832

cueman

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Hey, where are you located? I ask because if you're not too far away, I'd drive over and kick you in the nuts for that suggestion. Changing straight pool would be like changing the number of cards in a deck or number of sides on a die. Some things just are not meant to ever change.
Be sure and let me know when you are coming so I can wear a steel cup that day. :)
On the serious side keep standard straight pool for high run competitions. But I think for regular pro pool we need to bring in a twist to keep it main stream for TV or it will die. Maybe make someone have to play safe after running 50 balls and keep the races to 200. Something has to be done or pro straight pool is dead as the players are too good at high runs now. High run competitions are the only avenue for Pro Straight pool now. Amateur straight pool is fine like it is.
 
Last edited:

L.S. Dennis

Well-known member
actually i think we're getting to numbers where it's not realistic for the more methodical / deliberate players to get there. it took mosconi 4.5 hours to run 526 and he was a fast player. it took john schmidt over 4 hours to run 626. schmidt is a fast player. he is also fast compared to most current top pros. add another 374 balls and i think we're talking about 8+ hours for most of the potential candidates.
Not that it’s a big deal but but the time it took Mosconi to run 526 against Earl Bruney in that exhibition match was NOT 4.5 hours. I know that’s what Google says but that’s obviously in error. There’s no way that a fast player (as you indicate that he was) would have taken 4.5 hours to run 526 balls. I think the more accurate time it took for that run as I recall was 2 hours and twenty minutes. I’m sure that 2 hours and twenty minutes probably felt like 4.5 hours being that he was dressed in a coat and tie, with dress shoes. Not exactly they way to be dressed to do a long run in straight pool.
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Not that it’s a big deal but but the time it took Mosconi to run 526 against Earl Bruney in that exhibition match was NOT 4.5 hours. I know that’s what Google says but that’s obviously in error. There’s no way that a fast player (as you indicate that he was) would have taken 4.5 hours to run 526 balls. I think the more accurate time it took for that run as I recall was 2 hours and twenty minutes. I’m sure that 2 hours and twenty minutes probably felt like 4.5 hours being that he was dressed in a coat and tie, with dress shoes. Not exactly they way to be dressed to do a long run in straight pool.
That sounds about right – I can’t imagine it took Willie more than 4 minutes per rack / 15 seconds per ball, even figuring in 30 seconds per rack to re-rack the balls.
 

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Not that it’s a big deal but but the time it took Mosconi to run 526 against Earl Bruney in that exhibition match was NOT 4.5 hours. I know that’s what Google says but that’s obviously in error. There’s no way that a fast player (as you indicate that he was) would have taken 4.5 hours to run 526 balls. I think the more accurate time it took for that run as I recall was 2 hours and twenty minutes. I’m sure that 2 hours and twenty minutes probably felt like 4.5 hours being that he was dressed in a coat and tie, with dress shoes. Not exactly they way to be dressed to do a long run in straight pool.

either way, mosconi, schmidt and shaw were/are all fast players. with the number raised to 832, and especially if we're talking about the 1000, there are few candidates that can do it without wearing themselves out. aside from shaw i can only think of filler
 

EL Picos

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
who cares??? 14.1 was never meant to be played on tiny ass wickets.
You tell me that the number of balls can be compared to what was done in the past regardless of the width of the pockets,:rolleyes:. Pocket size for valuing this kind of feat should be the first thing to consider. If the pockets are 1/4 or 3/8 inch larger than what others had including him in his attempt before this one, that's something to consider. If I ask it, it's simply that for me the size of pockets in his last 832 seem larger than before.
 

BasementDweller

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
but the pressure is way higher knowing if you dog it your opponent may hit you with a 10rack run. shouldn't need to keep saying this. oh well.
You shouldn't keep saying it -- because it's just not true. Do you really think these top players are feeling the heat in a 14.1 match with 650 dollars on the line? They may have felt some heat while playing in the finals of a 14.1 tourney back in the day, but the truth is -- many of them played BETTER because of the pressure, not worse.

The idea that JAYSON SHAW is going to succumb to the "pressure" in a 14.1 match is humorous. There's way more pressure on him as the run climbs higher and higher even if it's just an "exhibition", whatever that even means.
 

maha

from way back when
Silver Member
some differences

pockets sizes. favored old time
slow cloth. hurt old time
polished balls. helps now
hard to open balls from break shot. severely hurt old time as most runs ended because of that.
balls scattering on break. helps now immensely.
long runs were the result of one try from a game or exhibition. hurt old time
longs runs now are result of planning and multiple attempts. helps now
 

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
some differences

pockets sizes. favored old time
slow cloth. hurt old time
polished balls. helps now
hard to open balls from break shot. severely hurt old time as most runs ended because of that.
balls scattering on break. helps now immensely.
long runs were the result of one try from a game or exhibition. hurt old time
longs runs now are result of planning and multiple attempts. helps now

don't forget the clothing. jayson wasn't wearing a coat or tie. and there was no jukebox in the room
 

maha

from way back when
Silver Member
it all adds up that is why you really cant compare the two feats. you are just comparing numbers.

like comparing pole vaulting numbers. the equipment is totally different so the numbers are not relevant.

or driving distance now at golf. jack nicklaus lead most years with a 270 yard distance average. now he might be near dead last of the pro tour winners.
 

Fore Rail

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
or driving distance now at golf. jack nicklaus lead most years with a 270 yard distance average. now he might be near dead last of the pro tour winners.
Driving distance stats weren’t kept until 1980 & Jack never led in that category.

Jack could move it well over 300 yards with a 42 3/4 persimmon steel shafted driver.
 
Last edited:

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
it all adds up that is why you really cant compare the two feats. you are just comparing numbers.

like comparing pole vaulting numbers. the equipment is totally different so the numbers are not relevant.

or driving distance now at golf. jack nicklaus lead most years with a 270 yard distance average. now he might be near dead last of the pro tour winners.

we can conclude that, in the absence of time machines, jayson can't go back in time and play paid brunswick exhibitions on 8ft tables. bobby's online streaming initiative is the best we can get, and in my opinion it's better because we can all see it in real time.
 

maha

from way back when
Silver Member
jack did average about that and did lead the winners. guys like daley drove ten yards farther but werent leading winners. jack stayed in the fairway more. and then you didnt need stats on your phone to look at you got to see what they did on tv. and earlier on sam snead was about the longest as he did hit many 300 yard drives on tour.
evan williams used to win the long drive contests. his drives were 320 yards around that number.
my point was to show the equipment changes not argue over distances.

and i used to play with a mcgegor tommy armor 693
 

Fore Rail

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Look there were no definitive driving distance average numbers until 1980. There was a mini average in 1967 where Jack averaged 276 based upon 11 tournaments.

It’s not just the equipment as there are no magic wands.
 

EL Picos

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
From what I see, the pockets on the 832 balls run table seem wider than I ever seen, check where the wood end rail touch the metal corner hardware close to the pocket rubber and normally this is flush, we see that the end rail have been cutted for a wider opening, when you have to cut it, it's because you want a very wide opening, more than 5 1/4 inch. 1/4 - 3/8 wider is a very lot.
Screenshot 2025-01-06 104052.png
 

trob

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
From what I see, the pockets on the 832 balls run table seem wider than I ever seen, check where the wood end rail touch the metal corner hardware close to the pocket rubber and normally this is flush, we see that the end rail have been cutted for a wider opening, when you have to cut it, it's because you want a very wide opening, more than 5 1/4 inch. 1/4 - 3/8 wider is a very lot.View attachment 801237
5 inch pockets.
 

fjk

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Be sure and let me know when you are coming so I can wear a steel cup that day. :)
On the serious side keep standard straight pool for high run competitions. But I think for regular pro pool we need to bring in a twist to keep it main stream for TV or it will die. Maybe make someone have to play safe after running 50 balls and keep the races to 200. Something has to be done or pro straight pool is dead as the players are too good at high runs now. High run competitions are the only avenue for Pro Straight pool now. Amateur straight pool is fine like it is.
I have an unpopular view on what would make pool a more enjoyable spectator sport: keep tightening the pockets until running one rack of anything is impressive. To me, there's nothing more boring than watching a top pro run a wide-open rack. I would rather see him/her take some chances in order to get the needed better position. I want to see them stress and struggle to run a rack. I want to see their temper and personalities come out when they miss. I want to see them incorporate more safeties and strategies to win.

Today's top pros are so good they make the game boring to watch. Keep tightening those pockets!
 

SBC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Lol. I was backing Marc playing him, I may come out of retirement 🤣

Those cues he built with the cuemaker(can't remember) look very nice
Be in splinters soon enough.

Dude busted a $1,400 dollar cue.
Paid to repair it.
Then blew it into a million pieces for missing a shot in a $20 set
Brain Damaged
 

DaWizard

Well-known member
I have an unpopular view on what would make pool a more enjoyable spectator sport: keep tightening the pockets until running one rack of anything is impressive. To me, there's nothing more boring than watching a top pro run a wide-open rack. I would rather see him/her take some chances in order to get the needed better position. I want to see them stress and struggle to run a rack. I want to see their temper and personalities come out when they miss. I want to see them incorporate more safeties and strategies to win.

Today's top pros are so good they make the game boring to watch. Keep tightening those pockets!
The problem with ultra tight pockets is that players then can only take simple shots. Pool is also fun to watch because the players play combo's, banks and other cool high risk shots.

I do agree that run outs are a little boring, even though they are a real demonstration of elite skill.
 
Top