Women vs. Men

  • Thread starter Thread starter CvilleBilliards
  • Start date Start date
C

CvilleBilliards

Guest
Okay I think the game knows no gender!!!!!!!!!

But some of my friends & a couple of older Male Pros that I have asked "Women vs Men who will win?"....Have said MEN!!! 5 to 1......THAT IS CRAZY!!!! :rolleyes:

I would love to see a Tournament with Men & Women....and the LADIES kick their A$$!!!! lol

How do you feel Sarah about Men vs. Women?

:D

Thanks,
Fan OF The Game
 
Well, it is true, pool should know no gender. There is no reason that women and men cannot play exactly the same. There are many theories on why. I have mine and others have theirs.

There is some division in the games of men and women. The men are way ahead of the women. I think the women are progressing and shrinking the gap between the two. In the future we will all play the same. How far in the future? Who knows.

I am not saying that one of the top women cannot beat the top men. In a tournament situation it has happened multiple times. That is one or two sets though, not a long session. I think if one of the top women plays one of the top men races to 7 or 9 the would win 1-3 out of 10 sets.

I think the women are well on their way to catching up. Karen Corr has won Joss events beating hall of famers. Allison I believe has won a Viking tournament. Ga Young Kim is as aggressive as any man alive. Jeanette has proven that she can keep up in every game. Maybe even me playing in the men's tournaments.

This is just my opinion. I apologize if anyone is offended.
Sarah
 
sarahrousey said:
Well, it is true, pool should know no gender. There is no reason that women and men cannot play exactly the same. There are many theories on why. I have mine and others have theirs.

There is some division in the games of men and women. The men are way ahead of the women. I think the women are progressing and shrinking the gap between the two. In the future we will all play the same. How far in the future? Who knows.

I am not saying that one of the top women cannot beat the top men. In a tournament situation it has happened multiple times. That is one or two sets though, not a long session. I think if one of the top women plays one of the top men races to 7 or 9 the would win 1-3 out of 10 sets.

I think the women are well on their way to catching up. Karen Corr has won Joss events beating hall of famers. Allison I believe has won a Viking tournament. Ga Young Kim is as aggressive as any man alive. Jeanette has proven that she can keep up in every game. Maybe even me playing in the men's tournaments.

This is just my opinion. I apologize if anyone is offended.
Sarah
Click to expand...

Let me ask you this Sarah; What kind of spot would
you honestly feel you would need in a race to 11
against say Johnny Archer or Fransisco Bustamante?
I don't mean this question to in any way reflect
badly on your game by implyng that you would need a
spot, as I'm very impressed with your game. I was
just curious as to how that match would play out.


Regards, Bobby
 
Bobby, to be honest, I am not even sure what I would need. It is alot I am sure. I know of some of the top women playing some of the not so top player men getting the 6,7 and losing. I wish I could say I would only need the 8 but we all know that is not true :) I would imagine playing a top male player, the woman player would have to have a strong break and get a spot to take away the break from the male player. It always helps when the other person, male or female, doesn't have the chance to run racks on you. If I had to guess maybe the 5, 7 and the breaks? I played Ronnie Alcano with the 6,8 and the breaks and broke even. He can keep up with the best but I would say just the seasoning and whatnot that Archer and Bustamante have would give them more of an edge.

I hate having to say that since I am supposed to be progressing womens pool. I have to be honest though. Hopefully, I myself and others in the future will work towards giving the men a spot!

Sarah
 
sarahrousey said:
Bobby, to be honest, I am not even sure what I would need. It is alot I am sure. I know of some of the top women playing some of the not so top player men getting the 6,7 and losing. I wish I could say I would only need the 8 but we all know that is not true :) I would imagine playing a top male player, the woman player would have to have a strong break and get a spot to take away the break from the male player. It always helps when the other person, male or female, doesn't have the chance to run racks on you. If I had to guess maybe the 5, 7 and the breaks? I played Ronnie Alcano with the 6,8 and the breaks and broke even. He can keep up with the best but I would say just the seasoning and whatnot that Archer and Bustamante have would give them more of an edge.

I hate having to say that since I am supposed to be progressing womens pool. I have to be honest though. Hopefully, I myself and others in the future will work towards giving the men a spot!

Sarah
Click to expand...

Thanks for your candid reply. Actually, breaking even
with Alcano getting te 6, 8 and the breaks is not bad
at all. I know some very good players that probably
would not take that spot (they would want more).
I once took a similiar spot from Ginky and thought
it would be a fair game. He drilled me! I never really
got to the table with a chance! So, the spot sounds
like more than it is.

Regards, Bobby
 
I think the main difference between the men and women is that there are so many more men playing pool than women. Therefore the competition is greater among men and that makes them play better to get to the top.

You can name thousands of great male players while you may have trouble naming 50 great women players.

Of course if you only look at the top half dozen or so women playing now they might do well against the men. But I sure wouldn't bet on it.

But that might make for an interesting match-up. Like the Mosconi Cup. Six top women playing six top men in a race to 11.

I watched Jeannie Seaver play Archer in Orlando. Jeannie broke and ran the first three racks. Then Archer came to the table and ran the next four racks. And ended up winning the match 7-4. While that may be common in matches among men I doubt that it happens in matches among women.

In fact in the same tournament Mika ran 9 or 10 straight racks, 4 of them in the second match against Scotty Townsend. Then Scotty came to the table and ran 3 of his own. But couldn't beat Mika.

Jake
 
Bobby, you are right, the spots sound so big but reality sets in sometimes and you find out it really means nothing. Plus, those good players are used to giving up big spots in order to get any action.

Jake, I agree with your theory that more men are playing so competition is greater. I also think it has to do with the fact that it has always been a "mens" game. Women have gotten a late start compared to the men.

I think you have some truth to the rack running theory as well. The women in pro tournaments cannot run racks, it is alternate breaks. Does that take away from showing true potential? Yes. I was told that in a pro tournament Allison ran the first 8 racks and then broke and didn't get a shot. So yes, women can run racks. I do believe that the men are more consistant with running racks. It is common to see the men running 2 or 3 each match while the women might do that too but not every match.

The thing that really bothers me is the "rivalry" that is started with the men and women. When I play pool I want to be looked at as a pool player, not a woman. Men are supposed to and most of the time do take offense to losing to a woman and women are supposed to expect to lose. Men also play different against women. Some of them want to win so bad so they don't get embarrassed that they play horrible. Others for the same reason do not miss a ball. I think all players, regardless of sex, race, creed, color, anything, should be treated with the same respect.

Sarah
 
Hi,
Just wanted to weigh in on the discussion for what it is worth. The above discussion assumes that 9-ball (including the short races in tournaments) is a fair test of skill. I totally disagree (though often the best player wins). How often do we see someone break and have an easy combo or out, the next player has a hideously difficult layout. Is the lucky player the best player?? Willie Mosconi said it best, if you want to find out who the best player is, then play multiple sets of straight pool up to a final of 2000 or 2500. I would love to see the women compete with the men at this game - MUCH LESS LUCK, no rewarding lucky slop shots and misses, no "sledgehammer breaks (who really enjoys this)".

At the DCC we did an unofficial test of 80 games (9 ball) where we tried to predict the winner of the game from the lay of the balls after the break (with no regard for the talent of the players - they were all great). We were correct 92% of the time (why even watch the rest of the game??). About half way through it became obvious that we were just watching an exhibition of skills, the games all seemed decided by the break. No wonder the ball racking takes longer than the game. The true competition was the Pagulayan/Schmidt straight pool matchup, that was epic (don't get me started again or they will kick me off the forum).
 
Last edited:
Very good point Willie. I agree that short races can be won by anyone. Luck is a huge factor. Television has changed the way pool is played. That has been argued and proven. Straight pool is a great game that has pretty much become obsolete. It is truly a test of skill. It is comparable to snooker. The game has some luck but no one will win a game based on luck in my opinion. Perhaps that is why the snooker players play so deliberate and so well. Maybe there will be a straight pool tournament sometime in the future.

Sarah
 
Sarah,
You might better say "American television" has changed the game. In Britain, they still televise long snooker matches and tournaments (and at one time had a 24 hour a day snooker channel). American television (read ESPN) has a warped view of the attention span of the viewing audience. The pool fans would watch any kind of pool, for any length of time. ESPN seems to be trying to attract a different demographic (??pool non-junkies??). Having said that, 9 ball sure does give us some spectacular shots and position plays (if you edit out the interminable racking of the balls). I find that the tedious safety/kicking battles are much worse in 9-ball than in straight pool (though the intentional scratches are not highly entertaining - don't tell anyone I said that or I will be expelled from the S.P.S.S. - Straight Pool Snobs Society).
 
Luck plays a part in every game so players have to learn how to deal with it.

The better player will almost always want a long race - 11 or 13 - believing that it removes the luck factor and brings the cream to the top so to speak, and skill will win out.

Alternate breaks are there to hinder the player who has a good break, normally the better player. To prevent them from stringing racks and putting the match out of reach.

Rather than alternate breaks I think that using the bowling format where after the first break each player would get two breaks might be interesting.

I believe Pat Fleming did a little study of breaks vs wins and found that the breaker wins about 51% of the time. Not as great an advantage as one would believe.

Sarah, what is your long run in straight pool?

Jake
 
A few years ago I attended the US 14.1 Invitational. Women played along side men. If you are a straight pool advocate like me you would have enjoyed it. You would see clearly that the women are just not ready to play with the men. The high run was by Alison in the 50's. Besides Loree Jon Jones she was the only one who showed any idea of understanding the game. Men were dropping hundred ball runs like rain. I think Jeannette Lee's approach to trying to master all elements of the game will greatly improve the women's game. Until then they are really not a factor in competing with the men. Willie you aint getting kicked off the forum we need straight pool people like you.

Williebetmore said:
Hi,
Just wanted to weigh in on the discussion for what it is worth. The above discussion assumes that 9-ball (including the short races in tournaments) is a fair test of skill. I totally disagree (though often the best player wins). How often do we see someone break and have an easy combo or out, the next player has a hideously difficult layout. Is the lucky player the best player?? Willie Mosconi said it best, if you want to find out who the best player is, then play multiple sets of straight pool up to a final of 2000 or 2500. I would love to see the women compete with the men at this game - MUCH LESS LUCK, no rewarding lucky slop shots and misses, no "sledgehammer breaks (who really enjoys this)".

At the DCC we did an unofficial test of 80 games (9 ball) where we tried to predict the winner of the game from the lay of the balls after the break (with no regard for the talent of the players - they were all great). We were correct 92% of the time (why even watch the rest of the game??). About half way through it became obvious that we were just watching an exhibition of skills, the games all seemed decided by the break. No wonder the ball racking takes longer than the game. The true competition was the Pagulayan/Schmidt straight pool matchup, that was epic (don't get me started again or they will kick me off the forum).
Click to expand...
 
I've been reading these stories about men vs women, not just in pool , but in golf and tennis as well. In my opinion women can play in any tournament they want, play any gender, but we should still need to have a men's and a women's tour separate. Like any other sports league, unless pool is not considered a sport but gambling, then cross playing is no problem. Maybe have an open tour once a year where women and men can play against one another, sanctioned by WPBA and BCA.
 
Everyone has very good points here. I think it will be an argument that can go on forever and ever.

Willie, you are right, American television has changed pool. Americans in general are impatient people so of course no one wants to watch a long, drawn out match. 9ball is very exciting that is why it is shown on TV. You are right, the kicking and safety play is very interesting along with the amazing shot-making.

Jake, I wish the luck wasn't a part of the game but it is. We all get our fair share of good and bad luck (even though the bad appears to show up more) I'm not sure about the precentages of winning when breaking. I haven't really paid much attention. You have to figure though if a good player is breaking well they have the capability to break and run out every time at the table. I personally like the winner break format, but as long as I am getting the opportunity to play I will not complain about the alternate break format. I don't play as much straight pool as I would like to. My high run is 55. I think it could be higher if I got a chance to play more.

Yobagua, you too are right. The men run hundreds with ease while the women struggle. Jeanette has run hundreds before. Line Kjorsvik has run hundreds before. I think the women are capable of doing it. Maybe it is because there haven't been many straight pool tournaments in the US? I know women in Europe have straight pool championships to play in a couple times a year. Maybe the women there can run hundreds consistantly? I agree about Jeanette as well. She has started to learn every game. She is very knowledgable because of that.

Parvus, I agree with you as well. The tours should be seperated when it comes to organized events. Smaller tours and large tournaments like DCC are okay to mix together. They are Open events. Maybe in the future there will be no need to seperate the tours. There are many things that need to happen in the pool community and society in general first.

Just my opinion here. Sorry it took a little while to respond. I was having trouble getting to the site.

Sarah
 
Let me ask your opinion Sarah. Ive noticed that with the women they are very much supportive of one another and try to be nurturing. Winners are always trying to comfort losers and weaker players always accede to stronger players. While the men are so aggressive and are in the attack mode all the time. This maybe has to do with thousands of years with cultural/social mores.
Do you think that the women are to easy on each other and accept players with lesser ability to try and have some kind of communal growth and men are just king of the hill dog eat dog frame of mind and thats what makes them excel.
I came up from the apprenticeship program in Asia and there they dont let you walk before you can crawl. And they will make you crawl. You might spend a year just doing errands for your superiors and cleaning up after them and then just watching them. I know this is extreme but I can remember the time when guys used to fight over carrying cue cases for top players just to be around them and watch them play so they could learn.
 
yobagua, you have another good point. Yes, the women are more friendly than aggressive. Some of the women use the tournaments as a social gathering. Others are friendly with only certain people. I myself am friendly with just about everyone. I have my certain friends that I am closer to than others. I do want to see new people succeed and I will try to help them with their confidence. Many new players are so intimidated by the top players they turn into an emotional/mental wreck. Good for the top players. I think it is also good to try and get the confindence of these players up so they show their full potential.

On the other hand I want to win. I have my friends but when we play each other I remember why I am there. I am there to win. I spent alot of time, money, and hard work to get there. Therefore, we are not friends during that match. Maybe some of the women get that confused. I think the men have some of that going on as well. They are friendly with each other but definitely have the killer instinct.

I think the being friends part of the game should be there. After all, you should be able to have a little fun, but you also have to be able to tell when you should be having fun with friends and when you should be serious.

Sarah
 
Yobagua,

40, 50 years ago, maybe more, it was like that here in America. there was a learning process, an apprenticeship program, and we had genuine craftsmen. And the new people learned by being apprentices to the masters. But those days are gone thanks to modernization, new inventions, and unions. We are on the fast track and everyone wants instant gratification.

And it might not be a bad thing. Although the "good old days" might be nice to think about, I sure would not want to give up all the modern conveniences and go back to the so called good old days, because they really were not all that good compared to now.

Jake
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top