Shane Van Boening's World Record

jasonlaus

Rep for Smorg
Gold Member
Silver Member
But, that's the point others were making.....a 7 ft Diamond with Pro Cut pockets is not your run of the mill Valley. The tight pockets and deeper shelves make it play much harder.

And here's another point there hasn't been brought up in this thread yet... Many of you have said in the past that playing on a 9-foot shouldn't be any more difficult than a 7. If your cue ball position is good, there should be no shots on a 9-foot there any longer than on a seven. And if they have the same size pockets, a 4-foot shot on a 9-foot is identical to a 4-foot shot on a 7. It's all about cue ball position.

Next, you're going to say that cue ball position is harder on a 9-foot. No, it is not. Think of it this way... the adjustment is no different then playing on a 7-foot with slow cloth, and then shooting on 7 ft table with Simonis worsted, or something faster. Obviously you have to make an adjustment. You do exactly the same going from a 7 to a 9. Once you have the speed figured out, your brain should quit and your arm should take over. I'm not saying it wouldn't take some practice. It's all about speed, not distance. Given the same quality cushions and cloth, going for cue ball position two rails and rolling 5 feet, is the same on both tables.

The ones that are saying a 7 (or 9) ft Diamond plays badly, because the rails are to springy, or whatever, just can't make the adjustment required.. Or they don't want to. The pros don't seem to have a problem adjusting. I didn't have much problem adjusting on my brother's friends
Diamond (9 ft Tournament w/drop pockets). Matter of fact, I played pretty well.
I was with you for a minute, but it seems more like mental gymnastics
 

buckshotshoey

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I was with you for a minute, but it seems more like mental gymnastics
I rambled on for too long, I know.
I'll say it simpler. .... there are no shots on a 9 that is different then a 7... same angles...same shots.... just speed difference. If you have a 8 1/2 foot shot, you probably pissed away your cue ball control. If it happens, it's at least unlikely.

Anything else is all in your head. That's the way I try to look at it every time I get the pleasure to play on a 9foot.
 

westcoast

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Sorry, the pros don't have that high a run out rate and the numbers have been shown time and time again on the forum, the percentage of run out is near the same from 7-9ft table

Even bar box 9ball on standard valley tables I watch saez and Reyes, neither ran the set out and both had to play safeties on each other.
I don’t think he was saying that he runs out 75 percent of the time-he was stating he runs out 75 percent more frequently on a 7 vs 9 footer
 

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
Even though that run was made on a table having specifications within pro guidelines at the time, I have often posted that I wondered whether Mosconi's record should have been recognized at all. I consider Darren Appleton's 200 and out against Bustamante to be the true world record run, as it happened in tournament play.
Strange response from you here. I must have missed all your previous posts about the validity of Mosconi's run. Do you think John Schmidt's run should also not be recognized.
 
Last edited:

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
The problem is, and it's not only him, but SJM and others, as beloved as they may be, disparage a large part of the pool playing population when they refer to 7 ft. Tables as "kiddie tables".

As much as they believe that 7 footers do nothing for pool, the constant belittling of THE ONLY type of pool a large majority of the population plays is even worse.

It is well documented that pros for the past several decades have no problems playing tourneys, challenge matches, gambling matches, etc., on 7 foot tables. I do not understand why some feel it is necessary to disparage these tables. "Kiddie tables", or " real pool is played on 9 footers", or " the world's best shouldn't play on bar boxes "... it's all horse crap.

Many REAL POOL PLAYERS never have the opportunity or desire to play on 9 ft. Tables. It does not make them any less of a pool player. And it is a slap in the face to call them kiddie tables. Just my opinion.
Well said. You could take this argument one step further and say that only records set on a 10' table should count, becauise that's what they played tournaments on for decades (up until the late 40's in fact). Perhaps back then when the 9' table became more popular, many people scoffed at it as a little too easy.
 

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
Perfect post. Where would pool be without leagues. How many 9 footers you gonna stuff in a bar. How many bars are gonna buy GC's.

This is the equivalent of dismissing softball players because the fence is much closer than the in MLB. Well, no shit, they are amateurs versus pros. And yeah, some pro's have played in celebrity softball games and crush it. They don't compete on those but why should they, they have billion dollar stadiums and $250M contracts. Pool players don't know what they are eating for dinner the next day so if they want to play on 7 footers, just enjoy it.

By the way, how much pool stuff would be sold if no 7 footers. There would be no pool in the USA if you took the 7 footers out. League dry up. Then folks that sell billiard related stuff go out of biz, and then, soon after the pool rooms and then money for tournaments. I may dislike the AP APA rules and format, but I do know what they bring to the table in supporting pool and brining tens of thousands to the sport.
The pros will play on the floor if the money is there! 😁
 

sjm

Sweating it at Derby City
Silver Member
Strange response from you here. I must have missed all your previous posts about the validity of Mosconi's run. I would ask you if you think John Schmidt's run should also not be recognized.
They are both rightly recognized as exhibition runs and are valid runs in my book, and BCA certification represents ample substantiation of John's run in my books.

My point has always been "why have an exhibition run record on the books at all?" The billiard press quite rightly reported Appleton's 200 and out vs Bustamante as a world record when it happened, breaking Joe Procita's record of 180-something. I've always felt that pool against the ghost is not the same as pool against an opponent. Achievements in practice are just that and are not to be confused with what is accomplished in the true arena of battle with pro specifications, pro opponents, and tournament pressure.

I've always believed it's a bit like the difference between succeeding on the pistol range and succeeding in actual combat. It's a different situation when someone is shooting back.
 

The_JV

'AZB_Combat Certified'
Well put and I can say for myself and probably many others in this forum that we don’t hate bar boxes. I love 9’ because they are challenging and requires a hard and a soft stroke and you can play with either almost exclusively if you know how to play proficiently at either. Some days I hate them.

I really enjoy bar boxes for entertainment. They are fun as all hell coming from a 9’.

I commonly play at our local bar which serves good food and me and the family go to eat and have a few beers. My goal is to try to hold the table all night long till closing. Doesn’t always happen but I try every time.

Now as far as competition, meh. It’s too easy to run out. If I had to gage the amount of times I run out on a 9’ and a 7’ I would say I run out 75% more of the time on a 7’ vs a 9’. That’s huge and not exaggerated. So if I can do that then the pros are obviously running the same or more. That’s why you can see 28 break and runs. Somewhere in the world although probably not documented someone has ran more.

Sure it’s an enormous achievement for Shane or any player. But, let’s be realistic for a moment. In no way is a 7’ tougher than a 9’. Although 7’ tables are more popular right now and possibly forever who know’s, it’s not considered mainstream professional.
Totally agree on all points.

Maybe I'm just not that strong a 9ft player, but throw me on a barbox and look out. I play that game a few times a year and my runout rate is well North of 60%. Packages of 5/6 are not uncommon. However, and I've said this once already in this very thread. There is a massive difference between an actual barbox and smaller 7ft version of a 9fter. Diamond 7fters can be just as tough as any 9ft. My personal success rate on a diamond-ish 7ft is still stronger than 9, but no where near a true to form barbox.
 

ChicagoRJ

EEEEEXCELLENT ;)
Silver Member
I've always believed it's a bit like the difference between succeeding on the pistol range and succeeding in actual combat. It's a different situation when someone is shooting back.
Wait, what? You probably meant to analyze shooting at the range for practice, or shooting in competition against an opponent. Lets not think shooting pool is akin to going to war. You don't need someone shooting back at you to determine if you can hit the broad side of a barn. just saying.

Also, there is a book on world records, most of which were not involved during any competition. Pool is not like mainstream sports, so we got to take the records where we can get them ;)
 
Last edited:

The_JV

'AZB_Combat Certified'
I rambled on for too long, I know.
I'll say it simpler. .... there are no shots on a 9 that is different then a 7... same angles...same shots.... just speed difference. If you have a 8 1/2 foot shot, you probably pissed away your cue ball control. If it happens, it's at least unlikely.

Anything else is all in your head. That's the way I try to look at it every time I get the pleasure to play on a 9foot.
Not entirely true..

CB control goes beyond just spd. The way you utilize the rails to funnel the CB into the correct zone for the next shot changes as well.

I'm probably 95% 9ft play. Pure potting for me on a barbox is comically easy. It's the finer CB control of spinning off multiple rails that may give me issue. Usually I'll bail myself out with shot making, but the point remains.
 

The_JV

'AZB_Combat Certified'
I've always believed it's a bit like the difference between succeeding on the pistol range and succeeding in actual combat. It's a different situation when someone is shooting back.
Agreed... The heat of battle, and the potential consequences for mis-steps changes how a player manages their play.

I've been 'practicing' a lot of straight pool in the last year or so. Most of my high run efforts (which is every turn at the table when you play solo) ends with some dumb risk. A risk I would never take if in competition.
 
Last edited:

buckshotshoey

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
My previous post is how I go about playing on a 9 foot. It works for me. I have to preach what I practice.

Try this.... when you play on a 9 foot, use 1 to 1 1/2 ounce heavier cue.
 

The_JV

'AZB_Combat Certified'
My previous post is how I go about playing on a 9 foot. It works for me. I have to preach what I practice.

Try this.... when you play on a 9 foot, use 1 to 1 1/2 ounce heavier cue.
I reread the previous post... With all due respect, I think the heavy cue for larger table play is an effort to quell something that's all in your head.

What does adding this extra cue weight do for you in terms of determining the required CB englsh and rail management on a 9ft as compared to a 7...?
 

buckshotshoey

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I reread the previous post... With all due respect, I think the heavy cue for larger table play is an effort to quell something that's all in your head.

What does adding this extra cue weight do for you in terms of determining the required CB englsh and rail management on a 9ft as compared to a 7...?
I'm not sure why. I switched to my spare cue and I started playing better on the 9 foot. Its 1.2 ounces heavier.

I do the same for slow/fast tables. Lighter cue for fast tables, heavier for slow tables.
 

sjm

Sweating it at Derby City
Silver Member
Wait, what? You probably meant to analyze shooting at the range for practice, or shooting in competition against an opponent. Lets not think shooting pool is akin to going to war. You don't need someone shooting back at you to determine if you can hit the broad side of a barn. just saying.
Yes, yours is a better comparison.
 

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
They are both rightly recognized as exhibition runs and are valid runs in my book, and BCA certification represents ample substantiation of John's run in my books.

My point has always been "why have an exhibition run record on the books at all?" The billiard press quite rightly reported Appleton's 200 and out vs Bustamante as a world record when it happened, breaking Joe Procita's record of 180-something. I've always felt that pool against the ghost is not the same as pool against an opponent. Achievements in practice are just that and are not to be confused with what is accomplished in the true arena of battle with pro specifications, pro opponents, and tournament pressure.

I've always believed it's a bit like the difference between succeeding on the pistol range and succeeding in actual combat. It's a different situation when someone is shooting back.
I tend to agree with you here for the most part. Records made in exhibitions should be labeled as such, opposed to those made in a tournament setting. For example someone may have broken the record for the Mile during a practice run and without the proper certificatrion it will not be recognized as a new world record.

I will point out that Mosconi's record run did come while playing an opponent and was witnessed in its entirety by over thirty people. He did not start with BIH on a break shot. On the other hand, John's run came after hundreds, if not thousands, of attempts playing against the "Ghost" if you will. He had the benefit of using the same table over and over again. Unlike Mosconi who had to adjust to a different table in every poolroom he entered. Big difference in the two imo. Put Willie on one table and let him go out it over and over for days or weeks and what would his high run have been? Maybe 1,000 or more! :unsure:
 

HawaiianEye

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I tend to agree with you here for the most part. Records made in exhibitions should be labeled as such, opposed to those made in a tournament setting. For example someone may have broken the record for the Mile during a practice run and without the proper certificatrion it will not be recognized as a new world record.

I will point out that Mosconi's record run did come while playing an opponent and was witnessed in its entirety by over thirty people. He did not start with BIH on a break shot. On the other hand, John's run came after hundreds, if not thousands, of attempts playing against the "Ghost" if you will. He had the benefit of using the same table over and over again. Unlike Mosconi who had to adjust to a different table in every poolroom he entered. Big difference in the two imo. Put Willie on one table and let him go out it over and over for days or weeks and what would his high run have been? Maybe 1,000 or more! :unsure:
I have said that repeatedly.

John “conditioned” the atmosphere for a “perfect storm”.

He didn’t walk in cold to a strange table, hit a few balls, play an exhibition, and then continue a run.
 

smoooothstroke

JerLaw
Silver Member
I tend to agree with you here for the most part. Records made in exhibitions should be labeled as such, opposed to those made in a tournament setting. For example someone may have broken the record for the Mile during a practice run and without the proper certificatrion it will not be recognized as a new world record.

I will point out that Mosconi's record run did come while playing an opponent and was witnessed in its entirety by over thirty people. He did not start with BIH on a break shot. On the other hand, John's run came after hundreds, if not thousands, of attempts playing against the "Ghost" if you will. He had the benefit of using the same table over and over again. Unlike Mosconi who had to adjust to a different table in every poolroom he entered. Big difference in the two imo. Put Willie on one table and let him go out it over and over for days or weeks and what would his high run have been? Maybe 1,000 or more! :unsure:
What were the table conditions for JS run, pocket size etc?
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
What were the table conditions for JS run, pocket size etc?
Here's the equipment list posted by Bob Jewett a year and a half ago:

 
Top