clash royale hack pixel gun 3d hack mobile legends robloxtool.com
HomeAbout Billiards DigestContact UsArchiveAll About PoolEquipmentOur AdvertisersLinks
Tips & shafts
By George Fels
Consulting Editor George Fels has been writing for Billiards Digest since 1980, and his "Tips & Shafts" column is usually our readers' first stop when they crack open the magazine. For better or worse, pool has been his only mistress for 40-plus years.


Archives
• August 2017
• July 2017
• June 2017
• May 2017
• April 2017
• March 2017
• February 2017
• January 2017
• December 2016
• November 2016
• October 2016
• August 2016
• July 2016
• June 2016
• May 2016
• Apr 2016
• Mar 2016
• Feb 2016
• Jan 2016
• December 2015
• November 2015
• October 2015
• September 2015
• August 2015
• July 2015
• June 2015
• May 2015
• April 2015
• March 2015
• February 2015
• January 2015
• October 2014
• August 2014
• May 2014
• March 2014
• February 2014
• September 2013
• June 2013
• May 2013
• April 2013
• March 2013
• February 2013
• January 2013
• December 2012
• November 2012
• October 2012
• September 2012
• August 2012
• July 2012
• June 2012
• May 2012
• April 2012
• March 2012
• February 2012
• January 2012
• December 2011
• November 2011
• October 2011
• September 2011
• August 2011
• July 2011
• June 2011
• May 2011
• April 2011
• March 2011
• February 2011
• January 2011
• December 2010
• November 2010
• October 2010
• September 2010
• August 2010
• July 2010
• June 2010
• May 2010
• April 2010
• March 2010
• February 2010
• January 2010
• December 2009
• November 2009
• October 2009
• September 2009
• August 2009
• July 2009
• June 2009
• May 2009
• April 2009
• March 2009
• February 2009
• January 2009
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008


Best of Fels
 
September: Feedback
September 2016

By George Fels
[Reprinted from October 1986]


It has been pointed out, accurately if unnecessarily, that losers do not get the credit they deserve; without them, after all, there would be no winners. (I may have said that myself.)

If thereís a flaw in that logic, itís that very few losers take proper pride in their role. Ever hear a road pool player talk about a loser he booked? I wouldnít tread water waiting until you do, either. And, Freud to the contrary, most pool players I know who do lose would lots rather win. The various expressions of that exact sentiment can be very creative.

At the very darkest end of the spectrum, thereís no question that billiard cues have occasionally been graduated from instruments of touch and precision to weapons of assault and even murder. Ugliness goes down far more often in bars than in commercial rooms. Most pool is played in bars these days, almost never sociably, and liquor and gambling go together like blood and sharks. It might not be the exchange of money itself that foments the explosion; the vagaries of 8-ball rules, or conflicts over cue ball fouls, for instance, are amply volatile when cash rides on the outcome. But cash is usually the ultimate villain. On the other hand, I donít play bar pool, and I was nearly killed over a pool game once. Whatís more, I canít even become a stiff-spined moralist and directly blame my woes on gambling either; no money changed hands. I had split four games of straight pool, at three dollars per. I paid my share of the time and was walking silently away from my opponent when he did his best to brain me. To this day I have no idea why.

But pool tantrums generally have a much lighter side to them, and cues more often than not are not so much weapons as victims. Iíve seen the handiwork of the gameís greatest wandmakers, right up to Balabushka, turned to driftwood by disgruntled losers, and sometimes even by practice players. Now my slate here is not quite so clean; Iíve confessed to my own cue-busting days in print before. When I was competing regularly, I had a pool buddy named Jack Gunne, with whom I played far more often than anybody else, and we regularly drew sweators who cared not so much about who would win as who would first change a cue into flotsam. When Jack and I would run out of shafts ó assuming we were lucky enough not to splinter the butts too ó we were reduced to house cues, and weíd routinely select slews of six or eight sticks apiece before entering combat, in the manner of tennis starts taking Centre Court at Wimbledon.

Occasionally, the six or eight would be enough to see us through a session. Now given my voluminous experience, I can tell you that a mangled cue, unlike physical mayhem, is not the direct result of blowing the cheese. It has far more to do with anger at oneself, and overloading of emotional circuits to the point of an explosion that whites out all logic. I have never in my life whacked a rail while thinking about money or anything anywhere near that rational; my point is just the opposite ó that the act takes place quite without thinking at all. Iíve always prided myself on being a reasonably smart guy ó not remarkably, but reasonably ó and I state in all candor that Iíve never felt more like the village idiot than I did when my so-called senses returned and I found myself with a severely circumcised cue in hand. And one day I stopped, not that I can tell you exactly when or how. I just stopped. There are those who claim I havenít been the same player since.

But while Iíve outpaced a lot of guys when it comes to sheer volume of lumber, I rate myself a piker as to outburst imaginativeness. We used to have a local player named Harold Johnson, whose demonstrations were recounted and exchanged among those who knew him with few repeating the same story twice. Road players would gather to watch Hal play and see what new fables of temper might arise, for comparison with and/or addition to their existing collections, like scholars sifting the sonnets of Donne. Hal had a level of talent that partially justified his sensitive temperament; in stride, he gave players like Joey Spaeth and Dallas West fits. But his share of immortality will forever accrue to his being off-form, not on.

Perhaps because I understood Hal Johnsonís problems of self-control better than most, I gave him very little grief and even felt sorry for him. Similarly, I have a tough time choosing between these three splendid Johnsonian descents into hell. See what you think:

1. He broke an opponentís cue once. Iíve never heard anything else like this in 30 years, but there were witnesses. (The opponent, a practical fellow, responded by breaking Haroldís too. Quid pro quo.)

2. In an inversion of the victory dance that scoring football players do in the end zone, Hall Johnson danced on the table in defeat. His purpose was not the betterment of terpsichorean science, but the kicking of the offending balls. (You could hardly expect him to take the balls on barehanded; Harold was expert at billiards, not martial arts.) 3. The kamikaze sprint. (This one gets a lot of votes, from many quarters.) Harold seized his cue in mid-shaft with both hands, pointed it at his breastbone, and, with rich primal scream, dashed into the nearest wall. Just how many things he wanted to break remains unclear.

Winning isnít just more fun than losing. Itís considerably cheaper. And much, much better for you.


MORE VIDEO...