I think knowing how to exploit your environment to best advantage is a talent every good pool player should have.
Lou Figueroa
JAYSON SHAW BREAKS 626!
- Thread starter lfigueroa
- Start date
I think knowing how to exploit your environment to best advantage is a talent every good pool player should have.
Lou Figueroa
Lou - he said "3-4 racks (likely around +\- 10 shots during the entire run)"
So that may very well be the case. Personally, I could care less. Everybody is a critic. That is our world today in social media. Imagine if they had FB or internet forums in Willie's time..... Oh boy.
As a side -- I was at Archer's Place last night, and he stated that Earl told him directly, "No way anyone runs 500 on this table". Just saying. No matter how "easy" the table, 714 is an incredible number!
Yes, I saw that on a re-read and edited my post -- the morning espresso had not yet kicked in : -)
Lou Figueroa
I didn’t say every three or four shots, I said every three or four racks, and then even before reading any other posts, I went back and edited my post and said roughly every five racks (once every 70 balls).
We see that same thing literally every single stream on tight ass tables, and more often. Even 4 in Mosconi Cup pockets! The pocket talk doesn't hold water. Besides, it's not like they disassembled the table and hid the pocket info from people, you know, like they did with the other high run table.
Sounds like 9-5.....M-F....Life.
He missed a break shot? And Congrats!!!
Has there been a press release?
Google search- Straight pool/14.1/Jayson Shaw/714 links nothing to any media outlet that isn’t pool related. ?!? This is not cool. Get crackin’ and make it happen!
The 714 ended on a scratch.
"it's not hidden." So, the pocket facing angles for this table have been disclosed? If so, that's new information. My understand up to now has been that Bobby Chamberlain has refused to disclose this information. Please point me to where Bobby or anyone associated with Legends has published this.
Your multiple edits about the BCA are simply a diversion from answering the basic question. The issue isn't some speculation about what the BCA would recognize. The issue is: disclosing the table specifications for the table on which Jayson ran the 714 so that anyone who wants can make an attempt under the same conditions.
What is your "sound reason this information should be hidden from Jayson's peers desiring to make a run at 714, or for that matter from any schmuck such as myself who might want to set up such a table and see how far they can go."
Do you have some legitimate reason this information shouldn't be available to anyone who wants to make an attempt under the same table conditions as existed when Jayson ran the 714?
I hear ya’ Pool Playa. I can understand the frustration. Pictures of a corner pocket were posted with what appeared to be parallel pocket facings. When pressed on the issue the only response was deflecting, as if folks were embarrassed about the setup.
We do have standardization with the table difficulty factor (TDF) calculations posted on the site. It’s a sticky for Pete’s sake! Every time you visit the main page you have to scroll past it. I can GUARANTEE that every new member here who has recently bought a table has checked their table’s dimensions using that thread Even if they didn’t contribute the resulting measurements.
One of the criteria is measuring the difference between pocket mouth and throat.
It don’t mean spit though! What was the pocket mouth to throat difference on the table Mosconi ran 526 on? I remember people speculating that Schmidt shaved the slate to the pockets so balls would fall easier on his way to 626.
It all amounts to sour grapes. I can stay focused and perform for less than 3 racks. I am in awe of the professionals who have been able to run 5, 6, and now 7 hundred balls without a lapse. The table conditions aren’t inflating the numbers to record status; this is WORLD CLASS play.
We do have standardization with the table difficulty factor (TDF) calculations posted on the site. It’s a sticky for Pete’s sake! Every time you visit the main page you have to scroll past it. I can GUARANTEE that every new member here who has recently bought a table has checked their table’s dimensions using that thread Even if they didn’t contribute the resulting measurements.
One of the criteria is measuring the difference between pocket mouth and throat.
It don’t mean spit though! What was the pocket mouth to throat difference on the table Mosconi ran 526 on? I remember people speculating that Schmidt shaved the slate to the pockets so balls would fall easier on his way to 626.
It all amounts to sour grapes. I can stay focused and perform for less than 3 racks. I am in awe of the professionals who have been able to run 5, 6, and now 7 hundred balls without a lapse. The table conditions aren’t inflating the numbers to record status; this is WORLD CLASS play.
This is something that has been amusing and a source of consternation through the various threads.
Why pretend? Like Lou says; if you have the means it’s your playing field. OWN IT! “Here’s what it is. Set it up for yourself and beat it!” It goes back to what HU stated about creating standardization moving forward.
You say "Set it up for yourself and beat it!" I'm agreeing. Anyone should be able to set it put for themselves and take a stab at beating it. We'd love to see all that competition. But, last I heard, Bobby Chamberlain is refusing to provide the information so someone can set it up for themselves and attempt to beat Jayson's 714 under the conditions of his run.
As for "creating standardization moving forward," that's a great idea but is unrelated to the Legends folks disclosing the full specs on the table so that others can attempt to beat Jayson's 714 under the conditions of his run. Both should happen.
But, let's imagine if Bobby refuses to provide the table specs so others can make their attempts on the same conditions as Jayson, and new standardized specifications are devised that recognize the higher skill of today's players and set pocket widths at 4.5".
Under those circumstances, it would be far less likely that 714 would be in jeopardy anytime soon. And, the table specs that existed for Jayson's 714 would remain hidden so no one could just duplicate those conditions to attempt a high run under the same conditions. Jayson's 714 would effectively be locked in place. No other player (except, of course, those invited to Bobby's "special" table under his terms) would have the information to permit them to attempt their run under the same conditions as Jayson.
So, I ask again, do you have some legitimate reason this information shouldn't be available to anyone who wants to make an attempt under the same table conditions as existed when Jayson ran the 714?
Dude, you don’t need the Legends table specs to do it yourself. It doesn’t matter what their specs are. They are not the one’s that will ratify your world record run.
You have a right to information that will enable you to play on a table that is eligible to be recognized for a world record run. Absolutely. I agree. I can tell you, having emailed the BCA about this, that for them to ratify a world record, they require every single detail of the equipment used: ALL pocket specs, cue, chalk, table specs, balls, cloth, venue, date, time, etc. Absolutely everything. While they didn’t specifically say they use their BCA table specs when considering approval of a world record run, it was strongly implied when I asked if the table I used would be eligible. “That table falls within the BCA specs” (approximate quote).
So there you go. Go to the BCA table specs PDF and setup a table that pushes those specs to the absolute limit. If you do so, I suspect you’ll have a table that is very similar to the Legends table.
Do I have a legitimate reason this information shouldn’t be available to people who want to run balls under the same condition as the Legends table? Not for why it shouldn’t, but for why it isn’t: Legends have no obligation to provide that information to us. Once the run is approved, the BCA will have every single detail of the Legends table. You can then contact the BCA and request those details. I see no reason they wouldn’t disclose them. They replied to both of my email within hours.
Thanks for admitting there is no legitimate reason why the table specs should not be shared with the public so that anyone who wants can attempt to break Jayson's record under the same conditions it was set. We agree on this.
Looking through all the discussions in this thread (and all the others),it amazes me how people can create drama out of everything.
Because if you scan through social media to find out what other pros think of Jayson`s run you can find just ONE oppionion- total admiration of Shaw`s achievment.
No pro, or top referee or any other pool related heavyweight stood up and said :" Nahhh, because pockets and angles and lets review this by Mosconi`s descendants and get the NSA involved so we can investigate the video...!"
Is pool equipment in need of standardization?
Yes, of course. Every other serious cue sport has standards for their equipment, at least for the pros.
But discredit a 714 balls...slowly...sevenhundredandfourteen balls....only azforums can do such thing.
Because if you scan through social media to find out what other pros think of Jayson`s run you can find just ONE oppionion- total admiration of Shaw`s achievment.
No pro, or top referee or any other pool related heavyweight stood up and said :" Nahhh, because pockets and angles and lets review this by Mosconi`s descendants and get the NSA involved so we can investigate the video...!"
Is pool equipment in need of standardization?
Yes, of course. Every other serious cue sport has standards for their equipment, at least for the pros.
But discredit a 714 balls...slowly...sevenhundredandfourteen balls....only azforums can do such thing.
Indeed. Where we apparently disagree is that Legends should be responsible for providing that to us. Is there a legitimate reason for them not providing those details? Yes, they don’t have to. It can’t get much more legitimate than that.
If however, once the run is ratified, the BCA refuses someone’s request for the table details, then I would have my pitchfork out, and I’d be standing right beside you.
We've decided to wait for cerification.
But in the background a lot of things are churning.
Lou Figueroa