Do you really learn more by gambling in one pocket?

Jimmy B

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
6,895
I'm really curious, but I couldn't read that article without subscribing to the New York Times. Could you post it in some other form? I would like to see the names. New York was never a hot bed of the game, such as Chicago and Detroit, so I would guess that the high rollers there were not big name bowling stars. I might be wrong.

It's strange that in all the years I bowled, I never encountered big gambling.

When Thugs and Hustlers Ruled Dark Alleys – GHUSBC (bowlhouston.com)
 

Mkbtank

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
5,901
From
Philly Pa
I know this will sound stupid to all of you...but I think I enjoyed the game more when I knew less about it...now when looking at a shot I find myself thinking about what if I miss...and trying to put the cue somewhere advantageous...before I would just shoot and not think about anything but making the ball...

to prove this simple thought...one of you leave me a straight back bank.,..I am almost a 90 percent shoot at it....lol
I liked you better back then too 😂
 

gulfportdoc

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
12,653
From
Gulfport, Mississippi
I'm really curious, but I couldn't read that article without subscribing to the New York Times. Could you post it in some other form? I would like to see the names. New York was never a hot bed of the game, such as Chicago and Detroit, so I would guess that the high rollers there were not big name bowling stars. I might be wrong.

It's strange that in all the years I bowled, I never encountered big gambling.
I couldn't get it either. I think they give you at least 1 freebie, then a subscription is necessary.
 

chicagomike

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
1,559
I know this will sound stupid to all of you...but I think I enjoyed the game more when I knew less about it...now when looking at a shot I find myself thinking about what if I miss...and trying to put the cue somewhere advantageous...before I would just shoot and not think about anything but making the ball...

to prove this simple thought...one of you leave me a straight back bank.,..I am almost a 90 percent shoot at it....lol
Of course you would…Some things will never change Billie!
 

vapros

Verified Member
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
4,806
From
baton rouge, la
News to me, and a bit after my time. I recognized two or three names from the PBA shows on TV. The action scene described was similar to that in most cities, but the amounts wagered in New York were far greater - assuming reasonable accuracy of reporting. Colorful lore.
 
Last edited:

J.R.

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2006
Messages
696
From
Chicago, Illinois
I love hearing guys say “If you want to learn the game and improve you gotta gamble with better players”….or “You learn by playing a much better player in a tournament.”

Are you kidding me??? All you’re going to learn is how to be broke or find your way to the door early. Honestly….what has any of you ever learned about one pocket from strictly gambling with a better player??? I’m not talking about them giving you advice or coaching you, but strictly gambling.
If I ever wanted to improve I had to look to myself…watch videos, talk to knowledgeable people, do drills, find a coach etc. Gambling might improve your focus or help you make better choices when you have something on the line, but I really don’t think it improves your knowledge of the game.

Whoever says…” Wow I’ll tell you, I got my ass kicked in and paid his rent for the month, but let me tell you what I learned about the game and why I am a better player now.”

C’mon man…seriousl

Mike, I agree that if you want to learn the game and improve you will not do it by gambling with better skilled players. It may help but not much.

I believe with today's instructional tapes, books, magazines, and videos plus watching high level professional players engaged in tournaments or one-on-one gambling sessions, is the gateway to learning the game and improving.

It reminds me of a novice amateur and highly skilled player discussing what the amateur would bet if they were to play. The amateur stated, "I want to learn the game but I don't know what to bet." The pro player responded, "Well, the more you bet the quicker you'll learn."
 

jtompilot

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
5,797
From
New Orleans
Mike, I agree that if you want to learn the game and improve you will not do it by gambling with better skilled players. It may help but not much.

I believe with today's instructional tapes, books, magazines, and videos plus watching high level professional players engaged in tournaments or one-on-one gambling sessions, is the gateway to learning the game and improving.

It reminds me of a novice amateur and highly skilled player discussing what the amateur would bet if they were to play. The amateur stated, "I want to learn the game but I don't know what to bet." The pro player responded, "Well, the more you bet the quicker you'll learn."
I agree that all the YouTube videos and such will speed up the learning curve but you'll never put it all together without playing better players and that means GAMBLING.
 

kollegedave

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
169
From
St. Louis, MO
I love hearing guys say “If you want to learn the game and improve you gotta gamble with better players”….or “You learn by playing a much better player in a tournament.”

Are you kidding me??? All you’re going to learn is how to be broke or find your way to the door early. Honestly….what has any of you ever learned about one pocket from strictly gambling with a better player??? I’m not talking about them giving you advice or coaching you, but strictly gambling.
If I ever wanted to improve I had to look to myself…watch videos, talk to knowledgeable people, do drills, find a coach etc. Gambling might improve your focus or help you make better choices when you have something on the line, but I really don’t think it improves your knowledge of the game.

Whoever says…” Wow I’ll tell you, I got my ass kicked in and paid his rent for the month, but let me tell you what I learned about the game and why I am a better player now.”

C’mon man…seriously.
Mike,

If you wanted to say that people over value the benefits of gambling with better players, I might be able to get on board with that, but I think gambling with players that are better (but not too much better and for reasonable stakes) does have value for several reasons. It might be a character flaw in me, but I have a knee-jerk reaction against extremes. Let me make the case for a type of gambling that improves your game...at least in my view.

1) To the extent there are flaws in your game, the better player exposes them immediately, and if you want to win, you must play correctly. For example, for the longest time I resisted playing an up-table game, even when the balls were laying where I was forced into that game with the correct shot. Trying to not play the up-table game when it is time for the balls to go up, simply leaves your opponent free banks and makes your wallet lighter...lesson learned against a better player in not a lot of time.

Also, moving in the end game with the balls up table, required me to have $ at stake, because it is the part of the game I dislike the most, and when playing for nothing, I too often checked out and shot the wrong shot. A few years ago, I had one 15-hour session with one of the better players in our city. I would argue to you that this single session improved my game by a ball or maybe two.

2) To me, the biggest reason you should play better players for money is...self image. Lenny Basham wrote a great book on competitive performance called "With Winning in Mind". One of his arguments in this book is that all of us have an image of ourselves as player of x speed in whatever discipline we compete in. When we compete, part of what puts real limits on our performance is our self image saying, "You are supposed to play at x speed", so the image we have of ourselves simply does not allow us to play better. Playing better players allows us to see ourselves competing against a better player, and it opens the door to an improved self image and a higher competitive ceiling. Lenny Basham explains it better, I highly recommend the book, and I am totally convinced after reading it that there is some truth in the assertion I am making here.

I might concede that the benefits of playing better players diminish when compared against the costs as an amateur player improves. Let's say a player works his skill level up to that of a quality amateur local player (Fargo Rate 650 -- 700ish). At this level there are very few players who are markedly better in any locale. For example in Chicago, the list that comes to mind is Chris Gentile, Ike, Mike Perron, Jr., Mark Jarvis (if he hangs out there), Bobby Hunter, maybe some others I don't know. In any event, that is an intimidating crew if I am looking at those guys as sparing partners. Even worse, how much do you have to bet to get Gentile in action? Some guys travel, and maybe some guys are known to be not the best sportsman. If you eliminate guys on the road, guys who are assholes, guys who are total champions, guys who only bet 1 million dollars, you might be left with no one to play in any given locality.

I believe the 700 player needs to be in action with a 720 player, the 720 player with a 740 player, and so on. Starting around 650, the pickings are slim unless you travel or are willing to bet an irresponsible sum of money. Just my humble opinion. However, if I win the lottery, I am going to be looking for better players to gamble with in the day time with a flashlight.

kollegedave
 

chicagomike

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
1,559
Mike,

If you wanted to say that people over value the benefits of gambling with better players, I might be able to get on board with that, but I think gambling with players that are better (but not too much better and for reasonable stakes) does have value for several reasons. It might be a character flaw in me, but I have a knee-jerk reaction against extremes. Let me make the case for a type of gambling that improves your game...at least in my view.

1) To the extent there are flaws in your game, the better player exposes them immediately, and if you want to win, you must play correctly. For example, for the longest time I resisted playing an up-table game, even when the balls were laying where I was forced into that game with the correct shot. Trying to not play the up-table game when it is time for the balls to go up, simply leaves your opponent free banks and makes your wallet lighter...lesson learned against a better player in not a lot of time.

Also, moving in the end game with the balls up table, required me to have $ at stake, because it is the part of the game I dislike the most, and when playing for nothing, I too often checked out and shot the wrong shot. A few years ago, I had one 15-hour session with one of the better players in our city. I would argue to you that this single session improved my game by a ball or maybe two.

2) To me, the biggest reason you should play better players for money is...self image. Lenny Basham wrote a great book on competitive performance called "With Winning in Mind". One of his arguments in this book is that all of us have an image of ourselves as player of x speed in whatever discipline we compete in. When we compete, part of what puts real limits on our performance is our self image saying, "You are supposed to play at x speed", so the image we have of ourselves simply does not allow us to play better. Playing better players allows us to see ourselves competing against a better player, and it opens the door to an improved self image and a higher competitive ceiling. Lenny Basham explains it better, I highly recommend the book, and I am totally convinced after reading it that there is some truth in the assertion I am making here.

I might concede that the benefits of playing better players diminish when compared against the costs as an amateur player improves. Let's say a player works his skill level up to that of a quality amateur local player (Fargo Rate 650 -- 700ish). At this level there are very few players who are markedly better in any locale. For example in Chicago, the list that comes to mind is Chris Gentile, Ike, Mike Perron, Jr., Mark Jarvis (if he hangs out there), Bobby Hunter, maybe some others I don't know. In any event, that is an intimidating crew if I am looking at those guys as sparing partners. Even worse, how much do you have to bet to get Gentile in action? Some guys travel, and maybe some guys are known to be not the best sportsman. If you eliminate guys on the road, guys who are assholes, guys who are total champions, guys who only bet 1 million dollars, you might be left with no one to play in any given locality.

I believe the 700 player needs to be in action with a 720 player, the 720 player with a 740 player, and so on. Starting around 650, the pickings are slim unless you travel or are willing to bet an irresponsible sum of money. Just my humble opinion. However, if I win the lottery, I am going to be looking for better players to gamble with in the day time with a flashlight.

kollegedave
Dave that was an outstanding response buddy..thanks so much and I’ll look into the book.👍
 

Mkbtank

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
5,901
From
Philly Pa
Mike,

If you wanted to say that people over value the benefits of gambling with better players, I might be able to get on board with that, but I think gambling with players that are better (but not too much better and for reasonable stakes) does have value for several reasons. It might be a character flaw in me, but I have a knee-jerk reaction against extremes. Let me make the case for a type of gambling that improves your game...at least in my view.

1) To the extent there are flaws in your game, the better player exposes them immediately, and if you want to win, you must play correctly. For example, for the longest time I resisted playing an up-table game, even when the balls were laying where I was forced into that game with the correct shot. Trying to not play the up-table game when it is time for the balls to go up, simply leaves your opponent free banks and makes your wallet lighter...lesson learned against a better player in not a lot of time.

Also, moving in the end game with the balls up table, required me to have $ at stake, because it is the part of the game I dislike the most, and when playing for nothing, I too often checked out and shot the wrong shot. A few years ago, I had one 15-hour session with one of the better players in our city. I would argue to you that this single session improved my game by a ball or maybe two.

2) To me, the biggest reason you should play better players for money is...self image. Lenny Basham wrote a great book on competitive performance called "With Winning in Mind". One of his arguments in this book is that all of us have an image of ourselves as player of x speed in whatever discipline we compete in. When we compete, part of what puts real limits on our performance is our self image saying, "You are supposed to play at x speed", so the image we have of ourselves simply does not allow us to play better. Playing better players allows us to see ourselves competing against a better player, and it opens the door to an improved self image and a higher competitive ceiling. Lenny Basham explains it better, I highly recommend the book, and I am totally convinced after reading it that there is some truth in the assertion I am making here.

I might concede that the benefits of playing better players diminish when compared against the costs as an amateur player improves. Let's say a player works his skill level up to that of a quality amateur local player (Fargo Rate 650 -- 700ish). At this level there are very few players who are markedly better in any locale. For example in Chicago, the list that comes to mind is Chris Gentile, Ike, Mike Perron, Jr., Mark Jarvis (if he hangs out there), Bobby Hunter, maybe some others I don't know. In any event, that is an intimidating crew if I am looking at those guys as sparing partners. Even worse, how much do you have to bet to get Gentile in action? Some guys travel, and maybe some guys are known to be not the best sportsman. If you eliminate guys on the road, guys who are assholes, guys who are total champions, guys who only bet 1 million dollars, you might be left with no one to play in any given locality.

I believe the 700 player needs to be in action with a 720 player, the 720 player with a 740 player, and so on. Starting around 650, the pickings are slim unless you travel or are willing to bet an irresponsible sum of money. Just my humble opinion. However, if I win the lottery, I am going to be looking for better players to gamble with in the day time with a flashlight.

kollegedave
Now I see why your first name is Kollege…. :). Outstanding stuff.
 

kollegedave

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
169
From
St. Louis, MO
Dave that was an outstanding response buddy..thanks so much and I’ll look into the book.👍
Mike and Mitch,

Thank you for the kind words.

So often when people talk about improving in one pocket, they talk about "learning the game". Sure, if someone is a novice, they need to learn the game. However, in my opinion while Mike may not be an ancient-all-knowing-one-pocket-wizard, he knows enough, that to the extent there are easy improvements to make in his game, I would not choose "knowledge" as the area to improve. Suppose Mike was not allowed to learn a single additional thing about one pocket, but the one pocket God's granted him the shooting accuracy of Chang Jung Lin: if that happened, I would make Mike a heavy favorite to go deep in any one pocket tournament...T-Rex ain't got nothin' on this new and improved chicagomike. So to me, if the original post is meant to explore how Mike can improve given the budget of time and money he is willing to invest, then I think Mike (and me, and maybe many others who know a decent amount about one pocket) are well served to think about where they can get the most bang for their "hobby-practice-buck", and I would humbly submit that knowledge of one poket has diminishing returns once someone reaches a sufficient amount of knowledge and is facing high level execution in races to 3 or 4 (most tournament races).

If the objective is to consider how someone can improve in competitive one pocket, I think it would help to be precise with what we are trying to improve and to concentrate efforts where some improvement can be concretely achieved. I would respectfully submit there are three areas where someone can develop their ability:

1) Physical Execution of a precise pool stroke
2) Game Theory / Knowledge
3) Mental Preparation

How often has someone said a sport is "90% mental"? So often, it's a cliche'. I bet many of us (me included) would concede their is an element of truth to the statement. However, how many of us practice or think critically about how our mental approach to competition could be improved? Probably not many. I didn't, until I read "With Winning in Mind" last year. I gave very little thought to how I mentally prepared or didn't prepare, for competition. I bet many of us here can improve our mental preparation easily, as many of us have probably not been doing any mental preparation.

Lastly, for Mike or anyone else trying get the most bang for their "hobby-practice-buck", I think it is worth considering (as I think's Mike's original post sort of did), how can they make the practice time and money they are willing to invest the most effective. Is it optimal to play better players? Maybe not in Mike's case, if you also consider the cost of time and money to him. However, I don't think that means he has to take his one-pocket balls and go home. Luckily, Mike isn't the first person to wonder about how people can most effectively develop skills through practice. Another great book, PEAK: Secrets on the New Science of Expertise by Anders Ericcson and Robert Pool, takes an in-depth look at developing skill in a variety of disciplines and (in my view) makes really encouraging findings. Cliff Notes Version: break your skill into pieces and practice the pieces not the entire thing. So if you play violin, you don't practice playing the symphony, you practice playing the C note then the D note, and so on.

Anyway, I highly recommend those books.

kollegedave
 
Last edited:

Mkbtank

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
5,901
From
Philly Pa
Maybe I should have said that Gambling helped me to develop better discipline. Does that equate to one pocket improvement? I would have to say yes.
 
Top