PDA

View Full Version : The most useless yet highly discussed stat in pool


Ekojasiloop
10-20-2017, 08:27 PM
Let me start off by saying I’m not hating. I actually really like John Schmidt and his game.

I think the stats he has in straight pool, although no doubt legit, are seriously overrated. I’m sure there’s been tons of great players who have put unheard of nine ball packages together in their basements, but who the hell cares?!

Mike Sigel ran 150 and out at least a couple of times I know of in major competitions. That’s a stat. He won major straight pool tournaments. That’s a stat.

Some people may say other players can’t do it. Can’t do what? Concentrate for long periods of time while they are practicing. Well, you’re right about that, but who cares?

I don’t appreciate the 400 stat at all, not that I feel it means nothing, I just don’t think it has any bearing on his status as a player whatsoever. His performances against other players, which has historically been quite good, is what sets his status level. He’s quite taken with the stat himself, but I really think if you sat him down and read this post to him, he’d begrudgingly agree.

mikepage
10-20-2017, 09:07 PM
Let me start off by saying Iím not hating. I actually really like John Schmidt and his game.

I think the stats he has in straight pool, although no doubt legit, are seriously overrated. Iím sure thereís been tons of great players who have put unheard of nine ball packages together in their basements, but who the hell cares?!

Mike Sigel ran 150 and out at least a couple of times I know of in major competitions. Thatís a stat. He won major straight pool tournaments. Thatís a stat.

Some people may say other players canít do it. Canít do what? Concentrate for long periods of time while they are practicing. Well, youíre right about that, but who cares?

I donít appreciate the 400 stat at all, not that I feel it means nothing, I just donít think it has any bearing on his status as a player whatsoever. His performances against other players, which has historically been quite good, is what sets his status level. Heís quite taken with the stat himself, but I really think if you sat him down and read this post to him, heíd begrudgingly agree.


The flip side is that we have so few stats in pool that are absolute measures that there is nothing wrong with honoring those few....

Cracktherack
10-21-2017, 04:54 AM
If you think John Schmidt isn't capable, you should ask him to play some for a friendly $$$ wager. Go ahead, knock some wind out of his sail by beating him down on the table.

Warning; A fool and his money are soon parted.

He is known as Mr.400. He likes 9 ball, 10 ball, 14.1 and One Pocket. Take a cushion for the seat of your chair and you'll be more comfortable while he runs out on you.

Black-Balled
10-21-2017, 05:19 AM
He’s quite taken with the stat himself, but I really think if you sat him down and read this post to him, he’d begrudgingly agree.

What kind of dumb shit are you typing?

My only hope is that you have given the matter such a low amount of thought to find it 'unimpressive'.

The man has a documented run of 400+balls. 200 is impressive and the envy of many.

The man won the us open.

Name another American and there was a point john schmidt played better.

He is a bad mofo and your silly thought wont change that.

Z-Nole
10-21-2017, 05:40 AM
Let me start off by saying Iím not hating. I actually really like John Schmidt and his game.

I think the stats he has in straight pool, although no doubt legit, are seriously overrated. Iím sure thereís been tons of great players who have put unheard of nine ball packages together in their basements, but who the hell cares?!

Mike Sigel ran 150 and out at least a couple of times I know of in major competitions. Thatís a stat. He won major straight pool tournaments. Thatís a stat.

Some people may say other players canít do it. Canít do what? Concentrate for long periods of time while they are practicing. Well, youíre right about that, but who cares?

I donít appreciate the 400 stat at all, not that I feel it means nothing, I just donít think it has any bearing on his status as a player whatsoever. His performances against other players, which has historically been quite good, is what sets his status level. Heís quite taken with the stat himself, but I really think if you sat him down and read this post to him, heíd begrudgingly agree.

What are you smoking? You know, they don't call it dope for nothin

Roscoe
10-21-2017, 06:00 AM
Straight pool separates the men from the boys.....

Roscoe

strmanglr scott
10-21-2017, 06:58 AM
What are you smoking? You know, they don't call it dope for nothin

Sometimes I check the time stamp of the post after reading incoherent or ignorant posts and think yeah, someone is not entirely themselves rt now.

Pushout
10-21-2017, 07:02 AM
Straight pool separates the men from the boys.....

Roscoe

This^. Absolutely, positively.

Texas Carom Club
10-21-2017, 07:16 AM
Op must be a rotation fan
This is typically rotation player bullshit , I will never understand how those games breed such a toxic culture
They don't have the mental fortitude for hard games


Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool
Than to open it and remove all doubt

dogginda9
10-21-2017, 07:33 AM
Let me start off by saying Iím not hating. I actually really like John Schmidt and his game.

I think the stats he has in straight pool, although no doubt legit, are seriously overrated. Iím sure thereís been tons of great players who have put unheard of nine ball packages together in their basements, but who the hell cares?!

Mike Sigel ran 150 and out at least a couple of times I know of in major competitions. Thatís a stat. He won major straight pool tournaments. Thatís a stat.

Some people may say other players canít do it. Canít do what? Concentrate for long periods of time while they are practicing. Well, youíre right about that, but who cares?

I donít appreciate the 400 stat at all, not that I feel it means nothing, I just donít think it has any bearing on his status as a player whatsoever. His performances against other players, which has historically been quite good, is what sets his status level. Heís quite taken with the stat himself, but I really think if you sat him down and read this post to him, heíd begrudgingly agree.

Ummmm, what?

Ekojasiloop
10-21-2017, 11:38 AM
If you think John Schmidt isn't capable, you should ask him to play some for a friendly $$$ wager. Go ahead, knock some wind out of his sail by beating him down on the table.

Warning; A fool and his money are soon parted.

He is known as Mr.400. He likes 9 ball, 10 ball, 14.1 and One Pocket. Take a cushion for the seat of your chair and you'll be more comfortable while he runs out on you.

Who said John Schmidt wasnít capable?

Learn to read bro.

Ekojasiloop
10-21-2017, 11:41 AM
What kind of dumb shit are you typing?

My only hope is that you have given the matter such a low amount of thought to find it 'unimpressive'.

The man has a documented run of 400+balls. 200 is impressive and the envy of many.

The man won the us open.

Name another American and there was a point john schmidt played better.

He is a bad mofo and your silly thought wont change that.

Learn to read.

Tin Man
10-21-2017, 12:17 PM
I am willing to concede that achievements in one's basement don't necessarily equate to results in competition. It is an incomplete measure as it doesn't factor in psychology, confidence, attitude, and heart.

That said, a high run in straight pool is a great measure of physical and technical skill.

Suppose you set up a spot shot and wanted to find out what someone's make percentage was. You couldn't have them just shoot it once. The results either way wouldn't be accurate. Of course the thing to do would be to have them shoot it many times and average it out.

That's fine to measure competence at one shot. But what about one game? How can you measure your overall technical skill at a game like straight pool? Which shot would you set up that would encompass being jacked up over the rack, using the bridge, speed control, nudging apart clusters, thin break shots, pattern play, etc?

There's only one way. To play the entire game.

And since there is no binary win/loss like with an individual shot, you can't play the entire game and 'take an average' of your success rate. Instead, the high run serves this purpose.

If someone is 50% to pocket any ball, then 1 in 10,000 times they should be able to run 8 balls. If someone is 95% to pocket a ball then they should have runs of 50+. Of course transitions rack to rack make some parts of the rack tougher on an individual ball basis, but overall running a lot of balls can reflect someone's overall consistency and ability to execute. Someone that's a banger simply isn't capable of a 50 or 100 ball run, it would be virtually mathematically impossible. So when someone does run 100 it's a milestone, because it reflects a high level of mastery over the entire array of skills needed to play successful pool.

Now, similar to the guy posting about the pointlessness of the 10 ball ghost, I will agree this doesn't equate to winning straight pool tournaments or competing under pressure. They are two different things. But in practice most people that can run multiple-hundreds of balls have tournament wins as well. I believe using your example that Mr. 400 has a US Open 9 ball title under his belt to go along with it. The fact that he considers them both meaningful should indicate the value it provides. Only an elite player can build a game that is capable of executing a run that long and challenging without an error.

vapoolplayer
10-21-2017, 12:25 PM
What kind of dumb shit are you typing?

My only hope is that you have given the matter such a low amount of thought to find it 'unimpressive'.

The man has a documented run of 400+balls. 200 is impressive and the envy of many.

The man won the us open.

Name another American and there was a point john schmidt played better.

He is a bad mofo and your silly thought wont change that.

Guy wins US Open and feels like his documented 400 run is just as coveted to him.

Guy on azbilliards says it means nothing......

This place hasnít changed a bit. 😎

JoeyInCali
10-21-2017, 12:40 PM
The Euros' domination of the Mosconi Cup.

Mr. Bond
10-21-2017, 12:41 PM
It is neither useless nor highly discussed.

Saturated Fats
10-21-2017, 01:10 PM
Of course, this means that Mosconi's 526 is nothing either.

Texas Carom Club
10-21-2017, 01:15 PM
Of course, this means that Mosconi's 526 is nothing either.

Nothing that anyone else can do that is
Not on any size table or pockets

Although I'd bet that if schmidty would take on the task of going for it on an 8fter with 5 inch pockets, he'd prolly do it at some point

Danimal
10-21-2017, 01:24 PM
Several guys have run 400.

JS is Mr. 400 because he's run 400+ twice.

He's also also in the hall of fame of the funniest pros you will ever meet.

Black-Balled
10-21-2017, 01:40 PM
Learn to read.

I do not see your defense of the claim that running 400 balls is a useless stat.

BmoreMoney
10-21-2017, 02:09 PM
I'm gonna a take a guess here - I think the OP was just trying to say a 400 ball run and 5 bucks will get you a cup of Starbucks coffee but not necessarily trying to diminish John's incredible feat. If this is correct then I agree with the OP, if he's not saying that then I completely disagree. I personally don't really care for st right pool - neither playing it nor watching it but I do respect it and certainly respect anyone who plays it at an elite level.

400 is definitely most impressive! Add in a US Open and that should tell you everything you need to know about John. But even more so than his accomplishments on the table, I really like him as I've always found John to be one of the nicest and most down to earth pros anywhere. As brought up in the recent " Mosconi " thread about someone breaking the record, well if there were to be a competition or prize for doing so I'd out my money on John doing it first . This is really sad but my high run is 29 lolol! Of course I don't play the game and I'd really like to believe I can do at least a little better than that but nine the less 400 just seems like a different world to me and I imagine most people as well. Kind of interesting , when I first started taking pool serious way back in my early teens I actually liked straight pool and played it often as my game of choice. ( that's when I got my 29!!!! Lololol). Anyhow, I have countless 14's but that dan break ball always got me. It was aways one of two things - either I didn't plan well enough to leave me a good break shot OR ( and this was most common ) I'd have a decent one but always felt the need to hit it at warp speed to obliterate the rack lol, often resulting in a miss.

The last game of 14.1 I played was right before leaving for SBE '14. I stopped in Big Daddys to try to get in stroke a little and this was right after I snapped someone and the room owner off playing onehole. There was only one other guy in there as it was early. He would not gamble, AND he only wanted to play straights. Normally for either of these two reasons I would have declined but I said what the hell, haven't played straight pool in 20 years so why not. The guy seemed decent enough. I have no real way of knowing but I'm confident I would crush him playing one hole - even 9 ball but 14.1 was this guy's game and he left himself good break shots and that was the difference. As stayed earlier , I had plenty of 10'space - 14's but no real runs. He beat me 150- 110 ish with a high run of 30 something I think. It was actually kind of fun. Maybe I'll play another game of it sometime before the next 20 years...... maybe .

wesand24
10-21-2017, 08:53 PM
If he devoted himself entirely to pool, he would be the best every year in pool, but he doesn't.

Nostroke
10-22-2017, 05:17 AM
You lost all credibility when you said "highly discussed' -Stop replaying that Accu-Stats tape where it is mentioned twice

Z-Nole
10-22-2017, 05:25 AM
So what is the most overused and over rated stat in pool? I'm can't really think of a good example.

Nostroke
10-22-2017, 05:29 AM
So what is the most overused and over rated stat in pool? I'm can't really think of a good example.

Maybe there isnt one-There doesnt have to be one you know.

RunoutJJ
10-22-2017, 07:40 AM
400 is a huge run. I would be very proud to hold that as a title.

jackpot
10-22-2017, 10:51 AM
I have decided to devote all playing time to breaking Mosconi's record. It is
quite a struggle, and I can see how it is still standing after all these years.
After a few weeks I ran 192, but missed the 13 ball that would have put me
at 205. On my very next try I got 2 racks for 240 but did not make a ball on
the break on the 3rd rack. BUMMER!! Got too break harder and better if I'm
going to do it. Wish me luck. I will keep you guys informed.
jack

PoolBum
10-22-2017, 11:18 AM
I have decided to devote all playing time to breaking Mosconi's record. It is
quite a struggle, and I can see how it is still standing after all these years.
After a few weeks I ran 192, but missed the 13 ball that would have put me
at 205. On my very next try I got 2 racks for 240 but did not make a ball on
the break on the 3rd rack. BUMMER!! Got too break harder and better if I'm
going to do it. Wish me luck. I will keep you guys informed.
jack

Hmmm....I think you multiplied when you should have divided by zero and carried the 1.

Straightpool_99
10-22-2017, 07:42 PM
I was going to say something quite harsh, but instead I'm going to make an attempt to educate you...
The high run stat is not at all useless, in fact I find it to be a near linear correlation between a persons high run and their overall skill, if the high run is recent AND the person has played a sufficient amount of straight pool.

A top professional will usually have a high run above 200, or at least very close. A run approaching 400 is exceptionally rare, even among professionals, even in the era of straight pool dominance. That should tell you something, but apparently it doesn't....
A very good amateur may also approach the 200 mark.
Even a person who rarely plays the game, will probably have run 100 if that person is an A player. B-C players are all over the map, but B-players are usually a bit below 100 and C players have maybe got 50 or slightly less. I don't know any C players with an above 70 ball high run, and above 50 is rare too.

The anomalies happen when the person never plays straight pool and doesn't really know how to play the game. Then you find the rare A player who has a suspiciously low high run. That doesn't really prove anything. There is some (but a lot less than rotation games) luck in straight pool, so a C player may, if he plays straight pool exclusively eventually get a nice high run with all the rolls in his favor, but that is also rare. Instead, they're mostly around the 30-40 mark, if that.

I don't know what you really mean by the statement that the high run is "useless". Have you ever met a pathetic, helpless player with a recent 100 ball run? I haven't. When a person has run 100 balls recently, there's a pretty good chance he's no pushover in any pool game, because during such a run almost every kind of shot is likely to come up.

Some people just don't play a lot of tournaments. Playing well in tournaments is a skill set in itself, and is not always completely correlated to technical prowess. Sometimes someone gets all the rolls through a tournaments and you get strange, unlikely winners, especially in games like 9 ball. Does that mean that they are superior to the technically brilliant players who choked or got unlucky on that day? Of course not. I know a guy that NEVER plays tournaments, but is a feared opponent of any player in my pool hall. Shall I tell him he's unskilled and all his training is useless?

I'm almost on the complete opposite of the spectrum compared to you, when it comes to judging the importance of tournaments and high runs. I have at times not entered tournaments, because I knew in advance that the best players were going to stay home. Winning such a tournament would be completely meaningless to me. I'm interested in becoming skilled at the game, not aquiring useless pieces of metal to throw in the back of my closet. A medal doesn't really prove ANYTHING of value, especially in 9 ball, unless of course it's a US Open or WPC medal, but that is quite different from the typical tournament. Winning a 9 ball tournament is dependent on your luck of the draw, opponents performance, rolls, and of course your own performance. We're playing races to 7 here. A race to 7 in 9 ball is as good as a coin toss between players that are even remotely closely matched but that is a fairly typical length of a race, some are even shorter. A straight pool run is almost solely dependent on your performance and to a very small extent; rolls.

Mr. Bond
10-24-2017, 10:20 PM
I was going to say something quite harsh, but instead I'm going to make an attempt to educate you...
The high run stat is not at all useless, in fact I find it to be a near linear correlation between a persons high run and their overall skill, if the high run is recent AND the person has played a sufficient amount of straight pool.

A top professional will usually have a high run above 200, or at least very close. A run approaching 400 is exceptionally rare, even among professionals, even in the era of straight pool dominance. That should tell you something, but apparently it doesn't....
A very good amateur may also approach the 200 mark.
Even a person who rarely plays the game, will probably have run 100 if that person is an A player. B-C players are all over the map, but B-players are usually a bit below 100 and C players have maybe got 50 or slightly less. I don't know any C players with an above 70 ball high run, and above 50 is rare too.

The anomalies happen when the person never plays straight pool and doesn't really know how to play the game. Then you find the rare A player who has a suspiciously low high run. That doesn't really prove anything. There is some (but a lot less than rotation games) luck in straight pool, so a C player may, if he plays straight pool exclusively eventually get a nice high run with all the rolls in his favor, but that is also rare. Instead, they're mostly around the 30-40 mark, if that.

I don't know what you really mean by the statement that the high run is "useless". Have you ever met a pathetic, helpless player with a recent 100 ball run? I haven't. When a person has run 100 balls recently, there's a pretty good chance he's no pushover in any pool game, because during such a run almost every kind of shot is likely to come up.

Some people just don't play a lot of tournaments. Playing well in tournaments is a skill set in itself, and is not always completely correlated to technical prowess. Sometimes someone gets all the rolls through a tournaments and you get strange, unlikely winners, especially in games like 9 ball. Does that mean that they are superior to the technically brilliant players who choked or got unlucky on that day? Of course not. I know a guy that NEVER plays tournaments, but is a feared opponent of any player in my pool hall. Shall I tell him he's unskilled and all his training is useless?

I'm almost on the complete opposite of the spectrum compared to you, when it comes to judging the importance of tournaments and high runs. I have at times not entered tournaments, because I knew in advance that the best players were going to stay home. Winning such a tournament would be completely meaningless to me. I'm interested in becoming skilled at the game, not aquiring useless pieces of metal to throw in the back of my closet. A medal doesn't really prove ANYTHING of value, especially in 9 ball, unless of course it's a US Open or WPC medal, but that is quite different from the typical tournament. Winning a 9 ball tournament is dependent on your luck of the draw, opponents performance, rolls, and of course your own performance. We're playing races to 7 here. A race to 7 in 9 ball is as good as a coin toss between players that are even remotely closely matched but that is a fairly typical length of a race, some are even shorter. A straight pool run is almost solely dependent on your performance and to a very small extent; rolls.

I must agree.
Anyone - I repeat - Anyone who can run 400 together has damn near experienced every possible shot and knows exactly how to get back to center table.

Run 100 on me and wow that's insane.
Run 200 and holy cow what did you eat for breakfast?

Run 400 ? Wtf just happened? Dead stroke.
Personally I don't care if it's at home or in an event, if you show me a video of you running 400+, you have my respect.

Dognit
10-25-2017, 12:03 AM
To the OP...

Id suggest a nice wager on a 400 pt 14.1 game with JS.

I bet it would be a more memorable stat...for one of you.

buckets
10-25-2017, 08:30 AM
Straight pool separates the men from the boys.....

Roscoe

Patience comes with age :)

Texas Carom Club
10-25-2017, 08:50 AM
For the op
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/7f/f3/30/7ff330990a7ef4cc8546d588b9703dc1--favorite-movie-quotes-funny-movie-quotes.jpg

Koop
10-25-2017, 09:00 AM
Stupidity knows no bounds!!!

Texas Carom Club
10-25-2017, 09:01 AM
Damn that one's funny!

Black-Balled
10-25-2017, 09:11 AM
He knows it was dumb.

Hasn't found an explanation for it yet.

Learn to read.
Who said John Schmidt wasnít capable?

Learn to read bro.