Yes, I have. But of course the final shot was also available at the presentation at the restaurant in Orange, CA in March.
John Schmidt's 626
- Thread starter pk249
- Start date
So either you are calling me a liar or you are calling a friend of mine a fraud. Was that your intent?
With a cut and spin transfer, that looks makeable by hitting the 8 first with right english and slow speed. Unless he had teflon on the balls.
Tough to judge from the diagram, but sometimes there is just enough space between balls such as this, that the 8 ball could be cut into the combo without spin, you'll lose control, of course but it can be done with just the right amount of space.
Last edited:
No silicone if that's what you mean. I don't think John has ever used silicone on the balls.
But I think you mean left english as 3 needs to be thrown to the left.
So in your opinion this is a valid record? If so that is good enough proof for me. I think your reputation speaks for itself.
To me it looks like the 3 is lined up to the point of the short rail. That would mean the 3 ball needs to be thrown to the right as the shooter sees it. If the 8 is hit first, as full as possible, with a stun action and right english, as slow as you dare, it would put left english on the 8 which would throw the 3 to the right.
And yes, I meant silicone. I have sometimes used teflon spray on pool balls for a laugh, but it stinks and is hard to clean off. It's more common to use silicone, of course.
Anyway, I don't generally play on super clean equipment (balls are a little worn, and usually not highly polished), so with brand new balls, polished within an inch of their lives, the shot may not go. Hard to say without more testing.
Last edited:
My recollection of events, as posted here, is that you saw the video at a SoCal showing during which part of the video was shown at an accelerated speed.
Once again, to the best of my recollection, you have never said you carefully watched *every* shot, or that perhaps, in between drinks and whatever food stuffs were made available, your attention may have wandered. And, you have never, to the best of my recollection, stated any criteria for the run in terms of OB fouls, frequent polishing of the balls, removal of balls from the playing surface, racking, nor any observations about the pockets and slate.
Lastly, about the silicone -- there is at least one poster on this board who would probably take strong issue with your thoughts about about JS applying silicone to the balls, particularly the CB.
Regardless of all that, until an unedited version of the run is available for close examination for one and all, the validity of the run will always remain in question to many folks.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
If the BCA recognizes it, our opinions are worth as much as a bottomed out chalk.
I did go to the Orange, CA showing in March, 2020.
Considerably before that I sat and watched the entire original unedited recording. At that time I noted the position of each break ball and the number of the break ball. When there was any question I had the video rewound to the part needed. The entire video was at normal speed. I was watching for any touch fouls. I did not see any, which of course does not guarantee there were none.
I remember hearing about John posting that he's figured out something before the big run. Did you notice any difference in his play from his other runs?
I agree. The balls (8 and 3) are too far apart to throw. If the three is lined up towards the end rail side of the pocket as it appears, trying to throw it by hitting the 12 first is not likely to work as it appears the eight and three are at least a quarter inch apart. It appears from the photo, the only chance would be by playing the cue ball into the right side of the eight ball to cut the combo. I’m curious as to which of those two options he chose and where the 3 ball hit? The end rail or side rail side of the corner pocket?
Obviously if you move any of the 12, 8, or 3 even an 1/8" in certain directions it can make a pretty decent difference to the results here, and I realize your diagram may not perfectly represent the shot as it actually was, or perhaps even as you intended to show it (I also see the 8-3 as being lined up about a 1/2" from the pocket on the end rail. But the way the diagram actually sits it looks to me that the gap between the 8 and 3 is 1/2", and certainly on the plus side of 3/8". The maximum amount the 3 can be cut to the right with a 8-3 combo is without question going to be more than the maximum amount the 3 can be thrown right with a 12-8-3 combo. So as the diagram sits I think the best chance to make the 3 is by cutting the 8 just about perpendicular into the end rail, with either a little speed on the cue ball, or a little right on the cue ball, or both, to reduce or eliminate the cut induced right spin that would otherwise be on the 8 ball which in turn would would have translated into slightly increased the left cut/spin induced throw on the 3 ball, and you want to eliminate as much left throw on the 3 as possible because whatever amount of left throw is transferred is cancelling out some of the right cut on the 3 and you need all the right cut on the 3 you can get here to maximize the chances for pocketing it.
I think it would be impossible to throw the 3 much if any to the right by hitting the 8 first. Regardless of how you hit the 8-3 combo I think it would probably be trying to throw the 3 to the left (although that shot would end up cutting the 3 ball to the right).
And while your right english on the cue ball would want to try to put left english on the 8 as you said, the fact that the cue ball is hitting the 8 on the right side will be trying to impart right spin from the collision cancelling much or all of the effect from the cue ball's right english, and as a result I think you are going to end up with little or no left spin on the 8. And even if the 8 does have some left spin on it, the same thing happens again, where the collision between the 8 and 3 is trying to impart left/spin and throw on the 3 which offsetting whatever left spin you had on the 8. On net I think you are more likely to end up with left throw on the 3 ball if anything by hitting the 8 first and would be doing good to just eliminate that left throw so that the right cut on the 3 would be able to be maximized.
And if you accidentally or intentionally cut the 8 into the 12 a bit, the chances of ever being able to get right throw on the 3 by hitting the 8 first go down even more and probably about into the realm of impossibility it would seem.
Although the 4 is an ideal break ball, in hindsight it looks like his best shot to continue the run would be to play the 6 to set up a better angle on the 4, to come around 2 cushions to pocket the 3 in the same pocket as the 4 and maybe break out one of the remaining 2 balls into position for a break shot.
That's all the verification I personally need. There isn't anybody more knowledgeable in pool, he has always been known to be a straight shooter about things, and I can't conceive of any reason for him to want or need to lie here.
Last edited:
Yes, in hindsight. If the combo appears to be dead, it eliminates the hard shot with hard position. My own tendency in a situation like this is to believe that the easy solution will work. That's a bad tendency.
I went and watched some of each of the four series of attempts. Each series was for about a month but not every day and some play days were short. In the early attempts it seemed that there were about three pretty hard shots per rack. John kept making them. It is possible to run 400 like that, evidently.
In the later series of attempts it seemed like there were far fewer hard shots.
I think John may have been referring to something about the break shot, such as the best speed or choice of angle/spin or such. I'm not sure.
Statistics from all of his runs that were over 100 balls shows which balls in the rack he was most likely to miss. From those stats, he was about 1/22 to miss the break shot and also about 1/22 to miss the shot after the break shot. For all the other shots taken as a group, he was about 1/134 to miss each one.
Here is a diagram of shot 627. I imagine that John was thinking that the only way the run would continue was for the 8-3 combo to throw enough to make the 3. It didn't throw.
![CropperCapture[115].jpg](https://forums.azbilliards.com/data/attachments/414/414351-73d4e99d4ad05f2dbdd86860b12abd7e.jpg "CropperCapture[115].jpg")
Is that the layout as well?
The 6 and 4 afford a simple way to get under the three balls with all three three looking good for the back corners. Yes I know hundreds of balls down but that kind of intermediate failure shows a guy out of headroom. 5" pockets indeed...
OK, so what about the rest of my question?
Also, why were you given, what sounds like, a special viewing of the tape and do you know why it has not been released to a wider audience?
Lou Figueroa
Funny you mention that. I was actually thinking the same thing the more I looked at the diagram. Knowing myself, if I would have missed the combo, I would have immediately thought - "Why didn't you just shoot in the 6 ball??" Watching a professional makes pool fun. Playing it yourself, well, I don't get that same feeling, lol..
Bob, is that diagram accurate? I'm assuming it is and it appears there's somewhere around 3/8ths of an inch between the 8 and 3. The 12 looks to be frozen to the 8.
If that's the case then I can't see how he missed the shot.
I don't know if it was mentioned but I'm assuming he hit the 8 1st, not the 12. But you keep mentioning left english which would be counterproductive if contacting the 8 1st and pretty much irrelevant if hitting the 12 1st.
I'm confused as to what actually happened. Could you clarify what he did and what if anything he said about why he thought it missed. Because from what I see on the diagram this shot is 100 % makeable unless mishit somehow.
If that's the case then I can't see how he missed the shot.
I don't know if it was mentioned but I'm assuming he hit the 8 1st, not the 12. But you keep mentioning left english which would be counterproductive if contacting the 8 1st and pretty much irrelevant if hitting the 12 1st.
I'm confused as to what actually happened. Could you clarify what he did and what if anything he said about why he thought it missed. Because from what I see on the diagram this shot is 100 % makeable unless mishit somehow.