Jayson Shaw's 714 becomes 669?

ShootingArts said:
John himself said he tried heated slate. It didn't work for him and I think was not in use when the record was claimed. He tried heaters under the table, not heat tracers or similar which I assume are used with real heated slates.

I believe current claims are that the balls were polished once during the run. Unless something unusual was put on the balls I don't see this as a big deal. It would help but wouldn't seem like a valid reason to disqualify a run.

I think that six inch pockets are pretty easy to disprove. They are big but not that big.

That leaves polished slate. This is unknown and will forever be unknown or open to question. With all we know, and considering the magic cue ball, I consider some slate shenanigans like recontoured mouths of pockets and some gentle contouring of the slate towards the pockets a distinct possibility.

There are many other things that could have been done. I am very glad that john's run quickly became just a footnote.

Hu
Click to expand...
I agree with most of your post, but polished balls IS a big deal for straight pool. I play mostly with balls that are cleaned, but not polished. The difference is dramatic, for break shots.
Chicagoplayer said:
I suppose the final question I need answered is:
Does integrity matter?
Click to expand...
It matters for credibility in some cases, but hard evidence would trump such concerns. What I'm hearing about JS does seem to indicate that care should be taken to verify all aspects of the run, but one should never claim something to be true or not true, if one does not have solid evidence. Whatever "default" credibility JS had, he destroyed with his rack manipulation in one of his runs. From now on, he should be watched a lot more carefully, IMO. Does that answer your question? Also the fact that the run is not publicly available is a major concern to me, personally, as there could be other matters that have not been disclosed. So my post should not be taken in any way as an endorsement of the validity of the run and is meant only as a comment on the claims regarding the table itself. Possible racking concerns, possible hidden fouls, possible video splicing and such things are entirely separate matters which need to be adressed separately.
 
Last edited:
John S may not have the official high run record. He does have a great practice run that was recorded and got noticed by many people.

Should there be two categories because 14.1 is a niche game?

Jayson Shaw official Mosconi record breaker. First to be recognized by legal billiard authorities.
John Schmidt unofficial Mosconi record breaker. First to publish.
 
ShootingArts said:
I agree 100% about john. I saw his less than sterling qualities first hand long ago.

It was my understanding that the table Jayson was on had five inch or larger pockets and 760 cloth not usually used on the big tables. My apologies if Jayson wasn't on a table specially set up for the record attempts with unusual conditions. It was my understanding that they had roughly copied what was known about john's table other than the heaters which john couldn't make work anyway.

I very much regret Jayson's incidental foul. As for john's run, I remain dubious. He cut every corner he could legally and having seen proof of his willingness to "bend" things in other runs we have to question his record run. I do believe it is rendered mote by the acceptance of Jayson's run. I hope Jayson comes back with an unblemished run however.

Hu
Click to expand...
we did not copy anyones table or try to make the same conditions either. We made sure we had an unedited video for the public to see and after the run was completed it was decided not to repost the high run video and send it to market. John cut every corner illegally not legally. The 626 needs to be reviewed undert he same scrutiny and if John doesnt offer it than thats the answer to the whole story. Once a cheat always a cheat.
 
gerryf said:
I can visualize the spittle flying when you type this. Calm down!!

There's no evidence Schmidt used a gaff table, and good evidence it was not. You say you heard a rumour from anonymous people that Schmidt's table had 6" pockets, but the people who saw the table, and the BCA, say 5". Unless you can actually provide a source, you're just spreading rumours.

There were a lot of people spreading rumours about the Legends table, and you didn't give those credence. You didn't really provide any rebuttal either.

You keep saying it isn't about Schmidt, but you keep turning everything into an attack on him. We all understand you have personal problems with Schmidt and don't like him.

Serenity now!
Click to expand...
Gerry you always chime in to defend the love of your life. Go jump off a bridge honestly. We provided everything and much more than the BCA asked from us and John didnt provide shit and certainly wasnt under the scrutiny that Jaysons run was under noiw was it. We dont owe anything to you or anyone but we provided a lot with full transparency. Go ahead and pound sand now after you get off the nutsack if you can.
 
Last edited:
Straightpool_99 said:
Edited: A typo said that there was an OBJECT ball curve, of course I meant cue ball. I think that was clear from the context.
If we disregard the (cue) ball curve controversy, the pockets do look like near 5 inch pockets. I should know, I played on those size pockets for a lot of my time playing pool. It would be very difficult to be 100% certain about this kind of thing due to camera distortion and the distance. All I can say is, the pocket size doesn't seem OBVIOUSLY larger than a 5 inch would look to me.

The claims that have been made about that table used by John Schmidt are as follows:
1. Sanded slate,
2. Heated slate
3. 6 inch pockets
4. Polished balls (continuously)

It's all conjecture until solid evidence is provided. So far I have seen none. That object ball curve looks super suspicious, but until hard evidence is provided or at least equal results are produced by experimental methods, nothing can be said for certain. The only thing I can say is, I've played pool for 20 years, and I've watched more Accu-Stats videos than is healthy for any human being, and I've never seen another ball behave like that on a level table. Never, unless you're talking about Cyclop balls or crazy 8 balls, that is. Not in snooker or even Billiards, either. There is only one explanation I find plausible and it is that the table isn't flat/and or- level. Is it deliberately out of level or not flat, or not, is the next question? We'll never know as the table has been atomized, never to be seen again, for all practical intents and purposes. Even if it were produced there would be no way to prove it's the same slate and impractically difficult, but not impossible to prove it's the same rails. So we'll never know for sure. This is why record tables should be kept for inspection before being dismantled. It would completely remove almost all concerns regarding shenanigans of this sort.

Of the 4 claims I think the heated slate is the least worrying to me personally, if there was any merit to it. It would in fact remove a lot of the environmental factor from the pool equation. I'm usually an old school kind of guy, but this would maybe be a step forward for our sport. I usually play in a dry climate but I think some people who don't would appreciate this a lot. It wouldn't really change the game, per se, but make it more uniform around the world. I'm having trouble seeing that as a bad thing for the pro game? We amateurs must put up with living without, as it would be impractically expensive. It's the same way in snooker, and it's completely fine.
Click to expand...
Simply put John can release the video and get paid big money for doing so and prove to everyone that he didnt cheat and the run is legit. I wonder what would have happened if we didnt release Jaysons video? Maybe the next one when he breaks his own World Record we might not release it and see how the nuthuggers complain then.
 
Bob Jewett said:
No, but I know and trust the person who did. Also I have played on that table and watched many of Schmidt's attempts on that table. It does not and did not have 6-inch corner pockets. I have placed balls in the jaws on that table and noted the half-inch gap.
Click to expand...
I asked merely for clarification purposes, btw. The pockets in the videos do not look larger to me than the pictures indicate.
 
Bob Jewett said:
They lied to you then. Can you name them? I don't like liars, and I'd like to know who they are.

Here are pictures of the pockets on the table where John Schmidt ran his 626. I saw some of his attempts in each of the three series he played in that room. The table was the same for all of the attempts there.

View attachment 645931

View attachment 645930

View attachment 645932

View attachment 645933

View attachment 645935

View attachment 645934
Click to expand...
Did you take the photos? Who the fucc took those measurements. Try measuring from the tip of the pockets and that would make the measurements more realistic and those pocket angles look easily around 148-150 degree angles and 142 is the proper angles. Do you have pictures of the table at the pockets with the cloth off to see the slate lips? How about video of the run to provide proof of the run itself and the distance of the camera from the table itself. How about not following the rack outline and moving the rack outside of the rack outline by racking them high tomake room for a break shot? Oh I get it. Any further questions I should ask the BCA. That was the words you emailed me after I sent you a digital copy of the video where you were just suppose to review by YOURSELF and you didnt and just do a ball count for the BCA after the 3 Committees wasnt enough and Your Buddie at the BCA wanted to find something else wrong with the run and you went on a fishing expedition and with a friend also which wasnt the agreement between us now was it.You told a fib there ol Bob.
 
Last edited:
The status of Jayson Shaw is decorated with 14.1 titles and to break Mosconi's record displays the relative strength of players in a different era.

John Schmidt better known for his journey to break Mosconi's record creates a mystique that 14.1 high runs are achievable by players of lesser reputation.

Its an A is better B and C is better than A argument.

The tradition to chase a high run has been updated by players of this era.

It was great fun to see them in competition and on practice tables.

The future of 14.1 high runs could include records for speed.
Who can run 100 the fastest?

The time based goal makes it easier for beginners to gauge a progression.

How about a record for most consecutive break shots of the same type?
I watch top 14.1 guys its a point of distinction. Repeat break shots make life easier.

The idea is to give more 14.1 players achievement directions as opposed to just running the table.

Or 14.1 run out with no side pockets used?

Future generations might develop more about the game. Today's crop of pool superstars managed to run the same advertising 14.1 high run on much cheaper costs. A youtube account is free compared a print publications that requires mailing.
 
wrldpro said:
Simply put John can release the video and get paid big money for doing so and prove to everyone that he didnt cheat and the run is legit. I wonder what would have happened if we didnt release Jaysons video? Maybe the next one when he breaks his own World Record we might not release it and see how the nuthuggers complain then.
Click to expand...
I hope he does release the video. An unreleased video, in spite of any allegiances or sympathies, should always be seen as a warning sign, when we are talking about a claim of a record of any sort. Speaking for myself, I'd not accept this kind of thing from anyone. John Schmidt could easily have put a lot of concerns to rest by releasing the video, even if it were not free to watch. The rack manipulation by JS in one of his runs and various stories have significantly changed my views on JS. If however, he were to release the video and no suspicious activities or factors were to be found, I'd give him his due (as a previous record holder) without reservation, except the possible slate issue mentioned earlier, which cannot really be proven. I'd also retract whatever objections/suspicious or whatever I might have made earlier. It's only fair. The run would be still be valid, no matter what he's done before or after. I know some people might disagree on that point, I can only speak for myself in this regard. Luckily it's not as important of a point at this time, as we have a new record holder.
xradarx said:
Pause the video.
Place a straight edge along the side rail nose edge and the table end rail nose, and you clearly see that the pocket openings extend into the playing surface approximately 1/2”.
Click to expand...
I did this, but I think what we're seeing is a function of perspective. If possible I'll go to the closest 5 inch table I can find and try to recreate the picture. If the picture was more directly overhead it would be easier to say for sure.

Also, even IF, and it's only a thought experiment, the shelf were to extend out in the fashion you claim, it would not prove the pockets were wider only that the shelf was narrower. So that is a NEW claim, not the same as the 6 inch claim. It would prove the pictures were not of the same table as well, though I like to keep the discussion confined to the video, as talking about the pictures would introduce even more speculation that cannot be easily resolved.
 
Last edited:
Bob Jewett said:
Perhaps you missed the pictures of the pockets I posted above.
Click to expand...

Bob Jewett said:
At tournament carom play it's all ball fouls always. Call fouls on yourself.
Click to expand...


Bob, to bunch up a bunch of your posts, I didn't notice those pictures handy until after I had posted. I knew I had seen those or similar pictures, plus I don't think any of us could watch play on six and six and a half inch pockets and not notice they were beyond huge.

Touching on your second post I am quoting and one I missed quoting somehow, pool becomes almost impossible to play without some level of honor. Your honor is of the highest level and it makes discussions with you easy since I know you are telling the truth. If I disagree, I know we are both telling the truth as we know it. Makes for pleasant communications. Also would be great to play pool with you, a person with great integrity is easy to play with. The other player can't catch all fouls from the chair. It is great playing someone who can be trusted to call all fouls, large and small, on themselves.

Not talking about this thread in particular but just reading threads in general I can weed out a lot of guys that I don't want to play pool with, some I agree with some that I don't agree with. Either way, I suspect those without honor on the forum are likely to be the same way on the table. I will say most that I have met in person after meeting on AZB have been great, exceeding already high expectations.

Rambling a bit, long day!

Hu
 
I see it as very strange that John is not defending his run or himself here. He's laying low for a reason.
Release that unedited version of 626 if you have nothing to hide. Shame on the BCA for not requesting
the video for review by the same committee that dissected Jayson's video. Silence is a sure sign of guilt.
 
rjb1168 said:
I see it as very strange that John is not defending his run or himself here. He's laying low for a reason.
Release that unedited version of 626 if you have nothing to hide. Shame on the BCA for not requesting
the video for review by the same committee that dissected Jayson's video. Silence is a sure sign of guilt.
Click to expand...
Possible explanations:
1. He is not the official record holder anymore. There is nothing more to defend, apart from his reputation. He may not care much about that, especially the reputation he has on this forum, for which he has expressed contempt.
2. Defending his run would validate the concerns that it may be illegitimate. At this time he has the stamp of approval from the BCA, which is really all that is needed. He has nothing official to gain but quite a bit to lose. He may want to let sleeping dogs lie and not open a potential can of worms.
3. The BCA may have dissuaded him, especially if they are worried about something coming to light that they may have missed or glossed over.
4. The "bloodhounds" of Azb have short attention spans and he may believe (rightfully IMO) that this will all blow over and if he waits long enough nobody will care even IF something was proven to be fake or illegitimate. People on here are very forgiving, even admiring, of scams that happened in the past.
5. He's not releasing the video out of pure spite and malice. He hates Azb and many people on it and he doesn't want them to ever watch it or to interact with them/us for the same reason.
 
Straightpool_99 said:
Possible explanations:
1. He is not the official record holder anymore. There is nothing more to defend, apart from his reputation. He may not care much about that, especially the reputation he has on this forum, for which he has expressed contempt.
2. Defending his run would validate the concerns that it may be illegitimate. At this time he has the stamp of approval from the BCA, which is really all that is needed. He has nothing official to gain but quite a bit to lose. He may want to let sleeping dogs lie and not open a potential can of worms.
3. The BCA may have dissuaded him, especially if they are worried about something coming to light that they may have missed or glossed over.
4. The "bloodhounds" of Azb have short attention spans and he may believe (rightfully IMO) that this will all blow over and if he waits long enough nobody will care even IF something was proven to be fake or illegitimate. People on here are very forgiving, even admiring, of scams that happened in the past.
5. He's not releasing the video out of pure spite and malice. He hates Azb and many people on it and he doesn't want them to ever watch it or to interact with them/us for the same reason.
Click to expand...
6. john is still hugely embarrassed about making an ass out of himself on AZB long ago and has no interest in discussing his run or anything else on a level playing field.

Please excuse the edit. Number six is the answer or at the least a huge portion of it.

Hu
 
rjb1168 said:
I see it as very strange that John is not defending his run or himself here. He's laying low for a reason.
Release that unedited version of 626 if you have nothing to hide. Shame on the BCA for not requesting
the video for review by the same committee that dissected Jayson's video. Silence is a sure sign of guilt.
Click to expand...
I agree with this, well written and concise. I think it was Bruce Lee that mentioned to be formidable and or pure - we must be like water as agua does not fight. It would seem much doubt (Hawks of truth) surrounding the 626 CLAIM and now bca/ Shaw's/chamberland's 714 CLAIM is nothing close to water. bca/ j.s/c.w have had to divide public :-( never produced solid evidence that there was a new World Record in 14.1 Pocket Billiards caught on unedited camera - enter their FIGHT sequence - that is called Losing. Shaw new he fouled - when his cue touched object ball (no matter how tired a top player can feel the cue touch any object ball upon follow true - guaranteed) loss some respect when I heard Jason state - there are NO RULES in 14.1 high run competition. Those who state that Shaw's 714 or 669 lol is a live performance - after the facebook losing feed for hrs - are sadly mistaken. It is clear to me that the bca needs to be dismantled, they can keep their little bar box events - but should be omitted as any official adjudicator of Current Pocket Billiards History Record Keeping. Anything' where bca or facebook is involved will mo than likely - not be on the up - just my opinion. I think this flows nicely.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top