That final break shot which scratched was hit with right (outside) english, not left (inside english). The counter clockwise spin on the cue ball in combination with the possible bulging red dot on the bottom of the cue ball (as it was spinning) is the best explanation of what caused the strange curve towards the pocket. I agree it was still a remarkable run, and I'm guessing the mental anguish of how close he had come to the record (within 100 balls) and the strange way that run ended has required John to take a break from it for a while to recharge his batteries.
14.1 Stats -- John Schmidt's Run of 434 on Video, December 2018
- Thread starter AtLarge
- Start date
They certainly didn't scratch as often as Hohmann the first time I saw him in the New Jersey State Championship (I think it was the first year he played, at Comet). At least two of his long runs ended when the cue ball hit the lower side of a rack ball and flew straight into the foot corner pocket, the draw being unable to curve it away in time.
The one scratch on the break by an "old style" player I remember was by Pete Margo in an exhibition. On the standard side of the rack break shot with a thin cut, the cue ball followed through the rack to the side pocket, ending the run of 198. Everyone agreed it was a horrible roll. When the "modern" break scratches, it's just what it does sometimes.
Another way to look at it is by the percentages that Mosconi, Cranfield, Crane and Eufemia must have had to get into the next rack successfully. They were about 90% to get into the next rack from the break shot of this rack, and about 99% for any individual shot. To maintain percentages like that, if your break is "dangerous" to the tune of several percent, you have to tighten up the percentages on all your other shots.
My June, 2006 article in Billiards Digest discusses these percentages: http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/BD_articles.html
Last edited:
Last edited:
So I just watched the scratch for the first time in the video Dr. Dave has posted. That's the craziest scratch I've ever seen. After watching it I agree I don't think it hit anything like a piece of debris. I like Dr Dave's ball turn theory, but for a curve that dramatic I think there has to be something else at work also like an issue with the table. I haven't watched the entire run, but if there is one game where you may not notice a roll off in the table until too late it would be a game like straight pool where not too many balls are played up table and certainly not rolled with a slow speed.
The current plan is for John to try some more during the month starting May 6th.
Good video. Brutal roll.
Dr. Dave — Respectfully, I was not anticipating that you would identify, as a possible cause (in whole or in part) of the movement of the cue ball, a “bulging” red dot on the cue ball without providing any analysis based on the scientific method. Might you be able to provide some references, if not test results?
Thanks and regards,
Seth
I listed this only as a possible contributing factor, which is fairly weak. I have not done any analysis or testing. Although, the "analysis" is easy. If the ball is rolling forward with a lot of sidespin with a bulging dot close to the contact point (which appears plausible in the video), it would be like the CB is sitting on a slanted surface, which will cause it to turn. The testing would be difficult. First, I would need a CB with a bulging dot, and then I would need to find a way to make it spin and roll forward with a slight tilt with the dot close to the bottom.
Honestly, I think "ball turn" is the primary (maybe only) cause for John's scratch (it also didn't help that he lost control of the CB); but since I'm not entirely sure, I wanted to list other possible contributing factors.
Regards,
Dave
I havent read thru this entire thread but I can tell you on new cloth, balls tend to funnel into pockets due to pulling the cloth tight into the pockets.
His shot appears to be a perfect storm. Lots of spin, slowing forward motion which gives spin a chance to grab, and cloth stretch.
His shot appears to be a perfect storm. Lots of spin, slowing forward motion which gives spin a chance to grab, and cloth stretch.
I think the cloth was about six months old at the time of the video.
I watched the video again this evening, primarily looking for any other instances of a ball rolling slowly toward the head rail on the side of the table where John's run ended with the scratch -- to see if any identifiable table roll was present. I didn't notice any such occurrences in the whole run.
As mentioned in post #1, 22 balls were pocketed where John scratched. None of those shots showed table roll (but most were at medium speed).
I agree, Dan. The CB wobbled as it came to a stop dozens of times all over the table.
Agree. Does anyone here know the proprietor of Easy Street Billiards? If so, would you mind speaking with him to see if the cue ball used by John for that run is still identifiable and if it could be examined closely for roundness, bulges, flat spots, etc. Is it a legitimate Aramith ball, or could it be a counterfeit? That last shot has certainly been of interest, and it would be nice to know whether a CB defect was a factor in the scratch.
I spotted another time John marked the CB with a piece of chalk and, presumably (it was off camera), cleaned it -- between Racks 15 and 16 at about 47:08. So (unless we spot another time) it was off the table 4 times (once with BIH).
As mentioned in post #1, 22 balls were pocketed where John scratched. None of those shots showed table roll (but most were at medium speed).
I agree, Dan. The CB wobbled as it came to a stop dozens of times all over the table.
Agree. Does anyone here know the proprietor of Easy Street Billiards? If so, would you mind speaking with him to see if the cue ball used by John for that run is still identifiable and if it could be examined closely for roundness, bulges, flat spots, etc. Is it a legitimate Aramith ball, or could it be a counterfeit? That last shot has certainly been of interest, and it would be nice to know whether a CB defect was a factor in the scratch.
I spotted another time John marked the CB with a piece of chalk and, presumably (it was off camera), cleaned it -- between Racks 15 and 16 at about 47:08. So (unless we spot another time) it was off the table 4 times (once with BIH).
The scratch was most likely due to the "way" the cloth was stretched.
No hair is gonna cause that. Also, if it was a "raised" dot on CB.....well, it would have happens everytime that dot rolled on table at similar speeds.
Bottom line: it got unluckily in a "cloth track" that led to the pocket.
Also, come on people, give the "he cleaned the ball", took BIH... etc...etc... stuff a rest. Its getting old.
To me.... unless I can "even get close" to what he is doing..... LOL...... I'm not gonna judge and compare his runs to anyone else's runs that I didn't see.
I know a ton of non-playing A55hats in my area that RIP John a new one right after they fail on a 50 to 60 ball run.
<<<<< shakes head....
No hair is gonna cause that. Also, if it was a "raised" dot on CB.....well, it would have happens everytime that dot rolled on table at similar speeds.
Bottom line: it got unluckily in a "cloth track" that led to the pocket.
Also, come on people, give the "he cleaned the ball", took BIH... etc...etc... stuff a rest. Its getting old.
To me.... unless I can "even get close" to what he is doing..... LOL...... I'm not gonna judge and compare his runs to anyone else's runs that I didn't see.
I know a ton of non-playing A55hats in my area that RIP John a new one right after they fail on a 50 to 60 ball run.
<<<<< shakes head....
That's not table roll, that's grain tracking, sorry. And a piece of chalk could have changed the cue balls direction, but NOT kept it turning right into the center of the corner pocket!! I'd be willing to bet the roll off could be reproduced if the cue ball was shot In the same pathway, at the same speed.
I'm not sure "what" caused his scratch, but I've played with measle cue balls that I "felt" had "bulging" spots.
I've also played with some where the "spots" seem to be either "slicker" or "less slick" than the white material of the cue ball.
That is one of the reasons I never play with them.
I've also played with some where the "spots" seem to be either "slicker" or "less slick" than the white material of the cue ball.
That is one of the reasons I never play with them.
Rolling across a raised dot is a lot different from spinning like a top on the dot. The former gives you little bumps each time the dot comes around. The latter possibly causes a continuous force to one side.
As I've stated before, no significant roll-off was noticed at any other time by that pocket.
IMO, it was Mosconi's hand.. or maybe Jack Klugman's.