Tonight at 7 PM (9PM EST) here in Arizona we will be streaming from www.ontherailtv.com ,The Freezer is giving up the 6 out to Allen Pettis who is a solid B player for the cash,stop in and enjoy. :wink:
OTR~ Live Stream Tonight: Scott Frost Giving the 6 Out for the $!
- Thread starter Fast Lenny
- Start date
If the guy is a B player than Scott is robbing with that spot. I've seen pros give B players the 4 and out and win, and give A players the 6 and out. One pro told me "the spot doesn't matter that much, it's a race to the one ball".
I do think that Scott is the favorite here but to be honest he does not have to win.He was giving up the 7 out last night and lost 2 sets in a tourney to Allen so this is how we got to this point.The guys plays slow and does not make alot of errors,he is a very solid player,high end of a B rating,perhaps low A,he is consistent.
Ill be watching, go scott
Getting ready to start
Thanks for the FEED Lenny - been sweating it for hours and it's FLAWLESS!!! Send some REAL GREEN (money for the rest of you) your way to help keep you going. Scott is really having to bring it here - he ain't stealing by any means.
By the way, I REALLY like the way you position the camera. It's nice to actually see the players and not just when they are down on the shots.
By the way, I REALLY like the way you position the camera. It's nice to actually see the players and not just when they are down on the shots.
i still say this isnt as big of a spot as it sounds since the money balls do not count on the break. if alan breaks wide open and makes the 6 for instance, he really taking away from his spot. if im playing a player of scotts caliber, i want as many of my money balls on the table as possible..so that i can roll them when necessary because he will never out move scott.
anyone know how they ended up ?
when i went to bed scott was up $500
when i went to bed scott was up $500
This was fun to watch and fun to chat about. There were endless arguments about whether this is an insane spot and Pettis had the nuts, or this is a gaff game and Scott had 'em.
I think it's a pretty fair spot.
Mr441's quote says it all: "the spot doesn't matter that much, it's a race to the one ball"
I think the way it's supposed to work at his level of play is... by the time someone is on the 3, they are supposed to be in control and win that rack. I say the 3 because your shot on the 1 ball will rarely be ideal, and the 2 will be at the opposite end of the table a lot, so if you control both enough to be ok on the 3, you're officially "in line" and the game should be over.
So, if Scott treats it as if he's playing the ghost, it just boils down to how good the kid breaks and who plays better safeties. Well, Pettis had a pretty poor break... hit 'em hard but rarely controlled whitey and often made nothing. Could have just been a bad night or the tough table (4.125" pockets). And his safeties were not what I'd call "strong B" safes, whitey was almost never locked up close to another ball and often he'd let scott see the ball. Pettis' worst habit (besides taking 30 games to realize he should change his break position) was raking the balls for scott and not making him shoot. People were joking that it was like Scott had the 6 out because often he'd rake the last 4 or so. Once he gave scott the entire rack. Scott had to dog a few before he stopped doing that.
I think the first game was 7-6 and the second 7-5 or thereabouts, and then they went downhill for Pettis from there. So yeah, the spot was perfect (for Scott)... enough to give the underdog a chance, but still a definite edge for the pro. Due to inattention, getting pissed at bad rolls, or just not being at 100% Scott would often miss shots before the 6. Some of them were ones you know he makes 100 times in a row so there were a few comments on him stalling to keep it competitive. Scott definitely shot a lot of balls as if he were just freestroking them in practice, trying long thin cuts instead of safes or trying sorta wild cluster breaks.. I dunno, either way Pettis could have taken a set and I can see he's capable of running a rack. Apparently he beat scott twice in a tournament just before that.
So, I bailed after the first 5 sets at 100 apiece, Scott took all of 'em, does anyone want to share the final score?
I think it's a pretty fair spot.
Mr441's quote says it all: "the spot doesn't matter that much, it's a race to the one ball"
I think the way it's supposed to work at his level of play is... by the time someone is on the 3, they are supposed to be in control and win that rack. I say the 3 because your shot on the 1 ball will rarely be ideal, and the 2 will be at the opposite end of the table a lot, so if you control both enough to be ok on the 3, you're officially "in line" and the game should be over.
So, if Scott treats it as if he's playing the ghost, it just boils down to how good the kid breaks and who plays better safeties. Well, Pettis had a pretty poor break... hit 'em hard but rarely controlled whitey and often made nothing. Could have just been a bad night or the tough table (4.125" pockets). And his safeties were not what I'd call "strong B" safes, whitey was almost never locked up close to another ball and often he'd let scott see the ball. Pettis' worst habit (besides taking 30 games to realize he should change his break position) was raking the balls for scott and not making him shoot. People were joking that it was like Scott had the 6 out because often he'd rake the last 4 or so. Once he gave scott the entire rack. Scott had to dog a few before he stopped doing that.
I think the first game was 7-6 and the second 7-5 or thereabouts, and then they went downhill for Pettis from there. So yeah, the spot was perfect (for Scott)... enough to give the underdog a chance, but still a definite edge for the pro. Due to inattention, getting pissed at bad rolls, or just not being at 100% Scott would often miss shots before the 6. Some of them were ones you know he makes 100 times in a row so there were a few comments on him stalling to keep it competitive. Scott definitely shot a lot of balls as if he were just freestroking them in practice, trying long thin cuts instead of safes or trying sorta wild cluster breaks.. I dunno, either way Pettis could have taken a set and I can see he's capable of running a rack. Apparently he beat scott twice in a tournament just before that.
So, I bailed after the first 5 sets at 100 apiece, Scott took all of 'em, does anyone want to share the final score?
Tnx Creedo, for your summary.
Would love to see this match-up myself, because I would like to see what other amateurs play like when they play pros. Would also be interesting to figure out my speed compared to this b-player, and then trying to figure out if I would be able to play Scott with that handicap etc.
Hope there will be more such match-ups in the future, with an amateur and a pro battling it out.
Would love to see this match-up myself, because I would like to see what other amateurs play like when they play pros. Would also be interesting to figure out my speed compared to this b-player, and then trying to figure out if I would be able to play Scott with that handicap etc.
Hope there will be more such match-ups in the future, with an amateur and a pro battling it out.
terryerdman
Registered
Atm
I quit watching when Scott was up 3 sets and they were starting to play set 4, so I guess you were right about Pettis=ATM.
Pettis = ATM
I quit watching when Scott was up 3 sets and they were starting to play set 4, so I guess you were right about Pettis=ATM.
Haha, it's tough to fade the railbirds when you're the underdog in this kind of game. If you play really well and and beat a pro by a little, someone will say the pro miscalculated the weight. If you win by a lot then you had the nuts and suckered someone. If you lose by a little you don't enough skill and shouldn't be matching up here. If you lose by a lot you're an ATM. I dunno if the guy has heart or just a trust fund but it's nice to see someone jump in the box here.
I think someone said playing scott will drop your playing level by a ball or so, just on the nerves factor and the way scott makes the other guy look bad (by virtue of looking so good). I definitely saw the guy getting freaked out by either the money or the live feed. He was doing stuff like starting with BIH on a hanger and getting out of line on the next ball. Even a C-player isn't gonna do that unless something's in his head. I hope he'll try again getting the 5 (which scott has done before, but apparently won't do again) and is able to overcome his nerves.
I think someone said playing scott will drop your playing level by a ball or so, just on the nerves factor and the way scott makes the other guy look bad (by virtue of looking so good). I definitely saw the guy getting freaked out by either the money or the live feed. He was doing stuff like starting with BIH on a hanger and getting out of line on the next ball. Even a C-player isn't gonna do that unless something's in his head. I hope he'll try again getting the 5 (which scott has done before, but apparently won't do again) and is able to overcome his nerves.
I have seen him give the 5 out and make it. I have also seen him play an "8" rated player 11-2 in one pocket and make it. I have seen him play even and not make it. It just depends on the day sometimes.
BVal
Pettis spotted Scott too much
Easy to say in hindsight, but Pettis spotted Scott way too much. If the pockets were 4.125" or even in that neighborhood, Pettis taking the breaks was a spot to Scott. Unless Pettis broke and ran out or broke and ran to a strong safety over 50% of the time giving him the breaks was actually a spot to Scott.
Even without Pettis getting all of the breaks, the tight pockets are a very substantial spot when there is that much difference in the two player's playing ability. Tough equipment favors the better player, the tougher the equipment, the more it favors the better player.
Hu
Easy to say in hindsight, but Pettis spotted Scott way too much. If the pockets were 4.125" or even in that neighborhood, Pettis taking the breaks was a spot to Scott. Unless Pettis broke and ran out or broke and ran to a strong safety over 50% of the time giving him the breaks was actually a spot to Scott.
Even without Pettis getting all of the breaks, the tight pockets are a very substantial spot when there is that much difference in the two player's playing ability. Tough equipment favors the better player, the tougher the equipment, the more it favors the better player.
Hu