What's the best safe from here?

I just tried it for conformation.^

Hit the 8-ball full but slightly on the 3-ball side....cue-ball above center.
..hit this shot at 'cream-puff' speed.

About 6 balls came loose and whitey was stuck in the pack.

ps..the thin cut on the 14-ball and to the rail back into the pack is not
aggressive enough....same as thinning the head ball.

pt109 said:

I just tried it for conformation.^

Hit the 8-ball full but slightly on the 3-ball side....cue-ball above center.
..hit this shot at 'cream-puff' speed.

About 6 balls came loose and whitey was stuck in the pack.

ps..the thin cut on the 14-ball and to the rail back into the pack is not
aggressive enough....same as thinning the head ball.

Click to expand...

Sorry for the delay Rufus, i thought this was the same safety thread from a few weeks back. my bad.

i also think shoot straight into the 8 tickling the 3, gotta watch the speed though that corner ball has a tendency of coming off the back rail as a shot into the corner.

-Steve

Just saw this myself, I'll add that while we all are comfortable with different stroke techniques, I also like going into the 8 favoring the left side ever so slightly, but with a tad of left follow. I personally would not want to touch the 3 at all.

For me, ( now this is a touch shot hit very softly just enough to drive a ball to the rail.) the touch of left helps the CB eat into the 8-3 crotch, further preventing it from rolling off the 8 to the right and nesting in a bit deeper.

for me this is where i leave myself sometimes when i know i can't break them.
for me the correct shot is maximum left spin hitting the nine as full as possible and soft enough so that the ten ball doesn't come back into the pack. the cue ball is going to stick right there most every time, every single time for a good player. the ten needs to be makeable so my opponent can't play safe behind the rack/.
I really like my chances from this posisition.
steven

Straight onto the 9 is another possibility if you're sure not to graze the 8 (basically, mentally draw a line each through rows 11, 4 and 9, as well as 10 and 8, making sure which you are above/below, and decide from there), but it's slightly less aggressive, as a safety is always going to be most effective if there are object balls out in the open on two sides of the rack (instead of just one), with the cue ball parked on the third.

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

Bob Jewett said:

I agree with most of the previous posts except I don't think any side spin is needed. You need to hit the shot hard enough to get a ball to the cushion, but if you hit it a little too hard, the balls on one side or the other of the rack seem to roll to safe positions. You want to leave shots on both sides of the rack.

Click to expand...

Yeah, Bob, what I was attempting to explain is it really isn't spin, its a little turn, hardly noticeable, and it acts as a bit of insurance putting the brakes on the CB from doing any drifting off to the right. At least that's how I like it from this angle. You can't do that going into the bottom ball or it will tear the bottom ball away. It's much more difficult to explain than it is to execute.

If the pack isn't really tight, the safe on the eight is chancy. It appears that the safe on the nine is not quite available. --- otherwise, it would be my first choice. If the safe on the eight is in your wheelhouse, by all means play it (a little follow and no English). If not, either a) graze the corner ball and bring the cue ball into the back of the rack, or b) a back scratch is certainly reasonable here, too, and I have often seen top pros take a back scratch out of fear that a ball will leak out on the safe directly into the eight. Nice thread with very good responses.

I hesitated to answer this because I just did not know. I have been there before and had mixed results. I felt the 9 was not available. The 8 was a maybe. I have had some success with the 8, but I have leaked a ball out going for it, too. The skim the 14 ball and go to the bottom is available, as is the cue ball to the bottom, back scratch into middle of the rack.

I think if I did not feel really confident with the 8, I would probably go the back scratch route.

dmgwalsh said:

I hesitated to answer this because I just did not know. I have been there before and had mixed results. I felt the 9 was not available. The 8 was a maybe. I have had some success with the 8, but I have leaked a ball out going for it, too. The skim the 14 ball and go to the bottom is available, as is the cue ball to the bottom, back scratch into middle of the rack.

I think if I did not feel really confident with the 8, I would probably go the back scratch route.

Click to expand...

Too passive a choice against serious competition, I feel - I'd rather have a (even if only positional, given I have to let my opponent to the table) advantage, and to get balls open on two sides of the rack and the cue ball against the third is the way to get (maintain = from the perspective that I'm at the table) it. The balls are being racked for you (or you rack them yourself, which I prefer in Straight Pool anyhow), so insist on a tight rack where that corner ball will not leak out.

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

What sjm said. My first thought was the 8 was chancy. Balls pop out at that angle. Unlike sjm, I like to freeze the cb to the rail. When you kiss the rack, it's way too easy for your opponent to tick you off it and kiss YOU to the rail. Sure, you can stick to the rack from the rail but sometimes the angle gets funny and you force your opponent to pop a ball out from there.

Backscratching if you don't have to causes pop outs. That's always been my luck
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Put me in the backscratching camp. I've seen balls leak out on the side-of-rack safe from this angle way too often. I've also seen it get safe, but not really all that safe. And yes, sometimes it works great, but even that can be fleeting - as Bob said, the standard reply would be a nudge to try and change the position. If it doesn't, who cares? My opponent will take the third foul, insist on a tight rack, and he'll leave me a very difficult shot on two fouls. Not a total disaster for him.

I like the side of the rack safe from close positions on more shallow angles. This is way too risky for me from here, but I tend to skew conservative on this particular safe.

- Steve

SpiderWebComm said:

What sjm said. My first thought was the 8 was chancy. Balls pop out at that angle. Unlike sjm, I like to freeze the cb to the rail. When you kiss the rack, it's way too easy for your opponent to tick you off it and kiss YOU to the rail. Sure, you can stick to the rack from the rail but sometimes the angle gets funny and you force your opponent to pop a ball out from there.

Backscratching if you don't have to causes pop outs. That's always been my luck
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Click to expand...

It's not for me to say what your experience has been freezing the cueball to the rail, but I don't like it because the incredibly easy second ball safety from behind will be made available to your opponent far too often. My shot makes sure that all the available responses will leave the rack largely undisturbed.

Also, backscratching from this position is very easy to execute and is a rock solid choice. It's extremely easy to control the speed and the accuracy of the backscratch from this close the the bottom of the table.

In each case, the intent is to begin a safety battle on relatively even footing.

If the relatively risk free safe on the nine were available, you could be reasonably sure of taking a big lead in the safety battle, but the masters were not that eager to play the third ball safeties from either above or behind the rack.

Steve Lipsky said:

Put me in the backscratching camp. I've seen balls leak out on the side-of-rack safe from this angle way too often. I've also seen it get safe, but not really all that safe. And yes, sometimes it works great, but even that can be fleeting - as Bob said, the standard reply would be a nudge to try and change the position. If it doesn't, who cares? My opponent will take the third foul, insist on a tight rack, and he'll leave me a very difficult shot on two fouls. Not a total disaster for him.

I like the side of the rack safe from close positions on more shallow angles. This is way too risky for me from here, but I tend to skew conservative on this particular safe.

- Steve

Click to expand...

Good point of view, Steve. Most safety battles are wars of attrition in which you need to stick to sound principles of developing threats while avoiding playing chancy shots. You have to stick to shots within your comfort zone, and I am not inclined to gamble on this type of safe either.

Well analyzed, too. Best case scenario is probably that opponent will incur a fifteen ball penalty, but if you get this wrong, you may be in for a long trip to the chair.

sjm said:

Good point of view, Steve. Most safety battles are wars of attrition in which you need to stick to sound principles of developing threats while avoiding playing chancy shots. You have to stick to shots within your comfort zone, and I am not inclined to gamble on this type of safe either.

Well analyzed, too. Best case scenario is probably that opponent will incur a fifteen ball penalty, but if you get this wrong, you may be in for a long trip to the chair.

Click to expand...

This thread brings up something I've long felt. I would generally prefer leaving my opponent super tough rather than in absolute jail. When left with literally no options he is almost forced to take three fouls, which I really don't consider a giant advantage to the receiver on semi-tough equipment.

I'd much rather leave him an awkward bank or a weird cut uptable from the rail, where he's maybe 25-30%.

- Steve

Folks:

Been away from the 14.1 forum for a little spell, so it was a pleasant surprise to come back & notice there's this jewel of a thread!

I don't like the side-of-the-rack safety simply because the cue ball is "too high." Playing one pocket as much as I do gives a bit of a unique perspective on this kind of safety, in that I can't tell you how many times I've sold out when the corner ball leaked out enough that even if I glued the cue ball to the 8-ball (or any of those balls in that side of the rack closest to the cue ball), the opponent still had a shot at the "leaked out" ball -- in this case, the 14-ball.

If the cue ball were just a bit lower -- say, where that piece of chalk is on the rail -- I'd go for the side-of-the-rack safety in a heartbeat, because the angle is more straight "into" the side of the rack. There is no "diagonal energy" (for lack of a better term) that would otherwise divert down the row of balls, pushing that 14-ball outwards.

Put me in the backscratch camp as well. And I like Dave's (SpiderWebComm's) stance on "Brunswicking" your opponent -- glue the cue ball to the rail if you can. The only caveat is be careful with this, because if the ball you "tick" (or another ball next to it) leaks out, your opponent will have a shot at a "threatening" safety -- meaning, a shot that puts the ball in play on the other side of the rack, limiting your defensive counter-moves because that loose ball is now threatening the majority of the perimeter around the rack.

-Sean

P.S.: yes, I know the Brunswick label is on the other side (head end) of the table. I've always playfully called a weld to the center point on the short rail "Brunswicking" the cue ball.

sjm said:

It's not for me to say what your experience has been freezing the cueball to the rail, but I don't like it because the incredibly easy second ball safety from behind will be made available to your opponent far too often. My shot makes sure that all the available responses will leave the rack largely undisturbed.

Also, backscratching from this position is very easy to execute and is a rock solid choice. It's extremely easy to control the speed and the accuracy of the backscratch from this close the the bottom of the table.

In each case, the intent is to begin a safety battle on relatively even footing.

If the relatively risk free safe on the nine were available, you could be reasonably sure of taking a big lead in the safety battle, but the masters were not that eager to play the third ball safeties from either above or behind the rack.

Click to expand...

My personal issue w/ that second ball safety is it's cake to tick your opponent to the side rail and spin back to kiss the short rail (my starting position). I've always tried to be the first one to kiss the rail. Otherwise, it's too easy for my opponent to put me there (and I think it sucks from there).

From that position, depending on the angle, you can force someone to knock a ball loose by performing what should be a standard safety. Lots of bad things can happen for your opponent while touching the bottom rail -- and the only bad thing that can happen to them by touching the rack is being on a tangent to the pocket. Otherwise, the follow-up safety is a throw-in.

The back scratch is available; however, you always run the risk of a back-row ball sinking off the rack. If your opponent tilts the rack ever so slightly without you noticing, you're doomed. I'm not saying it's a bad move, it's not. I'm just saying I try to eliminate the chance of bad things happening while forcing my opponent to come into/off-of the rack first.

If my opponent kisses me into the rack and gets fortunate enough to tangent me to the corner, I'll intentional my way out of it.

Hopefully that makes sense. I just wanted to explain my thought process. I think my biggest strength is kissing the CB to that short rail. If someone wants to shoot at a loose ball at a funny angle up table while kissing the rail, I always let'm.

SpiderWebComm said:

My personal issue w/ that second ball safety is it's cake to tick your opponent to the side rail and spin back to kiss the short rail (my starting position). I've always tried to be the first one to kiss the rail. Otherwise, it's too easy for my opponent to put me there (and I think it sucks from there).

From that position, depending on the angle, you can force someone to knock a ball loose by performing what should be a standard safety. Lots of bad things can happen for your opponent while touching the bottom rail -- and the only bad thing that can happen to them by touching the rack is being on a tangent to the pocket. Otherwise, the follow-up safety is a throw-in.

The back scratch is available; however, you always run the risk of a back-row ball sinking off the rack. If your opponent tilts the rack ever so slightly without you noticing, you're doomed. I'm not saying it's a bad move, it's not. I'm just saying I try to eliminate the chance of bad things happening while forcing my opponent to come into/off-of the rack first.

If my opponent kisses me into the rack and gets fortunate enough to tangent me to the corner, I'll intentional my way out of it.

Hopefully that makes sense. I just wanted to explain my thought process. I think my biggest strength is kissing the CB to that short rail. If someone wants to shoot at a loose ball at a funny angle up table while kissing the rail, I always let'm.

Click to expand...

First of all, your opponent won't be frozen. If you try to freeze them, you'll scratch some of the time and the response will , so a top player will hit this just slightly hard enough to come a bit off the rail. Second, I do not agree that there is any problem from under the rack, but if, by some chance, nothing easy is available to me from undeneath, I'll take a scratch into the back of the rack which will loosen a couple of balls but will leave nothing. If you then knock me back below the rack, I'll have lots of options for my next safety. This, by the way, is how Irving Crane used to play from below a frozen or nearly frozen rack if he didn't like the safety angle into the back of the back. Practice the escape from below. Though it will sometimes cost you one point, it's an incredibly simple escape to execute.

Trust me on this one, your approach will never win the safety battle against a tactically strong opponent. If will merely start a safety battle, one which you may ultimately win, but you are not ahead in the safety battle with your prescribed shot against a top player.