S. Putnam vs. B. Shuff 2011 D.C.C.

One Pocket Ghost

Verified Member
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
9,711
From
Ghosttown
This would be one of the rare times I would strongly consider taking an intentional playing bank pool. The intentional I would take would put my opponent in a very compromising position. I would freeze the cue ball on the rail (to the left of where the cue ball is laying) by the chalk. From that position your opponent will clearly have the worst of the exchange...unless he takes an intentional right back. My reason for taking an intentional would be that in situations like the one Shawn is faced with you should want to extend the game as much as possible.

Another thing to consider is, the strength of the players competing. The stronger the players are, the more the intentional is a viable option.

Dr. Bill


Billy...I agree that taking an intentional here is a viable option...and let me just say that an equally good cueball placement in shooting that intentional, would be to softly roll the cueball straightly up against that bottom ball of the three-ball lineup....then with the spotted ball up there, he's wedged in frozen between the 3rd and 4th balls - in a nice tight trap.

- Ghost
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,693
From
Dallas Tx.
Billy...I agree that taking an intentional here is a viable option...and let me just say that an equally good cueball placement in shooting that intentional, would be to softly roll the cueball straightly up against that bottom ball of the three-ball lineup....then with the spotted ball up there, he's wedged in frozen between the 3rd and 4th balls - in a nice tight trap.

- Ghost

That's not a bad place to position the cue ball. However, frozen to the bottom rail would Imo be the best place. From there he can't get back to the bottom rail and he will have to open up the lined balls. Taking an intentional back will be his best option from there.

Thanks for the response.

Dr. Bill
 

Cowboy Dennis

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
11,123
From
Detroit,Michigan
CatFishBreath said:
Snooker table.... POOL table..get it:D:lol CFB

PS: can you regurgetate your first part? I'm not so sure I understand what you mean:eek:


CatFishBreath said:
Good points Bill but thepool table reason you never see anyone take an intentional inpool table BP is because "A" ball in banks ispool table just to big to just give away. A ball in bankspool table is way bigger than any pool game i canpool table think of and therefore that's why you never seepool table anyone just give them back,me included. The only time I will takepool table one is if I'm cornered hooked.Otherwisepool table,I'm doing something but I'm not just going to give them awaypool table It's good to know that you see what a precarious stiuation that ispool table. JB

Oh, I guess I missed where you mentioned pool table my first time reading your post, I thought you had written "pool game". My mistake, I see it now:p.

Find a 3rd grader to explain the rest:D. How's it feel having a prank played on you and you not figuring it out???

Dennis
 

John Brumback

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
1,747
Oh, I guess I missed where you mentioned pool table my first time reading your post, I thought you had written "pool game". My mistake, I see it now:p.

Find a 3rd grader to explain the rest:D. How's it feel having a prank played on you and you not figuring it out???

Dennis

:lol It sucks I reckon.I'll try to find a 3rd grader:sorry.:p Please don't rake me over the coals to bad,good buddy:) CFB

PS: I think this one is done.Got anymore? Oh and from now on wi'll have to figure in jumps shots in BP???:eek::lol
 

NH Steve

Administrator
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
12,283
From
New Hampshire
Billy...I agree that taking an intentional here is a viable option...and let me just say that an equally good cueball placement in shooting that intentional, would be to softly roll the cueball straightly up against that bottom ball of the three-ball lineup....then with the spotted ball up there, he's wedged in frozen between the 3rd and 4th balls - in a nice tight trap.

- Ghost
I usually agree with you Ghost, but I don't like the idea of taking a foul by touch-rolling the cue ball to freeze it to the bottom of the line-up. Unless you land exactly in line with the spotted balls, when your penalty ball is spotted you would leave a slight angle one way or the other -- plus the rules of spotting call for a smidgeon of air between the cue ball and spotted ball. With even a slight angle, the incoming shooter would be able to skim whichever way is easier across the spotted ball to the side rail and down to the middle of the bottom rail -- putting you back to where the trouble all started in the first place, and meanwhile you sacrificed a ball.
 

fred bentivegna

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
6,690
From
chicago illinois
I was going to stay out of this discussion as I had already posted my opinion earlier, however I was inveigled to get back in from a few PM'ers who wanted my take on the latest discussion.

First I want to say, just to be sure, I shot the shot over and over on my table and I did discover a few things.


The setup was that the q ball is 1/4 diamond over from the middle diamond and a chalk's width from the cushion. The first time I shot my choice, rolling softly into the back ball, I sold out! But I knew something was wrong because I had shot this shot with success many times before. Then I realized what I had done wrong by not thinking the shot thru. Going directly at the fullness of the bottom ball, ie., hitting it full in the face will sell out. Reason: That option provides the minimum amount of resistance to the bottom ball from the 2 above it, and thereby deflects off of them to the right and sells out.

But, by hitting the bottom ball SLIGHTLY off center to the right will result in the bottom ball being acted upon with the most amount of the weight and resistance of the two upper balls, enough so that the bottom ball will stick to the upper two and stay frozen to the Q ball.

Now unless you know that unusual quirk of physics, and few players figure to do so, rolling up to the back ball is a bad idea. (drawing off of the back ball is also a stiff because there is no way you can get enough draw to move the cue back backwards toward the cushion without the head ball returning to that end of the table.)

The only reason I remembered how to roll up to the bottom ball was just a matter of having had to do it so many, many times in my bank career.

Now with all that said, let's assume that you are not comfortable with rolling up to the bottom ball, especially because you are not familiar with using the weight of the two front balls move, then I can certainly see someone taking a deliberate scratch; and the scratch that I would take would be to push the cue ball even closer to the cushion and over to the left another inch or so in order to completely eliminate the barely doable, roll up to the bottom ball angle. This move often results in confusing your opponent and he may panic and do something stupid.

Now it is very surprising that Dr Bill has endorsed taking a scratch in this spot, since he chastised me for suggesting taking a scratch in an earlier bank pool layout. Unfortunately, I dont remember when or what particular layout that involved, so I cant compare situations. One of my PM guys reminded me that he once did that. ???

I am totally against, however, the Ghosts suggestion to take a scratch up against the bottom ball. That situation is easily handled by playing off of the bottom ball into the long rail and returning to the middle of the short rail, gaining nothing.

The worst situation for you if you take a table scratch is if your opponent takes one back, and I just dont see that happening -- not in bank pool. Everytime I have ever done on an open table and not off of a corner hook, my opponent goes on tilt and tries to do something other than returning the scratch -- and thereby playing into my strategy. It would take a hard core guy to return the scratch. I would of course.

Even if he takes a scratch back, remember now two more balls have been spotted up and it now becomes much easier to clip off of the bottom ball with a little english and go to the long rail and return to a place under those balls in the middle of the short rail.

Phew! That gave me a headache. I knew I shoulda left this discussion alone!

Beard
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,693
From
Dallas Tx.
I was going to stay out of this discussion as I had already posted my opinion earlier, however I was inveigled to get back in from a few PM'ers who wanted my take on the latest discussion.

First I want to say, just to be sure, I shot the shot over and over on my table and I did discover a few things.


The setup was that the q ball is 1/4 diamond over from the middle diamond and a chalk's width from the cushion. The first time I shot my choice, rolling softly into the back ball, I sold out! But I knew something was wrong because I had shot this shot with success many times before. Then I realized what I had done wrong by not thinking the shot thru. Going directly at the fullness of the bottom ball, ie., hitting it full in the face will sell out. Reason: That option provides the minimum amount of resistance to the bottom ball from the 2 above it, and thereby deflects off of them to the right and sells out.

But, by hitting the bottom ball SLIGHTLY off center to the right will result in the bottom ball being acted upon with the most amount of the weight and resistance of the two upper balls, enough so that the bottom ball will stick to the upper two and stay frozen to the Q ball.

Now unless you know that unusual quirk of physics, and few players figure to do so, rolling up to the back ball is a bad idea. (drawing off of the back ball is also a stiff because there is no way you can get enough draw to move the cue back backwards toward the cushion without the head ball returning to that end of the table.)

The only reason I remembered how to roll up to the bottom ball was just a matter of having had to do it so many, many times in my bank career.

Now with all that said, let's assume that you are not comfortable with rolling up to the bottom ball, especially because you are not familiar with using the weight of the two front balls move, then I can certainly see someone taking a deliberate scratch; and the scratch that I would take would be to push the cue ball even closer to the cushion and over to the left another inch or so in order to completely eliminate the barely doable, roll up to the bottom ball angle. This move often results in confusing your opponent and he may panic and do something stupid.

Now it is very surprising that Dr Bill has endorsed taking a scratch in this spot, since he chastised me for suggesting taking a scratch in an earlier bank pool layout. Unfortunately, I dont remember when or what particular layout that involved, so I cant compare situations. One of my PM guys reminded me that he once did that. ???

I am totally against, however, the Ghosts suggestion to take a scratch up against the bottom ball. That situation is easily handled by playing off of the bottom ball into the long rail and returning to the middle of the short rail, gaining nothing.

The worst situation for you if you take a table scratch is if your opponent takes one back, and I just dont see that happening -- not in bank pool. Everytime I have ever done on an open table and not off of a corner hook, my opponent goes on tilt and tries to do something other than returning the scratch -- and thereby playing into my strategy. It would take a hard core guy to return the scratch. I would of course.

Even if he takes a scratch back, remember now two more balls have been spotted up and it now becomes much easier to clip off of the bottom ball with a little english and go to the long rail and return to a place under those balls in the middle of the short rail.

Phew! That gave me a headache. I knew I shoulda left this discussion alone!

Beard

I don't remember chastising you for suggesting to take a scratch in an earlier bank pool discussion. I can't argue with you that I have never chastised you because I have, which you benefited from.:sorry I'm glad to see that you have come to your senses (finally) and endorsed my recommendation on the intentional scratch as being a viable option.

For those who are reluctant to take an intentional playing bank pool is understandable. However there are situations, particularly when playing ..top players...that the intentional is a viable option.

Dr. Bill
 

androd

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
7,718
From
New Braunfels tx.
First I want to say, just to be sure, I shot the shot over and over on my table and I did discover a few things.


The setup was that the q ball is 1/4 diamond over from the middle diamond and a chalk's width from the cushion. The first time I shot my choice, rolling softly into the back ball, I sold out! But I knew something was wrong because I had shot this shot with success many times before. Then I realized what I had done wrong by not thinking the shot thru. Going directly at the fullness of the bottom ball, ie., hitting it full in the face will sell out. Reason: That option provides the minimum amount of resistance to the bottom ball from the 2 above it, and thereby deflects off of them to the right and sells out.

But, by hitting the bottom ball SLIGHTLY off center to the right will result in the bottom ball being acted upon with the most amount of the weight and resistance of the two upper balls, enough so that the bottom ball will stick to the upper two and stay frozen to the Q ball.

Beard

After I posted the shot, I shot it a 1/2 dozen times and always stayed on the bottom ball. I figured bank players were just to heavy handed to shoot it. It seemed an easy safe to me.
Rod.
 

New 2 You Qs

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
122
From
Cincinnati, OH
The first time I shot this situation I believe I had be cueball further to the left than where it is actually in the OP. When you get the CB over 1/3 of a diamond to the left the shot becomes increasingly more difficult. With the CB 1/4 away from the diamond I was to execute the shot per Freddy's explanation.

I'm no bank champion by any stretch of the imagination, but I love the game. The nuances of these types of shots and the information shared in this forum is invaluable.

If this shot came up in a match before reading this thread and playing around with it a little bit, I would have approached it with a completely different mindset that I will after reading this thread.

Thanks to all for their input.
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,693
From
Dallas Tx.
I was going to stay out of this discussion as I had already posted my opinion earlier, however I was inveigled to get back in from a few PM'ers who wanted my take on the latest discussion.

First I want to say, just to be sure, I shot the shot over and over on my table and I did discover a few things.


The setup was that the q ball is 1/4 diamond over from the middle diamond and a chalk's width from the cushion. The first time I shot my choice, rolling softly into the back ball, I sold out! But I knew something was wrong because I had shot this shot with success many times before. Then I realized what I had done wrong by not thinking the shot thru. Going directly at the fullness of the bottom ball, ie., hitting it full in the face will sell out. Reason: That option provides the minimum amount of resistance to the bottom ball from the 2 above it, and thereby deflects off of them to the right and sells out.

But, by hitting the bottom ball SLIGHTLY off center to the right will result in the bottom ball being acted upon with the most amount of the weight and resistance of the two upper balls, enough so that the bottom ball will stick to the upper two and stay frozen to the Q ball.

Now unless you know that unusual quirk of physics, and few players figure to do so, rolling up to the back ball is a bad idea. (drawing off of the back ball is also a stiff because there is no way you can get enough draw to move the cue back backwards toward the cushion without the head ball returning to that end of the table.)

The only reason I remembered how to roll up to the bottom ball was just a matter of having had to do it so many, many times in my bank career.

Now with all that said, let's assume that you are not comfortable with rolling up to the bottom ball, especially because you are not familiar with using the weight of the two front balls move, then I can certainly see someone taking a deliberate scratch; and the scratch that I would take would be to push the cue ball even closer to the cushion and over to the left another inch or so in order to completely eliminate the barely doable, roll up to the bottom ball angle. This move often results in confusing your opponent and he may panic and do something stupid.

Now it is very surprising that Dr Bill has endorsed taking a scratch in this spot, since he chastised me for suggesting taking a scratch in an earlier bank pool layout. Unfortunately, I dont remember when or what particular layout that involved, so I cant compare situations. One of my PM guys reminded me that he once did that. ???

I am totally against, however, the Ghosts suggestion to take a scratch up against the bottom ball. That situation is easily handled by playing off of the bottom ball into the long rail and returning to the middle of the short rail, gaining nothing.

The worst situation for you if you take a table scratch is if your opponent takes one back, and I just dont see that happening -- not in bank pool. Everytime I have ever done on an open table and not off of a corner hook, my opponent goes on tilt and tries to do something other than returning the scratch -- and thereby playing into my strategy. It would take a hard core guy to return the scratch. I would of course.

Even if he takes a scratch back, remember now two more balls have been spotted up and it now becomes much easier to clip off of the bottom ball with a little english and go to the long rail and return to a place under those balls in the middle of the short rail.

Phew! That gave me a headache. I knew I shoulda left this discussion alone!

Beard
I agree with my peers that rolling up to the bottom ball and executing a legal shot is the best option. For argument's sake, lets now assume that the original position of the cue ball is to the left a few inches, and closer to the cushion. From this position (like Fred stated) the angle to play the bottom ball safety no longer is available. Now from this position I feel that it's clearly the right choice when playing a top player to take the intentional. I'm not saying that it's right for all levels of players...which it probably isn't....but for top players it is.

I would like to offer my appreciation to "New 2 You Qs" for the acknowledgement he has shown for the players on this site that have the knowledge and also the willingness to share their wisdom. It's people like him that keeps the fire burning inside me...and hopefully others... so we can continue to help other aspiring, players.

Dr. Bill
 

fred bentivegna

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
6,690
From
chicago illinois
I agree with my peers that rolling up to the bottom ball and executing a legal shot is the best option. For argument's sake, lets now assume that the original position of the cue ball is to the left a few inches, and closer to the cushion. From this position (like Fred stated) the angle to play the bottom ball safety no longer is available. Now from this position I feel that it's clearly the right choice when playing a top player to take the intentional. I'm not saying that it's right for all levels of players...which it probably isn't....but for top players it is.

I would like to offer my appreciation to "New 2 You Qs" for the acknowledgement he has shown for the players on this site that have the knowledge and also the willingness to share their wisdom. It's people like him that keeps the fire burning inside me...and hopefully others... so we can continue to help other aspiring, players.

Dr. Bill

That goes ditto for me.

Beard
 

Cowboy Dennis

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
11,123
From
Detroit,Michigan
After I posted the shot, I shot it a 1/2 dozen times and always stayed on the bottom ball. I figured bank players were just to heavy handed to shoot it. It seemed an easy safe to me.
Rod.

Rod,

As I told CatFishBreath, it's a standard position that all Bank players have seen countless times and the only response is to hit the bottom ball and leave the cueball on it. I can't picture any true Bank player doing anything else from there. It is an easy safe.

Dennis
 

John Brumback

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
1,747
Rod,

As I told CatFishBreath, it's a standard position that all Bank players have seen countless times and the only response is to hit the bottom ball and leave the cueball on it. I can't picture any true Bank player doing anything else from there. It is an easy safe.

Dennis

I just shot it too,1 time.That's all it took.It was an easy shot to just roll up there and bump the top ball to the end rail making a legal shot.And the way mine worked out my cball was 2in. from the two object balls that were stuck together making getting out of that trap extremely diffucult:eek: So Rod was dead right,right off the bat,well and you too I reckon:eek::lol CFB

PS: I did have dirty balls though:p
 

John Brumback

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
1,747
I agree with my peers that rolling up to the bottom ball and executing a legal shot is the best option. For argument's sake, lets now assume that the original position of the cue ball is to the left a few inches, and closer to the cushion. From this position (like Fred stated) the angle to play the bottom ball safety no longer is available. Now from this position I feel that it's clearly the right choice when playing a top player to take the intentional. I'm not saying that it's right for all levels of players...which it probably isn't....but for top players it is.

I would like to offer my appreciation to "New 2 You Qs" for the acknowledgement he has shown for the players on this site that have the knowledge and also the willingness to share their wisdom. It's people like him that keeps the fire burning inside me...and hopefully others... so we can continue to help other aspiring, players.

Dr. Bill

Yeah, me too and very well said. JB
 
Top