Statement from The Legends of Pocket Billiards

logical

apart of their 'semi public'
Silver Member
Bobby changed his mind on revealing the payouts. His dough, his decision.

True statement: JS table was set up for high runs.

Another true statement re perfect conditions.

I was referring to John and that would be another true statement.

Yet, apparently everyone, to include the BCA was OK with the conditions, artificially perfect or not. Ergo it would make no sense to handicap ourselves by doing otherwise.

I can’t address the one about the certification process at this time because of an agreement made a couple of days ago. Perhaps we can come back to that one soon.

On scoring errors, they were inadvertent and the crew got better at it as we went along.

Lou Figueroa
I'm curious about this one specifically...you may have overlooked it.

Feb 17 2020
"Because, then we're into territory where the run is questionable, at least to me, in terms of the conditions being artificially perfect -- much like the guy who recently broke the marathon record. If conditions were constructed to provide an artificial advantage not encountered in normal play then I think we're talking about a big asterisk..."

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm curious about this one specifically...you may have overlooked it.

Feb 17 2020
"Because, then we're into territory where the run is questionable, at least to me, in terms of the conditions being artificially perfect -- much like the guy who recently broke the marathon record. If conditions were constructed to provide an artificial advantage not encountered in normal play then I think we're talking about a big asterisk..."

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

No, didn’t overlook — by fifth comment coresponded to your fifth quote.

Lou Figueroa
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
He only played one exhibition match ever? Makes his run much more impressive. I thought it was a multiple shows per week kind of gig.
According to stories, it was sometimes three exhibitions per day and Willie drove between them. Pool halls were not so few and far between then.
 
Last edited:

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
As for the size of tournament tables, the World Championships changed from 10-foot tables to 9-foot for the 1950 US National and World Championships. Those were held on the Navy Pier in Chicago in February of 1950. This is only peripherally related to the current "discussion".
 

JazzyJeff87

AzB Plutonium Member
Silver Member
I wonder if there was much hoopala* surrounding the change to 9’. Where did you complain about pool stuff back in the 50s? Tack up a note on a telephone pole outside the pool hall I suppose.

“This is bullsh!t. I’ve spent 2 score years running balls continuously on a standard sized billiard table like a real man...”


As for this situation...did we expect smooth sailing if the number 626 was surpassed? Nein. As for the pocket specs - I’d call them generous 5” pockets - anyone around the world can figure that one out and setup a table to try to beat 714 on similar conditions.

It doesn’t need to be the exact specs of the table. We don’t have a humidity/temp reading for the time the run took place, exact number of balls pocketed on the cloth since last changed etc.

I do think it’d be a great thing to have a pro and amateur pocket template to use for all tournaments and official records but for now we’re still wild westing. Nothing wrong with that.

I’d like to know the payout myself, just curiosity. I heard a number unofficially lol. I wouldn’t publicly announce the $ either though due to tax men and other niceties.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... I do think it’d be a great thing to have a pro and amateur pocket template to use for all tournaments and official records ...
For snooker, matching a pocket template has been required for records for about a hundred years. I think several records have been disallowed because the table had not been certified.
 

mikemosconi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I don't think you understand. 14.1 tournaments in the 40's and 50's weren't played on 8' tables like Mosconi ran 526 on. They were actually played on 10' tables.
I understand EVERYTHING about the history of 14.1 tournament play- that is NOT the point here.

One night in the 1950s at age 41, while traveling around the country daily, often sleeping in his car for an hour or two outside pool rooms prior to a scheduled exhibition, Willie Mosconi completed a 14.1 exhibition match on 1950s equipment, in a fan filled, smoke filled, pool room that made no special accommodations for his exhibition match. It was early 1950s HVAC, 1950s billiard cloth, nothing special about the racks or balls ( sometimes he used his own ball set for exhibitions).

Someone asked Willie to keep shooting just to see how far he might go on the run, well, he just said "OK" and then casually ran off a total of 526.
I don't think he made a dime off the run. Willie only cared about his competitive records. A few players in the 1960s claimed "practice" runs in the 600s and 700s- I am sure these were very possible.

What does this all mean anyhow? Since when do practice and exhibition sports achievements count for anything, except for just points of discussion among the most diehard sports fans. These attempts at running 600/ 700/ or whatever will not bring in one new player to this game- the only people who care are existing pool fans yearning for ANY glimpse of hope for the sport/game.

Seems to me the whole idea of "beating" Mosconi's "record" has done nothing but serve to divide existing pool fans - it was a really stupid idea to begin with - IMO.
 

mikemosconi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
it isnt beating what mosconi did, no one ever will. it is now establishing a new high run on today's equipment.

if you want to say you beat what mosconi did, then fly or drive to a strange city and play an hour long exhibition on any table with any sized pockets, and then run 526 balls on your first and only try.

as that was his exhibition routine. he would keep on his last runout till it ended or he got tired and quit.
AMEN to THIS!!!
 

Cameron Smith

is kind of hungry...
Silver Member
I understand EVERYTHING about the history of 14.1 tournament play- that is NOT the point here.

One night in the 1950s at age 41, while traveling around the country daily, often sleeping in his car for an hour or two outside pool rooms prior to a scheduled exhibition, Willie Mosconi completed a 14.1 exhibition match on 1950s equipment, in a fan filled, smoke filled, pool room that made no special accommodations for his exhibition match. It was early 1950s HVAC, 1950s billiard cloth, nothing special about the racks or balls ( sometimes he used his own ball set for exhibitions).

Someone asked Willie to keep shooting just to see how far he might go on the run, well, he just said "OK" and then casually ran off a total of 526.
I don't think he made a dime off the run. Willie only cared about his competitive records. A few players in the 1960s claimed "practice" runs in the 600s and 700s- I am sure these were very possible.

What does this all mean anyhow? Since when do practice and exhibition sports achievements count for anything, except for just points of discussion among the most diehard sports fans. These attempts at running 600/ 700/ or whatever will not bring in one new player to this game- the only people who care are existing pool fans yearning for ANY glimpse of hope for the sport/game.

Seems to me the whole idea of "beating" Mosconi's "record" has done nothing but serve to divide existing pool fans - it was a really stupid idea to begin with - IMO.
I agree with a lot of what you say here. I don’t think any of these runs are in the same category as Mosconi’s run or the other exhibition runs of yesteryear. The extended runs during the American 14.1 championships in 2021 are the closest parallel.

That said, I disagree with the suggestion that these run attempts will not bring people into 14.1. It certainly won’t entice casual players to pick up the game but it could very well inspire current players to try 14.1. Certainly there would be some interest among some rotation/8 ball players to try to see what kind of runs they could manage. And this has resulted in quite a bit of visibility on the main forum. When Shaw ran 714 the whole front page was filled with posts talking about 14.1.

I think the objective here is that if we can assume that 10% of serious players practice 14.1, maybe if they can maintain interest they can move that needle up to 25-30%. That would be enough to potentially spawn more actual tournaments.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Can you say hypocrite!

Gee, Officer Obie, I didn’t know it was against the law in this jurisdiction to change your mind over the years.

Guess it’s time to head over to the Group W bench with the father rapers, lol.

Lou Figueroa
everyone sing
In four-part harmony
 

logical

apart of their 'semi public'
Silver Member
I understand EVERYTHING about the history of 14.1 tournament play- that is NOT the point here.

One night in the 1950s at age 41, while traveling around the country daily, often sleeping in his car for an hour or two outside pool rooms prior to a scheduled exhibition, Willie Mosconi completed a 14.1 exhibition match on 1950s equipment, in a fan filled, smoke filled, pool room that made no special accommodations for his exhibition match. It was early 1950s HVAC, 1950s billiard cloth, nothing special about the racks or balls ( sometimes he used his own ball set for exhibitions).

Someone asked Willie to keep shooting just to see how far he might go on the run, well, he just said "OK" and then casually ran off a total of 526.
I don't think he made a dime off the run. Willie only cared about his competitive records. A few players in the 1960s claimed "practice" runs in the 600s and 700s- I am sure these were very possible.

What does this all mean anyhow? Since when do practice and exhibition sports achievements count for anything, except for just points of discussion among the most diehard sports fans. These attempts at running 600/ 700/ or whatever will not bring in one new player to this game- the only people who care are existing pool fans yearning for ANY glimpse of hope for the sport/game.

Seems to me the whole idea of "beating" Mosconi's "record" has done nothing but serve to divide existing pool fans - it was a really stupid idea to begin with - IMO.
So you were there?

I get it...but if somebody shot 700 on the same table 2 weeks later Mosconi fans would still be insisting it didn't mean anything.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

boogieman

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
Hmmmmmm????
wrldpro said:
“No sir it was to Mr. Logical after he thought it was funny to call me a stooge.. !56 is a incredible run and congrats on it. Mizerak told me he would like to avg. 40 balls every time he got to the table. Makes alot of sense to me. Its just crazy that people don't understand What it takes to make high runs.How much easier it is when you have a table custom doctored to make the balls fall in when they shouldn't and just hang at the holes not to mention 760 Simonis cloth and pulling the balls off the table many, many times after the run has started and polishing them which makes the conditions stay the same the whole way through the run and never making the run get harder. People that have never run many balls don't understand these variables they only think of the ball count. I myself as a player that has broke 100 balls hundreds of times feels it is totally disrespectful to the game to obviously cheat by making such conditions that would never ever ever ever ever ever be such conditions in any Tournament or anywhere else. Not 1 person in history has had such conditions set up like this for any reason but Schmidt. So if conditions don't matter than how come Schmidt has never broke 300 on a pro diamond table which is less than half of the 626 and he has tried on a Diamond for about 10-15 years. Point proven”
He's right you know.
 

justadub

Rattling corners nightly
Silver Member
Gee, Officer Obie, I didn’t know it was against the law in this jurisdiction to change your mind over the years.

Guess it’s time to head over to the Group W bench with the father rapers, lol.

Lou Figueroa
everyone sing
In four-part harmony
With feelin'!

Comin' around on the guitar now...
 

straightline

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
He's right you know.
I don't know the state of this discussion or what your comment refers to so here's my opinion again.

Big numbers is a fledgling genre. One guy going as big as he can. The goal is hypothetical. The method improvisatory and highly biased against misfortune. Nobody's got a handle on it.
 

nicksaint26

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Gee, Officer Obie, I didn’t know it was against the law in this jurisdiction to change your mind over the years.

Guess it’s time to head over to the Group W bench with the father rapers, lol.

Lou Figueroa
everyone sing
In four-part harmony
You are a fraud and everyone knows it! You ask for proof you guys knocked John and once it gets provided you back track as usual.

But But blah blah blah
 

Johnny Rosato

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Just going by what LFigueroa said, it's kind of funny how things change:

Jul 30 2021
"Yes, Arnaldo, the compensation structure will be publicly known before the first attempt is made.

I've seen the payout schedule and it is generous. Very generous."

Jul 20 2021:
"It is my understanding that JS had that table especially set up for high runs."

May 14 2021
"I don’t think anyone can have a problem with “perfect conditions.”"

May 12 2021
"It took him hundreds of tries under artificially perfect conditions. There is zero chance he is going to walk into a strange room for an exhibition and run 500+ in front of spectators, on any size table, on a single attempt." Lou may have referring to Schmidt, but also to Shaw.

Feb 17 2020
"Because, then we're into territory where the run is questionable, at least to me, in terms of the conditions being artificially perfect -- much like the guy who recently broke the marathon record. If conditions were constructed to provide an artificial advantage not encountered in normal play then I think we're talking about a big asterisk. Otherwise, the next guy is going to wear a fan on his head to blow the balls into the pockets and its going to be OK."

Feb 05 2020
"Want a BCA record: have the PR guy and another guy who's background is race tracks OK it.
Piece of cake.
Lou Figueroa
not
worth
the
paper
it's
printed
on?"

Apr 30 2021
"The fact of the matter is that not all affidavits are created equal. Just as not all evidence is created equal. And the same can be said of witnesses. Each must be weight individually on their merits and faults."

I had a laugh when i heard that the Legends group was providing an affidavit, and was sending it to the BCA so they could certify it. As Lou says, the merits of the witnesses must we weighed individually on their merits and faults. We can believe the witnesses might have been in the room, but with the multiple scoring errors, they weren't paying attention. Someone must have elbowed them and said, 'he just set a record - you're a witness'.

My favourite scoring error is the the run where the scorekeeper double counted one rack, then a couple of racks later, the scoreboard incremented in the middle of the rack, then a few racks later, changed by six. Good quality witnesses who didn't notice any of that!!
Beautiful post.
I admire Shaw's talent and wish him the best that life has to offer,
but I hate he got tied in with this bunch and hope he severs all ties.
I really wish he would say he's already finanially secure with his pool hall
and not endorse any payouts for anyone concerned.
I've learned a helluva lot in the last few months with this event and all the posts and comments concerning it.
 
Top