Interesting choice of One Pocket matches question

[One Pocket Ghost]

Here's a hypothetical match choice question that I've idly thought about - I'm curious which choice you guys would pick, and why...

The situation is, hypothetically, that you've got a stakehorse that's giving you $1,000 to play just one race to 7 games with a choice of one of the following three willing opponents:

Opponent #1. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY even with you, and you would be playing him even if you choose to play him.

Opponent #2. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY 10-7 better than you, and you would get 10-7 if you choose to play him.

Opponent #3. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY 10-7 under you, and you would give up 10-7 if you choose to play him.


You'll be playing on a table with 4-3/8" pockets.


Which opponent would you choose to play, and if you want to explain...why ?


My personal first choice would be to give up the 10-7.…my 1st reason for choosing to play the lesser player is that he will be making the the most mistakes of the three players, which will give me a lot of offensive opportunities - possibly game-winning ones...and secondly, I think playing the player with lesser skills will put me in a strong mindset for the session...

My second choice would be to receive 10-7...I like the idea of going to that lower number, since I believe my moving will gain me the first shot the majority of the time...

Playing the even opponent would be my last choice.

- Ghost

Arturo is one of my filipino bro's at Chris's Billiards...his main/strongest game is 9ball (no surprise since he's filipino :heh), but he plays good One Pocket also...besides us gambling against each other, I sometimes play partners One Pocket and Arturo is one of the players who I will take as a partner - for two reasons: #1. Because he plays hard/to win & #2. Because even though he's a 9ball player, he plays One Pocket carefully and smart - he has no interest in trying to fire in hero shots...anyway, all that said...

Arturo played a careful, productive, high% shot here, and he hit it pretty much perfect...he pocketed the 12ball and made sure to leave me high enough on my long rail to both double me up on the 9ball, and also high enough to where the angle for me to carom the 11ball is not so good (I can't control whitey as needed, from there)...

...here's how he left it ----->

 

[Cory in dc]

Here's a hypothetical match choice question that I've idly thought about - I'm curious which choice you guys would pick, and why...

The situation is, hypothetically, that you've got a stakehorse that's giving you $1,000 to play just one race to 7 games with a choice of one of the following three willing opponents:

Opponent #1. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY even with you, and you would be playing him even if you choose to play him.

Opponent #2. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY 10-7 better than you, and you would get 10-7 if you choose to play him.

Opponent #3. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY 10-7 under you, and you would give up 10-7 if you choose to play him.


You'll be playing on a table with 4-3/8" pockets.


Which opponent would you choose to play, and if you want to explain...why ?


My personal first choice would be to give up the 10-7.…my 1st reason for choosing to play the lesser player is that he will be making the the most mistakes of the three players, which will give me a lot of offensive opportunities - possibly game-winning ones...and secondly, I think playing the player with lesser skills will put me in a strong mindset for the session...

My second choice would be to receive 10-7...I like the idea of going to that lower number, since I believe my moving will gain me the first shot the majority of the time...

Playing the even opponent would be my last choice.

- Ghost

If you would pick the lesser player for that reason, maybe you didn't quite define "EXACTLY" exactly right? Part of the player being 10-7 below you is that he will "be making mistakes" and giving you "a lot of offensive opportunities." Maybe when you *think* someone is 10-7 below you, they're actually 10-6 below you?

In any case, if you've literally and correctly defined three coin tosses in terms of the money, then I would take getting 10-7. That's for the simple reason that I would be spending my time against a better player, which pays off more in the long run in other ways.

Cory

 

[Mkbtank]

Interesting choice of One Pocket matches question

My reasoning, which you stated. It's about how many opportunities I will get. The first choice giving 10-7. I will get the most chances. Now, for me, I would play the even match second. Lastly, getting 10-7. Because I feel that in the even match, I will have more opportunities to perform than getting 10-7. The rest is up to me. Also, my confidence is higher in an even match.

 

[beatle]

if you understand high school math you would instantly know all three games have the exact same probability of winning for you which is 50%

so it matters not which you pick money wise. if you think it does you need to give up gambling as you are a sucker.

however there can be personal reasons why you may choice one of the opponents.

 

[Mkbtank]

Interesting choice of One Pocket matches question

if you understand high school math you would instantly know all three games have the exact same probability of winning for you which is 50%



so it matters not which you pick money wise. if you think it does you need to give up gambling as you are a sucker.



however there can be personal reasons why you may choice one of the opponents.

Agreed. Logically they are all even. It's all mental.

 

[1pwannabe]

All things considering, I agree with your choices and feel the same way about them. Gambling is a mental game, especially in 1P, and playing a weaker player for that much $ will give me better odds gambling.

Here's a hypothetical match choice question that I've idly thought about - I'm curious which choice you guys would pick, and why...

The situation is, hypothetically, that you've got a stakehorse that's giving you $1,000 to play just one race to 7 games with a choice of one of the following three willing opponents:

Opponent #1. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY even with you, and you would be playing him even if you choose to play him.

Opponent #2. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY 10-7 better than you, and you would get 10-7 if you choose to play him.

Opponent #3. You know for a fact, plays EXACTLY 10-7 under you, and you would give up 10-7 if you choose to play him.


You'll be playing on a table with 4-3/8" pockets.


Which opponent would you choose to play, and if you want to explain...why ?


My personal first choice would be to give up the 10-7.…my 1st reason for choosing to play the lesser player is that he will be making the the most mistakes of the three players, which will give me a lot of offensive opportunities - possibly game-winning ones...and secondly, I think playing the player with lesser skills will put me in a strong mindset for the session...

My second choice would be to receive 10-7...I like the idea of going to that lower number, since I believe my moving will gain me the first shot the majority of the time...

Playing the even opponent would be my last choice.

- Ghost

 

[1pwannabe]

if you understand high school math you would instantly know all three games have the exact same probability of winning for you which is 50%

so it matters not which you pick money wise. if you think it does you need to give up gambling as you are a sucker.

however there can be personal reasons why you may choice one of the opponents.

It isn't linear math, handicaps don't perfectly correct deficiencies in matches. There are other factors as well.

 

[jalapus logan]

if you understand high school math you would instantly know all three games have the exact same probability of winning for you which is 50%

so it matters not which you pick money wise. if you think it does you need to give up gambling as you are a sucker.

however there can be personal reasons why you may choice one of the opponents.

Gotta agree with beatle on this one. If each of these hypothetical propositions are indeed 50/50, i.e. a perfect handicap, then any perceived psycological reasons would be reflected in the perfect handicap, then it truly does not matter for the money.

Having said that, I would also agree with Cory in that I would choose to play the better player, with me getting 10-7. That way I could learn some new shots and moves and then hopefully not need 10-7 the next time...

 

[NH Steve]

There is the "on paper" math exact difference, but then there also are the many intangibles, and they are intangible for a reason -- they are more fleeting.

I am again reminded of Ronnie Allen, who often talked about how his biggest scores came when he had to "outrun up the nuts". I think in general if giving 10-7 is the right handicap on paper, if I was the backer, I would definitely be more inclined to step up for my horse in that game. The main intangible reason I go with there is that the player going to 7 is a little more predisposed to the loss than the player going to 10, and conversely the player going to 10 is more used to coming through with what it takes to win.

The strange thing is, as a player my first inclination is to accept the 10-7. The reasons being two. Number one is that I know my game fluctuates with errors of execution, which is a big part of why I can get 10-7, yet I am capable of going on streaks when I don't make those errors as much. Plus I always feel like I move well (execution errors already noted, lol) and see the game at least a little better than my opponent. And that is another area I feel like I can "dig down a little deeper" in some situations that give me a chance to win. So I tend to feel like an "exact spot" is a good deal for me. You better players, take note, because I think that's part of what makes a good sucker, lol -- see you at DCC

 

[jrhendy]

My choice would also be number three.

Most guys getting 10/7 are not used to long races IMO and may not be used to betting that much.

 

[LSJohn]

You never "know for a fact" that a game is even.

I wouldn't be comfortable taking responsibility for someone else's money if I thought a game was a coin toss; it's a terrible bet for him (more likely her, staking me with the proceeds of the disability checks she gets for brain damage. :heh )

I can't disagree with anything anyone has said, but I have one thought no one has mentioned: Getting 10-7 looks better on your gambling resume, win or loose.

 

[cincy_kid]

I would pick the even match because if I am playing someone of equal skill, then the outcome all boils down to my performance. I like this for the same reason that I would much rather bet on myself playing anything vs someone else (pool, ping pong, cards, whatever) than I would to bet on a sports game or someone else playing that I have no control over whatsoever.

If I lose, it's because I played bad or just got out-played and I can digest the loss better than something I had no control over. Just like if I win, it boosts my confidence because I made it happen.

That's my thought process anyway

 

[unoperro]

I play the guy who I would play if there was nothing on the line.
I cant stand slow play even if I have the nuts. So a slow player is out.
I have a backer, does the other guy? Do I not like any of them?
Remember how Schmidt felt about Harriman?
Is one of them a "back-up" artist?

 

[petie]

I would also pick the guy whom I gave 10-7 to. The main reason is that he already thinks of himself as a loser against me. Any brilliance I show a flash of will send him over the edge. It will be harder and harder for him to mount his offense.

 

[Cory in dc]

Agreed. Logically they are all even. It's all mental.

But shouldn't the "mental" side be part of the determination of what it means for a game to be "even"?

 

[Mkbtank]

Interesting choice of One Pocket matches question

But shouldn't the "mental" side be part of the determination of what it means for a game to be "even"?

Yes. Mental.

 

[One Pocket Ghost]

Since the math/semantics police are after me...

Perfection doesn't exist on the molecular level..and..chaos theory trumps math...

 

[unoperro]

Since the math/semantics police are after me...

Perfection doesn't exist on the molecular level..and..chaos theory trumps math...

So this is a wwyd

 

[sheldon]

I think I'm more comfortable getting weight, than giving it. Sometimes I feel pressure to live up to the fact that I am supposedly the better player. Getting weight, I am usually pretty relaxed, and enjoy having a bit of an edge.
It really boils down to exactly who the opponent is, if I know them. (I almost always do)
If I didn't know any of them, I would probably not really care which game I played, I'd just be stoked to be in action.

 

[Miller]

if you understand high school math you would instantly know all three games have the exact same probability of winning for you which is 50%

so it matters not which you pick money wise. if you think it does you need to give up gambling as you are a sucker.

however there can be personal reasons why you may choice one of the opponents.

2nd sharpest guy on here already gave all you goofs the answer......
:sorry