Howz about some shooting for a change?

[wincardona]

Billy, how would you shoot it if only the 9 and 6 were on the table and you needed both?

Skin

The distance the 9 ball is from the foot rail is crucial when deciding which route to choose. Obviously the more of the 9 ball you can afford to hit will usually result in more consistent speed which is needed with the cue ball. Cue ball speed is the crucial part of going from the 9 ball to the 6 ball. Also by having the benefit of hitting more ball you should be less concerned with running into the 6 ball which should allow you to be more efficient with that choice.

But if you need to spin and slow your speed to ensure lengthening out the cue ball off the 9 ball I would then go from the 9 ball to the 2 ball.

Billy I.

 

[Frank Almanza]

The distance the 9 ball is from the foot rail is crucial when deciding which route to choose. Obviously the more of the 9 ball you can afford to hit will usually result in more consistent speed which is needed with the cue ball. Cue ball speed is the crucial part of going from the 9 ball to the 6 ball. Also by having the benefit of hitting more ball you should be less concerned with running into the 6 ball which should allow you to be more efficient with that choice.

But if you need to spin and slow your speed to ensure lengthening out the cue ball off the 9 ball I would then go from the 9 ball to the 2 ball.

Billy I.

The closeness of the nine to the rail is what I said in my post as to why I would not go to the six from the nine. It is a shot that could easily get away from you and the worse would be to mis hit it and bump the six to a worse position.

 

[SJDinPHX]

The closeness of the nine to the rail is what I said in my post as to why I would not go to the six from the nine. It is a shot that could easily get away from you and the worse would be to mis hit it and bump the six to a worse position.

I certainly would not argue that point Frank...As usual, you need to be live, and down on the shot. You cannot fully assess the difficulty level by looking at a WEI layout...Like anyone else...I'm all for getting all the balls I can, the easy way.

It happens to be a shot I am (was) very comfortable with, and would shoot it in a heartbeat, ONLY if I thought it was do-able. I would not shoot straight up in the air, and knock the six out of play...I would either execute the shot, and get good shape on the 6, or I'd be shooting the one ball next...It does not look (to me) like an extreme penalty to pay, for basically cinching all 4 balls, with one decent shot...

 

[Skin]

I don't know If I understand your question good or right but I never bank playing straightpool. But I only play It for practice a little.I think It might be the best game for practice that there Is for all pool games except banks of course.What do you mean,part ways? And thanks,I like you too! John B.

John, I think Bill Stroud caught onto what I was getting at about you perhaps parting ways sometimes with 14.1 guys when it comes to how to run balls. I cannot imagine a guy with your banking skills sticking to running balls like a 14.1 guy when a better opportunity came up for you to bank a ball and keep going. You would give them heart attacks in serious games.

The very cool thing about 1p to me is that any and every skill a guy has comes into play sooner or later to win a game. It truly is a game that employs all the pool skills. No one set of them can carry the day for long. This, in my opinion, is why there are so many diverse opinions on the same layout and why everybody can learn something from somebody else. What a great game!

Skin

 

[Skin]

The distance the 9 ball is from the foot rail is crucial when deciding which route to choose. Obviously the more of the 9 ball you can afford to hit will usually result in more consistent speed which is needed with the cue ball. Cue ball speed is the crucial part of going from the 9 ball to the 6 ball. Also by having the benefit of hitting more ball you should be less concerned with running into the 6 ball which should allow you to be more efficient with that choice.

But if you need to spin and slow your speed to ensure lengthening out the cue ball off the 9 ball I would then go from the 9 ball to the 2 ball.

Billy I.

Alright, Billy, I admit it. I was trying to trap you with my question but you're too long in the tooth for that.

I wanted to get you to say how you would play position for the 6 off the 9 if only those two balls were on the table and you needed both. Thought maybe you would shoot it my way...and then I would have had you. Would have asked why if you were so confident in the shot with two balls on the table you wouldn't shoot it with four on the table to cinch the runout.

Skin

 

[Dudley]

It has been discussed pretty thoroughly but diagrammed are two places I would not want to be if playing the 6 first.... If you get inside the right area -->playing the 6 2nd solves the difficult part of the out but getting stuck on the rail in an akward spot or too close to the 6 could be a disaster.

This is why I leaned towards the 9,2,1,6 option. IMO the lines are more natural and need less precision then the 6 ball as the 2nd shot.


Dudley

[CUETABLE]http://pool.bz/P/?@4AQtf4BbQR3FPDw4IKSi3PIdn3kIdn4kHxi4kHhl3kaon@4AQtf4BbQR3FPDw4IKSi3PIdo3kIdo4kHxi4kHAn3kTDw@[/CUETABLE]

 

[wincardona]

last but not least

last but not least

For those who look at this lay out and have decided that the best way to get out is shooting the 9,6,1 or 2, could possibly be over looking a more important question. And that question is which way produces more balls on an average?
I feel the 9,2,1,6, or the 9,1,2,6 will produce a higher ball running average than the 9,6, method. This applies to all tables and conditions with the 9 ball 1/4 inch from the foot rail that carries a natural angle to drop for either the 2, or 1 balls.

And by the way there is no free chance to fall on the 6 twice going from the 9 ball to the 6 ball. On the contrary there is a free chance to fall on the 6 ball going from the 9 ball to the 1 or 2 balls.

The main point with this debate of choice should be which method produces the most ball production on average.

Billy I.

 

[fred bentivegna]

Economy of motion

Economy of motion

For those who look at this lay out and have decided that the best way to get out is shooting the 9,6,1 or 2, could possibly be over looking a more important question. And that question is which way produces more balls on an average?
I feel the 9,2,1,6, or the 9,1,2,6 will produce a higher ball running average than the 9,6, method. This applies to all tables and conditions with the 9 ball 1/4 inch from the foot rail that carries a natural angle to drop for either the 2, or 1 balls.

And by the way there is no free chance to fall on the 6 twice going from the 9 ball to the 6 ball. On the contrary there is a free chance to fall on the 6 ball going from the 9 ball to the 1 or 2 balls.

The main point with this debate of choice should be which method produces the most ball production on average.

Billy I.

Another way to look at things is to measure economy of motion. That is, how much distance that the cue ball will have to travel to absorb the average four ball run. If you go to the six ball first and you land a little high on it, or a little low, the cue ball is going to have to travel up to 3 rails if you land a little low on it, and at least 1 rail if you land a little high on it. Add up all the average distances the cue ball had to travel to make all four balls and the 6-ball-second-choice-path is going to be using up the most distance.

Think of Mosconi and how little distance he had to travel to run 100 balls. Mosconi's cue ball probably only traveled maybe 300 feet to run 100 balls. Everybody else probably needed double, triple, or worse, that distance to run the same 100.

Beard

That's a bank pool game I would like to play. The winner is the player who uses up the least amount of object ball distance needed to make 8 banks.
I am going to get, and make, way more short banks rather than straight backs.
The next game would be the least amount of cue ball distance needed to make 8 banks. Same principle applies. Since I can out move Jehovah playing banks, I am going to start out much closer to the shots that I make.

Football success is usually determined by yardage. Pool success can be determined by the least yardage used or needed.


Beard

 

[Dudley]

Another way to look at things is to measure economy of motion. That is, how much distance that the cue ball will have to travel to absorb the average four ball run. If you go to the six ball first and you land a little high on it, or a little low, the cue ball is going to have to travel up to 3 rails if you land a little low on it, and at least 1 rail if you land a little high on it. Add up all the average distances the cue ball had to travel to make all four balls and the 6-ball-second-choice-path is going to be using up the most distance.

Think of Mosconi and how little distance he had to travel to run 100 balls. Mosconi's cue ball probably only traveled maybe 300 feet to run 100 balls. Everybody else probably needed double, triple, or worse, that distance to run the same 100.

Beard



That's a bank pool game I would like to play. The winner is the player who uses up the least amount of object ball distance needed to make 8 banks.
I am going to get, and make, way more short banks rather than straight backs.
The next game would be the least amount of cue ball distance needed to make 8 banks. Same principle applies. Since I can out move Jehovah playing banks, I am going to start out much closer to the shots that I make.

Football success is usually determined by yardage. Pool success can be determined by the least yardage used or needed.


Beard

Good Concept Fred,

I believe this also applies to nine ball. Good stuff.

Dud

 

[bstroud]

I agree with Freddy wholeheartedly about playing efficiently.

Don Watson comes to mind. He moved the cue ball less playing 9 ball than anyone I ever saw. Guess what? He was a terrific 9 ball player.

Bill Stroud

 

[fred bentivegna]

Beat me to the punch

Beat me to the punch

I agree with Freddy wholeheartedly about playing efficiently.

Don Watson comes to mind. He moved the cue ball less playing 9 ball than anyone I ever saw. Guess what? He was a terrific 9 ball player.

Bill Stroud

Portland Don Watson was the exact same example I was going to refer to next. Once he made the first ball in 9 ball, everything that followed was all one and two foot shots, with the 9 itself always a hanger for him to make.

Beard

My old road partner, Port Chester Mickey Carpinello, played a very similar style of 9 ball. Hanger after hanger.

 

[wincardona]

another way at looking at it.

another way at looking at it.

Another way to look at things is to measure economy of motion. That is, how much distance that the cue ball will have to travel to absorb the average four ball run. If you go to the six ball first and you land a little high on it, or a little low, the cue ball is going to have to travel up to 3 rails if you land a little low on it, and at least 1 rail if you land a little high on it. Add up all the average distances the cue ball had to travel to make all four balls and the 6-ball-second-choice-path is going to be using up the most distance.

Think of Mosconi and how little distance he had to travel to run 100 balls. Mosconi's cue ball probably only traveled maybe 300 feet to run 100 balls. Everybody else probably needed double, triple, or worse, that distance to run the same 100.

Beard

That's a bank pool game I would like to play. The winner is the player who uses up the least amount of object ball distance needed to make 8 banks.
I am going to get, and make, way more short banks rather than straight backs.
The next game would be the least amount of cue ball distance needed to make 8 banks. Same principle applies. Since I can out move Jehovah playing banks, I am going to start out much closer to the shots that I make.

Football success is usually determined by yardage. Pool success can be determined by the least yardage used or needed.


Beard

Playing the 9 ball to either the 1 ball or 2 ball is the most comfortable way of running out simply because you know you will be shooting at the 6 ball to win the game. This option allows you to feel comfortable at the table which by the way is always a confidence builder.

Billy I.

 

[fred bentivegna]

Billy, I am getting tired...

Billy, I am getting tired...

Playing the 9 ball to either the 1 ball or 2 ball is the most comfortable way of running out simply because you know you will be shooting at the 6 ball to win the game. This option allows you to feel comfortable at the table which by the way is always a confidence builder.

Billy I.

...of having to agree with you. But the psychological power behind your presumption needs to be reaffirmed. It is a very important point. What you said is probably one of the main principles in running balls in straight pool. I always kinda felt that to be true, instinctively, but I never actually thought it through or seen it put into exact words.
That explains why good straight pool players shoot hanger after hanger after hanger, and somehow they never seem to need to shoot touchy, delicate shots.
As Billy so aptly put it, there is nothing better for your confidence than to get to dispatching easy shot after easy shot. In a weaker players impatience to get perfect, and that certainly has included me, they, and me, keep thinking we need to do more than we really need to do.

Sadly, I have had this principle beaten into my head by my teachers, but it never properly registered. Thats why I was never much of a straight pool player.

I was practicing straight pool one time with the great Baby Face Whitlow, and he had just made a break shot, and all the balls were wide open and spread all over the table. I naively asked him what pattern he was going to choose, and what was his break shot, key ball, and ball to get to the key ball -- all this with 14 balls still on the table. He looked at me like I was nuts and said, "All I'm lookin' to do now is just shoot some of these balls off the table."
A light went on in my brain and I realized that he meant that if he just started looking for hangers and banging them in, and not over analyzing, eventually the final break shot pattern would present itself. The light soon went out however, and I went back to looking for 6 and 8 ball straight pool patterns.

Beard

Billy, maybe you really are the Doctor.

 

[Cary]

"Mosconi's not that good. Hell, he never shoots no hard shots."

 

[SJDinPHX]

Despite all the expert input...See post #83...I am still going to try to get on the 6... If it is not doable, I will know that when I get over the ball. (the WEI table can be decieving...I will not shoot myself in the foot, and knock the six out of play...For all the guys who fear this shot, I wish it were 1965 again...you would be a severe under dog..

PS..That goes for those who would shoot the 9, instead of the 6, in the other thread...