Statement from The Legends of Pocket Billiards

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
BTW, I wanted to mention that Mike Howerton is featuring a very nice write up of Shaw's run at our event on the AZ home page:


Snowflakes, trolls, graphic artists, table mechanics, and cognitive dissonance Poo Bahs should all enjoy it..

Lou Figueroa
It’s a great write up. Notice how the authors did not try to delete Schmidt from history.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
That’s very sad. It’s been a week now and even you are saying no progress. Admission of a mistake is a good start.

er, OK -- but that's not what I actually said.

No no. Don't ask me to explain it to you. Perhaps you shall eventually figure it out.

Lou Figueroa
take it slowly
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
And Jayson Shaw competed in the DCC but couldn't win it because Joshua Filler ran a 285 with very little effort, and set the overall high run on a Diamond.
Wow, 285 on a Diamond could very possibly be more impressive than 714 on that table. However, most who follow pool would have no clue what the difficulty difference really is. Actually nobody truly will as long as they refuse to release the size of the pockets.
 
Last edited:

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Wow, 285 on a Diamond could very possibly be more impressive than 714 on that table. However, most who follow pool would have no clue what the difficulty difference really is.

Educate the masses -- make it your mission.

Lou Figueroa
 

kanzzo

hobby player
Well fortunately we don't really care what you think.

Lou Figueroa
easy
well, we will see.

you were caught lying and you were caught not keeping your word. My posts were just pointing this out to the other members of this forum. Sometime in the future it could help to be known as a man of integrity. And a damaged reputation could be difficult to repair.

My advise to you would be to refrain from further posts since you are only digging yourself deeper into the hole. Wait for the BCA approval of the record. And if you get it, you can celebrate, how your cheating went successful. If you don't get the approval, you can (with a help of some attourney) make an apology statement to the community for the confusion with the table specifications, set up a table that would actually meet the BCA requirements and perhaps continue with your Straight pool challenge.

For my personal opinion: I couldn't care less for people with your integrity standards. I have more respect for my dog.
 
Last edited:

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
well, we will see.

you were caught lying and you were caught not keeping your word. My posts were just pointing this out to the other members of this forum. Sometime in the future it could help to be known as a man of integrity. And a damaged reputation could be difficult to repair.

My advise to you would be to refrain from further posts since you are only digging yourself deeper into the hole. Wait for the BCA approval of the record. And if you get it, you can celebrate, how you cheating went successful. If you don't get the approval, you can (with a help of some attourney) make an apology statement to the community for the confusion with the table specifications, set up a table that would actually meet the BCA requirements and perhaps continue with your Straight pool challenge.

For my personal opinion: I couldn't care less for people with your integrity standards. I have more respect for my dog.

Where did I lie?

And honestly, I've been on the pool forums for about 25 years and am totally comfortable with my reputation. You though, snowflake, should heed your own advice.

Lou Figueroa
now go
hug your dog
 

kanzzo

hobby player
Where did I lie?
Making people believe, you are running the challenge on a regular 5'' table. Withholding the truth that it is actually a 5 1/4'' pockets table. That wouldn't get BCA approval for last 70 years

But I can see that you can't recognize a lie anymore if it stands in front of you.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
From (rounded) corner to corner my measurement is 5.15'', from where the gray line is cutting the gray extension line its' just below 5''.

So I would say the rails were cut perfectly for 5'' pockets but look a tiny bit bigger because of the rounding effect from tightly pulled cloth on the rail. The angle is a perfect 141°
I get about the same thing by measuring mouth and throat (using straight facings front to back and the back edge of the cushion as the throat):

4 7/8" at the mouth
4 3/8" at the throat
= 1/2" total narrowing = 140.4° per side (5.4° from parallel)

pj
chgo

pocket facing angle (2).png
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I get about the same thing by measuring mouth and throat (using straight facings front to back and the back edge of the cushion as the throat):

4 7/8" at the mouth
4 3/8" at the throat
= 1/2" total narrowing = 140.4° per side (5.4° from parallel)

pj
chgo

View attachment 626061
The pocket/table shown in the photo is a different table, different balls than the table in question, so what’s your point, unless you’re just trying to determine the critical pocket measurements for this particular table, fully knowing it’s not the table we have been talking about this entire thread?
 

Dead Money

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The pocket/table shown in the photo is a different table, different balls than the table in question, so what’s your point, unless you’re just trying to determine the critical pocket measurements for this particular table, fully knowing it’s not the table we have been talking about this entire thread?
Another user put his home table pocket picture on here with a clear picture so the ones that wanted to try out the measuring software could. Nothing much more to it than that. PJ's presentation and graphics are very nice. Best I have seen so far.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
The pocket/table shown in the photo is a different table, different balls than the table in question, so what’s your point, unless you’re just trying to determine the critical pocket measurements for this particular table, fully knowing it’s not the table we have been talking about this entire thread?
Just comparing notes on a sample pocket to show that comparing the mouth and throat to a known measurement (two balls width) is an easy and accurate way to show facing angles.

In this case particularly, the measurements are pretty accurate because the picture looks like it was taken from straight above with no distorting angle - an even better way would be to just lay rulers across the mouth and throat before taking the pic.

pj
chgo
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Another user put his home table pocket picture on here with a clear picture so the ones that wanted to try out the measuring software could. Nothing much more to it than that. PJ's presentation and graphics are very nice. Best I have seen so far.
Ok, that’s what I thought but just confirming, so other readers of this thread/post aren’t confusing this photo with the screenshot of the 714 table that had significantly larger pockets.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Making people believe, you are running the challenge on a regular 5'' table. Withholding the truth that it is actually a 5 1/4'' pockets table. That wouldn't get BCA approval for last 70 years

But I can see that you can't recognize a lie anymore if it stands in front of you.

The table does have 5" pockets and frankly neither you nor anyone else knows what or how the BCA approves stuff.

Lou Figueroa
next
 
Top