Is Schmidt's and charlie 626 Legit

[gerryf]

Not crying fraud, just asking to see the unedited footage - that apparently does not even exist. So please stop with the accusations, again - if Willie's 526 has been surpassed on camera - the World has a right to see the footage. As I stated my business example - is actually a solid analogy, there are many on this forum that are undecided about whether to BELIEVE the possibly phony 626 Claim - however if they had to bet there own cash flow - they might not. None of yer weak hollywood cancel culture drones will be able to convince the majority of the public - that Willie's World Record - has in fact been preceded.

Well, yes, you have been crying fraud. Read your posts. Read a dictionary. My dictionary defines fraud as "a person or thing intended to deceive others, typically by unjustifiably claiming or being credited with accomplishments or qualities." You've accused Schmidt, the BCA, Predator and anyone else who accepts the new record.

Why do you say the unedited footage doesn't exist? Did Schmidt, the BCA, or anyone else involved in this say that? Or is it just a story you're trying to start? Remember when you tried to start the story that people viewing the video had to sign an NDA? That was BS. Remember when you were claiming shaved slates? More BS. And you spread a lot more BS besides.

"The World has a right to see the footage" Well, no they don't. The sanctioning body for the high-run record has seen the evidence and accepted the record. Some people have a "desire" to see the footage, and they can do that by attending an 'Evening with John Schmidt" Many have. But they have to pay for it. Similarly, if you want the original footage, you'd have to pay for that. If you offered Schmidt $10,000 he might provide it. But you're not offering anything, just whining that Schmidt isn't giving it away or selling it for peanuts. You may not agree with his monetizing strategy, but it's his video to sell how he sees fit.

I think you're well behind the times. The "majority of the public" has already accepted this record and moved on. You're the one holding grievances against anyone who may have slighted you, and you've decided Schmidt, Agnir, Jewett, Wilson, the BCA, the pool room owner, etc., etc., are those people.

Just a talker. Just a whiner.

 

[JB Cases]

A mensch, lol?

Do you even know what that means?

mensch | men(t)SH |
noun (plural menschen | ˈmenCHən | or mensches)
North American informal

a person of integrity and honor.

Sorry, you got no chance.

Lou Figueroa

Yep, that's me. A person with integrity and honor.

That's why I would save you if I had the opportunity to do so.

Unlike you who supports the accussation hurled at John Schmidt of criminal fraud and stupidity WHILE claiming to be "good" with him, after the last round of denigration that got you put on John's shit list the first time.

That type of behavior on your part is not showing integrity nor honor.

Nor do you even have the balls to admit that you are accusing John of criminal fraud. "Have my doubts" is your professional "spin".

You have pretty much done everything you can to cast doubt on the world record in this thread. To the point where you even want to argue about whether the bca's acceptance of it is even meaningful.

I don't know what John thinks about your comments here but they certainly don't feel like you're talking about someone you are good with.

With friends like these.......

 

[Dan Harriman]

I understand, but you were young in that video, of course.

That is fair to say. If you forced me to make a decision right now based on what we know to date, I'd have to say the run is legit. However, if it is my own money on the line I want to see the original video. I think the run should be made public unedited if it is to be accepted universally as the new record. I still don't think this was an exhibition record but more a practice record. Should it matter? Another discussion I guess.

If there is a problem with the run it is more likely a cue ball foul that wasn't noticed or some technical thing like that rather than an intentional scam. That's just my opinion. JS has always been nice to me and my father whenever we had occasion to talk. It was funny -- in one group lesson he gave he said he used to be a real asshole when he was young. His words.

Ranger that, as far as 'exhibition record' vs 'practice record - I'm not hear to get lost in that "entanglement" - that is just "measurement interference." Thanks for the clarification - your alright in my book Dan, I am slowly trying to move away from Danny to Dan - I have no qualitative evidence that it will stick or be accepted from Open Public or even friends. Your posts are well articulated Dan - thanks for that. My short term goal with this thread - is to let the readers decide for themselves whether or not the "semi evidence" that bca/nytime report err' has produced and or directed - to be deemed - extraordinary evidence. I am learning how to behave - if there is no Proper Pocket Billiard Sports History Adjudication committee. It is not easy on me to see these special interest groups - create or try to engineer a Claim into more than folklore - without releasing the unedited video - that they claim to have. So far the EXPERIMENTAL evidence the bca has presented is 'obfuscated' - if bca were to release the unedited video of this hidden 626 - well I would call that 'elucidated' evidence.

 

[Black-Balled]

I noticed in yer and ken's commentary of Tar (14.1) match between j.s. and myself - you and ken mentioned that schmitt was a Mosconi Cup Team member, also noticed y'all did not mention that I too was a Mosconi Cup team member in yer commentary. I think maybe that's because y'all weren't grooming the public for me towards - any attempted theft of Mosconi's 526 - thanks for that accolade fred & fell low' bca collaborators. I really mean that - thanks.

Sometimes the simplest answer is the most likely:
Cause everybody and everything is about you.

But seriously, you'd have to be living in a fantasy world to think TAR was scripted, part of a master plan for pool world takeover or concerned with much past getting action matches and paying the bills to put on the next event.

You and John coulda been far better participants and the fiasco associated with your matchups absolutely had a profound impact on TAR's desire to do what it do.

 

[Dan Harriman]

if it is my own money on the line I want to see the original video.

Thanks again, I knew you were honest. For anyone else - who pays taxes - it IS there $ too i.e - belief/investment - that is on the line.

 

[lfigueroa]

Yep, that's me. A person with integrity and honor.

That's why I would save you if I had the opportunity to do so.

Unlike you who accuses John Schmidt of criminal fraud and stupidity WHILE claiming to be "good" with him, after the last round of denigration that got you put on John's shit list the first time.

That type of behavior on your part is not showing integrity nor honor.

Nor do you even have the balls to admit that you are accusing John of criminal fraud. "Have my doubts" is your professional "spin".

You have pretty much done everything you can to cast doubt on the world record in this thread. To the point where you even want to argue about whether the bca's acceptance of it is even meaningful.

I don't know what John thinks about your comments here but they certainly don't feel like you're talking about someone you are good with.

With friends like these.......

I'm not going to bother -- I'm just reporting your post to the mods and MH.

Lou Figueroa

 

[JB Cases]

I'm not going to bother -- I'm just reporting your post to the mods and MH.

Lou Figueroa

Go ahead, I don't know what else having doubt means in a thread where the thread starter has explicitly accused John and his team of fraud and you keep agreeing without explicitly saying it.

You have taken every opportunity to attempt to argue against the verified BCA certification.

So here is your opportunity to state clearly that you think John's record is legitimate and thus him charging people money to watch the video of him running 626 is not in any way fraudulent.

 

[JB Cases]

Two years, 5/27/19 - 5/27/21? Easier to find info about dodo birds or Rodrigues Solitaire.

Info about what? All of the details of John's historic 626 have been released as far as I know.

 

[JB Cases]

Thanks again, I knew you were honest. For anyone else - who pays taxes - it IS there $ too i.e - belief/investment - that is on the line.

So dramatic. Now it's a threat to taxpayer's money?

It must really burn you up that your "nemesis" broke Mosconi's record. I can only imagine how you received the news..... God no anyone but HIM!

So much hatred exudes through your posts. So much so that you can't possibly see how publicly awkward you come across to the readers.

I can only tell you that when I read some of my earlier posts they are quite cringe-worthy. Maybe a day will come when you look back on your content here and see it like we see it.

 

[Black-Balled]

The last statement above could be very telling, if it's accepted on face value.
Dan Harriman has been very gracious(I'm not him) in asking for proof of a claim and seeking others thoughts about the legitimacy of the claim.
He has been thoroughly accused, by many posters here, of being schizophrenic.(I'm not him)
He has been accused, by those same posters, of needing psychiatric help.(I'm not him)
Others expound upon his thoughts and make charges of what they think that he means when he communicates his thoughts very well.(I'm not him)
They have demeaned his writing style as well as his choice of words.(I'm not him)
They have accused him(I'm not him) of using many different userid's to post as others and not as Himself,(I'm not him) without any proof of that either.

Oh, and the preceding was not written by Charles 'danny' Harriman.(I'm not not him)

 

[JB Cases]

The last statement above could be very telling, if it's accepted on face value.
Dan Harriman has been very gracious in asking for proof of a claim and seeking others thoughts about the legitimacy of the claim.
He has been thoroughly accused, by many posters here, of being schizophrenic.
He has been accused, by those same posters, of needing psychiatric help.
Others expound upon his thoughts and make charges of what they think that he means when he communicates his thoughts very well.
They have demeaned his writing style as well as his choice of words.
They have accused him of using many different userid's to post as others and not as Himself, without any proof of that either.

Feels terrible to be accused without proof doesn't it?

 

[JB Cases]

There is absolutely no comparison of the two runs.
1. Mosconi; run starts with legal 14.1 rack and break during an exhibition and continues from zero to 526.
2. Schmidt; 1100+ attempted runs start with legal 14.1 rack with head ball removed and placed wherever on the playing field Schmidt chose to place it as a break ball along with the chosen placement of the cue ball for each starting attempt.

Schmidt had played enough 14.1 Continuous Pocket Billiards to know how an exhibition must start with an opponent and a legal 14.1 rack and break, or actually call it what it was, just practicing for running high runs.
Carry on, please and fill in some of the missing details, since there have been none provided in the two years since the claim was made.

Oh my god......

Seriously? A run starts with a pocketed ball and continues until an ball is missed.

To disclaim and defame a world record run because one was started during an exhibition match and the other was started as a deliberate attempt at a long run is really nitty.

To say that there is no comparison between them is not factual.

What do you not know about John Schmidt's world record run of 626 balls that you think you should know?

 

[JB Cases]

Well my first instructional dvd was a 280 ball run - with commentary, the fellow who helped me produce the dvd was a professional. He had the dvd locked, the only way they could dub a copy off was through a special machine (most do not have this particular device). So while yer and j.s. excuse sounds ok - it is not. I sold many copies of my 280 and not just ANY idiot could dub off a copy. I CAN and WILL deny that the bca has access to a unedited copy, this gets back to my investment theory. The two people at bca who originally CLAIMED to have seen unedited proof - are not recognized as 14.1 aficionados - at all. As far as the moon landing - yer getting out in left felt - along with yer buddy cuedup. While the bca - may be yer daddy - I seriously doubt you would bet $10,000 of yer own $ that the bca and or j.s have an unedited run of 626 in 14.1 re rack. Please refrain from posting anymore of yer medical elite diagrams, I am familiar with u hypo glitch types that hide behind science.

Lol, yes you're right, no one has access to RCA cables, a DVD player, a television and DVD writer.

I would bet $10,000 that John Schmidt has the original recording. Are you willing to bet that he doesn't? If so let's make arrangements and I will let John keep the whole ten thousand when he produces the video by way of allowing you a single viewing of it with cameras and witnesses present who are 14.1 "certified".

I think the "reaction" video of you watching John run 626 will get a ton of views on YouTube. For sure you will be ok with publishing that video for free consumption as you value full transparency right?

I will back that action 100% and if you want to bet more we can.

 

[Cuedup]

I think the "reaction" video of you watching John run 626 will get a ton of views on YouTube.

*subscribed*

 

[JB Cases]

So John said he did what 1100-1300 attempts? Is it possible that John holds more world records? Most balls run in a day? Most run in a month, in a year? Highest number of 200+ runs?

I bet there are plenty of ways to come up with new records based on John's epic journey towards the ultimate goal of setting a new official high run record.

This man has really done something amazing for pool and 14.1 in my opinion. So much so that this epic and tragic thread talking about John's run two years later likely has zero chance of getting close to as many posts as John has run balls.

Imagine 1300 attempts, where running the first hundred is almost a given, maybe with a two hundred+ average..... Call it 260,000 balls run in a year..... That's amazing.

The perseverance, the stamina, the emotion, and the skill..... Truly world class journey and achievement.

At Large, what other records would you suggest that might be gleaned from John's statistics during this mammoth undertaking?

 

[Cuedup]

I'd be interested how many balls were made in his two highest back to back attempts.

Having a great run of , say, 350 balls and have it end on a miss only to jump back on the table and run another ???

 

[logical]

There is absolutely no comparison of the two runs.
1. Mosconi; run starts with legal 14.1 rack and break during an exhibition and continues from zero to 526.
2. Schmidt; 1100+ attempted runs start with legal 14.1 rack with head ball removed and placed wherever on the playing field Schmidt chose to place it as a break ball along with the chosen placement of the cue ball for each starting attempt.

Schmidt had played enough 14.1 Continuous Pocket Billiards to know how an exhibition must start with an opponent and a legal 14.1 rack and break, or actually call it what it was, just practicing for running high runs.
Carry on, please and fill in some of the missing details, since there have been none provided in the two years since the claim was made.

That's a difference without a real distinction. And you don't even have the facts straight about the Mosconi run.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[gerryf]

Dan Harriman has been very gracious in asking for proof of a claim and seeking others thoughts about the legitimacy of the claim.
He has been thoroughly accused, by many posters here, of being schizophrenic.
He has been accused, by those same posters, of needing psychiatric help.
Others expound upon his thoughts and make charges of what they think that he means when he communicates his thoughts very well.
They have demeaned his writing style as well as his choice of words.
They have accused him of using many different userid's to post as others and not as Himself, without any proof of that either.

Good try, Danny!

 

[wrldpro]

I'd be interested how many balls were made in his two highest back to back attempts.

Having a great run of , say, 350 balls and have it end on a miss only to jump back on the table and run another ???

Here's a stat that is out there. In 1969
Cranfield ran a 490 then took a break to use the bathroom and wash his hands and ran 493 the very next attempt.
So Cranfield has the highest run ever known at 768 and 893 in 2 innings.
That's Strong right there.
Next incredible Stat is in a race to 1500 in 1968 Luther (Wimpy) Lassiter ran 1139 in 3 consecutive innings.
FWIW I lean more towards JS running 626 than not but it's about 51/49%. So when JS stops making scraps from his movie showings then there should be no reason at all to not show a full unedited video which he still could make money from. There is no reason at all to have edited the run and charged people to watch it. Running the last 200 or so balls at 2x speed is one of the big issues. If ran at regular speed the difference would only be about 20-25 minutes longer which is nothing for a run which is 5 hours long.

 

[gerryf]

FWIW I lean more towards JS running 626 than not but it's about 51/49%. So when JS stops making scraps from his movie showings then there should be no reason at all to not show a full unedited video which he still could make money from. There is no reason at all to have edited the run and charged people to watch it. Running the last 200 or so balls at 2x speed is one of the big issues. If ran at regular speed the difference would only be about 20-25 minutes longer which is nothing for a run which is 5 hours long.

...and why do you think he edited the run, when people who have viewed it said it wasn't edited. Do you have any real concrete information, or is this another of the BS rumours that were started?) Have you attended one of Schmidt's evenings? Have you asked him?

The run wasn't "5 hours" long, so you're not accurate there. The "last 200 or so balls" weren't run at 2x speed, so you're not right there either. (It was about 200 balls between 300 and 500.) You may have read the comments from people who actually viewed the presentation that the 2x rate was appropriate. (And if you watch a 14.1 game at 2x rate you can see why it wasn't a bad idea.)

But i do agree that when Schmidt has made as much as he can from his showings, he should provide the video either for sale, or have it posted by Predator, as they did for his run of 434. But exactly when that happens is properly John Schmidt's call.