jtompilot
Verified Member
2 minutes, that’s real fast for Dennis. Seems more like 5 minutes when I’m watching him.
Filler/ Chohan May 12-13th
- Thread starter crabbcatjohn
- Start date
2 minutes, that’s real fast for Dennis. Seems more like 5 minutes when I’m watching him.
believe Filler is more playful
likes to explore, loves playing crazy shots. Orcollo way more clinical.
he is back, residing in Aken, Germany. That's a 2-hour drive. I am allowed to cross the border and will do so.
he will be jet-lagged still so we will start in the morning and i will low-roll him....can't lose...o yeah and play 2-and-stop
likes to explore, loves playing crazy shots. Orcollo way more clinical.
he is back, residing in Aken, Germany. That's a 2-hour drive. I am allowed to cross the border and will do so.
he will be jet-lagged still so we will start in the morning and i will low-roll him....can't lose...o yeah and play 2-and-stop
gulfportdoc
Verified Member
Good points, Bill. Another attribute, which RA had, is an innate spatial feel for the entire table-- an almost geometric understanding of where the balls lay and how they might be re-arranged. RA had the uncanny ability to move groups of balls from his opponent's pocket over toward his. T-Rex has quite a bit of this natural ability. The other attribute that's absolutely necessary is confidence. One has to honestly believe that he is doing the right thing, and that it will be successful. OTOH, doubt compels mistakes and losses.
Intelligence can be an asset, it can also be a hindrance. 1P is not chess, nor is it particle physics. Intelligence might help a guy as much off the table as on. I've known plenty of people who were not highly intelligent, but were very cunning. Cunning will usually prevail over intelligence.
ill take intelligence for the figuring things out part every time. cunning for other abilities making for a win. you need both to be top notch.
visual spacial ability for complex decisions with multiple balls in one pocket play a big part. yea tony and r.a. seemed to have it. without that you are severly handicapped at higher levels of the game. it is an innate skill so hard to improve upon.
visual spacial ability for complex decisions with multiple balls in one pocket play a big part. yea tony and r.a. seemed to have it. without that you are severly handicapped at higher levels of the game. it is an innate skill so hard to improve upon.
as far as dennis i dont know why anyone would ever play him. for money or pay to watch him on tv. much too slow.
if more people responded as such he would be forced quickly to play at the proper tempo. no need for a clock on him just quit him and he will change.
stop inviting him to tournaments as an example and they will all speed up and make watching more enjoyable.
if more people responded as such he would be forced quickly to play at the proper tempo. no need for a clock on him just quit him and he will change.
stop inviting him to tournaments as an example and they will all speed up and make watching more enjoyable.
I think there are very quantitative reasons that does not work though. Moving I mean.
First, I hope nobody think I am saying moving is unimportant. More what I am saying is a guy has two years of one hole knowledge (under high pressure) he will be fine up against a guy with 20 years, as long as he has the edge in shooting.
Back to the point though... bear with me please... there was an Indian artifact burial site by my house where I grew up. They wanted to put apartments on top of the site, but the lawyers who fought against it won many victories in a row and the apartments were not able to go up.
Yet the next court battle the builders won. Guess what, that's all it took. Half a dozen court cases, the developers won a single case and now they are the winners forever.
Same principle applies in one pocket. The math just is not there. If you move move move, and that is your game, you miss your spot by an inch one time, or a ball leaks out unexpectedly when you go into the stack, and it is over.... forever like the apartments. It is highly favorable to be those apartment developers or the shooter in other words, because you only have to win once, whereas the other guy has to constantly perform and execute, constantly be perfect.
I really feel it should not even be a discussion to be honest, look at who wins one pocket tournaments. I think if moving was anywhere near as important as we think it is, great movers who are a cut or two below the shooters on offense would win often.
Dennis "Whitey" Young
Verified Member
El Chapo, I think it is all relative to each individual match up. We can all agree that every decent pro has fire power, meaning they can pocket balls if that is what fire power means. There are some pros that pocket balls better than others, and we know who they are, the ones that win tournaments or place well.
An example of what you are trying to express, for me is Frost vs. Orcollo when they first played a challenge match. Frost is considered a shade less of a pocketer than Orcollo and at that time Orcollo was not the OP player that Frost is. Day 1. Frost let the game be played on Orcollo terms, and uptable game, and thus Frost dug himself a hole. Day 2. Frost does not allow the up table game and Orcollo could not hang (move) with him. Frost gain back much off the lead, but when getting close to the finish line then the one behind by a fair margin has to have everything go right, otherwise you lose. We seen this happen with Chochan vs. Filler.
My take, Frost should of won that challenge match hands down for he could at that time out maneuver Orcollo no doubt, but it took Frost to long to realize he had to play in the trenches stack play and not allow the up table game. Frost just beat Filler in their DCC match. Frost was down but then he bared down and got back even, he put Filler froze to foot rail and Filler sold out and Frost won. It was a great 3 out of 5 and Filler went toe to toe, not an easy task when Frost is on. Whitey
lll
Verified Member
chappo
again i think you have to weigh the amount better in shooting to the amount better moving
if the shooting is close but the moving far favors the other player
you think the shooter will still win
i dont
because the better mover is probably more cautious
most games in most sports are won from who made the fewer unforced errors
jmho
icbw
again i think you have to weigh the amount better in shooting to the amount better moving
if the shooting is close but the moving far favors the other player
you think the shooter will still win
i dont
because the better mover is probably more cautious
most games in most sports are won from who made the fewer unforced errors
jmho
icbw
But there are reasons hardcore movers do not win tournaments guys!
The thing that honestly really suprises me, is people who adore one pocet don't seem to ask themselves why that is.
The reason is, Artie is a great example, you have to move SO PRECISELY to keep world class players off the shots and off of good moving opportunities.
Guess what, Artie had the ability to do that, but ONLY because he played on a table or two at Besinger's and could in fact have that accuracy. That does not work when you are at dcc going from table 12 to table 7 and the rails are 10% shorter and 5% faster on table 7.
THAT is why shooting is so favored. Moving for wins, at least the way I am talking about where a guy like Artie just completely suffocates his opponents with cb precision, simply is not attainable.
Mcready used to say "you can't sling a table over your shoulder and go play around the country". But that is in fact what you would need to do to make the style of play Artie exhibited to win modern day tournaments.
The legends 1991 tournament i believe it was where shannon won could not prove these points any more clearly. You had the best movers in the world and shannon was getting up there firing and in some cases he scratched into pockets i swear about 5 times in one game, against bugs. But he won the tournament. It is also interesting to note during that time frame steve mizerak, more of a shooter, ended up making it to the finals of that tournament more often than he should have.
Last edited:
Frost has a pretty erratic game, but I think my point applies perfectly to him. Sure he is a good mover with a lot of knowledge and experience, but let his thinking go south for a shot or two and next thing you know the other guy is on a roll. Idk if I am making any sense, this is just what I believe... knowledge is very easily overcome by good shooting. And I think the reason, in part, is as in Frosts example, you gotta move good and think good almost 100% of the time for it to be truly effective. A single misstep out of 100 shots in thinking or execution in the moving game, or a ball rolls off, and the shooter now possibly has a huge advantage. And I think we see this bare out when a player like fuller beats or domes close to beating these guys like frost.
Last edited:
Dennis "Whitey" Young
Verified Member
El Chapo, I am certainly not disagreeing with you. Matter of fact when you go over the past records list of players that won the US Open and Derby City Classic it backs up your contention. US Open 2013 Dennis Orcollo, DCC 2013 Corey Duel, 2012 US Open Shane VanBoeing, 2011 DCC Shane Van Boeing runner up Earl Strickland, Current; DCC 2017 & 2020 Billy Thorpe. I would venture to say that none of these would be considered great movers over their fire power ability.
You have to go back to 2010 and earlier to get into an era dominated by the more traditional OP players. Why is and did this transformation happen, I am not qualified to answer this. The ebbs and flows of OP I am not qualified to answer that either. In talking to Don Waterman (sp) he said pool has sure changed, and he said in OP you could always get a $20 game in the Bay area back in the 60's & 70's, but now (2012) you can not get a game for anything. So how long can these past traditional players maintain as they get older and the action is just not there. Just maybe this is the reason?
Currently for me, Busty is the epitome of a OP player. He of course has had Efren as his playing partner but the torch is being past and Busty is coming into his own with DCC 2018 & 19 OP champion. He now has a window for some challenge matches, and more championships. Whitey
You have to go back to 2010 and earlier to get into an era dominated by the more traditional OP players. Why is and did this transformation happen, I am not qualified to answer this. The ebbs and flows of OP I am not qualified to answer that either. In talking to Don Waterman (sp) he said pool has sure changed, and he said in OP you could always get a $20 game in the Bay area back in the 60's & 70's, but now (2012) you can not get a game for anything. So how long can these past traditional players maintain as they get older and the action is just not there. Just maybe this is the reason?
Currently for me, Busty is the epitome of a OP player. He of course has had Efren as his playing partner but the torch is being past and Busty is coming into his own with DCC 2018 & 19 OP champion. He now has a window for some challenge matches, and more championships. Whitey
Last edited:
as the shooting power goes up the moving importance goes down. more than proportionately.
average players will be defensive(not talking offensive) moving much more in their games than top players and their mistakes will not be as costly.
and they will miss more shots which doesnt often cost them the game right there.
top players will move less and their defensive moving mistakes will also costs less than their missing a shot which very often costs the whole game .
average players will be defensive(not talking offensive) moving much more in their games than top players and their mistakes will not be as costly.
and they will miss more shots which doesnt often cost them the game right there.
top players will move less and their defensive moving mistakes will also costs less than their missing a shot which very often costs the whole game .
As has been said by others, it's a false choice between moving and shooting. The great players do both when necessary. The reason the professional players who are known as movers don't win anymore is because they can't shoot like they used to and can't run out when they get their shot. So when given the choice of the come with it shot or moving, they move. Tony lost because he forgot to use the other part of his skill set. It's the complete game that wins, not just reckless shooting. Dennis started winning once he learned how to trap and get out of traps. But I agree with a sentiment made in this forum. A man with 20 years experience in one pocket does not have much more knowledge than a pro that has been playing for only 5. Education in one pocket has never been more easily obtainable than it is now. As such, the learning curve has flattened drastically from the 1950's, 1960's and even the 1990's. What once took ten years can now be learned in three, as we have seen with Orcullo and Gomez.
lll
Verified Member
question for you guys and especially chappo
ronnie allen and efren are considered the greatest of all time in on onepocket on most peoples list
was it his moving (ronnie being the inventor of power one pocket which is not shooting a 90 degree cut)
that made him the greatest??
and efren
was it his cue ball control (moving and creativity) not shooting 90 degree cuts
that made him the greatest??
just askin
ronnie allen and efren are considered the greatest of all time in on onepocket on most peoples list
was it his moving (ronnie being the inventor of power one pocket which is not shooting a 90 degree cut)
that made him the greatest??
and efren
was it his cue ball control (moving and creativity) not shooting 90 degree cuts
that made him the greatest??
just askin
lll
Verified Member
i think if the shooter to shooter difference is too great
the mover is not the favorite
if the shooter to shooter difference is close
the better mover will win
jmho
icbw
interested to hear your opinions
the mover is not the favorite
if the shooter to shooter difference is close
the better mover will win
jmho
icbw
interested to hear your opinions
catkins
Verified Member
efren was not only a stellar mover he was one of the greatest shooters of all time. The way I see it is The great shooter makes you feel like if you make a slight mistake you will lose. A Great mover who does not also have fire power it feels like you can get away with mistakes a little more. The pressure is very different. The great shooter does not need to move as well if they are able to run 8 and out from any where they just need to get out of trouble where as the great mover has to put constant pressure on the opponent where they feel that they will never get a good shot and break down and go for flyers. I agree with Chapo in that the shooter is a constant threat that does not have relief while the mover if they make one mistake lets there opponent believe they have a chance.
vapros
Verified Member
I am not one of the old pool players on this site, but I am an experienced spectator when it comes to Efren. I've spent many hours with my jaw hanging open, watching the videos. Efren not only moved better, he moved differently from all the others - how else can you explain his superiority over such a span of time? It's there for anyone to see. I never saw Artie play, but if he was as tough and clever as the Chicago guys say he was, then I would imagine his game might have resembled Efren's. No one else's did. Like Henry Ford, Efren had a better idea.