World Record: 526 balls

I think it's fair to beat the record with the same equipment...then move on to a nine footer.

This offer has been out there for a while with no takers: I have a Brunswick Anniversary (new rails, new Simonis 860 Blue) that is very close to the table Mosconi used in that it has 4 3/4" pockets and is 4X8. I also have video equipment and a guest house where any top player wishing to make the attempt can stay. I will set up the camera, turn it on and let it run.

Only players known to have long runs at 14.1 are invited or anyone in the top 10 of the BCA rankings.

JoeyA said:

Personally, I would like to see the record broken, based upon someone using equipment similar to which Willie played on.JoeyA

Click to expand...

Personally, I'd rather win a world title.

Champions win championships. Does anybody care, for example, about a golfer's best practice round?

Did Willie play with Aramiths on 860? No, but again, who cares? I'd much rather be a champion, say, like Ortmann, than somebody who has run a lotta balls, but has done zippo in world championship play.

JoeyA said:

I don't know how much discussion there has been about Willie Mosconi's world record but I know there's been plenty.

I was just wondering if it would be fair or even appropriate if a 4 x 8 table should be set up with 4 7/8" pockets, like the one Willie used to make the world record that still holds to today?

Many of today's tables have much narrower pockets than this and I'm sure it inhibits todays pocket billiard 14:1 specialists from beating that record.

Would you like to see the world record broken using the same equipment?
Would you prefer seeing the world record broken using today's larger tables with the 4 7/8" pockets?
Or would you prefer to never see Willie's record broken.

Personally, I would like to see the record broken, based upon someone using equipment similar to which Willie played on.

JoeyA

Click to expand...

We covered this topic in the 14.1 forum in this thread:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=229984

And FWIW, I happen to agree with you in that it should be attempted on the same or very similar conditions to what Mosconi had.

MitchDAZB said:

Personally, I'd rather win a world title.

Champions win championships. Does anybody care, for example, about a golfer's best practice round?

Did Willie play with Aramiths on 860? No, but again, who cares? I'd much rather be a champion, say, like Ortmann, than somebody who has run a lotta balls, but has done zippo in world championship play.

Click to expand...

Willie won the world title 15 times.

Edit: And I don't believe Aramith existed yet when Willie played.

Many of Mosconi's Record stand today, and I ask how was he able to do this without, MAGIC CUES, MAGIC TIPS, and MAGIC CHALK? The answer I think was SKILL. AMAZON has his book CHEAP FROM $11.17.

JoeyA said:

I don't know how much discussion there has been about Willie Mosconi's world record but I know there's been plenty.

I was just wondering if it would be fair or even appropriate if a 4 x 8 table should be set up with 4 7/8" pockets, like the one Willie used to make the world record that still holds to today?

Many of today's tables have much narrower pockets than this and I'm sure it inhibits todays pocket billiard 14:1 specialists from beating that record.

Would you like to see the world record broken using the same equipment?
Would you prefer seeing the world record broken using today's larger tables with the 4 7/8" pockets?
Or would you prefer to never see Willie's record broken.

Personally, I would like to see the record broken, based upon someone using equipment similar to which Willie played on.

JoeyA

Click to expand...

Joey:

As someone who plays 14.1 as one of his two favorite games (my two "staple" games, if you will), I'd like to see the record broken on today's standard/regulation 4.5' x 9' tables.

REASON: Willie's hallowed 526 has a footnote (or asterisk) next to it, precisely for this reason. Other greats have actually [unofficially and unconfirmed] broken Willie's 526 on standard 9-footers -- including Mike Eufemia's 626, and Babe Cranfield's 768. Willie's 526 is considered "official," however, because of the actions of the attorney that happened to be present in the audience at the time.

I think Thomas Engert's 492 is a modern-day high run that is actually on par with Willie's 526, because the 492 was done on a tournament-standard/-spec 9-foot table.

There'd actually been a lot of discussion about this in the 14.1 forum.

Perhaps you might want to add a poll? (Just a thought -- it'd be interesting to hear the viewpoint of the non- or occasional-14.1 player.)
-Sean

JoeyA said:

I don't know how much discussion there has been about Willie Mosconi's world record but I know there's been plenty.

I was just wondering if it would be fair or even appropriate if a 4 x 8 table should be set up with 4 7/8" pockets, like the one Willie used to make the world record that still holds to today?

Many of today's tables have much narrower pockets than this and I'm sure it inhibits todays pocket billiard 14:1 specialists from beating that record.

Would you like to see the world record broken using the same equipment?
Would you prefer seeing the world record broken using today's larger tables with the 4 7/8" pockets?
Or would you prefer to never see Willie's record broken.

Personally, I would like to see the record broken, based upon someone using equipment similar to which Willie played on.

JoeyA

Click to expand...

Should the be an asterisk next to the record, probably. The game has evolved, but you have to also consider he was making record runs on tables that had blanket like cloth, playing in places before air conditioning, different rubber in the rails, different balls and so on. Where do you draw the line? We don't know if it was not even more difficult back then, then it is today and the things he did viewed through that prisim even more astounding.

We don't know how many balls say John could run on a table like Mosconi played on, neither do we know how many balls Mosconi could run on the more perfect conditions that can be found today. I would tend to lean to Mosconi. Under today's conditions he could have been as, if not more, dominate then he was almost 3/4 of a century ago but it is imposable to ever know.

#526

Once again, people are doing their best to discredit Mosconi. I had the pleasure to meet him a few times and he was a real class act. What he couldn't stand was the degradation of the wonderful sport that he dedicated his life to improve. He grew up with the hustlers and bums and wanted pool to raise above all that. Look around at your favorite pool hall and see just how many of those people would you want to know where you lived, let alone invite them over to dinner? It's sad to see that a lot of the "Legends" of this wonderful sport are just 2nd rate hustlers and gamblers who would cheat anyone they could for a couple of bucks. Also, IMHO, straight pool can be harder on an 8ft table than a 9ft table. You use mostly 1/2 the table anyway so there is more of a chance to tie up balls. 10ft table is a different story.
I heard Mosconi try to promote larger pockets on most tables so that the average player would not get so discouraged and could make more shots. This, he believed, would lead to more people playing pool.I also believe his Brunswick contract preventing gambling to give pool a better image. When he was a young man in Philadelphia, I'll wager not too many of these "road hustlers"would travel there for some action.
Finally. Seems that the attention span of todays players would really be tested to run 527. Picture throwing out 15 balls out on the table and shooting them all in and doing that 35-36 times with out a miss. Hmmmm.

Records are made to be broken. I've watched many times and had a brief session with Mosconi. In a way I'd like to see it stand but there is always someone better. The problem with breaking this record is equipment. What pro wants to invest the time on a 4 x 8? BTW Smaller does not mean easier, on a crowded table. As I recall he had a few spectators. Would that happen if someone tried to break the record?

I think his record is far from being challenged at this point. My guess is someone might or will do it one day on a 9 footer but I doubt on an 8 footer.

Rod

Reproducing the conditions of yesteryear is, to me, time wasted. As some have noted, nappy cloths and lousy pool balls were standard back then, rail rubber was less consistent, low deflection shafts didn't even exist yet, pool rooms were hot and smoky, etc., etc., etc.

How many AZers recall that, in pro baseball, the pitcher's mound was lowered in the late 1960's? Does that mean that we cannot compare the hitters and pitchers of today with those of yesteryear? No, it doesn't. Baseball has evolved and is different today than in the past, but players, fans, and sports journalists all delight in comparing the stats across the generations, despite the fact they understand how much has changed about the game.

Mosconi was the best of his era and owns the highest exhibition run in history (as already mentioned, Cranfield ran 768 in practice). In the exhibitions at the Riviera, noone beat Mosconi, but Willie's record will fall one day. Schmidt, Hohmann, Harriman, Appleton, Ortmann, and a few others have it in them to beat Willie's highest exhibition run, and I wish them good luck in doing so.

The difficulty of comparing players across generations has been discussed often here on the forum. Nonetheless, I feel that trying to reproduce the playing conditions of the past to facilitate such comparison is going overboard.

sjm said:

Reproducing the conditions of yesteryear is, to me, time wasted. As some have noted, nappy cloths and lousy pool balls were standard back then, rail rubber was less consistent, low deflection shafts didn't even exist yet, pool rooms were hot and smoky, etc., etc., etc.

How many AZers recall that, in pro baseball, the pitcher's mound was lowered in the late 1960's? Does that mean that we cannot compare the hitters and pitchers of today with those of yesteryear? No, it doesn't. Baseball has evolved and is different today than in the past, but players, fans, and sports journalists all delight in comparing the stats across the generations, despite the fact they understand how much has changed about the game.

Mosconi was the best of his era and owns the highest exhibition run in history (as already mentioned, Cranfield ran 768 in practice). In the exhibitions at the Riviera, noone beat Mosconi, but Willie's record will fall one day. Schmidt, Hohmann, Harriman, Appleton, Ortmann, and a few others have it in them to beat Willie's highest exhibition run, and I wish them good luck in doing so.

The difficulty of comparing players across generations has been discussed often here on the forum. Nonetheless, I feel that trying to reproduce the playing conditions of the past to facilitate such comparison is going overboard.

Click to expand...

The biggest problem with the record being broken is the amount of 14.1 that is played. For it to be broken a player would have to dedicate himself to doing it. Mosconi played hundreds of exhibitions every year and when ever he would end a game on a run the chant was always for him to continue. I doubt we have any idea how many 200 or 250's he ran and just forgot about during those exhibitions. With no one playing the game today the odds of the record being broken are slim except by a few who are capable, but will they even bother trying.

Tar?

How about some 1000 point matches on Tar....
..there's enough talent around to have a lot of match-ups.

be nice to have a 'competitive' high run....

straight pool needs some TAR-TAR sauce

Interesting responses JoeyA

I would like to see it broken only because I know it will have to be video taped for everyone to see and believe.

I think the tables today are tougher than those of the 40s and 50s.

I also believe that the players today would have broken that record long ago if there were any decent money offered.

If 14.1 were as popular as today's 9 ball maybe there would be more interest.

I would rather see Earl's 11 pack or a Snooker, from the break, 147 in competition.

IMO 14.1 just isn't exciting enough to sit through 35+ racks. The only excitement is seeing how close you are to predicting how the shooter will shoot the pattern for the breakout and Key ball.

JoeyA said:

Would you like to see the world record broken using the same equipment?
Would you prefer seeing the world record broken using today's larger tables with the 4 7/8" pockets?

Personally, I would like to see the record broken, based upon someone using equipment similar to which Willie played on.

JoeyA

Click to expand...

I think it would be tougher on an 8 footer, allot more congestion. Much like pros playing 8 ball on a 9 footer compared to bar box 8 ball. It's run out 8 ball on a 9 footer, and not always the case on a box, too much congestion.

pt109 said:

How about some 1000 point matches on Tar....
..there's enough talent around to have a lot of match-ups.

be nice to have a 'competitive' high run....

straight pool needs some TAR-TAR sauce

Click to expand...

The problem is, they will being trying to win the match. To make really high runs you have to do things you would not do in a real match. For example, shoot a high risk break shot you would never shoot unless you were just trying to lengthen an exhibition run. In fact you would have to get a bit lucky more then a few times to make a really high run doing things you would never normally do. Even most 100 ball runs are not textbook and require a good roll here and there. Every break shot has the ability to end any run no matter how skilled the player.

Is there anyone alive that saw Mosconi make his run?

Island Drive said:

I think it would be tougher on an 8 footer, allot more congestion. Much like pros playing 8 ball on a 9 footer compared to bar box 8 ball. It's run out 8 ball on a 9 footer, and not always the case on a box, too much congestion.

Click to expand...

You can bet what you want - I'll take a Pro breaking and running out on a bar box versus a 9 footer.

I've heard many people state that Mosconi wouldn't have been able to run 526 on a Diamond Pro because they have tighter pockets, faster cloth etc.

One thing they often overlook is that the balls are often more congested on a 4x8 table and the slower cloth may require a better stroke to move the balls around, though in straight pool, cue ball travel is minimized compared to rotation games that are now en-vogue.

Personally, I'd like to see the record broken on any table, if it happens on a Diamond Pro 9 footer all the better.

JoeyA said:

I don't know how much discussion there has been about Willie Mosconi's world record but I know there's been plenty.

I was just wondering if it would be fair or even appropriate if a 4 x 8 table should be set up with 4 7/8" pockets, like the one Willie used to make the world record that still holds to today?

Many of today's tables have much narrower pockets than this and I'm sure it inhibits todays pocket billiard 14:1 specialists from beating that record.

Would you like to see the world record broken using the same equipment?
Would you prefer seeing the world record broken using today's larger tables with the 4 7/8" pockets?
Or would you prefer to never see Willie's record broken.

Personally, I would like to see the record broken, based upon someone using equipment similar to which Willie played on.

JoeyA

Click to expand...