Happy straight pool day!
- Thread starter Pete H
- Start date
I enjoyed watching it, but just curious what is so amazing about that rack for a player like Thorsten? I kind of assumed by your description it was going to be a rack where nothing went right and he had to pocket a bunch of very hard shots to get through it. Manufacturing the break ball followed by the perfect planning for the last 7-8 balls was certainly very impressive, but nothing he hasn’t done a million times before.
I recall a match between Nick Varner and Grady Matthews played at the Chelsea Billiard club in New York City in the mid-1990s in which Nick had to shoot three different bank shots to get out of one of the racks. This is virtually unheard of in straight pool but the balls weren't cooperating and it took all of Nick's magic to keep his run going. Nobody was recording that one, and it's not clear whether it represented great straight pool.
Sigel's 150 and out against Zuglan in the 1992 US Open, which has probably been posted twenty different times on this forum over the years, is likely the standard by which other runs will always be judged. He was never in trouble during the run, which was witnessed by Willie Mosconi, Jimmy Caras, and, in case you care, SJM.
Sigel's 150 and out against Zuglan in the 1992 US Open, which has probably been posted twenty different times on this forum over the years, is likely the standard by which other runs will always be judged. He was never in trouble during the run, which was witnessed by Willie Mosconi, Jimmy Caras, and, in case you care, SJM.
It was amazing at least for a 14.1 noob like me. Don't remember seeing this little work with the cue ball for the last 7-8 shots and when I saw this for the first time my jaw was on the floor for several minutes.
If you know a million videos like this, please post them all.
Thorsten is a 14.1 genius. Clearing the last balls with this little effort is IMO much more impressive than clearing a rack with several difficult shots because you made mistakes or had bad rolls.
Efren's play for example is amazing and entertaining, but he often gets himself into those bad spots.
Yes, I'm a novice, but I believe Thorsten could very well be the smartest (meaning he has the best overall understanding of the game because he has thought more about it than anyone else) 14.1 player out there. Based on a few dozen matches/runs (LOL sample size as we used to say in poker) I've seen on youtube and live streams, he seems to be on a level of his own. Most players just don't put that much effort on 14.1 because there's more money in other games.
There's Schmidt of course, but he plays so fast I can't keep up without pausing. And his style is not for me to emulate. I might be wrong, but to me John's game seems to be more based on experience and Thorsten's game relies more on theory and understanding. Please let me know if my gut is dead wrong.
But of course there's no correct way to play pool, you should always choose the style that fits you the best.
Gene Simmons has said a lot of stupid things, but Keep It Simple, Stupid is not one of them. I chose Hohmann and Sigel as my virtual mentors as their game makes the most sense to me and trying to shoot only easy shots fits my lack of skills.
Besides in a race to 150, I'd put my money on Hohmann over Mr 626 every time.
IIRC Sigel had 1 difficult long shot and maybe another a bit more difficult one, but it's one of the most impressive runs I've seen. And trust me Sir, I do care.
kanzzo
hobby player
Experience comes from theory and understanding, so there is not much difference there.
Schmidt plays so fast, that I have to pause often myself - but when I do, his patterns are as good as anybody's.
The difference in the styles, is that Schmidt doesn't like to spend mental energy unnecessary on easy racks - being able to have more 400+ runs than anybody else on the planet.
And Hohmann is a big fan of Souquet and is probably more prone to try to play every rack perfect, which makes him favorite in tournament play but gets him probably earlier to a state of mental exhaustion (not able to play 8 hours straight pool every day).
I think there is. What I meant is I believe Thorsten has spent more time off table thinking about his game (and improved his physical and mental capabilities with other means like exercise, diet, etc) and John has played thousands and thousands of racks more and is able to see patterns by instinct because he has been in similar situations so many times.
Of course both have spent tremendous amount of time on working their game on and off table, but my guess is that there's a major difference in their on/off table ratios.
Totally agree. Schmidt worked his game to be able to break Mosconi's record. For Thorsten it's more important to be able to run 150-200 balls preferably from the first opening. Different type of GOATs, but GOATs nevertheless.
John's not Jayson Shaw, but he's willing to gamble more than Thorsten. Or at least it looks like gambling, but he obviously knows good things are almost certain to happen in those situations. Thorsten is more cautious and usually has insurance ball(s).
Definitely a nice rack. Developing the 10 was a good shot.
Good post.
Thorsten is, of course, the best 14.1 player of this generation. I'd suggest he's not stylistically like Souquet or Ortmann, who are surely among his influences, but instead like Niels Feijen, who is very nearly Thorsten's equal. Both Niels and Thorsten can overpower the table at both nine ball and straight pool which, in part, explains why they are two of the only players in history to win a sanctioned world championship in both disciplines (Sigel and Varner are the only others that come to mind).
As you note, Thorsten is more consistent than John, but I'd say that John is a little better at playing short position than Thorsten. When the cue ball has to be moved just a few inches in position play, I'd call John the most accurate position player I've ever watched (or at very least on a par with Varner and Rempe). I think that it is in short position play where the old masters who played straight pool every day were better than the players of today, who focus on nine ball. John is the exception, being the only pro who has focused solely on straight pool in recent years.
John capitalized on his exceptional short position play skills well when he won the 2009 Derby City One Pocket title. One pocket requires extremely precise position play, and John made up for the fact that he had a few less tactical skills than the top few at one pocket by running the table a little better than they did in that event.
All that said, neither Thorsten nor John is the GOAT, but both are on the list of greatest straight poolers of this era. You obviously have no idea how often Mosconi and Greenleaf ran 150 and out in competition, and for how many years each dominated all comers. Both Mizerak and Sigel ran balls more consistently in competition than either John or Thorsten, too, but neither Mike nor Steve dominated their competition the way Mosconi and Greenleaf did. At straight pool, to see the GOAT you need a time machine.
Regarding your highlighted statement above.... the rack in your video made your jaw hit the floor in large part because of the "correctness" of his play.It was amazing at least for a 14.1 noob like me. Don't remember seeing this little work with the cue ball for the last 7-8 shots and when I saw this for the first time my jaw was on the floor for several minutes.
But of course there's no correct way to play pool, you should always choose the style that fits you the best.
Gene Simmons has said a lot of stupid things, but Keep It Simple, Stupid is not one of them. I chose Hohmann and Sigel as my virtual mentors as their game makes the most sense to me and trying to shoot only easy shots fits my lack of skills.
Besides in a race to 150, I'd put my money on Hohmann over Mr 626 every time.
IIRC Sigel had 1 difficult long shot and maybe another a bit more difficult one, but it's one of the most impressive runs I've seen. And trust me Sir, I do care.
If Thorsten, or Varner, Sigel, Mosconi or whoever, played while adhering strictly to a particular style we'd probably be discussing other players in this thread.
The fact that they're some of the greatest is because they had the awareness and the courage to develop their game based on correct play even when it might have clashed with their style or made them uncomfortable.
Their "style" is to do whatever necessary to address each situation in the most "correct" (highest percentage) manner. JMO
I'd say he made a decent recovery after missing his attempt to manufacture the 7 break ball...
I’ve gained more appreciation for this rack the more I’ve watched it. The last 7 shots were virtually stop shots, setting up the perfect break ball angle. A thing of beauty!I'd say he made a decent recovery after missing his attempt to manufacture the 7 break ball...
I still remember seeing the rack for the first time. I had no clue what he's up to until the first stop shot that left another one and so on.
Thanks for the correction and a very insightful post. I obviously forgot what the GOAT actually stands for
Good point and totally agree that the best players are the ones who've spent the most time working on their weaknesses.
I've been comparing 14.1 to the travelling salesman problem and if the "correct" way to play is to move the cue ball as little as possible.
For the most parts it's probably true.
In rotation games it's totally different though.
ahha schmidtty is ur super hero - watch the 2nd TAR all around match (14.1) we are only talking about 14.1. J.s.'s patterns are not all that special - particularly when he receives fire back in his direction. Then u will see j.s. has a huge weakness - his mental game - is horrible. Once he see's the game is tough he looks for an excuse to try and shark his opponent - I have seen his act -first hand what a bad joke he can become - & with a lisp even. Nice bump for the now defunct fake news broadcaster though. Nokanzz dew the dew.
kanzzo
hobby player
your quote of me was adressing the difference in patterns between Hohmann and Schmidt. Just comparing these two. You don't have to take everything personal
I am just a fan of 14.1 and study different players with different approaches and styles, trying to find the best one for me. I was impressed with your game at TAR and liked your DVDs. I like Schmidt's DVDs and his runs were also helpful to my game. It's not a big secret, he is not that good under (tournament) pressure.
It's surely wrong attacking me for whatever personal differences you two may have.
Welcome to the rather large club of forum regulars that DH has chosen to attack for no rational reason.
Fair enough - was not attacking u ha ha - I mis read Hohmann for Harriman. I do disagree with u however that j.s. has more 400 ball runs than anyone else on the planet, I think that is a presumptuous statement - from yer end. u have no idea how many people in Europe and Asia practice and compete in 14.1. Anyone who says that the 626 is Legit - I would ask why after two years - there is no unedited footage for sale - of this CLAIM. This is not an attack, just a simple request for unedited footage as proof or clarification. Anyone who cares to debate me - in that John or any of his promotional base' should be allowed to CLAIM he has surpassed Mosconi's 526 - and then not provide unedited proof to Open Public as proof - yer debate is welcomed. I will give u an unedited version of the truth - in double speed lol. u stated yer a fan' I think that may be different than a student of the game. I am a student of the game - but count me out on being a fanatical student of the drive by news media game. Capiche?
Last edited:
So again anyone who cares to debate me as to why bca/csi/predcue company has chosen to support j.s.'s claim that Mosconi's 526 has in fact been surpassed - or that their theater show ='s unedited footage, and or the elusive unedited 626 disc should not be offered for sale - as another form of proof to support the Claim as lets say - a 2nd option to their edited theater show - I welcome a civil debate. With great talent comes great accountability - I have not seen enough accountability for the 626 claim - to make it to the Smithsonian (as with Willie Mosconi's factually based 526 Record). I never liked debate class, but I welcome any key board warrior who thinks their theater show (part of which is shown in 2x speed) ='s unedited footage - come one come all - I will set u Straight -in Pocket Billiard education, rather than bca/csi's version of the 626 theatrical cess pool drive by media/ get rich quick from corruption losers.
Last edited:
I'm guessing most just think there's enough babble on the forum about that topic that there's no need to create more.
Funny thing though.... Even if I had access to the unedited footage, and somehow found myself bored enough to sit through it. I'd probably bump the play back rate at least 2x.
Funny thing though.... Even if I had access to the unedited footage, and somehow found myself bored enough to sit through it. I'd probably bump the play back rate at least 2x.