PDA

View Full Version : The State of the Slate



09-12-2002, 08:49 AM
I was talking with a firiend last night. In passing, he marveled at how Mosconi was able to run 526 balls. Then he added, “And that was without all of the technological advancements we enjoy today.” I have heard this sentiment expressed several times, but can not honestly see this supposed tide of evolutionary progress.

Am I missing something? What are they? Inquiring minds want to know!

In recent weeks I have had occasion to play on a Brunswick table, circa 19050, using a old Burton Spain cue. I did not come away with the feeling that the state of billiard equipment has advanced by any great degree. The table was predictable and responsive, and the cue played like a dream. Unfortunately, the balls and chalk were new, so I can’t make a valid comparison on those aspects.

There is no question in my mind, that the science of billiards has made some quantum leaps. Prolific writings and research in the past 50 years have unlocked many of the mysteries that could previously only be learned through years of experience. And likewise, science has explained why the traditional table and cue manufacturing techniques and materials provide superior results.

There have been a number of quasi-advancements; Sardo racks, gloves, and a potpourri of tip paraphernalia. But when it comes down the basic elements, the table, balls, chalk, and cue, have there been any significant changes?

Assuming my observations are correct, I am not suggesting that this lack of advancement is a bad thing. There is a simple elegance about the status quo of billiards, unlike the chaotic ?progress? of golf which hinges on the latest-and-greatest club and ball technology.

What’ya think? Am I missing the trees for the forest?

PQQLK9
09-12-2002, 09:13 AM
Maybe he meant the Shoes....(no Air Mosconi's back in the day) /ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif

Fred Agnir
09-12-2002, 09:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: CueBald:</font><hr> There have been a number of quasi-advancements; Sardo racks, gloves, and a potpourri of tip paraphernalia. But when it comes down the basic elements, the table, balls, chalk, and cue, have there been any significant changes?<hr></blockquote>
Balls, for certain, are now made with higher tech. manufacturing methods and materials.

Cloth. I doubt Mosconi ran his 526 on Simonis 860, since it didn't exist. Today's pool and billiard cloth is superior. That's probably why I've got something against these cloths. Flaws in players' strokes can be hidden.

A/C: Probably the greatest technological advancement as far as pool goes.

Oh, I'm sure there's more.

Fred

MikeM
09-12-2002, 09:22 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: CueBald:</font><hr>
What'ya think? Am I missing the trees for the forest? <hr></blockquote>

I hope so or all the money I've been spending is wasted!/ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif

MM

TomBrooklyn
09-12-2002, 10:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Fred Agnir:</font><hr> Today's pool and billiard cloth is superior. That's probably why I've got something against these cloths. Flaws in players' strokes can be hidden.<hr></blockquote> I'm trying to imagine how modern cloth can hide flaws in players strokes, but I can't think of any reason. I would love to know how this is. =TB=

Jay M
09-12-2002, 10:16 AM
the old cloth was napped (like snooker tables still are) and a bad stroke would show up because there was more friction than on today's cloth. Now the cue spends more time sliding than it does grabbing.

Jay M&lt;~~~~ Just an opinion from someone that's only played napped cloth on a snooker table