626 is it legit?
- Thread starter Danny Harriman
- Start date
I agree my fine Finnish friend but prepare for the oncoming s^*t-storm. Some of these Mosconi minions are kinda out there. To say the least.
Schmidt/Mosconi/StraightPool
Stop with the name calling. This isn't about who(m), it's about what. The Game 14.1, has remained mostly unchanged since its origination about 1910. Players came and went, but they all played The Game, the same, until some few felt that it needed more offense to enlighten the game. Somewhere about the 1980s, someone felt the need to invent a hi-run contest, evidently without rules. This opened the game up to all kinds of processes to extend the possibility of higher and higher runs. 526/626 are just numbers, whose names are associated with the names are unimportant. The game is paying the consequences. Proceeding, ever so to it's end. No players willing to pay to practice the game. Had not John Schmidt found willing parlor owners to allow him free playing time, for the better part of two years, these attempts would have never happened.
I'm inclined to agree with the spirit of this post. When some tried to bring the focus in 14.1 to high runs rather than excellence in competition, it was the beginning of the end of the game's popularity among those who came from the straight pool era.
I found it particularly offensive when a rule was added in the Dragon 14.1 events allowing players on a run to continue shooting despite having reached the finish line in a match, as it was emblematic of the reduced focus on winning.
The event that, more than any other, respected high run and competitive excellence objectives equally was the Derby City 14.1 Challenge, which sadly no longer exists. High runs were required to qualify for the main single elimination tournament, and most of the money awarded in the event went to those who did well in the single elimination.
Yes, straight pool and so many of its followers lost focus.
It is a great achievement and I just do not understand. All. The. Hate.
You people make me sad for humanity. This is a beacon to be celebrated, and most of you just want to tear it down. I don't get it, I am honestly baffled and deeply disappointed.
Wake Up & Pee, the whole world is on fire!
About 50 posters of 68,000 members and now we are committing inhumanity to humanity. 7.8 billion humans divided into 50= 6.e-9%, hardly noticeable as a beacon to anything. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, not flashes of light, baffle them with bullsh*t. That's where js626 without edited proof=bullsh*t, and where it will remain until proven.
I believe the run happened and accept the BCA's signoff on it, but your dismissing those that want to see the evidence first hand before believing it as "making you sad for humanity" makes me sad for you.
In this age, unlike that of Mosconi, significant world records attained are, with very rare exception, available to the public for viewing. Not a single member of the general public saw the run from beginning to end when it happened, as a significant portion of it occurred before the poolroom was even open. The only witnesses of the entire run were members of John's team, and eight months after the run occurred, it hasn't been released for general viewing.
The fact that this run remains shrouded in secrecy and mystery makes it far less of a cause for the celebration you suggest is fitting than it could have and should have been.
It would be very hard to argue that the sport of pool has gained in any way from this undeniably remarkable achievement.
There's is a difference between "official" competition and a match-up.
The high run in an officated (but probably not sanctioned) match was Appleton's 200-and-out against Bustamante.
Hopkins claims a run of 300+ in a match, but it was probably a money match or an exhibition match. I don't know whether there was a ref.
Filler's 285 at the DCC in the qualifying phase was officiated with "all fouls" but it was not a match.
official,exhibition = nonsense
Too many posters are getting hemmed up on semantics, I have said this many times already and I don't like to sound like a 'broken record here'.:wink: With today's advancement in recording technology (not available in Mosconi's era) there is no reason for bca or team schmidt/predator to make such a claim and then not offer the video to the general public - other than maybe a problem with the video. I do understand about hype and or foreshadowing a story/ 'Western' but this goes beyond all that, so my only concern at this juncture is why we are not allowed to see the evidence or unedited footage? We ' the people' i.e. general public - have been asking to see proof for almost a year? The hidden mystery tape will answer most of my questions, we will be able to see the possible sanded slate pockets and or possible larceny with video splicing. Keep in mind folks - if there is no visible triangle line drawn - for the viewers to see what ball is in or out of the rack - this would eliminate any legitimacy of the video for me - as it should - there will almost certainly be break shots where the object ball resides very near the triangle. I would b willing to bet ya'll sight unseen that there will not be a line drawn (vintage schmidt).
Not showing the video to the public after almost a year is just another way of not showing a rack line - as to blur the lines of judgement. I saw one of his earlier runs where the fellow threw the rack down when cue ball was (in my view) clearly NOT in the rack, poor schmidt just has not changed a bit as he just smacks the cue ball with his cue and has a look of disgust, he knew the cue ball was outside the rack - since they had no visible line drawn - he continues his run?. I too am not happy that there are not any organized 14.1 professional competition tournaments (I won't call myself a pro on avatar till there is fyi) bout the only thing schmidt and myself have in common is we both love 14.1. Taking frustrations out on the game (smacking cue ball that is out of triangle - no line drawn) is not a good way to release the fact that 14.1 is not being marketed in a proper way. There should be a structured format for the aspiring 14.1 player to attain pro status - maybe the bca does not want any competition for their petty bar leegs? All I know is that if I do again try to capture some good runs on camera there will not be any 'hidden pockets' - you will be able to see a rack line and i won't need 5" pockets to get 'r' done - I will not hide the tape from the public's eye either - 'it will be out in sight' and not behind closed doors i.e. walls of corruption. There will not b any weird members only club that is only allowed to view the footage - there is no semi public we are all equal. oh and hey Mark Griffin - if u read this Harriman said hurry up with their tape man.
Too many posters are getting hemmed up on semantics, I have said this many times already and I don't like to sound like a 'broken record here'.:wink: With today's advancement in recording technology (not available in Mosconi's era) there is no reason for bca or team schmidt/predator to make such a claim and then not offer the video to the general public - other than maybe a problem with the video. I do understand about hype and or foreshadowing a story/ 'Western' but this goes beyond all that, so my only concern at this juncture is why we are not allowed to see the evidence or unedited footage? We ' the people' i.e. general public - have been asking to see proof for almost a year? The hidden mystery tape will answer most of my questions, we will be able to see the possible sanded slate pockets and or possible larceny with video splicing. Keep in mind folks - if there is no visible triangle line drawn - for the viewers to see what ball is in or out of the rack - this would eliminate any legitimacy of the video for me - as it should - there will almost certainly be break shots where the object ball resides very near the triangle. I would b willing to bet ya'll sight unseen that there will not be a line drawn (vintage schmidt).
Not showing the video to the public after almost a year is just another way of not showing a rack line - as to blur the lines of judgement. I saw one of his earlier runs where the fellow threw the rack down when cue ball was (in my view) clearly NOT in the rack, poor schmidt just has not changed a bit as he just smacks the cue ball with his cue and has a look of disgust, he knew the cue ball was outside the rack - since they had no visible line drawn - he continues his run?. I too am not happy that there are not any organized 14.1 professional competition tournaments (I won't call myself a pro on avatar till there is fyi) bout the only thing schmidt and myself have in common is we both love 14.1. Taking frustrations out on the game (smacking cue ball that is out of triangle - no line drawn) is not a good way to release the fact that 14.1 is not being marketed in a proper way. There should be a structured format for the aspiring 14.1 player to attain pro status - maybe the bca does not want any competition for their petty bar leegs? All I know is that if I do again try to capture some good runs on camera there will not be any 'hidden pockets' - you will be able to see a rack line and i won't need 5" pockets to get 'r' done - I will not hide the tape from the public's eye either - 'it will be out in sight' and not behind closed doors i.e. walls of corruption. There will not b any weird members only club that is only allowed to view the footage - there is no semi public we are all equal. oh and hey Mark Griffin - if u read this Harriman said hurry up with their tape man.
Last edited:
Trumpetguy85
New member
Is there a way to watch this?
First thing I want to say great job John I think you ran the 626. That said I have seen a lot of high runs myself as I was part of the DCC 14.1 event for a number of years. I saw nothing but improvement from year to year (Big Foot year being the exception) due to the focus on the event and it was looked forward to as a destination event. Players wanted to run balls under the gun and get into the tourney. The event had money available to pay for their excellence and it made the game more relevant and yes the runs were qualifiers but they were performed in front of people/players and there was pressure. It was good for the game and more 14.1 was played from coast to coast and around the world because of the format and the visibility of the game on Youtube, lot of high runs free and easily viewable by any who wanted to see. excellence performed on great equipment at a great event. The people running the DCC 14.1 had some good sponsors (Greg/Diamond/Simonis/Araimith./Bob Jewett many others and many hard working volunteers along led by Bill and Dennis) so there was ready money available if you had the game and could put up high runs you could get paid and the runs got higher and higher. We initially thought there would never be a 200 on a tight Diamond and there were and then they came in multiples per year. Great runs great players great event and great game. The money got the players playing hard and our sponsor got a lot of bang for their bucks.
That said there was no money put up really to sponsor Johns effort. He did it in the hopes of running balls so as to break the 526 run of Mosconi. I have not seen the video, I think he ran the balls but I do not think he had a plan to monetize the accomplishment. Now whether it was a video'd practice run or an exhibition or in competition that is all semantics, John made a concerted effort to run 526+ and capture it on video whatever it was he did it, he got some support from a couple of rooms and when it was happening there was a lot more straight pool talked in their rooms and on FB/AZ and I think it was good for the game and I think John hopes it pays off for John. He definitely does not have the sort of deal that Mosconi had, those days are gone.
It is pretty obvious that the details are lost of exactly what happened to end Mosconi's run (He himself stated he missed at one point and later he said he got tired and stopped.) The affidavit was an afterthought without the details on the ending of the run. Great job Willie 526 run was recognized by the BCA and was the high run for a long time, a very long time.
When the video is shown publicly I hope it is accepted, I am sure it will be inspected as closely as the Zapruder video maybe closer. I do not think John will play the cheat game. If there were edgy slates then more scratches would also occur so that would not be a winning strategy. I think John ran his run and he ran it on a 9' table and told people what he was trying to do, it was what it was a public, long term, concerted effort to run a big number. Good job John, 626 is a big number.
I look forward to seeing the 626 video when it is available. Danny put up your own big number run, capture it on video and release it immediately have a marketing plan get it out on ESPN. Make 14.1 Great Again.
That said there was no money put up really to sponsor Johns effort. He did it in the hopes of running balls so as to break the 526 run of Mosconi. I have not seen the video, I think he ran the balls but I do not think he had a plan to monetize the accomplishment. Now whether it was a video'd practice run or an exhibition or in competition that is all semantics, John made a concerted effort to run 526+ and capture it on video whatever it was he did it, he got some support from a couple of rooms and when it was happening there was a lot more straight pool talked in their rooms and on FB/AZ and I think it was good for the game and I think John hopes it pays off for John. He definitely does not have the sort of deal that Mosconi had, those days are gone.
It is pretty obvious that the details are lost of exactly what happened to end Mosconi's run (He himself stated he missed at one point and later he said he got tired and stopped.) The affidavit was an afterthought without the details on the ending of the run. Great job Willie 526 run was recognized by the BCA and was the high run for a long time, a very long time.
When the video is shown publicly I hope it is accepted, I am sure it will be inspected as closely as the Zapruder video maybe closer. I do not think John will play the cheat game. If there were edgy slates then more scratches would also occur so that would not be a winning strategy. I think John ran his run and he ran it on a 9' table and told people what he was trying to do, it was what it was a public, long term, concerted effort to run a big number. Good job John, 626 is a big number.
I look forward to seeing the 626 video when it is available. Danny put up your own big number run, capture it on video and release it immediately have a marketing plan get it out on ESPN. Make 14.1 Great Again.
This is a very sharp observation which to my knowledge hasn't been previously mentioned in the many discussions. And it is quite relevant, because in any ultra-high runs I've ever seen -- in-person and on video -- there were generally one or more near-scratches. Happened perilously close to almost ending Crane's1966 runout against Balsis, and also the one that almost ended Sigel's NYC 1992 cue ball-on-a-string 150-and-out against Zuglan.
Arnaldo
Not a chance in hell it is legit. He is capable of doing it, but the way he has treated this, there is zero chance it is real.What makes Mosconi's real is that it was an exhibition in front of many fans, and done on one of the few occassisons in exhibitions where he went for a high run. Practice runs with secret video do not cut it.
It is well known that I believe this run happened, I'm happy for John, and know how much effort went into reaching this milestone. Well done!
That said, I disagree with your point about edgy slates. The same exact point can be made about the use of 5" pockets rather than the 4 1/2" pockets pros usually use. Scratching into a pocket was a greater danger on the loose table, but not to the point that it made running balls harder.
I am also struggling with the suggestion that whether this was an exhibition run or a practice run is a matter of semantics. As practice runs do not qualify for consideration as the world record (Eufemia 626, Cranfield 768 and Cranfield over 700 on another occasion), there is something very strange about the fact that the BCA signed off on this as an exhibition run, as a significant portion of it occurred before the pool hall opened and was not witnessed by anyone outside of John's team. A year after the fact, the general public has not seen the video, save a few who were charged for the privilege. Mosconi's run was witnessed in its entirety by numerous impartial observers on hand for a pre-announced exhibition.
Last edited:
Wrong Registry
There is no such thing as a 14.1 high-run record.
There are no specifications, no rules, no regulations for documentation.
Move from BCA to Ripley's Believe It or Not! Not an iota of difference.
Much higher 14.1 practice runs have better documentation than this one does.
Pick any one of them and call them the high-run record holder.
There is no such thing as a 14.1 high-run record.
There are no specifications, no rules, no regulations for documentation.
Move from BCA to Ripley's Believe It or Not! Not an iota of difference.
Much higher 14.1 practice runs have better documentation than this one does.
Pick any one of them and call them the high-run record holder.
Last edited:
Can you enlighten the group as to what you are referencing?
How high are the runs?
What is the "better documentation"?
Who accomplished the runs that were much higher than 626?
Stu -- I don't know whether it's true that no one outside of John's team saw the run from the start. Here are some posts on that subject exchanged about 3 months ago.
Of the 8 people who signed the certification referenced in the affidavit, 4 of them would certainly be considered part of John's "team" -- his wife, the room owner, the racker, and the racker's wife. I don't know whether the other 4 [Fred Lenz, David Lota (or Cota), Ian Locklar, Josiah Sinkler] were present for the entire run. The certification says they "witnessed" the run of 626.
Dammit, Haze!
There is no support to offer for the claim. Why you buggin' the nut about that?!!?