Seeking Input: Archer ‘93 vs. Today
- Thread starter Callaghan
- Start date
To address part of this post and not de-rail this thread. A world champion player described Filler as a refined Earl in play style, during a conversation. I fully agree with this. I didn’t want to start a thread as it’s a limited topic. So I inserted it here, I thought of you Stu when he said that. What’s your take? Not saying one is stronger than the other. Just similar style and one is more refined (but possibly equal, not better). That’s yet to be determined. Earls still going
Ok back to the normal thread.
Sorry for digressing. But it’s an interesting contrast of the then vs. now topic, which is kinda what this thread is about.
Best
Fatboy <———not a refined Minnesota Fat’s ( still working on that)
archer played in last year's DCC and turning stone. he played ok. his stint in the comm booth at turning stone detracted from his play.
and he ain’t lanky and skinny no more!
They all look the same, stroke the same, waste too much time looking at the next shot the same, it's like watching paint dry. There's no spontaneity. Much too conservative style play. The thrill is gone
baby!!
Last edited:
A champion of any era is a champion because they had the physical and mental make- up to dominate the best at a given time- end of story. The length of time that one dominated any sport will tell you how superior their skills and mental make- up were during that time period.
I firmly believe that the superior training methods and the availability and accessibility of high level, CORRECT, billiard instruction; coupled with over all billiard related equipment advances from balls, to tables, to cues, etc - in addition to exposure to the pocket game worldwide ALL contributed to more precision level play on much wider scales world wide.
NOW, with skill levels going so high- the game on 4 3/4 to 5 inch pockets (Brunswick, Gandy, Olhausen - all tournament sponsors in 70s,80s, 90s) ---- JUST HAD to result in tighter pockets bc the game really was too easy at the pro level with so many being exposed to the best of everything in terms of advancements.
So now we are going down to 4 1/4 inch pockets - maybe lower, I don't know- but the smaller the pockets get- just expect higher levels of " sterile" play that some complain about- YES-- you have to be " perfect" to meet the new table demands- the old " free- wheeling" style just would not work today at the highest levels.
I firmly believe that the superior training methods and the availability and accessibility of high level, CORRECT, billiard instruction; coupled with over all billiard related equipment advances from balls, to tables, to cues, etc - in addition to exposure to the pocket game worldwide ALL contributed to more precision level play on much wider scales world wide.
NOW, with skill levels going so high- the game on 4 3/4 to 5 inch pockets (Brunswick, Gandy, Olhausen - all tournament sponsors in 70s,80s, 90s) ---- JUST HAD to result in tighter pockets bc the game really was too easy at the pro level with so many being exposed to the best of everything in terms of advancements.
So now we are going down to 4 1/4 inch pockets - maybe lower, I don't know- but the smaller the pockets get- just expect higher levels of " sterile" play that some complain about- YES-- you have to be " perfect" to meet the new table demands- the old " free- wheeling" style just would not work today at the highest levels.
You win! There's never been anybody more wrong than you. Congrats
Calling Filler a more refined version of Earl is reasonable in many ways. In fact, as far as how they approached the runouts, they played with a very similar style and philosophy. Because each had superhuman ball pocketing skills, neither had to prioritize getting super-close to the next object ball to complete the runouts with mind-blowing consistency.To address part of this post and not de-rail this thread. A world champion player described Filler as a refined Earl in play style, during a conversation. I fully agree with this. I didn’t want to start a thread as it’s a limited topic. So I inserted it here, I thought of you Stu when he said that. What’s your take? Not saying one is stronger than the other. Just similar style and one is more refined (but possibly equal, not better). That’s yet to be determined. Earls still going
Ok back to the normal thread.
Sorry for digressing. But it’s an interesting contrast of the then vs. now topic, which is kinda what this thread is about.
Best
Fatboy <———not a refined Minnesota Fat’s ( still working on that)
Josh and Earl were more concerned with getting the angle needed for the next shot even if it meant being a few inches further away from the object ball. In this regard, Gorst, Parica, Souquet and Appleton probably all played position a little more aggressively than either, but their level of execution was not quite at the same level (well, maybe Fedor).
Relative to their contemporaries, I'd say Earl had a better break than Josh. Where Josh is more refined than Earl is in his defense, two-way shots and his downside management. His tactical excellence is often overlooked because of his offensive wizardry, but Josh is one of the game's best strategists. Hence, to me, Josh is a more complete player than Earl ever was.
The world champion player who made those comments knows of what they speak.
Last edited:
You win! There's never been anybody more wrong than you. Congrats
Jason, buddy, while you're very often a dick, I have to admit, your stye of posts crack me up. I may have to commandeer this one to add to my own arsenal.
Great post. Each generation of competitors has advantages over the previous ones in resources and the quality of competitive conditions, and it explains, in large part, why the level of performance keeps rising.
This is absolutely true. To be the best in the world at anything requires the kind of drive, stubbornness, fortitude and obsessive personality that maybe 1 in 10 million possess. A dozen of yesteryear's champions all had it. While going back in a time machine and bringing them back to play Filler would be humbling for them the first time, they would practice on the new conditions for 16 hours a day until they would be ready to challenge him again.
Earl once told me that when he was young (teen, I believe) he made himself run 100 balls before he took his morning pee. He said it was so uncomfortable it made him practice harder. My memory is fading now so this may not be a perfect quote, but it was something close to that. Anyway, that's the kind of weird, freak personality needed to become the best in the world.
billiards_watch
Well-known member
No problem son.You win! There's never been anybody more wrong than you. Congrats
I agree. And this might have already been stated, but many of the the players of yesterday are still the players of today. Its depends on what we're calling yesterday? Busty, Efren, Warren, Ralf, Earl and many other guys were playing 20 years ago and are still competitive on any given day. Top of there game, no, but still worthy of recognition yes.
Filler is a strong player, maybe the best today, but not tomorrow, its to be seen. SVB had a much longer run as the odds-on-favorite to winn any rotation match for the Money or tournament. Fador looked unbeatable for a good stretch, so I think this yaer will go long way towards determining
whos the best rotation player.
I think they are both pool geniuses with the ability to think and act accurately in rapid succession. FSR is close, but not at the same level. Josh might be more refined than Earl in term of their antics
I see SVB, Efren and Gorst more as strategists who could be more effective than "geniuses" when it comes to overall play. Possible reason why they are better than Josh and Earl in one-pocket.
Per the original topic, someone already mentioned the main ingredients why today's generation is better in all sports - namely better equipment and knowledge (coaching, access to information on the internet, etc.). I also believe today's generation is getting better financial support from their parents so they can focus on the sport at much younger age.
Last edited:
I think they are both pool geniuses with the ability to think and act accurately in rapid succession. FSR is close, but not at the same level. Josh might be more refined than Earl in term of their antics
I see SVB, Efren and Gorst more as strategists who could be more effective than "geniuses" when it comes to overall play. Possible reason why they are better than Josh and Earl in one-pocket.
Per the original topic, someone already mentioned the main ingredients why today's generation is better in all sports - namely better equipment and knowledge (coaching, access to information on the internet, etc.). I also believe today's generation is getting better financial support from their parents so they can focus on the sport at much younger age.
they also treat it like a sport with regards to practice, physical exercise, smoking, drinking, etc.. and in general they have better fundamentals, which leads to higher consistency. kicking has evolved, jumping too (obviously), so the safety game is harder now.
Haven't seen a video of Warren recently. I love watching that guy play. The Warrior!