tomatoshooter
Well-known member
Mosconi's table was an 8', did anybody measure those pockets? What was the size of the pockets on Cranfield's table? What size pockets are acceptable for a high run?
John Schmidt- live 14.1
- Thread starter JazzyJeff87
- Start date
Pockets back then were all buckets!
I was just pointing out that all runs have asterisks if any do. Shaw missed balls by 3 diamonds that still went in. He still made 714 in a row
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I didn't mean to be crabby, there were just so many people refusing to acknowledge the runs, both Schmidt and Shaw, it started to feel like people would invent a reason not to accept the run no matter what. It seems like Mosconi's run is accepted and the conditions would be considered favorable compared to today's tournament tables.
Mosconi is a legend, so his achievements are in that rarefied air
So right! On one of his break shots he came off the rail with the CB and hit near center side of rack without too much speed and half the rack opened up- old time you would be lucky to get 3 balls out on that break shot. Balls, cloth, rails today all add up to much easier opening break outs and a much higher % of balls being scattered from the rack. This is no where near Mosconi's era of 14.1 in terms of difficulty.
Last edited:
They are NOT going after the old run records on today's "tournament" tables because they are utilizing all the advantages from today's "tournament" set ups BUT substituting larger pocket sizes for today's "tournament" pocket sizes.
No complaints here, the Schmidt and Shaw runs are acknowledged. But let's set the record straight- no way was the equipment from Mosconi's or any one else from that era's 14.1 runs easier than the actual equipment these guys are using to achieve record runs today.
The balls ( elasticity), the cloth ( Simonis etc. vs. old wool cloth), the cushion rebound speeds, the discard of a physical rack for the balls, all add up to modern day advantages to running a much higher number of balls- especially when you match pocket size to Mosconi's era.
This set up for high 14.1 runs is as ideal as ever existed in pool's history - it is what it is- but we should not think that these conditions are anywhere close to a guy walking into a room to do an exhibition in the 1950s on a random Brunswick public pool room table - which is what Mosconi achieved.
Last edited:
As mentioned- so many other factors outside of pocket size in today's equipment are more favorable to high 14.1 runs - so when you match pocket size to the old standards, you still have a big advantage today to run a lot of balls.
This should not detract for today's high runs- they should be acknowledged and appreciated - but it is a different era.
WM's 526 was on a 4x8 with buckets. Asterisk added.
And it wasn't videotaped
Boy are they ever.
You may not be a fan of their products but they sure know how to promote themselves.
Clever company.
Have to admire his stamina and attitude.
He scratches after a nice run and just retrieves the balls and starts over.
But Willie was still setting record that stood.
Babe Ruth set record old school, Ruth’s record stood for decades. Same with Mosconi.
we can never compare them. we would have to go back to
old tables with much deader rails, and with 5 inch pockets, and slow nappy cloth. along with less elastic balls that are never cleaned during the run of a player. including the cueball,
along with no air conditioning and humid conditions because of that.
and the old high runs were done on the first attempt or close to that.
the real question that will never be answered is would willie mosconi or irving crane or the other top 14.1 players of old
be able to equal todays players if they had the same equipment and conditions. and could make multiple attempts for hours on end.
i believe so as having seen both sides from each era.
old tables with much deader rails, and with 5 inch pockets, and slow nappy cloth. along with less elastic balls that are never cleaned during the run of a player. including the cueball,
along with no air conditioning and humid conditions because of that.
and the old high runs were done on the first attempt or close to that.
the real question that will never be answered is would willie mosconi or irving crane or the other top 14.1 players of old
be able to equal todays players if they had the same equipment and conditions. and could make multiple attempts for hours on end.
i believe so as having seen both sides from each era.
Is 126 the high thus far? I think this is the only 14-1 on the new predator table, correct?
Mosconi was not in love with pool,it was a way to support his family.
If Mosconi was alive today in his prime and was offered $25000 to run a 1000 balls it would get done.
This sums it all up for me too!
Look, you have to be someone who played 14.1 on the old equipment ( slower cloth, older cushions, more dead balls, rooms without A/C or older A/C set ups, crowded rooms full of smoke, thick wood racks, etc. AND also be that someone who also has played 14.1 on the most modern table/ball / cloth / smoke free/ modern A/C, modern lighting conditions to fully understand and appreciate the differences in the game- given an equal pocket size set -up. I have played in both eras quite a bit.
The 14.1 runs will never be comparable because the conditions are not fully comparable and conditions make a big difference in 14.1 especially because you have to get the balls open to run them.
So we can just all relax and enjoy the 14.1 game for what it is today and the run attempts as benefitting from modern day billiards conditions.
Must not sponsor too well. Go fund me for 5k
I said they PROMOTE themselves well.
I never mentioned anything about sponsoring anything or anybody.
Try reading a little better next time.
I still say that Predator is a master at marketing.