strength. I think Donny as saying he wants to bet on Charlie Bryant vs Alex Pagulayan. Charlie is way stronger, this should be easy. I am a sucker though, I will take Alex, what are we betting Donny?

Ya I think I'll bet on that. Should be close.

 

[donny mills]

Nah, it is all strength. I think Donny as saying he wants to bet on Charlie Bryant vs Alex Pagulayan. Charlie is way stronger, this should be easy. I am a sucker though, I will take Alex, what are we betting Donny?

What I meant to say is this: If guys like you weren't around then I wouldn't have my 30-3 win loss ratio. lol!

 

[alstl]

Wasnt straight pool different back then? They pretty much played with 4 pockets on one end of the table due to the slow cloth I think.

Your post got me interested, so I watched the Crane run from 1966 and the video of the 2009 world championship finals between Immonen and Cohen, won by Cohen 200 - 181. I only looked at the first 150 balls from Immonen and Cohen to compare to Crane's 150.

Crane pocketed eleven balls up table, mostly as a result of two racks where he broke the balls open from behind the rack. He let the cue ball get up table only one time on a break shot.

Immonen pocketed thirteen balls up table and had one behind the rack break shot but sent the cue ball up table four times on break shots, one of which was costly because he missed the next shot and ended a run.

Cohen pocketed nineteen balls up table due to five behind the rack break shots and he sent the cue ball up table twice on a break shot. Cohen missed on one of his behind the rack break shots and ended a run. Cohen seems to have more of an old time game, perhaps due to his mentoring from DiLiberto.


Based upon this I would say the number of balls pocketed up table are directly related to the number of behind the rack break shots which tend to drive more balls up table, but it is still mostly a four pocket game.

On the modern equipment it seems like the balls break open easier and it seems like some of today's players aren't bothered by sending the cue ball up table on break shots. I think back in 1966 you risked getting called before the board to explain your actions if you sent the cue ball up table four times like Immonen did.

You're probably sorry you asked, but there it is.

 

[donny mills]

Donny,
Grady has 4 World One Pocket Championships AND he's been in big action for 40+ years. Are you saying that Grady, in his prime, would get run over by Frost? I respect you a lot for posting here, but nowhere did anyone say that Frost was getting "heisted", just that there were some very, very formidible players in years gone by. I know you weren't really saying that, but don't object so strong when an old timer's exploits or credentials are enumerated. Said another way, no matter how great Scott Frost plays, shouldn't nobody diminish the great exploits of the greats of yesteryear.

Hopkins would have been another handful for anybody when he was in his prime.

All the old timers were a lot better than they're getting credit for being.

***Diminishing them now is like somebody saying 20 years from now that Efren, Shannon and Scott Frost were bums compared to whoverer would be at the top then.

Lol jesus I'm not putting anyone down. If players 50 years from now play 5 balls better in one pocket than todays players... I think it should be known. I played grady one pocket 6 or 7 years ago in one pocket and I won. 6 or 7 years ago frost (the ways he plays now) wouldve given me 11-7 and hijacked me!

Look my point is (and I'm 100% convinced of it also) that todays players play alot better, and I'd be surprised if players 50 years from now won't play better than todays also.

Also tournaments were so much easier to win back in the day if you were really good. Earl stricland even told me how he wishes we could play on 10 footers because everybody makes great shots now.