And therefore can't be "ratified" because it was not under match conditions and therefore the foul can't be overlooked after the fact because a referee missed it.
Jayson Shaw's 714 becomes 669?
- Thread starter loggerhead12
- Start date
Listen, I don't even shoot pool anymore. If you live within 9 hours of me, I can be there in 10.
madmartigan
Active member
As others have pointed out, there’s no rule that says a player attempting a record run is required to re-rack and start with a fresh break shot. If I’m not mistaken I believe some of Schmidt’s attempts at various points actually began mid-rack; if he missed a ball he would occasionally just keep shooting from there. 669 legally potted balls in a row is a run of 669 balls.
L.S. Dennis
Well-known member
So the new recognized run is 669, that’s ok and nothing to sneeze at. Well done Jason!
I take it as his run of 669 started after the foul on the 45th ball - 714-45=669.
Why did Jayson always rerack on a miss during his high run attempts if you can start a run mid rack? I assume all the other players who made high run attempts prior to Jayson also reracked after a miss. I never saw Earl start runs mid rack, although I didn't watch all of his play. Bobby should be able to confirm, did Bobby always rerack after a miss?
And, while John Schmidt did not make the video of his high run available publicly, he did post video of his other high run attempts, and for the record in one of those videos he moved an object ball with his hand, and he kept shooting, he did not end the run. I've posted the time stamp where he moved the ball before.
If you are playing cue ball fouls only, can you just move problem balls with your hand?
And, while John Schmidt did not make the video of his high run available publicly, he did post video of his other high run attempts, and for the record in one of those videos he moved an object ball with his hand, and he kept shooting, he did not end the run. I've posted the time stamp where he moved the ball before.
If you are playing cue ball fouls only, can you just move problem balls with your hand?
Last edited:
Correct on all 3 of your points. And from what we can tell, Mosconi's run of 526 was 11 in the first rack, then 36 full racks of 14, then another 11 before missing. His opponent made 3 balls in the first rack before Mosconi's run started.
Of course, whoever is producing a high-run event could require that the run count has to start from racking 14 or 15 balls (Mosconi started one of his big runs from a rack of 15 balls). Maybe the BCA will do that in their future "guideline document that will establish parameters and standards for future exhibition 14.1 high run record attempts." But that is not the way it is today.
Find and repost that time stamp of him moving the ball. Thank You.
Personal high runs
168 here and 5 other runs over 100, practicing straight pool over a summer on a Diamonized Gold Crown 1. Every attempt, I restarted from a break shot.
7 racks of 9 ball on a 9 foot Gold Crown, ran the set from the coin toss.
12 racks of 8 ball on a Valley (could have continued, but my opponent quit).
I own a room and have a Diamond here at home I barely touch.
Regardless of all that. Denying players restart solo straight pool high run attempts is being intentionally obtuse. It was a rule in the Legends of Pocket Billiards event itself. The BCA gave extra credit of 11 balls to appease the situation to follow.
People wonder why pool goes nowhere? It's because it's the most Mickey Mouse sport where the rules and history are bent to suit the flavor of the day.
Last edited:
You keep repeating this. That doesn't make it true. Maybe try saying it louder.
Where in the literature of universal pool rules is this written? You keep citing this authoritatively, so you must be pretty darn sure of it. Post a link to the governing body that you are following the rules of.
Just because you feel this is how it should be, doesn't make it so. It's just, like, your opinion, man.
It was a rule in the very event the attempts were made.
If it happened on the 45th ball, shouldn't the run after that be nullified?
RefrainReyes
Active member
Mr Schmidt.
714, Blasphemy! Off with his hand!
This thread is too funny, to much to do about nothing.
Whether you accept 714, 669 or nothing, it's all just a personal choice since these type of high run attempts are something relatively new to the game. As for me when someone ran over 200 balls on that tough Diamond table at DCC I was very impressed. It was done during some type of organized competition with prize money at stake. That adds pressure to the situation. These recent attempts to break Mosconi's record by making attempt after attempt for days and weeks is less impressive. That said, Schmidt's 626 and Shaws 714 are somewhat astounding, no matter how they came about. They are equally authentic to Cranfields' 768 imo.
Last edited: