will there ever be a dominant player on the men's circuit again?

[Jimmy M.]

Right on, Jimmy, and the version of nine ball you've referred to is called "Shootout", and there were more push-outs permitted in that format of play. It's arguable, but some contend that those rules gave a greater advantage to the great shotmakers than Texas Express, as great shotmakers could push-out into super-tough shots. You're right about the strategy, too. It was very different and very intreresting. Still, the defense and kicking games were less interesting and less important in that version of nine ball, and it's in the areas of defense and kicking that I find Texas Express to be truly fascinating. "Shootout" did take out some of the luck factor, but at the expense of slowing the game down a little. I grew up playing "Shootout," but have come to prefer Texas Express.

Oh, I wasn't referring to the shootout rules. I was talking about post-shootout, pre-Texas Express rules.

 

[sjm]

Oh, I wasn't referring to the shootout rules. I was talking about post-shootout, pre-Texas Express rules.

My mistake, Jimmy. Sorry.

 

[JustPlay]

In a match between Sigel and Varner in 1990 US Open, spotting balls and shooting from behind the line was the rules. Commentating on this accu-stats match was Buddy Hall and Grady Mathews and Mathews was commentating on how pro 9-ball should change to texas express rules so the incomming player wouldn't be penalized for the breakers scratch.

Today in 2005, it seems that everyone is still trying to figure out new rules for 9-ball because as a player or players think it is too easy to win with the current rules. BUT, it makes for great tv. yet tv is really a joke when compared to where pool has been and is currently sitting with the public.

As a player, I prefer a pushout after every shot and if the pushing player misses the shot, then the incomming player has ball in hand. The bigger question is: Will professional pool ever evolve or ever grow? Should the games be changed?


Getting back to the original thread, Not having highlights on espn sports news of who won the US Open or a World Title is not helping the game of reconition with the public. So the general public will never know who the dominating pool players are. We all will, but it is a small market. If pool had LIVE events televised it would help. Having taped matches played months after they are played are a waste of time. Like some stated earlier in this thread or in another thread, when a pool player is part of a commercial, they should have a speaking part in the production. There are some color characters in pool and people need to have some attachment to them, like some of the players in football, baseball, tennis or golf.

There are dominant players in pool. Just no single one or select few. This commentary may be alittle off course from the original thread, but, if there were a dominant player(s), they should be reconized.

I think bar box 8 ball should be televised, who doesn't know how to play 8-ball!

 

[Jimmy M.]

In a match between Sigel and Varner in 1990 US Open, spotting balls and shooting from behind the line was the rules. Commentating on this accu-stats match was Buddy Hall and Grady Mathews and Mathews was commentating on how pro 9-ball should change to texas express rules so the incomming player wouldn't be penalized for the breakers scratch.

I wonder if Grady Mathews still feels that way about it. In hindsight, I think the best way to fix that problem would be to give the incoming player the option to pass the shot back to the breaker.

 

[LastTwo]

In a match between Sigel and Varner in 1990 US Open,

Is that the match where it was hill-hill and Nick Varner had an easy 9 in the side pocket, which he missed, and the cueball and 9-ball ended up frozen to each other with no shot for Mike? Mike hit the ball 100 miles per hour jumping the cueball off the table, and then conceded the match to Nick. That was pretty shocking to me.

 

[jimmyp]

I agree

There are more players that shoot great pool and they've uped their caliber of play. 9 ball isn't going to prove anything other than who's breaking great that week and on a little hot streak with a few good rolls. The game has to be changed to determine it or a greater variety of games for an all-around best player. 14.1 would do it or possibly even rotation with a different way of scoring than is standard. BTW, Mike Sigel was certainly a dominant player until he just decided to pack it in for making cues or retirement, or whatever he's doing. He was winning EVERYTHING at one point and there were certainly a lot of great players around at the time, many of which are still here.

Maybe someone needs to invent an entirely new game using all the balls, all of the pockets and every facet of shooting, kicking, banking, breaking, and safeties to bring out the best in each player every rack.

I agree with you regarding Mike Sigel. He was absolutely the last dominant player. Why he quit is a good question. I watched him "blow away" many, many great players tournament after tournament. What a show he put on.

 

[JustPlay]

Is that the match where it was hill-hill and Nick Varner had an easy 9 in the side pocket, which he missed, and the cueball and 9-ball ended up frozen to each other with no shot for Mike? Mike hit the ball 100 miles per hour jumping the cueball off the table, and then conceded the match to Nick. That was pretty shocking to me.

Yes, that is the match.