After witnessing JS blatantly cheat at least twice in last high run attempt, his word means nothing to me. Who know what shenanigans went on during his"626". I am not a fan of this guy after watching that.
Is Schmidt's and charlie 626 Legit
- Thread starter Dan Harriman
- Start date
- Status
Is that just your opinion, or do you have any actual proof that can support your claims?
Agreed. I think a lot of people owe Dan Harriman an apology. He knows the character of JS up and close and was right to be skeptical. I am neutral on the issue but it won't be a record in my eyes until the video is publicly available.
Is that so? I don't know either of the two, DH or JS, in person.
But I have seen very much of Harriman's insults here, foul language, attacks, character assassinations on top of being very boring after 2.5 years. Not only in this thread. I have rarely or actually never seen someone beating a seriously dead horse as much as he did right here.
So, even though he might be a decent pool player nobody should feel a need for an apology. If JS cheated or not is a moot question now but reading DH's outbursts here I tend to always believe the opposite of what he says. On the contrary, a single post in clean language about the suspicion about JS' run might have made a lot of people consider what DH says. If you keep attacking another person for so long you make a statement about yourself instead of adding to your credibility.
Interesting. DH talks about other people's character.
If you were neutral you would have noticed how DH attacks people, what language he uses and how insanely repetitive he is. This should be enough to NOT write a posting like the above while claiming to be NEUTRAL.
I think you are overstating the scope of my comment. I'm simply saying that DH had good reason to be skeptical of the JS run and those who thought he was nuts for that need to rethink their position a bit. That has nothing to do with someone's behavior in this forum one way or the other. I agree with some of what you say.
I am neutral on the subject of the 626 run, not on personalities in this forum. If I was forced to bet on it I'd say the run was legit, but I wouldn't be super confident, given the scrutiny that the Shaw video was subjected to. I don't know if the 626 would stand up. The video hasn't been made widely available, so I can't really say.
Did I miss something? The same people who reviewed Shaw’s run reviewed Schmidt’s run.
But they were both parties who are authorized to speak on behalf of the BCA, no?
Sure it is.
The same BCA that has been trashed by Harriman so many times is now a different organization? Wow.
Yes. They spent hours pouring over the videos to ensure it / they were legit. But conspiracy theories prevail. The BCA presented their findings and what they did to review the Schmidt video to many of us at that year’s BCA Hall of Fame banquet. I have no reason to believe they didn’t do this.
You don't know what you are talking about.
John's run was reviewed by three people, two of whom do not play pool. The third was a friend of John's.
In March Bobby flew out to Colorado to show Jayson's run to BCA officials. A committee of six watched in an executive suite Bobby had reserved, on a 70” screen -- most people here would recognize the names of some of the folks on that committee -- as they are well known on AZ. We don't know what size screen John's video was viewed on by the BCA but do know the camera for his run was set back a fair distance from the table.
After that first BCA meeting, a second BCA committee was formed to review Jayson's run that included two professional players, one of whom is a HOFer. Bobby was not invited to that review.
And subsequent to that review *a third BCA committee* that included video experts and a highly regarded member of the billiard industry was formed and reviewed Jayson's run. Once again, Bobby was not invited to attend.
So by no stretch of the imagination did the same folks review the two runs.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
After all the cries for transparency of 626, we are grtting quite a vague account.
That's fine, your option. The BCA confirmed 626 and did not recind the confirmation, via committee or otherwise.
Th
Good grief, of course they're not going to rescind anything...
... unless... perhaps... maybe... they re-review that run at the same level of scrutiny Jayson's run got ; -)
Lou Figueroa
you never know
Last edited:
What you say isn't unreasonable. It is speculation though and the twists and ifs one could consider are endless and subsequent claims are unsupportable.
What's real is that the BCA has not chosen to rescind acknoledgement the hi run record/s was/we're set by John and/or Jayson.
I guess I don’t have to understand how you’re wired. You seem to ignore one of our most esteemed members saying years ago at this point that he reviewed the unedited run. And you can be sure he did the best job possible for the integrity of the game. He even detaile every break shot.
Have at it Lou. I’m sure you’ll come up with some other bone to chew. This whole 626 was satisfied a long time ago. And now it’s been surpassed. Great job Jayson and John. Hoping someone else breaks it.
Truth....all of it.
I say you- Filler has not yet had his say and I hope somebody cracks the four-figure line.
My opinion too! I saw him cheat with my own eye's!
Schmidt blamed the high rack on the old man racking for him.
I don’t respect that.
- Status