Best 14:1 Player Ever-John Schmidt or Willie Mosconi?
- Thread starter the420trooper
- Start date
john schmidt said:
I love you John. You are one of the unique characters in the pool world. I'm glad you will be a part of our little undertaking next week. Hopefully good things will come from it.
Do you remember our conversation a few years back before you played in the finals at the Sands? You were nervous then too. But you rose to the occasion and won the tournament. I was very proud of you that day.
Just know this, you are not so unlike other TOP players. They also get nervous when they have to play YOU. It's natural among great competitors. The champions are the ones who can turn that nervous energy into strength. And you have learned how to do that. You were BRILLIANT in the final match of the One Pocket with Scott Frost. Even he said, "Did you see what he just did to me?" When the day comes that you don't feel nerves going into a big match, is the day you might as well retire.
I just wish we could see you play more. I have felt for a long time that you should be competing on the International stage. You know that because we've discussed it. You have the game to beat ANYONE, filipinos and Chinese included. You may be the best shot maker in the game today.
One last thing, being compared with Mosconi is one of the ultimate compliments you could receive. Very few players are ever mentioned in the same breath as him. And for good reason. He was a great player, one of the best of all time. John, you have the skills to create a great record of your own, albeit a different one than Willie's. You have already won several major titles, you just need to continue to compete and keep amassing victories.
John, you may not realize this, but you have the potential to have a Hall Of Fame career. But to do that, you must play ALL the majors wherever they are held. You must DEDICATE yourself to being a professional pool player, first and foremost. As I said to you once before years ago, this is what all those years of preparation were about. You have reached the mountain top, now what are you going to do there?
This is not just about earning money or making a living. It is about something far more important. It is about leaving your legacy. So that one day, some young hot shot pool player will be compared to you. I wish you the best John. This has been a valuable lesson for you. Sometimes we learn important things about ourselves off the table as well as on. The more we can keep our cool when the pressure is on, the better we will do under fire. In the heat of competition you will be a little better prepared next time. I just hope I'm there to see it.
Jaybird
Last edited:
Well said John, you're wrong however about people hating you, I think you're a good guy and someone who is needed in a sport that has lived with a bad reputation for so long. I'm glad you're staying around as we love to have your input and expertise. Have a great time on your dirtbike trip and the AZB family wishes you well.john schmidt said:
Nice final post John. I was actually thinking to myself after you won the DCC One Pocket, that you now have two distinct major titles to your resume along with the 406 run and what more would it take for a player to reach HOF status. You definitely have the skills to win another US Open or two in your career as long as you keep dodging the cactus on your dirt bike.
I also like the fact that you are happy with your position in life and career as a professional pool player. It appears that you know how to manager your time and your money - something many a pro should emulate.
I also like the fact that you are happy with your position in life and career as a professional pool player. It appears that you know how to manager your time and your money - something many a pro should emulate.
watchez said:
Great post. With John's wondrous all-around skills, he may be the first player in recent times that has a chance to match Nick Varner's monumental achievement of having won a major championship in each of straight pool, one pocket, nine ball, bank pool and eight ball.
Threads like this are useless. They are pointless as no conclusions can be drawn from the endless personal opinions and baseless comparisons. This thread and others like it serve no purpose other than to get people upset and cause pain to those that are discussed as though they are not real people and have no feelings.
There is no other purpose to a thread of this sort than to stir things up and it causes people pain in the doing.
There is no other purpose to a thread of this sort than to stir things up and it causes people pain in the doing.
Last edited:
JimS said:
Threads like this are extemely interesting. Serious fans of any sport delight in the comparison of players across the generations of the game. As you note very correctly, even for the AZBers like me who saw both the old masters of 14.1 and the current crop of players up close, it's a pretty inexact science.
Was Mike Schmidt a better home run hitter than Mickey Mantle? Hmmm. Now let's see, Mantle played in a ballpark where a home run to right field didn't require much distance relative to other ballparks. Then again, the left field fence at Yankee stadium was a long, long way away from the plate. The pitcher's mound was higher off the ground in Mantle's day. Specialty relief pitchers were far more scarce in Mantle's day than in Mike Schmidt's day. Man, this is starting to get complicated, but try telling the serious baseball fan that comparison of players with those that came before them is a pointless pursuit. Much of the joy that the serious fans of the game and the sports media derive from following baseball is in placing the efforts of today's ballplayers in the broader context of history.
Who was the better dunker, Michael Jordan or Dr. J? Everyone knows that on many of the dunks that Michael made, he'd have been called for travelling in Dr. J's day. How then, can we make the comparison? But fans and media that follow the NBA do make the comparison.
It is no different for the pool fan. The complications of comparison across the genarations are obvious, but great joy is derived from the comparison, and in most cases, professionals enjoy the comparisons, too. Was Strickland better than Lassiter at nine ball? That's a toughie. After all, Lassiter played pushout on slow cloth, while Strickland excelled at Texas Express on fast cloth, which requires a slightly different set of skills. Still, here on AZB, we've had many a thread in which we've compared these two. Were they pointless threads? No, they were interesting.
Why do we bother with such comparisons when we know that it is such an inexact science? Because we love it! And that's why this thread is not only useful, but stimulating for so many. I expect many more threads like it in the future.
RunOutRodney said:
Are you serious? I have to say I find this claim a little bit hard to believe. I know Lassiter was a great champion but I've seen some of the numbers from his Championship games and he just didn't run 100s as often as Mosconi or Greenleaf. It was more like 60s and 70s with some 100s here and there. I would think that any player with a high run of 800 balls (or anything over 400 for that matter) would be raining 100s all the time.
I'm in no way trying to lessen Lassiter's great accomplishments, I just find this story a little hard to believe.
Hopefully John will go ride his dirtbike, play some golf, win another couple pool events and come back here after awhile.
John is a comedic genius- some of the stuff he comes up with is funnier than Seinfeld.
Laugh at the naysayers John, plenty of people here are big fans and hope you do well. Fans, even the haters, are why there is any money ( I know its pitiful, but better than playing for nothing) in pool so you just need to find a way to not let people rile you up.
You have talent, major victories, a hot chick, and live in the US. You can't be THAT pissed off at the world.
John is a comedic genius- some of the stuff he comes up with is funnier than Seinfeld.
Laugh at the naysayers John, plenty of people here are big fans and hope you do well. Fans, even the haters, are why there is any money ( I know its pitiful, but better than playing for nothing) in pool so you just need to find a way to not let people rile you up.
You have talent, major victories, a hot chick, and live in the US. You can't be THAT pissed off at the world.
Bobby said:
Actually he DID play that good. Or at least much better than you think. Being the statistician that I am, I delighted in keeping track of match results, even back in the Johnston City days. I would follow the best players throughout the tournament and see what made them winners. Lassiter had five Straight Pool victories at JC and numerous second place finishes. The matches were contested at 125 points and rarely did Luther not run a 90 or better in EVERY match he played. That was his winning formula.
Too bad there are no written records of those events. I remember my amazement at his ability to put together long runs match after match. Other players would make the occasional 100 ball run, but only Lassiter did it seemingly at will. No one else came close to matching him for multiple long runs every year he played at Johnston City. He won numerous other 14.1 titles in his career as well. Lassiter could play the game, don't let anyone tell you differently.
Whether he ever ran 500, 600, 700 or 800 balls I have no idea. For a player of his skill anything would be possible on his own home table. Cranfield supposedly ran over 700 on his home table. Records like this don't mean a whole to me. What players did in competition is far more significant.
Last edited:
jay helfert said:
The thing that makes it hard to believe for me, Jay, is that if Lassiter had actually run over 800, somehow, I feel, the word would have spread. I heard about Eufemia's and Cranfield's alleged mega-runs when I was young, but never of Lassiter's.
Still, Wimpy was, in the eyes of many, the greatest ball pocketer in our sport's history, so it's at least within the realm of possibility that he ran a huge number.
sjm said:
I agree with everything you just said. :thumbup:
Do I win a gold star?
here is what i think.sjm said:
if anyone wanted to play 14.1 today like they did back in the day there would be a lot of 400 ball runs.
about 2% of the players of today play 14 .1.
the reason is no one gambles at it.
i think if john played it more he would be better than the old school guys.
jay helfert said:
Jay, funny that you would mention this. There was a recent post of the '66 World Championship between Wimpy and Cicero Murphy to 150. Lassiter won in two innings. Murph played real well but unfortunately one of his two turns was the opening break.
Murphy breaks, Lassiter ran like 54, Cicero ran 111, and Wimpy runs 96 and out.
Last edited:
sjm said:
I have to agree with you there, word would have gotten out about such a monsterous run. The only thing I can think of is that maybe the man who told the poster this story said something like "yeah Lassiter ran 800 balls" but not really meaning 800 balls literally, like when someone says "Archer breaks the balls 100 miles per hour" we all know he doesn't literally mean 100 mph.
sjm said:
Mantle could have been one of the all time best, but injuries hurt his longevity. But I would still take Schmidt as a better home run hitter. Schmidtty retired when he could still play better than most, but not up to his standards. He had at least three more years in him and could have reached 600 HRs.
Bobby said:
My Grandfather's old road partner was a monster. You gotta remember straight pool runs were not that big of deal back then, getting the win was. Both my Grandfather and Wimpy had a way to gauge whether they had the best of playing someone they both said they would watch the guy warm up if he missed more then once an hour he had no shot. Both Wimpy and Don had an open invitation to anyone to come to their hometowns (Elizabeth N.C, and Canton OH) andplay for anything. Here is a straight fact. In one action match circa 1955 Wimpy was playing a strong player games to 150 points for $50 (not a bad bet in the 1950's) First game Wimpy runs 150 and out on his opponents break, next game Wimpy breaks safe, and the guy eventully takes the first shot he runs some balls and once he misses Wimpy runs out, etc, etc. Luther never missed a ball in five games. Sure he had safty exchanges at the beginning of each came but once the first shot was taken Wimpy ran out over 750 balls without a miss in action, Wimpy was on everybody's do not play list from the late 40's till the early 70's, He travelled the road with my Grandfather for over ten years, and trust me if someone coulda ran 800 on his home table it was wimpy. He was an absolute moster in N.C. My opinon on runs past 300 balls are that it becomes a crap shot, a test of endurance, and willpower. If you can run 300 then you are capable of running 600+.
Last edited: