Whats this spot worth????

[spiderwebcomm]

Lou--

Are you saying to shoot through the impeding ball with follow to hit the side rail and then back to the muck? If not, and you're referring to leaning on the 5, you're selling out the 14. Let's assume you mean the opposite side of the rack.

Here's my question>>

If you juice it too much, you go below the rack and you lose from there. You actually have to "do" something to be perfect w/ the safety you describe.

A hair too little and you crash into the ball offscreen, perfect goes perfect and too much you sell out low. Basically, you have to be perfect to execute that safety.

Based on that, why not just go for the win w/ the natural kick? The short answer for no is because you're jacked-up. But is that any harder than figuring speed/spin through a frozen ball where there are sell-outs high and low?

I'm trying to figure why hitting through the impeding ball with surrounding danger (where if I'm successful, I'm not REALLY advantaged in the game based on the skill gap) is better than jacking up to kick a ball sitting in front of a pocket (when you can win with a successful execution).

Dave

 

[Dudley]

Lou--

Are you saying to shoot through the impeding ball with follow to hit the side rail and then back to the muck? If not, and you're referring to leaning on the 5, you're selling out the 14. Let's assume you mean the opposite side of the rack.

Here's my question>>

If you juice it too much, you go below the rack and you lose from there. You actually have to "do" something to be perfect w/ the safety you describe.

A hair too little and you crash into the ball offscreen, perfect goes perfect and too much you sell out low. Basically, you have to be perfect to execute that safety.

Based on that, why not just go for the win w/ the natural kick? The short answer for no is because you're jacked-up. But is that any harder than figuring speed/spin through a frozen ball where there are sell-outs high and low?

I'm trying to figure why hitting through the impeding ball with surrounding danger (where if I'm successful, I'm not REALLY advantaged in the game based on the skill gap) is better than jacking up to kick a ball sitting in front of a pocket (when you can win with a successful execution).

Dave

I'm not Lou but I have some opinions on your questions.

the Kick: There is a lot that can go bad with a kick like that. If you miss you'll leave them straight in to run a bunch of balls. This is very risky and there is no guarantee of shape if you make the ball anyway.

shooting the shot to leaving them against the stack: you have a ball in your pocket, they have to take a risk to reverse the situation--> if they tap the ball and foul you have a ball on that side to move and leave them in trouble in your next shot. This is ideal. If you hit the ball out of the picture thick and gently this isn't a bad result either. The stack will block their shots and still protect the ball in your pocket.

Cue ball control is almost everything in one pocket. the shot into the stack is a very soft controlled shot and shouldn't be hard to do if you know how to read the angle shooting through a frozen ball. Not knowing exactly where that other ball is makes it hard to see how viable this shot really is though. But the concept is good.

Dudley

 

[spiderwebcomm]

I'm not Lou but I have some opinions on your questions.

the Kick: There is a lot that can go bad with a kick like that. If you miss you'll leave them straight in to run a bunch of balls. This is very risky and there is no guarantee of shape if you make the ball anyway.

shooting the shot to leaving them against the stack: you have a ball in your pocket, they have to take a risk to reverse the situation--> if they tap the ball and foul you have a ball on that side to move and leave them in trouble in your next shot. This is ideal. If you hit the ball out of the picture thick and gently this isn't a bad result either. The stack will block their shots and still protect the ball in your pocket.

Cue ball control is almost everything in one pocket. the shot into the stack is a very soft controlled shot and shouldn't be hard to do if you know how to read the angle shooting through a frozen ball. Not knowing exactly where that other ball is makes it hard to see how viable this shot really is though. But the concept is good.

Dudley

I learned a lesson, really. I took that pic not to post on the web, but to remind myself later on on what I had and what worked/didn't work. The room was dark as well, which is why I was close. In the future, if I post another scenario in the 1pkt forum, I'm going to stand at the ball well and take an accustats-style picture facing up table with all balls in view.

My picture angle and picture completeness caused confusion and lack of information. Won't happen again.

That said, I appreciate everyone's views - even SJD - who thinks 95% of players wouldn't shoot what I did. Although he might be right, you have to put yourself in the same situation in that when you're playing a game w/ a spot you NEVER played before (nor thought of) and playing a HOF-caliber player (when you're nowhere close), and have been on the receiving end of it for hours----- every inning that goes by is one step closer to a loss when you're unsuccessful in getting the additional pockets in play.

Lou's story with Efren is a good one. I could only imagine how good that felt making bank after bank down in front of a paying crowd. Sometimes that happens - and it feels good when it does. Statistically, that doesn't always happen and if he played Efren 10x, >5 of those "after match stories" wouldn't read the same as the one posted in this thread. The way Lou played is exactly how you have to play to beat Efren. If one or two of his banks didn't fall, he likely wouldn't have won any games. NOT taking anything away from Lou-- just saying you HAVE to make those to beat Efren when you play Lou's speed. If Lou would have fired those same banks in against Appleton or Gentile, he would have won at least one out of eight games (cause I know Lou can play and is allowed to win at least a game).

At the DCC a few years back I played Tony Crosby in the banks division and I RAM-FIRED a slew of banks on him in a row (I forget how many). I eventually missed and he got back into the set and beat me on the hill. After the match, he said, "Holy crap-- at first I had no clue who the hell I was playing." You need to keep that pace up to win against top guys. The guy I played in this game KEPT THAT UP EVERY SINGLE SHOT FOR HOURS. I'm not a top-level player playing with a spot I didn't know well enough to manage, found that out mid-match, so I opted to try to win when I could since I wasn't capable of out-moving him.

I learned something with that-- as well as from the insight of the posters here. I'll report back with my next session, which is in 3 weeks. I have a hunch it'll be a little different. Maybe not TREMENDOUSLY different, but it will be a HAIR different.

For me, I felt like I needed to make that kick for a chance. That was the most offensive peek I had at ANYTHING in a while, so I took it.

 

[lll]

when you play or see him next time
ask him how he would play you with a ball spot playing the usual pocket a piece way
then you will know against you what he thinks that spot is worth......
just sayin
check your pm

 

[spiderwebcomm]

Let's say if you're a scratch golfer at your local course. You play pretty well.

If Tiger Woods shows up and offers to play you with 7 clubs instead of 14 --- can you win?

You probably need a stroke spot in addition to the club spot.

 

[lfigueroa]

Great story, Lou. An experience like that can provide a confidence lift for the times when a guy needs something to draw on when he's feeling kinda puny. You've usually played well against top players. Perhaps that's part of the reason.

Doc

Thanks, Doc. And you're right -- you play a couple of these world beaters and then go up against strong shortstops and it's like, "Yeah, right, whaddayougonna show me?"

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

Lou--

Are you saying to shoot through the impeding ball with follow to hit the side rail and then back to the muck? If not, and you're referring to leaning on the 5, you're selling out the 14. Let's assume you mean the opposite side of the rack.

Here's my question>>

If you juice it too much, you go below the rack and you lose from there. You actually have to "do" something to be perfect w/ the safety you describe.

A hair too little and you crash into the ball offscreen, perfect goes perfect and too much you sell out low. Basically, you have to be perfect to execute that safety.

Based on that, why not just go for the win w/ the natural kick? The short answer for no is because you're jacked-up. But is that any harder than figuring speed/spin through a frozen ball where there are sell-outs high and low?

I'm trying to figure why hitting through the impeding ball with surrounding danger (where if I'm successful, I'm not REALLY advantaged in the game based on the skill gap) is better than jacking up to kick a ball sitting in front of a pocket (when you can win with a successful execution).

Dave

Just shoot through the ball softly with a little high inside. You aim the CB for like a little above the first diamond on the side rail and it will hit the rail like a diamond higher than that. As long as you don't hit it too hard the 7 doesn't go anywhere and the CB should come up behind the cluster, or at a minimum not sell anything out. If you don't know the shot, Bob Jewett published a system he developed for it. I think it was also included in one of Bob Byrne's books.

HOWEVER, now you've mentioned a ball off-screen, which, to be truthful, I missed you talking about earlier and I gotta say: goodness gracious me. IF there's a frippin' ball over there why are you talking about intentionals?! Bank it two rails to your pocket, or just tap it over to your side and leave him upstairs with as bad an angle as you can come up with.

Lastly, I wouldn't shoot the kick with a gun to my head. Because it's like an automatic loss of game if you don't hit it perfect. The layout, especially with a ball in your jaws, is actually pretty good for you at this point and your strategy has got to be to protect it and not bet the game on a kick.

Lou Figueroa

 

[spiderwebcomm]

Just shoot through the ball softly with a little high inside. You aim the CB for like a little above the first diamond on the side rail and it will hit the rail like a diamond higher than that. As long as you don't hit it too hard the 7 doesn't go anywhere and the CB should come up behind the cluster, or at a minimum not sell anything out. If you don't know the shot, Bob Jewett published a system he developed for it. I think it was also included in one of Bob Byrne's books.

HOWEVER, now you've mentioned a ball off-screen, which, to be truthful, I missed you talking about earlier and I gotta say: goodness gracious me. IF there's a frippin' ball over there why are you talking about intentionals?! Bank it two rails to your pocket, or just tap it over to your side and leave him upstairs with as bad an angle as you can come up with.

Lastly, I wouldn't shoot the kick with a gun to my head. Because it's like an automatic loss of game if you don't hit it perfect. The layout, especially with a ball in your jaws, is actually pretty good for you at this point and your strategy has got to be to protect it and not bet the game on a kick.

Lou Figueroa

I couldn't bank that ball off to the right because I couldn't see it -- the 7 was in the way. If I could see it, I would have banked it into the side and drew the CB down the rail so I could have a chance to win.

I never considered the 2x fuller system. I think I got brain-locked on the kick... was hungry to win. Playing him was like playing chess w/ Bobby Fisher when you don't have your queen or rooks. It is what it is, really. One pocket isn't my main game -- 14.1 is. That said, I'm never threatening to win at 14.1 either. The closest I came was 150-87 one time and I played totally perfect to get that far. Unlike most other players, and you def know this, you almost never come into an inning with anything playing an elite player. The leaves are just too powerful. Maybe that's why people make up spots like "move the CB one hand width" just to see the bottom of the CB once in a while.

I once played a game with an elite 14.1 player where I had to go to 10 and they went to 50 (and I broke). I chose to break because I felt if I left the CB stuck to the short rail in the kitchen, I'd have a chance at them missing the first shot. I kind of felt that they would DEF put me there and I wanted them to start there. I broke, KISSED the ball on the first diamond on the short rail on a PERFECT break.

The break basically had the two balls coming off and back in. The corner ball on the side of the rack where the CB sat came up to a position about 3" from the side of the muck--- COULD be made, but man it was tough. This other guy screwed his cue together, never took a practice stroke, got down on the ball, RIFLED it in, and ran 50-and-out from the absolute worst starting position on earth. That was in the pit at Pool Sharks---- and it cost me a Cafe Chloe dinner (which was the bet), valued at about a c-note. I felt if I had a shot, I was out. I only needed A SHOT. I honestly felt even if he made it, he STILL had to run out or prevent me from shooting (all the pressure was on him). My point is (and you know this)--- it's just a different level of execution than normal players.

 

[jrhendy]

Exactly. I think your post is the bottom-line.

I think out of this I learned that there's a huge gap between excellent one pocket players and legend one pocket players. Once the gap goes beyond a point -- it's fruitless.

I am a "Good" one pocket player and have been for many years. I have been spanked by Scott Frost giving me 10/5 twice.

It sounds like a great game but is not. In both sessions we played, he takes a couple scratches where I also have to take one. Now we are playing 12 to seven. Not nearly as good a game and one I would not take to start out with.

I jumped out ahead in one session and he flat locked me up until he had a chance to run balls. For my speed, I am a very good defensive player. The gap in defensive play is also huge.

You are right, there is a huge gap between the upper level (Legend) players and the rest of us.

 

[lll]

I am a "Good" one pocket player and have been for many years. I have been spanked by Scott Frost giving me 10/5 twice.

It sounds like a great game but is not. In both sessions we played, he takes a couple scratches where I also have to take one. Now we are playing 12 to seven. Not nearly as good a game and one I would not take to start out with.

I jumped out ahead in one session and he flat locked me up until he had a chance to run balls. For my speed, I am a very good defensive player. The gap in defensive play is also huge.

You are right, there is a huge gap between the upper level (Legend) players and the rest of us.

and imho icbw opinion
if the spread in skill is too large the spot almost doesnt matter

 

[androd]

and imho icbw opinion
if the spread in skill is too large the spot almost doesnt matter

There's a correct spot for every game. 10/5 just isn't it for John H.
Rod.

 

[SJDinPHX]

There's a correct spot for every game. 10/5 just isn't it for John H.
Rod.

That is correct, as usual Rod..I may have told this tale before, but I once had this 'pharmacutical' vendor, who was doing a land office business in SJ..and he was a hi-rolling gambler...He looked good at the table, but running 2 or 3 balls, in 9 ball, was about his max...He loved to gamble high, with the right spot, but rarely won, against the local shortstops..most of whom, would not bet enough to hold his interest...I had already burned out at 9 ball, with him, giving up hellacious weight..(which was quite lucrative)..

I had been trying for quite a while, to match up a one pocket game with him, as he had never even played 1P..so it was almost impossible. He didn't even know what he needed, to have a chance...One day he pops in, and I put my usual shot on him...I had been offering him 25 to 6, for the last few weeks, (started out at 20 to 7, but he was never interested)...He finally bit. He said, "I'll play some 25 to 5, for $500 a game" (this was in the mid-60's)... I said "Gimme the break, put up for 4 games, and you got it"..I wasn't even real sure I could win, as I figured he may have had some one pocket 'schooling' somewhere.

It soon became obvious, I was stealing, but he still went off for two sets..Now I guess he had developed a 'hard on' for me..and I kept him broke for quite a while...We went from 22/5, he breaks, to 20/4.. and our last session was 20/3, I break..He never did grasp the basic concepts, of one pocket.

I don't really consider this bragging, because I obviously had a "helpless pigeon"...I bring it up strictly for your edifcation, and to prove lll and Rod's point..There is ALWAYS a match-up somewhere..You just have to find the right button to push..

 

[Frank Almanza]

That is correct, as usual Rod..I may have told this tale before, but I once had this 'pharmacutical' vendor, who was doing a land office business in SJ..and he was a hi-rolling gambler.

He looked good at the table, but running 2 or 3 balls, in 9 ball, was about his max...He loved to gamble high, with the right spot, but rarely won, against the local shortstops..most of whom, would not bet enough to hold his interest...I had already burned out at 9 ball, with him, giving up hellacious weight..(which was quite lucrative)..I had been trying for quite a while, to match up a one pocket game with him, as he had never even played 1P..so it was almost impossible.

One day he pops in, and I put my usual shot on him...I had been offering him 25 to 6, for the last few weeks, (started out at 20 to 7, but he was never interested)...He finally bit. He said, "I'll play some 20 to 5, for $500 a game" (this was in the mid-60's)... I said "Gimme the break, put up for 4 games, and you got it"..I wasn't even real sure I could win, as I figured he may have had some one pocket 'schooling' somewhere.

It soon became obvious, I was stealing, but he still went off for two sets..Now I guess he had developed a 'hard on' for me..and I kept him broke for quite a while...We went from 22/5, he breaks, to 20/4.. and our last session was 20/3, I break..He never did grasp the basic concepts, of one pocket.

I don't really consider this bragging, because I obviously had a "helpless pigeon"...I bring it up, for your edification, and to prove lll and Rod's point..There is ALWAYS a match-up somewhere..You just have to find it..

Just curious, was that Bobby at Circus Billiards?

 

[SJDinPHX]

Just curious, was that Bobby at Circus Billiards?

Not sure Frank. (Lillies may know)..All we knew him as, was 'Big Guy"...and he was a BIG black fella..Good guy to gamble with, no hard words ever..That was when Clay Robie had the Circus..'66, or '67, on one of my extended trips back to SJ, from Texas..Played him at 4th St. Bowl a few times, and at the Circus...Got Richie F. down with him once too ! Good score !...He was a sweetheart..Did you ever play him ?

 

[Dudley]

I learned a lesson, really. I took that pic not to post on the web, but to remind myself later on on what I had and what worked/didn't work. The room was dark as well, which is why I was close. In the future, if I post another scenario in the 1pkt forum, I'm going to stand at the ball well and take an accustats-style picture facing up table with all balls in view.

My picture angle and picture completeness caused confusion and lack of information. Won't happen again.

That said, I appreciate everyone's views - even SJD - who thinks 95% of players wouldn't shoot what I did. Although he might be right, you have to put yourself in the same situation in that when you're playing a game w/ a spot you NEVER played before (nor thought of) and playing a HOF-caliber player (when you're nowhere close), and have been on the receiving end of it for hours----- every inning that goes by is one step closer to a loss when you're unsuccessful in getting the additional pockets in play.

Lou's story with Efren is a good one. I could only imagine how good that felt making bank after bank down in front of a paying crowd. Sometimes that happens - and it feels good when it does. Statistically, that doesn't always happen and if he played Efren 10x, >5 of those "after match stories" wouldn't read the same as the one posted in this thread. The way Lou played is exactly how you have to play to beat Efren. If one or two of his banks didn't fall, he likely wouldn't have won any games. NOT taking anything away from Lou-- just saying you HAVE to make those to beat Efren when you play Lou's speed. If Lou would have fired those same banks in against Appleton or Gentile, he would have won at least one out of eight games (cause I know Lou can play and is allowed to win at least a game).

At the DCC a few years back I played Tony Crosby in the banks division and I RAM-FIRED a slew of banks on him in a row (I forget how many). I eventually missed and he got back into the set and beat me on the hill. After the match, he said, "Holy crap-- at first I had no clue who the hell I was playing." You need to keep that pace up to win against top guys. The guy I played in this game KEPT THAT UP EVERY SINGLE SHOT FOR HOURS. I'm not a top-level player playing with a spot I didn't know well enough to manage, found that out mid-match, so I opted to try to win when I could since I wasn't capable of out-moving him.

I learned something with that-- as well as from the insight of the posters here. I'll report back with my next session, which is in 3 weeks. I have a hunch it'll be a little different. Maybe not TREMENDOUSLY different, but it will be a HAIR different.

For me, I felt like I needed to make that kick for a chance. That was the most offensive peek I had at ANYTHING in a while, so I took it.

SWC,

I know the feeling of frustration you are talking about. You had a shot and wanted to take it. I do this all the time also.

I enjoyed this thread although it was a little tough to imagine where the mystery ball was.

Glad to see you posting here.

Dudley

 

[Jimmy B]

SWC,

I know the feeling of frustration you are talking about. You had a shot and wanted to take it. I do this all the time also.

I enjoyed this thread although it was a little tough to imagine where the mystery ball was.

Glad to see you posting here.

Dudley

I know that feeling as well. I knew about that ball right out of sight above the first diamond, but the score was one to minus one so there are two other balls up table somewhere you can play off, but still the angle does not look that severe to me and I feel it should not be that hard for spider to judge the cue ball back into that cub of four balls there. I would like to know how you play compared to David Dippy Viffer Peat whatever you call him and how your opponent compares to Scott. Then we can tell you how to beat the guy..

 

[lfigueroa]

I couldn't bank that ball off to the right because I couldn't see it -- the 7 was in the way. If I could see it, I would have banked it into the side and drew the CB down the rail so I could have a chance to win.

I never considered the 2x fuller system. I think I got brain-locked on the kick... was hungry to win. Playing him was like playing chess w/ Bobby Fisher when you don't have your queen or rooks. It is what it is, really. One pocket isn't my main game -- 14.1 is. That said, I'm never threatening to win at 14.1 either. The closest I came was 150-87 one time and I played totally perfect to get that far. Unlike most other players, and you def know this, you almost never come into an inning with anything playing an elite player. The leaves are just too powerful. Maybe that's why people make up spots like "move the CB one hand width" just to see the bottom of the CB once in a while.

I once played a game with an elite 14.1 player where I had to go to 10 and they went to 50 (and I broke). I chose to break because I felt if I left the CB stuck to the short rail in the kitchen, I'd have a chance at them missing the first shot. I kind of felt that they would DEF put me there and I wanted them to start there. I broke, KISSED the ball on the first diamond on the short rail on a PERFECT break.

The break basically had the two balls coming off and back in. The corner ball on the side of the rack where the CB sat came up to a position about 3" from the side of the muck--- COULD be made, but man it was tough. This other guy screwed his cue together, never took a practice stroke, got down on the ball, RIFLED it in, and ran 50-and-out from the absolute worst starting position on earth. That was in the pit at Pool Sharks---- and it cost me a Cafe Chloe dinner (which was the bet), valued at about a c-note. I felt if I had a shot, I was out. I only needed A SHOT. I honestly felt even if he made it, he STILL had to run out or prevent me from shooting (all the pressure was on him). My point is (and you know this)--- it's just a different level of execution than normal players.

Not sure we're talking about the same system. Anywhos, for those that may have missed it, Bob Jewett's system from Bob Byrne's "Standard Book of Pool and Billiards" which if you don't own, you should.

Lou Figueroa

 

[spiderwebcomm]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2ruLOLPj4U[/ame]

Same?

 

[lll]

Not sure we're talking about the same system. Anywhos, for those that may have missed it, Bob Jewett's system from Bob Byrne's "Standard Book of Pool and Billiards" which if you don't own, you should.

Lou Figueroa

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2ruLOLPj4U

Same?

thanks for the info
good stuff

 

[Cary]

Let's say if you're a scratch golfer at your local course. You play pretty well.

If Tiger Woods shows up and offers to play you with 7 clubs instead of 14 --- can you win?

You probably need a stroke spot in addition to the club spot.

Only if I leave my driver in the bag.