World Champions, Past and Present?

[hunger strike]

continuous pool and 14.1 continuous pool not the same

I never said it wasn't .
I did about 30 years of research myself and while I am sure Mr. Ursitti knows what he is talking about, you seem to have misunderstood nearly everything I have written.
Perhaps it is me.
I will leave it up to the other readers as to who is misunderstanding whom.

The thing I was trying to point out to you is that you may have been reading continuous pool as 14.1 continuous, and they are not the same game.
" I believe 1910 had 5 such tournaments, all were won by Jerome Keough"
...this is true, but they were not 14.1 continuous pool, just continuous pool. Don't take my word for it, contact Ursitti. I just thought the way you worded it would lead readers to believe that the first 14.1 championship was in 1910 and it was not. If you can demonstrate records to the contrary, I will be happy to change my mind and agree with the truth. Have a great day.

 

[FranCrimi]

Being able to call an international event a World Championship means a lot to event organizers around the world. In many cases, it becomes a matter of national pride to host such an event, such as with China and the Arab states.

One thing the WPA does not want to do is to devalue the worth and quality of legitimate World Championships for several reasons. Here are two that normally arise:

1.) Players who are the best representatives of their countries and who are traveling from places around the world should be competing for a decent and legitimate prize fund. Therefore a minimum of $75,000 added was set. This was as of last year. I don't know if the WPA has changed this minimum since then.

2.) The WPA also insures that the manner in which players are invited and placed in brackets is fair and that all continents who wish to participate are fairly represented.

In many cases, one or both of the above reasons prevents an event from becoming a sanctioned World Championship.

 

[Mr. Bond]

I think the game "61" you refer to was originally called Chicago elsewhere for Chicago, IL was where it had first become popular; if so, it was also called "rotation" and was not at all part of the evolution of games leading up to today's 14.1. I don't have much of a billiard library and am simply going by what I was told by old guy back in the 50s. Eddie Robin

a little trivia:
yes, '61' was later called "Chicago", aka 'rotation'
(not to be confused with '15-ball' )
however, there was another game also known as 'Chicago' that didnt involve a rack proper. instead, you placed each ball against the rail at each diamond, in numerical order around the table...etc.

 

[Eddie Robin]

Believe that game originated in Argentina

a little trivia:
yes, '61' was later called "Chicago", aka 'rotation'
(not to be confused with '15-ball' )
however, there was another game also known as 'Chicago' that didnt involve a rack proper. instead, you placed each ball against the rail at each diamond, in numerical order around the table...etc.

Wow; your post certainly brought back an old memory of shooting pool in pool room at the 92nd Street Y in New York City. I'd always believed that game with the balls on the diamonds had originated in Argentina and my recall of what the Argentinian that had shown it to me in the mid 50s had said back then is sort of coming back to me. I guess . . . actually I now think it did have the same name "Chicago" because I do recall his use of the word, "version" or maybe even, "our version". The more I think about it as I write this the more I think you're right -- it was called "Chicago". That Argentinian had definitely claimed that his version had already been quite popular in his home country for years. Guess any old-time pool or billiard player from Argentina would know. Eddie Robin