Is a statement by a person who was present for the event considered to be evidence? If so, that was not the truth.Truth.
Lou Figueroa
Is a statement by a person who was present for the event considered to be evidence? If so, that was not the truth.Truth.
Lou Figueroa
Is a statement by a person who was present for the event considered to be evidence? If so, that was not the truth.
Is a statement by a person who was present for the event considered to be evidence? If so, that was not the truth.
The guy who was racking and the text was "626 baby!" I had a further confirmation after they checked the count. (Previously a run of 421 that I was present for had been counted as 435 until the video was checked later. They were fully aware that a video count was needed.)What was the statement and who was the person?
Lou Figueroa
testimony does not
automatically
equal truth
A quick review of the video reveals very little to inform anyone of the basic start for 14.1 continuous straight pool per the various billiards organizations rules of the game. Same rules for competition as well as exhibitions. Just for clarification, this I've Got a Secret Show was broadcast about six years after Willie had a heart attack and five years after he officially retired from active competition and exhibitions.
6:23, you see his stroke slip as well.
But recognized nonetheless.
Would you rather strike down John's accomplishment?
The guy who was racking and the text was "626 baby!" I had a further confirmation after they checked the count. (Previously a run of 421 that I was present for had been counted as 435 until the video was checked later. They were fully aware that a video count was needed.)
Well said.
Way to go John, you not only set the NEW WORLD RECORD, you started the " When Willie was King" fan club.
Current membership is at 19 and counting.
The guy who was racking and the text was "626 baby!" I had a further confirmation after they checked the count. (Previously a run of 421 that I was present for had been counted as 435 until the video was checked later. They were fully aware that a video count was needed.)
Wasn't there the guy who was racking for Mosconi -- Charlie Ursitti -- the day he ran just short of 600 at the Waldorf-Astoria?
My impression was that one guy, even one with Ursitti's credentials, wasn't considered sufficient evidence to declare a record.
Lou Figueroa
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not aware that Mosconi or Ursitti were trying to claim the official record was 589 at any point.
Also, the 609 gets even more difficult. Only Mosconi accounts for it, not Ursitti, given available information. I've posted it in other threads.
Again, correct me if I'm wrong.
All the best,
WW
I don't know about all that.
No record was being attempted but I think that would be immaterial.
Lou Figueroa
Well, but aren't you the one who says a signed affidavit is the necessary standard in those days before video? That is what has held the 526 as the official record.
Just trying to understand...
All the best,
WW
I have to say that I fully think John is capable of running 626, but the fact that this run seems to only have been witnessed by one other person, was not streamed, and conveniently came the day after he discovered a "secret" of straight pool just does not sit 100% with me. If there is any cut or skip in the video, I would not allow the record. If he did it in front of an audience fine. But in front of 1 person and video released seemingly well after the fact? Not so sure of that to be frank.
Glad I started this thread.
I knew the haters and critics were idiots, but I didn't expect them to get this desperate and petty.
While John Schmidt reached new highs, these dregs have reached new lows!!!
Well, well...John has broken the record.
John has broken it by 100 balls.
It is on VIDEO. There were witnesses.
It is the highest run ever confirmed. It is confirmed in the most reliable, indisputable and conclusive way. Nothing about it is subjective, it is purely objective. No hearsay. No BS.
I had a feeling that once he did this, all there would be left are the desperate ramblings of people saying so-and-so ran 700+ in some basement...and other unsubstantiated, mythical runs. Legends of pool. Do I personally believe some of the greats pulled off a higher run in practice or what not? Sure. I think it is very likely. I don't think it is a sure thing. But either way, it matters not as there's no evidence.
Mosconi's run was witnessed by a lot of people who signed on it. That is legit. All these other runs are mythical. Don't care what so and so said, who knew so and so who saw it themselves.
Let's see...is there anything the haters, Mosconi worshipers, and others can say to knock John?
Can they criticize the table? No, not compared to what Mosconi played on.
Some say it's not the same as John had many attempts. Well, that's BS too - because Mosconi routinely made exhibitions and routinely would continue runs to please the crowd. So he had many attempts too. Now..he may not have been completely committed to and determined to run as many as he could possibly run on each of his exhibitions, but nonetheless, this claim that it was his only high run attempt is bogus.
Oh, there's the claim that John wasn't playing an opponent. Is that even relevant when you're running 600+ balls? Deduct a full rack of 14 points to compensate for a starting position, he still broke the record. A match typically is played to 150. Again, irrelevant.
Ha, just waiting for someone to claim John was using performance-enhancing drugs. LOL.
Just give it up. Instead of trying to diminish John, recognize it as the greatest run ever. Mosconi's run is still great and always will be. Accomplished so long ago. Stood for so long as seemingly unbreakable.
It doesn't mean John is the greatest 14.1 player. Mosconi was better.
I guess we need to get "Mr. 625" matched-up with "Five-time Hohmann" for a multi-day 1000pt match. That would be epic.