Willie buy amoxil levitra price Smith gives some advice on the correct way to play Billiards generic amoxil or Snooker sadly no sound just silent movie scripts to read,part one moneygram locations is basic technique, watch and learn!
Willie buy amoxil levitra price Smith gives some advice on the correct way to play Billiards generic amoxil or Snooker sadly no sound just silent movie scripts to read,part one moneygram locations is basic technique, watch and learn!
@formaline2004 – clearly you know a lot about the game too. I just wish that Lindrum has opted for Smith’s style of play, after all, he was a genius. Clearly WL could play the attractive all-round game. Smith certainly played the way many top people play now (only they’re not as good), namely using all 3 balls and the whole table. WL will never be matched for sheer scoring power, as Smith knew when he played him! Although it would be nice to see a top player now get a 2000+ in competition.
Having said all that, I do acknowlege 2 things; Willie was playing the more attractive game for the spectators and average punters and in the end Willie was right about the stifling effect of repetitive stroke play on interest in the game. While I am clearly a Walter devotee I think I would have rather watched Willie…..and thank you for sharing your views on the history of the game, I respect your depth of knowlege and understanding.
If a player finds a way to score bigger breaks and to win matches within the rules of the game and then develops that art to a level of prefection not before seen then he can hardly be criticised as not being an all-round player. If Willie Smith did not or could not follow where Walter led the game that does not by default leave him as the “greatest all-round player”. The very fact that Willie did not play certain shots that Walter did makes Walter the all-round player, not vice versa.
@formaline2004 – and Smith said those words when he arrived back in England with WL. My point is just that Smith played the game the ‘proper’ way, and I dare say if Lindrum chose to play the same way (he certainly had the ability) then billiards in the 1930s and beyond would have been different. Instead Davis, Newman McConachy etc had to copy Lindrum in order to try and beat him, and in doing so killed billiards as a spectator sport.
Finally, in this long-winded defence of Walter Lindrum vs Willie Smith, the press of the day saw it this way” There is no doubt that Walter Lindrum is the finest player the world has ever seen. We used to think that Willie Smith was unbeatable, but in comparison with the Australian artist he is but an imperfect artisan” Morning Post December 1929.
Willie Smith himself acknowleged Lindrum’s all round superiority with these words” I did more than any professional has ever done in Australia, yet I went down to this modest young man. The hottest stuff I have met.” Willie was right; the last time they met in 1930 Lindrum defeated him 36256 to 14971.
@formaline2004 – Not saying he wasn’t a master at all aspects of the game, just saying that Smith played a game that encompassed all parts. Lindrum, Levi and others have commented upon this, and he refused to play ‘cushion crawlers’. I think you have to admire Smith’s stance of the all-round game and as I said, his huge break did not rely on hazards or canons, but on all scoring methods. I wonder what WL’s highest break was not using hazards or canons for long periods or 100s at a time?
To reinforce the point about Lindrum being capable at all aspects of play he famously made a break against Claude Faulkiner where he accidentally potted the white ball and then made 1581 off the red ball alone. This break, before he had even learnt nurseries, directly led to the limitation of hazards rule. Though it is now popular to demonise him as just a nurseries player, he was first citicised as “just a hazards player”. Truth is he was the master of all facets.
@formaline2004 – I know that he used postman’s knock a lot but I have to question the bit about repeated middle pocket losers. Smith was a known critic of the game of billiards played with ‘only two balls’, and the likes of Inman who was a specialist losing harzard player. He also refused to adopt the nursery canons so beloved of Lindrum and then eventually of Davis, Newman and the rest. Lindrum grew to rely on the nurseries more and more. Smith was therefore the greatest ‘all-rounder’ ever.
Willie Smith was indeed a fabulous player, but to suggest he did not play repeating patterns is simply not correct. He was a very strong exponent of repeating middle pocket losers, the spot stroke and the repeating top of the table sequence. The high degree of skill required to get and MAINTAIN repeatable scoring is the essence of first class billiards. Could Lindrum play the open game? Absolutely, indeed it was the only game he played until later in his career.
People need to understand in his youth his stance was different.He adopted this stance to suit his age and body.
Willie is my hero because of his objectball control….stunning
I think we lost true billiard skill with this generation…its a shame because todays billiards players are crap in comparison.
Smith scored a break of 2743 against Newman in 1928 and that stands as the highest break ever without the aid of repetitive scoring metholds. The man was a genius. Could Lindrum top that without using nursery cannons?
Willie Smith was the peoples champion of his day, at billiards. He didn’t play close nursery canons like the big four of the day, Walter Lindrum, Joe Davis, Tom Newman and Clark McConachy.. he played an all round open game like the average man would. Willie though, played it to a very, very high standard. He made an all round break of over 2,000, which must have demanded unbelievable concentration.
the bridge style is great as all the fingers pointed almost straight towards the line of aim. and the thumb dint cross over the finger to make a supposed strong bridge , it seems the bridge is weak but it is very strong and i feel that being the finger straight the cue pass through the channel with ease finding more smoothness through the skin.
our great text book style on stance says that our right leg should be on the line of aim and the left leg goes 45 degree forward on the left hand side but here the left leg in behind and the toe is outward and almost parelal to the right leg. We are told to spread pur legs inorder to have a balance but your opponent do not push you when you play and you do not spread our legs inorder to have balance when we walk!! Old is gold!!
I have tried this stance and the bridge style ,I have found it wonderful. This style contradicts with the modern day socalled text book style. I started with the our text book style in the begining but later wished to make some experiment on this and to my surprise my potting ability increased. I have made another experiment on Alex higgins grip with one finger down ! 🙂 believe it or not that grip is great too. Dont be afraid to try something new you can always come back to the text book style