The Aging Gunfighter

D

drivermaker

Banned
We all know what happens to aging gunfighters, boxers, football, baseball and basketball players. At a certain point they lose speed, strength, and sometimes coordination. But what is it about the aging process that makes a pro pool player (or any good player) start declining in their skill level?

I mean, what's the big deal about moving your forearm back and forth that could affect play? Take Buddy Hall, Earl, Nick Varner, Sigel, Jim Rempe, Allen Hopkins, and maybe even Keith as examples. Don't get me wrong, they're all still very fine players, but they get stomped at times by no names that couldn't even carry their case for them at one time.

In Varner's case he has the shakes in his stroke and Hopkins is kinda like an old golfer with the yips in that there's hardly a backstroke. So is it the nerves, eyes, concentration, drive or something else. When you look at Buddy, he still has the most beautiful stroke imaginable along with the experience and a knowledge base that grows each year. With Buddy, Earl, Rempe, and Sigel, I can't even pick up on what is causing them to either lose to lesser players, or just not even want to compete any more because of a decline. It sure hasn't hit Efren yet.

I don't even know if the younger guys can really answer this since they've not experienced problems of aging. So, thoughts?
 
drivermaker said:
I mean, what's the big deal about moving your forearm back and forth that could affect play?

I think vision in what hurts a player as he/she gets older the most. :(
Click to expand...
 
The older gentleman that I played with for years was in his late 80's. He shot like a champ to this day.

The only thing that got him was eyesight, and he still never wears glasses and can make any long 3 rail bank.

Fortunately this is one game you can enjoy as long as you can get to the table regardless of your age.
 
T411 said:
I mean, what's the big deal about moving your forearm back and forth that could affect play?
drivermaker said:
The action of moving your arm back & forth probably doesn't wear out from age, unless a disease causes the misfortune.

When your eyes no longer tell you the "REAL" story, meaning what you see is really at that exact place in space, your pool game obviously suffers.

Glasses may help you read the paper, but altering the picture (the view you have) so that your mind can see a target clearer, doesn't bode well for us pool players. When a person gets up there a bit, the eyes lose their accomodation functionality, meaning they lose some depth perception. That effects the mind's ability to hit the ball 7.77 feet for position.

I still play well in the box (side pockets to the corner pockets) but my long game for all practical purposes is... GONE
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You also must take into account that Joe Balsis didn't win his first major until he was 46. For 10-15 years he was a major force. Into his 60's. Jack Colavita plays here in NJ and still can run 100 balls and a few racks of 9 at 74.

Joe
 
classiccues said:
You also must take into account that Joe Balsis didn't win his first major until he was 46. For 10-15 years he was a major force. Into his 60's. Jack Colavita plays here in NJ and still can run 100 balls and a few racks of 9 at 74.

Joe
Click to expand...


I agree about Balsis and even Crane, however they were using half the table most of the time since they played 14.1 like Mosconi so eyesight wasn't affecting them as much. It's the long range 9-ballers and 1P players moreso that the straight pool players. There are a few exceptions to the rule, and I sure as hell hope that when I'm in my 70's or 80's (if I get there) that I can still play decently.

What's your explanation and everybody else's regarding the less than top level play of the pro's that I mentioned in the opening post...Hall, Sigel, Earl, Rempe, Varner, Hopkins, Ronnie Allen, and anybody else that you can throw in that fits the profile of ex-champ/great player that has declined with age?
 
whitewolf said:
IF YOU ARE GOING TO COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES, then you must find older players who still play a WHOLE lot. Buddy Hall plays a lot I am guessing and Efren plays very frequently also. This should answer your question:
Click to expand...


No, it doesn't answer my question. That's exactly what I'm talking about. Buddy DOES play a lot and still lives for pool. So does Varner, until he had the operation. I don't know what Earl does or how much. As much as they play, which is like a younger person, they're NOT winning and if they do pull one off occasionally, the wins are very far and few between. All of them used to be somewhat dominant at one time with multiple wins every year.
 
drivermaker said:
No, it doesn't answer my question. That's exactly what I'm talking about. Buddy DOES play a lot and still lives for pool. So does Varner, until he had the operation. I don't know what Earl does or how much. As much as they play, which is like a younger person, they're NOT winning and if they do pull one off occasionally, the wins are very far and few between. All of them used to be somewhat dominant at one time with multiple wins every year.
Click to expand...

I think one of the major problems is when these guys were winning there was not the amount of competition there is now.

Joe
 
drivermaker said:
I agree about Balsis and even Crane, however they were using half the table most of the time since they played 14.1 like Mosconi so eyesight wasn't affecting them as much. It's the long range 9-ballers and 1P players moreso that the straight pool players. There are a few exceptions to the rule, and I sure as hell hope that when I'm in my 70's or 80's (if I get there) that I can still play decently.

What's your explanation and everybody else's regarding the less than top level play of the pro's that I mentioned in the opening post...Hall, Sigel, Earl, Rempe, Varner, Hopkins, Ronnie Allen, and anybody else that you can throw in that fits the profile of ex-champ/great player that has declined with age?
Click to expand...

Sigel, Rempe, Hopkins, Allen were / are not primarily 9 ballers. Earl is the only legit 9 baller there, and maybe Hall. But when they were at the top of their game they played the best nine ball. 20 years ago you had half the players. Today you get 180+ players in the US open I remember when they could barely crack 100.

I think Allen Hopkins would petrify Mika, as an example, in a straight pool game today. As well as many of the current 9 ballers. Same with Sigel, granted he got his feet wet again.

Joe
 
classiccues said:
I think one of the major problems is when these guys were winning there was not the amount of competition there is now...
Click to expand...

I tend to disagree that there was not the amount of competition there is now. Without getting into a who's-the-best debate, on the contrary I believe the competition was much more stiffer than today, and the cream of the crop seemed to be more CONSISTENT with their level of play.

BTW, like Joe Balsis winning his first major title at the age of 46, let's not forget "Spanish Mike" Lebron winning the U.S. Open at the age of 54! :)

The one thing every American pool champion has in common is that none of them have gotten rich from playing pool in competition venues. Players at the top of their game like Mike Sigel and Allen Hopkins ventured off into another pool-related industry in order to make a living, recognizing there ain't no money in pool.

I would imagine winning $25,000 in the year 1975 was big bucks. In today's world, $25,000 doesn't go quite as far 30 years later in the year 2005 and could easily be used up within several months of expenses relating to tournament attendance. Week-long tournaments eat up $1,500 to $2,500 in monies, and if you're lucky enough to come in fourth place, you might break even for the trip. In essence, the cost of living has gone up, and pool payouts have gone down.

JAM
 
One of the most difficult things I have had to deal with over teh past few years is the fact that I can no longer hit them like I sued too. Parkinson's has eliminated the fluidity of my movements, my balance, and my energy. I believe there does come a time where you should hang your guns up. That's not admitting defeat, or crawling into a hole....it's called exercising wisdom. There are some very fine exceptions to this rule, including some of the great players - some of the you could name, some of them you couldn't.

I no longer have pool and gambling as my top priority in life. For a long time, it consumed me. I'm much better off now than I ever was when I was out there causing trouble. I don't miss it because I traded it in for something much more worthwhile - true happiness. At this point in my life I know that true happiness is not out there on the road, its not at the end of a road trip, or in a stack of money, or in a victorious fist pump. For along time I searched those places looking to create happiness form the outside in, instead of from the inside out. People glorify the road, they glorify the gambling, but never stop to think of what happens to the players when you don't hear much about them anymore. The lifestyle is destructive in every way and from every angle. There aren't too many success stories, but there are many tragedies. I am in a very good spiritual place these days, so I consider myself a success story, regardless of my playing ability as an aging gunfighter.lol.
 
i think another part of this maybe you arent taking into account is just the simple percentages. At some of these tourneys, youre basically talking a bunch of a+++ players getting together, on any given night 2 guys of equal skill, either one can win, so the odds against someone winning is low to begin with. I realise you have times where a player seems to dominate, but then statistically im sure it averages back out for the most part. Archer dominated alot in the 90s, then he was really quiet there for awhile (I dont think getting older is the factor with him), then you have the older players that were mentioned, who didnt win a big tourney in their younger years only to win it in their 40's and 50's.Maybe age has some small part to play in it, but I dont think its huge, i think its just odds.
 
I find it interesting that so many think that eyesight is the biggest thing about getting older. What about Fred Davis, the snooker champion was severly myopic and won his last major title in 1980. He was 67 years old at the time.

And then there's the other players that always play with glasses. Bergendorff did fairly well this last WPC, the Indian champ (another snooker player) wears glasses. McAninish wears glasses, and he beat some were sporty players at the Glass City Open.

Then what about the guys that look at the cue ball last? I know a lot of guys feel that 'locking onto the OB' is a major think about accuracy. How would Souquet make a shot (he looks CB last)?

Personaly I think it comes down to competitive fire and increased skill in the competition. There are just way more good players now than there used to be. Especially so in international competition where you've now gotten the Asians as well. And if you've already dominated the competition for a while, you can't get the will to win that first one back. That's just the way it goes.

I also think that the increased quality in new players fundamentals have something to do with it. Players like Keith and Allen will probably be out-shot by these guys if they don't practice way more. Why? If your fundamentals are shaky, I truly believe that the drawbacks of getting old affect you way, way more.

Just some cents...
 
Physically, there are many factors that add to a players decline as he/she ages- back pain, foot pain, arthritis, fading eyesight, a decrease in hand eye coordination, loss of flexibility, more difficulty in concentrating.....the list goes on and on.

And, I think a lot of it comes down to what Willie Mosconi himself said- "There's more to life than playing pool." As people get older, they realize that there are other ways to spend their time. They have children, grandchildren, spouses, and so on. If you're Mike Sigel or Jim Rempe, what do you have to prove? Unless you continue to completely dominate, all you can do is tarnish your legacy. You have to ask yourself if you're prepared to practice 8 hours or so every day and travel endlessly just to try to live up to your past accomplishments. I think a lot of older players just decide it's not worth the price anymore.
 
JLW said:
Physically, there are many factors that add to a players decline as he/she ages- back pain, foot pain, arthritis, fading eyesight, a decrease in hand eye coordination, loss of flexibility, more difficulty in concentrating.....the list goes on and on.

And, I think a lot of it comes down to what Willie Mosconi himself said- "There's more to life than playing pool." As people get older, they realize that there are other ways to spend their time. They have children, grandchildren, spouses, and so on. If you're Mike Sigel or Jim Rempe, what do you have to prove? Unless you continue to completely dominate, all you can do is tarnish your legacy. You have to ask yourself if you're prepared to practice 8 hours or so every day and travel endlessly just to try to live up to your past accomplishments. I think a lot of older players just decide it's not worth the price anymore.
Click to expand...

Very well written, and I agree with you 100 percent! :)

JAM
 
drivermaker said:
We all know what happens to aging gunfighters, boxers, football, baseball and basketball players. At a certain point they lose speed, strength, and sometimes coordination. But what is it about the aging process that makes a pro pool player (or any good player) start declining in their skill level?

(snip)
Click to expand...

If the reason is not physical, then it is mental.

Blackjack said it best concerning the mental: [as one ages, s/he finds a path to happiness that doesn't require winning games.] I've said it before and I'll say it again: if this shot doesn't add to your happiness, do something else. How does one know what to do?...Goals.

As for the physical, I see several problems:

1.) eyes and eye hand coordination change.
2.) legs get tired sooner and mind says, "sit down."
3.) back tires easier, too.
4.) hell, even eyebrows get so bushy they block vision
5.) aging, in general produces inferior cells and these do all sorts of interesting things to the body.
6.) I'm too tired to type anymore...zzzzz....

Jeff Livingston
 
I remember reading from the BD few years ago about Johnny Ervolino running 330-something in straight pool in his late 60s or even early 70s... Quite a remarkable feat, requires a lot of stamina that kind of a run ! :cool:
 
mjantti said:
I remember reading from the BD few years ago about Johnny Ervolino running 330-something in straight pool in his late 60s or even early 70s... Quite a remarkable feat, requires a lot of stamina that kind of a run ! :cool:
Click to expand...

Found a quote from another forum:
"In 2000, at the age of 65, Johnny Ervolino ran 333 balls at The Billiard Emporium in Commack, NY (on Long Island). "

More info:
"I was not there to witness it, but many were and there is a big plaque hanging on the wall commemorating it as the room's high run. Also Johnny has the high straight pool run at Amsterdam Billiards in Manhattan. It's around 260, I think, and it was done maybe a couple of years earlier (maybe 1998 or 1999)."
 
mjantti said:
Found a quote from another forum:
"In 2000, at the age of 65, Johnny Ervolino ran 333 balls at The Billiard Emporium in Commack, NY (on Long Island). "

More info:
"I was not there to witness it, but many were and there is a big plaque hanging on the wall commemorating it as the room's high run. Also Johnny has the high straight pool run at Amsterdam Billiards in Manhattan. It's around 260, I think, and it was done maybe a couple of years earlier (maybe 1998 or 1999)."
Click to expand...


Ervolino can still run over 100 balls on pretty
much a daily basis. When ever he's in NYC he can
be seen by himself at the table running rack after
effortless rack of straight pool for hours. he'll
shoot by himself for about 6 straight hours every
day. He once told me that the main thing that he's
lost over the years is competitive drive. He said
when he was young he felt utterly fearless playing
anyone and wanted to not only beat them but beat
them by as large a margin as possible.

He gets frustrated when he loses to players that
he feels are nowhere near his speed as a younger man.
For example a few years ago he played Mika Immonen
a game of straight pool and Mika beat him something
like 150-130. Ervolino was livid! He said that when
he was 14 years old he could have drilled Mika in
straight pool. They played a year later, 3 games
to 200 points and Mika never got 50 balls in any
of the games.
 
drivermaker said:
So is it the nerves, eyes, concentration, drive or something else.
Click to expand...
In a P&B article, Bruce Venzke posited that the most common factor was the loss of desire. I tend to agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top