You Arnaldo, are my hero!
I agree wholeheartedly with your observations, and the remedies you suggest to implement!
And YES, precedent cedes,
“go in favor of the shooter.”
Jayson Shaw's 714 becomes 669?
- Thread starter loggerhead12
- Start date
I agree wholeheartedly with your observations, and the remedies you suggest to implement!
And YES, precedent cedes,
“go in favor of the shooter.”
But "splitting hairs" is required in order to determine whether the official high run number is 669 or 658. I vote for the latter number given the arguments I made earlier.
I feel this is absolutely a ridiculously moot point. It’s not like this was an officiated professional tournament match - it was a marathon exhibition with a player that plays at an extremely fast pace. He ran 51 consecutive racks and there is speculation he may have possibly touched (not even moved) one ball in the 4th rack - are these people serious?
Do you feel it would be necessary to have an official present to validate future high run attempts?
Let’s get real - who is going to front the $ to have a neutral qualified paid referee for a marathon high run multi day session? Certainly not the participants.
Possibly- couldn’t hurt.
telinoz
Registered
Part of any competent event organisation is planning out the requirements and making a project plan with a budget.
This includes having an official ref present, to avoid issues like this and the many more detailed in all these threads and elsewhere for years and years.
Honestly, not doing due diligence is just plain lazy at this point.
It would be one thing if Shaw were doing this on his own, but the 714* event was organized and run by the same people who spent literally years trolling Schmidt and nitpicking the 626. So no sympathy for them.
Shaw should put this to bed soon enough with an even longer run though…
Last edited:
Chris, I agree that a referee the entire time isn't practical. However with the present cost of cameras multiple cameras properly positioned would not be out of the question and could be more definitive than a single official. Two to four cameras could be had for pocket change, one to two hundred dollars or even less. The TV table would be handy for teaching on, video production, and big events too. I think any pool hall should have one or two tables available with cameras today, for an additional fee of course if the cameras are running.
Hu
Guess you don't know about Fair Use.
You can certainly post a small section of that video to show the shot in question.
In the US Fair Use allows the unlicensed use of copyrighted material – such as text, image, video clips and audio files – without permission from the author or copyright-owner under certain circumstances such as criticism, parody, news reporting, commentary, research and scholarship, and teaching.
Mark Griffin had spoke about putting something together with Bobby Chamberlain years BEFORE Schmidty broke Mosconi’s record.
If a promoter like Mark Griffin or Bobby Chamberlain are asking the same question I’m asking, I don’t consider that trolling.
I haven’t seen John’s run and do not understand why in 3 years John has never released such an amazing record breaking event for sale to the public, especially since John is a capitalist.
It is a BCA certified run.
There is no reason not to scream it from the roof tops and sell copies to the world.
It’s the breaking of a record that was 60+ years old!
It’s not like John couldn’t sell thousands of copies.
I would have bought it.
Last edited:
The 9 clearly moves. It's pretty minor and would not have affected the shot or any shot afterwards. https://streamable.com/uk1vuc
Here in the four images below is what my low-tech self's screenshots show starting at the 8:28 video timeline -- no change in the angular position of the vertical-trending yellow stripe on the 9-ball which would have likely occurred with the slightest back or forth shaft stroking, however slow or rapid. ~ Arnaldo
:
:
My eyeballs don't see any 9-ball movement in posted uk1vuc clip, but even if anyone's better vision does indicate to them that the OB moved at all -- it's of absolutely no relevance here when Jayson's run is achieved playing under a "CB fouls only" caveat/guideline.
Arnaldo
I see slight movement. Looks like the cue touched the 9 on the draw back, and then the 9 moved slightly forward.
Nah, I’m calling bullshit. I think it’s a video artifact. It looks like there’s slight movement on the backswing, but once his cue is away from the 9 and moving forward, the ball appears to move forward again without his cue being anywhere near it.
Honestly, this just makes me angry. There’s no freaking way any sensible person could say with certainty that was an object ball foul, particularly given that the 9 appears to move forward a bee’s penis while his cue is nowhere near it. So whoever came to this conclusion completely ignored that little piece of magic.
I saw what you saw. The nine was touched on his backstroke. It wavered ever so slightly and returned to its original position. I've seen players kick at balls at speed and graze them so thinly that the obect ball barely and almost impercepibly is disturbed as the cue ball brushes past it. I'm talking about a hit so thin that you cannot see it from the other end of the table if you're looking right at it. The word we usually used to describe this phenomena was that that object ball "rocked" and I think that happened here.
Last edited:
Yeah, possible. Actually, I was playing a couple of days ago in a small tournament. I could only see an edge of the 1 ball, played safe off it. I 100% saw it do the ‘rock’. I stood there for about 5 seconds, then just picked up the cueball and gave ball in hand, knowing none of the 5 or so other people would have seen it move.
However, that kind of movement could also be caused by tense fingers on the bridge. Someone must have a real stick up their bum to die on this hill.
As opposed to this nonsense with the commentators saying it’s 100% legit
At the 2h53m mark.
Mark Griffin had spoke about putting something together with Bobby Chamberlain years BEFORE Schmidty broke Mosconi’s record.
If a promoter like Mark Griffin or Bobby Chamberlain are asking the same question I’m asking, I don’t consider that trolling.
I haven’t seen John’s run and do not understand why in 3 years John has never released such an amazing record breaking event for sale to the public, especially since John is a capitalist.
It is a BCA certified run.
There is no reason not to scream it from the roof tops and sell copies to the world.
It’s the breaking of a record that was 60+ years old!
It’s not like John couldn’t sell thousands of copies.
I would have bought it.