[xradarx]

Originally Posted by Biloxi Boy

Yes, it is clear to a trained mind. Read the document titled "Affidavit" -- it tells you that only one person appeared and was sworn. Give me a break.

AS compared to the JS626 witness statement for all jonny-come-lately's. Not one witness stated that they, in fact attended the entire 4 hours and 7 minutes, of the run. No notary signed certification available to be included. Mosconi's is notary signed and stamped with a seal and on record in the Smithsonian Institute.

[jimmyg]

Originally Posted by Biloxi Boy

Yes, it is clear to a trained mind. Read the document titled "Affidavit" -- it tells you that only one person appeared and was sworn. Give me a break.

Correct, two separate documents....the notarized statement was executed on the 24th of March while the "run" and "witness statement" occurred on the 19th of March...evidently, there wasn't a notary present during the run to verify all of the signatures of the witnesses. That being said, a witness statement containing that many witnesses would/should stand up to logic as well as law.

By the way, I'm sure that you realize that a "notarized" statement only means that the identity of the signatory was verified by the notary...nothing more.

[Patrick Johnson]

Originally Posted by jimmyg

I'm sure that you realize that a "notarized" statement only means that the identity of the signatory was verified by the notary...nothing more.

Yes - I could get a statement notarized today that "certifies" I saw Travis Trotter run 1,000 in rotation. Isn't evidence of anything except I am who I say I am.

I bet the naysayers today would have been naysayers regarding Willie's run too...

pj
chgo

[ShootingArts]

In years past and still accepted on some documents, two witnesses carry the same weight as a notary. Here we have over thirty witnesses.

While it has been believed that there have been higher runs, Willie's went down as the highest official run due to the numerous witnesses and exhibition setting. Because this is accepted as the official high run, for another run to beat it, the run would have to be set under similar conditions.

I won over 160 games of eight ball in a row one night. I had a motley bunch of witnesses that overlap to have seen the whole thing, maybe even a few that saw it all. Never heard of the equal, never heard of anyone claiming any number of wins in a row as a record. I won when I challenged that old nine foot table and retired undefeated when the last of my challengers quit so there were also no losses that night. I could claim a record, not even I would care since it has no official standing. Out of twenty to thirty challengers, only four to six could have made a ball in an ocean so the accomplishment isn't what it seems anyway. The most amazing thing was to have never made an early eight or scratched on the eight in those bucket pockets, standard on those tables.

If they were to declare john's record to be the video record I would be much more willing to accept it. To call it the exhibition record when it wasn't set in an exhibition is ridiculous. One thing more, the number of Willie's witnesses didn't change from day one. john's went from four to five to six to eight in the days following the run. Had eight people witnessed it from start to finish in a closed business that would have been the claim to begin with, or so I believe.

When we start questioning credibility of his witnesses, he is left with one that might have been focused on every shot, his racker. Even he might have wandered off during a rack for coffee or a whiz. (Incidentally, I am skeptical that all thirty-six or thirty-eight of Willie's witnesses saw every shot. However with that many witnesses it is easy to believe that some did and that there was overlap so that several dozen witnesses saw any shot.)

My point is few would accept the conditions john's attempt was made in as acceptable to set a record in any sport or event. If it is valid everyone with a video camera or cell phone can set it up and start going for world records at pretty much anything. I wonder if anyone caught my great pass of thirteen cars before the green flag on video? Got to be at least a track record! Got away with it too in front of several thousand witnesses. It was even legal under current standards.

Hu

[Black-Balled]

Originally Posted by xradarx

AS compared to the JS626 witness statement for all jonny-come-lately's. Not one witness stated that they, in fact attended the entire 4 hours and 7 minutes, of the run. No notary signed certification available to be included. Mosconi's is notary signed and stamped with a seal and on record in the Smithsonian Institute.

And of course you'll apply the same standards of the witnesses to 526 and 626, right?

The smithsonian and the witnesses are all 100 ball runners and all the witnesses saw every shot?
L
O
L

[Danny Harriman]

Originally Posted by Patrick Johnson

What's pretty clear is that a few want that to be the case - either because of professional envy, bad blood, simple contrariness or all of the above. It's not a good look.

pj
chgo

Ur not that pretty p.j. and as I stated before - these three examples ur tryin to give - have zero significance in relation to why there is no unedited video. Again if it were someone I knew well that claimed to have surpassed Mosconi's legendary record - I would still insist on unedited video proof - for my own eyes to view. Yer fellows (deep state) who tried to make me carry an anvil got caught. ;-/ It IS super clear to me - that this situation does look ugly for bca,j.s. and other deep stater's involved in the cover up of unedited video proof. It was nice timing from the media cowards however, they tried to sneak their phony chopped video into record books - as a distraction during this govt. shut down. I am starting to see u may be apart of the drive by media p.j. - that anvil yer carrying will eventually get heavy.

[xradarx]

Originally Posted by Black-Balled

And of course you'll apply the same standards of the witnesses to 526 and 626, right?

The smithsonian and the witnesses are all 100 ball runners and all the witnesses saw every shot?
L
O
L

Tsk,Tsk,Tsk, lotta spewing bs, means, brings nothing for consideration. Failure to communicate, a Cool Hand Luke, ur not. bye, uno

[Patrick Johnson]

Originally Posted by Danny Harriman

...if it were someone I knew well that claimed to have surpassed Mosconi's legendary record - I would still insist on unedited video proof.

But the same standard doesn't apply to your acceptance of Moscon's record - go figure. I guess that's because you never feuded with him, huh?

pj
chgo

[Biloxi Boy]

Jimmy G -- U R Wrong. Notaries can place one under oath, also -- check with your Secretary of State's office.

[Danny Harriman]

Originally Posted by Patrick Johnson

But the same standard doesn't apply to your acceptance of Moscon's record - go figure. I guess that's because you never feuded with him, huh?

pj
chgo

Ur getting uh little too good - at always being incorrect here lately p.j. The fact that there was no digital video accountability in Mosconi's era - would seem relevant - or even make all the difference in the world. We have already been over this in past threads, so ur starting to sound like a 'broken record'. There is more accountability in today's digital age - unless u have a time machine. u really should not try and make an excuse or create distracted narratives for john and bca not showing verifiable evidence (in the form of unedited video).

If he said he ran 626 but never caught the run on camera then that would be one thing, here we have the bca and j.s. claiming to have an unedited video - but hiding THAT video after almost two years - won't due. Ur politics are showing true colors now eh? Cheaters rarely win in the long run p.j. - I don't care how many phony bureaucratic connections y'all have or are seekin to have from this news cluster. I did my math - and checked my work - still no unedited video evidence from bca and j.s. - I knew after the first few months of them hiding the video - their claim that Mosconi's 526 had been surpassed - was simple drive by media news i.e. bad actors doing 'business as usual'.

[Biloxi Boy]

Hu -- still in mississippi, the signature of two witnesses will substitue for an "Acknowledgement" on a deed but I want to say one of the witnesses has to appear before a notary and give a witness's acknowledgement (you need an acknowledgement to record).

Also, in the Mosconi docs, since the multiple signatures were made before the Affidavit, and its sig. and contents, existed, the multiple signatures could not be construed as supporting affd. or contents.

[jimmyg]

Originally Posted by Biloxi Boy

Jimmy G -- U R Wrong. Notaries can place one under oath, also -- check with your Secretary of State's office.

Never said that they cannot, but I fail to see the "oath" statement contained in this document, in some states they can even perform marriages.

[justadub]

The thread that keeps on giving....



It is alternatively amusing and depressing. Nothing new here...

[briankenobi]

Originally Posted by justadub

The thread that keeps on giving....



It is alternatively amusing and depressing. Nothing new here...

The same reason I keep track of it.

[Black-Balled]

Originally Posted by xradarx

Tsk,Tsk,Tsk, lotta spewing bs, means, brings nothing for consideration. Failure to communicate, a Cool Hand Luke, ur not. bye, uno

What is BS? If the BCA is held to a certain standaard then why aren't the others?

Let me know when you get back from your probation officer visit, mmmkay?