Lou:
You know I appreciate good, spirited debate, as long as it's kept respectful -- which you and I have never had a problem with. (I've stopped responding to another responder in this thread, because he insists on making things personal, even after it was pointed out to him it wasn't appreciated.)
All the things you point out about Mosconi above are in fact, TRUE:
My question is, what does all this have to do with the continued abuse of the phrase, "Mosconi would be turning over in his grave" in reference to the style of play of today's players?
- he made the game look so easy;
- he was quick and graceful at the table;
- he always ran at least 100;
- his cue ball acted like it was possessed by a demon, doing his bidding and relocating itself each shot to within millimeters of where he wanted it to go;
- he could power the cue ball through the stack like a hot knife through butter.
Do we say "Astaire would be turning over in his grave" in reference to today's choreographed dancers? No. (In fact, if Fred were still around and saw what was being done today, he'd probably want to be part of it!)
Do we say "Sinatra would be turning over in his grave" in reference to, say, the crooning of Michael Buble? No.
Thankfully, Ali is still with us, but after he unfortunately passes, do you think we'll say "Ali would be turning over in his grave" in reference to the fighting chops of the heavyweight champions of tomorrow? I definitely say NO. Although Ali was known as a mouth (and Howard Cosell certainly exploited it to help sell Ali's image), privately he held the highest respect for the champions that succeeded him. This was captured in an interview I saw on the show "20/20" when Ali was still lucid and capable of clear speech. He admitted that he admired Evander Holyfield at the time.
So while we'll [rightfully] put Mosconi in the same "super category" as the aforementioned icons, I stand by my notion that the "Mosconi would be rolling in his grave" insult is entirely unjust to not only the 14.1 players of today (for the specialist/generalist reasons I already mentioned), but also to Mosconi himself. It's doing him a grave injustice.I suppose what the phrase has to do with the play of modern day players is: *you* need to stop hanging around some old farts who are in dire need of fresh material
And that Mosconi's style set a platinum standard for simplicity and elegance that 50 years later still resonates with knowledgeable fans. IOW, Mosconi's style of game clearly represents, to many (most), the ideal when it comes to playing 14.1. It's not just a matter of someone having a new, or more modern, or just plain different style -- it is a statement that basically says that while someone else's style of play is very nice and all it is, regrettably, not up to the ideal. That's all. When folks have seen the game played in a manner that is so pure, that's going to happen.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
I have to say that my idea of a crappy 100 is a bit different from what you are saying. I ran a 50-something a day or two ago, but it included 1 near impossible bankshot that I'd never have tried in a competition, plus another near impossible table length cut shot from the rail. I don't consider it a good run, really no better than a couple of two rack runs. Same thing happened a week ago... this time I made a break shot where the break ball bounced off the foot rail, caromed off another ball and ended up in the pocket. Sure, I'll take it, but It wasn't really a run to be proud of.