What's Left for Efren?

[MVPCues]

You might not see him at his best, but you can see him playing at an extremely high level. Not so with Mosconi. You don't get to see him play at anywhere near his best. Pretty much any tape you see of him is after his stroke and well past his prime. The tape that has survived is usually pretty grainy and tough to follow. If there were some high quality tape of him, I think a lot of his detractors would realize the awesome talent he really was. I was always a big Sigel fan, but, I never really understood his 14.1 greatness until I watched the 1992 US Open match with Zuglan. His control, concentration and confidence were remarkable. One can only wonder what a tape of Mosconi in his prime would be like.

I played an old fellow named Mr. Henry at Virginia Tech once. He claimed to have played Mosconi a few times. He said sometimes during a run Mosconi's concentration would be so intense he would be frowning with his bottom lip poked out and it would turn pale from lack of blood flow during a high run.
Kelly

 

[JamisonNeu]

Willie was the Best

I have some old interviews of Irving Crane talking about his years on the road. When asked who was your toughest competitor without hesitation he said Willie Mosconi when asked why he said he might run 400 safe you then run 400 again. He was the most consistent player that ever lived and when Mosconi was asked who he didn't want to play he always said Greenlief. Makes you wonder.
The facts are the game was harder then and Willie played great. Even on those ten foots with tight pockets. I have seen and played an 10' tournament tables used back then it's not easy at all. It's twice as hard in fact. Besides, he's dead let him be. Compare Efren to Steve Mizarak or someone that has played the same sport. The games are not even the same. Besides no one will ever break all his records. Did you know when Mosconi retired he held every record in pocket billiards.

 

[jsp]

You have to be joking. Wilie played THE BEST 14.1 for 20 years and had 15 WORLD titles. Running 50, and running 100 are 2 completely different animals. 200 is another giant plateau. 400+ is only done by the elite. You can run 50 100 times, never break 100 and you'd be considered a mediocre 14.1 player. Also, no player will ever run a 1 time 550, because they would have made multiple 100/200/300 ball runs before getting there. I run 50's weekly and only have 3 100+ ball runs in the last 10 years. I'm an o.k. 14.1 player by North Eastern standards. Sorry if I came accross strong in this post, but I love the game, and I"m very passionate about straight pool......

No offense taken. I have to admit, I'm not extremely knowledgeable about straight pool, so my opinions can sound ignorant to all you straight-pool aficionados. Regardless, I think you've missed the points of my post.

First off, I'm not putting down Mosconi at all. I'm just saying that I believe the high-run record is an overrated (okay, maybe not completely overrated) record, because it does not totally and exactly reflect one's true ability. By definition, a high run is a streak, and like all streaks, it is just a one-time event that can be enhanced with luck. JLW put it nicely when he said...

Luckily, Mosconi's greatness as a player is not dependent on this record.

Mosconi is great NOT because he holds the high run record, but because (like you and others have said) Mosconi dominated straight-pool tournaments for decades. Viewing Mosconi ONLY as the person who holds the high run record, IMO, is an insult to him as a player and diminishes his lifelong extraordinary achievements in pool. If I were Mosconi, I'd rather be remembered as someone who won 15 World Championships rather than someone who holds the high run record.

First and foremost, I grew up a baseball fan (pool only came into my life a little over 2 years ago). I kind of relate the the 526 record of Mosconi to the 56 game hitting streak of Joe Dimaggio. To baseball fans, this record is one of the most, if not the most, endearing records in all of baseball history. To me, I find this hitting streak overrated as well. Why? Because it's a streak, and luck almost always plays a part in keeping a prolonged streak alive. Also, many baseball fans wouldn't even consider Joe Dimaggio as the best pure hitter in baseball history (not even close to me). Many would place give that honor to Ted Williams, Ty Cobb, Pete Rose, or even Barry Bonds. To me, Ted Williams was THE BEST hitter in all of baseball because he hit .400 three times in his career, and because he was CONSISTENT. Incidentally, Ted Williams (at least to my knowledge) never cracked 30 games for a hitting streak.

Also...I believe that several of today's top pros can break that record, given the same exact conditions as Mosconi AND enough tries. I have no doubts that Efren, Alex, Engert, Hohmann, and Souquet can all eclipse that record eventually if they concentrated on straight pool as much as Mosconi did. The problem is that none of them play straight pool nearly as often as Mosconi, and that the equipment of today is totally different. (However, notice that I did not say that any of them would consistently beat Mosconi in head-to-head matchups in straight pool.)

As for me saying that running 50 11 consecutive times as a better guage of a player's ability than a one-time run of 550...maybe you're right. To me, I just feel think that consistency is the key for extended success in straight pool (and in pretty much everything else). A one-time stay at the table, no matter how long, is still only one time at the table. JMO

 

[Gerry]

Interesting you say that Gerry, as I used to run a 50 nearly every decent snooker match session, but never made a hundred. Statistics would suggest I should have made quite a few centuries, but the pressure used to build as the numbers climbed.

It takes time to battle past mental barriers.

I know just what you mean Colin. When I finally learned a little about running balls a friend of mine showed me some real interesting articles about how averages work in repetative situations. It had me screwed up for ever thinking the longer my run, the more the odds were against me. Finally I said to hell with that, and my new theory is I have the same percentage to make my shot on every shot. That may not be true, but I use it like a security blanket none the less

I used to think I would never run 50, then I learned to compile a list of my run stoppers while practicing and competing. That helped me tremendously to truely know what stopped my runs. Now running 50 is standard for my practice routine.
SO, getting to 100, which I've done 3 times, I think is as much a mental a block as anything else for me. I had a real nice 73 last week that was flawless, and I missed a silly slow roll shot that did'nt need to be played the way I did!!!......into the book it went. The longer I play 14.1 the more I learn, and that translates into longer runs obviously. I think the easiest way to put it is I'm learning what NOT to do while running balls, that is the key I feel. Like going into the back of the rack without an insurance ball! Anymore I don't mind a run being cut short as long as what I was doing when it stopped was the correct move......Have fun,

Gerry

 

[Bobby]

No offense taken. I have to admit, I'm not extremely knowledgeable about straight pool, so my opinions can sound ignorant to all you straight-pool aficionados. Regardless, I think you've missed the points of my post.

First off, I'm not putting down Mosconi at all. I'm just saying that I believe the high-run record is an overrated (okay, maybe not completely overrated) record, because it does not totally and exactly reflect one's true ability. By definition, a high run is a streak, and like all streaks, it is just a one-time event that can be enhanced with luck. JLW put it nicely when he said...


Mosconi is great NOT because he holds the high run record, but because (like you and others have said) Mosconi dominated straight-pool tournaments for decades. Viewing Mosconi ONLY as the person who holds the high run record, IMO, is an insult to him as a player and diminishes his lifelong extraordinary achievements in pool. If I were Mosconi, I'd rather be remembered as someone who won 15 World Championships rather than someone who holds the high run record.

First and foremost, I grew up a baseball fan (pool only came into my life a little over 2 years ago). I kind of relate the the 526 record of Mosconi to the 56 game hitting streak of Joe Dimaggio. To baseball fans, this record is one of the most, if not the most, endearing records in all of baseball history. To me, I find this hitting streak overrated as well. Why? Because it's a streak, and luck almost always plays a part in keeping a prolonged streak alive. Also, many baseball fans wouldn't even consider Joe Dimaggio as the best pure hitter in baseball history (not even close to me). Many would place give that honor to Ted Williams, Ty Cobb, Pete Rose, or even Barry Bonds. To me, Ted Williams was THE BEST hitter in all of baseball because he hit .400 three times in his career, and because he was CONSISTENT. Incidentally, Ted Williams (at least to my knowledge) never cracked 30 games for a hitting streak.

Also...I believe that several of today's top pros can break that record, given the same exact conditions as Mosconi AND enough tries. I have no doubts that Efren, Alex, Engert, Hohmann, and Souquet can all eclipse that record eventually if they concentrated on straight pool as much as Mosconi did. The problem is that none of them play straight pool nearly as often as Mosconi, and that the equipment of today is totally different. (However, notice that I did not say that any of them would consistently beat Mosconi in head-to-head matchups in straight pool.)

As for me saying that running 50 11 consecutive times as a better guage of a player's ability than a one-time run of 550...maybe you're right. To me, I just feel think that consistency is the key for extended success in straight pool (and in pretty much everything else). A one-time stay at the table, no matter how long, is still only one time at the table. JMO

Actually Ted Williams hit .400 ONCE, he hit .406.
Ty Cobb hit .400 3 times...he hit .420, .410 and
.401, in my opinion Cobb was far and away the
greatest hitter of all-time with a .367 lifetime
average.
I agree with you about Dimagio's streak, as great
an accomplishment as it is, there's just too much
focus on it. My grandfather saw him play a lot and
he said it's a shame people today don't know how
well he fielded, he's never seen anyone like him
in centerfield.

 

[jsp]

Actually Ted Williams hit .400 ONCE, he hit .406.
Ty Cobb hit .400 3 times...he hit .420, .410 and
.401, in my opinion Cobb was far and away the
greatest hitter of all-time with a .367 lifetime
average.
I agree with you about Dimagio's streak, as great
an accomplishment as it is, there's just too much
focus on it. My grandfather saw him play a lot and
he said it's a shame people today don't know how
well he fielded, he's never seen anyone like him
in centerfield.

Technically, Williams did hit .400 three times 1941, 1952, 1953, but i guess 1952 doesn't count because he only had 10 at-bats the whole year. So I guess we were both wrong.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/w/willite01.shtml

But you're right about Dimaggio getting way too much focus on his streak. That's all people of my generation know about him. Like you said, not too many understand how great a fielder he was. That's why we pool fans should try not to relate Mosconi only with his 526 high run record. We'll be missing out on the total package.

 

[cuetechasaurus]

I have some old interviews of Irving Crane talking about his years on the road. When asked who was your toughest competitor without hesitation he said Willie Mosconi when asked why he said he might run 400 safe you then run 400 again. He was the most consistent player that ever lived and when Mosconi was asked who he didn't want to play he always said Greenlief. Makes you wonder.
The facts are the game was harder then and Willie played great. Even on those ten foots with tight pockets. I have seen and played an 10' tournament tables used back then it's not easy at all. It's twice as hard in fact. Besides, he's dead let him be. Compare Efren to Steve Mizarak or someone that has played the same sport. The games are not even the same. Besides no one will ever break all his records. Did you know when Mosconi retired he held every record in pocket billiards.

Mosconi is the greatest straight pool player ever. Efren is the greatest all around player ever. Simple as that.

 

[gulfportdoc]

What no one has mentioned yet is Mosconi's run on
a 5 x 10 table, which I believe was 365. To me that's
about as impressive a record as any I've ever heard
of.

Bobby

You're probably referring to Irving Crane's run on a 5x10, which I believe was 309. This to me is more impressive than Mosconi's 526 on a loose 4x8; and not likely to ever be surpassed. In regards high runs in general, no one will ever run anything like 400 on a 9' table with tight pockets.

Doc

 

[Bobby]

You're probably referring to Irving Crane's run on a 5x10, which I believe was 309. This to me is more impressive than Mosconi's 526 on a loose 4x8; and not likely to ever be surpassed. In regards high runs in general, no one will ever run anything like 400 on a 9' table with tight pockets.

Doc

No, I was referring to Mosconi running 365 on a
5 x 10. I've seen it mentioned a few times in
articles. Irving Crane did hold the record for awhile
on a 5 x 10 with 309, but then Mosconi tied the run
with a 309 of his own. A few years after that Mosconi
ran the 365. Babe Cranfield claimed to have ran 420
on a 5 x 10 but it's never been verified.