Why has no one beat Mosconi's high run?

Mr. Bond said:
All due respect, I don't think any of these statements are true.

The fields today ( in 14.1) may be smaller than they have ever been in history.
Back when 14.1 was at its peak of popularity, competition at the highest level was very evenly matched. Why would it not have been?
The "game and format " today has more luck? It's basically the same exact game and there is no more luck than there ever was.

I enjoy learning, so if I am mistaken, feel free to let me know how and why.
Click to expand...

You misunderstood.

World championships today are mainly rotation games. I don't even think there are any true World 14.1 tournaments. I could be wrong though.

If there was, then I think you could see someone dominate as well as Mosconi did in his era. First name that comes to mind is Thorsten. Not saying he's as good as Mosconi, but he can certainly win titles.

As it currently stands with the bulk of World championships being determined by short race, single elimination, alternate break formats. You just aren't ever going to see many multiple world title winners.
 
Dan White said:
Incorrect. A team plays half its games at home. Think about it.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

The short distance to the right field fence at Yankee Stadium had a lot to do with Babe's record.
But I'm sure it was just a coincidence it got built that way:)

Dale
 
pdcue said:
Bingo.

The short distance to the right field fence at Yankee Stadium had a lot to do with Babe's record.
But I'm sure it was just a coincidence it got built that way:)

Dale
Click to expand...

He was also responsible for some 20% of the home runs in the major league.:eek:
He was in a time where you can count in your two hands ( maybe one ) how many pitchers had 95MPH fast balls or sliders .
Now, every team has several of them.
 
JoeyInCali said:
He was also responsible for some 20% of the home runs in the major league.:eek:
He was in a time where you can count in your two hands ( maybe one ) how many pitchers had 95MPH fast balls or sliders .
Now, every team has several of them.
Click to expand...

Of course you can go down the rat's next of differences between eras and argue about which was harder. For instance, the strike zone wasn't reduced until 1969. They also dropped the mound five inches, which made is easier to hit the ball.

Ruth had more home runs than entire teams combined, so it isn't like it was easy to hit one.
 
pdcue said:
Bingo.

The short distance to the right field fence at Yankee Stadium had a lot to do with Babe's record.
But I'm sure it was just a coincidence it got built that way:)

Dale
Click to expand...

I always thought Babe's record was because he never faced any top notch pitching.

:grin-square:
 
Dan White said:
Of course you can go down the rat's next of differences between eras and argue about which was harder. For instance, the strike zone wasn't reduced until 1969. They also dropped the mound five inches, which made is easier to hit the ball.

Ruth had more home runs than entire teams combined, so it isn't like it was easy to hit one.
Click to expand...

True, but he would definitely not hit 60 in a season today.
 
JoeyInCali said:
He was also responsible for some 20% of the home runs in the major league.:eek:
He was in a time where you can count in your two hands ( maybe one ) how many pitchers had 95MPH fast balls or sliders .
Now, every team has several of them.
Click to expand...

The relief pitcher has become quite the equalizer, except Chris Davis hit 50 last year and you can't even start comparing him with Ruth.
 
cookie man said:
The relief pitcher has become quite the equalizer, except Chris Davis hit 50 last year and you can't even start comparing him with Ruth.
Click to expand...

50 in 162 games .
Not quite 60 in 156.
Davis would have hit how many during the days when no Latino and Black played in the majors ? All day games ?
 
cookie man said:
So which record was set because of a players home field advantage?
Can't say Babe, he would have shattered the record where ever he played.
Click to expand...

The idea is that the home run record itself is a suspect statistic. For example, DiMaggio holds the record for most single-season home runs by a right-hander in Yankee Stadium (I think it was 45). It was broken only recently after about 70 years by a steroid pumped Alex Rodriguez in a field that is much smaller. The left center power alley in DiMaggio's time was 457' (now 399') with center field at 461' (now 408'). DiMaggio unquestionably would have been the home run record holder if the stadium were a normal one. The outfield was even nicknamed "Death Valley." At the same time, the right field pole was at only 314'. The right pole at the polo grounds was at 258'!

This is why I say records are interesting to talk about, but they are really of limited value. Sure, the best players will have the biggest numbers, but as soon as you try to say so-and-so was better because of this or that record, you can get into trouble.
 
Dan White said:
Let me ask you a stats question, if I may. If we stipulate that a 100 ball run is one trial rather than 100 individual trials, why wouldn't it be proper to use 100^6? The 1.0 I was referring to was Mosconi's probability of running 100 balls in a given evening.
Click to expand...

Because he could run 101,345,536, not just 100,200,300. If he never misses, someone should convince him to keep running, which is (according to this thread) exactly what happened. And now we know.

tackle this problem: A guy performs exhibitions 3 nights a week and in every one he runs 100 balls on his first try, unscrews his cue and leaves. What is the probability that he will run 526 if asked to continue shooting? The answer to that is harder to find than the Higgs boson. :eek:
Click to expand...

If that is ALL the pool he played? One could award him the title of longest run after 6 nights. Guinness does have rules for how long breaks can be though. Really much easier than finding the Higgs; cheaper by 9 orders of magnitude as well.

Thank you kindly.
 
Corwyn_8 said:
If that is ALL the pool he played? One could award him the title of longest run after 6 nights. Guinness does have rules for how long breaks can be though. Really much easier than finding the Higgs; cheaper by 9 orders of magnitude as well.
Click to expand...

There is no record for balls pocketed on consecutive evenings without a miss, unless possibly if the balls were left on the table untouched. I think a high run in pool has to be done with common sense breaks for bathroom or a drink, for example.

I think you are starting to appreciate the problem, at least as it pertains to Mosconi. He really did run 100 balls and stop every time during exhibitions. You have no other data because, at best, tournament results are only tangentially related to exhibition play. So all we have theoretically is exhibition runs. All of them are 100. All of them stop at 100 unfinished. At least with the boson it was possible to formulate a strategy to find it. How are you going to predict the high run of a guy who only does 100 and outs? :grin:

Of course this is all in fun and this conversation has veered all over the place. Thanks for the feedback.
 
JoeyInCali said:
50 in 162 games .
Not quite 60 in 156.
Davis would have hit how many during the days when no Latino and Black played in the majors ? All day games ?
Click to expand...

Dead balls and no add medicine,lol. Hard to say.
The relief pitching is the biggest difference today IMO.
 
Dan White said:
The idea is that the home run record itself is a suspect statistic. For example, DiMaggio holds the record for most single-season home runs by a right-hander in Yankee Stadium (I think it was 45). It was broken only recently after about 70 years by a steroid pumped Alex Rodriguez in a field that is much smaller. The left center power alley in DiMaggio's time was 457' (now 399') with center field at 461' (now 408'). DiMaggio unquestionably would have been the home run record holder if the stadium were a normal one. The outfield was even nicknamed "Death Valley." At the same time, the right field pole was at only 314'. The right pole at the polo grounds was at 258'!

This is why I say records are interesting to talk about, but they are really of limited value. Sure, the best players will have the biggest numbers, but as soon as you try to say so-and-so was better because of this or that record, you can get into trouble.
Click to expand...

I agree and i wouldn't rate players because of records.
PS Willie Mays did pretty good at the polo grounds.
 
cookie man said:
I agree and i wouldn't rate players because of records.
PS Willie Mays did pretty good at the polo grounds.
Click to expand...

I think the aiming forum has some kind of force field around it that turns people nuts. Outside that forum the same people are perfectly normal. :wink:
 
JoeyInCali said:
50 in 162 games .
Not quite 60 in 156.
Davis would have hit how many during the days when no Latino and Black played in the majors ? All day games ?
Click to expand...

One thing which interests me about this discussion is the difference between how the game was played in the previous era. I was researching Babe Ruth's final season with the Boston Braves. In 1935 the Braves played 35 double headers. That's a total of 70 games which were part of a double header. Cramped clubhouses (today's players gripe about Wrigley's clubhouses) no air conditioning, traveling by train frequently instead of flying, no trainers or modern surgery (Tommy John) and all those double headers for a paycheck so small the players had to get jobs during the off season.

How well would today's players do under those conditions?

One interesting tidbit about Ruth. His final home run cleared the roof at Forbes Field in Pittsburgh. It was only the second series he ever played in Forbes Field and he retired 5 days later. Only 11 players ever did that at Forbes Field.

When discussing eras you also have to consider conditions in which they played.
 
JoeyInCali said:
True, but he would definitely not hit 60 in a season today.
Click to expand...

IMHO - and it is only an opinion, with today's baseballs and more games, he would hit 90, if they would pitch to him.

Dale(not a baseball genius, but I do know who Johnny Kling was)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top