Keith McCready said:Grady,
As far as you and me playing, I will play you at any time, anywhere, for any amount
Earthquake Out.
This needs to be televised!!!! How about a closed curcuit feed direct to AZ?
Jim
Keith McCready said:Grady,
As far as you and me playing, I will play you at any time, anywhere, for any amount
Earthquake Out.
jhendri2 said:This needs to be televised!!!! How about a closed curcuit feed direct to AZ?
Bob Jewett said:Such an event will occur in January in Louisville.
Paul8ball said:1. Efren Reyes
2. Alex Pagulayan
3. John Schmidt
4. Mike Sigel
5. Charles Bryant
However, the list is not as important as the equipment they play on. The specifications of the pocket (opening width and angle) will determine whether a record like that is attainable or not. If Mosconi did this on an eight foot table that is important also. The smaller the table the more congested it is after the break shot. With everything being equal, it is harder to run balls on a smaller table. Topnotch straight pool is about playing patterns and it is easier to maintain a pattern on a larger table.
This topic brings up a larger question. For records to be comparable over time there needs to be standard specifications for the equipment that the players perform on. Then records like Mosconi's 526 run in straight pool is put into perspective.
SmoothStroke said:good idea...get rid of that mike and loree jon crap and let the games begin,,,grady will be in hiding he couldn't hit the floor if he fell off the bed
rhncue said:Actually, Mosconi never ran the 526 in Springfield Ilinois but in Springfield Ohio.
Dick
Keith McCready said:Grady, I read your post, and in an effort to not lower myself to your level on this forum, I am going to try to respond.
I have read many of your ramblings in the past, and I feel sorry for you. I wish you could play like you did 25 years ago, then nothing would bother you. It seems like everything you do nowadays, whether attempting to promote a pool tournament or gamble, when things go wrong, it's everybody else's fault, but never yours.
If you've seen this show called The Surreal Life, I think that it would be a good place for you to go audition. I see a lot of you in it, a bunch of people who were great at something 20 and 25 years ago and now they are miserable as hell, so they take all of their aggrevations out on each other. What a resemblance!
As far as you and me playing, I will play you at any time, anywhere, for any amount, and the first one to say one word loses their money guaranteed. Put your money where you mouth is. This is a challenge I make to you personally. When it's all said and done, we'll see what your excuse is then.
Earthquake Out.
JLW said:Just a random thought, but you never hear anyone mention it when discussing this record. Allegedly, Mosconi's run didn't end because he missed. He quit.
That's not true according the tourney director in our local hall.DDKoop said:That's what I heard but who knows if it's true or fable.
That's already been covered several times. He missed. As I recall, the newspaper article at the time described it as a tough cut into the side. While it's not mentioned specifically in the affidavit -- which is on-line on the Smithsonian Institution's site -- I think it would have stated that there was no miss if that had been the case.JLW said:Just a random thought, but you never hear anyone mention it when discussing this record. Allegedly, Mosconi's run didn't end because he missed. He quit.
Grady said:Do you guys also believe that Mosconi made a five rail kick shot with another great player needing only two?
Larry Liscotti, before he became a drunk, never played a game that I saw where he didn't run a hundred, on all types of equipment. I oughta' know. In central CT somewhere he ran 150 and out on me for $2,000 and 138 and out for $5,000.
I played Ervolino lots of times, too. The prejail Johnny was a far superior player to the older Johnny.
The table was a 4X8. See the affidavit signed by witnesses at the time. It's remarkable how much bad info surrounds this run.JoeyInCali said:That's not true according the tourney director in our local hall.
He has several pictures of him playing Willie ( he was his exhibition partner in Philladelpia ).
Willie just missed according to him, and maintained to him he played on a 9-foot table.
JoeyInCali said:That's not true according the tourney director in our local hall.
He has several pictures of him playing Willie ( he was his exhibition partner in Philladelpia ).
Willie just missed according to him, and maintained to him he played on a 9-foot table.
JAM said:In the future, I will click the "X" in the upper right-hand corner when I read these sucker-punching posts because I do not like controversy and do not want to engage in a "flame war," as they call it in Forum Land.
For the young readers who do not know the late Larry Lisciotti and Johnny Ervolino, do not pass judgment on the deceased by reading the words of a cantankerous man with sour grapes in his mouth.
JAM
sjm said:Excellent point, but even that wouldn't be enough.
Today's players, when they miss shape, often don't have to give up the table. Often, they just take out this absolutely ridiculous contraption (that surely has the old masters rolling in their graves) called a jump cue and continue their run. To me, the inclusion of even a single shot with a jump cue should make any run ineligible for consideration as the record.
onepocketchump said:Are you serious? I normally agree with you but on this point I have to take exception. Adding the element of the jump cue would make it that more skilled and triumphant if successful.
First of all, as I have said countless times on these forums, to execute a jump shot correctly (that is making the ball) you must do everything you would normally do for any other shot AND calculate the trajectory as well. So HOW could you NOT think that this is a skilled shot? That's like saying all shots made using chalk should be disallowed.
Lastly, can you imagine how the audience would go nuts if the cueball rolled a little to far and the player pulled out a jump cue to jump the stack and his only chance to keep the 300+ run alive is to make the ball AND get perfect shape afterwards?
The "old masters" were more than happy to use the latest equipment. I certainly didn't see Mosconi trying to win his straight pool championships with a mace, or no leather tip or no chalk. I am positive that there were plenty of times in their carreer that they would have been more than happy to have had a jump cue. A pro masters all the tools available to him.
FOR THE LAST TIME (not really) THE JUMP CUE DOES NOT MAKE THE SHOT - THE PLAYER USING THE JUMP CUE MAKES THE SHOT.
John
onepocketchump said:Are you serious? I normally agree with you but on this point I have to take exception. Adding the element of the jump cue would make it that more skilled and triumphant if successful.
First of all, as I have said countless times on these forums, to execute a jump shot correctly (that is making the ball) you must do everything you would normally do for any other shot AND calculate the trajectory as well. So HOW could you NOT think that this is a skilled shot? That's like saying all shots made using chalk should be disallowed.
Lastly, can you imagine how the audience would go nuts if the cueball rolled a little to far and the player pulled out a jump cue to jump the stack and his only chance to keep the 300+ run alive is to make the ball AND get perfect shape afterwards?
The "old masters" were more than happy to use the latest equipment. I certainly didn't see Mosconi trying to win his straight pool championships with a mace, or no leather tip or no chalk. I am positive that there were plenty of times in their carreer that they would have been more than happy to have had a jump cue. A pro masters all the tools available to him.
FOR THE LAST TIME (not really) THE JUMP CUE DOES NOT MAKE THE SHOT - THE PLAYER USING THE JUMP CUE MAKES THE SHOT.
John
sjm said:Nonetheless, if our goal is to see who can outperform Willie Mosconi, I don't see how we could logically allow jump cues.