Intentional 3-foul ... anyone ever do it in a match?

RobMan

RobMan

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
So, played a match this weekend; me going to 115 and opponent to 90. Neither of us are world beaters with high runs -- mine this season is in the 20's; his is 14. He is an older gentlemen who can pot balls well, and plays very good safeties and cue ball control on long safeties. Plays slow and methodical; definitely not my style - and yes it shouldn't get to me affecting my play, but it does.

I am getting shellacked pretty good: He needs 6 balls; I need 52. There are 10 or so balls on the table, my shot with no real good shot or safety play; and I have been losing safety battles. I decide to roll an intentional with the intent to see if he follows suit to increase his needed balls for win. Surprisingly he does, so I take him to two fouls with me, then intentional three foul. He looks at me like I am nuts.

So he now needs 8 and I need 70. Play a good break; after some safety play, I get an opening and get back 15 balls before I brain fart an miss on a somewhat open table. He gets up to game ball, and misses a really hard shot. Reprieve! But the remaining balls are clustered.

With him needing just one ball and me needing 55, I decided to intentional foul, and lo and behold, he follows. We both go to 2, then I take the 3rd intentional for the second time in the match. Now he needs 3 and I need 73.

I play another really good break leaving one ball long and angled. He calls it, shoots and lo and behold the CB hits the repack and scratches in the corner! So he 3 fouls and must now break. He now needs 19 to my 73.

He is flustered a bit now, and the match has taken a long time. Without any more boring details, he wound up winning by a score of 90 to 87. So I lost by 28 balls. I actually had a chance, but after shooting a dead ball, wound up getting snookered by the last rolling ball on the table.

Win some; lose some! But this was definitely a unique match. Afterwards I advised him never to go backwards in count with only needing one ball and me needing so many - after all I am not a threat to run 70 balls..... He told me it was a great lesson, and he had never played a game where someone used my strategy, and frankly was a bit confused by it.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Pushout

Pushout

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've known people who have done it but have never taken the 3rd foul myself. I've seen people I've played GET three fouls, though:wink:
 
acousticsguru

acousticsguru

player/instructor
Silver Member
Of course!

Of course, many times. As long as the rule set makes it possible for a player to use his/her brains, why not? It's won me close matches, remembering one in National Men's Singles Championship and another in an open, both against the same top player and within three weeks, each time it was close and he needed barely a handful, both times I got to execute an opening break, both times he missed from the head rail (I know what that's like - getting old myself) and I ran out the remaining 40+ balls. I also remember a National Seniors Singles Championship semifinal where within four innings, we were both at -18, made perfect sense under the circumstances, still mad after all these years that I beat him to the shot in the safety battle, then got a horrible kick/skid on the second shot in an open table (so needless to mention, I lost).

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
 
Last edited:
Bob Jewett

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
The most I've seen in one game was in a match between Luther Lassiter and Dick Lane in which Lassiter took 3 fouls 3 times, so he made over 200 in a game to 150. He won with a high run of 103.
 
Straightpool_99

Straightpool_99

I see dead balls
Silver Member
Yes, I've taken 3 fouls intentionally in a match.

If you are playing quality opposition you have to realize when you have a bad hand. This shouldn't give you any more trouble than folding in poker. In a game with quality players, leaving your opponent a shot will easily cost you from 40-50 points and upward, possibly the whole game. On the other hand, if you are both c players, then you should consider your options more carefully. I made a thread about this earlier, detailing my thoughts on the matter.

Here it is, for what it's worth:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=404542&highlight=fouls
 
Last edited:
acousticsguru

acousticsguru

player/instructor
Silver Member
Straightpool_99 said:
Yes, I've taken 3 fouls intentionally in a match.

If you are playing quality opposition you have to realize when you have a bad hand. This shouldn't give you any more trouble than folding in poker. In a game with quality players, leaving your opponent a shot will easily cost you from 40-50 points and upward, possibly the whole game. On the other hand, if you are both c players, then you should consider your options more carefully. I made a thread about this earlier, detailing my thoughts on the matter.

Here it is, for what it's worth:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=404542&highlight=fouls
Click to expand...

While I agree one might try and gauge the speed of one's competition (which is implicitly what one does letting one's opponent to the table), I've always felt that doing so is risky business. The more pertinent question is whether or not one feels 18 balls are manageable. Personally, they make no difference to me whatsoever. What I need is to beat the other guy to the shot, preferably an open table to get going. So, on the contrary, I've occasionally been mad at myself for not taking three fouls and the 18-point penalty, saying to myself I'm not supposed to lose a game choosing a potentially less predictable strategy ever.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
 
Last edited:
Straightpool_99

Straightpool_99

I see dead balls
Silver Member
acousticsguru said:
While I agree one might try and gauge the speed of one's competition (which is implicitly what one does letting one's opponent to the table), I've always felt that doing so is risky business. The more pertinent question is whether or not one feels 18 balls are manageable. Personally, they make no difference to me whatsoever. What I need is to beat the other guy to the shot, preferably an open table to get going. So, on the contrary, I've occasionally been mad at myself for not taking three fouls and the 18-point penalty, saying to myself I'm not supposed to lose a game choosing a potentially less predictable strategy ever.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion, but I disagree. Taking -18 may be nothing for a 100 ball runner, especially in a race to 125-150, but in a race to 75 with people whose high runs are in the 30's for instance, it's a major disadvantage. A player of that standard may have a average point per inning score of about 3-4 points, maybe even less. Puts it in perspective, I think. If you want to be a 100-200 ball runner some day, then by all means learn the "correct" way to play against such players. But if you are a once a week league player, playing against other such players, then you might put yourself at a disadvantage. Taking scratches is contingent upon you being able to outrun the other player, even from a disadvantageous position. If that is not the case, then you should think and act differently.

Straight pool and one pocket are two games in which it may be beneficial to "play the player" to an extent. If you know a persons weakness, it can be exploited to great effect. Besides, in straight pool especially, a persons speed tends to be pretty well clocked. Very rarely will you be surprised by a poor player putting big runs together all of a sudden. Even if it does happen, it would have been a good bet to bet against it. But I agree that at the higher levels, you're better off playing the safe way, and playing the table.
 
acousticsguru

acousticsguru

player/instructor
Silver Member
Straightpool_99 said:
I respect your opinion, but I disagree. Taking -18 may be nothing for a 100 ball runner, especially in a race to 125-150, but in a race to 75 with people whose high runs are in the 30's for instance, it's a major disadvantage. A player of that standard may have a average point per inning score of about 3-4 points, maybe even less. Puts it in perspective, I think. If you want to be a 100-200 ball runner some day, then by all means learn the "correct" way to play against such players. But if you are a once a week league player, playing against other such players, then you might put yourself at a disadvantage. Taking scratches is contingent upon you being able to outrun the other player, even from a disadvantageous position. If that is not the case, then you should think and act differently.

Straight pool and one pocket are two games in which it may be beneficial to "play the player" to an extent. If you know a persons weakness, it can be exploited to great effect. Besides, in straight pool especially, a persons speed tends to be pretty well clocked. Very rarely will you be surprised by a poor player putting big runs together all of a sudden. Even if it does happen, it would have been a good bet to bet against it. But I agree that at the higher levels, you're better off playing the safe way, and playing the table.
Click to expand...

There is no disagreement: that is what I meant by "gauging the speed of one's opponent" - you need to be sure they average no more than you're pointing out. In Open tournament play, there's no way of knowing - risky business to let the unknown to the table. One has to rely on one's own ability, and play the table as you say. Needless to say, if it were a certainty one's opponent averages 4, one might consider shooting at a white flag. It's not the correct way, as you're pointing out, especially if one plans on improving in the long run. I wish there were leagues in my neck of the woods, so I'd see more of what you're referring to, but I can only imagine. I live where there's nothing but practice in one's ivory tower, occasionally driving many miles to where after a near-prefect lag and opening break, leaving the cue ball right under the head rail, you're sitting on the electric chair praying the eagle-eyed teenager at table isn't going to run out on you...

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top