Corr vs Appleton Safety Battle

Dan White · Sep 17, 2014

Diamond Billiards did a great thing by live streaming their straight pool tournament last weekend, and then posting some of the matches for replay.

I watched the finals between Corr and Appleton and of course they are both top notch, first class level players. However, I found that the safety battle near the end of the match was surprisingly one dimensional. My purpose with this post is not to try and criticize world class players (well, I guess I am doing that), but to see if I have really learned anything about safety battles -- from Stu in particular. I would like to go through each safety shot explaining what I think is wrong, and what a better alternative would have been. I think I will learn more from your various replies that way.

Unfortunately I had to post all the photos at the bottom of this post, so you might have to scroll up and down a bunch of times to see what I am talking about. Also, if you want to view the actual safety battle you can find it here (starting at about 43:20):

http://vimeo.com/106301897

The overall comment I have is that both players seem to be relying too heavily on only one safety strategy: "put a lot of space between the cue ball and the rest of the balls." This is only one strategy, and I believe is one that is mostly used when there are no other alternatives.

Stu likes to talk about "developing threats." Like in chess, the war is won a bit at a time, not all in one battle. Developing threats is the process of moving balls into the open one or two at a time while at the same time not allowing your opponent to have a shot on those balls. Eventually it will be nearly impossible for your opponent to leave you without a shot if you have done things perfectly. I don't see any of that in this safety contest.

PHOTO 1
This begins the safety contest. Corr has gotten straight on her break ball and decided to play safe by pocketing the break ball and drawing back to the head rail. IMO the correct play here is to pocket the ball and roll ahead about a ball diameter. Take the point. Then, play a "second ball" safety by shooting into the 5 ball. This is a standard "bread and butter" 14.1 safety play that scatters balls nicely and freezes the cue ball...tough to get out of. Corr had the opportunity to take an offensive position in the safety play with the second ball safety, instead, she passed on the opportunity and left things neutral.

PHOTO 2 shows what Appleton is left with.

PHOTO 3
In this photo Appleton has already taken a "back scratch" by going two rails and into the back of the rack, which was the correct shot. He almost misplayed the shot by not freezing the cue ball to the back of the pack. Corr is in the process of grazing the 15 and going to the head of the table, which I believe is another mistake.

I've heard two HOF players say to "never, never, ever, ever, never.....ever" graze a corner ball and send the cue ball uptable. There is too great a risk of creating a dead combination into one of the near corner pockets. You can see the 12 and 13 balls move after she hits the shot, and the first thing Appleton does is walk over and scrutinize those balls for something dead.

I think she could have shot the cue ball towards the left side rail, nicking the 15 in the process and leaving the cue ball either near the left corner pocket, or somewhere that she isn't leaving a shot on the 8 ball.

PHOTO 4
So Corr gets away with it and hits a shot with nice speed, leaving him on the rail. Appleton does the right thing and even develops the 8 to his advantage from a difficult position (seen in photo 5).

PHOTO 5
If the bottom row of balls were frozen, it could have been a nice opportunity to open more balls up (more threats) while freezing on the 11, but in fairness I don't think that was possible here. Corr does about all she can from this situation.

PHOTO 6
I think Appleton takes the wrong shot here. He again uses the strategy of putting the cue ball far away from the object balls. In the process, though, he sends the 8 into the pack and it NEARLY freezes dead into the corner pocket (see photo 7). Against someone like Corr, that could have been a serious turning point in the match. The 11 on the other side of the pack was disturbed by the 8 ball contact and could have been made dead in the corner off the 6, although it wasn't.

I think he should have thinned the right side of the 8, sending it to the middle region of the table while hiding the cue ball either nestled in the pack, or hidden just below it. In either case, there is no risk of creating a dead combination.

PHOTO 7
Again, Corr thins the 8 in order to send the cue ball back uptable away from the other balls. She disturbs the rack in the process and just look at the 15 ball. It moves backwards and comes within an eyelash of being dead in the corner. Appleton takes a second look for dead balls.

I think she might have been wise to take a 1 rail back scratch with right english. In other words, don't try to thin the 8. Just reset your strategy by taking a scratch and snugging up against the 9 and 2 without moving a lot of balls apart (after all you are on 1 foul and your opponent can just tap the cue ball if you make things too difficult).

PHOTO 8
Appleton loses the safety battle on this shot. Again, he is using the same strategy...keep the cue ball far away from the other balls. He hits too fat and pops the 9 ball out as a hanger. Maybe the better option is to back scratch as in photo 7. You just have to be careful about not leaving a shot on the 8.

PHOTO 9
This shows the result of Appleton's safety. Corr misses, probably due to fatigue, but she still won the safety contest.

After looking through these shots in more detail, I think Corr's shot in Photo 7 was potentially the most devastating. That 15 ball moves backwards almost in perfect position to be dead off the 5 in the corner.

When you remove the "thin a ball and send the cue ball uptable" shot from your thinking, it opens up other interesting possibilities. I can't say there is NEVER a time for a shot like that, but then who am I to argue with HOF straight pool players?

I'm interested to hear comments!

Bob Jewett · Sep 17, 2014

Dan White said:
... Corr misses, probably due to fatigue, ...

I don't think Karen would miss that ball by that much due to fatigue. I think it was due to the way she played the ball.

I agree with the rest of your analysis. It seems that very few players these days are aware of the second ball safety from a full (or 14-ball) rack.

I think that when Appleton played two cushions to the back of the rack, he should have tried to leave the cue ball in the middle of the back of the rack and maybe a little firmer. If he disturbs nothing or very little, Corr should go 2 or 3 rails to the other end without moving any balls.

sjm · Sep 17, 2014

Very nice analysis here, Dan. In Diagram 1, most of the old masters would play for the second ball safety to develop threats on the side and under the rack at the beginning of the rack. Many would also take the back scratch in diagram 8 (one rail with english into the nine is unlikely to cost here). It's often easy to overlook that a back scratch may still be available even though the rack is partially disturbed.

As for thinning the corner ball in Diagram 3 and going up table here, both Crane and DiLiberto professed against this, as a backscratch response will typically be possible, so the upside is minimal, and the downside (which rarely, but occasionally, occurs) is leaving a dead ball.

You've learned your lessons well.

Or course, Darren and Karen are superstars of the highest order, but what right have we to expect them to know the 14.1 moves the way those who played 14.1 every day of the week did?

stevekur1 · Sep 18, 2014

sjm said:
Very nice analysis here, Dan. In Diagram 1, most of the old masters would play for the second ball safety to develop threats on the side and under the rack at the beginning of the rack. Many would also take the back scratch in diagram 8 (one rail with english into the nine is unlikely to cost here). It's often easy to overlook that a back scratch may still be available even though the rack is partially disturbed.

As for thinning the corner ball in Diagram 3 and going up table here, both Crane and DiLiberto professed against this, as a backscratch response will typically be possible, so the upside is minimal, and the downside (which rarely, but occasionally, occurs) is leaving a dead ball.

You've learned your lessons well.

Or course, Darren and Karen are superstars of the highest order, but what right have we to expect them to know the 14.1 moves the way those who played 14.1 every day of the week did?

I totally agree, the shot that should of been played from the start is pocket the breakball get the point then play the safety into the second ball at the bottom of the side of the rack.

3 or 4 balls will come out with the cueball frozen to the rack. Which will leave a tougher situation for the opponent to defend.

I play this shot quite often, and it works like a charm every time !!!

-Steve

Bob Jewett · Sep 18, 2014

sjm said:
... Many would also take the back scratch in diagram 8 (one rail with english into the nine is unlikely to cost here). ...

But if the foul moves almost nothing he may find himself frozen to the head rail which is worse than where he starts.

sjm · Sep 18, 2014

Bob Jewett said:
But if the foul moves almost nothing he may find himself frozen to the head rail which is worse than where he starts.

Right, Bob, but a) opponent may not know that response and b) opponent will be jacked up and will be hard pressed to execute the two/three railer to the top.

To be honest, Bob, based on a whole lot of observation, the scratch response to the top is not well known to this generation of 14.1 players.

You'll gain more often than not with this passive play.

Bob Jewett · Sep 18, 2014

sjm said:
Right, Bob, but a) opponent may not know that response and b) opponent will be jacked up and will be hard pressed to execute the two/three railed to the top.

To be honest, Bob, based on a whole lot of observation, the scratch response to the top is not well known to this generation of 14.1 players.

You'll gain more often than not with this passive play.

All true. I find that in league I can play some very neutral safeties and they work well due to the lack of knowledge of standard responses. A few players know the second ball safe (against the full rack) but many do exactly what Karen did except they don't freeze the cue ball to end rail.

alstl · Sep 18, 2014

Thanks for the thread and pictures, interesting discussion.

First shot, I agree she should have played for the second ball safety. Pretty much a standard shot.

Appleton's response, maybe he tried to two rails into the middle ball and accidentally hit the corner ball. If not, that was a mistake.

Picture 8, that was about he worst thing he could have done. If he didn't like kicking into the bottom of the rack he would have been better off just touching the cue ball and giving the shot back to Karen. Better to take the penalty and re-rack than open up the rack in the finals of a tournament with a world class field. He was lucky to get out of his seat with a shot after that.

Regarding playing a safety because the opponent might not know the correct response - that is risky because if the opponent is a world class player and they do know the correct response it could cost you the game.

I and others have said it before. Today's players can run balls as good as anybody but the difference between today and yesteryear is safety play. Probably a result of the previous generation playing more against an opponent while the current generation mostly play 14.1 by themselves running balls.

Bob Jewett · Sep 18, 2014

alstl said:
... Picture 8, that was about he worst thing he could have done. If he didn't like kicking into the bottom of the rack he would have been better off just touching the cue ball and giving the shot back to Karen. ...

I think kicking to the 9 is tough. You have to just get there and it looks like it takes a lot of right side. If he hits on the right (as we see it) side of the 9 he could leave it straight in with the 8 to break with.

I think better than just touching the cue ball is to move it to a place where the safe is a little less difficult.

alstl · Sep 18, 2014

Bob Jewett said:
I think kicking to the 9 is tough. You have to just get there and it looks like it takes a lot of right side. If he hits on the right (as we see it) side of the 9 he could leave it straight in with the 8 to break with.

I think better than just touching the cue ball is to move it to a place where the safe is a little less difficult.

I agree, kicking into the 9 would be, as Grady would say, fraught with danger. Better than what Appleton did but still iffy.

Pushing to the end rail or rolling up against the top of the stack would make the safe more difficult and most likely would result in 3 fouls but if you want to entice the opponent into taking an iffy shot it might be better to leave just touch the cue ball and see if the opponent wants to try it.

Nostroke · Sep 18, 2014

These players win by their shooting and as everyone has noted-they dont know the SP moves by heart yet.

Marlon Manalo won the NJ SP Championship-at the time pretty equivalent to this field here and from what i have been told, knew less than what either of these 2 here know. Who even knew Karen Corr had played a game of SP ?

Daz with his limited knowledge of SP was still the FAVORITE to win this tournament and whatever one that comes next also. Efren won his first SP tourny, after somewhat practicing SP for 2 weeks. Daz won the DCC thing, his first ever SP tourny also-didnt know any of the rules other than keep trying to make balls.

Draw your own conclusions but straight shooting and CB control seem to be the most important things is SP. overcoming tactics. as disappointing as that may be to those that love this game.

sjm · Sep 18, 2014

Nostroke said:
Draw your own conclusions but straight shooting and CB control seem to be the most important things is SP. overcoming tactics. as disappointing as that may be to those that love this game.

I think it was always this way, but just as it used to be, the ability to steal a couple of innings will, from time to time, be the difference.

sjm · Sep 18, 2014

alstl said:
I agree, kicking into the 9 would be, as Grady would say, fraught with danger. Better than what Appleton did but still iffy.

Pushing to the end rail or rolling up against the top of the stack would make the safe more difficult and most likely would result in 3 fouls but if you want to entice the opponent into taking an iffy shot it might be better to leave just touch the cue ball and see if the opponent wants to try it.

First of all, the downside is not likely to be greater than leaving the eight bridging over the stack, while the upside is loosening something in the front which would deny any aggressive response. Remember, you are behind in this sequence and are looking to maneuver in a way that opponent cannot trap you. This is your best chance.

Second, Grady's terminology was "fraught with peril." Third, that is not how Grady would have described this approach.

dmgwalsh · Sep 19, 2014

Nice analysis, Dan.

I will give a link to our straight pool league, which includes many who are new to the game. I may not be able to get away with stealing a few innings quite as often, but on the other hand, the quality of league play may improve.

Andrew Manning · Sep 19, 2014

sjm said:
In Diagram 1, most of the old masters would play for the second ball safety to develop threats on the side and under the rack at the beginning of the rack.

For those of us who aren't that familiar with 14.1 tactics, why the second ball? It's unclear to me what makes that better than the ball above it, or even the one above that.

sjm said:
As for thinning the corner ball in Diagram 3 and going up table here, both Crane and DiLiberto professed against this, as a backscratch response will typically be possible, so the upside is minimal, and the downside (which rarely, but occasionally, occurs) is leaving a dead ball.

What shot, then, would Crane or Diliberto opt to attempt instead?

Andrew

sparkle84 · Sep 19, 2014

With a full rack and the CB located somewhere opposite the 2nd diamond on the long rail this is a very effective safety. If executed correctly the CB is frozen to the rack, one ball goes down to the bottom rail and another ball goes out towards the opposite side rail. Your opponent has few to no options and many times is forced to take a foul.
The same safe can be played into the bottom ball or the 3rd ball up with like results. Which is chosen is determined by CB location. In diagram 1 if the CB was exactly where the break ball is you'd be in perfect position to shoot full into the second ball. If she shot the break ball and stopped dead wouldn't be quite as good but could still be done by hitting the 5 as full as possible and applying a good amount of right to help keep the CB from going towards the bottom rail.
The line of centers are key. You'd like the CB to be slightly below the line of center of the 5 & 4 so the CB path fades slightly right and ends up frozen between the 5 & 7.
If the CB were slightly higher then playing into the line of 7,14,9 would be better or if lower play full into the 15.

* It's essential the balls be frozen or this is not going to work so if you're going to do it then make sure when your opponent racks the balls.

sjm · Sep 19, 2014

Great questions, Andrew.

Andrew Manning said:
For those of us who aren't that familiar with 14.1 tactics, why the second ball? It's unclear to me what makes that better than the ball above it, or even the one above that.

Yes, there are safeties available off each of these balls. But, as Sparkle84 and Steve Kerr note, what makes this choice so popular among the best tacticians is the great predictability of which threats you will create. Done properly, this safety leaves threats on the side of the rack and under the rack, putting great pressure on opponent.

Andrew Manning said:
What shot, then, would Crane or Diliberto opt to attempt instead?

They'd probably graze the bottom of the pack and come back across far enough to ensure not leaving a shot on the eight. This will extend, not win, the safety battle.

Dan White · Sep 20, 2014

Let's try it and find out!

I was interested in the discussion between Stu and Bob regarding Appleton's shot in photo 8 in which he sold out the farm. In the first photo below I've reproduced the set up as accurately as I could including the correct ball numbers.

My first observation is that it is clear that there is very little room between the 9 and the other balls. It isn't like you can hide the cue ball behind the 9. You are either going to hit the 9 or hit the 2 next to it. You can't sneak up in between them (not that anyone suggested that).

My next observation is that both Bob and Stu are right! I was surprised to find out how much english is needed to get the cue ball to hit the 9. I thought that there was enough angle between the cue ball and the bottom rail that you wouldn't need much english. But the 15 is blocking that angle and it is really much straighter than you might think. In order to hit the 9 ball, you have to imagine rebounding the cue ball into the left side pocket. This takes a lot of english!

On my first two attempts (next photo), I rebounded into the 2 first and was able to pocket the 8 AND make my way around the table at additional shots. I was able to reach the 8 in both cases even though I am left handed. So I lost the safety battle.

On the third attempt, and near maximum side spin, I rebounded into the 9 perfectly and had a nice safe. It was impossible to use the bridge to reach the 8, although if I had stacked 2 bridges I probably could have made the 8. My safety reply was to graze the 2 and go down to the bottom rail and back into the pack gently. Even though I executed this reasonably well, the cue ball position was different enough that I now had a shot on the 8 (not easy, but make-able). I was able to rebound back into the pack for a shot on the 2 in the corner, and was off and running.

So what I learned is that if you are aware of the extreme english required for this shot, it is not a bad bet to hit the 9. I guess if I set the shot up 20 times I could see how repeatable it is. Something tells me, though, that if you hit the 2 first you will leave the 8 open for a shot, but if you hit the 9 you are OK.

sjm · Sep 20, 2014

Dan White said:
I was interested in the discussion between Stu and Bob regarding Appleton's shot in photo 8 in which he sold out the farm. In the first photo below I've reproduced the set up as accurately as I could including the correct ball numbers.

My first observation is that it is clear that there is very little room between the 9 and the other balls. It isn't like you can hide the cue ball behind the 9. You are either going to hit the 9 or hit the 2 next to it. You can't sneak up in between them (not that anyone suggested that).

My next observation is that both Bob and Stu are right! I was surprised to find out how much english is needed to get the cue ball to hit the 9. I thought that there was enough angle between the cue ball and the bottom rail that you wouldn't need much english. But the 15 is blocking that angle and it is really much straighter than you might think. In order to hit the 9 ball, you have to imagine rebounding the cue ball into the left side pocket. This takes a lot of english!

On my first two attempts (next photo), I rebounded into the 2 first and was able to pocket the 8 AND make my way around the table at additional shots. I was able to reach the 8 in both cases even though I am left handed. So I lost the safety battle.

On the third attempt, and near maximum side spin, I rebounded into the 9 perfectly and had a nice safe. It was impossible to use the bridge to reach the 8, although if I had stacked 2 bridges I probably could have made the 8. My safety reply was to graze the 2 and go down to the bottom rail and back into the pack gently. Even though I executed this reasonably well, the cue ball position was different enough that I now had a shot on the 8 (not easy, but make-able). I was able to rebound back into the pack for a shot on the 2 in the corner, and was off and running.

So what I learned is that if you are aware of the extreme english required for this shot, it is not a bad bet to hit the 9. I guess if I set the shot up 20 times I could see how repeatable it is. Something tells me, though, that if you hit the 2 first you will leave the 8 open for a shot, but if you hit the 9 you are OK.

Very good post, Dan. One must weigh one's ability to execute any safety or intentional foul before selecting any shot. Personalizing the percentages is something you and I have discussed, and this is a good example.

Still, Dan, if you are hitting this soft enough, even though you might leave the eight in the corner with a jacked up cue, nothing else will come off the rack and, if that's the case, opponent might not even shoot the eight, favoring the multi-rail scratch to the top rail noted by Bob, which would possibly apply even greater pressure.

Again, your analysis is solid.

Dan White · Sep 21, 2014

sjm said:
Still, Dan, if you are hitting this soft enough, even though you might leave the eight in the corner with a jacked up cue, nothing else will come off the rack and, if that's the case, opponent might not even shoot the eight, favoring the multi-rail scratch to the top rail noted by Bob, which would possibly apply even greater pressure.

Hmm... speed of shot isn't something I considered carefully enough. I was shooting hard enough to get the cue ball to stick in the pack and pop out one or two "threats." The presumption was that by sticking the cue ball in the pack I would not leave a good enough shot on the 8, and the 2 rail scratch would not be possible due to the added threats. In your scenario, by hitting the shot softly, no other balls are disturbed. This means even if the 8 is pocketable, it doesn't give away much as the balls are still clustered. So I guess the soft approach is more of a hedge against a potential shot on the 8, whereas a slightly harder hit requires that there be no shot on the 8 available. I guess if Appleton is on the defensive, then he shouldn't try to do too much with the shot??

Thanks for pointing out that nuance, Stu!

Corr vs Appleton Safety Battle

AzB Silver Member

Attachments

AZB Osmium Member

Older and Wiser

The "COMMISH"

AZB Osmium Member

Older and Wiser

AZB Osmium Member

AzB Silver Member

AZB Osmium Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Older and Wiser

Older and Wiser

Straight Pool Fanatic

Aspiring know-it-all

AzB Silver Member

Older and Wiser

AzB Silver Member

Attachments

Older and Wiser

AzB Silver Member