PDA

View Full Version : top player spot on wich table??


buck15
12-04-2007, 02:09 PM
my friend and i had a conversation about a spot in 9 ball. we both took different sides and i told him i would put it to the az community to voice their opinion, so here goes...
a top player offers you a spot(fill in your speed here) playing 9 ball..(money ball spot)
would you rather play that top player on a very, very tight table or a loose table?? 9 footer was our table but feel free to add your track of choice.

Black-Balled
12-04-2007, 02:12 PM
Really, depends on the spot.

Is the spot games on the wire or early balls,
Phuk! What is the game?
(gawddamit, can't you even read, flat-balls? dood said 9b)

Perk
12-04-2007, 02:14 PM
Personally I would go with the bigger pockets. A top player is going to hit the center of the pocket in most cases regardless, however I would like to know I can cheat the pockets if needed or if I dont hit a shot pure that it still might fall. When I play a better player, the last thing I need is to rattle a few shots due to tight pockets. IMO

buzzsaw
12-04-2007, 02:19 PM
Personally I would go with the bigger pockets. A top player is going to hit the center of the pocket in most cases regardless, however I would like to know I can cheat the pockets if needed or if I dont hit a shot pure that it still might fall. When I play a better player, the last thing I need is to rattle a few shots due to tight pockets. IMO
Agreed, the tight pockets would effect the weaker player more than it would the stronger one.

Southpaw
12-04-2007, 02:19 PM
I would prefer the looser pockets myself. The tighter pockets are gonna affect your ball pocketing ability more than his so I want to be able to run balls when I get the chance. JMO/

Southpaw

Jude Rosenstock
12-04-2007, 03:56 PM
There is a very simple rule in pool which I realize runs contrary to what people have already said - Anything that promotes more exchange is beneficial to the weaker player. That is to say, if the cloth is slow, the rails are dead or the pockets are tight, usually the weaker player is going to do better than if the equipment were perfect.

With that said, I know some professionals like Mika Immonen are especially comfortable on tight equipment. I'll take my chances with him on buckets, if I have the choice. Against almost anyone else, I have to hope the tighter pockets will afford me a few more innings.

JustPlay
12-04-2007, 04:19 PM
I would prefer a tight table just for the fact that a better player will have to player really good, but his chances of missing a ball are greater than if he was playing of loose equipment. He may just get a enormous lead on loose equipment and the lesser player get fewer chances at the table and go broke without ever getting a chance to play.

Also on loose equipment, making balls on the break creates more opportunities to run out for the better player. All this could be said for the lesser player, however, tighter equipment I think ensures the lesser player will get more opportunities at the table and make the lesser player focus even more to play better. As you see in tournaments today with diamond tables, you see more back and forth play compared to players being dominated as it used to be in the 80s and 90's on loose gold crown tables.

Southpaw
12-04-2007, 04:28 PM
There is a very simple rule in pool which I realize runs contrary to what people have already said - Anything that promotes more exchange is beneficial to the weaker player. That is to say, if the cloth is slow, the rails are dead or the pockets are tight, usually the weaker player is going to do better than if the equipment were perfect.

With that said, I know some professionals like Mika Immonen are especially comfortable on tight equipment. I'll take my chances with him on buckets, if I have the choice. Against almost anyone else, I have to hope the tighter pockets will afford me a few more innings.

You are not gonna out shoot a top pro on any table, but you have a chance to run balls on a looser table. A top pro will know which shots are too low percentage for him/ her to go for and therefore will out move you...unless you think you can out move a top pro. JMO.

Southpaw

CTYankee
12-04-2007, 05:03 PM
Loose pockets... same reason as above.

Unless I am playing Archer... man that guy is a machine on loose pockets. I will only play him if the pockets are smaller than 2 1/2".

poolcuemaster
12-04-2007, 06:00 PM
I don't think you can out shoot a better player to start with, but if I'm getting the spot I need with a road player the six and out and the breaks. If he rattles a few shots because the tight pockets and leaves me some jawed money balls early, he may put more pressure on himself and end up giving me a chance I might not get on big pockets.

Leonard

Masayoshi
12-04-2007, 06:44 PM
if the top player is giving me enough weight so that i have the advantage, say maybe the orange crush, i might prefer buckets because then i can keep him in his chair for several racks if i am breaking well. if i am getting too little weight i would prefer tight pockets because they will tend to miss a little bit more giving me more chances to shoot. if the top player is on buckets and you dont have the breaks, he will almost never miss and the spot wont do you any good in your chair.

our_auctionguy
12-04-2007, 08:01 PM
I don't think you can out shoot a better player to start with, but if I'm getting the spot I need with a road player the six and out and the breaks. If he rattles a few shots because the tight pockets and leaves me some jawed money balls early, he may put more pressure on himself and end up giving me a chance I might not get on big pockets.

Leonard
I know of a little known local pro in Florida whose favorite practice is race the ghost on a triple shimmed GC for $100-500 a set. Nobody wants to play him with or without a spot on that table. He holds a few #1 spots in Florida events beating the likes of Corey Duel, and other top players who venture onto the circuits there. Tight and fast doesn't scare guys like him. In fact, they prefer it and practice on them or don't practice in order to maintain their perfect aim and stroke. Any above average player or less would be foolish to take these guys on with or without a spot playing on a fast tight table. if you do, you just lowered your own ball making probability and while letting them get paid to practice on you.

Willie set the world record by running 526 consecutive balls without a miss during a straight pool exhibition on March 19, 1954. To this day the record has not been toppled and many speculate it may never be bested. A handwritten and notarized affidavit[6] with the signatures of more than 35 eyewitnesses exists as proof of this feat.

The record was set on a 4 foot x 8 foot Brunswick pool table with 5 1/2 inch pockets at the East High Billiard Club in Springfield, Ohio. However, today's standard for tables is much more difficult to play on than Mosconi's table, as today's standard tables are 9 foot x 4 1/2 foot with 4 1/2 inch pockets.

I want that extra pocket width, so I can shoot like Mosconi.

TWOFORPOOL
12-04-2007, 10:34 PM
I'm considered an A (or Open) player and if I had to play a world class player with a spot I would want tight pockets. The reason is the world class player would miss a little more therebye giving me a few more opportunities.

The more opportunties I have the better chance I have to win plain and simple.

branpureza
12-04-2007, 11:07 PM
tighter pockets are more advantageous to the stronger player.

HollyWood
12-05-2007, 12:20 AM
Try looking at it like this I would bet if you played a pro ( and played sudden death 7- ball for (you) getting ball in hand, the pro gets it where you shoot it. 95 percent are Dead NUts dreaming if ya think ya have a prayer of a chance. Ten ball and alternate break, maybe even WTB. mark

branpureza
12-05-2007, 01:04 AM
Try looking at it like this I would bet if you played a pro ( and played sudden death 7- ball for (you) getting ball in hand, the pro gets it where you shoot it. 95 percent are Dead NUts dreaming if ya think ya have a prayer of a chance. Ten ball and alternate break, maybe even WTB. mark

i have no idea what this means.

Ronoh
12-05-2007, 01:08 AM
The tighter the table, riff raff blah blah blah.

Make sure your mind is wrapped around the concept. The tighter the table, the more wrapped the player. People like that thrive on tight tables. Frustration is their fuel.

They burn out early though. They stroke hard, at hard targets, to keep the line...

The table sucks, it leans.



Honestly, read the table. The one who understands the table first will win.

HollyWood
12-05-2007, 01:12 AM
all that matters is time -itll just take a couple morn minutes on the tighter table sorry for confuseion mark

asn130
12-05-2007, 02:20 AM
did i suddenly lose the abillity to understand english????

hemicudas
12-05-2007, 02:27 AM
There is a very simple rule in pool which I realize runs contrary to what people have already said - Anything that promotes more exchange is beneficial to the weaker player. That is to say, if the cloth is slow, the rails are dead or the pockets are tight, usually the weaker player is going to do better than if the equipment were perfect.

With that said, I know some professionals like Mika Immonen are especially comfortable on tight equipment. I'll take my chances with him on buckets, if I have the choice. Against almost anyone else, I have to hope the tighter pockets will afford me a few more innings.

This my friends is the perfect answer. Can't improve on it. Nice shot, Jude.

RunoutalloverU
12-05-2007, 02:57 AM
i have no idea what this means.

all his posts are like that.

RunoutalloverU
12-05-2007, 03:05 AM
I practice on the tightest tables I can find at a pool hall, I won't even practice on loose tables. At home my table has pocket reducers on. A pro has an easy enough time with loose pockets, I would only play a player better than me on a tight table.

predator
12-05-2007, 06:01 AM
On loose equipment, they'll run out everything.
On tight equipment you'll get a few more chances to shoot, but you'll be forced to do more safety escapes for sure.
Either way, you're doomed. If you're significantly weaker player, neither loose nor tight table will save you.

Jude Rosenstock
12-05-2007, 08:55 AM
You are not gonna out shoot a top pro on any table, but you have a chance to run balls on a looser table. A top pro will know which shots are too low percentage for him/ her to go for and therefore will out move you...unless you think you can out move a top pro. JMO.

Southpaw


Actually, I've beaten a few pros and it's always been on loose equipment though like I said, against most of them, I would probably prefer tight pockets.

uwate
12-05-2007, 09:16 AM
tighter table favors the better player for sure.

Tennesseejoe
12-05-2007, 09:30 AM
If I was spotted a ball or more ie., the 7 & 8, I would want the larger pockets. This would give me a better chance making spot ball combinations and a definite advantage in the push out after the break.

Mike Templeton
12-05-2007, 09:36 AM
There is a very simple rule in pool which I realize runs contrary to what people have already said - Anything that promotes more exchange is beneficial to the weaker player. That is to say, if the cloth is slow, the rails are dead or the pockets are tight, usually the weaker player is going to do better than if the equipment were perfect.

With that said, I know some professionals like Mika Immonen are especially comfortable on tight equipment. I'll take my chances with him on buckets, if I have the choice. Against almost anyone else, I have to hope the tighter pockets will afford me a few more innings.
I agree with Jude and $Bill on this one.................

Mike

crawfish
12-05-2007, 09:49 AM
After all of this rhetoric and indecision, it assures me that better players can still make games in their favor.

It depends on a shitload of things:

1. Your speed. I mean, do you play a ball or the seven under the guy? Or, you can't run four balls if your life depends on it?

2. Home turf?

3. Who is it, and do they ever make mistakes? When you are getting balls spotted, and you aren't even close to the guy, you should probably say no and go deal the cards. You can't win here. Games, different story. Noone like to start a race to seven, down five.

4. Size of the bet. If he plays three hundred to three thousand daily or three times a week, and this will be your first time. Expect to throw up before you begin.

5. Crowd? Most guys love the crowd. Do you?

Etc. Etc. All of these things and WAY more come into play when matching up. Those who can fit all of these things into their own formula and come out on top consistently will continue to do so. Others... well, I hope they get their money's worth of enjoyment.

Note to all from experience: IN SOME FORM OR FASHION, YOU MUST TAKE YOUR OPPONENT OUT OF THEIR ELEMENT TO WIN. That's what he is expecting of you. He will give some gimmick. Your gimmick has to be better. Otherwise, well you know the outcome.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 10:07 AM
Actually, I've beaten a few pros and it's always been on loose equipment though like I said, against most of them, I would probably prefer tight pockets.

I wasnt saying "You" as in you...i meant "You" as in us players below top level. If a tighter table makes it tougher for a pro to pocket balls, isnt it gonna make it even tougher for a non pro? The moves of the game are gonna come into play ALOT more and I just dont think you can compensate for the knowledge and cue ball control a pro is gonna have. They will be able to adjust their game to a tighter table by playing more high percentage shots (safeties, 2way shots, etc.). I would much rather be on a table that I could run balls on and maybe keep him sitting as long as I could. On a tight table, basically you're only gonna shoot when/ if he misses and when he plays safe...I dont like my end of that. JMO.

Southpaw

Tin Man
12-05-2007, 10:18 AM
If one pro spots another pro the 8 ball it is a relatively small spot as they both get out consistantly anyway.

When one C player spots the other C player the 8 ball, it turns into a monster handicap.

The lower the level of play, the larger the ball spots become. Thus, with a ball spot I would always prefer the toughest possible tables.

On the other hands, games on the wire don't affect the outcomes of each individual game. I would prefer a looser table if I was getting game spots.

If the pro couldn't decide, I would be happy to take both games and balls..........

Actionhound
12-05-2007, 11:00 AM
this is my opinion,

when your playing a "top player" or a player better than you, as long as you have matched up an even game, the only thing that matters is you, if you break down easy, and get frustrated, then your not going to want to play on a tight table, because all it will take is missing one ball and your confidence is gone, and the match is over with then.

Jimmy M.
12-05-2007, 11:15 AM
I'm surprised to see that people would disagree on this but, then again, people disagree on how to play a stop shot around here, so it really shouldn't come as much of a surprise at all. I'd rather play on a tight table. In your hypothetical match-up here, it's the top player that needs to be slowed down; not the lesser player who needs the advantage of easier equipment. All that loose equipment will do is make it easier for the top player to keep you in your chair.

Black-Balled
12-05-2007, 11:17 AM
I'm surprised to see that people would disagree on this but, then again, people disagree on how to play a stop shot around here, so it really shouldn't come as much of a surprise at all. I'd rather play on a tight table. In your hypothetical match-up here, it's the top player that needs to be slowed down; not the lesser player who needs the advantage of easier equipment. All that loose equipment will do is make it easier for the top player to keep you in your chair.

Precisely why I voted this way. I want my money ball rattling between the facings when the spotter gets to it.

arsenius
12-05-2007, 12:51 PM
I think about it this way, using extremes. Imagine the pockets are 55 gallon drums. If you can hit the object ball it's going in, doesn't matter how bad you hit it. You don't need to be a pro to do that, so it evens things out.

Now imagine the pockets are 2.5 inches. Only a great player can make balls consistently now (and probably not very consistently at that size), so it favors the better player.

It's true that the top player may miss more on the tighter table, but so will the worse player. Put another way, the tight pockets might cause the top player to miss 10% more often, but the worse player is going to miss 15% more often with them (those are bogus numbers of course).

It's not enough for the better player to miss. The worse player still has to get out afterwards.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 12:56 PM
I think about it this way, using extremes. Imagine the pockets are 55 gallon drums. If you can hit the object ball it's going in, doesn't matter how bad you hit it. You don't need to be a pro to do that, so it evens things out.

Now imagine the pockets are 2.5 inches. Only a great player can make balls consistently now (and probably not very consistently at that size), so it favors the better player.

It's true that the top player may miss more on the tighter table, but so will the worse player. Put another way, the tight pockets might cause the top player to miss 10% more often, but the worse player is going to miss 15% more often with them (those are bogus numbers of course).

It's not enough for the better player to miss. The worse player still has to get out afterwards.

EXACTLY!!! Yes you may get a few more opportunities on a tighter table, but what good are they if you cant run 5 balls consisitently.....Another way to look at it is like this, a top player breaks and makes a ball then misses the 2 ball. You are getting the 6 out so you have to run 5 balls to win the game. Which table would you rather be on? Say you run the 5 balls on a loose table and break the next game and make a couple of balls and run down to the 6 and win again. Thats 2 games you have gotten from his miss. How often are you gonna do that on a tight table? You have to be able to take advantage of the opportunitites you get and a looser table helps the weaker player to do that. JMO.

Southpaw

Jude Rosenstock
12-05-2007, 12:57 PM
I think about it this way, using extremes. Imagine the pockets are 55 gallon drums. If you can hit the object ball it's going in, doesn't matter how bad you hit it. You don't need to be a pro to do that, so it evens things out.

Now imagine the pockets are 2.5 inches. Only a great player can make balls consistently now (and probably not very consistently at that size), so it favors the better player.

It's true that the top player may miss more on the tighter table, but so will the worse player. Put another way, the tight pockets might cause the top player to miss 10% more often, but the worse player is going to miss 15% more often with them (those are bogus numbers of course).

It's not enough for the better player to miss. The worse player still has to get out afterwards.

All I know is, when I give out weight, I want the buckets. Seriously. I rarely (if ever) give out weight on tight equipment.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:01 PM
I know alot of people who agree with this statement

Ask a top pro like SVB, or John Schmidt or any of the others which table they would rather give the 6 out on. They will tell you that the tighter table favors them way more.

Southpaw

crawfish
12-05-2007, 01:02 PM
I'd much rather be giving out weight than receiving it, mentally and skill level.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:10 PM
[QUOTE=BPG24]The tighter table favors the smarter player, not the player with the highest offensive gear[/QUOTE

Most of the top players are pretty smart on a pool table, thats why they are top pros along with skill. Smarter is a part of being better.

Southpaw

Jude Rosenstock
12-05-2007, 01:11 PM
Ask a top pro like SVB, or John Schmidt or any of the others which table they would rather give the 6 out on. They will tell you that the tighter table favors them way more.

Southpaw


Wait, are you saying they told you this or this is what you think they would say?

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:13 PM
Wait, are you saying they told you this or this is what you think they would say?

No if the 6 out is a fair game (all other things equal) im betting they will tell you they would rather give it to you on a tighter table.

Southpaw

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:26 PM
I have been more succesful getting the 7 & 8 (for example) from a shortstop level player (or above) on a very tight table...

I have lost more often on standard or looser tables to shortstop or above level players...

IMO it all depends on the style of players involved, given that they are both experienced..

Another factor is, even for a pro its harder to make balls on the break on a tight table... So strings of racks are much harder to produce

Would you rather get the 6 out from a TOP pro on a bar table or a standard pocket size 9'? and why?

Southpaw

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:29 PM
I don't play on bar boxes period... I don't even consider it real pool...



Also a top pro is giving me all the breaks with whatever ball spot or he has no chance of playing me...

LOL..hypothetically speaking...which would you rather get the 6 out on...a bar table or a 9'?

Southpaw

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:34 PM
9' because my strengths would come into play more... But there is no chance at my $$$$ without all the snaps... I have been gambling way too long have it any other way

You would rather get the 6 out on a 9'table than on a bar table??? Are you serious?? You have a chance to run racks on a bar table that you are way less likely to do on a 9 footer. The easier table favors you more. Same difference with a loose 9' and a tight 9'. The tougher table is gonna affect your ball pocketing ability wayyyyyyy more than a top pros.

Southpaw

Mike Templeton
12-05-2007, 01:35 PM
Ask a top pro like SVB, or John Schmidt or any of the others which table they would rather give the 6 out on. They will tell you that the tighter table favors them way more.

Southpaw
I may be wrong, but I don't think they would. If you are giving the 6 out, I think you need a table that it is easier to run out on. If the better player is running out, the weaker player shoots less. And if the better player should miss, it will be so close that the ball will probably hang in the pocket anyway.

I have only given this type of weight occasionally, but when I did, I wanted a table that it was easier to run out on.

Mike

Jimmy M.
12-05-2007, 01:42 PM
A loose 9' table is still much tougher than a bar table. Of course, if I had a bunch of money balls, I'd rather play on a bar table. Why not? I'd have money balls flying all over the place with nowhere to go but one of those huge ass pockets. :D

Using the bar table argument though to demonstrate why "easy pockets" is the right answer isn't fair anyway. That's an extreme case that isn't realistic. We could make an extreme case in the other direction and say, "yeah, but what about a 10' table with 3" pockets?". I promise that, on a 10' table with 3" pockets, you are going to get A TON of shots, and I don't care who you're playing, essentially closing the gap between the better player and the weaker player; just like the bar table.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:44 PM
I may be wrong, but I don't think they would. If you are giving the 6 out, I think you need a table that it is easier to run out on. If the better player is running out, the weaker player shoots less. And if the better player should miss, it will be so close that the ball will probably hang in the pocket anyway.

I have only given this type of weight occasionally, but when I did, I wanted a table that it was easier to run out on.

Mike

Their ball pocketing ability and their ability to control the cue ball better and their knowlege is their edge, right? So why would they improve one of your disadvantages (ball pocketing) by playing it on a table that can only help you? Now remember this thread is about a top player giving you a huge spot, not a shortstop or a B player giving the weight. They will out move you because they are going to adjust their game to suit the table and a weaker player cannot. The weaker player HAS to be on equipment that he can take as much advantage of as he can when he gets an opportunity.

Southpaw

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:50 PM
A weaker player (than a top pro) can't adjust their game??????

Where are you getting this stuff????

You are not gonna adjust as much or more than a top player will......

Southpaw

Mike Templeton
12-05-2007, 01:52 PM
Their ball pocketing ability and their ability to control the cue ball better and their knowlege is their edge, right? So why would they improve one of your disadvantages (ball pocketing) by playing it on a table that can only help you? Now remember this thread is about a top player giving you a huge spot, not a shortstop or a B player giving the weight. They will out move you because they are going to adjust their game to suit the table and a weaker player cannot. The weaker player HAS to be on equipment that he can take as much advantage of as he can when he gets an opportunity.

Southpaw
I'm curious now. We will have to ask Stevie or Shannon the next time we see them. I'd like to see what they think.

I think that if I'm playing Stevie or Shannon with the 6 out, as the weaker player I would much rather play on very tight tables to keep them from putting together alot of racks on me.

corvette1340
12-05-2007, 01:55 PM
I'm curious now. We will have to ask Stevie or Shannon the next time we see them. I'd like to see what they think.

I can tell you exactly what they will say, as well as Bruce, because they've told me before. The lessor the player the tighter the table they want to give the spot on.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 01:57 PM
I watched SVB give Tony Watson and Troy Frank the 8 on a tripple shimmed diamond in Atlanta last year and he stone cold ROBBED both of them. He beat Tony out of $6k @ $500/ game and he beat Troy 8 ahead in about 2 1/2 hrs for $4000. Now do you honestly think that they would not have had a better chance on a looser table? They couldnt get out so the spot was basically obselete, but on a looser table the spot comes into play more.

Southpaw

Mike Templeton
12-05-2007, 01:59 PM
I watched SVB give Tony Watson and Troy Frank the 8 on a tripple shimmed diamond in Atlanta last year and he stone cold ROBBED both of them. He beat Tony out of $6k @ $500/ game and he beat Troy 8 ahead in about 2 1/2 hrs for $4000. Now do you honestly think that they would not have had a better chance on a looser table? They couldnt get out so the spot was basically obselete, but on a looser table the spot comes into play more.

Southpaw
Maybe that's true when you get to that level. I know that if I'm playing someone that makes a fair game with me, and I give the 6 out, I want to be able to run out as much as possible.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 02:03 PM
The 8 ball is not much of a spot when you are talking about top players...
It's almost nothing... The lessor player should not have agreed to take the game... That's bad gambling...

They took the game thinking they were gonna get more shots because he would miss more.......and they paid for thinking that. Just like any lesser player would have. The spot didnt matter. They did get shots, but they couldnt run out like they would have on a looser table.

Southpaw

corvette1340
12-05-2007, 02:07 PM
The 8 ball is not much of a spot when you are talking about top players...
It's almost nothing... The lessor player should not have agreed to take the game... That's bad gambling...


lol, the title of this thread is "TOP PLAYER spot on which table" and asks which table you'd prefer to get a spot on if you were playing a TOP PLAYER. And if you'd prefer to get a spot from a top player on a tight table then you are playing into most of their hands. I can't speak for every top pro, but most of them tend to think alike on shooting related topics and the fact is that every top player I know would prefer to give a spot to a lesser player on a tight table. FACT

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 02:07 PM
Ya, that was my point exactly... The 8 doesn't matter at all...

They matched up wrong.... Bad Gambling

They could have gotten the 6 and it wouldnt have mattered. But if you think that even though a player like Troy Frank couldnt get there and you can....then there is no hope for you.

Southpaw

corvette1340
12-05-2007, 02:42 PM
I have already said twice that MY MONEY will never be involved against a top pro unless I get all the breaks...

Now you quoted me from a conversation with someone else that has nothing to do with what you have written here... Why I do not know...

I have been gambling my whole life, I know what is best for me... Booking a loser isn't something that has ever happened to me often... If you don't like it, I am sorry...


Apparently English 101 is something else that has never ever happened to you often as well.

JLW
12-05-2007, 02:45 PM
Personally I would go with the bigger pockets. A top player is going to hit the center of the pocket in most cases regardless, however I would like to know I can cheat the pockets if needed or if I dont hit a shot pure that it still might fall. When I play a better player, the last thing I need is to rattle a few shots due to tight pockets. IMO
My thoughts exactly.

corvette1340
12-05-2007, 02:53 PM
So do you have a point or are you just being a Bi***?

Nevermind we all know the answer


lol, don't get mad man, just keep on doing your thing. Or maybe, keep on ever doing your thing often in your case.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 03:02 PM
LOL...how did a great debate turn into a name calling contest? Maybe this forum should be 18 and older. :D

Southpaw

corvette1340
12-05-2007, 03:03 PM
There is a big difference between not knowing how to phrase something, and making a mistake due to changing what you were saying, and not going back to fix it...

Proof reading is a good thing... A good thing that i could have done...


However, you being a dick and butting in where you weren't needed is another story... Especially when you act like you have never made a mistake... You are not perfect, maybe when you grow up, you will realize it


damn, your next post will be #1000. Don't mess it up.

corvette1340
12-05-2007, 03:04 PM
LOL...how did a great debate turn into a name calling contest? Maybe this forum should be 18 and older. :D

Southpaw

its not a name calling contest when only one poster is doing the name calling.

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 03:07 PM
I agree...

In fact it was all good until your post about how there is no hope for me..
Which had absolutely nothing to do with what we were arguing about...

Then others want to join in... Funny how that works

it had everything to do with the thread. You think that a high level pro player like Troy Frank cant match up as good as you can. If you honestly believe that...then theres no hope for you.

Southpaw

Southpaw
12-05-2007, 03:20 PM
No, see you have no idea what you are talking about...

I was saying that the 8 ball isn't much of a spot between great players... It is almost no spot...

And if SVB or whoever gave a player that is not as good as him the 8 ball, he is a monster favorite...

The other guy, who ever he may be, should know better...
therefore he matched up wrong...

And you were out of line saying what you said... Period

I can have a mature and intellectual debate about a topic on a public forum without resorting to calling people who do not agree with me names. So, you are gonna have a tough time convincing me that I was out of line. By the way, this makes 2 threads where you have done your best to "ignite" problems. The other is your B/S/T thread. I will continue to have a debate about this thread with you, but Im not getting into a mud slinging contest....you can be the winner of that.

Southpaw

ccshrimper
12-05-2007, 07:45 PM
lol, the title of this thread is "TOP PLAYER spot on which table" and asks which table you'd prefer to get a spot on if you were playing a TOP PLAYER. And if you'd prefer to get a spot from a top player on a tight table then you are playing into most of their hands. I can't speak for every top pro, but most of them tend to think alike on shooting related topics and the fact is that every top player I know would prefer to give a spot to a lesser player on a tight table. FACT

I agree 100%. I'm not a top player but usually I play smarter than anyone I'm giving the 6 or 7 out to and can out safety play/kick them easily. Now, if my break isn't working or I scratch a couple times on a loose table they can run out 4 to 6 balls, maybe get some on the break or combos they wouldn't make on a tight table. A weaker player WILL crap in more balls and the rolls will come into play more on a loose table from my experience.

dogginda9
12-06-2007, 12:03 AM
It's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. I played a champion once getting the 7 and the break. Played on a triple shimmed Gold Crown III. I played great and still lost 11-9. I missed 1 ball. Problem was, he didn't even "look" like he was gonna miss nor get out of line at all. The table was so tight, I made very few balls on the break. I offered to move over 1 table and bet a little more, but was politely declined.

Masayoshi
12-06-2007, 12:36 AM
It's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. I played a champion once getting the 7 and the break. Played on a triple shimmed Gold Crown III. I played great and still lost 11-9. I missed 1 ball. Problem was, he didn't even "look" like he was gonna miss nor get out of line at all. The table was so tight, I made very few balls on the break. I offered to move over 1 table and bet a little more, but was politely declined.

just a question, but how did you get 9 games on him if you made very few balls on the break and he never missed or got out of line?

AZE
12-06-2007, 03:12 AM
tighter pockets, no if's and's or but's about it.

The bottom line is if you're playing a better player getting a money ball spot you're going to want to play on tighter equipment, if you don't know that you do now, and if you don't want to believe it then have a good day :)

Jimmy M.
12-06-2007, 03:32 AM
tighter pockets, no if's and's or but's about it.

The bottom line is if you're playing a better player getting a money ball spot you're going to want to play on tighter equipment, if you don't know that you do now, and if you don't want to believe it then have a good day :)

What is being overlooked here by "the other camp", I think, is the fact that, in many (and I would argue "most") cases, the outcome of a match is based purely on the performance of the better player. If the better player plays their game, they win. Sure, there are circumstance that could come into play, but that is why I said "many" or "most" (not "all") cases. The tables don't need to be easier so that the weaker player can play better. The weaker player can't play so good that the better player can't win. It just can't happen (in the long run); that's what makes the better player "better" (doh!). They need the better player to make some mistakes - even getting weight.

Now before I get jumped on by some of you, yes, I understand that there are special-case situations where the things I just said might not hold true. HOWEVER, this is a general rule of thumb, and the original question that was posed in this thread did not specify any special-cases. You can always find exceptions to any rule, but they don't necessarily invalidate the rule.

hemicudas
12-06-2007, 04:10 AM
It's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. I played a champion once getting the 7 and the break. Played on a triple shimmed Gold Crown III. I played great and still lost 11-9. I missed 1 ball. Problem was, he didn't even "look" like he was gonna miss nor get out of line at all. The table was so tight, I made very few balls on the break. I offered to move over 1 table and bet a little more, but was politely declined.

This should be the ultimate testimony and explanation why it really is a "NO BRAINER". Yet about half the people responding to this thread have it totally wrong. People question your honesty, because they obviously can't be wrong, LOL. They are wrong.

This is the only exception,
A snooker table. If you can get a single ball spot on a snooker table playing 9 ball with pool balls or to a lesser degree 6 ball using snooker balls,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, AND PLAYING OLD STYLE ROLL OUT RULES. On your first shot if you roll your cash ball to a frozen position on the rail, you turn yourself into the favorite to win the game. This is assuming you are capable of playing a speed above Ned The Primmer.

buck15
12-06-2007, 04:32 AM
i can't believe the response on this poll/topic. i myself believe that the easier table is the equalizer. a top player is going to make most of his/her shots on either table where a lesser player will jaw up or rattle more shots on a tight table. the friend of mine that i had the debate with believes that the tighter table will put more pressure on the top player when shooting other players money ball. a neutral party said that a top player will figure out wich shots on the money balls are low percentage and start the move game when getting to them for that reason. this is part of the reason that i feel anyone can be beat on a bar table. keep it going though as everyone has brought out some good points both ways.:D

corvette1340
12-06-2007, 06:52 AM
tighter pockets, no if's and's or but's about it.

The bottom line is if you're playing a better player getting a money ball spot you're going to want to play on tighter equipment, if you don't know that you do now, and if you don't want to believe it then have a good day :)


lol, you guys still don't get it. If you ask 100 champions on which table they would like to give a lesser player weight on, I guarantee you that at least 75 will say on a tighter table. (The true number is more likely 90 or so, but I'll go on the low end since I haven't actually asked 100 champions). A looser table makes it easier for lesser players to break on, pocket balls on, and gain confidence on. A tight table makes it harder in all aspects on the lesser player and kills any kind of confidence the player might gain. The champion, however, will still run out on the tighter table and when faced with a tougher shot will outmove the lesser player until they get a more favorable shot. I have been around champion players a lot and this is why they often make good games with lesser players because at least half of the pool population gets this spot theory completely wrong.

branpureza
12-06-2007, 09:18 AM
lol, you guys still don't get it. If you ask 100 champions on which table they would like to give a lesser player weight on, I guarantee you that at least 75 will say on a tighter table. (The true number is more likely 90 or so, but I'll go on the low end since I haven't actually asked 100 champions). A looser table makes it easier for lesser players to break on, pocket balls on, and gain confidence on. A tight table makes it harder in all aspects on the lesser player and kills any kind of confidence the player might gain. The champion, however, will still run out on the tighter table and when faced with a tougher shot will outmove the lesser player until they get a more favorable shot. I have been around champion players a lot and this is why they often make good games with lesser players because at least half of the pool population gets this spot theory completely wrong.


I know right... this is pretty much pool 101. A tighter table benefits the stronger player and that's all there is to it. Huge pockets somewhat neutralize the better players ability since it makes the weaker player pockets many balls they would normally miss while the stronger player gains virtually nothing out of the deal. I spot a lot of the guys I play with multiple balls and the break... but I only play them on Diamond tables. I would have no chance playing on buckets. They would probably just beat me on the break, and if I survived that, piss would get me.

Southpaw
12-06-2007, 10:55 AM
Everyone that thinks a tighter table will benefit the lesser playing is solely depending on whether or not the top player will miss more....he will maybe about 10% more, but the lesser player is gonna miss atleast 25% more. And if he does miss a few more on a tighter table, what good does it do you if you cant run 4 or 5 balls consistently....the lesser player CANT WIN! You need to be on equipment that you can run balls on and make balls on the break on and put a different kind of heat on the top player (not just the heat of a tighter table...they WILL adjust their game for that). It amazes me that so many on this forum do not understand this. Spend some time with some top players....then you will learn.

Southpaw

Jude Rosenstock
12-06-2007, 11:52 AM
Everyone that thinks a tighter table will benefit the lesser playing is solely depending on whether or not the top player will miss more....he will maybe about 10% more, but the lesser player is gonna miss atleast 25% more. And if he does miss a few more on a tighter table, what good does it do you if you cant run 4 or 5 balls consistently....the lesser player CANT WIN! You need to be on equipment that you can run balls on and make balls on the break on and put a different kind of heat on the top player (not just the heat of a tighter table...they WILL adjust their game for that). It amazes me that so many on this forum do not understand this. Spend some time with some top players....then you will learn.

Southpaw


I think the underlying problem with this thread is that most people have a different picture in their heads on what is a "top player" versus a player that would receive weight and what that weight would be. I'm an open level player. If I'm in a game with a guy who can give me the 5-ball, I'd want that weight on a tight pocket table because any time he misses, he's going to lose and there's a reasonable chance I will average one turn at the table per game.

If you're a D player playing against a top player, a comparable game would be the 3-out. You think a pro is going to want to give ANYBODY the 3-out on tight equipment? HELL NO! He's going to want the buckets so he can run out every time he gets a chance!

Jimmy M.
12-06-2007, 11:58 AM
Everyone that thinks a tighter table will benefit the lesser playing is solely depending on whether or not the top player will miss more....he will maybe about 10% more.

And everyone who thinks a looser table benefits the lesser player is mistakingly believing that the lesser player will then be able to play well enough to outrun the better player. In most cases, it doesn't work that way.

Southpaw
12-06-2007, 12:05 PM
And everyone who thinks a looser table benefits the lesser player is mistakingly believing that the lesser player will then be able to play well enough to outrun the better player. In most cases, it doesn't work that way.

If the person getting the spot cant make balls when the opportunity arises...they cant win. Bottom line. Now which table will they have a better chance to run balls on?

Southpaw

Southpaw
12-06-2007, 12:08 PM
If they can't make balls, then they wouldn't be gambling...

Thats why they are getting a huge spot genius....thats the whole point of the thread.


Southpaw

Jimmy M.
12-06-2007, 12:14 PM
lol, you guys still don't get it. If you ask 100 champions on which table they would like to give a lesser player weight on, I guarantee you that at least 75 will say on a tighter table. (The true number is more likely 90 or so, but I'll go on the low end since I haven't actually asked 100 champions).

I'll bet against that number if anyone can come up with a way to get it (and a way that is verifiable).

No one wants to give up a bunch of money balls, champion or otherwise, and then have to fire at tiny pockets. I don't think anyone wants to play on buckets, but just something not so tight that making balls becomes a chore.

Anyway, the main audience in this forum, the one that was asked the original question, "which table would you want to play on getting a spot from a top player", needs A LOT of weight. So, if anyone ever does pose this question to any champions, let them know that they are giving up a bunch of weight; probably multiple money balls.

If the game is kind of close, like an Efren playing <insert pro here who might only need a little weight> then, yeah, tighter pockets might be better for Efren. However, I don't think the people here, at least not most of them, are only getting "a little" weight from the "top pro" that they will be playing.

I kind of feel like an idiot for posting in here now that I realize what is happening. The OP started this thread, asking for OPINIONS, just to argue with everyone who offers one that doesn't match his. I've been had, I guess. :)

Jude Rosenstock
12-06-2007, 12:15 PM
Thats why they are getting a huge spot genius....thats the whole point of the thread.


Southpaw


You know what's funny is, I have Jimmy M pegged as one of the better players on azb and he agrees the buckets favor the better player.

Southpaw
12-06-2007, 12:16 PM
You are missing the point obviously...

No one is going to gamble if they can't make balls... Surely you are smart enough to realize that 2 free spot balls isn't that big of a spot whe a top player is giving it... there won't be as much of a difference in ball pocketing skills as you think...

A top pro is 2 balls better than a shortstop... Do you think a shortstop can't get out???

No, I think you are missing the point. This thread is about a weaker player getting a spot from a top player....not only people that play a short stops speed getting a spot. In case you didnt realize this...alot of people that cant be the 6 ball ghost still gamble....they try and match up to a fair game.

Southpaw

Southpaw
12-06-2007, 12:23 PM
Dude several people have tried to explain to you why you are wrong...

A "weak" player needs alot more than the 6,7, and 8 from a top pro...

The sooner you figure that out the better...

The thread says pick whatever spot you think you need....If I were gonna play a top player I would take the 6 out.....read the original post please.

Southpaw

Southpaw
12-06-2007, 12:28 PM
LMAO... so you can change things around but others can't...

WOW...


I want some of your smoking please.....

Southpaw

Jude Rosenstock
12-06-2007, 12:28 PM
No, I think you are missing the point. This thread is about a weaker player getting a spot from a top player....not only people that play a short stops speed getting a spot. In case you didnt realize this...alot of people that cant be the 6 ball ghost still gamble....they try and match up to a fair game.

Southpaw


Okay but let's say we have a guy who can't beat the 6-ball ghost is playing a pro. That's basically a C-level player, right? He's going to need something like 5-out wild from someone like a Tony Robles and he'll likely need a little more than that. Tony's "strategy" is going to be very conservative in the early goings of the rack, making sure he has no problems before he proceeds so that he can guarantee once he starts pocketing his opponent's money-balls that he can finish the frame. He has to assume he's going to pocket everything and the only thing that can throw a wrench into his plans is a tight-pocket table. Once he misses, there's no telling if he's going to get a shot and even if he does, if he's going to have sufficient position that will allow him to run out.

I mean, running out when you're in-line on tight equipment is tough enough. Try shooting a recovery shot!

Southpaw
12-06-2007, 12:31 PM
Okay but let's say we have a guy who can't beat the 6-ball ghost is playing a pro. That's basically a C-level player, right? He's going to need something like 5-out wild from someone like a Tony Robles and he'll likely need a little more than that. Tony's "strategy" is going to be very conservative in the early goings of the rack, making sure he has no problems before he proceeds so that he can guarantee once he starts pocketing his opponent's money-balls that he can finish the frame. He has to assume he's going to pocket everything and the only thing that can throw a wrench into his plans is a tight-pocket table. Once he misses, there's no telling if he's going to get a shot and even if he does, if he's going to have sufficient position that will allow him to run out.

I mean, running out when you're in-line on tight equipment is tough enough. Try shooting a recovery shot!

Thats the point...on a tighter table he doesnt have to run out every time. His safeties are gonna be that much more effective. Plus he has taken away any chance that the player getting the weight has of running out and making balls on the break. He doesnt have to run out every time to win. A top player will know this and use it to his advantage and a weaker player, especially one getting the 5 out, cant adjust his game like a top player can.

Southpaw

corvette1340
12-06-2007, 12:40 PM
Thats the point...on a tighter table he doesnt have to run out every time. His safeties are gonna be that much more effective. Plus he has taken away any chance that the player getting the weight has of running out and making balls on the break. He doesnt have to run out every time to win. A top player will know this and use it to his advantage and a weaker player, especially one getting the 5 out, cant adjust his game like a top player can.

Southpaw


lol, its no use man. Obviously these guys have never gambled with, hung around with, or watched top players gamble. I gave 3 examples of champions that I have personally asked this and I'll call Corey and get his take, but I'm sure he'll say the same thing. These same people are the kind that get trapped up in games that they have way the worst of it because they can't see past their flawed logic.

KMRUNOUT
12-06-2007, 12:43 PM
On loose equipment, they'll run out everything.
On tight equipment you'll get a few more chances to shoot, but you'll be forced to do more safety escapes for sure.
Either way, you're doomed. If you're significantly weaker player, neither loose nor tight table will save you.


I think THIS is the right answer. I really don't think it makes a difference. The tighter table is the exact same amount more difficult for the pro and the weaker player. If either one mis-aims or mis-strokes, they are going to miss-maybe a little less on the loose table. So if we assume that the pro might miss a little more on the tight table (and he certainly will in the long run), that just means it is that much more difficult for you to convert on that opportunity. The reason you get more innings is because it is HARDER TO RUN OUT. I play primarily on either a triple shimmed GCII or a 8' table with pocket reducers. I LIKE tight pockets for sure. I am no pro or even close. However, against my friend we sometimes play on a loose table and sometimes on a tight one. If I am really in stroke, it doesn't matter-I will probably win anyway (even with a huge spot). However, if I am NOT in stroke, she will destroy me on the tight table, whereas I might have some chance on the loose one. The problem is, we never know which "me" is going to show up. Same is true for a pro. While they will be way more consistent than the rest of us, they still have the in-stroke/out of stroke issues and catch gears and more gears. A pro in top gear is going to run packages on a tight table-same on a loose one. If they are on, it doesn't matter which table.

My $0.02

KMRUNOUT

corvette1340
12-06-2007, 12:47 PM
Here is a great example that maybe some of you can grasp. How much money do you think LilJohn has lost to champions over the last few years? $100,000-$200,000 easy. Why do you think they all want to play him on tight ass diamond tables giving him the 6, 8, and breaks? LilJohn is a very good player, but on a tight table it reduces his ball running, balls made on break, and all confindence he can get. While it also reduces these aspects for a champion, its not near the degree as it is for LilJohn. None of these champions will give this spot on a loose table, but all of them will line up to give it on a tight table. FACT

corvette1340
12-06-2007, 01:02 PM
Brian White said that he'd rather get the spot from a champion on a tight table, but at Brian's speed he can run out on any table so the disparity isn't as much. You guys are talking about people that need the 5 out. I'm waiting on Corey to call me back to get his take on it. It may be a case where both parties are right to a certain extent it just matters what speed the lesser player is.

Southpaw
12-06-2007, 01:05 PM
Brian White said that he'd rather get the spot from a champion on a tight table, but at Brian's speed he can run out on any table so the disparity isn't as much. You guys are talking about people that need the 5 out. I'm waiting on Corey to call me back to get his take on it. It may be a case where both parties are right to a certain extent it just matters what speed the lesser player is.

But Brian moves ALOT better than the average player. He wants it to be a moving contest. A player getting the 5 out has no prayer of out moving a top pro so his only chance is to make balls when he gets the chance.

Southpaw

Perk
12-06-2007, 01:06 PM
It may be a case where both parties are right to a certain extent it just matters what speed the lesser player is.

Look at the results of the poll, I think it gives a pretty good idea that both parties are right.

I however am not going to play a top player with a lot of weight if I dont think I can perform to my ability and have a shot. For me to have that shot it needs to be on regular tables (i.e. loose) where I can have my own personal confidence. I realize that a top player is going to run packages on them as well, but I would like to think that if the spot is right that I would be able to also. I know that I cant play the same on tighter conditions, and will give a top player the credit that they can, or have the ability to play safe when they cant get out.

corvette1340
12-06-2007, 01:18 PM
Incredible how dumb MY first statement Usually is...

I corrected this for you.

Jimmy M.
12-06-2007, 01:23 PM
lol, its no use man. Obviously these guys have never gambled with, hung around with, or watched top players gamble.

You definitely have me pegged.

corvette1340
12-06-2007, 01:28 PM
Imagine cat, you mange the tooth so its grounds butter for you...


lol, lets call it a draw man. I think both parties are right it just matters what speed the person getting the spot is.

corvette1340
12-06-2007, 01:30 PM
You definitely have me pegged.


wasnt talking to you Jimmy.

Jimmy M.
12-06-2007, 02:26 PM
wasnt talking to you Jimmy.

I do see the argument that you guys are making. I think maybe we all have different opinions of what the assumed weight is here, or how big of a gap there is between the two players who are playing. Maybe everyone wouldn't be so divided in their opinion on this if the particular scenario were better defined. Maybe there isn't one "standard" answer.

I'm no top player but, personally, if I am giving up a significant amount of weight, I would rather do it on pockets that weren't overly tight. However, if I were just giving up a little weight, to someone who played close to my speed, I'd rather do it on tight pockets to force us both to have to play well. I think that's the key here. If there is a huge gap between the two players, the weaker player is really a non-factor (taking luck and other special circumstances out of the equation). It all comes down to what the better player does. If there is a small gap, well now the weaker of the two players has a definite influence on the outcome of the match and, if I were the better player in the match up in that situation, I'd want the conditions to be tough for both of us.

CreeDo
12-08-2007, 11:28 AM
Definitely buckets.

If the spot has evened things up perfectly, then big pockets favor the weaker shotmaker. Big pockets don't make it any easier to sink the everyday simple shots that come up when you're in line, they favor making the testers. The weaker player will probably be faced with more testers (cuz he's got worse position play). The pro will be spending most of his time in line, where it doesn't matter having an extra inch of leeway.