is the schmidt record legit or not

deanoc

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
does anyone but danny dispute the record

i got tired of reading the thread,but i am curious if any
reasonable doubt exist
 

Matt_24

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
does anyone but danny dispute the record

i got tired of reading the thread,but i am curious if any
reasonable doubt exist

John doesn't strike me as someone who would make it up. Plus, hasn't he been showing a movie now where people have watched the run? There is footage of him running over 400 on youtube. Add a few more racks to that and there you have it. I'm confident it's legit.

I would still rather watch the Mike Sigel 150 and out run on YOUTUBE from back in the day. Or the Irving Crane 150. Competition high runs are way more exciting.
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
does anyone but danny dispute the record

i got tired of reading the thread,but i am curious if any
reasonable doubt exist
Did we really need another thread started on this same topic? 664 responses to the identical thread was not enough for you?
 

logical

Loose Rack
Silver Member
I heard he had some other anonymous player do it for him.

Sent from the future.
 

deanoc

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
enough let the cat die here

i just wondered and the long talk was confusing

i conclude it is legit
 

Joe_Jaguar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Did we really need another thread started on this same topic? 664 responses to the identical thread was not enough for you?

Not until he is finally given a ban for the nonstop drivel posts. Of course I was banned for pointing out his drivel by the previous wonderful moderator :rolleyes:
 

straightline

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm new here obviously so hi yall. I enjoy the action stories although I question the wisdom of knocking yourself lol.
Anyway, 626 is just a vaguely quantified number. Same the 768. The thing that strikes me about the alleged record is, "5 inch pockets". JS says ya gotta have 'em. Who 'm I to argue? I do think though, that "record" attempts should be made on ultra tight equipment; no slack on the random outcomes. Contenders would just have to shoot the compound shots (banks, billiards, combos, and any soup they can call) to keep getting out. If that caps the human achievement at one or two hundred, so be it.
 

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I heard a rumor that the rails on that table were actually a set that belonged to someone else and supplied by RKC. ;)
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
Adapted form a post I made in the 14.1 forum:

I believe the run happened, and its validation by the BCA is enough evidence for me. That said, this is a matter of opinion and I'm trying to get a better handle on why others question whether the run was legit.

For me, the facts don't add up if this was all a hoax and the video was doctored to hide a miss or a foul, because:

1) given how unprepared John's team was for the release of the record setting run were it to occur, one must presume that the run caught them all off guard.

2) if they spent the period immediately following the alleged run doctoring/editing the video, they would have had plenty of time to come up with a marketing plan for release and marketing of the run.

3) given that John's team appears to have had no intention to market the run, what was the motive? Has anybody gained from this run financially? The BCA, which has not used the run in any way in its marketing of pool, certainly had no financial interest in signing off.

A couple of other thoughts.

Who is to say what the rules are governing an exhibition or even what an exhibition is?

All ball fouls?
We have seen Mosconi play an exhibition without using the all-ball fouls rule in a match with Caras. If the kind of foul that wouldn't be a foul unless this rule was in effect were to be found on careful inspection of the video, would it invalidate the run?

Consultation?
Some have commented that shots may have been discussed along the way. If one or more positions were discussed with others who were present, does it invalidate the run?

Was this Really an Exhibition?
Some have taken note that the run began well before the poolroom was open to the public. A case can, therefore, be made that it wasn't an exhibition run at all. Is a run that was only partially available for view by the general public really an exhibition run?

It's all very confusing. While I'm fully satisfied of the run's legitimacy, I don't want to be dismissive of those who are suspicious, but if it turns out that this was all a hoax and that the BCA endorsed a run that wasn't legitimate, it will be a sad day in our sport's history.

Finally, I don't feel that John's continuing delay of releasing the video to the general public should be viewed as making it more likely that there are issues with the run. The video belongs to John and his team and it is their right to handle its release (or non-release) as they choose.

Conclusion
While I believe the run happened, I cannot be dismissive of those who still question its validity. They raise some valid questions, and what's wrong with them insisting on more evidence?
 
Last edited:

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm new here obviously so hi yall. I enjoy the action stories although I question the wisdom of knocking yourself lol.
Anyway, 626 is just a vaguely quantified number. Same the 768. The thing that strikes me about the alleged record is, "5 inch pockets". JS says ya gotta have 'em. Who 'm I to argue? I do think though, that "record" attempts should be made on ultra tight equipment; no slack on the random outcomes. Contenders would just have to shoot the compound shots (banks, billiards, combos, and any soup they can call) to keep getting out. If that caps the human achievement at one or two hundred, so be it.
Yeah, I’d estimate for every 1/4 inch tighter than 5 inches the pockets get, the high run record would decrease by at least 25%. On 4-inch corner pockets, I’d be shocked if any human could run 10 racks - 140 balls.
 
Last edited:

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm new here obviously so hi yall. I enjoy the action stories although I question the wisdom of knocking yourself lol.
Anyway, 626 is just a vaguely quantified number. Same the 768. The thing that strikes me about the alleged record is, "5 inch pockets". JS says ya gotta have 'em. Who 'm I to argue? I do think though, that "record" attempts should be made on ultra tight equipment; no slack on the random outcomes. Contenders would just have to shoot the compound shots (banks, billiards, combos, and any soup they can call) to keep getting out. If that caps the human achievement at one or two hundred, so be it.
Yeah, the size of the pockets and the pocket facing angles is everything when it comes to 14.1 high runs. I’d estimate for every 1/4 inch tighter than 5 inches the pockets get, the record high run would decrease by at least 25%. On 4-inch corner pockets, I’d be shocked if any human could run 10 racks - 140 balls.
 
Last edited:

straightline

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yeah, the size of the pockets and the pocket facing angles is everything when it comes to 14.1 high runs. I’d estimate for every 1/4 inch tighter than 5 inches the pockets get, the record high run would decrease by at least 25%. On 4-inch corner pockets, I’d be shocked if any human could run 10 racks - 140 balls.

Sure it's possible. If the task were defined in proper terms, never mind the geezers, those "extreme" kids would be all over it.

On pockets, the jaws screw it all up. Take snooker; small aperture, stupid jaws. Can't even make a rail shot. Pyramid cut pockets would be a step in the right direction but why have jaws at all? If the rails were cut flat like plain ole 2x6s then the nose of the cushions at the pocket would form the apertures and rail shots would have at least a ball's width to fall into the table. You could have 3.5 inch pockets give or take.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... Was this Really an Exhibition?
Some have taken note that the run began well before the poolroom was open to the public. A case can, therefore, be made that it wasn't an exhibition run at all. Is a run that was only partially available for view by the general public really an exhibition run? ...

Apparently Easy Street's normal opening time for customers is 1:00 pm. But that is for customers to play pool. To me, that doesn't necessarily mean they wouldn't let people in who arrived earlier than that to watch John's high-run attempts. It's possible that the room advertised or posted notice of the days and times John would be there running balls, and let in anyone who showed up to watch. But, granted, we do not know at present.
 
Top