Official High Run - 14.1

Cornerman

Cornerman

Cue Author...Sometimes
Silver Member
From different threads, we have lists of 14.1 high runs including Cranfield, Eufemia and Mosconi over 600 and 700 balls. But the official high run is Willie’s 526 because it was at an exhibition and not a practice session. A tournament high run would also count as official (from previous BCA wording), but not a practice session.

What is the current official high run on a 9’ table then? Was Chin’s 500+ an exhibition? Was Engert’s 491 an exhibition? Or is Schmidt’s 490 the official 9’ record?

10’ - Crane, Mosconi 309
9’ - ???
8’ - Mosconi 526

Tournament

9’ - Appleton 200 out




Freddie <~~~ unofficial
 
The "highest 'unofficial' tournament run" that I know is Pete Margo's run of 330 in 1978 or 1979 at the Biltmore Hotel in the World Series of Pool. I say "unofficial" because the run continued after the match was over. However, Weenie Beenie (Bill Staton) was the Tournament Director and Cue Ball Kelly (Carl Zingale) was the referee all through the run. The match was between Pete Margo and Mike Carella. They did not get along well in or out of the pool world. Pete told me that Mike had once made a derogatory remark about him. Anyway, Pete ran 125 or 150 and out to win the match. The crowd asked him to continue the run. Normally, Pete said that he would never do that out of respect for his opponent, but his disdain for Carella prompted him to continue the run. He ran up to 330 and missed an easy 6-ball in the side pocket due to what he said was "physical exhaustion". I have Pete Margo's written documentation and signature to these facts. If there is anyone who has proof of a higher documented tournament run with a referee calling all ball fouls, let's hear about it.

Freddie, as you correctly stated, the actual official highest run in tournament play is 200 by Darren Appleton against Francisco Bustamante at Steinway Billiards during the 2013 World 14.1 Tournament promoted by Charlie Williams. Bustamante made one ball, missed a carom and then Darren ran 200 balls on his first offensive turn at the table. At the end of the match, Darren continued to run another four balls, for a total of 204. Then, with the balls still on the table, Bustamante came over to the table and scattered the balls, so we'll never know if Darren would have or could have broken any other records. Darren said that because he had his next match coming up very soon, he probably would not have continued the run, anyway. I was there and disappointed that the run ended like that: 200 + 4.
 
Last edited:
Freddie Please understand Im not picking at anyone but lets use common sense here.
No one has ever videotaped their high runs until about 20 years ago and even then why would anyone go through the hassle. Most top pros haven't bothered because of the hassle and certainly no money to do so. This and all runs should all be thought of as official.
Cranfield, Mosconi and so on didn't have Cameras did they nor did they have tables set up to be easier to make high runs.I have posted this link to a Audio by 1 of the only Historians and Hall of Fame Member Charlie Ursitti that says plenty about Mosconi including him racking and witnessing Mosconi running 589 balls at 66 years old. This is Audiotaped and Charlie Swears that it happened so in my book its certainly official to me. When I talked to Mosconi a few times he told me he ran over 600 a few times but said he didn't have an opponent so he didn't count them. So why would any runs today be any different considering in the past in the 1950s and 1960s no one had video equipment and didn't care to bother to go out of the way for witnesses because there was no reward for high runs. Babe Cranfields 768 is the record and for official witnessed runs with backup audio and a Hall of Famer Swearing to the run is 589.
https://www.facebook.com/mr3cushion...f_t=video_processed&notif_id=1542760693483993
 
Two Questions

1. What is meant by "official?"

2. Are there examples of "records" in other sports that did not take place in a tournament?

One wonders whether Mosconi's impressive run got into Brunswick's record books (actually their pool rules book) simply because he worked for Brunswick and it was good advertising for the company?

What criteria do the Guinness Book of world records demand?
 
Cornerman said:
From different threads, we have lists of 14.1 high runs including Cranfield, Eufemia and Mosconi over 600 and 700 balls. But the official high run is Willie’s 526 because it was at an exhibition and not a practice session. A tournament high run would also count as official (from previous BCA wording), but not a practice session.

What is the current official high run on a 9’ table then? Was Chin’s 500+ an exhibition? Was Engert’s 491 an exhibition? Or is Schmidt’s 490 the official 9’ record?

10’ - Crane, Mosconi 309
9’ - ???
8’ - Mosconi 526

Tournament

9’ - Appleton 200 out




Freddie <~~~ unofficial
Click to expand...

Actually, both Crane and Mosconi ran 309 on a 10-footer, but that's less than Cranfield's, 420 on a 10-footer, which I believe was a practice run but I once saw a framed newspaper article in a poolroom in which the 420 was reported. Engert's 491 was a practice run, too. So were both of Cranfield's 700+ runs and so was Eufemia's 600+.

As I was told over 30 years ago and later confirmed by Bob Jewett, Mike Eufemia ran 150 and out in five consecutive matches played in one day in five different poolroom exhibition matches. Cue Ball Kelly saw it all and called it the greatest pool ever played, with 750 balls pocketed without a miss.

Once can argue that the real world record is Appleton's 200, as it occurred in competition with the pressure that is found only in competition.

Which of these is the greatest achievement? Heaven only knows, but hats are off to all these wonderful players.

John Schmidt, I feel certain, will own the world record for an exhibition run on a nine footer, sooner rather than later.
 
nickgeo said:
1. What is meant by "official?"

2. Are there examples of "records" in other sports that did not take place in a tournament?

One wonders whether Mosconi's impressive run got into Brunswick's record books (actually their pool rules book) simply because he worked for Brunswick and it was good advertising for the company?

What criteria do the Guinness Book of world records demand?
Click to expand...

Tricky subject. The record for consecutive free throws made in basketball is 2,750 which was done by a 71 year old podiatrist named Tom Amberry and yet I don't think anyone has ever hit 100 in a row in NBA competition.

Ask anyone who was the best free throw shooter ever and I doubt anyone will say Tom Amberry, but if the record need not be set in competition, Amberry was, perhaps, the best. Amberry, by the way, turned down an offer to play for the Lakers.
 
Positively Ralf said:
Why is this not the official tournament high run? ---> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVfKQ5iX3CQ

Feijen's 259 in what seems to me to be a tournament in his home country.
Click to expand...
There is no tournament match that I know of that is longer than 200 recently other than maybe Charlie Williams' event that may have had a finals match to 300 one year. Also, considering the shirt he is wearing, I doubt that is in a tournament.
 
kkdanamatt said:
... Freddie, as you correctly stated, the actual official highest run in tournament play is 200 by Darren Appleton against Francisco Bustamante at Steinway Billiards during the 2013 World 14.1 Tournament promoted by Charlie Williams. Bustamante made one ball, missed a combination and then Darren ran 200 balls on his first offensive turn at the table. ...
Click to expand...

Bustamante's miss was actually a carom rather than a combo: https://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4321587&postcount=162
 
nickgeo said:
1. What is meant by "official?"

2. Are there examples of "records" in other sports that did not take place in a tournament?

One wonders whether Mosconi's impressive run got into Brunswick's record books (actually their pool rules book) simply because he worked for Brunswick and it was good advertising for the company?

What criteria do the Guinness Book of world records demand?
Click to expand...

A little known fact is the Guiness Book of World Records began as a promotional bar trivia book produced by the Guiness Beer Company. The idea was born when a marketing person from Guiness heard two men arguing over the fastest bird in the world. Then they spent the next year gathering data to produce the first book.
 
Student's t-test

And around the turn of the century (1900) an employee at Guinness, Wm. Gosset, developed the t-test and t-distribution, fundamental developments in the nascent field of statistics.
 
Cornerman said:
From different threads, we have lists of 14.1 high runs including Cranfield, Eufemia and Mosconi over 600 and 700 balls. But the official high run is Willie’s 526 because it was at an exhibition and not a practice session. A tournament high run would also count as official (from previous BCA wording), but not a practice session.
Click to expand...

This is the problem, many of you will have to deal with, especially if John runs more than 526, or happens to run more than 768.

Some, like myself, think that with enough integrity, a practice run does qualify as a record, if believably achieved. The reason I believe Babe Cranfield ran 768 is because he told me about the run in 1977, when I was in Syracuse. In my mind, that's the record. Babe never made up anything of fiction when it came to 14.1 runs.

However, there is a camp who states it needs to be an official exhibition to qualify as the high run. Do you understand what you're saying? John's current pursuits are practice runs, not exhibitions. They happen to be recorded, but that makes it somehow official? I don't see how that's an exhibition, whatever that means. What is your definition of exhibition, those of you who cling to that requirement? Has to be witnessed by people? A certain minimum number of people? How do you know everyone at Mosconi's exhibition didn't fall asleep for at least five minutes during it?

I jest a bit, but the definition is being tested a bit. John is doing practice runs. If he breaks 768, I think he has the record. But they are practice runs, no opponent, not really an exhibition. Where do you official exhibition hard-liners fall? Not that easy a question, is it?

All the best,
WW
 
I think you've hit the nail on the head.
First, there is a tournament high run.
Then, a tournament high run continued until a miss.
Then, an exhibition (against an opponent) high run.
Then, a practice high run verified by witnesses and/or video.
Then, a practice high run unverified.
Oh, add into the mix: played on a 10'. 9', or 8' table.
YIKES!
 
I won't argue semantics, but as i understood the BC wording, to be an official high run, the run had to be part of a tournament or an exhibition. An exhibition has an official definition ( a display of a particular skill). The BCA presumably meant to differentiate practice sessions (which are clearly not meant for a display of a particular skill, but rather for a person's self-use for improvement) and exhibition. John's attempts this month are promoted as exhibition and certainly looks like they follow the definition.

Now, whether one has any faith in the BCA wording and intent or if anyone disagrees with the notion that Schmidt's attempts are an exhibition, that's really not the point.

If there's some agreement that Willie's is the "official record," then based on that (which is based on the BCA wording), then what is the official record for 9' tables? If we keep going back to "well, Willie's isn't the record," which is all fine and dandy, then my question has no answer. Surely, you all can be better than that.

Or I'll just say it myself without asking. If Chin and Engert's weren't exhibition settings, then John has the official 9' record based on the criteria that makes Mosconi's the record (tournament or exhibition).

Freddie <~~~ if I had the magic wand
 
Last edited:
Cornerman said:
Or I'll just say it myself without asking. If Chin and Engert's weren't exhibition settings, then John has the official 9' record based on the criteria that makes Mosconi's the record (tournament or exhibition).
Click to expand...

Agreed, Freddie, and I suspect he'll have the highest exhibition run record on any table pretty soon.
 
WildWing said:
John's current pursuits are practice runs, not exhibitions. They happen to be recorded, but that makes it somehow official?

(snip) But they are practice runs, no opponent, not really an exhibition. Where do you official exhibition hard-liners fall? Not that easy a question, is it?

All the best,
WW
Click to expand...
I actually think it's an easy question and answer. The reason why the "exhibition or tournament" stipulation is in there is for documented evidence. You are suggesting that there would be have to be rules of the game or that an actual game has to be part of the high-run even in an exhibition. It might have been, for all I know, but I've never gave one thought in that direction. I've thought simply that it was the easiest way to ensure documented evidence was available. All the high-run attempts at DCC are not in a game situation. I can't imagine how any of those high runs would not be official.

Freddie
 
14.1 Run

There is no "official" definition of an exhibition. "exhibitionist" - yes

"Exhibition" - no

Lets go for "Guinness" (not to be confused with beer) "World Records"
 
Cornerman said:
I actually think it's an easy question and answer. The reason why the "exhibition or tournament" stipulation is in there is for documented evidence. You are suggesting that there would be have to be rules of the game or that an actual game has to be part of the high-run even in an exhibition. It might have been, for all I know, but I've never gave one thought in that direction. I've thought simply that it was the easiest way to ensure documented evidence was available. All the high-run attempts at DCC are not in a game situation. I can't imagine how any of those high runs would not be official.

Freddie
Click to expand...

Freddie, in your selective cut and paste, I think you missed the important part of what I said. Here it is:

"John is doing practice runs. If he breaks 768, I think he has the record."

I suggested nothing with rules of the game or that an actual game has to be part of the high run. Others seem to have suggested that, over many threads. The notion of official seems in the minds of some, to be announced, with an opponent, and with a big crowd, and documented, etc, etc. I said the opposite, that John's counts, if done. That's it. Please don't misconstrue.

All the best,
WW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top