| Author |
Pool equivalent to a 147 max??? |
|
superruss
Just can't stay away
Joined: 13-Mar-2009
Posts: 107
From: High Wycombe
|
Posted: 2010-05-13 17:41
What do you guys on here think is the equivalent in Pool to making a maximum break in Snooker? Breaking and Running TEN straight 9 ball racks??? SEVEN straight 10 ball racks??? EIGHT straight 8 ball racks??? 250 ball Run in 14:1 Straight Pool??? Although the general mechanics of the games are the same. Each game requires a different skill set to play well to a good/high standard. And although straight hitting over distance through good cueing is essential to snooker......Touch and knowledge is essential to the Pool dicsiplines. I feel this would make an interesting debate as there are many converted snooker players playing 9 Ball like myself for one reason or another. And also what is the highest/largest run in any of the Pool dicsipines you have either witnessed or acheived yourselves??? cheers peepz.
-----------------
You know that!!
|
|
Zain
Home away from home
Joined: 19-Jan-2008
Posts: 207
From: Markham, Ontario
|
Posted: 2010-05-13 18:36
Personally I dont think you could compare a 147 in snooker to anything in 9 ball pool. I think a comparison of a 147 in snooker to something like a run of over 200/300 in straight pool is more a possibility, as they are the more similar to each other and that they are rare but happen enough (if that makes sense). [ This message was edited by: Zain on 2010-05-13 18:37 ]
|
|
superruss
Just can't stay away
Joined: 13-Mar-2009
Posts: 107
From: High Wycombe
|
Posted: 2010-05-13 19:02
yes that makes perfect sence.....I see what your getting at. Yes break building in snooker and a straight pool run is very similar in regards to manipulating/developing the balls and the positional play is similar as you try and play percentage position....even though potting is easier in pool....the length of time per inning at straight pool for a high run could last anywhere between 45 minutes to an hour for 150 plus balls......or in Cliff Thorburns case....THREE WEEKS!!! LOL....Thus meaning consentration must be maintained for a much longer period of time. I also respect that yes in 9/10 ball even though the skill required is huge to run multiple racks....you still need the luck of landing on the lowest ball and hope for realistic chances to dish from the break....ie no tricky layouts or problem balls/clusters.
|
|
Riggers
Home away from home
Joined: 30-Mar-2006
Posts: 4454
From: Barnsley (centre of the universe)
|
Posted: 2010-05-13 19:30
IMO a 300 break at straight pool is a greater achievement than a 147 and is probably more rare these days.
|
|
simmo77
Home away from home
Joined: 11-Dec-2006
Posts: 1405
From: Derby
|
Posted: 2010-05-13 19:40
I ran 7 at 9 ball so think that counts as being better than a 147! lol
|
|
TheWizard
Home away from home
Joined: 18-Mar-2006
Posts: 823
|
Posted: 2010-05-13 20:17
All cuesports can be demanding in their own ways and there isn't any 2 cuesports that can truly be compared because there are simply too many subtle differences between the object of each game, skill/ability requiements, and the sizes of equipment that is used.
Jm2c fwiw
Willie
|
|
DrDevil
Quite a regular
Joined: 03-Oct-2009
Posts: 62
From: London
|
Posted: 2010-05-14 04:36
Agree with the Wizard! It's really hard, cause IMO 9,8,10ball games depend on the break and a there's a big amount of luck. The percentage of luck may be reduced by the perfect rack, as a result i've seen a friend with medium skills running 7 racks with soft brake which is kinda easy (7 games, yeah, but soft brake with perf rack).
If we compare snooker and pool as a general -
1. Pool is much easier to pot, harder to position your shots.
2. Snooker is harder to pot, easier to position.
Just the opposites and if there's a way to compare achievements, maybe that will really be the 200-300 straight pool run.
|
