Oikawa
Well-known member
He had clear points in my opinion. What's the issue? Nowhere near word salad.
Seeking Input: Archer ‘93 vs. Today
- Thread starter Callaghan
- Start date
That’s why I watch one pocket. I can count to nine and ten and basically that’s what the game amounts to from a spectators standpoint. Plus to have to remember of today’s culture in pool verses the road players of yesteryear. The names…the clothes, the travel…the equipment…the lifestyle…the absence of jump cues. I miss the nights and early mornings at LeCue and Parker’s in Houston in the 60’s. Nothing today comes close. Nope, not even Fast Eddie’s or Slick Willie’s.
I ran into some of those trick tables and just some in bad shape. I was a master banker on one old ten footer aiming at one corner pocket. Coming from the head of the table when you got within a few feet of the pocket anything slow rolled and anywhere within sixteen inches of the side rail was going in!
I have found those tables with inclines and monster bevels cut into them too. They drew bangers like flies because everybody made a lot of balls. The coin op mechanisms would start jamming from overheating.(grin)
Hu
Ehhh.... I think that a main factor is that the older cloth almost always came with bigger pockets, and as a result, lots of players never were under any real pressure to really work on having a laser straight stroke. And actually... Slower cloth is inherently more friendly to poorer strokes on all the "regular" shots played with english. So much so that players of yesteryear almost always played cut shots with running english, a practice that would not get you very far on fast, slick cloth. Sure, some of these type players still win matches over really good players.. But do they win majors? See: CJ Wiley. He was actually playing some after the move to Diamonds.. He just couldn't adjust to the different style of play. Also, see: Oscar Dominguez. His stroke is just a hair less accurate and smooth than the elites, and as such.. He sometimes stumbles at critical points in matches against elites.
Now.. That being said.. I agree, that running racks is easier on slick cloth, to a certain extent.... When they all lay nice. But when they don't.... Lack of precision in both stroke and general overall approach rears it's head, and the elite players still separate themselves from the pack. I would argue even MORE so than in years past...
Case in point... John Horsfall, a Canadian player, won the Sands Regency at some point in the 90s. Now, while the Sands Regency events had a lot of dead money, and were very much akin to Turning Stone.... I don't think under the more challenging pockets, 9 on the spot break rules, and slick cloth, that such a player has any chance of winning such an event today. And the thing is... EVERYBODY runs more racks as a general rule.. But it doesn't change who ends up winning the events. Because the less accomplished players may run a three pack... And then get caught out when they need to pull out a world class shot with precision position, and they end up turning over the table to their opponent. Who is an elite player and then runs 3 racks, and handles the next critical shot perfectly.
The point being... In the early 90s, I too played on slow cloth Gold Crowns.. And the games did tend to be slower, less runouts (at my level), but then the games were decided by superior safety play and strategy. To even be able to enter tournaments with the monster players of today, those safety and strategic skills are part of the BASIC skillset you must have.. And the accuracy of stroke is what decides if you put down the critical shot to keep momentum going or not. Or whether you execute the safety shot perfectly and freeze your opponent to a ball.. or whether you leave a few inch gap that allows for a jump shot.
I agree with what somebody else said... Slower cloth greatly improves one's margin of error on position shots. You can get thin on a ball, and not have to worry too much about it. Literally being too thick on a ball was the ONLY thing that kept people from running out, in a lot of games. If you struggled to run out on the slow Student Union cloth... You probably consistently got too thick on balls. In the modern game.. If your pattern play is not TIGHT.. Getting too thin on a ball greatly increases chances of "not" getting out, if you are not completely dialed in on 2-3 rail angles and speed being melded at just the right ratio to recover.
whatever you're smoking please send me some.
i’m the one on drugs, right? if they can travel decades why not centuries?
Now now, Garczar, no need for cuss words and ugly epithets! Where is your usual charm and gentle disposition?
For the less loquacious among us, I think modern pool is more fun to watch. Give me Gorst-Filler hill-hill in the World Pool Masters, or Gorst-Kaci hill-hill in the WPC, or Raga-Alcaide hill-hill in the Euro Open, any day of the week.
Last edited:
Wayne Crimi
Member
I just found this thread and started reading it. Maybe I missed something that was already discussed, but instead of asking "would the peak Archer of the 90s be able to hang wih the best players of today" and then talking about reasons players of today are better (more accurate cues, faster cloth, more consistent racking, jump cues and jump skill etc..) IMO we should reverse the question and ask if the Filler, Gorst, SVB etc... of today were transported to the 90s and playing with bigger pockets, but also with old wooden high deflection cues, on rug clothes, with inconsistent racking and no jump cue would they be able to hang with peak Archer, Earl, Efren, Hall, Varner etc... IMO of course they would. They would get used the conditions quickly but their games would decline relative to what you see today. However, I think they would be no better than those guys other than at kicking which is a skill that clearly improved when 9-ball switched from push out at any time to having to shoot and hit the next ball and when Efren taught everyone how to do it better.
I think people forget how incredible those players in the 80s and 90s were with what amounts to playing with bad cues and often under bad conditions.
What has clearly no doubt changed is that there are WAY more of those elite players now because the game is more international now than back then. If there are way more players playing now and they ALL have the advantage of learning on the internet you will get more elite players.
I think people forget how incredible those players in the 80s and 90s were with what amounts to playing with bad cues and often under bad conditions.
What has clearly no doubt changed is that there are WAY more of those elite players now because the game is more international now than back then. If there are way more players playing now and they ALL have the advantage of learning on the internet you will get more elite players.
Last edited:
Wayne Crimi
Member
I think there are equiment explanations for some of that (definitely speed of cloth, quality of cue and more consistent racking), but setting that aside what ARE those stats?
Going way back I used to occasionally hear of someone running a 10 pack with all that old equipment.
Do we see that way more 10 packs now?
What was the run out percentage for an elite player back then compared to now?
Spurious thought about fast table/slow table.
The balls are more likely to stay off the rails and less likely to bunch up on a fast table.
The balls are more likely to stay off the rails and less likely to bunch up on a fast table.
Ten packs with the 1 on the spot where the wing ball was dead wired in the corner on certain tables, on 4 5/8" pockets. Not even in the same universe as what players are doing these days. Top players of that age had a power break, because obviously they needed one... But everything else about their games was not as refined as what is needed to compete today.
Wayne Crimi
Member
I think switching to 4" pockets was idiotic for the game in general.
I can see the very best players wanting to play with 4" pockets in tournaments because imo that subtly increases the pobability that the better player will win and the best players want every possible advantage.
However for non tournament pool it's the dumbest idea ever.
One thing that gives people pleasure while playing pool is running balls. Whether we are talking about a beginner, D, C, B or A level player they measure themselves and gain enjoyment by running balls. Maybe it's 3 balls for beginner and 3 racks for the more advanced player, but pleasure is derived from making balls not missng them.
So why in the world are we making the equipment much tougher to the point where even B and A level players tighten up and miss extra shots because of the tougher equipment?
In my youth, most of the pool rooms I played in had Brunswick Gold Crowns with 4 5/8 inch pockets. The main room I played in also had one especially tight pocket table, but even the pros and short stops only rarely used it for action. Top players mostly used it for practice to help sharpen their concentarion or pocketing. IMO that was the perfect scenario for beginners, casuals, serious and pro level players (and they were all there).
If I go into a pool room now and all see 4" Diamond tables, that might be the last time I go there. I don't enjoy banging balls into the rail anymore than a beginner. If they run pro level tournaments there, I can see half the tables being 4", but the idea is to ENCOURAGE people to play this game and easier tables do that. Super tough tables discourage people from taking up the game and enjoying it.
I can see the very best players wanting to play with 4" pockets in tournaments because imo that subtly increases the pobability that the better player will win and the best players want every possible advantage.
However for non tournament pool it's the dumbest idea ever.
One thing that gives people pleasure while playing pool is running balls. Whether we are talking about a beginner, D, C, B or A level player they measure themselves and gain enjoyment by running balls. Maybe it's 3 balls for beginner and 3 racks for the more advanced player, but pleasure is derived from making balls not missng them.
So why in the world are we making the equipment much tougher to the point where even B and A level players tighten up and miss extra shots because of the tougher equipment?
In my youth, most of the pool rooms I played in had Brunswick Gold Crowns with 4 5/8 inch pockets. The main room I played in also had one especially tight pocket table, but even the pros and short stops only rarely used it for action. Top players mostly used it for practice to help sharpen their concentarion or pocketing. IMO that was the perfect scenario for beginners, casuals, serious and pro level players (and they were all there).
If I go into a pool room now and all see 4" Diamond tables, that might be the last time I go there. I don't enjoy banging balls into the rail anymore than a beginner. If they run pro level tournaments there, I can see half the tables being 4", but the idea is to ENCOURAGE people to play this game and easier tables do that. Super tough tables discourage people from taking up the game and enjoying it.
Last edited:
what do you think of the 4 ball/ 5 ball
pink/ purple/ orange changes?
@Wayne Crimi
Related to Fran?
Anyway, A and B players - even amateur division, that can't hit 4" ers are incorrectly rated. Reminds me of musicians that require autotune to sound pro. (Google that if you need to) It's a simple element to hit a ball along its own swath. It's by no means virtuosic. It just requires diligent observation and implementation. It should be fundamental.
Related to Fran?
Anyway, A and B players - even amateur division, that can't hit 4" ers are incorrectly rated. Reminds me of musicians that require autotune to sound pro. (Google that if you need to) It's a simple element to hit a ball along its own swath. It's by no means virtuosic. It just requires diligent observation and implementation. It should be fundamental.
I learned on slow cloth.
Might be why there's always an underlying desire to crank it up. I'm Always a tad long on fast cloth.
One is much more entertaining to watch.
It is a job. Blech.
It is a job.
That one went way over my head.whatever you're smoking please send me some.
You realize you're talking about seeing them naked??
You realize you're talking about seeing them naked??
When you remove an older players ability to make shape and pocket balls by cheating the holes, it takes away a significant part of their game. Many have trouble making the adjustment.