Todays players would rob previous gen. players

[jay helfert]

Some aspects of the game have evolved over time. Kicking, as brought up by a few already, is something that has gotten better over time. Credit to that has to go to the Filipinos. Breaking, jumping and the level of women's play has also gotten better.

That said, I still believe any of the top players, given a time transport to Bellflower in the 70s, would have a tough time beating Keith on the barbox. Or change the destination to Oklahoma and put them into the box with David Matlock when he was in high gear and I find it hard to believe Matlock would get robbed.

This is an age old discussion not just in this sport. Is Michael Jordan the high water mark of the NBA? What about comparing Tiger to others?

I know this for sure. You can't rob anyone if you dont get to shoot. Greenleaf, Mosconi, Harold Worst, Lassiter all come to mind as opponents that could put you in the chair for a while. Could Efren beat them all? Maybe...Maybe not...but would he flat out rob them? I dont think so.

No doubt players kick better today than ever before. You can put the blame for that squarely on the shoulders of Mr. Reyes. He opened everyone's eyes with his kicking ability in Houston. Likewise, jump shots are relatively new also. And Earl had a lot to do with that revolution, when he jumped over one ball to make another on national television at Caesars Tahoe in 1983.

Women's pool has improved by light years, thanks to a well organized and televised tour. And the money ain't bad either. Only Jean Balukas from 20 years ago would have a chance with the top women today. As good as Loree Jon was, she would be "middle of the pack" today.

Now comparing todays champions with the best players of the 60's and 70's is very tough to do. I'm not sure ANYONE would have liked playing the Keith or Buddy of 1975. Or Matlock on the Bar Box.

Comparing Efren with these four legends is not fair either. Greenleaf and Mosconi are noted for their 14.1 skills, and Efren rarely plays this game. At 9-Ball, Efren would certainly not have been a lock over Worst or Lassiter. Only at One Pocket could he be considered the superior player, and no telling what Worst could have done or become had he lived. He had the capacity to learn and excell at any game he desired. I'm sure he would have gone after Ronnie at some point if he had not passed away. He was just that kind of guy, that he wanted to beat the best at their game.

Wanted to add one comment. I only see ONE current player who could possibly have beaten a 1970's era Ronnie Allen at One Pocket.
And you know who that is.

 

[jay helfert]

I haven't kept up with high performance in years but it used to be that each dyno was pretty much unique to itself, there wasn't any set calibration. Along about 1973 Bobby Allison had a dyno. According to his dyno his engines only produced 480 horsepower. However they were still stout enough to win anywhere. Interesting that the old engines are showing so much horsepower on the new dyno's. Makes me wonder what my 600HP sprint car engine really put out on alcohol.

My favorite daily driver was a 454 pick-up. It was mildly hopped and would pass almost anything but a gas station. Some other guys towed to the dragstrip with a '55 Ford pick-up and then put slicks on it and raced it. With a full race 427 under the hood it was an ultimate sleeper. Of course some guys in town had an old stock looking Galaxy with a 427 cammer under the hood, 736HP factory rating! I suspect it could still give all the new ones all they wanted in a straight line.

Hu

I owned a 1967 big block Corvette. It was a 427 with three 2 barrel carbs. No smog stuff, hi compression, cut out exhausts, 4.11 rear end and a more than mild cam. It was rated at 435 HP, but I suspect it was churning more like 500+. All I know was that car was a rocket! I've driven hot Mercedes coupes and a Dodge Viper and they didn't slam me back in the seat like that Vette. Even at freeway speeds, you could burn rubber if you hit the gas. I couldn't handle that thing today, and wouldn't want to try.

Even my 1969 Model SJ Pontiac Gran Prix was super hot by today's standards.

 

[jay helfert]

The game has become easier today with speed cloth, quick draw cue balls (red circle), one foul ball in hand rules and alternate break. In the 70s and 80s you actually had to have a stroke to go 3 rails for position on slow cloth with a blue circle cue ball. You also had to be able to make a tough shot with roll out rules.

The game today is run out until you get out of line and then duck to win the game. In the "roll out" days you were punished for getting out of line. You actually had to be able to shoot tough shots. Keith McCready was one of the best shot makers ever when roll out was king. Also how many times do you see a player miss and accidently hook his opponent? You could roll out back then.

I guarntee you I have a chance to beat a world class player in a race to 11 with todays equipment and rules. I have NO chance at all to be a world class player in "Roll Out". Todays game requires less shot making skills and more safe (ducking) skills. In the 70s and 80s the best players dominated the game because there was alot more skill required. The rolls have a less impact on "Roll Out" and require alot more shot making skills. Alternate break is a joke since the winner of the game isn't rewarded.

Who is dominatng the game today (with the exception of Efren - he would of been a dominate player in the 70s & 80s as well)? In the 70s and 80s there were about 10 players that dominated and the rest were also rans.

I would love to see 9 Ball go back to at least "Roll out" rules with winner breaks. I think you would see some different players at the top.

Very good observations here. It was all about "the stroke" back then.

 

[Scott Lee]

I would have to disagree that today's players are better than the old legends. The top players from the 50's & 60's were much better players than the players today. Why? Because every time they matched up with someone they were playing for food for their family, or a roof over their head. Every 9-ball was a loaf of bread or a jug of milk. Miss and their families went hungry. That was REAL pressure. It's nothing like that today. I will say, however, that because there is a preponderance of highly talented players out there today (due to the reasons already mentioned), real experts are much more common. Match up today's top players with the players of old in their prime, and it would be no contest. jmo

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

 

[gulfportdoc]

I would love to see 9 Ball go back to at least "Roll out" rules with winner breaks. I think you would see some different players at the top.

Good points, TFP. Shoot-out favors shot making. I'm going to go for a lot more shots if I know I can roll out if I get stuck. That's why the best players dominated the tournaments in those days. The game was not nearly as lucky. Today you rarely see anyone string together tournament victories.

Doc

 

[jay helfert]

Good points, TFP. Shoot-out favors shot making. I'm going to go for a lot more shots if I know I can roll out if I get stuck. That's why the best players dominated the tournaments in those days. The game was not nearly as lucky. Today you rarely see anyone string together tournament victories.

Doc

Only one exception to this. Efren has won the One Pocket at Derby City every year he has played in it. Five straight at last count, and these are huge fields and short races. AMAZING!!!

 

[Deadon]

I have to go with Jay and Scott on this one. But for a little different reason.

Pool is different now. Today its mostly about tournaments and leagues. There isn't 1/10 the action that there was in the 60s and 70s. Although there were a few tournaments, only Johnson City was about pool. Playing, and winning a tournament would only get you challenged to play. There were many players that seldom played tournaments, but beat everyone in sight. Denny Searcy comes to mind. Pool used to be about making money playing other players or dummys, tournament winnings wouldn't crack the nut if you won first place. Playing hard for cash at evey chance made these players, like Keith, deadly, unlike most players today.

Back then you could go into Cochrans, or Hard Times (forgot the other place in LA) and get into a nice payball game for all you wanted, on a 6x12. I would have to bet that most of todays (young) players have never played payball on a 6x12. IMHO there was a handfull of people in Cochrans that could play, anyone under 40 today, payball, and they wouldn't have a chance. I use payball as an just as an example because some people seem to think that players were less skillfull then. I think the same would be true for most of the other games.

As stated earlier, shoot out, separated the chaff from the wheat and most of todays players would find out they are more chaff.

The mental toughness of the players from the past put them in a group by themselves. It was earned by cutting balls backwards and running out for your last $5.00. Every day.

The best comparison, I guess, would be the first time I saw Keith. There's a tournament going on, all top players, Rempe, Lassiter etc, and this skinny, ruddy faced, shoeless, levis, tee shirt and messed up hair, kid, came in the main tournament area and immediately challenged anyone in the room to play, with the 8. Thats what makes them better players. They had to play, anyone.

Today young people look back at the older players and consider their method of play what we used to call "rough", meaning unrefined. It shows in some of the earlier posts. Their real play wasn't captured on tape or by ESPN so don't be surprised if your misinformed. Listen to those who where there, like Grady, John H. and many others that have posted.

To put it another way, you have been hustled, if you think todays players have even the slightest edge. Efren's 1 pocket may be the sole exception, as Jay noted.

BTW, nobody in that room wanted any part of this teenager. It was quiet as a church. Keith threw up his hands and walked out.

 

[John Barton]

Yes, they would. On today's equipment under modern rules, the top players today would rob the players of yesteryear if the players of yesteryear didn't have the same amount of experience on the same equipment. And converse is also true

A great player is a great player. A Lassiter, Mosconi, Willis and so on would rise to the top in any field under any conditions given the opportunity to adapt to those conditions.

In a purely skill oriented contest there will be no discernible difference between the great players of yesterday vs. the great ones of today. All of them possess the hand-eye coordination and steely nerves that define champions.

 

[PoolBum]

Wanted to add one comment. I only see ONE current player who could possibly have beaten a 1970's era Ronnie Allen at One Pocket.
And you know who that is.

Thanks for the compliment Jay, but my one-pocket game really doesn't need that kind of heat.

 

[hemicudas]

I owned a 1967 big block Corvette. It was a 427 with three 2 barrel carbs. No smog stuff, hi compression, cut out exhausts, 4.11 rear end and a more than mild cam. It was rated at 435 HP, but I suspect it was churning more like 500+. All I know was that car was a rocket! I've driven hot Mercedes coupes and a Dodge Viper and they didn't slam me back in the seat like that Vette. Even at freeway speeds, you could burn rubber if you hit the gas. I couldn't handle that thing today, and wouldn't want to try.

Even my 1969 Model SJ Pontiac Gran Prix was super hot by today's standards.

Very good point, Jay. Today, every funny car, every top fuel car, that has run the 1/4 mile in under 5 seconds at over 300mph, no matter what brand name is on the funny car body, all run the basic Chrysler 426 hemi engine. No exceptions. The engines are built by names such as, Donovan, Keith Black, Arias etc. and run super chargers and twin magnitos but are based on the 1964 Chrysler 426 hemi which only came with 2-4bbl carbs.

No player today, for the cash, would have a chance playing 9 ball against a 1975 Buddy Hall with a MO-2 Meucci in his hands. All the equiptment is better today, cues etc. but they all still have to bend the elbow to pocket the balls and no one did it better than, Buddy Hall.

The reason for my handle. My 1970 hemicuda.

 

[jay helfert]

Very good point, Jay. Today, every funny car, every top fuel car, that has run the 1/4 mile in under 5 seconds at over 300mph, no matter what brand name is on the funny car body, all run the basic Chrysler 426 hemi engine. No exceptions. The engines are built by names such as, Donovan, Keith Black, Arias etc. and run super chargers and twin magnitos but are based on the 1964 Chrysler 426 hemi which only came with 2-4bbl carbs.

No player today, for the cash, would have a chance playing 9 ball against a 1975 Buddy Hall with a MO-2 Meucci in his hands. All the equiptment is better today, cues etc. but they all still have to bend the elbow to pocket the balls and no one did it better than, Buddy Hall.

The reason for my handle. My 1970 hemicuda.

A Barracuda with a big block hemi? Too cool. The original motor was a 270 c.i. Right?

 

[ribdoner]

Very good point, Jay. Today, every funny car, every top fuel car, that has run the 1/4 mile in under 5 seconds at over 300mph, no matter what brand name is on the funny car body, all run the basic Chrysler 426 hemi engine. No exceptions. The engines are built by names such as, Donovan, Keith Black, Arias etc. and run super chargers and twin magnitos but are based on the 1964 Chrysler 426 hemi which only came with 2-4bbl carbs.

No player today, for the cash, would have a chance playing 9 ball against a 1975 Buddy Hall with a MO-2 Meucci in his hands. All the equiptment is better today, cues etc. but they all still have to bend the elbow to pocket the balls and no one did it better than, Buddy Hall.

The reason for my handle. My 1970 hemicuda.

What he said----and today's players could practice for a year on the old backed stevens/forsmens(sp) "cloth"

 

[hemicudas]

A Barracuda with a big block hemi? Too cool. The original motor was a 270 c.i. Right?

The original hemi engine, early hemi, was a 331ci and it came out in 1951. They kept boring it until it got to 392ci. The only thing it had in common with the, late model 426 hemi were the hemi heads them selves. The early hemi had the distributor in the rear. The 426 hemis have them in the front at the same angle as all the Chrysler big blocks. They only produced 426 hemicudas and 426 challengers in 1970 and 71, to the public. The 426 hemis are the only Chrysler engines ever produced where you had no choice of carburation. They all came with 2 Carter 4bbls. No 3-2bbls and no single 4bbl. The 270ci you speak of was probably the original small block which was a 273ci which was later bored/stroked to 318-340&360ci.

 

[jay helfert]

The original hemi engine, early hemi, was a 331ci and it came out in 1951. They kept boring it until it got to 392ci. The only thing it had in common with the, late model 426 hemi were the hemi heads them selves. The early hemi had the distributor in the rear. The 426 hemis have them in the front at the same angle as all the Chrysler big blocks. They only produced 426 hemicudas and 426 challengers in 1970 and 71, to the public. The 426 hemis are the only Chrysler engines ever produced where you had no choice of carburation. They all came with 2 Carter 4bbls. No 3-2bbls and no single 4bbl. The 270ci you speak of was probably the original small block which was a 273ci which was later bored/stroked to 318-340&360ci.

So you have the 426 Hemi in that little car. Sick!

 

[hemicudas]

So you have the 426 Hemi in that little car. Sick!

Yes. It is a 4 speed car with 4.10 gears. This is what's under the hood.

 

[ironman]

Yes. It is a 4 speed car with 4.10 gears. This is what's under the hood.

What do you have to do to the gas? Does it even run on unleaded?

 

[Snapshot9]

And Hemi ...

What do you think about the 'new' Challenger?

 

[cuetechasaurus]

That is an excellent point about the whole stroke thing. Back then the earls and keiths didn't have to even think about playing conservative as the competition could not run out as well on the slow equiptment.

Even one pocket though....I watch about 2 hours of the "world one pocket championship" with ronnie and Danny D. Both players were shooting sucker shots. one shot in particular, Danny D shoots a cross corner combo bank and if he doesn't hit it perfect, ronnie gets a duck cross corner. Just seems like they made ALOT more errors.

They are both way past their prime in that match.

 

[cuetechasaurus]

The game has become easier today with speed cloth, quick draw cue balls (red circle), one foul ball in hand rules and alternate break. In the 70s and 80s you actually had to have a stroke to go 3 rails for position on slow cloth with a blue circle cue ball. You also had to be able to make a tough shot with roll out rules.

The game today is run out until you get out of line and then duck to win the game. In the "roll out" days you were punished for getting out of line. You actually had to be able to shoot tough shots. Keith McCready was one of the best shot makers ever when roll out was king. Also how many times do you see a player miss and accidently hook his opponent? You could roll out back then.

I guarntee you I have a chance to beat a world class player in a race to 11 with todays equipment and rules. I have NO chance at all to be a world class player in "Roll Out". Todays game requires less shot making skills and more safe (ducking) skills. In the 70s and 80s the best players dominated the game because there was alot more skill required. The rolls have a less impact on "Roll Out" and require alot more shot making skills. Alternate break is a joke since the winner of the game isn't rewarded.

Who is dominatng the game today (with the exception of Efren - he would of been a dominate player in the 70s & 80s as well)? In the 70s and 80s there were about 10 players that dominated and the rest were also rans.

I would love to see 9 Ball go back to at least "Roll out" rules with winner breaks. I think you would see some different players at the top.

I agree with what you are saying, but I want to point out that alot of people fail to recognize some of the brilliance in two-way shots. Efren and Nick play the game like they are rocket scientists when it comes to percentages.

 

[gulfportdoc]

Only one exception to this. Efren has won the One Pocket at Derby City every year he has played in it. Five straight at last count, and these are huge fields and short races. AMAZING!!!

You're right, Jay. But that's in one-pocket, not 9-ball. Today's 9-ball rules, which favor luck, will not allow anyone to dominate.

Doc