I always find it funny when someone appoints himself the ender of the discussion. As if their opinion is SO correct and indisputable that no further views on the matter shall be considered.TXsouthpaw said:
Best 14:1 Player Ever-John Schmidt or Willie Mosconi?
- Thread starter the420trooper
- Start date
john what is the high run on a 9ft.john schmidt said:
and the players of today are much better than the past.
Celtic said:
i'm sorry i busted on your national player. i know who mike is... seen him play in person a bunch of times. thats why i said mentioning his name in the same page as nicklaus is a joke. it is what it is. mentioning john's 14.1 game in the same sentence or paragraph as mosconi is acceptable - at least it can be debated. next thing you'll say is gerry watson is among the best road players when he went thru nj.
sorry for 1 paragraph...im on my phone
Rich93 said:
As I said, this one was easy. Proper response would have been.
"Heya, thanks for the vote of confidence in putting my name up there with Mosconi. I have done nowhere near what he did during his career, the guy was a dominant force in the game for decades and I can only imagine what a challenge it would be to play him in his prime. It would be some kind of treat if it were possible to actually play him in his prime and I can only imagine how good he would shoot with todays equipment. If I caught a gear I like to think I could give the guy a run for his money.
It would be tough though, today's 14.1 players have a tough time in that we don't get to compete in the game like back in Mosconi's day. The money for them was better and they got alot of competition and paid exhibitions. As a 14.1 player today I have simply not gotten to compete as often in the game as they got to back then and it makes it tough to compare us with the players of that golden era of 14.1. How good would we be if we were born into their era? How good would they be born into ours? I have to think the names you see in either era would be somewhere in the mix no matter what era they were born into and a guy like Mosconi you would have to think would be pretty high up there in todays pool world given what he did back in the day.
Anyhow, thanks for the compliment."
Easy, you don't need to rip apart the past players, and yet you don't need to rip apart the present. A 100% respectful and honest reply. People would commend John on the humility he has while shooting as great as he does, they would probably prop him up saying "nice response man, I think you would indeed give him a run for his money", they would become bigger fans of his, buy more of his DVD's and cheer for him in his future matches.
That would have been the high road and the response of a person secure in their abilities and at the same time respectful of the past champions. Unfortunately we got the response of a person with VERY undeserved low self esteem issues, a guy who should be secure enough in his skills and accomplishments not to have to come to a forum like this and feel the need to defend himself or rip into the earlier eras of this game. Sadly, he is not, and seriously coming from me and to you John, you really need to realize that you ARE a great player and anyone with half a brain knows that. You do not need to defend your game to anyone, if anything holds you back atm it is your esteem issues that make you post things like this. Keep in mind that Willie Mosconi himself gave the nod to Ralph Greenleaf and said he was the greatest player he had ever seen.
Once you sort your own head out rest assured you will only be that much stronger on the table. Feelings of insecurity are not condusive to shooting top level pool, your huge skill is currently dragging you kicking and screaming to the top of alot of tournaments despite yourself. Get your head into a good place and we will start seeing your name alot more in the future and 20 years from now maybe this will be a seriously difficult thread to debate.
SpiderWebComm said:
As I said, it is exactly the same as mentioning John's name next to Willie Mosconi at this point in John's career.
John has one major win, a US Open, it matches with Weir's Masters win. Weir has 7 other PGA events which are all huge wins with many top pro's. Those wins would be akin to Reno open wins and 1-pocket wins at the DCC.
John has never been close to the 3rd ranked pool player in the world, so I gave him a boost there in fact.
Mike Weir has some course records from PGA tournaments, which are akin to high runs in straight pool, only one could argue that Weir's are done in competition and not practice so hold more weight.
John is to Willie Mosconi as Weir is to Nicklaus, atm that comparison is very very close to identical in accomplishments and relative skill levels. And that is not a cut, Weir is a firm fixture on the PGA tour and a well respected champion level player, despite your attempts to argue he is some shlep. Anyone who knows golf knows how far off you are on that call.
TXsouthpaw said:
Page 167 "Willie's Game" by Willie Mosconi & Stanley Cohen:
"On March 19th in Springfield, Ohio I ran 526 balls, a record that still stands. I was playing a two-hundred point match against an amateur named Earl Bruney in the East High Billiard Club. He made three balls off the break, then I ran two hundred and just kept going. The run took two hours and ten minutes which meant that over that span I averaged four balls a minute. I finally missed a difficult cut shot, but by that time I was weary; it was almost a relief to have it come to an end."
That's the fact, right out of the horse's mouth.
Pat Fleming supposedly considers Thorsten Holmann the best he's seen and he's seen them all too. That's one vote for a modern player. Mosconi himself told Sigel his 150 and out against Zuglan was the best he'd seen if I'm not mistaken.
I believe Mosconi is as good as anyone who has played the game, but wouldn't win as many tourneys as he did if he played later in the last century. There were always great players around, but not as many as today and not guys who are fitness and practice freaks.
Still, no one has anywhere near Mosconi's record of world titles. His 526 is legendary of course but others have broken it but not documented it. I think its a bit overated since its an exhibition. Eufemia ran 300's daily but couldn't win the titles. Engert's 492 or whatever is just as impressive as Willies 526 but still, it was practice.
Mosconi ran 150 and out a million times with the old balls. I think on todays equipment he'd win plenty, but there are just too many other great players now to win every time like it seemed he did.
My order would be Mosconi, Mizerak, Thorsten, Sigel, and then a ton of other guys like Varner, Engert, Schmidt, Dallas West, Ray Martin, Rempe, Caras,etc... all these guys are total studs at the game.
I believe Mosconi is as good as anyone who has played the game, but wouldn't win as many tourneys as he did if he played later in the last century. There were always great players around, but not as many as today and not guys who are fitness and practice freaks.
Still, no one has anywhere near Mosconi's record of world titles. His 526 is legendary of course but others have broken it but not documented it. I think its a bit overated since its an exhibition. Eufemia ran 300's daily but couldn't win the titles. Engert's 492 or whatever is just as impressive as Willies 526 but still, it was practice.
Mosconi ran 150 and out a million times with the old balls. I think on todays equipment he'd win plenty, but there are just too many other great players now to win every time like it seemed he did.
My order would be Mosconi, Mizerak, Thorsten, Sigel, and then a ton of other guys like Varner, Engert, Schmidt, Dallas West, Ray Martin, Rempe, Caras,etc... all these guys are total studs at the game.
Celtic said:
Stay away from the bikes!!!
What are you doing John??? lol Let me tell you from years of experience racing dirtbikes..... IT DOESN'T PAY!
You probably have the best hand/eye coordination of anyone I have met, and you should use this for fuel to beat that record, and it would actually be on an 9ft table as well.
I know pool can be a burnout, but keep it going buddy. BTW, it was good to see you happy with your woman. You looked like you were at ease in your element.
I loved when we popped our head in the straight pool room, and the guy saw Thorsten and told his buddy right in front of you.. "THAT'S THORSTEN HOHMANN, THE BEST STRAIGHT POOL PLAYER IN THE WORLD!!"... LOL
You have to admit, it was a little funny... Little do they know the record between you two.
What are you doing John??? lol Let me tell you from years of experience racing dirtbikes..... IT DOESN'T PAY!
You probably have the best hand/eye coordination of anyone I have met, and you should use this for fuel to beat that record, and it would actually be on an 9ft table as well.
I know pool can be a burnout, but keep it going buddy. BTW, it was good to see you happy with your woman. You looked like you were at ease in your element.
I loved when we popped our head in the straight pool room, and the guy saw Thorsten and told his buddy right in front of you.. "THAT'S THORSTEN HOHMANN, THE BEST STRAIGHT POOL PLAYER IN THE WORLD!!"... LOL
You have to admit, it was a little funny... Little do they know the record between you two.
your missing what im saying.Celtic said:
it really is not about whether im as good as him or not.
its the way people say it .
with bold letters like hes not even in the same league so matter of a fact etc etc.
these are the same people i give free advice too.
dvds ,hang out with and go out of my way to be friendly with and encourage when they post their 30 ball runs on video etc.
what irks me is instead of saying i think mosconi would have edged john out because he played 30 years of 14.1 only.
maybe even something like john would have gave him a battle for sure but i would have to give the nod to willie.
instead these people who act like my best friend as soon as they get a chance talk like im a ****ing joke and im sick of it.
you know i walk into a poolroom screw my cue together and run ,157,234,191, in like 5 innings.
the next day 289,167,187. in 6 innings
thats everyday when i play 14.1 which is hardly ever.
anyway my point is i know what im capable of the people at home dont because they see me 4 times a year.and when i do play its on a table way harder then back in the day.so do me a favor and get a clue.thorston and the other top players of today are as good as anybody ever and anybody who dont understand that just come on down and play us for a month,trust me.
in closing im tired of people acting like a buddy and then every chance they get to belittle me ,and my game they take it. ive had enough of this piece of shit forum ,.and understand why none of the other pros deal with some of the idiots on here.
you know the saying say something nice or shut the hell up.well that applies here.
Interesting discussion so far, but i have to go with Mosconi on this one. While I agree with several posters that Mosconi wouldn't have completely dominated as much as he did if he were playing today I still think he'd be the best and win more titles than anyone else. i think that all one has to do is look at the records that show how many 150 and out runs he had in tournament play, or even how many 100 ball runs he had and it's clear what an offensive machine he was. That being said, we haven't seen the end of John Schmidt, not by a long shot so it will be quite awhile before you can really compare the two.
What I'd really love to see is some of these long challenge matches like they used to have in Mosconi's day. How great it would be to see John Schmidt play Thorsten Hohmann in a 1000 pt match or even a 3000 pt match played over 10 days or so. even throw in Pagulayan, Engert, Souquet. I'm sure there'd be some really impressive runs.
What I'd really love to see is some of these long challenge matches like they used to have in Mosconi's day. How great it would be to see John Schmidt play Thorsten Hohmann in a 1000 pt match or even a 3000 pt match played over 10 days or so. even throw in Pagulayan, Engert, Souquet. I'm sure there'd be some really impressive runs.
bud green said:
I'm not sure that Pat Flemming (and Danny DiLiberto for that matter) are old enough to have seen Mosconi play in his prime which was pre-1956 and there is very little film footage from this era. I'm not aware of any film footage of any of Mosconi's championships the first of which was in 1941 and the last in 1956. I read DiLiberto's book and he talks (very unflatteringly) about playing Mosconi in an exhibition in 1961 (Mosconi retired from competition in 1956) and in the only post-retirement tournament Mosconi played in 1966. I have heard Pat Flemming comment on seeing Mosconi do exhibitions but I don't think he ever saw the man play in competition in his prime. Thorsten Houman is an impressive 14.1 player who has great control and really understands the game but I think that comparisons with Mosconi are a bit premature; let's see how long he can dominate 14.1. There's no doubt that any of the good modern 14.1 players could give the old timers a run for their money in any individual game but the consistency of Mosconi's wins is pretty convincing. John Schmidt points out that they had smaller fields in those days but I think it's important to remember that the players had to win qualifiers to get in those small fields. Some of the tournaments today have bigger fields but some of the players don't really have any realistic chance of winning.
It's interesting to me that in 1966 (at 53 years of age) after having recovered from a stroke and not competing professionally since 1956 that Mosconi payed in one last 14.1 championship in CA (a eighteen player round-robin) and came in second to Joe Balsis. After a ten-year layoff from competition and a stroke he finshed higher than players such as: Mizerak, Crane, Moore, Worst, Staton, Breit, Eddie Taylor, Ciscero Murphy, Ervolino, Eufemia, DiLiberto and had the tournament high-run of 126. I think that speaks volumes about the man's ability to compete. I understand that he was fiercly competitive and hated to lose so much that it drove him to win.
If I had a time machine I would love to go back and see players like Mosconi and Greenleaf play when they were at the top of their games. The closest thing I have is a Crane/Balsis match from 1966 where Crane runs 125+ and out. Crane's game is beautiful, very controlled and precise with soft break shots and massaging of the remaining balls as necessary. I've heard it said that the old players played a different, more controlled style (I'm not necessarily saying better) and this match would tend to bear that out.
SpiderWebComm said:
Spidey,
That is exactly what some earlier posters on this thread said. Willie played World events with Crane, Balsis, Lassiter, Cranfield, etc. In their day, they were the equivalent of the current players you mentioned. Each event was round robin format. No brackets. He with the best record head to head won. Regardless of your opinion of John's game, placing him in that format with the players you mentioned would result in perhaps one or two wins in fifteen tournament attempts. NOT ONE of the players you mentioned would win all FIFTEEN events! End of argument.
John, I cannot even imagine having the talent you have. Ive had dreams of playing as good as you, but only to wake up a C player. I can surely understand how you can take that to heart. You are one of the best who ever hold a cue and honestly, its not even possible for people to give you the credit you deserve. With that being said, I dont think its fair to your or mosconi to be compared to one another without a * involved. Two different time periods, different tables, balls, players, cues, everything. I dont think anyone was really putting your game down, only giving Mosconi the credit a legend deserves. On the other hand, being compared to what most people call, "the greatest player ever", should be taken as a compliment.
Honestly nobody likes coming in 2nd in the peoples hearts... even if its to "the greatest", so like I said, I can understand how someone could take that. But trust me, EVERYONE knows just how amazing you are on the table. You dont just put up 400 on luck... trust me, I've tried.
Honestly nobody likes coming in 2nd in the peoples hearts... even if its to "the greatest", so like I said, I can understand how someone could take that. But trust me, EVERYONE knows just how amazing you are on the table. You dont just put up 400 on luck... trust me, I've tried.
john schmidt said:
Meh, not sure who those people are, have not seen one single person in this thread come close to talking about you like you are a joke. I have said it before and I will say it again, you are being compared to the most dominant straight pool player in the history of the game.
I have not ever acted like your best bud, I treat you like the player you are, a solid player who the first time I ever met you came up to me in the Cue Club in Las Vegas asking to gamble a race to 9 for $100 and I laughed and told you that I had no chance. You proceeded to then dominate Stan Tourangeau 9-1 while he was getting backed by a friend of mine who tried to get me to take half of the action which I also laughed off. Had respect for you back then, and at that time you had won nothing major but I let people know that you would. And you did, and you got props for it and are atm one of the best players in the USA.
What I don't get is why that is not good enough? Saying you are a great player is not enough? We need to say you are the best ever? As good as the most famous player of all time? You think not being classed as an equal to Willie Mosconi is equating you to a joke? I am at a loss there man, sorry I just don't buy it. Noone is calling you a joke, that is your own invention from this thread where alot of people simply don't agree that you are as good as a 15 time world champion atm. Get over it, Reyes had the same threads and people took both sides, at the end of the day simply being compared to the best players of any era is at the end of the day a huge compliment. All those people you think are attacking you should be so lucky to have their name in a AZB thread of this nature at all. And look at what you cause the thread to become because of your insecurities over this kind of stuff.
John Schmidt said:
Whose gonna come down and play you? Other players of today? This was a post about a player of a different era. If a 30 year old Willie Mosconi came into this era, played with the equippment and got used to it, and then came on down and spent a month playing with you guys I expect he would be pretty darn tough to beat, that was the point of the thread. Could you beat him in matches? For sure. Would you be the overall winner after 100 matches? I am going to go with Willie, and if that offends you and makes you think that I am now calling you a joke then you are simply taking it oddly, he is a legend and the most dominant player straight pool ever saw.
john schmidt said:
Again, noone said anything negative about you by saying their favor Mosconi in a comparison with you. Just like if someone came here and say they think you would beat Mosconi they are not exactly calling Willie a chump because you yourself are a great player.
That said, this is a message board where lively debate like this is interesting, comparing various eras of any sport is a common thing amoung the fans. Who is better Tiger or Jack, who is better Ali or Marciano, who is better Schmidt or Mosconi.
While I am not here to flame or attack people I am also not here for the text written equivalent of a circle jerk. When a debate is taking place peoples opinions are going to come out and the thing with opinions is that they vary from person to person.
If you cannot take that fact then truly maybe forums are not for you. But if you do quit posting you are still going to be discussed because you are in fact a top calibre player that warrants discussion. Sorry man.
I agree Willie would have had his hands full with you guys. But on the other hand in his prime you guys would have had your hands full with him also. I am one who thinks Fats was a great player. He was probably never your all around speed, because you are a really great player. Banks and One Pocket were his games and he could play them way up there from what the old timers have told me. Were there better around? Definitely, but he was still a great player.john schmidt said: