Is Schmidt's and charlie 626 Legit

[arnaldo]

As far as the BCA I think we are gonna move forward with submitting Cranfields 768 for a record as seeing it was an exhibition and there are witnesses to the run that can sign an affidavit to it happening. They did not have a video from 1970 for it but we will find out if what and who is available is able to be enough for his run to be a record.

wrldpro said: "As far as the BCA I think we are gonna move forward with submitting Cranfields 768 for a record as seeing it was an exhibition and there are witnesses to the run that can sign an affidavit to it happening. They did not have a video from 1970 for it but we will find out if what and who is available is able to be enough for his run to be a record."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bobby, that doesn't seem like the smartest of strategies for now. While every moderately-informed 14.1 player does know that a record exhibition run falls into a different category than a record high run achieved in a 14.1 high run challenge event like yours, IMO at least until your event is totally and successfully completed. it doesn't seem sensible to be -- in effect -- waving a BCA-accepted accomplishment of 768 in front of players that are striving hard to surpass "smaller" (figuratively) numbers like Willie's 526 and John's 626.

Conceivably, 768 looks/could (mistakenly) look to some entrants (and the press) as the new standard against which they're going to be measured. Seems potentially and needlessly disheartening and daunting from the get-go for many of them. What's the point of doing it -- at least for now? The Cranfield project can wait a year . . . why not sensibly avoid putting shade on whatever the anxious and amped new guys are about to attempt for you and your very worthy event. And also thereby avoid a whole lot of questions, conversations, and explanations to the players (and to the media) about all the different categories of billiards record runs.

Arnaldo ~ Put 100% of your focus on the upcoming event you're doing. . . avoid confusion. Just my two cents.

 

[Black-Balled]

And Lou I want to Thank You again for all your work in helping us. Your knowledge and time sure is appreciated. AZB is a place you have to deal with some negativity and you have had your share not to mention the CIRCUS BS Show for like 40k and ended up only 10k. Well at least that's years behind you and I know in all our conversations that you are excited to see the events to start and so are many others. It sure will be a positive experience that has never been done before at least not on such a high level.

I think it important to remember we are all passionate about pool.

We are here. We have much in common with our fellow posters and pool aficionados and spirited competition can be a great thing for our game.

 

[Z-Nole]

I think bobby might have an extra cue or two. I can likely dig up 3 or 4 more at my house.

I can't play any damn 1p . I might be open to a 1p ball running challenge though. I gotta shoot at my pocket every couple turns or I might pay you to let me quit.

Shouldn’t you two be playing straight pool considering the topic?

 

[Black-Balled]

Shouldn’t you two be playing straight pool considering the topic?

You shut your damn rumhole!
Hahahah...pass.

 

[Cameron Smith]

wrldpro said: "As far as the BCA I think we are gonna move forward with submitting Cranfields 768 for a record as seeing it was an exhibition and there are witnesses to the run that can sign an affidavit to it happening. They did not have a video from 1970 for it but we will find out if what and who is available is able to be enough for his run to be a record."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bobby, that doesn't seem like the smartest of strategies for now. While every moderately-informed 14.1 player does know that a record exhibition run falls into a different category than a record high run achieved in a 14.1 high run challenge event like yours, IMO at least until your event is totally and successfully completed. it doesn't seem sensible to be -- in effect -- waving a BCA-accepted accomplishment of 768 in front of players that are striving hard to surpass "smaller" (figuratively) numbers like Willie's 526 and John's 626.

Conceivably, 768 looks/could (mistakenly) look to some entrants (and the press) as the new standard against which they're going to be measured. Seems potentially and needlessly disheartening and daunting from the get-go for many of them. What's the point of doing it -- at least for now? The Cranfield project can wait a year . . . why not sensibly avoid putting shade on whatever the anxious and amped new guys are about to attempt for you and your very worthy event. And also thereby avoid a whole lot of questions, conversations, and explanations to the players (and to the media) about all the different categories of billiards record runs.

Arnaldo ~ Put 100% of your focus on the upcoming event you're doing. . . avoid confusion. Just my two cents.

I have to agree with this assessment. Let's say Cranfield's run gets accepted and becomes the new benchmark and then during the event Filler runs 650. Having the 768 goal sort of throws cold water on the whole thing and now instead of being able to promote a new record run of 650, you can only say it's the highest run on video. The whole reason why we have a 200+ thread is that everyone accepted and believed Willies 526 to be record high run and John was touting a new record.

 

[JB Cases]

I volunteered to help BC.

And he has given me a free hand to do and write whatever I want ;-)

Lou Figueroa

Sounds like a good boss who recognizes a man's skills and allows him wide latitude to use them.

 

[JB Cases]

Embelishments?!

You ran 98, lol.

Lou Figueroa

Yeah..... The difference is that no one can come along and give a different account of my claim. Unlike you who has had your "stories" challenged several times by others who were there remember it happening much differently than you described. It seems that in your version you are the "hero"when in fact others didn't see it that way at all as according to them some important details about your behavior were left out when you tell the story.

I said I ran 98 because I did, not because I need accolades. When I did it I was practicing every day for hours. You can say you don't believe me and that's ok, your belief is not required, no one's is. I have nothing to gain by lying about it, I have never claimed any expertise in 14.1, I don't participate in any how-to conversations about 14.1. I have nothing to tell anyone about 14.1 other than to say that my very best personal result was 98 when I was practicing every day. I didn't submit it to any record-keeping body.

I also said that I ran five racks of nine ball and five racks of 8 ball as personal bests. Those were in league in Germany. You don't have to believe that either. Oh I had another five rack run in front of Ralph Eckert, the German professional. And I ran five in 9 ball against Ronnie Wiseman and lost 11-5.

It is easy for me to remember these because performances like these are rare for me. And it's easy for someone like you to say I am lying. That's cool because unlike you I haven't been caught telling lies about my pool journeys. It means a lot to you to think that I am lying about the best days I have had in my 35 years playing. So let that hate feed you if that is what you want to do.

Maybe next time you and your group will figure out a better way to insure that your victim goes off for the right amount. Ronnie could help you in that department.... Must feel awful that I lost more to a guy in a garage than to your group of backers and team of harassers with five months to get it done.

I mean I offered to double the bet in January if your side posted it all. January, with two months until the match. You had the nuts as you tell everyone here. You clearly don't believe i ran 98 and likely don't believe that I ever ran 50. So you think that you're a far better player than me.

With that in mind you had a sucker frothing at the bit to go off and yet your group couldn't get it done. And now your new boss wants to pipe up and say something about heart? Maybe he ought to look at how badly you and your group screwed up and revaluate your competence for this job.

 

[wrldpro]

I have to agree with this assessment. Let's say Cranfield's run gets accepted and becomes the new benchmark and then during the event Filler runs 650. Having the 768 goal sort of throws cold water on the whole thing and now instead of being able to promote a new record run of 650, you can only say it's the highest run on video. The whole reason why we have a 200+ thread is that everyone accepted and believed Willies 526 to be record high run and John was touting a new record.

No worries Cameron. Everybody knows there are runs over 526 and 626. Maybe everything will be put into the right places to preserve history maybe not. As for cold water thrown on any highrun dont worry there either as players will have a wide amount of cold cash given to them for a wide range of high runs. Players dont have many opportunitys to make big money and im hoping to change that. As for Cranfields run I know its legit as he ran over 700 twice and over 400 more than 30x. As for following through with the BCA about Cranfields run I have a Commitee that has their imput and votes on everything so its not just me making decisions so its as fair as can be.

 

[Cameron Smith]

No worries Cameron. Everybody knows there are runs over 526 and 626. Maybe everything will be put into the right places to preserve history maybe not. As for cold water thrown on any highrun dont worry there either as players will have a wide amount of cold cash given to them for a wide range of high runs. Players dont have many opportunitys to make big money and im hoping to change that. As for Cranfields run I know its legit as he ran over 700 twice and over 400 more than 30x. As for following through with the BCA about Cranfields run I have a Commitee that has their imput and votes on everything so its not just me making decisions so its as fair as can be.

It sounds like a great operation. This is quite an exciting initiative and I look forward to seeing the events regardless of the outcome of the high-run attempts.

 

[JB Cases]

No worries Cameron. Everybody knows there are runs over 526 and 626. Maybe everything will be put into the right places to preserve history maybe not. As for cold water thrown on any highrun dont worry there either as players will have a wide amount of cold cash given to them for a wide range of high runs. Players dont have many opportunitys to make big money and im hoping to change that. As for Cranfields run I know its legit as he ran over 700 twice and over 400 more than 30x. As for following through with the BCA about Cranfields run I have a Commitee that has their imput and votes on everything so its not just me making decisions so its as fair as can be.

You have the proper documentation of these alleged high runs?

I think it's great that you are willing to give away money for high runs. Will John Schmidt be allowed to participate?

You once told me that you were donating the profits of the sale of your Straight pool DVD to cancer research. Could you update us on how much you donated to date from that project?

What will the criteria be for participation? Will the players get a stipend to defray expenses while they are attempting their runs?

What kind of cash amounts are we talking about? Can a player win more than $100,000 for a run?

I mean it's your show and of course you can use whatever legendary runs you want as benchmarks. I agree with other posters that the allure is kind of tarnished after all of this controversy over what counts as an official record. It seems awfully odd that your public relations man has gone to great lengths to denigrate John Schmidt's official world record run of 626 while it sounds like you are going to have runs with far less evidence and official recognition as goals.

And since you already have indicated that your table specifications will be tougher than what you think the specs that you think John Schmidt created his world record on it feels to me like you're kind of setting up a lot of players for failure so that very little money will be disbursed. Of course I could be wrong and your project is going to be great and produce more world records.

I am glad that John Schmidt set the official world record before your project started. Now you have an official records that was set in the present era as at least one of the numbers your players will be trying to beat.

It's no secret that I despise you and that I despise Lou. I can barely think of two worse people that I have had the misfortune to cross paths with. I even hold those who have deliberately stolen from me in higher regard over you both. That said I will be absolutely complimentary and supportive if your project does indeed provide a viable path for professional players to actually make some profitable income.

And if you allow John Schmidt to participate and he decides to do so then I fervently hope that he runs the largest number and takes the most cold cash from you as possible. To me that would be perfect irony and karmic justice.

Even better when your public relations subordinate Lou has to put out a press release praising John for that accomplishment. That would be amazing and I am putting the possibility out there for all of those who share my sentiments in this thread.

Hoping for the best but keeping expectations real.....

 

[arnaldo]

I have a Committee that has their input and votes on everything so its not just me making decisions so its as fair as can be.

Bobby, fairness in any business decision is always practical, decent and wise, but "fair" is an obviously different fundamental ingredient within business (and moral) decisions than "strategic" "project-appropriate" and "well-timed" .

Impulsive inattention to these three specific ingredients, (as with timing the Cranfield issue) regularly turns out to be a factor in an enterprise going sideways or less productive than it should have been.

Arnaldo ~ been there (with many business decisions) and learned something new each time

 

[logical]

Bobby, fairness in any business decision is always practical, decent and wise, but "fair" is an obviously different fundamental ingredient within business (and moral) decisions than "strategic" "project-appropriate" and "well-timed" .

Impulsive inattention to these three specific ingredients, (as with timing the Cranfield issue) regularly turns out to be a factor in an enterprise going sideways or less productive than it should have been.

Arnaldo ~ been there (with many business decisions) and learned something new each time

The decision tree in play here is to find the most expedient way to overshadow what JS accomplished. Make more sense now?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[lfigueroa]

Yeah..... The difference is that no one can come along and give a different account of my claim. Unlike you who has had your "stories" challenged several times by others who were there remember it happening much differently than you described. It seems that in your version you are the "hero"when in fact others didn't see it that way at all as according to them some important details about your behavior were left out when you tell the story.

I said I ran 98 because I did, not because I need accolades. When I did it I was practicing every day for hours. You can say you don't believe me and that's ok, your belief is not required, no one's is. I have nothing to gain by lying about it, I have never claimed any expertise in 14.1, I don't participate in any how-to conversations about 14.1. I have nothing to tell anyone about 14.1 other than to say that my very best personal result was 98 when I was practicing every day. I didn't submit it to any record-keeping body.

I also said that I ran five racks of nine ball and five racks of 8 ball as personal bests. Those were in league in Germany. You don't have to believe that either. Oh I had another five rack run in front of Ralph Eckert, the German professional. And I ran five in 9 ball against Ronnie Wiseman and lost 11-5.

It is easy for me to remember these because performances like these are rare for me. And it's easy for someone like you to say I am lying. That's cool because unlike you I haven't been caught telling lies about my pool journeys. It means a lot to you to think that I am lying about the best days I have had in my 35 years playing. So let that hate feed you if that is what you want to do.

Maybe next time you and your group will figure out a better way to insure that your victim goes off for the right amount. Ronnie could help you in that department.... Must feel awful that I lost more to a guy in a garage than to your group of backers and team of harassers with five months to get it done.

I mean I offered to double the bet in January if your side posted it all. January, with two months until the match. You had the nuts as you tell everyone here. You clearly don't believe i ran 98 and likely don't believe that I ever ran 50. So you think that you're a far better player than me.

With that in mind you had a sucker frothing at the bit to go off and yet your group couldn't get it done. And now your new boss wants to pipe up and say something about heart? Maybe he ought to look at how badly you and your group screwed up and revaluate your competence for this job.

*No one* believes you were *ever* capable of running 98 balls at 14.1.

Lou Figueroa
ever

 

[lfigueroa]

You have the proper documentation of these alleged high runs?

I think it's great that you are willing to give away money for high runs. Will John Schmidt be allowed to participate?

You once told me that you were donating the profits of the sale of your Straight pool DVD to cancer research. Could you update us on how much you donated to date from that project?

What will the criteria be for participation? Will the players get a stipend to defray expenses while they are attempting their runs?

What kind of cash amounts are we talking about? Can a player win more than $100,000 for a run?

I mean it's your show and of course you can use whatever legendary runs you want as benchmarks. I agree with other posters that the allure is kind of tarnished after all of this controversy over what counts as an official record. It seems awfully odd that your public relations man has gone to great lengths to denigrate John Schmidt's official world record run of 626 while it sounds like you are going to have runs with far less evidence and official recognition as goals.

And since you already have indicated that your table specifications will be tougher than what you think the specs that you think John Schmidt created his world record on it feels to me like you're kind of setting up a lot of players for failure so that very little money will be disbursed. Of course I could be wrong and your project is going to be great and produce more world records.

I am glad that John Schmidt set the official world record before your project started. Now you have an official records that was set in the present era as at least one of the numbers your players will be trying to beat.

It's no secret that I despise you and that I despise Lou. I can barely think of two worse people that I have had the misfortune to cross paths with. I even hold those who have deliberately stolen from me in higher regard over you both. That said I will be absolutely complimentary and supportive if your project does indeed provide a viable path for professional players to actually make some profitable income.

And if you allow John Schmidt to participate and he decides to do so then I fervently hope that he runs the largest number and takes the most cold cash from you as possible. To me that would be perfect irony and karmic justice.

Even better when your public relations subordinate Lou has to put out a press release praising John for that accomplishment. That would be amazing and I am putting the possibility out there for all of those who share my sentiments in this thread.

Hoping for the best but keeping expectations real.....

Say, John, I could answer most of your questions but have decided it's not the right time.

Have a nice day.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

It's no secret that I despise you and that I despise Lou.

You really should seek out professional counseling.

Lou Figueroa

 

[wrldpro]

The decision tree in play here is to find the most expedient way to overshadow what JS accomplished. Make more sense now?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

That is of no objective. I've been wanting to put together events for at least 15 years and now have the time to do so. Without any doubt the list our committee has put together each and every player has far exceeded Schmidts billiard career. Let's all be logical enough to be positive.

 

[nicksaint26]

If John Schmidt is not on your list wrldpro then I have already lost all respect for what your doing. What a joke, jealous ones envy! He is by far one of the best straight pool players alive today and to omit him makes absolutely no sense at all! I would love to see a list of straight pool players currently more accomplished than him.

 

[lfigueroa]

If John Schmidt is not on your list wrldpro then I have already lost all respect for what your doing. What a joke, jealous ones envy! He is by far one of the best straight pool players alive today and to omit him makes absolutely no sense at all! I would love to see a list of straight pool players currently more accomplished than him.

You know what?

No event is going to make everyone happy. There will always be kvetching from one quarter or another about inclusions AND exclusions.

People have their favorites and their rationales. But it doesn't matter except for one thing: the players chosen to compete will all be elite and their opportunity to be financially compensated for a big run will be more generous than anything that has ever been offered in pool before. Some guys will get a justifiable crack at it, others will not. Not every player makes it to the All Star Game, regardless of the credentials some fans think entitle their inclusion. In the case of JS, he choose his road and won the compensation he thought he deserved. How and if he gets a shot at this golden ring...

Lou Figueroa

 

[Z-Nole]

You know what?

No event is going to make everyone happy. There will always be kvetching from one quarter or another about inclusions AND exclusions.

People have their favorites and their rationales. But it doesn't matter except for one thing: the players chosen to compete will all be elite and their opportunity to be financially compensated for a big run will be more generous than anything that has ever been offered in pool before. Some guys will get a justifiable crack at it, others will not. Not every player makes it to the All Star Game, regardless of the credentials some fans think entitle their inclusion. In the case of JS, he choose his road and won the compensation he thought deserves. How and if he gets a shot at this golden ring has yet to be decided.

Lou Figueroa

If JS doesn't get a shot at your event it would appear to be sour grapes on the promoters part, but if he's given a shot and someone else breaks the new record run of 626 it makes the new event that much more special. It would be like not inviting Mosconi if you had this event after he ran the 526.

 

[nicksaint26]

You know what?

No event is going to make everyone happy. There will always be kvetching from one quarter or another about inclusions AND exclusions.

People have their favorites and their rationales. But it doesn't matter except for one thing: the players chosen to compete will all be elite and their opportunity to be financially compensated for a big run will be more generous than anything that has ever been offered in pool before. Some guys will get a justifiable crack at it, others will not. Not every player makes it to the All Star Game, regardless of the credentials some fans think entitle their inclusion. In the case of JS, he choose his road and won the compensation he thought he deserved. How and if he gets a shot at this golden ring...

Lou Figueroa

I don't even like JS but to omit him is childish at best!