A new model for 14.1 High runs?

G

gerryf

Well-known member
Sheldon said:
Wrong. Internet keyboard warriors have manufactured problems and controversies. They don't actually exist in the real world. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

I think there were some things they did right, but also things they did wrong. I have no issue with that, as Lou said they were beginners and were expecting to make lots of mistakes.

And many of the controversies were self-inflicted. (EDIT: Almost all the controversies were self-inflicted)

It could be done better.
 
Last edited:
G

gerryf

Well-known member
Since 5" has been the nominal pocket size for Schmidt and Shaw, that seems reasonable for anyone in the world to match. If they can run a record on 4.25" pockets, that's great, and it will forever mean yet another asterisk on previous records.

And as of this morning, I've now heard commitments for $6K for Schmidt and Filler, $3K for SVB, Orcollo, Gorst, Hohmann, Ruslan, Appleton, Earl, , Pagulayan, Deuel, Ouschan. Fortunski, and $8K for Fisher (!!)
 
kanzzo

kanzzo

hobby player
Shuddy said:
EDIT: And, again just my personal opinion, but 4.5” and 4.25” is still big. You still have plenty of room to cheat pockets, particularly down the rails.
Click to expand...
4.5 '' is more than enough to cheat the pocket (it's two balls) and is very playable. Would love to see this as a standard for straight pool. 4.25'' down the rail after one week of play can get a little too tough so 400+ would become very very rare...

People want to see high runs so I would tend towards bigger pockets. 4.5'' should be enough for someone like Filler, Shaw or Schmidt to mangage 500+ and probably even 600+

But since not everybody can change his table specs that easily I would be ok with records for different weight classes. (Best run on < = 4.25, <= 4.5, <= 5 with a cutoff at 5''). This way Jayson can hold up to 3 World Records :)
 
ShootingArts

ShootingArts

Smorg is giving St Peter the 7!
Gold Member
Silver Member
The_JV said:
Screw the BCA... However regardless of the organization. There's a range of acceptable numbers. Personally I'd lean toward the WPA.
View attachment 625614

The only people that may care about the BCA are those living within the USA. There's a bigger world out there.
Click to expand...

Excellent illustration but the numbers on the WPA side pocket are going to be a little difficult to conform to!

Hu
 
alstl

alstl

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
7stud said:
Check your math.



Who cares what the BCA does? It's your event, set your own specs. In my opinion, no 5" pockets. I thought it was embarrassing to watch Jayson Shaw shoot at such wide pockets. It's modern times, and modern specs should be used. In my opinion, it doesn't matter if modern players beat the old records: it's time for the record books to record modern records on a standardized table.
Click to expand...
The reason this is such a big deal is because of Shaw running 714. I disagree that a high run contest should be held on a tight table not conducive to high runs.

One year the DCC 14.1 challenge was held on a 10' table. Only one person ran 100 balls for the entire contest. Not much interest in pros looking like bangers and failing.
 
R

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The_JV said:
I don't think that goes beyond using the same standard that the prior record holder used for sake of comparison. lol... Could you imagine the drama if they claimed the record but didn't bother with the BCA...?

Guess we need to determine if the playground is only as big as the USA, or includes the rest of the world.
Click to expand...
Do you understand what BCA stands for? The rest of the world has nothing to do with BCA.
 
arnaldo

arnaldo

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
alstl said:
The reason this is such a big deal is because of Shaw running 714. I disagree that a high run contest should be held on a tight table not conducive to high runs.

One year the DCC 14.1 challenge was held on a 10' table. Only one person ran 100 balls for the entire contest. Not much interest in pros looking like bangers and failing.
Click to expand...
This is significant information that can't be ignored in a sensible discussion.

Arnaldo
 
realkingcobra

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
iusedtoberich said:
No, it will never happen. Schmidt did it because he was obsessed.

Shaw did it because Bobby funded the whole thing and made it lucrative.

You will never find enough backers at a few bucks each to equal what Bobby put up.
Click to expand...
Besides the player getting paid, who's paying all the support personnel, cameras, location, table maintenance?
 
realkingcobra

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
gerryf said:
Maybe. But Shaw set a new record in about 50 hours. Maybe the total pledges would amount to $10K for an 800 ball run. That's still pretty good pay for a weeks work.
Click to expand...
Shaw pocketed and played more pool in a week than he would have played in total in the last 10 tournaments he played in, so I don't think $10K equates the same.
 
realkingcobra

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
ChrisinNC said:
I don’t know where you got those BCA pockets specs. I just checked and it’s 4-7/8”to 5-1/8” for the corners and 5-3/8” to 5-5/8”for the sides, and 142° +/-1° for the angles.

Based on this range, the table used for the 714 record run certainly appeared to be extremely marginal on all accounts.

The record should not even be certified until someone from the BCA is allowed to thoroughly (in person) inspect these pocket measurements, before they are potentially altered.
Click to expand...
100% agree!!!
 
iusedtoberich

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
ChrisinNC said:
I don’t know where you got those BCA pockets specs. I just checked and it’s 4-7/8”to 5-1/8” for the corners and 5-3/8” to 5-5/8”for the sides, and 142° +/-1° for the angles.

Based on this range, the table used for the 714 record run certainly appeared to be extremely marginal on all accounts.

The record should not even be certified until someone from the BCA is allowed to thoroughly (in person) inspect these pocket measurements, before they are potentially altered.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I checked too. The BCA site has "recreational" table specs, and "professional" table specs. The recreational are the ones you list, and should probably be the ones a straight pool table has to meet. The professional specs points to a dead link at the WPA website. It presumably points to their specs, which I believe are the 4.5" size.

Here is the direct link:

Here is the main page. If you scroll down right below #9, there is Equipment Specifications.
 
realkingcobra

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
The_JV said:
Frankly... I think all those who are concerned have already either verified it or not, and the BCA will not sway those opinions.

...and now of course let me be the first to ask if the BCA inspected the Schmidt or Mosconi table...?
Click to expand...
Learning from mistakes made in the past, prevent repeating the same mistakes in the future. I guarantee you, the 714 record can be broken on today's equipment, for example, Diamond 9ft ProAm with ProCut 4 1/2" and 5" pockets, GUARANTEED! The equipment, the balls, AND the PLAYERS today have everything it takes to do so.

When players have ALREADY demonstrated 200 & 300+ runs on that exact same table, the pockets being to tight is just a bullshit excuse. Put up a reward worth while, and that 714 will fall this year, on one of the 1,000's of 9ft Diamond ProAms around the world!!!!
 
Shuddy

Shuddy

Diamond Dave’s babysitter
Silver Member
iusedtoberich said:
Yeah, I checked too. The BCA site has "recreational" table specs, and "professional" table specs. The recreational are the ones you list, and should probably be the ones a straight pool table has to meet. The professional specs points to a dead link at the WPA website. It presumably points to their specs, which I believe are the 4.5" size.

Here is the direct link:

Here is the main page. If you scroll down right below #9, there is Equipment Specifications.
Click to expand...

The PDF is the one I referred to in my emails with them. Again, they didn’t directly say the table has to be within those specs, but it was implied (clarifying because I don’t want it to turn into, “BCA said those are the specs!!”)
 
Shuddy

Shuddy

Diamond Dave’s babysitter
Silver Member
realkingcobra said:
Learning from mistakes made in the past, prevent repeating the same mistakes in the future. I guarantee you, the 714 record can be broken on today's equipment, for example, Diamond 9ft ProAm with ProCut 4 1/2" and 5" pockets, GUARANTEED! The equipment, the balls, AND the PLAYERS today have everything it takes to do so.

When players have ALREADY demonstrated 200 & 300+ runs on that exact same table, the pockets being to tight is just a bullshit excuse. Put up a reward worth while, and that 714 will fall this year, on one of the 1,000's of 9ft Diamond ProAms around the world!!!!
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree with this.
 
realkingcobra

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
Pool rooms around the world could support high run attempts year round in house. All that needs to be done is lay out the list of requirements as far as equipment goes, cameras, live streaming, recorded video storage for replay viewing, and a single site to live stream through. There could literally be 100's of players all paying a registration fee of $25 to have their chance at breaking the record, all registration fees paid into a prize fund, building like an 8B break pot, getting bigger and bigger by the week. But for the players of the world, keep track of the top 64 high runs at all times, so there's a 64 player leader board established every year, then there's the 64 players for a world 14.1 straight pool championship as well, all qualified to play.

You guys just are not looking at this the right way!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top