Search results

I agree with a lot of your position generally, but tighter pockets will serve the game. The casual public does indeed like seeing runouts but if their success rate is too high, it loses the drama. So we do want a balance of misses and safety to create that sense of anxiety and create those...

I was thinking it might be more economical to do it in a single room to save on travel costs with gas so high right now. But it would be cool to do a traveling exhibition and it’s something that is missing from pro pool these days.

I’m just brainstorming. But my thought would be to do it in one venue and get some volunteers. Or even make them pay $10 per match to sit in the chair.

Or even just line up a dozen 100 point games per day and continue any run larger than 70 or something. Still not the same thing as Willie’s context, but it’s in ball park at least.

Agreed, the vision they have for pool is a game that their audience knows and doesn’t require more than a couple of sentences to explain to the audience. The moment we start adding balls, new formats, exotic breaking rules etc. The scope of their audience narrows. For the average fan, 9 ball...

They will want a solution that can be explained to the audience in a single sentence. Personally, I’d go with 9 on the spot and 4 inch pockets for all tournaments.

Balls per inning is a pretty strong predictor. According to Gerry Fs stats, John average 88 balls per inning over 4 days. That’s 14 more than Jayson. I don’t know if that average controls for the adjusted rack, but it wouldn’t make a big difference given how many balls where pocketed over 4 days.

Yes, this is my perspective too. Aside from those suspicious rack placements we’ve seen, John did maintain a bpi similar to Jaysons, I believe, which suggests he is capable of 626. It’s just now I know manipulating the rack is potentially in his playbook which makes me doubt it. So I just...

It disappoints me that instead of addressing the controversy they choose to instead make a copyright claim. I’m surprised that neither them or Schmidt have said anything yet. Maybe they don’t think it’s a big deal, but I do. This was supposed to be a world record attempt so what would he...

I agree it’s his video and he can do what he wants. It’s not a cure for cancer or anything.

I’ve said this before, but I am confident that the people showing up to Johns viewings would still do so even if they had a pirated copy of his DVD. Believing otherwise is like saying that CD sales hurts concert ticket sales. Johns shows would be still be worth it for fans to meet him and ask...

It is probably supposed to be on DAZN, but I wouldn’t subscribe until you see it posted on the DAZN site.

Ah! And then rack somewhere near the last ball, I’ll try that.

If you spend time finding a break shot and speed you like, you can get a perfect starting spread on most attempts.

I’ve often thought about which is more difficult, starting mid run or with a break shot. I think for me, mid rack is technically harder because, as you mention, every milestone is one additional break shot away. For these guys, I don’t think it matters at all because they are running such big...

I’d pay for that. Let’s set some match play records. The highest run in an actual game that im aware of is Feijens 300+

Yea agree, to not at least give him credit from the next breakshot onward is ludicrous.

Wait is this a clever marketing strategy to get us all to buy the run? Now I have to see this suspicious 45th ball!

Your turn starts where the balls finished after a miss, safety or foul. And to answer your question, it would be a 2 pack. I’m not suggesting we give him credit for the balls prior to the foul if we insist on all ball fouls.

I don’t understand why a run can’t start in the middle of the rack as long as the balls aren’t placed by hand. We don’t rerack on every miss in competition. But even so, why wouldn’t you at least accept the run starting at the next break shot? Maybe he has three records lol.