Preface: I think JS’s 626 is a phenomenal achievement. My motivation for and enjoyment watching the Legend’s streams has nothing to do with JS’s accomplishment. I just love straight pool. However, I’m referencing the Legends table and the other infamous table because people who accept JS’s run are beginning to suggest not accepting runs made on the Legends table.
Actually, I think the problem is not strawmen I’ve set up for you, but rather not explaining some of my own thoughts about pocket pool in general.
Pool doesn’t have standards; not standard pocket sizes, not defined angles, not defined shelf depth, not defined shelf curve. There are even different rubber specifications. I know there are various organizations that have ranges of specifications they require, but even those vary up to half an inch regarding pocket size. Compare this to snooker. There are very specific templates used by the WST for their tables. Nothing is ambiguous.
I’ll come back to this.
Fine. I acknowledged your anecdotal observations. As Legends has provided us with photos of their pockets with measurements overlayed, I personally would like to see the same for JS’s table. I can’t even see balls being potted on the table as it was when he made his 626. Before that happens, unless I’ve played on “both” tables, I can’t make any comparison between the two.
The only reason I want to see JS’s pockets is because people are starting to comment on the Legends table, and in your case, question the validity of any high runs made on the table.
See above re. comparing tables and my opinion of “standards” in pocket billiards.
I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure it was replaced just before Jayson started his session. That is, it’s not the same cloth Earl played on.
Regardless of the questions people have about JS’s table, or the questions they have about the Legends table, it won’t affect the validity of either JS’s world record high run, or any runs made during this event. The tables both have roughly 5” pockets. Is there a standard for other specifications as defined by the BCA for setting 14.1 high run records?
Semantics. I was obviously talking about high runs as you were.
Absolutely; I didn’t question your overall good will towards this event. In terms of controversy, 99.99% of pool players have zero first hand knowledge of JS’s high run or the conditions under which it was accomplished. I personally think that if we’re willing to accept and acknowledge his accomplishment in good faith, which I am, regardless of how much I really want to see his 626, then we should applaud the transparency Legends have provided and extend equal good will, particularly considering the lack of standards surrounding the acknowledgement of records in straight pool.
And finally, this is where I see all the knots. There are no standards for pool. John made his run on some random table somewhere (obviously not random, and we know where). Did that table meet some kind of standard? When standards are absent, how could it? You are respectfully and with good intentions suggesting the Legends make some adjustments to their table. However, this is based on nothing other than your anecdotal observations and your opinion that tables should meet some kind of defined standard (I think they should too, but for 14.1 high runs, there is no standard). Personally, I’d like to see photos with measurements from when JS made his run, but even then, regardless of what those photos informed me of, they would make no difference to the validity of high runs achieved during the Legends event.
Again, absolutely. It’s an amazing event they are running, and I’ve relished every opportunity they’ve provided to watch world class sports people playing the game I love.
High five
You are correct about the cloth.
New cloth, polished balls, Bobby is wearing gloves to rack, 5" pockets, and a great player who knows how to exploit every advantage. So yes, balls are going to slide in going down the rail.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
