14.1 Stats -- John Schmidt's Run of 434 on Video, December 2018

Grilled Cheese said:
No way it's a bulging spot.

If it was bulging enough to cause that radical of a curve, then it would bulge enough to cause the CB to hop, skip, skids or do other strange things on other shots. No way after 400+ balls on this run alone that the axis of the shot and the bulge did not come into play earlier.


I'm certain than upon inspection with a micrometer, the ball will not be perfect as NO ball is. The question is, how much out of round or how much of a small area bulge is necessary to generate that kind of curvature?

I don't doubt that even slight variances can cause stresses when spinning when you look at various mechanical objects in our world where balance is critical. How much is the question. It's really hard to imagine that with all that play, a player like JS would not notice a bulge on the CB. This is something he might be able to see. And certainly feel.



Occam says that the slate is F-ed up in that area. I've seen bad rolls and it's almost always slate.



I hope Bob can get a hold of the CB. If this theory is true, then this effect should be repeatable.

I predict the ball measured will show inconsistency.
I predict it is not enough to explain the effects.
I predict the effect will not be replicated.


If I am wrong on the above, this will create a new series of questions regarding Saluc Aramith and their quality control. The design or manufacturing process for this CB or any ball for that matter. For the kind of money they are charging for these premium ball sets - this should NOT happen. Wear is one thing, this would be blatant defect.


It won't be good to be known as the junk CB brand that ruined what was highly likely chance to break the high run record. He was 92 balls away. The way he plays, the record was probably toast if not for that freak CB behavior.
Click to expand...


I would agree, not as a science guy, but just a pool player.

It looked to me that the slate might have had a corner cracked sometime in its life and been bondoed back together but just not perfectly and the CB hit that seam. Total speculation but that makes way more sense to me that all the other theories combined.

Lou Figueroa
 
gxman said:
I like the DCC straightpool challenge.

$100 12 tries on a Diamond with 4.5" pockets. No funny business.
Click to expand...


hmmmmm, I would not bet on the "no funny business" part.

I have seen things live and on tape that give me great pause. And I do want to say upfront that I give great props to all the guys involved with producing that event. I feel they believe that all the players will embrace their better angels during that competition but regrettably I do not feel that that is always so.

Lou Figueroa
 
easy-e said:
lfigueroa said:
It’s ok, man. Everyone here knows about your beef with John. We all know you’d never give him credit for cheating a pocket when you can just as easily say he hit it bad and got lucky.
Click to expand...


I know what cheating a pocket is, or playing to one portion of the pocket or the other is.

I also know what missing a ball looks like :-) And if *any* player you'd care to name were to make a similar record attempt, I'd hold them to the exact same standard.

Lou Figueroa
no beef with John
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Snooker Theory said:
Do you guys think that was really that odd of a shot? Figured he just hit down on the ball a little and caused a masse effect and pulled into the corner pocket. ...
Click to expand...

That's not what it was. I think you lack experience with spinning balls.
 
HawaiianEye said:
easy-e said:
Loose pockets allow for looser position.

The more you "tighten" up the pockets, the more the player must "tighten" up their stroke and "positioning".

Players have a tendency to "flinch" more when conditions are tightened up. Also, knowing that you have to be somewhat "perfect" on every shot increases fatigue (mentally and physically) and stress levels.

I don't even know why people are so wound up over this. The simplest and easiest thing to do would be to play on a table that is somewhat a replica of what Mosconi shot the 526 on. How hard is that to set up? Not very, if you ask me.

Why does everyone keep trying to break it with different tables, different cloth, different balls, etc.?

There are old tables of the same size still around. There is old type cloth. We still have balls from that era. What's the problem?
Click to expand...

I agree with finding a table and cloth that are really, really similar but to say he can use an old set of balls from that era is asking a bit much from anyone.

There are lots of balls that would be similar in quality of the balls Willie was using but I would hate to have to play when it really counted with a really, really old worn out set of balls.

I do agree with you on everything else though.
Click to expand...
 
Finally got around to watching the video.
Impressions:
1. SLOW 760! Is that poolroom on the beach, and do they leave all the windows open? Jeez. I had always assumed faster cloth was better for 14.1 (easier to move the rock around the table when in trouble, better pack spread without over-hitting/jawing, etc.), but after seeing the control John gets, I may consider recovering with 860 next time.
2. Never played on a public table without a footspot label. I suppose it makes sense if only used for 14.1, but is it fair if you are trying to break a historical record?
3. BALL CLEANING: Isn’t part of making a very long run the gradual adjustment to changing conditions? While I have never seen anyone object to the shooter wiping the CB on his shirt after he leaves it in the rack and takes BIH in the kitchen, I feel sure the old pros had to face the fact that as play progressed, they had to gradually overcut/overhit shots to avoid the inevitable skids that will occur as the balls get dirtier.
4. John never once picked up the rake. I realize duplicating the legendary runouts of long-past history (10’ tables, mud balls, incandescent lighting, etc,) might be overkill, but I don’t think Willie ever used a ‘cue extension’ (?).
P.S. Did I see John make a ‘behind-the-back’ shot (or did I confuse with another video I watched recently)? I quit doing that after I taught myself to ‘switch hit”, but now I may start practicing it again.
 
Last edited:
DynoDan said:
Finally got around to watching the video.
Impressions:
1. SLOW 760! Is that poolroom on the beach, and do they leave all the windows open? Jeez. I had always assumed faster cloth was better for 14.1 (easier to move the rock around the table when in trouble, better pack spread without over-hitting/jawing, etc.), but after seeing the control John gets, I may consider recovering with 860 next time.
2. Never played on a public table without a footspot label. I suppose it makes sense if only used for 14.1, but is it fair if you are trying to break a historical record?
3. BALL CLEANING: Isn’t part of making a very long run the gradual adjustment to changing conditions? While I have never seen anyone object to the shooter wiping the CB on his shirt after he leaves it in the rack and takes BIH in the kitchen, I feel sure the old pros had to face the fact that as play progressed, they had to gradually overcut/overhit shots to avoid the inevitable skids that will occur as the balls get dirtier.
4. John never once picked up the rake. I realize duplicating the legendary runouts of long-past history (10’ tables, mud balls, incandescent lighting, etc,) might be overkill, but I don’t think Willie ever used a ‘cue extension’ (?).
P.S. Did I see John make a ‘behind-the-back’ shot (or did I confuse with another video I watched recently)? I quit doing that after I taught myself to ‘switch hit”, but now I may start practicing it again.
Click to expand...

1. Yes, John said the reason for the 760 was the humidity at that room. He even put a heater under the table, and said it was still slow. [I don't know whether the heater was under the table during this run.]

2. I think they are racking at what is normally the head of that table rather than the foot. I imagine the location for the rack was marked.
 
DynoDan said:
Finally got around to watching the video.
Impressions:
1. SLOW 760! Is that poolroom on the beach, and do they leave all the windows open? Jeez. I had always assumed faster cloth was better for 14.1 (easier to move the rock around the table when in trouble, better pack spread without over-hitting/jawing, etc.), but after seeing the control John gets, I may consider recovering with 860 next time.
2. Never played on a public table without a footspot label. I suppose it makes sense if only used for 14.1, but is it fair if you are trying to break a historical record?
3. BALL CLEANING: Isn’t part of making a very long run the gradual adjustment to changing conditions? While I have never seen anyone object to the shooter wiping the CB on his shirt after he leaves it in the rack and takes BIH in the kitchen, I feel sure the old pros had to face the fact that as play progressed, they had to gradually overcut/overhit shots to avoid the inevitable skids that will occur as the balls get dirtier.
4. John never once picked up the rake. I realize duplicating the legendary runouts of long-past history (10’ tables, mud balls, incandescent lighting, etc,) might be overkill, but I don’t think Willie ever used a ‘cue extension’ (?).
P.S. Did I see John make a ‘behind-the-back’ shot (or did I confuse with another video I watched recently)? I quit doing that after I taught myself to ‘switch hit”, but now I may start practicing it again.
Click to expand...


No -- in my experience, playing 14.1 when the conditions are too slick is the worst.

You want to be able to control the CB within a half a CB ball revolution, or less. And when its sliding all over the place you can't control it enough. IOWs, you don't want super slow but you definitely don't want super fast either.

Lou Figueroa
 
A friend who watched the video noticed this. Check out the shot at 21:28. The 7 ball appears to move when he places his bridge hand down on the table. We’re playing all ball fouls here,right?
 
fiftyyardline said:
A friend who watched the video noticed this. Check out the shot at 21:28. The 7 ball appears to move when he places his bridge hand down on the table. We’re playing all ball fouls here,right?
Click to expand...

Oh, yea, that bad moved. He touched it. That's a standard foul, touched ball, and his inning ends right there.

Video giveth, and video taketh away.
 
fiftyyardline said:
A friend who watched the video noticed this. Check out the shot at 21:28. The 7 ball appears to move when he places his bridge hand down on the table. We’re playing all ball fouls here,right?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing it's a foul.


Lou is gonna have a field day with this one.
 
fiftyyardline said:
A friend who watched the video noticed this. Check out the shot at 21:28. The 7 ball appears to move when he places his bridge hand down on the table. We’re playing all ball fouls here,right?
Click to expand...

Maybe it’s because I’m looking at it on an iPhone, but I watched that bridging multiple times and I don’t see any movement of the 7 ball.
 
Seth C. said:
Maybe it’s because I’m looking at it on an iPhone, but I watched that bridging multiple times and I don’t see any movement of the 7 ball.
Click to expand...

I'm looking at it on a 15" Macbook Pro, and zoomed in on it. It very clearly moves.
 
fiftyyardline said:
A friend who watched the video noticed this. Check out the shot at 21:28. The 7 ball appears to move when he places his bridge hand down on the table. We’re playing all ball fouls here,right?
Click to expand...
He didn't break the record anyway, so what's it really matter?
 
jviss said:
I'm looking at it on a 15" Macbook Pro, and zoomed in on it. It very clearly moves.
Click to expand...

Now I see it (or at least I think I do). It looks like the 7 ball wobbled slightly, but didn’t move or change position. Of course, touching is a foul, whether the position of the ball changes or not.
 
I saw the ball movement at 21:28 as well the other day while watching the run. I noticed how very, very close he comes to numerous ball touching fouls in the 20 min leading up to that one as well. Perhaps John’s “loose” style for the first 100 balls or so is a bit too loose for these kinds of attempts. I’m curious why he wouldn’t restart any and every run for ANY foul - unless - it’s not that big of a deal to him whether he makes a sloppy run of 527 or more. Or he honestly didn’t see or feel it. Which is quite possible. Maybe he’s just free-wheeling it and living fast and dangerously on the baize.

~ K.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BeiberLvr said:
It’s still a big run and a foul discredits that run.
Click to expand...
I agree, that was clearly a foul and should have ended his run. If he'd beaten Mosconi's 526, it would have eventually been completely discredited by this foul. I often practice 14.1 late at night by myself, always with the thought in mind of challenging my all time high run. Even though I don't video it, if I was to commit any sort of a foul like this in which a ball moves, I automatically start my run over, regardless of the fact that I'm alone in here, nobody is watching, and I'm not video taping the run. Anything less is cheating yourself and your own integrity, particularly as a 14.1 player - one of the few games left that is viewed as a "gentleman's game".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top