1on1pooltournys
Verified Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2009
- Messages
- 78
I watched bits and pieces of Billy's match against Scoot. I was surprised to see Billy in the box as I had heard he hadn't been playing much as of late. The parts of the match I saw I liked Billy, but the final score was Scooter winning 5 to 3 I believe.
In their match it was obvious this was a classic example of how not to play one pocket, but somehow still winning. Scooter is basically a pure straight shooter and will shoot at 1 ball taking a risk to give up several. Once Billy left him straight in almost froze on the end rail, with an OB along the side rail straight into his pocket. Scooter didn't think but 10 seconds, jacked up, fired the ball straight in and stopped snow dead in its tracks. Should he have missed Billy is on the right side of the stack with options to shoot and or move multiple balls into his pocket.
Billy fought hard in his match and had a chance to tie the set at 4-4 but he got a little funny while running some balls. This is where I was a bit shocked he took somewhat of a "flyer" by banking a "cut bank" to his hole and sending snow around three rails back on Scooter's side near his hole. If he makes it he probably wins the game, but at this point he had gotten himself back into a position to win, and I was surprised he went for the bank because it left scooter a bank at his hole.
So, the main point of this...are there times when two particular styles clash in a matchup, and perhaps Scooter's reckless play rubbed off a bit on Billy? I ask because while I watched this match up it reminded me of something that happened to me recently. I lost money (substantial amount) to somebody that I think I can beat. His style is similar to Scooters in that he shoots the wrong shots, but executes them so good he gets away with it.
I guess when these wild shooters are hot it is best to leave them alone. I enjoyed watching Billy he knows the game well.
After this loss tho, he walked around with his cue the rest of the week asking for the mortal nuts, and almost got a partner of mine to give him the dead nuts but I intervened.
Practice up Billy...you have a good game there with ol Scoot I think.
In their match it was obvious this was a classic example of how not to play one pocket, but somehow still winning. Scooter is basically a pure straight shooter and will shoot at 1 ball taking a risk to give up several. Once Billy left him straight in almost froze on the end rail, with an OB along the side rail straight into his pocket. Scooter didn't think but 10 seconds, jacked up, fired the ball straight in and stopped snow dead in its tracks. Should he have missed Billy is on the right side of the stack with options to shoot and or move multiple balls into his pocket.
Billy fought hard in his match and had a chance to tie the set at 4-4 but he got a little funny while running some balls. This is where I was a bit shocked he took somewhat of a "flyer" by banking a "cut bank" to his hole and sending snow around three rails back on Scooter's side near his hole. If he makes it he probably wins the game, but at this point he had gotten himself back into a position to win, and I was surprised he went for the bank because it left scooter a bank at his hole.
So, the main point of this...are there times when two particular styles clash in a matchup, and perhaps Scooter's reckless play rubbed off a bit on Billy? I ask because while I watched this match up it reminded me of something that happened to me recently. I lost money (substantial amount) to somebody that I think I can beat. His style is similar to Scooters in that he shoots the wrong shots, but executes them so good he gets away with it.
I guess when these wild shooters are hot it is best to leave them alone. I enjoyed watching Billy he knows the game well.
After this loss tho, he walked around with his cue the rest of the week asking for the mortal nuts, and almost got a partner of mine to give him the dead nuts but I intervened.
Practice up Billy...you have a good game there with ol Scoot I think.