PDA

View Full Version : Will anyone ever beat 526?



05-04-2002, 10:02 PM
Just wondering if anyone has come close to breaking Mosconi's record or if you think they ever will. Since the decline in 14.1's popularity over the last 30 years, I don't know if anyone ever will. I read that Strickland got 408 and has about given up. Anybody know of pros who have come close. I myself get within 500 balls of breaking it on a regular basis.

Cueless Joey
05-04-2002, 11:37 PM
I question the validity of this record. I believe Mosconi set this while on an exhibition match. Not a tournament. Plus, with BCA specs, how wide can the pockets be?
Some poster here swore he saw one player run 600 balls.

Tommy_Davidson
05-05-2002, 02:05 AM
> The only reason Willie Mosconi holds that record at 526,is an attorney was present during the entire run,and drew the official document up himself. Otherwise,the record would probably be 386,by the late Irving Crane. For any run to be a record,there needs to be at least 3 people that saw the whole thing,at least to my understanding. The 526 was run on an 4 x 8,no telling how big the pockets were on it,it was 1954,and back then most places charged by the game. Greedy room owners modified the pockets to the point where hanging a ball was nearly impossible due to a sloping of the pocket shelf. On tables with this modification,all you have to do is get the ball close,and it falls,even if you hit the rail a foot from the pocket. Mike Eufemia,a legendary player from New York,supposedly ran a 654 once,but no one saw the whole thing. Willie himself said in an interview with Charles Ursitti that he heard that someone had broken the 526,so on his home table he ran a 589,missed,and followed it with an unfinished 609. Only Willie knew if he was telling the truth,but with 15 World titles,and the only proper claim to our sport's most hallowed and unapproachable record,would you have doubted him? Tommy D.

05-05-2002, 03:18 AM
If the truth were known 526 has been beaten numerous times. The problem in this era is that fewer people are playing 14.1. There are a number of players (women included) who could beat 526 if they had a reason to.

05-05-2002, 09:17 AM
which women, i'd like to know... for that matter, which men? not very many, even if they wanted too...

Tom_In_Cincy
05-05-2002, 09:48 AM
Lem

You came within 500 of matching Willie's record?
Congrats.. keep up the good work..

Ken
05-05-2002, 09:57 AM
Efren and Earl look like they could go on forever running balls. Rempe is still hitting them pretty good and there's no telling what Mike Zuglan might do if he felt like it.

As for the women, I saw Karen Corr playing straight pool and saw no indication that she was likely to get to one hundred. I think one hundred for the women is very rare despite the fact that any match would offer the potential for a run of 100. 30s and 40s are more like it and will win some competitions. On the other hand, the men will throw in a 70 or more regularly in competition to 125.

Why would the women be much good at straight pool when there's no money in it? Why would they ever play it?

You put these players on an 8 foot table with 5 1/4 in. pockets and simonis cloth and I don't see what could stop them except bad luck on the break. With simonis the rack scatters if you barely nick it.
Ken in CT

05-05-2002, 10:21 AM
IMO the record would have likely been broken many times by now if 14.1 had remained the most popular game to play for the pros. If the BCA had continued their annual 14.1 U.S. Open title (even if that was the only 14.1 tourney of the year) I think you would have seen it broken - as more pros would have had an incentive to practice it regularly. Problem is that sort of run only comes in an exhibition, practice session or the continuation of a match - as 14.1 games are usually contested to no more than 150 points. Fact is, few of the pros play it seriously now other than just as a practice regimen, and as we all know there are no 14.1 tourneys to mention anymore.

The other problem with comparing 14.1 runs is that the impressiveness of a run is dictated not only by the size of the table, but even moreso by the size and taper angles of the pockets. This makes it virtually impossible to compare high runs from different players playing in different eras on different equipment. In our room here alone we have a table with 4-3/4" corner pockets (BCA corner pocket standards is 5" +/- 1/4") in which I've run close to 100, other tables with 4" pockets in which my high run is in the 50s, and a super tight 3-1/2" pocket table in which I'm as proud of my 30 ball run effort as I am of any of the longer runs I've achieved on the bigger pockets.

IMO any 14.1 player who wishes to seriously keep track of their high run and what it means (in relation to another player, or even to their own previous high run recorded on another table) should include the table pocket dimensions and tapers on which the high run was recorded. - Chris in NC

05-05-2002, 08:55 PM
You people kill me!!
Why is it that everytime Willie Mosconi's name comes up everybody starts hacking on him..
Sure, there are numerous pros out there that could run 526. Are you kidding??
You always say on here that EArl Strickland has an enormous ego. You do not think "Mr. Giant Ego" would not go after the greatest record in American Pool if he thought he could beat it.
He would get the lawyer, get the t.v coverage, get at least 3 people with enough "verification" abilities to justify his beating the record.
Hell, Ripley's believe it or Not would certainly put up the cameras to watch Earl or Efren break the record.
So why does Earl not go for it??

He knows he cannot get it done under the pressure??
Exhibition or not, think about running 5 hundred and 26 balls in a row.

I will bet most people on this board cannot run 70 without at least a bad break, a stiffed rack, or a white ball that just miraculously sat on another ball, leaving you no shot..

5 hundred and 26 ina row, no exscuses..

Take a moment, and think about it.. No bad breaks, all good luck, in the groove, and everything is falling, every break is spreading, and position play is perfect..

For 5 hundred and 26 balls..
That is 37.5 racks, that must break, leave you a shot, and a chance to get back into them.
I admit, some "good" luck is involved, and a ton of skill..

Too much skill for even someone of Earls' arrogance (arrogance being your word not mine, I rather enjoy Earl)
to try..

Now everyone, go to your favorite pool hall, load up a rack of balls, break them however you want, play on whatever pockets you want, and report back with your high score.
The best run you could muster..

526 stands because it is tough..
Willie did it because he is an awsome player, and all the bad-mouthing that goes on whenever his name comes up on this board is not going to change one thing..
If alive today, he would kick everyones ass on this board, every pros ass, and yes, even every woman on the pro tour..
9 ball, Efren plays 9 ball, and you all know what Willie said about 9 ball right??

Of course you do, you are all Willie Mosconi experts!!


Carson..

MikeM
05-05-2002, 08:59 PM
You tell 'em Carson!

MM

BTW.....register.

05-05-2002, 09:39 PM
well, i guess it's been a while since we dug ol' willie up and demanded that he prove himself again. you ain't so hot you ol bag of dust.

i won't be here but 50 years from now they'll be doin that to tiger woods.

think about it, at a time when there were pool rooms on every corner of every town in the country, when the roads were packed with traveling competitors, when the newspapers routinely covered it and there actually was money to be made at it...willie beat 'em all. over and over and over again. (quoting now, a bit, from the hall of fame notes...)...from 40 to 57 he won the worlds 15times. did an exhibition tour at age 20 with greenleaf, in ralph's prime and took 50 of 107 matches.

try it this way, pool then was bigger than golf is now and willie then was more dominant than tiger is today.

change the equipment, add air-conditioning, whatever; he'd own the record.

dan

05-05-2002, 10:35 PM
Michael Eufemia holds the record for the graetest continuous run pocketing 625 balls without a miss on february 2,1960 before a large crowd at Logan's Billiards Academy, Brooklyn, New York.

05-06-2002, 02:37 AM
HoustonDan,
You said it all.I can,t agree more with you.Wille was in will remain the greatest.

Misel

CarolNYC
05-06-2002, 03:35 AM
Hi,
Please dont quote me, but I believe johnny Ervolino ran 633!
Carol

Alfie
05-06-2002, 04:28 AM
I predict the record will be near 700 by the year 2050.
/ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif

Kato
05-06-2002, 07:44 AM
Voodoo would probably be able to tell us what Ervolino's high run is. He's told me stories of how great he is.

Kato

05-06-2002, 10:32 AM
Efren's game is rotation, not 9-ball. The only reason why he switched to 9-ball is because most of the pro tournaments is 9-ball. The man needs to make a living out of his pool playing skills. It's a much more difficult game to play.

05-06-2002, 10:41 AM
I believe that Johnnies high run is 376.

CarolNYC
05-06-2002, 11:44 AM
Your right,I think I have my numbers wrong-thanks!
Carol

Ralph S.
05-06-2002, 04:12 PM
This is my opinion based on what I have read here, what I know, and what is officially in the record books. On the record books Mosconi is the man. Others have come close and may have actually beaten the run of 526 as claimed, but without official verification and or documentation, this still makes Mosconi the man. This record is equivalent to some of the greatest sports records ever, like Hank Aarron's 755 home runs for example. I seriously doubt the 526 by Mosconi will be broke and will all but gurantee a record like Aarron's will not be broken. Both are icons in their respective sports and will remain holders of their records due to the fact that todays athletes lack the heart and desire and are way too pampered. Yesteryears athletes were not like that. So PLEASE, let Mosconi rest in peace.
Ralph S.

05-06-2002, 06:52 PM
Chris NC, can you imagine how thick the record books for the respective sports would be if they had to reflect:
1. Artificial turf, grass, wet field, dry field, windy, etc
2. Oily lanes, dry lanes, blocked lanes, wood lanes, synthetic lanes, lighter pins, heavier pins
Do you feel all baseball fields should be the same distance down the lines and to deep center? How about that altitude in Colorado? We would have to disclaim it, explain it, micro manage it and lastly, asterisk it. Games and sports are played in many type of venues. Those who compete across an assortment of conditions and can adapt deserve credit for their accomplishments. I don't care how easy the conditions are, 526 is awesome. Yeah, yeah, not on your tight pocket table, right? If your pockets were twice as wide how many people would be able to run 526? It's funny when people use the logic "well if all ball parks were 600 feet down the lines, how many would Bonds hit out?". I guess he'd just be another bum? There's more to pool than tight pockets but some people use it as an excuse to discount or diminish or measure the accomplishments of others. How many reading this have run 200 or more shooting on the easiest table you've every played on? Just curious. At some point, there are levels of accomplishment that can't be discounted. The 526 is probably one of them.

Troy
05-06-2002, 06:57 PM
To my knowledge, Mr. Mosconi said he didn't care about tight or loose pockets. "If I shoot in the middle of the pocket, it doesn't matter."

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Anonymous:</font><hr> Chris NC, can you imagine how thick the record books for the respective sports would be if they had to reflect:
1. Artificial turf, grass, wet field, dry field, windy, etc
2. Oily lanes, dry lanes, blocked lanes, wood lanes, synthetic lanes, lighter pins, heavier pins
Do you feel all baseball fields should be the same distance down the lines and to deep center? How about that altitude in Colorado? We would have to disclaim it, explain it, micro manage it and lastly, asterisk it. Games and sports are played in many type of venues. Those who compete across an assortment of conditions and can adapt deserve credit for their accomplishments. I don't care how easy the conditions are, 526 is awesome. Yeah, yeah, not on your tight pocket table, right? If your pockets were twice as wide how many people would be able to run 526? It's funny when people use the logic "well if all ball parks were 600 feet down the lines, how many would Bonds hit out?". I guess he'd just be another bum? There's more to pool than tight pockets but some people use it as an excuse to discount or diminish or measure the accomplishments of others. How many reading this have run 200 or more shooting on the easiest table you've every played on? Just curious. At some point, there are levels of accomplishment that can't be discounted. The 526 is probably one of them. <hr></blockquote>

05-06-2002, 10:56 PM
well, see? that stuff below is exactly why i've got a problem with people posting under anon.

there's too damn many anons. and i can't tell 'em all apart. sure, i notice the one that's attached to rackmup ken (i have, in the past, suspected that ken sends him a foil fee) but it would be nice if y'all would make up some kinda silly-ass name and stick with it just so we could talk to you.

the stuff below is fairly good, well thought out argument but how can anyone respond???

dear anon, (no, not you, the other one, no, not him, behind you, yea, the one in the funny hat)...

i could care less who you are in "real life" just pick some kind of i.d. so we can talk to you. then you can go back to your real life secret caped avenger job and noone will know.

dan



<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Anonymous:</font><hr> Chris NC, can you imagine how thick the record books for the respective sports would be if they had to reflect:
1. Artificial turf, grass, wet field, dry field, windy, etc
2. Oily lanes, dry lanes, blocked lanes, wood lanes, synthetic lanes, lighter pins, heavier pins
Do you feel all baseball fields should be the same distance down the lines and to deep center? How about that altitude in Colorado? We would have to disclaim it, explain it, micro manage it and lastly, asterisk it. Games and sports are played in many type of venues. Those who compete across an assortment of conditions and can adapt deserve credit for their accomplishments. I don't care how easy the conditions are, 526 is awesome. Yeah, yeah, not on your tight pocket table, right? If your pockets were twice as wide how many people would be able to run 526? It's funny when people use the logic "well if all ball parks were 600 feet down the lines, how many would Bonds hit out?". I guess he'd just be another bum? There's more to pool than tight pockets but some people use it as an excuse to discount or diminish or measure the accomplishments of others. How many reading this have run 200 or more shooting on the easiest table you've every played on? Just curious. At some point, there are levels of accomplishment that can't be discounted. The 526 is probably one of them. <hr></blockquote>

05-06-2002, 11:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Ralph S.:</font><hr> This is my opinion based on what I have read here, what I know, and what is officially in the record books. On the record books Mosconi is the man. Others have come close and may have actually beaten the run of 526 as claimed, but without official verification and or documentation, this still makes Mosconi the man. This record is equivalent to some of the greatest sports records ever, like Hank Aarron's 755 home runs for example. I seriously doubt the 526 by Mosconi will be broke and will all but gurantee a record like Aarron's will not be broken. Both are icons in their respective sports and will remain holders of their records due to the fact that todays athletes lack the heart and desire and are way too pampered. Yesteryears athletes were not like that. So PLEASE, let Mosconi rest in peace.
Ralph S. <hr></blockquote>

very well spoken.

there is one point i might make. i suspect that, were there any real money in it, the 526 could get broken within a year or two at the most.

trick-out the table(start with monster pockets &amp; go from there), put one of the top world-beaters on it to do nothing else for a while and you would eventually see the numbers.

now, having said that, put willie on the same table and give him two days and he'd double it.

dan...526 is beatable, willie ain't.

05-07-2002, 01:27 AM
very well spoken.

there is one point i might make. i suspect that, were there any real money in it, the 526 could get broken within a year or two at the most.

trick-out the table(start with monster pockets &amp; go from there), put one of the top world-beaters on it to do nothing else for a while and you would eventually see the numbers.

now, having said that, put willie on the same table and give him two days and he'd double it.

dan...526 is beatable, willie ain't. <hr></blockquote>

Completely agree, put $500k on the line to the first person to do it and in a couple of years guys might start to come close or beat the record.

Another point to ponder is if Willie was playing today, how much would his game improve in this era of Simonis cloth on every table, Aramith balls, super fast cushions and Predator shafts.

Stauber

CarolNYC
05-07-2002, 03:36 AM
Ah, Voodoo,please send him my regards!Hey, wasnt KATO in the green hornet?:)
Carol

05-10-2002, 01:43 PM
Mike Euphemia has allegedly run 625 in practice with no witnesses.

Voodoo Daddy
05-10-2002, 02:57 PM
First off Carol I miss ya..howya doing? Hope all is well by you. As far as 526...done on a 4X8 and he {Willie} "pushed one ball in claiming bad table roll" is a farce as far as I'm concerned. Dont misread me, I will never run 526, but the real deal was Mike Eufemia's 625 {done on a 4 1/2 X 9}. The problem has always been that no one saw it from beginning to end. I think ###Leonard has knowledge of other High-Runs. BTW Ervolino's high run was this 361 but this past August at the age of 65 or so he ran 344 in NYC...pretty impressive.

Voodoo...wish's 14.1 would make a comeback

PoolFan
05-10-2002, 03:10 PM
What if's, what if's!! This is a moot point, because Straight Pool does not have the popularity of days of old. To be able to beat this record, you'd have to play alot of 14.1.

I do agree that Willie, if alive today and in his prime again, he could put all the pros to shame with his 14.1 skills especially with today's equipment. But again, moot point, the guy is not around any more.

This record is the greatest record in pool. Who cares if the table was a 10X5, 9X4.5 or 8X4? Who cares if the pockets were 5", 4.5" or 4"? To be able to concentrate for 526 balls is a feat in itself. To be able to get out of bad situations, over and over again. I could go on and on. This record is beyond the equipment and the possible players who could beat it, if they tried. This record is the holy grail of pool. Appreciate it for what it is and the respect the man who brought it to us.

The one thing that I know is, records exist to be broken. If this one does get broken, I'd respect the player who did it and appreciate his/her efforts. But it would never diminish my admiration for the great Willie Mosconi!!

05-11-2002, 12:07 AM
Any discussion of running balls in str8 pool must include the name MIKE SIGEL. IMO Mike is the greatest str8 pool player that ever lived. Fred

BillPorter
05-11-2002, 07:32 AM
Dan, for what it's worth (probably not much), let me add my agreement to your assessment of Willie. I had the pleasure of watching him play once about 40 years ago and he made a lasting impression. The one thing I'd add to your comments is that Willie would have to rank high on the list, probably number one, of the players you would choose to shoot a life-or-death shot for you. That's when he was in his prime, of course.

#### leonard
05-13-2002, 12:20 PM
Great subject I could probably reply to everyone post. I heard about Mike Eufemia run of 625 I don't think it wasn't witnessed it is hard to find an empty poolroom in NYC especially if a quality poolplayer is shooting. Tom Parker of Cleveland told me of his running 650 and he broke around 400 and went to dinner then cameback and ran another 250 without a miss. Babe Cranfield told me of running 420 on a 5x10 at a black tie event at a Syracuse Private Club. He also lists 760 as his high run. Willie did run 169 and out on me and quit shooting because he had to be in Philley early the next day.
I think the tight pockets are just a joke unless every table is manufactured to the same specs. If you know the moves is straight pool they pose no problem. It is the nineball shooters that they would affect. They tend to shoot longer shots. ####

05-13-2002, 10:22 PM
526 balls is really awesome, but dont forget Alfred De Oro. He ran 96 balls playing rotation during early 1900's. Now, that is something else /ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif /ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif /ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif... The first real pocket billiard game played on tournament championship.

07-30-2002, 06:06 PM
I love playing straight pool....but I'm not good enough to even rack for the likes of a Willie Mosconi! I don't get to play it anywhere near as often as I'd like (and my high run is only 17 balls on a 9ft table)...but I have made sure that my 19 yr old son and his buddies have all been introduced to straight pool. They love it, too.

I really wish the game would come back. Although I am not a 9-ball player, I don't dislike the game. It's a great money game and a great game for some exciting play. But, I just think that it is waaaaaaaaay too easy for the top professional players. The way they can run rack after rack to me is a lot like having professional basketball players shooting nothing but free-throws. I'm sure that many of these pro pool players would be very good straight pool players, as well (but not all of them). I'd love to see these guys playing in a straight pool tournament. I'd bet you'd see some excellent play, epecially after a few years once they had that time to learn the nuances of the game. Sadly, the likes of ESPN will never, ever show a straight pool match.

Now..is it just me or does anyone else find it odd that the Mosconi Cup in 9-ball is named after one of the greatest straight pool players of all time and one who didn't even particularly care for 9-ball? To me it would be like naming a world checker championship the "Bobby Fischer Cup"!

nmshooter
07-30-2002, 06:35 PM
That darn evil asterisk.

Patrick
07-31-2002, 07:53 AM
Straight pool is a stupid game to make a record in, you don't need much skill, you need stamina. And you can't make a record in a tournament or a match. A better game is Rotation Straight Pool, where a 50 ball run is more difficult than any run in Straight pool. A match to 50 takes about 30-45 mins for good players.

In the future you will have more videocameras so a new record is easier to make official, there will be videocameras everywhere to prove the records.
In tournaments every table is filmed. The watcher on tv can choose which table he wants to look at. Then on the bottom of the screen there will be text with the runs of each table so you don't miss a high run. Even better is that you can go back and watch all the matches on each table, all matches are sent digitally and stored on your digital video or computer.

Patrick

DEADSTOKE32
07-31-2002, 09:25 AM
I WAS TOLD ONE TIME THE EFREN RAN SOMETHING LIKE 572 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. HOW TRUE IS IT I DON'T KNOW .
BUT IF I CAN RUN 20 BALLS EVERYTIME I GET TO THE TABLE .THAT CAN BE PRETTY STRONG .

07-31-2002, 01:47 PM
There have been other runs higher than Mosconis 526, but Willies was done during an exhibition. Babe Cranfield told me of his running 420 on a 5x10 at a Black Tie affair at a private club in Syracuse. He said there was hundreds of witnesses to that run. That would prrobably be the highest run on a 5x10.I never ever heard of anyone that had witnessed Mosconis but Russ Maddox who booked Willie. Mosconi ran 169 and out on me, like falling off a log, so I don't doubt Willie could run 526.####

rackmup
07-31-2002, 01:51 PM
Umm...okay. Sure. It all makes sense now.

Regards,

Ken (if only Patrick had been wearing a helmet)

07-31-2002, 05:36 PM
Deadstroke....I'd be happy to run 20 balls ANY night! I am amazed at how easy it is to get just a tiny bit out of position and bring a potential run to a grinding halt in straight pool. I can make shots decently enough...but that darned cue ball control of mine is in serious need of work! Another thing I do all too often is to leave an easy break shot for the next rack....shoot the shot, break the rack apart nicely...and MISS the easy shot. That sure takes the wind out of my sails in a hurry.

My favorite shots in the game, though, are when I see makeable shots in a cluster of balls. I hadn't done much straight pool shooting lately so I went to my basement today and played by myself. I did make two very nice shots out of clusters...one was shooting into 5 balls left in the rack and making the 3 ball up table in one of the corner pockets and breaking up the cluster in the process. The other one was similar except I had to bank the cue ball up table and back into the rack to get the correct hit...and I made my object ball into the corner pocket. I was impressed with myself....but sadly those were my only two good shots in the hour or so that I played. I only had a high run of 9 balls today but for me, 9 balls isn't bad.

Now...if I could just run 100 balls once in my life..but it doesn't seem too likely for me!

07-31-2002, 06:00 PM
Patrick I played a game of 50 points on TV in 1964 it took 12 minutes to run out the game, the next game took less time. The director wanted to know what are we going to do for the remaining 10 minutes of air time. It is obvious all your pool is in cyberspace.####

Patrick
08-01-2002, 11:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Anonymous:</font><hr> Patrick I played a game of 50 points on TV in 1964 it took 12 minutes to run out the game, the next game took less time. The director wanted to know what are we going to do for the remaining 10 minutes of air time. It is obvious all your pool is in cyberspace.#### <hr></blockquote>Running 50 in straight pool goes very fast. But running 50 in Rotation Straight Pool goes slower, maybe 20 minutes. There will be many difficult shots that you need to calculate.
The most fair game is the one that has as little luck in the shortest time as possible. In the future there will be even better games than Rotation Straight Pool, and a match is only one rack, and that one rack is impossible to run, there will be two or three times as many balls on the table.

Snooker matches are so long to make luck even between both players, who wants to watch for hours. Better play a more difficult game which has the least luck as possible, then if the matches are too short, just add more racks to the game. Maybe you can make a time limit, at least 45 minutes. If the rack is not over by then, they start another rack, and the winner of the last rack has an advantage. If the last racks score was 30-15, then the winner needs to get 16 points to win the next match. (Triple rotation, 45 balls on the table)
Then maybe someone dishonest will stall the game to make time go faster, but this can be changed so the time taken and balls made are counted together to make a final score.

Patrick