350.......
Watching mr. 400 trying to break the record
- Thread starter trob
- Start date
...duplicate...
John's a good player. 390, wow. I thought for sure I would see 400 today. I'll be watching tomorrow too, so maybe 400 then. The more I watch, the more I realize what a feat 526 was!
True that! Willie would always hit a ball three rails and shoot a couple of balls up and down the table. It didn't take much for him to gauge the speed of the table and how it banks. He just wanted to make sure nothing was wrong with the table. Since he was almost always playing on Gold Crowns (or in a few cases Medalists, Sport Kings or Anniversary's) he was pretty familiar with all these tables already. He would also take a walk around the table and inspect each pocket for a moment.
Under all the glossy stories, people seem to forget that Willie Mosconi was a pool savant. He probably knew as much or more about what constituted well made cues, good balls and cloth, and solid playing tables as anyone alive at that time. He KNEW Pool, forward and backward and had little time (or interest) to explain what he knew to those less informed. In other words, he didn't suffer fools lightly. :wink:
Last edited:
390! That's a big number. Even in the best of conditions 526 will be hard to equal. John's quest is proof of that. IMO you could pick any player you want (Orcullo, Filler, any of them) and let them try the same thing John is trying for a month or more and none of them is a favorite to run a 526. It could happen, but then again they're the underdog in this spot. So many people have criticized Willie's record but no one can seem to duplicate it. Of course it's only been sixty plus years. Give 'em time! :grin:
Last edited:
Even though John is a great straight pool player and all around pool player, I'm of the belief that if one of the more overall highly skilled players (e.g. very high Fargo rated players) did what John is doing, they would have a better chance to beat the record than John.
Some may disagree with me. But there is no real substitute for what an elite player can bring to running balls in 14.1.
Give SVB a month or two of playing nothing but 14.1, and I think everyone might be amazed at the numbers he could put up.
_______
exactly the same happened in the movie w Gleason and Newman.
Gleason (fats) missed the side pocket.
reason I mention this, I believe visually something happens to the eyes after playing long shots or corner pockets.
Happened to me and several others as well.
During a long run, you come up on the side pocket with an relatively easy shot and Miss.
The eyes flex, so... focus is good but maybe the eye hasn't finished flexing when you take the shot.
???
the side pocket gets everybody
Gleason (fats) missed the side pocket.
reason I mention this, I believe visually something happens to the eyes after playing long shots or corner pockets.
Happened to me and several others as well.
During a long run, you come up on the side pocket with an relatively easy shot and Miss.
The eyes flex, so... focus is good but maybe the eye hasn't finished flexing when you take the shot.
???
the side pocket gets everybody
I think John is probably doing just about as well as anyone could in trying to beat the record, but I believe it will evade him because of his "loosey goosey" style of play.
If you watch Mosconi in what few videos that are available, you never see him playing "loosey goosey" on any shot...even if it is a couple inches from the hole and he is two feet away.
John gets into a "gunslinger" mode and I think it causes him to not keep the mental side of the game in check like Mosconi did. Mosconi always looked like he was "fully" into the shot before he pulled the trigger...John, not so much.
I think Mosconi's "old school" PSR, closed bridge, and rock-solid mechanics maybe works a little better than John's style with his long open bridge and stance. Also, John seems to have a lot more balls up-table at times, where Mosconi tended to keep them down at the bottom half most of the time.
Mosconi's position was much tighter, too. He didn't let the cue ball run as much.
If you watch Mosconi in what few videos that are available, you never see him playing "loosey goosey" on any shot...even if it is a couple inches from the hole and he is two feet away.
John gets into a "gunslinger" mode and I think it causes him to not keep the mental side of the game in check like Mosconi did. Mosconi always looked like he was "fully" into the shot before he pulled the trigger...John, not so much.
I think Mosconi's "old school" PSR, closed bridge, and rock-solid mechanics maybe works a little better than John's style with his long open bridge and stance. Also, John seems to have a lot more balls up-table at times, where Mosconi tended to keep them down at the bottom half most of the time.
Mosconi's position was much tighter, too. He didn't let the cue ball run as much.
You got this one right on all counts. Willie never treated ANY shot like it was routine. He knew that he still needed to play good position for his next shot. He rarely shot a ball up table and very few into the side pockets. He made almost all his balls in the two bottom corners.
It was an 8 foot table with bucket pockets .... commercial or home is irrelevant .
Or maybe Grady was telling the truth and because it goes against your hero you think it’s a lie.
Again I’m in no way putting down mosconi’s record or think it shouldn’t be the record.. I just think Schmitt should be playing on the same size table. I promise you if Mosconi did it on a 9 foot and john was trying to break it on an 8 foot all of you saying equipment doesn’t matter for the record would be up in arms and refusing to give john credit if he would break it.
Again I’m in no way putting down mosconi’s record or think it shouldn’t be the record.. I just think Schmitt should be playing on the same size table. I promise you if Mosconi did it on a 9 foot and john was trying to break it on an 8 foot all of you saying equipment doesn’t matter for the record would be up in arms and refusing to give john credit if he would break it.
Last edited:
And I consider that to be Willie's greatest failing -- he did not pass on his knowledge to other players. I hope no one brings up his two instructional books that are very basic and contain some errors and apparently were not written by Willie. There are a couple of videos available but they are extremely basic. "Here is how to shoot the opening break shot."
Instead it would have been nice to have something like, "On this shot, Greenleaf would have left the cue ball here or here which are both good shots, but I leave myself a little more angle and take the cue ball to here which makes the next three shots easier." Or, "Here, some players leave themselves too much angle to break the cluster. I leave a fuller shot so I can control exactly how I hit on the seven ball and I bump it like that so this ball becomes a perfect key ball."
Bob, that was not a conversation Willie would ever have. He rarely hung around long after the exhibition was over to schmooze with people, maybe a few minutes. Once he got his check he was ready to go. He usually had someone with him and they would go out for dinner together. He was more concerned after the exhibition on where he was going to eat. He wasn't big on signing autographs either, unless he was getting paid for it.
With Willie, you had to learn by watching. He was a great pocket-er of balls, everything being hit crisply into center pocket. He moved the cue ball very precisely to exact positions for each successive shot, most of the time moving the cue ball short distances and staying close (12"-18") to the next object ball. Almost every ball was going into the two bottom pockets, with maybe one or two in a tough rack going to the side. He might hit one ball every few innings up table. He did not break the pack open hard enough to send balls up table. He was an excellent shot maker when necessary. If he was somehow left a tough shot he could buckle himself down and fire it in, and play position off of it. He could read the pack as well as anyone ever, finding dead balls where it looked like there was nothing. He knew HE was Wilie Mosconi and no one else was! :nono:
Caras was the closest I ever saw to Mosconi. He played a very similar game and his safety game may have been slightly superior to Mosconi. But Mosconi could put together high runs more frequently and that probably made the difference between them. Jimmy was good for those 50's, 60's and 70's, but Willie could hit you with an 80, 90 or 100 if he needed one.
One more tidbit of information. Lassiter did compete against both these guys in the 1950's and did okay but was clearly not the better player. Luther only became the dominant Straight Pool player after they had both retired. I don't think Caras ever played in Johnston City or the Stardust, although he did come back and win the U.S. Open Straight Pool in 1967 I believe. Lassiter's chief competition was from Joe Balsis and Irving Crane (and younger guys like Ed Kelly, Danny Diliberto, Lou Butera, Ray Martin and Steve Mizerak) who did compete at both JC and the Stardust (?) but was past his prime by then.
Last edited:
It was a different era.
And a lot of great players took their secrets to the grave, having never shared anything. You just didn't share deep knowledge back then.
Lou Figueroa
.
For me, this whole thing is like a carnival act. John should concentrate on breaking his own record run instead of someone else's.
Running 400 isn't even close to running 500.
John is good but he's no Mosconi.
Kind of reminds me of trying to make five eight on the breaks in a row.
I've done three in a row a few times but never five.
.
For me, this whole thing is like a carnival act. John should concentrate on breaking his own record run instead of someone else's.
Running 400 isn't even close to running 500.
John is good but he's no Mosconi.
Kind of reminds me of trying to make five eight on the breaks in a row.
I've done three in a row a few times but never five.
.
First, if he tries for mosconi's record then obviously he is ALSO trying to break his own,
and what's wrong with setting your sights high?
John is the first to admit running 100 more balls is "ten times harder" or "a hundred times harder"
...whether you're talking about 100 vs 200, or 400 vs 500. He says this all the time in interviews.
He has NEVER claimed to be better than Mosconi.
I cannot understand why people talk like he's some kind of a**hole for even trying,
like he's arrogant and needs to be taken down a peg.
John has a lot of humility for a guy who plays at his level.
These two records are not even in the same ballpark. You're comparing something
that is basically skill with a dash of luck, vs. something that is basically luck with a dash of skill.