who wins

I didnt say if Jim Brown was born today. I said athletes of the 1940's and 50's (this means they were born in the 1930's) absolutely could not compete in professional sports today. Lineman were 6' 190 lbs and ran 5.3 40 yard dashes. What position would they play in the NFL? The answer is none. Do you thin the 6'3" white centers in the 50's who couldnt dunk would fair well guarding LeBron James?

Bill Russell was the best center of the 50's and 60's. He was maybe 6'10". He could still play today, but he might be a reserve center. :rolleyes: Wilt came along soon after in the 60's. He could also play today, but he wouldn't average 50 points a game. Maybe only 30. :cool:
 
The bottom line is still, you don't know, and saying that there's no way Taylor could compete with Alex, just shows ignorance on the part of the person saying that. If you actually saw Taylor play in his prime (and Alex) then you are more qualified to make this comparison.

well jay h said it in 9 ball or 10 ball which in this thread are the games i talked about.
i am on the right side.
its easy the phill are the best at 9 ball 10 ball rotation not close.
and they have the best ever at one pocket not even close.
 
I didnt say if Jim Brown was born today. I said athletes of the 1940's and 50's (this means they were born in the 1930's) absolutely could not compete in professional sports today. Lineman were 6' 190 lbs and ran 5.3 40 yard dashes. What position would they play in the NFL? The answer is none. Do you thin the 6'3" white centers in the 50's who couldnt dunk would fair well guarding LeBron James?

Thats b/c there wasn't the MASS of interest that there is now. ALl the doctors, sports science etc. They are still trying to break mosconi's record. They are still trying to break Ruths/Marris's single season HR record without steroids. They are still trying to break Bob Beamons 30' long jump record. It took almost 40yrs for someone to break Jim Ryuns HS mile record....they still havent had a 17yr old run under 4min...oh wait he also set the 3:55 running against high schoolers and not pros (thats another record, no professional rabbit)

So guys are bigger now....bet money they aren't as mentally tough. How you think the young guys of today would like to play old rules in football against the likes of the 70's steelers with Bradshaw QB'n. As for basketball, well to put it this way they didn't WALK everytime they had the ball in the 50's either. Can't compare two completely diff games.

Same goes for pool, how many of the players today would like playing old school push out 9 ball w the likes of lassiter, Johnny Irish, Taylor etc....Don't even make me pull Harold Worst out the bag....Worst against anyone in any era is a gaff bet.
 
Can you imagine Wilt Chamberlain on steroids? Just saying, how many athletes today are (or were at one time) juiced?
 
Bill Russell was the best center of the 50's and 60's. He was maybe 6'10". He could still play today, but he might be a reserve center. :rolleyes: Wilt came along soon after in the 60's. He could also play today, but he wouldn't average 50 points a game. Maybe only 30. :cool:

LeBron James would score 100 points EVERY night if he played in the 50's and 60's. Period end of story. I am not knocking the great players of that era. I think any team would love to have Bill Russell. He was a winner, but he would be lucky to be a reserve center in todays game.
 
thats all i have said the whole time.
orcullo would win in 9 ball or 10 ball .
against any old champs.

I hate to say it, but you're probably right. He and Efren and Jose and Earl too, play a very different game than guys like Lassiter and Kelly did. They move the cue ball a little better, particularly on follow shots. Lassiter played a very simple game, with the least cue ball movement possible. Don Watson played the same way. Worst had more modern type skills. He could move the cue ball anywhere he needed to.

Buddy is much closer in skill to these current champions. In his prime he would be harder for Dennis to beat. Buddy had so much knowledge of the game. He still knows shots that they haven't learned yet. Buddy would have no problem burying his opponent if that looked like the better option than the run out. His safeties were of the 'lock 'em up' variety, with little or no escape. He did beat Efren in his prime at Houston.

And one more thing Chris. Buddy could grind like you, maybe even better. How would you like to play a guy who never misses a ball for hours on end? No one else liked it either :eek:! Buddy knew how to wear his man down, and he usually did whether it took hours or days.
 
Last edited:
LeBron James would score 100 points EVERY night if he played in the 50's and 60's. Period end of story. I am not knocking the great players of that era. I think any team would love to have Bill Russell. He was a winner, but he would be lucky to be a reserve center in todays game.


What a not well thought out statement.

You know I would have won the battle of thermopylae all by myself if I had a time machine and a mini gun w/ a few million rounds.

And if you think Russell would be on reserve you need your head checked. Remember they USED to play basketball. They actually PLAYED basketball, you know ran plays and that kind of Sh*t. Not the AND1 BS you see in the NBA today where they travel on every play.

you need your head checked,
Grey GHost
 
Thats b/c there wasn't the MASS of interest that there is now. ALl the doctors, sports science etc. They are still trying to break mosconi's record. They are still trying to break Ruths/Marris's single season HR record without steroids. They are still trying to break Bob Beamons 30' long jump record. It took almost 40yrs for someone to break Jim Ryuns HS mile record....they still havent had a 17yr old run under 4min...oh wait he also set the 3:55 running against high schoolers and not pros (thats another record, no professional rabbit)

So guys are bigger now....bet money they aren't as mentally tough. How you think the young guys of today would like to play old rules in football against the likes of the 70's steelers with Bradshaw QB'n. As for basketball, well to put it this way they didn't WALK everytime they had the ball in the 50's either. Can't compare two completely diff games.

Same goes for pool, how many of the players today would like playing old school push out 9 ball w the likes of lassiter, Johnny Irish, Taylor etc....Don't even make me pull Harold Worst out the bag....Worst against anyone in any era is a gaff bet.

The NFL teams of today, even the worst ones, would absolutely crush the 70's Steelers. NBA basketball sucks today. They have no fundamentals and most of theem cant shoot. However, they are a thousand times more athletic and would beat the old teams in the 40's 50's and 60's by any score that they wanted.
 
And BTW Taylor was born in 1918, so he would have been 45 when he won the Johnston City one-pocket in 1963. Maybe Jay saw him play many times, but whose to say how good he was in his twenties and thirties?
 
Last edited:
What a not well thought out statement.

You know I would have won the battle of thermopylae all by myself if I had a time machine and a mini gun w/ a few million rounds.

And if you think Russell would be on reserve you need your head checked. Remember they USED to play basketball. They actually PLAYED basketball, you know ran plays and that kind of Sh*t. Not the AND1 BS you see in the NBA today where they travel on every play.

you need your head checked,
Grey GHost

Maybe so. Go back yourself and check out the size and speed of players in years past. Then try and use some common sense and not be delusional about previous eras and maybe a light will come on. Probably not, but its worth a try.
 
LeBron James would score 100 points EVERY night if he played in the 50's and 60's. Period end of story. I am not knocking the great players of that era. I think any team would love to have Bill Russell. He was a winner, but he would be lucky to be a reserve center in todays game.

He wouldn't score 100 every night, just once in a while. :wink:
But I agree, he would average 50 a game like Wilt did. I agree that players in the physical sports like basketball, baseball and football are bigger and stronger today. But it is the exception that proves the rule. Wilt could play today and compete against any other center. I'm not as sure about Jim Brown though, great as he was. He might have some problems with these giants today.
 
And BTW Taylor was born in 1918, so he would have been 44 when he won the Johnston City one-pocket in 1963. Maybe Jay saw him play many times, but whose to say how good he was in his twenties and thirties?

I think he was still at the top of his game in the 60's. The other players seemed to think so too.
 
Maybe so. Go back yourself and check out the size and speed of players in years past. Then try and use some common sense and not be delusional about previous eras and maybe a light will come on. Probably not, but its worth a try.

Well you keep bringing up the supreme athleticism of todays players that are bred and raised to play basketball or football....its a stupid point to make. I'm not delusional about the past. The sports were much newer then. Just like today there are 20times the top players in pool than there were 60yrs ago. Your argueing an obvious fact...is that not obvious?

Get all puffed up over lebron with his slew of doctors, been dribbling since he was 2...best coaching, best training. WTF, duh he's supposed to be better. What I'm trying to say is what the hell kind of point are you making? A mute one is about it.

Why do you think i made the comment about the battle of thermopylae?

Some things don't change that much, but in total people usually get better as time progresses in any subject.

Hey I bet most people are smarter now than they were in 1500.
Thats the kind of retarted point your making.

Grey Ghost
 
I didnt say if Jim Brown was born today. I said athletes of the 1940's and 50's (this means they were born in the 1930's) absolutely could not compete in professional sports today. Lineman were 6' 190 lbs and ran 5.3 40 yard dashes. What position would they play in the NFL? The answer is none. Do you thin the 6'3" white centers in the 50's who couldnt dunk would fair well guarding LeBron James?

Everybody already knows that athletes today are bigger, stronger, faster, etc. Obviously no one is arguing that Jesse Owens' time in the 1936 Olympics is faster than today's times. If that's your argument then you're arguing against a straw man, because no one is debating those facts.

The interesting question, and the one up for debate, is the one I asked.
 
I never met Eddie Taylor. The closest I came was around 1990 when me and Joe Macnamara went to Shreveport. I dropped Joe off at the pool hall and I went to Louisiana Downs. Later Joe told me, "You just missed Eddie Taylor". I asked him for details and he said Eddie only hit a few balls, but was still banking 'em in at 100 mph. I enjoyed reading about Eddie on onepocket.org, where Steve Booth has many interviews with past champions.

I like this little bit from Eddie Taylor (links follow): (on bank pool)


The last time I played him (Charlie Jones) he came in to the Phoenix Hotel and said, 'Come on, I'll play you for fifty a game', and I was flat broke from the racetrack. I said, 'Charlie, there's nobody here to put up the money, they're all at the track.' Only Don Decoy was there, and Joe Cremins from Cincinnati and the guy on the cashier's desk. Don Decoy probably had seven or eight hundred dollars in his pocket, but he wouldn't even stake himself if it was over twenty dollars a game -- he'd get staked and then never miss a ball. I knew there was no need of asking him. So Don Decoy comes over to me and says 'I'll let you play him a hundred dollars worth at twenty-five a game.' I liked to have fainted and so did Joe! So I told Charlie, 'I've got a hundred dollars, Charlie, if you want to play some for twenty-five a game.' And he says, 'Okay, come on Eddie.' I told him that as soon as the guys come in from the track we can play for whatever.



Anyhow, I won the first game and he said 'Bet you fifty.' Of course everybody put up back then, so I said, 'Get it up.' Don Decoy didn't even fall off his chair; it's a miracle that he didn't. We went on and played thirteen games and I won twelve of them, and Charlie banked eight and out the game he won.



When we got up to the room, I had won $525, and I said to Don, 'Joe's broke, lets give him this twenty-five.' He didn't really want to but I gave it to him anyhow. Then Joe says to me, 'You know Eddie, in those thirteen games you missed one ball that you shot at in thirteen games.' I said, 'Oh, man, come on, I was in a trance.' And Don Decoy spoke up and said, 'That's right Eddie, you missed one ball in thirteen games - that you shot at.' That was in the Phoenix Hotel in Lexington, Kentucky and that had to be about 1947.

http://www.onepocket.org/EddieTaylorInterview.htm

http://www.onepocket.org/EddieTaylorPart2.htm
 
Last edited:
I think most people are looking at this in the wrong direction. Obviously if you bought the great athletes of today back in time in the same condition they are in now they would dominate. Why because everything to do with training and conditioning is so much greater and advanced today. But is that a fair comparison to the older athletes. I think the more realistic way to look at this is like this.. If the top athletes of the 30' 40' 50's etc. were to come forward to play in this generation to be fair to the top ones of yesteryear you have to make them bigger and stronger just like they would be if they were born in this time frame. For instance a man like Jesse Owens if he were born in this generation he wouldnt be running the same times he ran in the 1936 olypmpics he would be much much faster. because his conditioning and training would have been the same as todays athletes. Joe Weider runs the Mr. Olympia. The top bodybuilding tournament every year. From 1965 to the present he has seen every top bodybuilder every year. Arnold Schwartzenegger won the Mr. Olympia a then record 7 times 1970-1975 and again in 1980. Lee Haney came along and won it a record 8 times from 1984-1991. They asked Joe Weider the same question we are all basically talking about. Who would win if Arnold would have competed against Lee Haney. Weider Said that the sport had changed a little since Arnold had competed and that Thighs today are more important then in Arnolds era. In the early 1970's the emphasis was more on upper body. He said using todays judging standards Lee Haney would win BUT if you were to bring Arnold forward and let him train at the same time as Haney and let Arnold know what the judges are looking for Arnold would have done whatever he had to do to his body and Arnold would find a way to WIN. Because his heart and determination and dedication was 2nd to know one. My point to this is the only fair way to compare how good athletes were is by how much they dominated their era. Babe Ruth hit more home runs one year that any other TEAM did. Thats domination. Now obviously if you put Albert Pulos of now back in the 1920"s he would probably hit 80 home runs a year. But if Albert was born in the 1910's he wouldnt be in the same shape he is now and may only of matched Ruths accomplishments or not even. If you bring Ruth forward you have to put him in alot better shape to be fair to him. Which he would be because the emphasis on it. How much better would Jack Nicklaus would have played with this modern technology in clubs. The point being the top top champions in every sport would be great in any era if you are fair enough to give them the same conditions to train in.
 
They are still trying to break mosconi's record.

One of my responses copied and pasted from another thread on the same subject.... Keep in mind that, IIRC, the 9' Diamond pros at the DCC have 4-1/2" pockets and Willies 8' 526 table had 5-1/2" pockets. How many balls is that extra 1" worth?

"I know this whole Mosconi 526 subject has been beat to death but here are the facts: they did use old "clay" type balls, nap cloth, and it was on an 8' Brunswick Sports King with 5-1/2" pockets. Snipped from the Wikipedia page for Willie Mosconi-->>> "The record was set on a 4 foot x 8 foot Brunswick pool table with 5 1/2 inch pockets at the East High Billiard Club in Springfield, Ohio." Some may argue that the pockets were really 5-1/2" but a local player from here in Central Ohio played a very long ring game session on the 526 table the day after Willies run. Johnny said it was the biggest bucket table he had ever played on.... So there is no doubt in my mind that the 5-1/2" pockets are a fact! With all of the resources that members here have, why doesn't someone here make this happen at the DCC this year?-->>> Set up an 8' Brunswick Sports King w/ 5-1/2" pockets, slow cloth, and "old" balls for the straight pool challenge table..... I know someone here can make that happen! Why not give John, Danny, and all of the other current top SP players a shot at glory under the same conditions Willie had???????"

IMO, on a table like that John Schmidt would torture that record.... PLUS, how much media coverage could pool get if John did???
 
One of my responses copied and pasted from another thread on the same subject.... Keep in mind that, IIRC, the 9' Diamond pros at the DCC have 4-1/2" pockets and Willies 8' 526 table had 5-1/2" pockets. How many balls is that extra 1" worth?

"I know this whole Mosconi 526 subject has been beat to death but here are the facts: they did use old "clay" type balls, nap cloth, and it was on an 8' Brunswick Sports King with 5-1/2" pockets. Snipped from the Wikipedia page for Willie Mosconi-->>> "The record was set on a 4 foot x 8 foot Brunswick pool table with 5 1/2 inch pockets at the East High Billiard Club in Springfield, Ohio." Some may argue that the pockets were really 5-1/2" but a local player from here in Central Ohio played a very long ring game session on the 526 table the day after Willies run. Johnny said it was the biggest bucket table he had ever played on.... So there is no doubt in my mind that the 5-1/2" pockets are a fact! With all of the resources that members here have, why doesn't someone here make this happen at the DCC this year?-->>> Set up an 8' Brunswick Sports King w/ 5-1/2" pockets, slow cloth, and "old" balls for the straight pool challenge table..... I know someone here can make that happen! Why not give John, Danny, and all of the other current top SP players a shot at glory under the same conditions Willie had???????"

IMO, on a table like that John Schmidt would torture that record.... PLUS, how much media coverage could pool get if John did???

i wont lie i did not read all this stuff.
the record is safe cause noone plays 14.1 how about that.
 
One of my responses copied and pasted from another thread on the same subject.... Keep in mind that, IIRC, the 9' Diamond pros at the DCC have 4-1/2" pockets and Willies 8' 526 table had 5-1/2" pockets. How many balls is that extra 1" worth?

"I know this whole Mosconi 526 subject has been beat to death but here are the facts: they did use old "clay" type balls, nap cloth, and it was on an 8' Brunswick Sports King with 5-1/2" pockets. Snipped from the Wikipedia page for Willie Mosconi-->>> "The record was set on a 4 foot x 8 foot Brunswick pool table with 5 1/2 inch pockets at the East High Billiard Club in Springfield, Ohio." Some may argue that the pockets were really 5-1/2" but a local player from here in Central Ohio played a very long ring game session on the 526 table the day after Willies run. Johnny said it was the biggest bucket table he had ever played on.... So there is no doubt in my mind that the 5-1/2" pockets are a fact! With all of the resources that members here have, why doesn't someone here make this happen at the DCC this year?-->>> Set up an 8' Brunswick Sports King w/ 5-1/2" pockets, slow cloth, and "old" balls for the straight pool challenge table..... I know someone here can make that happen! Why not give John, Danny, and all of the other current top SP players a shot at glory under the same conditions Willie had???????"

IMO, on a table like that John Schmidt would torture that record.... PLUS, how much media coverage could pool get if John did???

The table that Mosconi ran the 526 on had 4 3/4" pockets. Mosconi also had a few runs over 300 on a 5 x 10 table, now I don't know what kind of pockets were on those tables but even if they were buckets it's super impressive. The point is the guy could really play.
I would be more impressed if Schmidt or Hohmann ran 300+ on a 5 x10 table than if they ran 526 on a smaller table.
 
Back
Top