Snooker vs. Pool

[TheThaiger]

Perhaps I should elaborate on what I meant by attitude.

What does it take to be successful in the modern game?
Let’s use Shane as an example.

He has good mechanics and a level head he has put in the hard work on the practice table and challenge matches and has become a very successful player, perhaps he has even raised the bar a little.
It could be argued that his break is a big part of that but I still believe he has raised the bar some in regards to the open play of the game.
The reason I believe that is his unforced error count is much lower than the rest of the field.
The game is won and lost on unforced errors and the bottom line is he makes less of them and his mechanics are a big part of it.

So when was the last time the bar was raised in pool, Efren, Earl? I would say so for arguments sake. With shot making skills and consistency at a higher level than the rest of the field, that is what made them successful, they also had a better fundamental approach.
So now we are in a different era, the game has expanded to other shores and all of these new players have brought about a change in the standard of play.

Some of these players particularly the UK players have been exposed to snooker even if they didn’t play pro they certainly played some and were brought up with the mindset of the importance of the fundamental side of the game.
Down low over the cue, rock solid stance, straight stroke, staying down on the shot, no movement etc, all the things that are required for the accuracy and consistency of the modern Snooker pro.
Without these solid mechanics you cannot make it in the modern game, you need this precision to create openings and to keep errors to a minimum.

Safety plays from tight under the bottom cushion or a long opening red demand this type of accuracy and consistency or you will get punished. That is up 12 ft away and you have to hit those safeties time and time again and return past the balk line consistently to prevent your opponent from getting his hand on the table and knocking in a long one, this game is not played from 5ft away that’s utter mindless rambling from people with zero knowledge of match play Snooker.
The modern game is often won in one inning so errors need to be kept to a minimum and often the only way in is to knock in a long red. Look at the stats of some of the modern players, 95%+ pot success rates, 85% safety success, 65% long ball success, these are massive numbers to put up in match play.

The reason they are at this level is because the game demanded it, Steve Davis came along in the 80’s and was a ball making machine with a lock up tactical game that blew away the old guard with his ruthless mechanical consistency. The old guard were the players that learned to play in the local social club and just picked up a cue and went with it, none of them had any formal training or the mechanics to compete with the likes of Davis.

Then along comes a new army of players that followed his lead, Hendry, Higgins and of course Ronnie all modelled after Davis. And for some perspective there is Neal Robertson with over 90 centuries in the 2013/2014 season so far, Alex Higgins only made 46 in his whole career.



Attitude.

Not being one to mince words, arrogance.
That is the only way I can describe the attitude amongst the American players.
Here is an example of what I mean.
When Stuart Pettman showed up at the bigfoot challenge and destroyed the field at a game he doesn’t play, banging in 2 tons along the way all the American players on the comm could do were ridicule his lack of pattern knowledge.
Instead of saying hey this guy has something extraordinary that we could learn from they were just saying things clearly borne out of jealousy.

Players like Pettman, Melling, Drago etc are ball potting machines, though they lack some of the finer points of the game of pool there is no denying they can pot balls with more accuracy than the rest of the field and why wouldn’t they, it’s a simple fact that errors are magnified as the distance increases, it’s all down to the mechanics and is proof that the two games do not require as different a mechanical approach as many would like to think and only a fool would choose to ignore what these players bring to the table.

Imagine training up and coming young American players in these strong fundamental skills, along with the knowledge of the game of pool they could raise the bar again and become more competitive on the world stage, heck you may even regain the Mosconi in five or ten years.

Forget about the role models of the past, it’s time to move on and embrace aspects of other disciplines that can improve on what you have. Stand up stances, wobbly strokes BHE pivoting and silly aiming systems are not going to get you there, the advantages of a strong fundamental approach are clear for all to see tried and tested and as advertised the best part is it’s free and is not for the sole purpose of boosting some ones ego or out there to make money. As the new equipment gets tighter and or larger you will need new tools to be better.
Just because it is not an American invention is not a good reason for your arrogance to get in the way.

This one can be pinned.

 

[sfleinen]

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the Blue is your saver...when you get out of line for the Pink or Black, usually the Blue is available to keep your break open; in that case, you really have to be adept at hitting the blue (into the side) at various angles to get back in line. In that case, a player would be well advised to make sure they can ALWAYS sink that shot when they need to get back in line. (But then again, I'm a pool player, so what do I know?) :wink:

WP1987:

Just a quick word on this. While you are correct in that the center-spotted blue "is always there to fall back on," the side pockets on a snooker table are relatively easier than the corner pockets. In fact, whereas most pool players eschew the side pockets in favor of the corner pockets on a pool table, it's reversed in snooker.

If you watch many snooker matches, you'll see -- just as you say -- snooker players shooting the blue into the side pockets. But you'll also see those players shooting reds from the rack area into the side pockets as well. (This is a staple shot, because often you won't have a corner pocket available for a red due to the congestion down there.) The blue into the side pocket is not necessarily a heavily practiced shot, because 1.) the entire side pocket aperture is available to the blue no matter where the cue ball is, and 2.) it's easier than trying to shoot that blue into the corner pocket -- which, viewed-aperture-wise, is a smaller pocket from where that blue sits (the corner pocket's aperture faces a certain number degrees away from the blue, towards the rack area). Whereas pool players "love" shooting object balls down the rail into a corner, that is a shot to be avoided in snooker, because it's such a low-percentage shot.

To summarize, here's why many players practice shooting the blue into the corner pockets:

1. It exercises your focus, fundamentals, and long-distance potting. You want an acid test (or litmus test) of your long-distance potting? Try this shot!

2. It's often practiced with the cue ball behind balk, in the "D" area around the head spot (i.e. shooting the cue ball through/between the yellow and brown, or through/between the brown and green).

It is a VERY challenging shot indeed, and a real test of your alignment and fundamentals to pot consistently.

In fact, it's one of my pet shots on a snooker table. On a pool table, the nearest parallel would be pinning the cue ball up against the head rail (between the "break-box" lines -- near the "Brunswick" or "Diamond" logo), and shooting a center-spotted object ball into the corners. Pinning the cue ball against the rail on a pool table is kind of a handicap, to try and equalize the difficulty of the "center-spotted blue into a corner pocket" shot on a snooker table. Even then, the center-spotted blue is a tougher shot, IMHO, because of the much greater distance and smaller / rounded-cornered pockets.

Hope that helps explain it a bit better,
-Sean

 

[West Point 1987]

WP1987:

Just a quick word on this. While you are correct in that the center-spotted blue "is always there to fall back on," the side pockets on a snooker table are relatively easier than the corner pockets. In fact, whereas most pool players eschew the side pockets in favor of the corner pockets on a pool table, it's reversed in snooker.

If you watch many snooker matches, you'll see -- just as you say -- snooker players shooting the blue into the side pockets. But you'll also see those players shooting reds from the rack area into the side pockets as well. (This is a staple shot, because often you won't have a corner pocket available for a red due to the congestion down there.) The blue into the side pocket is not necessarily a heavily practiced shot, because 1.) the entire side pocket aperture is available to the blue no matter where the cue ball is, and 2.) it's easier than trying to shoot that blue into the corner pocket -- which, viewed-aperture-wise, is a smaller pocket from where that blue sits (the corner pocket's aperture faces a certain number degrees away from the blue, towards the rack area). Whereas pool players "love" shooting object balls down the rail into a corner, that is a shot to be avoided in snooker, because it's such a low-percentage shot.

To summarize, here's why many players practice shooting the blue into the corner pockets:

1. It exercises your focus, fundamentals, and long-distance potting. You want an acid test (or litmus test) of your long-distance potting? Try this shot!

2. It's often practiced with the cue ball behind balk, in the "D" area around the head spot (i.e. shooting the cue ball through/between the yellow and brown, or through/between the brown and green).

It is a VERY challenging shot indeed, and a real test of your alignment and fundamentals to pot consistently.

In fact, it's one of my pet shots on a snooker table. On a pool table, the nearest parallel would be pinning the cue ball up against the head rail (between the "break-box" lines -- near the "Brunswick" or "Diamond" logo), and shooting a center-spotted object ball into the corners. Pinning the cue ball against the rail on a pool table is kind of a handicap, to try and equalize the difficulty of the "center-spotted blue into a corner pocket" shot on a snooker table. Even then, the center-spotted blue is a tougher shot, IMHO, because of the much greater distance and smaller / rounded-cornered pockets.

Hope that helps explain it a bit better,
-Sean

Well stated, very good points. I misunderstood the original poster on the potting the Blue from distance. I thought he was saying that snooker players spending time shooting the spotted Blue from different angles was a waste of time, but I see he was talking about spot shots from the balk, which is really tough. IMHO, neither effort is a waste.

 

[Johnson]

so he was well seasoned @ pool when he placed 3rd in the "world" championship in the early 2000's? yet was still a mainstay on the main snooker tour @ the time???

 

[Gerry]

I'm lucky enough to play at a room with a snooker table, a 3c table and diamonds/crowns etc. plus a 9'er in the basement.

Pool and snooker to me use the same mechanics, and until I absorbed some of the snooker discipline into my game I had HUGE holes in my technique for both games.....mostly alignment/grip.....BUT I could play good pool, run 100's, beat the 10ball ghost etc.....but not play good snooker.....my high run is 127 in snooker.

I think with most any type of "style" you can play, as long as it repeats and the OB/CB go where you intend......who cares, BUT again IMO with proper fundamentals it makes the game WAY easier.....just took me 30 years to figure it out!

I started out as a "feel" player and systems are lame.

I am now a much more solid foundation/controlled/learned player....just hope its not too late to use it.

Actually I am now playing 3c, and seeing where that goes?

have fun,
G.

 

[Cornerman]

LADS - it's really not Brain Surgery. Snooker players focus on making the shot. In simple terms - pot the ball. This simple and most basic idea IF MASTERED will carry a cue-sports player deep into any cue sport he / she chooses to participate in.
Hense the shooting accuracy of a top Snooker player is going to be better than that of his / her Pool counterpart. This is because they have spent longer hours achieving this by shooting on a 12x6ft table, with smaller balls and tighter pockets.

NOW THEN - The pool player comes into their own when it come to cue ball control. Because the cue ball is bigger, there is so much more a top pool player can do with it. THIS IS THIER ADVANTAGE over a snooker player, especially when it come to using English / any spin or jump technique. A pool player has more in their locker when is come to being creative with shot making - and guess what? Pool is a more creative / flare game than Snooker!

Proof: Play months of Pool and then revert back to Snooker. Positional play has improved because the player has learnt greater pool stroke & cue ball controlling techniques. Just my opinion :thumbup:

I like your opinion.

Freddie

 

[Scaramouche]

not something that would entice an unemployed "pro" pool player to drop his action over here, move to a country with a higher cost of living and trudge his way up through a system for an indeterminate period of time before he's qualified to enter a paying event.

So a "pro" pool player enters tournaments where ALL the prize money is put up by pool players, no sponsors, and expects to earn a living.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4679155&postcount=1

DUMB :bash: :bash: :bash:

Win in Q school and your are on the tour.
You can go as far and as fast as your talent and luck will take you.
But first you have to TRY.

To put the first prize of that BB tournament in perspective:
First prize is $20,000
13 of the 16 will lose money

In snooker tournaments, half the field will win something for winning just one match.
In the Masters, an invitational event, a participant gets £12,500 - more than $20,000 - just for showing up, doesn't have to pot a ball.

 

[zeronine]

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the Blue is your saver...when you get out of line for the Pink or Black, usually the Blue is available to keep your break open; in that case, you really have to be adept at hitting the blue (into the side) at various angles to get back in line. In that case, a player would be well advised to make sure they can ALWAYS sink that shot when they need to get back in line. (But then again, I'm a pool player, so what do I know?) :wink:

You're right - the blue is often used to keep a break going if you fall the wrong side of a red to stay down for the pink or black. I thought maybe that's what the '4hrs off the spot' might mean but then i thought about it a little more and i dunno...

The thing is, if you do run out of position a little and have to go up for the blue, you're going to leave a shot to middle to come back down for the reds. Very few players would intentionally leave a blue to corner to keep a break going because the distance makes it risky, and if they found themselves with only a long blue to continue a break then they'd probably play safe. If the blue was on the spot and the CB was close by with little to do for position then maybe it's no big deal, but then that's hardly worth practicing either.

So i dunno...the idea of spending 4hrs a day on the blue seems weird when taken literally.

The only thing i can think of worth spending 4hrs a day on involving the blue would be the blue/pink shot below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS5np7-dsls

 

[Cameron Smith]

so he was well seasoned @ pool when he placed 3rd in the "world" championship in the early 2000's? yet was still a mainstay on the main snooker tour @ the time???

He placed 3rd in 2003 and AZB shows that he played in the World Pool Masters in 1999 and it certainly wouldn't be a stretch to assume that he had played before that.

I don't think anyone can really deny that Snooker players have an easier transition, but I think we can look at Mark Williams as a better example of someone played a world championship with little seasoning or practice (I'm assuming at least). He played in the 2003 World Championships, qualified out of his group was beaten 9-0 in the last 64. Still impressive because there are a lot of full time pool players who didn't get out of their groups.

 

[Underclocked]

When and if we ever have enough American snooker to draw a comparison, I will be happier.

 

[shinobi]

And for some perspective there is Neal Robertson with over 90 centuries in the 2013/2014 season so far, Alex Higgins only made 46 in his whole career.

That is a pretty shocking statistic. Hard to read it and move on without comment.

Equally interesting IMHO is that even though Neal Robertson is making centuries like brushing his teeth, he usually gets his butt handed to him by Ronnie O. I say that based on all the recent matches I have seen; not on guaranteed statistics (for all I know Neal has won all the matches I haven't seen, though I kinda have my doubts on that one).

 

[Cameron Smith]

That is a pretty shocking statistic. Hard to read it and move on without comment.

Equally interesting IMHO is that even though Neal Robertson is making centuries like brushing his teeth, he usually gets his butt handed to him by Ronnie O. I say that based on all the recent matches I have seen; not on guaranteed statistics (for all I know Neal has won all the matches I haven't seen, though I kinda have my doubts on that one).

10 wins for Ronnie, 5 wins for Neil according to cuetracker.net. Over the long haul Ronnie still has a better centuries per games played stat. This year Neil has scored a century every 8.11 games and 13.72 games over the course of his career. Ronnie is actually close behind Neil this season with a century every 8.95 games and 12.27 for his career.. Hendry finished with a century rate of 1 per 15.13 games, Alex Higgins had 1 per 75.47 games.

 

[Mike Porter]

I could be wrong but the drills for Blues off the spot often include two drills. Making the blue while missing the baulk colors (in and out of baulk)so that the cue ball continues back up the table towards the black end. The main one is straight into the far (diagonally) corner from distance. In the later drill, any errors in your stroke will become obvious.
Mike

 

[pt109]

10 wins for Ronnie, 5 wins for Neil according to cuetracker.net. Over the long haul Ronnie still has a better centuries per games played stat. This year Neil has scored a century every 8.11 games and 13.72 games over the course of his career. Ronnie is actually close behind Neil this season with a century every 8.95 games and 12.27 for his career.. Hendry finished with a century rate of 1 per 15.13 games, Alex Higgins had 1 per 75.47 games.

This is great info, Cam....Do you have a link?
I'd like to know records for Marco Fu and Steve Davis.

 

[Neil]

It's refreshing to see some guys on here get some of it right. It's sad to see the same guys then go on and say just the opposite of what they were saying. Too many can't see the forest for the trees.

The main American problem is that we tend to look at pool as a game, not a sport. That means, our dedicated guys will get a couple of lessons and think that will last them a lifetime. There is no ongoing training other than what they want to come up with on their own. Such as SVB does. And, even he has a lot of room yet for improvement.

Our players are driven by ego for the most part. Most learned by gambling, which also carries ego as their source. They have to let go of the ego, open their minds, and start training. That includes everything available. Some of you made great posts, then scoffed at using any kind of systems. You are oh so blind! The ENTIRE game is systematic!! When will you see that?? All it takes to be a great player is knowing what does what and why, and practicing until you get extreme precision. Whichever player starts to take the game really seriously, he will dominate all others before him. It's not rocket science. Just takes proper training and a desire to go through that training.

Most players here consider lessons as a one time introduction into the very basics and think that is all they need. They never even get to the real parts of the game. Mark Wilson came out with a book showcasing the need of extreme precision. And, even his book is just the tip of the iceberg of what a professional player should be doing. Maybe in time, people will start to open their eyes to what is actually possible with real training and dedication and we will see a whole new game being played.

I believe we are just now entering the age of instruction, and it will only get better from here. Right now, in this country, instruction is looked at as a joke by most. Our best instructors, instead of having a room dedicated to instruction, are having to travel the road to students instead of students coming to them. Many states, you can't even find a qualified instructor. Hopefully soon, people will start to realize that an APA 8 or 9 is not the pinnacle of success, but only the first stepping stone to success. And the pros will start getting serious about wanting to be the best instead of just going for the cash whenever possible. No outside source is going to look at putting any money into pool when the "pros" don't even take it seriously. When Americans finally start treating pool like a sport, like the Euros did with snooker, then the money will come.You have to have something to sell before you can expect others to buy.

 

[Swighey]

No outside source is going to look at putting any money into pool when the "pros" don't even take it seriously.

Excellent! When a snooker player can turn up and win, or nearly win, or do well beating big names along the way, to a pool tournament (albeit a high variance version of pool - 9 ball) that indicates the game isn't taken too seriously by the pool community (and by community I mean the top "pro" players and authorities such as the WPA and regional bodies).

That said, a lot of the talk about fundamentals is missing the point - the games have different fundamentals but snooker fundamentals (whatever they are) give a snooker player a great chance in a pool tournament. The fact that they do so well indicates one of two things - snooker fundamentals transfer well to pool and are functionally adequate and if adapted and improved on can turn a great snooker player into a great pool player - or pool is an easier game to master than snooker and the snooker player starts out naive from a strategic/tactical point of view and will be found out in certain situations. When the snooker player learns to use the margin for error with the heavier balls he can get there. Steve Davis did rather well playing with a snooker cue and then a hybrid cue with (as far as we now) very little training, instruction or practice. That was when he was way past his best as a snooker pro. Learn to use a real cue, learn to make a jump shot and practice, practice, practice - he would fly.

The level of snooker at the elite level now is sky high. They are machines - that's what makes Ronnie O'Sullivan so special. He is a machine in an age of machines that has an air of the players of old and looks like he's just turned up from the pub. And then he throws in a few special shots from time to time where he does things with the cue ball that are as good as, or better than, anything that Strickland or Reyes can do with the heavier balls and the bigger margin for error.

But the fact that Ronnie can slaughter the Robertsons, the Dings, the Selbys and so on (who all have games that are technically way ahead of the greats of the past) also suggests that a supreme talent from the pool world could make it in snooker. There are lots of Asian players who are a hair's breadth away from winning every round of the World Championship (play at their best, get some lucky rolls, opponent off form etc) and taking it down (and Ding at his very best is "almost" unbeatable) and it should only be a matter of time before a player from the Philippines or the USA is in with a shout. Playing a snooker professional in a one off frame for money and using your gambler's mental edge to get inside his head doesn't count - in a long game he will adapt to your plan and force error upon error on you.

If some people take my comments (and opinions), and those of others along similar lines as some kind pool bashing they are missing the point big time. And those that say "you must be a euro" etc need to advance to 8th grade.

 

[Cameron Smith]

This is great info, Cam....Do you have a link?
I'd like to know records for Marco Fu and Steve Davis.

Here you go,

www.cuetracker.net

Specficially, here is the Neil vs Ronnie Head to Head record,

http://www.cuetracker.net/pages/h2h.php?ID1=16&ID2=18

You can get their individual stats by clicking on either of their names in the outlined matches.

Here is Marco Fu

http://www.cuetracker.net/pages/players.php?ID=30&season=2013/2014

and Steve Davis

http://www.cuetracker.net/pages/players.php?ID=69&season=2013/2014

You can select individual seasons to view their matches and season statistics. The "compare" function is really cool, you can select any two players and compare their statistics (matches won, tournaments won, frames won etc.)

The site is quite extensive, even including statistics for Joe Davis. No idea where he/they get the info from though, but it appears accurate all the same.

 

[shinobi]

Some of you made great posts, then scoffed at using any kind of systems. You are oh so blind! The ENTIRE game is systematic!! When will you see that??

I think you are confusing "scoffed at using any kind of systems" with "scoffed at using CTE".

Anyway, it doesn't really matter what non-pro posters on AZ scoff or don't scoff at, only the players themselves.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled scoffing

 

[SakuJack]

It's refreshing to see some guys on here get some of it right.

All joking aside, I agree with what you say about treating it as a sport. I disagree on most of what you say on systems.

 

[Colonel]

Some of the things in this thread are mind boggling. Snooker & pool are 2 different animals, realistically the different variations of pool, 14-1, 9 ball, 10 ball, one pocket are all different animals requiring varying skill sets. Snooker has a tour, it's top players can more than a comfortable living, pool does not, it never has & therein lies its problem. Anyone that has ever excelled in any cue sport realizes the time & dedication it requires to become world class. The problem has always been that for everything you have to put into it to reach an elite level there is no return on it, only a small handful can make enough $ to not have a regular job & devote their life to their craft, this reason is why gambling has always been so prevalent. Players had to resort to the road & gambling in order to NOT have to keep a regular job to survive. This reason is truly why there has never been a functional tour where pools top players can make a good enough living to forgo gambling. Potential corporate sponsors have 0 desire to be associated with the negative specter of gambling. Therein lies the conundrum, sponsors don't want to be associated with gambling so there's no tour, players gamble because there is no tour that provides a way to make a living at the skill they've dedicated their life to developing & on & on like a dog chasing its tail & never catching it. This bleeds down, it isn't that this sport isn't appealing to young people, it's that for the time & dedication you must invest to become great, there's no return, no endgame. Therefore pool over the last 40 years since I became involved in it is something that's considered to be a denizen for gamblers, hustlers, louts & layabouts like myself. Because this is how it's perceived no corporate sponsor will touch it & why it's wrongly perceived as not being a sport which is a travesty as I believe it's the greatest sport that's ever existed. It really has nothing to do with schools or formal instruction or anything of the kind. In my time I've known thousands of world class talents that no ones ever heard of that hung it up just for the simple fact that in order to have a family or what most consider a normal life, a home, a family, stability they had to give up what they loved to get a job to support that life. Only those willing to live a relatively lone existence chasing their dream of making a living at this game IE, traveling, gambling, getting a game wherever they can stay in it & forgo what most consider to be a normal existence, it's just the way it is. For those who want to denigrate American players & their skill sets vs snooker players, I offer you this. Step out of your comfortable world of arriving at a tour event well rested in your cute little vest where you'll earn thousands for just showing up without having pocketed a ball & step into a world where you drive all night in a cramped car, eat at some chain diner, check into a modest motel in the interests of bankroll management, get a few hours sleep & then set off to find a game understanding that your continued existence counts not only on finding that game but winning it & failure to do so places you in a precarious position. Match up & grind for 8,10, 36 hours in a hostile environment where no one is rooting for you & if you take it down & get out you have to think about getting back to your motel without getting robbed or worse, try that for a few years & tell how it sits with you. As far as American players or those that play pool venturing into the snooker world, well as you can see, not many have, not because they can't but because they're just not interested, it's a different game & it's not popular here because most consider it boring, hence the lack of snooker tables here. Those that have, Cory Duell, Pagulayan, it's about $, not a love for the game. At the end of the day it's a travesty Pool isn't perceived as a sport for reasons I've already mentioned but to suggest American pool players aren't as skilled as snooker players because of a lack of a formal training school or that we don't have a tour because of a lack of a formal training school to develop upcoming players is ludicrous. Pro pool players do take their craft seriously but are jaded by a lack of a way to earn a living at it without having to gamble & it's gambling that keeps a corporate sponsor from backing a reputable tour, not because of unskilled players or pros who don't take it seriously.


Why am I the Colonel? Because I always get the chicken