^^^ What he said ^^^
(I knew all about this but I wasn't gonna mention it)!
Where is the 626?
- Thread starter markjames
- Start date
(I knew all about this but I wasn't gonna mention it)!
Yes, but numerous witnesses signed an affidavit, so this conspiracy theory seems to hold little water.
Ya. I’ll go on record as saying I don’t believe him...for what that’s worth lol. He’s 81 or 2 during these matches and miscalls many shots, rambles a bit etc. I’ve heard other commentators talk about these same accusations but I heard them for the first time by chance just the other night. I’ll try to go back and find the match where he says it.
He claims that the guy who was refereeing the exhibition match told him that during the 526 Mosconi hung up some ball(s) and they were just pushed into the pocket and glossed over so he could keep the run going.
I’m not just trying to start drama (hard A...as in Adam) but I thought it funny that Danny accidentally claimed “626” as mosconis number, claimed it was impossible, didn’t happen. And now we have a hopefully soon to be verified 626...that he can watch
No, not really. This is the highest exhibition run ever.
Cranfield's runs, which I have little doubt happened, two of them over 700, were practice runs and I agree they shouldn't count as the world record.
Careful not to leave out:
The End - The Beginning
Revelations - Genesis
Number of the devil - Days of the great flood
666 - 40 = 626
Last edited:
If Mosconi had put out a video of his 526 it probably would still be selling.
And the reason is that he just did it one night -- it would be lightning in a bottle. I would also have to say that there was something hypnotic about watching Mosconi run balls. He started out pretty deliberately but once he got going he fell into a rhythm and pace with a style that was beautiful to watch.
Lou Figueroa
Not too long ago, we all thought the Berman's were taking too long with their US Open 9 Ball decisions and lo and behold, we were all wrong.
Super Sad Thought for John and the infamous 626, what if before he gets the DVDs ready to ship, someone else Trumps it with a higher recorded run and then jumps at selling copies. All that effort would seem for nothing.
So just in case, John, Get Those DVDs Ready To Ship ASAP. Just In Case...
So just in case, John, Get Those DVDs Ready To Ship ASAP. Just In Case...
Like I say to my daughter when she asks something that is not really realistically possible:
What if, honey? What if...?
Who is gonna beat it?
To answer a question as to who could beat 626, imho there are some who could beat it if they dedicated themselves to doing so like Mr. Schmidt did. Just to name a few- Filler, Hohmann, Appleton, Melling, and if the reward was high enough, the snooker players would get involved. Then the list gets bigger.
Thanks for sharing. If either of the two shots in which the object ball came out of the pocket was a jump shot, I'd disallow it. If not, I think the ref made the right call.
This very situation arose when I attended what I believe was the 1997 BCA Open, played primarily in the rooftop lounge at the Riviera in Las Vegas. During practice, balls came out of the pockets and onto the carpet on one of the tables on a couple of shots. The players knew, as did I, that the equipment was faulty. A referee was called over, and the ruling was the logical one, which was to disallow the shot if it had been a jump shot, otherwise to accept the shot as valid and allow the shooter to continue. I can't say whether this was a proper application of the rules of the game, but in my view, common sense prevailed.
Interesting that Cue Ball Kelly, whom I knew quite well, knew about Cranfield's 768 run. I knew that Crane suggested to me circa 1980 that Babe had more 300+ runs than any player in history and that his claim of two different runs of 700+ was highly credible. As for me, I once saw a framed newspaper article in which Cranfield's 420 on a 10-footer was noted, a number to which neither Willie or Irving came even close, but I've never read anything about Babe's 768.
I'm looking forward to seeing John's historic run of 626 recognized as the world record exhibition run very soon, because it could possibly usher in a time when pool's history is documented more thoroughly than in the past.
Potential based on skill to me Is almost irrelevant. Takes a huge commitment to want to battle that beast.
Pretty much how I see it. Hohmann, Filler, Orcullo, Appleton, Feijen, Immonen and a few others might have it in them to beat this number, but John's level of commitment to a high run is not something I can imagine in any of them.
My sense of things is that John will own the record for a long, long time. Mosconi's record held for over 60 years, and John's might well last as long.
It would be nice to know what actually happened, but unless an eye witness surfaces now or the complete, accurate journal of a witness turns up, we can't. And even an eye witness is suspect 65 years after the fact.
There was a pocket problem in one of the 1970s 14.1 tournaments (1976?). The tables were some off-brand mistakes and the bottom of the pockets had the wire runners of the ball returns exposed. A ball shot straight into the center of the pocket at speed -- such as a break shot -- might get catapulted up and back onto the table. The ruling, if I recall correctly, is that such shots didn't count and the run ended.
Gold Crowns through at least the GC3 with drop pockets have the issue that a ball shot at speed can do a loop-the-loop around the bottom of an empty pocket and come back onto the table. A single ball in the pocket sits centered in the drain hole and a perfectly shot ball can hit it squarely and come back onto the table. And since more than three balls can cause a rejection due to overcrowding, you need to have exactly two balls in the pocket to minimize the chance of rejection.
A large problem with allowing rebounded balls to count is that you have to somehow distinguish between a normal rattle and a reject due to the table. If the pocket liner is loose and sticking out past the facing, should a ball count that does not drop only because it hit the broken pocket liner? And suppose the cue ball is rejected back onto the table. Is that a scratch?
I think in nearly all cases of issues with the pockets you have to go by the rule which is that a rejected ball does not count.
We can agree to disagree on that, it's ok. Practice versus exhibition is a pretty loose debate, loose definition over what exhibition really is, versus practice. I've seen the BCA definition, and you can drive a truck through it.
I don't doubt John did it, and it's now a matter of marketing. I also don't doubt Babe did it, and it's the highest ever. I guess it's however you want to look at it.
All the best,
WW
Yup, the case is certainly not open and shut, but that's how I feel.
John posted on FB that he is researching the best options to market the video......