john schimdt runs 266

[leto1776]

No, actually, that run is not the best, and it isn't even 2nd, 3rd, or 4th on the list either. I don't recall what the best is off hand, but any run over 400 on a 9 ft is certainly better than a 526 on a 8 ft with buckets. Mosconi has the highest run on an 8 ft with buckets, but he certainly doesn't have the best run. And nobody has any reason to be playing on 8 fts with buckets and until there is a reason to do so his record will likely stand for eternity even though multiple people have the ability to break it.

You are seriously becoming a broken record; keep repeating the same thing, it doesn't make it true. Mosconi has the highest run-period. Only a NIT of the highest order would try to belittle that. 526 is the only number that matters in reality. Not 8, not 9, not 10. Five hundred twenty six.there's a good reason the high run reward isn't set for Schmidt's current high run, even as great as an accomplishment as it it. Five hundred twenty seven is everyone's goal, because that's the record, no matter the equipment.

Oh, and you've mentioned several times that Willie was under no pressure that day. Obviously, you've never read anything on Willie's life. That man put more pressure on himself than probably any opponent ever could. The man didn't know how to "take it easy." Also, at that point in his life, hie had retired from competition, and depended on those exhibitions as his main source of income. If interest in him stopped, the jobs would dry up pretty quickly. That tends to put a lot of pressure on someone to perform at his best.

 

[nick serdula]

Greenleaf

Ran over 1200 and just stopped. He had enough. He had another very high run. But Pool was harder then. Players with 18 oz Cues couldn't get it. When they changed the cloth to fast stuff it took all the power out of the game.. Put backed cloth on that table and get you some.
Nick

 

[elvicash]

. Mosconi has the highest run-period. Only a NIT of the highest order would try to belittle that. 526 is the only number that matters in reality. Not 8, not 9, not 10. Five hundred twenty six.there's a good reason the high run reward isn't set for Schmidt's current high run, even as great as an accomplishment as it it. Five hundred twenty seven is everyone's goal, because that's the record, no matter the equipment.

Check out this link - http://hermund.ardalen.com/straightpoolhighruns.htm

These are not official but there have been higher runs

Arthur Babe Cranfield 768 in practice
Tom Parker 642 as told to Dick Leonard
Michael Eufemia 626

Per Lou in this thread Mosconi ran 600 and quit in practice.

There is no competition where any run is being officiated thus Mosconi's run is safe until it is beaten on video and then it will only be a run on video unless that is run is being executed in some manner to win a prize or something so it meets criteria to be exceptable by the powers that be whoever that is to recognize a high run.

 

[markgw]

Check out this link - http://hermund.ardalen.com/straightpoolhighruns.htm

These are not official but there have been higher runs

Arthur Babe Cranfield 768 in practice
Tom Parker 642 as told to Dick Leonard
Michael Eufemia 626

Per Lou in this thread Mosconi ran 600 and quit in practice.

There is no competition where any run is being officiated thus Mosconi's run is safe until it is beaten on video and then it will only be a run on video unless that is run is being executed in some manner to win a prize or something so it meets criteria to be exceptable by the powers that be whoever that is to recognize a high run.

Not sure what Willie did in practice but he tells two separate stories on how the run ended. One version he said he just stopped because he got tired. On another interview he said he missed a tough cut shot

 

[markgw]

Because of the mitre angles of the pockets and the deep shelf of the diamond. I guess tough is tough, but that deep shelf makes things even tougher, other conditions remaining similar.

I just received and watched Schmidt's 294 on the diamond table and the 366 ball run on the Brunswick. The commentary alone was worth the money, if you're trying to improve your game. The way he describes on what to do and why he is doing it, is very informative!! These video's are awesome. He makes the 366 run look so easy, it's really cool..:thumbup:

 

[Poolplaya9]

However, that is also one of the reasons Willie was so much better than todays’ 14.1 players — he was playing straight pool everyday on a wide variety of equipment.

Willie wasn't "so much better" than today's best players. He had a little more straight pool knowledge than today's best straight pool players, but it's not like he knew much more than say a John Schmidt or a Thorsten Hohmann. That advantage for him is fairly negligible. And those of today that are lacking the straight pool knowledge would gain it pretty darn quick if they were playing straight pool all day every day, so what little advantage there was mostly disappears pretty shortly anyway. On the other hand, today's players shoot a lot straighter giving them a pretty strong advantage in that area. On net, today's very top players are at least equal. Mosconi wouldn't be running over any top player of today who had some decent straight pool knowledge, no doubt about it.

 

[Poolplaya9]

It is unquestionable that there are guys out there that would love to hold the record. Why aren’t they trying on 8’ tables? Maybe it’s just not so easy ;-)

The record isn't worth the serious effort, time and money that would be involved in trying to reach it for little real value of the title in return. But again, if you or anyone else ever makes it worth the effort, we will all find out. It wasn't worth it to Mosconi to try for any records, why should it be different for anyone else? It isn't.

The only reason the record stands is because there are no reasons for any to pro to be playing on an 8 ft table, there are no reasons for any top pro to be playing much straight pool, and there is no reason to be putting in a lot of time and effort and money for a record that has little real value.

Unlike today’s players Mosconi didn’t go into a room, with a table set up perfectly, and a recording camera rolling

I think it is a pretty safe assumption that the table was set up well. We certainly have no reason to believe otherwise.

because it didn’t matter to him — he could run balls at will. Running 600 balls? No big deal.

Then why didn't he do it? One guy saying he saw it isn't proof. Isn't that your argument, that if he could have he would have? He didn't. A 526 was the best he ever accomplished in 74 years of playing pool.

Personally I think he very possibly could have run more than 526 if he had an incentive to do so (he didn't, just like today's players don't). But 600's as no big deal? Laughable.

Lastly, there's been lot's of money up for grabs for beating the record at the DCC for years.

On an 8 ft tables with buckets? Really? Funny how I haven't heard of that until now. But even if it were comparable tables, it is going to take more than the couple of hours that the players devote to it at the Derby. That was Mosconi's best in 74 years. Pretty safe assumption that it will take someone else more than a couple of hours to best it.

 

[Poolplaya9]

OK, give me a time frame that you think it reasonable. But you are putting up $15K if it is not done in an agreed time frame.

And because you don't seem to understand, most records eventually can be beaten, and this record is no exception, what you fail to understand, is this is the record until someone beats it. I NEVER said it could not be beat, not once, ever. You fail to grasp that, but words have meanings.

And no amount of bribes should be necessary to do it on such a "gaffe" table. Yet, it still stands.

Yet, I'll send my $30K to Jay Helfert, you send $15K. He will be the judge, jury and executor of the "estate".

If you think that nobody in the last 60 years has had the ability to break the record, and that is what you have said, then it is as close to impossible as you can get. And if it is that near impossible, there is near zero risk on the big prize fund money for someone being able to do it within say the next 6 months or year. Yet nobody, nobody, is willing to take what by their own account is near zero risk.

And the reason is because everyone knows that there is actually a very strong risk that it would be done. I'm tired of hearing how nobody for 60 years and nobody today has had the ability to break the record but yet even with almost zero risk (per their own assessment) they won't put up a prize fund or help organize a fund either. It is disrespectful to all those players that actually did have the talent to run more than 526 on an 8 ft with buckets to make those claims.

Either put up the prize fund, or don't. I don't think you will do it, and neither will or has anybody else to this point (smart financial decision IMO). Eventually someone will probably put up the fund for doing it on comparable equipment within a reasonable time frame (although it may take many years for someone to finally do it), and I certainly hope they do. When and if that happens I will side bet people as appropriate per the amounts I like to bet, my financial situation at the time, and dependent on the rules/time frame limitations imposed for breaking the record.

 

[Poolplaya9]

I can like both players without knocking one of them.

I haven't seen anyone knock Mosconi in the least. Everyone has unanimously agreed that he was a phenomenal player and talent. I have however seen plenty of knocking of today's top players and all the other top players of the last 60 years who supposedly didn't have the talent to run 526 on an 8 ft with buckets.

 

[Poolplaya9]

At the high run competition at the BCAPL in Las Vegas, Mark Griffin and I were putting up the $20k prize for a 526. The entry was $20 for four tries with prizes for the highest runs actually shot.

Unless this was being attempted on similar equipment (8fts with buckets) nobody can point to this as being anywhere close to equivalent to what Mosconi did. Regardless, it is a fun for players and fans alike and your's and Mark's monetary and time contributions are appreciated for it. It is a fun challenge.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Don't look now but I think someone just got called out. lol

The only person that has been called out is you and all the rest that claim near zero risk for it being broken any time soon because of the your claims that "not one single person alive today or that has lived in the last 60 years has had the talent/ability to break it because if they could have they would have" but yet are unwilling to back up something you feel is near zero risk with a thing.

Why don't you and the rest just be honest and tell the truth about what you really think and believe. What you all really believe, but just can't bring yourself to admit, is that you don't think it is probable that someone would do it in the next year even if there were say 30k on the line for it, but still a pretty good likelihood that it could and would be done even though you don't see it as likely. In other words more likely than not that it won't be broken and that is about it and not anywhere close to the near impossibility that you like to suggest.

And the reason you don't truly believe there is a near zero chance for it being done is that you don't really and truly believe that theory you profess of "nobody today or in the last 60 years had the talent to break it because if they could have they would have". You realize other factors besides talent (like it just wasn't worth it to break it) could have actually been in play all along and still today. Everything I said is true, isn't it?

 

[Poolplaya9]

Knowing there is 20k, sitting there, with my name on it, I myself, if I thought I had any real chance of beating that record, would practice my brains out before the event, come in hot and blow several hundred, if not thousand dollars trying to smoke that record.

I don't think there is anybody that believes that they can break the record on a tough 9 ft table in any length of time, much less in the few hours they have there to try for it.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Mosconi has the highest run-period. Only a NIT of the highest order would try to belittle that.

Where has anybody belittled that run? Nobody has belittled his run. Everyone agrees that it is phenomenal. Just because someone else can do it too doesn't mean that it isn't still phenomenal.

526 is the only number that matters in reality.

Yes and no. What if somebody ran a 525 with regulation pool balls on a regulation snooker table? Get the point yet? There is a big difference between highest run, and best run. Better runs have been made, numerous times. That doesn't mean that Mosconi's 526 isn't still phenomenal, because it is.

Oh, and you've mentioned several times that Willie was under no pressure that day. Obviously, you've never read anything on Willie's life. That man put more pressure on himself than probably any opponent ever could. The man didn't know how to "take it easy." Also, at that point in his life, hie had retired from competition, and depended on those exhibitions as his main source of income. If interest in him stopped, the jobs would dry up pretty quickly. That tends to put a lot of pressure on someone to perform at his best.

None of that is even close to the pressure that someone would feel while trying to break this long established and esteemed record, along with all the pressure they would be putting on themselves too.

 

[leto1776]

Where has anybody belittled that run? Nobody has belittled his run. Everyone agrees that it is phenomenal. Just because someone else can do it too doesn't mean that it isn't still phenomenal.


Yes and no. What if somebody ran a 525 with regulation pool balls on a regulation snooker table? Get the point yet? There is a big difference between highest run, and best run. Better runs have been made, numerous times. That doesn't mean that Mosconi's 526 isn't still phenomenal, because it is.



None of that is even close to the pressure that someone would feel while trying to break this long established and esteemed record, along with all the pressure they would be putting on themselves too.

Well! there's your opinion, and then there's the record books. You say you're not belittling Mosconi's record, but when you keep spouting this same tripe, and say that others have better runs based on the nitty equipment argument, you are belittling it.

You're not worth arguing with anymore, based on said nitty ness.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Well! there's your opinion, and then there's the record books. You say you're not belittling Mosconi's record, but when you keep spouting this same tripe, and say that others have better runs based on the nitty equipment argument, you are belittling it.

You're not worth arguing with anymore, based on said nitty ness.

No, what makes someone not worth arguing with anymore is when they either aren't intelligent enough to get points and use logic, or simply aren't willing to. That's what makes an argument pointless. It is you sir that is not worth arguing with.

 

[victorl]

Well, I'm glad that's settled.

 

[KRJ]

Willie wasn't "so much better" than today's best players. He had a little more straight pool knowledge than today's best straight pool players, but it's not like he knew much more than say a John Schmidt or a Thorsten Hohmann. .

Oh, then please list their world championships. I don't even care what discipline...Earl has 6 that I know of, anyone else have more than that?

When someone gets to double digits, then you got something to talk about.

 

[lfigueroa]

Willie wasn't "so much better" than today's best players. He had a little more straight pool knowledge than today's best straight pool players, but it's not like he knew much more than say a John Schmidt or a Thorsten Hohmann. That advantage for him is fairly negligible. And those of today that are lacking the straight pool knowledge would gain it pretty darn quick if they were playing straight pool all day every day, so what little advantage there was mostly disappears pretty shortly anyway. On the other hand, today's players shoot a lot straighter giving them a pretty strong advantage in that area. On net, today's very top players are at least equal. Mosconi wouldn't be running over any top player of today who had some decent straight pool knowledge, no doubt about it.

lol, you obviously never saw Willie shoot.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

The record isn't worth the serious effort, time and money that would be involved in trying to reach it for little real value of the title in return. But again, if you or anyone else ever makes it worth the effort, we will all find out. It wasn't worth it to Mosconi to try for any records, why should it be different for anyone else? It isn't.

The only reason the record stands is because there are no reasons for any to pro to be playing on an 8 ft table, there are no reasons for any top pro to be playing much straight pool, and there is no reason to be putting in a lot of time and effort and money for a record that has little real value.


I think it is a pretty safe assumption that the table was set up well. We certainly have no reason to believe otherwise.


Then why didn't he do it? One guy saying he saw it isn't proof. Isn't that your argument, that if he could have he would have? He didn't. A 526 was the best he ever accomplished in 74 years of playing pool.

Personally I think he very possibly could have run more than 526 if he had an incentive to do so (he didn't, just like today's players don't). But 600's as no big deal? Laughable.


On an 8 ft tables with buckets? Really? Funny how I haven't heard of that until now. But even if it were comparable tables, it is going to take more than the couple of hours that the players devote to it at the Derby. That was Mosconi's best in 74 years. Pretty safe assumption that it will take someone else more than a couple of hours to best it.

If the record isn't enough incentive you don't deserve to break it.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Johnnyt]

That's all most everyone played up until the 1950's, except for gamblers like Wimpy, that played mostly 9 ball. Not many of the Wimpy's were invited to the big 14.1 championships. Brunswick, the BCA, and the Hall of Fame turned their nose up on the gamblers. Today, if you just had the ones that play only 14.1 play a championship you'd have a dozen players maybe. Johnnyt