Hdhdt&wwyhd

Tom Wirth

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
2,619
How did he do this? and What would you have done?

The first image shows the result of player A's having played the two ball three rails toward his pocket, (upper right) He needs all four balls. His opponent needs one.

The next two images show what his opponent did in response to the three rail bank. The last image shows the result of player A's immediate response to this serious trap. How did A escape without having taken a foul? How would you have handled this difficult position?

Tom
 

Attachments

Tom Wirth

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
2,619
And finally, Player A's escape. How did he do this? What would you have done to escape this trap?
 

Attachments

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,879
is this how he did it??
View attachment 13860
That's old cloth. Looks to me pretty hard to get the 3-rail that long. Jacking up makes the 2-rail (4 rails to contact) difficult, but I think still easier to get it on the right track off the second rail.

But he had to do one or the other to get that exact result.
 

beatle

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,583
How did he get out of the trap. Now all 4 balls will be up table..
why not kick the 2 in. Might be able to bank out if he makes it. Can't be worse off. Or leave him up table with the 2 hidden and a long shot on the ten with sellout angle.
 

1pwannabe

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
842
How did he get out of the trap. Now all 4 balls will be up table..
why not kick the 2 in. Might be able to bank out if he makes it. Can't be worse off. Or leave him up table with the 2 hidden and a long shot on the ten with sellout angle.
The trap was the opponent only needed 1 ball and he had to get the 10 out or at least get whitey beneath the 10.

This is pretty high level 1p for sure, 75% of people trying something desperate would sell out and lose in this position.

The only other angle I see is this one, but it could have been 4 rails if it came in slightly different.



What would I do differently? Hard question! Kicking at the 2 is pretty hard, you'll most likely leave some kind of bank on it if you hit it badly. Being jacked up in the middle of the table where using a bridge is almost impossible makes this even harder, obviously. I would probably take a scratch and kick 2 or 3 rails down to the bottom of the table trying to get in a location where the 2 isn't easily bankable.
 

Tom Wirth

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
2,619
I have to say, you guys are coming up with some very good analysis of the problems this situation presents. Do any of you see a way out of this immediate problem with the use of a touch intentional foul? If so, how would that likely play out?

Tom
 

tucson9ball

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
253
I would say he probably shot to the upper left end rail and played 4 rails to hit the 10 ball. Nice shot seeing that he was over a ball in the middle of the table.

Noticing that the 10 ball is further away from the opponents pocket, I would have shot the kick at the 2 ball with pocket speed. Unless you hit it really bad it should end up ok with little risk of selling out.

As for a intentional foul? I don't like this option much. I could see both players just touching the cue ball back and forth a couple times, but eventually player A would have to shoot or lose game. The only advantage with that option is making player B need more balls to win the game, which may not be a bad idea.....
 

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,879
I have to say, you guys are coming up with some very good analysis of the problems this situation presents. Do any of you see a way out of this immediate problem with the use of a touch intentional foul? If so, how would that likely play out?

Tom
I

I would nibble until we both had two fouls, then I'd try to kick the 2 in (or if not playing 3 fouls, I'd nibble until he got tired of it. :D )
 

1pwannabe

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
842
I

I would nibble until we both had two fouls, then I'd try to kick the 2 in (or if not playing 3 fouls, I'd nibble until he got tired of it. :D )
Agreed, getting him off the 1 hole would be the first order of priority, then come with something that might save your butt. I'm surprised player A shot the 10 out from that position without first taking an intentional to at least give himself some chance.
 

gulfportdoc

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
9,980
And finally, Player A's escape. How did he do this? What would you have done to escape this trap?
He could also go up and back (head rail, foot rail) to kick the 10 as well. Where the 10 sits makes it a "big ball".

I can't tell if the CB is frozen to the 9. If so, he can shoot right through the 9 at the 2 ball. Otherwise I'd be inclined to lag at the 2 ball. It's hard to sell anything out that way.

~Doc
 

Tom Wirth

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
2,619
I

I would nibble until we both had two fouls, then I'd try to kick the 2 in (or if not playing 3 fouls, I'd nibble until he got tired of it. :D )
John, the three foul rule is definitely in effect.

One question, are you aware of how hard that kick shot on the two is from a position jacked up over a full ball and needing a bridge at that distance. How can anyone even see enough cue ball to hit from there? Just finding a point on the cue ball you can hit without miscueing should be considered a minor miracle.

Tom
 

Tom Wirth

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
2,619
He could also go up and back (head rail, foot rail) to kick the 10 as well. Where the 10 sits makes it a "big ball".

I can't tell if the CB is frozen to the 9. If so, he can shoot right through the 9 at the 2 ball. Otherwise I'd be inclined to lag at the 2 ball. It's hard to sell anything out that way.

~Doc
Doc. I realize it is hard to see but there is a hair of separation between the cue ball and the nine. Still, you could shoot through the nine and drive the cue ball to the foot rail. It's a foul, but you might get away with it. That is unless you sell out a bank on the two.

Kicking at the ten also might work but if you're thinking along those lines than why not just try to kick in the two?

Tom
 

GoldCrown

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
805
The day that I see that shot so much as executing it I get my diploma. :lol
 

Tom Wirth

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
2,619
The day that I see that shot so much as executing it I get my diploma. :lol
Yes! Seeing the possibility is the first step in learning how to execute any shot.

Exercise your imaginations. That's the fun of this game. What other pool game offers such wild opportunities?

Tom
 

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,879
John, the three foul rule is definitely in effect.

One question, are you aware of how hard that kick shot on the two is from a position jacked up over a full ball and needing a bridge at that distance. How can anyone even see enough cue ball to hit from there? Just finding a point on the cue ball you can hit without miscueing should be considered a minor miracle.

Tom
True, which points out that I'd better attempt that kick after my first "nibble" with only one foul in case I miss the 2, but with two balls on the spot, and the 2 ball frozen to the rail, I think it's probable that I don't leave anything and am OK even if I miss the 2 (speed would be important, and that would be difficult too jacked up like that, but after I nibble and he nibbles I may have a little better access to the CB for the kick -- he's got to keep me in the right place and it may be hard for him to do that after I foul.)

By the way, I think I can reach that shot without a bridge.

Does any of this make sense? :)
 
Top