Did Scmidt set new record

You get something on the CB, fine, have a ref clean it off.

But polishing 14 of them mid-run makes the racks open up like bags of spilt popcorn. Instead of the mountain getting steeper the higher you ascend, the more balls you run, and managing the stack requiring more care and skill, the balls open up with ease.

A ref is also useful. When you're shooting at lots and lots of balls... fouls and push shots can easily happen that cannot always be picked up on on video.

And then there is the issue discussed here not too long ago in the 14.1 forum about balls being racked high, being racked low, the rack being twisted this way or that to avoid a scratch or help the spread -- you think the rack can be manipulated at 9ball or 10ball -- try 14.1 to really see what can be done to help the shooter. It's another reason to have a ref/neutral racker taking part in any high run festivities.

Maybe all that is being taken care of. I dunno.

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
lfigueroa said:
You get something on the CB, fine, have a ref clean it off.

But polishing 14 of them mid-run makes the racks open up like bags of spilt popcorn. Instead of the mountain getting steeper the higher you ascend, the more balls you run, and managing the stack requiring more care and skill, the balls open up with ease.

A ref is also useful. When you're shooting at lots and lots of balls... fouls and push shots can easily happen that cannot always be picked up on on video.

And then there is the issue discussed here not too long ago in the 14.1 forum about balls being racked high, being racked low, the rack being twisted this way or that to avoid a scratch or help the spread -- you think the rack can be manipulated at 9ball or 10ball -- try 14.1 to really see what can be done to help the shooter. It's another reason to have a ref/neutral racker taking part in any high run festivities.

Maybe all that is being taken care of. I dunno.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

A ref or any other person to do the fielding is right on.
...and the triangle drawn in.

Toronto...not so much straight pool or one pocket played here in the 90s.

A room I worked at...we were having some 9-footers re-clothed...

...told the partners I was going to make two of them a 14.1-one pocket section...
....so I drew the triangle and a straight line from the spot to the end rail.
...that was late at night,
...came in the next afternoon, they’d been checking the security footage to see who
Vandalized their tables......%&#@% snooker players......:D
..told them it was time they learned some of the finer points of pool.


At least it’s nice you see the value of playing with pristine balls, Lou....
..not too much to ask from a guy who has a ball cleaner in his living room...:shocked:
 
Low500 said:
Was the Mosconi 526 run made on a 'little' 4x8 or on an oversize 4x8?
Someone here said they had played on the table??
Click to expand...

I played on it ...14 years later....no idea if it was over-sized,,,but I suspect it was...
...that’s how Brunswick used up their old 9-foot slate with the old bolting system.

I was a kid with a lot of stroke and not too much knowledge then...
...I just wanted to bet my cash and fire balls into pockets.
 
pt109 said:
I played on it ...14 years later....no idea if it was over-sized,,,but I suspect it was...
...that’s how Brunswick used up their old 9-foot slate with the old bolting system.

I was a kid with a lot of stroke and not too much knowledge then...
...I just wanted to bet my cash and fire balls into pockets.
Click to expand...

According to what Russ Maddox told me ( who owned the room after the record was set but still had the same table there ), it was an over-sized 8. For whatever that's worth.
 
jay helfert said:
I grew up in nearby Dayton and played in that room in the early 60's. I may have played on that very table. There weren't any tables with big pockets in that poolroom, I'm guessing all were slightly under 5", maybe 4.75". The old Brunswick Sport Kings "oversized" eight footers (46" x 92" playing surface) that I grew up on were NOT soft tables! They had straight cut pockets with deep shelves. You damn sure would miss if you hit the corners of the pocket. ...
Click to expand...

..........

[not sure if Jay was saying it was an oversized Sport King that Willie used]
 
pt109 said:
The Hyatts were still inferior to modern balls....
...one form of ‘mud racking’ was to make sure spots or stripes were touching in the rack.

The ‘89 trade show in Nashville...Raschig showed their product,,,,
..the balls stayed within 2/1000 off round, even when crossing a stripe or number....
....on a spherical micrometer.
Sometime later, Aramith bought Super Crystalate...and brought them up to par.
Click to expand...

Raschig are probably the best billiard balls ever produced. I wish I hadn't sold my set. I know the tolerances were the most exact of any set ever made. In other words, the balls were the closest to perfectly round and their weight was the closest to exactly the same throughout the rack. .003-.005 of an inch in size and weight in variance is considered an excellent set of balls.
 
Low500 said:
Was the Mosconi 526 run made on a 'little' 4x8 or on an oversize 4x8?
Someone here said they had played on the table??
Click to expand...

I played in that poolroom in the early 60's. All the tables were over-sized 8' (46" x 92"), which was very common in Midwestern poolrooms of that period.
 
jay helfert said:
Raschig are probably the best billiard balls ever produced. I wish I hadn't sold my set. I know the tolerances were the most exact of any set ever made. In other words, the balls were the closest to perfectly round and their weight was the closest to exactly the same throughout the rack. .003-.005 of an inch in size and weight in variance is considered an excellent set of balls.
Click to expand...
The brand new Aramiths I've measured recently were within 0.001. Of course after a few months of play and cleaning, they won't be that close.
 
Bob Jewett said:
The brand new Aramiths I've measured recently were within 0.001. Of course after a few months of play and cleaning, they won't be that close.
Click to expand...

Those are the best balls I've ever heard of! They must have made some advancements in the manufacturing process.
 
jay helfert said:
Those are the best balls I've ever heard of! They must have made some advancements in the manufacturing process.
Click to expand...
They were at a Trade Show so maybe they were tournament grade. As many balls as they make they could select the best. I've heard that for major carom tournaments they do a bounce test off a steel anvil to find the most elastic balls.
 
Bob Jewett said:
They were at a Trade Show so maybe they were tournament grade. As many balls as they make they could select the best. I've heard that for major carom tournaments they do a bounce test off a steel anvil to find the most elastic balls.
Click to expand...

Interesting thought.

Is there anything like ANSI standards that apply to our equipment?
 
Mr. Wilson said:
... Is there anything like ANSI standards that apply to our equipment?
Click to expand...
The only WPA ball specs are on diameter (2.25+-.005 inches, which is easy) and weight. For weight you are allowed 156 to 170 grams which is pitiful if seen in one set. Typically, the measurements people have posted here are +-1 gram for a new set.

At snooker the weight of the balls is actually not specified but the variation over a set is limited to +-3 grams. At English billiards (played on a "snooker" table) the allowed difference between any pair of balls in the three-ball set is +-0.5 grams. At billiards accurate ball weight is critical.

I believe that carom requires pre-approval of any ball type to be used in sanctioned tournaments. At pool, it would be possible to show up at an event and have to play with camo balls made of polystyrene. Oops... Nix that. Camo design is not permitted; the colors have to be solid.

I see now that the colors of the balls are actually specified in the WPA regulations:

The object balls numbered 1 through 8 have solid colors as follows: 1=yellow, 2=blue, 3=red, 4=purple, 5=orange, 6=green, 7=maroon and 8=black. The object balls numbered 9 through 15 are white with a centered band of color as follows: 9=yellow, 10=blue, 11=red, 12=purple, 13=orange, 14=green and 15=maroon. The two printed numbers 6 and 9 are underscored.​
I assume that some exception is granted for the "TV" sets.
 
Bob Jewett said:
The only WPA ball specs are on diameter (2.25+-.005 inches, which is easy) and weight. For weight you are allowed 156 to 170 grams which is pitiful if seen in one set. Typically, the measurements people have posted here are +-1 gram for a new set.

At snooker the weight of the balls is actually not specified but the variation over a set is limited to +-3 grams. At English billiards (played on a "snooker" table) the allowed difference between any pair of balls in the three-ball set is +-0.5 grams. At billiards accurate ball weight is critical.

I believe that carom requires pre-approval of any ball type to be used in sanctioned tournaments. At pool, it would be possible to show up at an event and have to play with camo balls made of polystyrene. Oops... Nix that. Camo design is not permitted; the colors have to be solid.

I see now that the colors of the balls are actually specified in the WPA regulations:

The object balls numbered 1 through 8 have solid colors as follows: 1=yellow, 2=blue, 3=red, 4=purple, 5=orange, 6=green, 7=maroon and 8=black. The object balls numbered 9 through 15 are white with a centered band of color as follows: 9=yellow, 10=blue, 11=red, 12=purple, 13=orange, 14=green and 15=maroon. The two printed numbers 6 and 9 are underscored.​
I assume that some exception is granted for the "TV" sets.
Click to expand...


I actually meant production controls...but it would be nice if we could homogenize the balls:thumbup:
 
Bob Jewett said:
I think that would be ISO-9000 standards. ANSI standards are more general, I believe.
Click to expand...

At one time, I was certified as an auditor for ISO 9000

ISO doesn't tell you a specific standard to meet..ie weight, size etc.
It mandates production controls such as traceability for lot control.., certain methodology, record keeping, chains of custody...stuff like that.
If they said here is how we produced this product, they could show records to confirm such.

I thought *maybe* they could mandate size, weight, color and even material they are made of. To go further, maybe how they play, as you mentioned by bouncing them to determine a specific range of "bounce"...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scleroscope

here is a method I used to employ to check materials that were too big or too remote to check with other conventional methods.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top