That almost how tight the pocket are at Hard Times in Sacramento and it was Oscar and Ernesto that did the fabulous job at Hard Times. It took me a while but now that I found (I think) my perfect cue it will be much easier.
Opinions on Oscar Vs. Morra Match!
- Thread starter mikeyfrost
- Start date
That almost how tight the pocket are at Hard Times in Sacramento and it was Oscar and Ernesto that did the fabulous job at Hard Times. It took me a while but now that I found (I think) my perfect cue it will be much easier.
If the objective was to take all the luck out of the game, then it would be best to play "call shot" Ten Ball. There would be no more slop shots, but still a player could get a lucky roll. Maybe on a lucky roll the incoming player would be able to push out again, just like on the break.
My opinion of the above. I HATE IT! There will always be some degree of luck in 9-Ball or Ten Ball. You can't legislate it out of the game. That is part of the game and sometimes it does make for some exciting things to happen. I have seen the audience reaction when a ball just barely slithers into the hole or the nine ball flies in on the break. Pure bedlam erupts!
IMO 9-Ball or Ten Ball has a very small degree of luck, especially between two good players. Maybe 90% skill and 10% luck. As opposed to poker which is about 50-50 luck vs. skill. The best players usually win and in every tournament I've been going to for 40 years it is ALWAYS the best players who are there at the end. Do you think that's because they are lucky?
We played 9-Ball for a million years and the nine always counted on the break. It was just part of the game. No one complained although we did have many racking wars. IMO it is much easier to make the nine ball than the ten ball on a fairly tough table, like a Diamond or Brunswick Metro. or a double shimmed Gold Crown. The rack in Ten Ball is a much more solid rack, with the full back row. Tightly racked, often you will barely see the ten ball move at all. I contend that it is much harder to make the ten on the break than the nine in similar circumstances.
My opinion is that the ability to win on the break should be part of the game. It benefits a player with a strong break and it also can penalize a player who is soft breaking. The biggest joke I've seen in the last forty years of rule changes was when they decided that making the eight ball on the break in Eight Ball was no longer a win. Do these people even play pool? If they did they would know that it is extremely difficult and equally rare to make the eight ball on the break. It's a great shot if you can do it. So now they want to penalize the player who can.
I say let the player who can make the ten ball on the break (in any pocket) win the game. John Morra and Oscar Dominguez (two very good players) just played 179 games of Ten Ball. Do you know how many ten balls were made on the break. ONE! Yes I said just one!
P.S. Go to jayhelfert.com to order. I personally send out all these books. Just make sure to put your name on the order, and I will personalize it for you.
Last edited:
Good post and good points. Oscar had an arsenal of jump cues at his disposal and he used all of them well. He did miss some easy shots, maybe more than John. Both players appeared tight throughout most of the match. John did loosen up a bit near the end. Too bad he couldn't have played that way throughout. He did not make the necessary adjustments to the table conditions. Maybe because he didn't have the repertoire of skills that Oscar has. Oscar is the more complete player and it showed here.
I bet on Oscar even money before the match, so I am biased.
However, my take on it was:
- Both players are very accurate shotmakers. I think the table favored Oscar because he practices on a table set up like this - he's used to it and it just seems normal to him.
- Morra has a ton of talent and a beautiful game - he's so smooth and professional, amazing really.
- Oscar played closer shape and had better speed control. Because he played many shots close to the object ball, he basically had easier shots and fewer misses.
- Both players kick very, very well. I think the difference is Oscar has perfected the lock up safe for which there is no decent response. He took the less riskier shots of the two and played the better "unanswerable" safes of the two. Again, speed control allows this. He rolled up behind many balls perfectly.
- Nerves played a big part in the missed shots. It was easier to see this at the event than on the feed. I think the grind got to them and there was more jumping up than I would expect on moneyball shots.
- Oscar may not have extensive experience when it comes to gambling, but he plays like an experienced gambler because he's been around it his whole life.
- The match was a grind. Morra couldn't catch a stroke on day two and Oscar did - creating an insurmountable lead.
- when Ernesto and Oscar wanted to jack the bet on arrival, it sent the right message. Oscar was pretty much viewed as the underdog leading to the match, but they obviously liked the game.
I've watched Oscar grow as a competitive player. He has always played well, but he is still getting better and has much more self confidence.
Chris
However, my take on it was:
- Both players are very accurate shotmakers. I think the table favored Oscar because he practices on a table set up like this - he's used to it and it just seems normal to him.
- Morra has a ton of talent and a beautiful game - he's so smooth and professional, amazing really.
- Oscar played closer shape and had better speed control. Because he played many shots close to the object ball, he basically had easier shots and fewer misses.
- Both players kick very, very well. I think the difference is Oscar has perfected the lock up safe for which there is no decent response. He took the less riskier shots of the two and played the better "unanswerable" safes of the two. Again, speed control allows this. He rolled up behind many balls perfectly.
- Nerves played a big part in the missed shots. It was easier to see this at the event than on the feed. I think the grind got to them and there was more jumping up than I would expect on moneyball shots.
- Oscar may not have extensive experience when it comes to gambling, but he plays like an experienced gambler because he's been around it his whole life.
- The match was a grind. Morra couldn't catch a stroke on day two and Oscar did - creating an insurmountable lead.
- when Ernesto and Oscar wanted to jack the bet on arrival, it sent the right message. Oscar was pretty much viewed as the underdog leading to the match, but they obviously liked the game.
I've watched Oscar grow as a competitive player. He has always played well, but he is still getting better and has much more self confidence.
Chris
Last edited:
Oscar had him playing his game for most of the match. I don't think the bet or TAR had anything to do with this outcome.
Well I do. His record is not good for bets over a couple thousand dollars, and many that know will tell you the same.
I'm not in the "know" or anything like tha when it comes to Morra, the most I really knew about him was his loss to Bergman and I seen him get 3rd against the whos who of 1 hole in NC the first time he ever played the game, I think he was 18 then,
Anyway I do remember the threads that had Morra's gambling on it, I do remember most of them being about him torching Jesse Bowman and Santos and those guys playing $1k-$2k per set. Then I remember something with Lil Jon beating him for like $13k or something getting a spot...the general trend(only what gets posted online like I said I dont know personally) is the smaller the money the better he plays, if you bet enough it seems like a coin toss or Morra has the worst of it. I think if you look through AZB like I just did for 20 mins the trend points in that direction.
a week prior to the match I told two of my friends that oscar is going to win and not bet against oscar.one of these firends is a seasoned gambler,stake horse and a good player.He did not agree with me.I don`t know how many thousands he lost on this match.I also told the owner of a pool hall that oscar is going to win.He appeared confused with my prediction.
Last edited:
I would have to disagree, I feel that the table was the way pool "should" be at the professional level. An accurate stroke should be the single most important thing in pool. On a table like that you have to shoot the ball with a level of accuracy that most professional pool players are simply not used to atm. From what I saw that table played very well though, and for the most part on open racks both John and Oscar were getting out on the tables they were supposed to. When they missed the odd shot they missed it was clear that they did not hit the ball well and they got the result that professional level equipment should give.
From what I saw also, the break results were not that bad, they were making balls a decent amount of the time, but they were not getting out on alot of the racks because they did not get the shot on the 1-ball they wanted. These safety battles that resulted from not having an open out off the break were a large reason the match went the way it did, John was simply outclassed in the safety aspects of that match by Oscar in every way. This is a good thing, the table allowed for the player who had better skills in a critical aspect of the game to show a clear advantage and win. And honestly, the table did not beat these guys up, when Oscar won a safty battle and got his ball in hand on the 1 or 2 he was getting out at probably close to a 80% rate, same thing with John, when they finally got control of the table and had an out they usually ran it out.
About the time that Oscar was at 88 games John loosened up his game and free stroked some balls and ran a rack from a safety and broke and ran the next rack, the table allowed break and runs, but it required that you shot well.
IMO pool played like it was on that table would help this sport hugely. On a table like that the combination of accurate potting with cueball movement and control that 10-ball requires gives the sport legitimacy, the game when played like that can be compared to snooker and finally be seen as equally difficult. Also, played on a table like that the truly great players are going to rise to the top. On a loose pocket table a guy like John could catch a gear and run some racks to beat a SVB level of player, on a table like the match was played on John is unlikely to get out that often and a player like SVB would have his higher level of skill truly represented.
I love seeing pool played on tables like that. If it were the standard instead of a rare occurance like it is now we would see the strokes of the pool players become far more accurate, cheating pockets for creating artificial angles would give way to more accurate potting and more emphasis on pin point shape play where you have the proper angle to begin with since you can no longer create one via a loose pocket.
IMO this is how pool "should" be for the pro's. The sport needs to show true challenge, a break and run should be a truly impressive feat and making each shot should require effort instead of a decent break leading to announcers going "well he has a good shot on the 1-ball here, he should be out..." Pool gets boring when runouts become routine because of the lack of difficulty in the equippment. I would LOVE to see pool played on tables like this at the pro level from now on so we could see which pro's out there are truly the top talents instead of matches in the WPC being flips of a coiun between the top 30 players every year on who will get hot on the break and keep the other person seated most of the match.
From what I saw also, the break results were not that bad, they were making balls a decent amount of the time, but they were not getting out on alot of the racks because they did not get the shot on the 1-ball they wanted. These safety battles that resulted from not having an open out off the break were a large reason the match went the way it did, John was simply outclassed in the safety aspects of that match by Oscar in every way. This is a good thing, the table allowed for the player who had better skills in a critical aspect of the game to show a clear advantage and win. And honestly, the table did not beat these guys up, when Oscar won a safty battle and got his ball in hand on the 1 or 2 he was getting out at probably close to a 80% rate, same thing with John, when they finally got control of the table and had an out they usually ran it out.
About the time that Oscar was at 88 games John loosened up his game and free stroked some balls and ran a rack from a safety and broke and ran the next rack, the table allowed break and runs, but it required that you shot well.
IMO pool played like it was on that table would help this sport hugely. On a table like that the combination of accurate potting with cueball movement and control that 10-ball requires gives the sport legitimacy, the game when played like that can be compared to snooker and finally be seen as equally difficult. Also, played on a table like that the truly great players are going to rise to the top. On a loose pocket table a guy like John could catch a gear and run some racks to beat a SVB level of player, on a table like the match was played on John is unlikely to get out that often and a player like SVB would have his higher level of skill truly represented.
I love seeing pool played on tables like that. If it were the standard instead of a rare occurance like it is now we would see the strokes of the pool players become far more accurate, cheating pockets for creating artificial angles would give way to more accurate potting and more emphasis on pin point shape play where you have the proper angle to begin with since you can no longer create one via a loose pocket.
IMO this is how pool "should" be for the pro's. The sport needs to show true challenge, a break and run should be a truly impressive feat and making each shot should require effort instead of a decent break leading to announcers going "well he has a good shot on the 1-ball here, he should be out..." Pool gets boring when runouts become routine because of the lack of difficulty in the equippment. I would LOVE to see pool played on tables like this at the pro level from now on so we could see which pro's out there are truly the top talents instead of matches in the WPC being flips of a coiun between the top 30 players every year on who will get hot on the break and keep the other person seated most of the match.
Last edited:
Your math is abit off there.
I've disagreed with you on some stuff but the way you worded this it's hard to dispute. If you term it "professional level" equipment than you are correct this is what pool will look like. A jump cue and a feel system couldnt get it done this weekend. You had to know some things the other player didn't when it came to the moving and ducking.
I do think Oscar and John may have changed the standard for the TAR matches and future action most likely will be taking place on equipment similar to what they played on. It might have been a truly great and revolutionary type of thing we witnessed this weekend. Not something we are used to seeing.
Sidenote, I don't know what SVB's game looks like if you take the break away, I'm not sure I know how anyone plays if they were faced with equipment like that!
Jay Helfert thats why you are a gentleman and a scholar who tells it like it is my man..Gotta respect that...Now give up 10-7 so i can get my one-pocket lessons on.Lol:wink:
Given SVB's break this table would probably just make him "only" make 1 or 2 balls per a break instead of 2 or 3 with perfect cueball control. You put SVB on a table like this in a race to 100 against someone like Yang or Orcullo and you will see some packages. Nothing ground breaking, but I dont think you would see less then a 5-pack at least once and alot of 2 and 3 packs off a win.
While John and Oscar are gret players there is definately a level above them and that top echelon would make for a heck of a battle on a table like this.
SVB vs Yang in a race to 60 10-ball on this table, man... that would be intense.
The thing I like about this table, on a loose table with 5 inch buckets if I catch a gear and break well I have a chance to beat anyone in a race to 11. On this table I don't care what gear I catch or how well I am breaking there are players that are better then me and I ain't gonna beat them because I cannot keep them off the table by running a 5 pack a couple times.
I do as well. I can remember before the Bergman-Morra match that Jay predicted Morra to be the next great thing. He is a great player but I think he seriously needs a 3rd base coach. His dad or someone should have been sitting right behind him the entire match. If possible, he also needed to show up there more than a day in advance of the match.
Morra lost by 20 games - that is 10 mistakes. If he can fix those, he will make a jump to the next level.
Absolutely correct. In my opinion, broadcasters such as ESPN made a joke out of the sport with their TV tables.
I was at the UPA Championships out here at the Bicycle Club. During the regular tournament, the tables were standard Gold Crowns - which are buckets to begin with.
Then - during the semi finals and finals between Corey Deuel and Danny Basovich, and I think Gabe Owen, they set up two tables that had not been used in the tournament. They had absolute buckets - I understand something like 5 1/2" corners - because ESPN thinks their viewers want to see a lot of break and runs.
It was a shame seeing players of this caliber on these joke tables.
Chris
Exactly - against Bergman and Oscar, I think it comes down to that he simply lost to a better player. No shame in that.
I agree with Celtic on his thoughts on the table. We have tables like this all over Southern California - in Hollywood, Santa Monica, Oxnard and several others. And who plays on these tables? Not the bangers. That's right, only the serious players. I'd bet that even John Morra will say there was nothing wrong with the table. Maybe someone can ask him.
Anyhow, I liked the match. I've seen Oscar play numerous times but I thought this was going to be a tough one for him.
I've hardly seen John play at all but I can see why many folks on here liked him in this match. He has a smooth, accurate, straight as an arrow piston-like stroke that I like. It would certainly take a champion to stop him.
In the end, there can be no excuses, Oscar was just too tough for John. If they decide on a rematch, on easier equipment, I'm going with Oscar to win it again. He has proven he can hang with the best of 'em.
Anyhow, I liked the match. I've seen Oscar play numerous times but I thought this was going to be a tough one for him.
I've hardly seen John play at all but I can see why many folks on here liked him in this match. He has a smooth, accurate, straight as an arrow piston-like stroke that I like. It would certainly take a champion to stop him.
In the end, there can be no excuses, Oscar was just too tough for John. If they decide on a rematch, on easier equipment, I'm going with Oscar to win it again. He has proven he can hang with the best of 'em.
Chris,
I awalys respect your opinion and do here as well,
I just want to add a different thought to this discussion. I mentioned it doing commentary with Jay last nite.
If you use the B-Wick with 5" pockets-its a joke, too many run outs. If you use 4 5/8" pockets (Tournment B-Wick size on a GC-5) its still too easy for guys like Morra/Oscar. then we go down to what this match was played on, a one pocket table. 10 ball or any rotation game is a rythem run out type of game and that table really isnt the solution either. Correct?????
So whats the problem, we went from 5" buckets down to less than 4" snooker pockets and still dont have a table that blends with a rotation game. Correct?????
So whats the problem???? I dont think its the pocket size. Its the fast cloth-thats the problem. Guys like Earl were the only players that could really move the rock on the slow Mali cloth, it took a big stroke to move the rock. We all assume the OB is going to be made so what were all looking at is the shape on the next ball right? messing around with pocket sizes isnt the answere to the problem, slowing the tables down it IMO!!!!
Making the ball is only part of the game, where you put the CB is more important to players and educated rail birds. With this fast cloth it dosent take much to put the CB anywhere, Heck we all can "almost" do what Mike Massey does on slow cloth when we play on fast cloth. My point is Shape is too easy now and we have a ball pocketing issue, lets shift the focus back on to position play and not worry about pocketing balls.
with 5" pockets all the balls go in, 4" no body lets their stroke out very often, and when they miss they awalys have shape, shape is too easy on the fast cloth, I remember seeing Kim make some amazing shape shots with his stroke that only a handful of people could do, now on the fast cloth I see B players move the rock like that.
see what I mean?????
that table is fine for JA and Busta, but for normal players it just dosent work. It exploited the weakness of Morra and Oscar way to much, both of whom are great players.
we need the old cloth and med size pockets, a balance of those 2 things, not just pocket size, or deep Diamond shelfs