No, the one-point penalty would be assessed in a game, but the length of the run is without deducting that point.
E.g. If I have an inning where I run 8 balls and scratch on the 9th, I have added 7 points to my game score, but my run was 8.
The Legendary Pearl to Take On 14.1 Attempts
- Thread starter lfigueroa
- Start date
E.g. If I have an inning where I run 8 balls and scratch on the 9th, I have added 7 points to my game score, but my run was 8.
Maybe the next challenge should be to beat Earls 11 rack run in 9 ball...... for a million.
JA and Mike Masse have both ran a 13 pack, Masse in a tournament in the 80's and JA against Francisco Bustamante
JA had 2 more going into the 13. So 15 his personal best.
So, been done already
I don't think the penalty applies to high runs. Only in a real game situation is it subtracted from the string.
Mike Masse signed an endorsement contract with McDermott cues promoting the D series cues after he ran his 13 pack.
According to an AZB website article on 2/2/2003:
In a 'challenge match' against French player Donald Du Bois, Feijen broke and ran 15 consecutive 9-ball racks on a regulation 4 1/2 X 9' table.
Niels Feijen's "fifteen pack", which took place in the Netherlands, is the longest run I've ever heard of in nine-ball on a full-size table that has full corroboration.
Ohh I see. Exhibition rules, well I remember when Mike Massey in an exhibition said, "scratching scores double." I have personal experience with trying to invoke that rule, with little success.
Yes I knew that. I was being festidious.So, been done already
Happy New Year!
<==== Opinion from a banger
I watched several hours of Earl in the last 3 days. While today was going, I got kind of tired of watching him run so few balls, so I tuned out and watched the 1995 event of Earl vs Ervolino. I got about 1/2 way through. Watched Johnny run his 80, with literally one tough shot, then Earl almost catch up. Deliberto and Billy were on the mic. Danny was saying Earl was playing horrible. Billy was saying he is playing "9 ball straight pool".
Earl looks exactly the same the past 3 days. No improvement on his patterns. I don't know how he could have run 408 or 480.
Another comment from the 1995 match is Billy said he never, ever, saw Earl play straight pool. Danny said he asked Earl to lend his name to the game and play in all the straight pool events the prior 10 years, and Earl always refused.
The patterns in this thread we have been discussing as holding him back from running 3-400, Danny was saying the exact same things, and going even further and saying they catch up to you for even a 100 run.
I watched several hours of Earl in the last 3 days. While today was going, I got kind of tired of watching him run so few balls, so I tuned out and watched the 1995 event of Earl vs Ervolino. I got about 1/2 way through. Watched Johnny run his 80, with literally one tough shot, then Earl almost catch up. Deliberto and Billy were on the mic. Danny was saying Earl was playing horrible. Billy was saying he is playing "9 ball straight pool".
Earl looks exactly the same the past 3 days. No improvement on his patterns. I don't know how he could have run 408 or 480.
Another comment from the 1995 match is Billy said he never, ever, saw Earl play straight pool. Danny said he asked Earl to lend his name to the game and play in all the straight pool events the prior 10 years, and Earl always refused.
The patterns in this thread we have been discussing as holding him back from running 3-400, Danny was saying the exact same things, and going even further and saying they catch up to you for even a 100 run.
Jim Ward's back to back 9's in a nine ball tournament would equal an 18 by exhibition rules. Just Sayin'.
No, what I wrote is not just an exhibition rule; it's the way it works in a game, as I said. The length of the run is however many were run prior to the fouled shot. But the points added to the game score in that inning are one less than the length of the run. So if you run 100 and scratch on the next shot, your run was still 100; good going!Ohh I see. Exhibition rules, well I remember when Mike Massey in an exhibition said, "scratching scores double." I have personal experience with trying to invoke that rule, with little success.
Looks to me like more than strategy is lacking - he also needs to slow down, focus more on each shot and manage his impatience.
He’s a world class sprinter, but 14.1 is a marathon.
pj <- like I know something
chgo
Festidious or facetious??? I"ve often been fastidiously facetious myself...
Jaden
I totally get your point. Obviously his high run is not on video. But I am inclined to believe that an Earl Strickland in his prime - a level of pool very few have come close to (and some will say no one has reached) - powered through enough racks with enough luck to hit the 400s.<==== Opinion from a banger
I watched several hours of Earl in the last 3 days. While today was going, I got kind of tired of watching him run so few balls, so I tuned out and watched the 1995 event of Earl vs Ervolino. I got about 1/2 way through. Watched Johnny run his 80, with literally one tough shot, then Earl almost catch up. Deliberto and Billy were on the mic. Danny was saying Earl was playing horrible. Billy was saying he is playing "9 ball straight pool".
Earl looks exactly the same the past 3 days. No improvement on his patterns. I don't know how he could have run 408 or 480.
Another comment from the 1995 match is Billy said he never, ever, saw Earl play straight pool. Danny said he asked Earl to lend his name to the game and play in all the straight pool events the prior 10 years, and Earl always refused.
The patterns in this thread we have been discussing as holding him back from running 3-400, Danny was saying the exact same things, and going even further and saying they catch up to you for even a 100 run.
Of course I have no way of proving this. But I can see it happening. I’m sure it wasn’t pretty if it was anything like these past few days. But a prime Earl? I can see it.
Edit: like Lassiter. Apparently his patterns were “not textbook” and he claimed to have a high run “of not missing for two and a half hours.”
Figure he took like 4-5 mins a rack? What’s that like 350 - 400? I believe that too.
Last edited:
What was a the high run today not counting the continuation? I recall 7 racks on the counter. Did I miss a higher run?
Yeah, before watching the last 3 days I thought for sure he would have gotten 400 plus in his prime. He shot straighter in his prime than all the other 300-400 ball runners on the straight pool lists. Now I'm not so sure. I don't think he's fibbing. Its just hard to believe.
Yep agreed. I’ll be honest and say he also just doesn’t really look like he gives a shit right now. Just my opinion. He doesn’t look like he’s got the intensity in his eyes. But he’s still got a number of 100 ball runs down, which is incredible.