Highest 14.1 Run ever in Competition

There are 'way too many variables in these 14.1 high runs....so many variables that no final conclusions can be drawn. But that's what makes it so much fun to debate.
Here a just a few of the variables:
1. Table size: 4x8, 4-1/2x9, 5x10
2. Cloth: Simonis or old fashioned "nappy" cloth
3. Balls: Clay, Composite, Aramith, Centennials, Cyclops, etc.
4. Pocket size: 4-1/2", 4-3/4", 5", etc.
5. Table manufacturer: Brunswick, Diamond, National, Blatt, etc.
6. Format: Challenge Match, Exhibition, Practice, Single Elimination, Double Elimination, Round Robin, Invitational, etc.
7. Length of match: 100, 125, 150, 200, blocks of 1000, etc.

As you can see, there are literally thousands of combinations, just using the examples that I've listed
above. That's what makes these discussions about straight pool so interesting and, at the same time, totally frustrating.

In many of Mosconi's exhibitions, he would set up a break shot and run 100. Most of the time he would stop at 100, and then go into his trick shot routine, pose for some pictures, sign some autographs, and then he was out the door, on his way to the hotel or on his way home. I wonder how many of those 100-ball runs could have gone on to 200, 300, 400, or more?

Charlie Ursitti, who was one of Mosconi's closest associates (Willie didn't have too many friends), tells this story, which I believe to be true:
Years after Willie's 526 high run on a 4x8 table, word had gotten back to Willie that Mike Eufemia was telling everyone that he had run over 600 at least twice, with a high run of 625 on a 4-1/2x9 table. This did not sit well with Mosconi. He said to Charlie, "anybody can run 600 in practice, and that's all Eufemia is...a practice player."
So, Willie set up a break shot and Charlie Ursitti racked them up...and kept racking them up...for a total of 42 racks in a row. Then Willie laid down his cue and said, "See how easy it is in practice? Now, let's go have lunch." Charlie says that Willie never attempted to continue the run after lunch.
 
Last edited:
But, decades ago, didn't the "world championship" sometimes change hands in one-on-one challenge matches? The consequence of missing in one of those matches could have been loss of the title of world champion. Weren't those "competition" rather than exhibition?

Absolutely. Back in the 'Golden Era' it was the practice to defend the title by
playing challenge matches against other players, using the block format.

IIRC - the runner-up had the right to challenge first, and if the champ were defeated
he could then challenge the new title holder to a rematch. There was some
accommodation for other of the top finishers to challenge for the title, tho I don't recall
details of the scheme, if I ever knew them.

So to contend that a one-on-one match is not competition because it is not a
tournament seems to imply a serious lack of understanding.

IIRC - there was a similar challenge-the-champ mechanism for Balkline and 3 Cushion.

Dale
 
Back
Top