It's like cricket (pool) and baseball (snooker). The flat-faced pocket innovation made pool into an offensive game. But running an 8 ball rack is something a C player shouldīe capable of. I get that when a B-level snooker player comes to pool and runs an eight ball rack in his first few games on "those bucket pockets," he thinks it's a far easier game, since it might've taken him a couple years on a snooker table before he even hit 20. A 30 point run (around 7-10 made balls in a row) in snooker is a solid "B-player" run. That element is always overlooked in this debate. So while it's easier to pocket balls in pool, you have to make more of them, a lot more of them. Straight pool games usually go to 150-250, so a 147 equivalent would probably be around a 200 run. In straight pool, a B-level player is capable of 37 shots in a row, which does also require precise position play with having to manufacture a break ball and playing position on said break ball. That requires 37 made shots in a row, with precise position being played on the black every other shot. A 147 is the zenith of snooker performance in a single frame. It's tough to compare 8 and 9 ball to snooker, but the closest pool game to snooker is straight pool. You have to be a threat to run multiple racks. In the main forms of pool, the player is expected to make more balls and, if you want to play at a high level, being able to run a rack or two isn't good enough. What I mean by that is just because it's easier to pocket shots in pool than in it is in snooker, doesn't mean pool is an inherently easier game. "Difficulty" isn't defined by the equipment of the game/sport, but by the talent pool and the "standards of play" of that particular sport. I play both to a decent level and I can assure you snooker is another level of difficulty.ĭisagree here (tl dr coming). Once they iron that out it’s just about learning the nuances of the game. When people see snooker players missing easy balls on pool tables, it’s usually because they aren’t used to the massively different throw of the ball with different cues and ball sizes. Pool is an amazing game, but the skill ceiling is much lower than it is on a snooker table. Some of them would be likely to get to the very top of the game with some years of dedication. I’m not saying they’d be the best, but they’d be very high level. They’d likely not be successful on the pro tour even if they managed to get on though.Įvery snooker player on the world snooker tour could be a successful pool player with a few years practice. Theres maybe a small handful of pool players who would have a small chance of getting on the pro snooker tour with a few years practice. Potts is a decent snooker player, his brother in law is four time world champion snooker player mark Selby. Not a very successful one, but a pro none the less.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |