Who is the Most Knowledgeable One Pocket Player?

[Fast Lenny]

Living or not, who do you think and why?

 

[Cary]

I thought about it

I thought about it

but.....no comment. Not a chance you'll suck me into this one.

 

[SJDinPHX]

Lenny, I predict, not a lot of answers on this one !!

Lenny, I predict, not a lot of answers on this one !!

Living or not, who do you think and why?

I am no longer allowed to take his name in vain,...But I definately know who THINKS he has the greatest one pocket mind in the world..

PS..Frost could easily give him, 10 or 11 to 5 (or more)..His far superior [sic] 'moving', would NOT save him.

 

[lll]

well i do remember artie bodendorfer was willing to bet $30,000? that the answer was him...

 

[jrhendy]

I am no longer allowed to take his name in vain,...But I definately know who THINKS he has the greatest one pocket mind in the world..

PS..Frost could easily give him, 10 or 11 to 5 (or more)..His far superior [sic] 'moving', would NOT save him.

Having been whipped a couple times by Frost 10/5 and a slight favorite over you know who (I think I am), you are right, he would not like it 11/5.

Frost can move much better than people give him credit for, but running a zillion balls is just more fun.

 

[wgcp]

whoever just beat me...though that might not be saying much...

but I do miss Arties mistake free one pocket analysis of shots...

B

 

[blindlemon]

I don't think any one person could hold that title. When we speak of people having great knowledge in pool it will usually be associated with a great performance. And performance is always how it is perceived by the viewer. The difference in knowledge in these world class players is so small as to be insignificant. When two great players match up at the top of there respective games it is a toss up. It always comes down to errors in judgement, and judgement is based upon our exposure. One player may have seen the other play as little as one match but it gives him the edge in understanding his opponent. Again I'm saying they are both executing at the top of there game. One may execute some shots slightly better to carry the day, but that is not knowledge, simply execution. All of these guys have very high gambling and pool IQ's. People that don't understand this are the food for these monsters.

JohnG

 

[SJDinPHX]

whoever just beat me...though that might not be saying much...

but I do miss Arties mistake free one pocket analysis of shots...

B

Artie's "supersqueeze" style, would beat a lot of people. (or put them to sleep)...Artie had a good concept of the game, that worked for him...But I feel quite sure..'Prime to Prime'..he would have fared no better against Efren, Scott or RA..than any other top player has, or would have !...Sure would be fun, if we could do it ALL over again, and all be the same age !... But for now, all we have to rely on, are our own opinions. (some of which, have been clouded by time) Except for MOI !!. ...Don't give up Bille, I don't know one stinking world beater at pool, who can fly an Apache helicopter !

Late edit; Blindlemon, makes a lot of sense too ! There are a lot of people, (lets call him player # 1) who can give weight, and win against guys, who can beat guys, that player #1 can't beat even..Pool is a very mentally challenging game.

 

[WillieNilly]

My vote goes for Mr. Gradick Alleffrost fuscardonabeardendorpher from N. San chicagadelphia, Alaska. AKA...."The Narwhale"...for his cue he made from a narwhale tusk. Or somtimes hes "The Igloo" depending on who ya ask.

legend has it hes still playing the first game of one pocket he ever started against a local shortstop in '57.
hes got the dead inuit nuts and hasnt shot at his hole yet, the squeeze is in ,all 15 balls are uptable corner pocket and the score is Mr.F, -1942087 (all intentional scratches)....opponent 0.

The bet is a walrus steak.

 

[sappo]

Living or not, who do you think and why?

Lenny, I truely believe it is Artie. I think Artie sees the pool table in a unique way, maybe like a grand master sees a chess board. He looks at situations beyond the present shot and is able to think in terms of future innings, with regard to his opponents responses, much better than anyone else. I dont believe its a coinscience that he was able to win all that money from the casinos, I just think his mind is gifted and he has great perception to idenitfy problems and come up with unique solutions.
While he may or may not have been able to beat Efrin or Scott {the 2 names that always come up} Im very sure he would out think them and Im certain he would put them to a very difficlut test.
Keith

 

[onepockethacker]

I don't think any one person could hold that title. When we speak of people having great knowledge in pool it will usually be associated with a great performance. And performance is always how it is perceived by the viewer. The difference in knowledge in these world class players is so small as to be insignificant. When two great players match up at the top of there respective games it is a toss up. It always comes down to errors in judgement, and judgement is based upon our exposure. One player may have seen the other play as little as one match but it gives him the edge in understanding his opponent. Again I'm saying they are both executing at the top of there game. One may execute some shots slightly better to carry the day, but that is not knowledge, simply execution. All of these guys have very high gambling and pool IQ's. People that don't understand this are the food for these monsters.

JohnG

You are right on the money sir.

 

[SJDinPHX]

You are right on the money sir.

OPH... Did you miss it ? (post #8)...Just curious to know, if you concur with my assessment of Artie's skill level,..where I address ONLY his one pocket game,
and not his other obviously successful enterprises...In it, I also agree with Blindlemon..on most of his observations. Its a 'late edit' cuz he was posting, as I was writing my response.

PS..Not seeking approval, just an opinion..I already know what many others think..But, I don't think theres any remote possibilty, of "mistake free" ANYTHING !..

As Obama proved last night...I would have lost big time...I woulda bet big $$$, he would have KILLED Romney, with his [sic] silver-tongued elequence..Now I have to sweat my few 'election bets' a little more as I laid BIG odds, on Obama winning..(even tho I can't stand him)..We ALL MAKE "MISTAKES", don't we ? :frus
Not that thrilled with Romney either, but the best GOP guys, are too SMART to run for POTUS !.:sorry:..Got side tracked !..:focus

 

[onepockethacker]

OPH... Did you miss it ? (post #8)...Just curious to know, if you concur with my assessment of Artie's skill level,..where I address ONLY his one pocket game,
and not his other obviously successful enterprises...In it, I also agree with Blindlemon..on most of his observations. Its a 'late edit' cuz he was posting, as I was writing my response.

Yes I concur with your opinion of that. I dont believe Arties style would have won against the 3 you mentioned but I could be wrong. Unfortunately we will never know. I wouldn't mind listening to Arties philosophy on one pocket sometime.

 

[SJDinPHX]

Yes I concur with your opinion of that. I dont believe Arties style would have won against the 3 you mentioned but I could be wrong. Unfortunately we will never know. I wouldn't mind listening to Arties philosophy on one pocket sometime.

You are a few years too late..for only $30,000, you could have had a lesson or two.. (or you could have gotten a headache, reading about it !)

 

[Cowboy Dennis]

...Just curious to know, if you concur with my assessment of Artie's skill level,..where I address ONLY his one pocket game,

You are an idiot...you cannot assess anyone's skill level at anything without having seen them play. I hope you don't think I'm being redundant when I say "you are an idiot".

RBL

 

[sappo]

You are an idiot...you cannot assess anyone's skill level at anything without having seen them play. I hope you don't think I'm being redundant when I say "you are an idiot".

RBL

Come on Dennis that is a redundant redundancy!!!!

 

[lll]

Artie's "supersqueeze" style, would beat a lot of people. (or put them to sleep)...Artie had a good concept of the game, that worked for him...But I feel quite sure..'Prime to Prime'..he would have fared no better against Efren, Scott or RA..than any other top player has, or would have !...Sure would be fun, if we could do it ALL over again, and all be the same age !... But for now, all we have to rely on, are our own opinions. (some of which, have been clouded by time) Except for MOI !!. ...Don't give up Bille, I don't know one stinking world beater at pool, who can fly an Apache helicopter !

Late edit; Blindlemon, makes a lot of sense too ! There are a lot of people, (lets call him player # 1) who can give weight, and win against guys, who can beat guys, that player #1 can't beat even..Pool is a very mentally challenging game.

Yes I concur with your opinion of that. I dont believe Arties style would have won against the 3 you mentioned but I could be wrong. Unfortunately we will never know. I wouldn't mind listening to Arties philosophy on one pocket sometime.

i havent seen ra in his prime or artie
BUT i will ask this rhetorical question
if you always play high percentage shots even tho they are positionally offensive but dont make balls
vs the aggressive player who takes the high risk high reward shot
who should win???
does a good defence beat a good offence???
that was arties philosophy as i understood it (icbw)
he often said he didnt shoot as good as the best players but he beat them to the shot because he rarely beat himself by shooting something he couldnt execute

 

[One Pocket Ghost]

Living or not, who do you know is?

Da Ghost...:heh...

 

[onepockethacker]

i havent seen ra in his prime or artie
BUT i will ask this rhetorical question
if you always play high percentage shots even tho they are positionally offensive but dont make balls
vs the aggressive player who takes the high risk high reward shot
who should win???
does a good defence beat a good offence???
that was arties philosophy as i understood it (icbw)
he often said he didnt shoot as good as the best players but he beat them to the shot because he rarely beat himself by shooting something he couldnt execute

The game has changed Larry. When RA came on the scene according to the majority of his peers they said he revolutionized one pocket playing such an offensive game compared to the grind out squeezing game of his predecessors. Now days the majority of top players play an aggressive style of play. The hidden secrets of yesteryear are now widely known through books, dvd's, what would you do scenarios, live streams, etc. etc. There are more top players playing the game then anytime in history. Most of the top players know ALL the moves now, and yet play a very aggressive style. In baseball, basketball, NFL, tennis, and golf all the athletes and players are better today. In those more physical sports the players are better partly because of improvements in equipment and conditioning. In pool the top players are better today because of the knowledge they can easily acquire through the books, dvd's, etc. Players today are able to learn all the moves that took years for the older players to learn through matching up and paying their dues. Take the current "what would you do" scenario.. some of the older players are looking to play safe or a 2 railer where a straight shooting top player is just going to shoot the 2 ball in and run out.

 

[boingo]

Frost can move much better than people give him credit for, but running a zillion balls is just more fun.

Some people just like gettin' out so much that they'll take some extra risk now and then.