Why Play $500 Or Less Ahead Sets?

[Johnnyt]

I don't understand why ahead sets are played for $500 or less. Most of them go on for many hours before one of them wins and what's worse a good percentage of them end with both players quiting and one guy getting paid for a few games. The table time remains the same and there is usually many hours of it. Am I missing something why anyone would want to play ahead sets unless it's for big money? Johnnyt

 

[sfmc-x1]

I think I can agree with the initial question in that it hurts the possibility of a rematch?

Just play a race, why not?

Keeping it close may entice the loser to play again?

my $0.02

 

[TATE]

I don't understand why ahead sets are played for $500 or less. Most of them go on for many hours before one of them wins and what's worse a good percentage of them end with both players quiting and one guy getting paid for a few games. The table time remains the same and there is usually many hours of it. Am I missing something why anyone would want to play ahead sets unless it's for big money? Johnnyt

The idea is the stronger player prefers an ahead set, regardless of the money.

There is far less chance that the weaker player will win one race, realize he's outgunned and quit.

 

[iusedtoberich]

Could be the economy. Could be the comfort level of the players. Could be a way to lock up more money. Could be the experience of the players. etc.

When I was in my late teens, I played lots of 50 and 100 sets. But rarely anything over the 200 range. A 500 ahead set would have been a big deal to me then.

 

[BeiberLvr]

Could be the economy. Could be the comfort level of the players. Could be a way to lock up more money. Could be the experience of the players. etc.

When I was in my late teens, I played lots of 50 and 100 sets. But rarely anything over the 200 range. A 500 ahead set would have been a big deal to me then.

Races to 50 or 50 ahead?

 

[Hungarian]

I'd call it passive-aggressive nitty-ness.

I don't understand why ahead sets are played for $500 or less. Most of them go on for many hours before one of them wins and what's worse a good percentage of them end with both players quiting and one guy getting paid for a few games. The table time remains the same and there is usually many hours of it. Am I missing something why anyone would want to play ahead sets unless it's for big money? Johnnyt

 

[Hungarian]

This only works if there's a fish on the other end. As a weaker player I'd never play a better player ahead set knowing exactly what you say. But I'm not a fish, I'm just dead money. And so why scare the fish with an ahead set. Why not just slowly bleed the fish over time? You are not supposed to destroy the fish, you are to slowly take his money. But then that leads me back to the original question.

Good ****ing question.

The idea is the stronger player prefers an ahead set, regardless of the money.

There is far less chance that the weaker player will win one race, realize he's outgunned and quit.

 

[Gunn_Slinger]

In todays gambling pool world, there is a LOT of matches " breaking even ".
I"ve seen it for years now. Very few players will stay and gamble. One player gets up 2-4 games, the other player gets even, the other guy quits. Same way with races. Player wins the first race, loses the second....he's done. Thats why you play ahead sets. If $500 ahead sets are common in your area...stay there. There are very few if any in my areas. Races have taken over in pool. And its a terrible way to bet your money. Ex: You win race 1 9-3..you lose race 2 9-8...you lose race 3 9-7. Your 3 games winner.....but your loser in money....then the guy pulls up...says he's tired...long session......3 races. Welcome to pool in the new millennium.

 

[Snapshot9]

sets

I don't play ahead sets anymore .... period. Play one years ago for 16 hours, we were dead even, and decided to quit. I won't do that again.

I only play races, and I am old school. We used to play $1,000 sets racing
to 11. Today, some want to go to 21 for a grand .... lol I think most of the time it falls somewhere around 15 though. Actually, I don't have that kind of money to gamble with anymore, so most of the time, I am just playing races to 7.

 

[backplaying]

This only works if there's a fish on the other end. As a weaker player I'd never play a better player ahead set knowing exactly what you say. But I'm not a fish, I'm just dead money. And so why scare the fish with an ahead set. Why not just slowly bleed the fish over time? You are not supposed to destroy the fish, you are to slowly take his money. But then that leads me back to the original question.

Good ****ing question.

One sure couldn't stall much playing a race to 7 compared to 5 ahead. Five ahead for 500.00 is 100 a game and not a bad bet. Playing ahead sets takes alot of the luck factor out. I liked it much better when most people just bet by the game.

 

[PaulieB]

My usual response to people who ask me to play ahead sets is... I'll play 2 ahead for a grand. The long marathon sets suck, they favor the younger players, especially those that are chemically enhanced. This is based on my personal experience, where people come over to my house after hours to play on my table. I have totally quit ahead sets that run until 6am(at my loss), I am getting older and don't do the stuff the younger players do to stay "on edge".

 

[backplaying]

In todays gambling pool world, there is a LOT of matches " breaking even ".
I"ve seen it for years now. Very few players will stay and gamble. One player gets up 2-4 games, the other player gets even, the other guy quits. Same way with races. Player wins the first race, loses the second....he's done. Thats why you play ahead sets. If $500 ahead sets are common in your area...stay there. There are very few if any in my areas. Races have taken over in pool. And its a terrible way to bet your money. Ex: You win race 1 9-3..you lose race 2 9-8...you lose race 3 9-7. Your 3 games winner.....but your loser in money....then the guy pulls up...says he's tired...long session......3 races. Welcome to pool in the new millennium.

I have to agree with this.

 

[backplaying]

I don't understand why ahead sets are played for $500 or less. Most of them go on for many hours before one of them wins and what's worse a good percentage of them end with both players quiting and one guy getting paid for a few games. The table time remains the same and there is usually many hours of it. Am I missing something why anyone would want to play ahead sets unless it's for big money? Johnnyt

I have to ask, do you gamble? If so, what do you play and bet?

 

[strokin'myshaft]

...............

I don't understand why ahead sets are played for $500 or less. Most of them go on for many hours before one of them wins and what's worse a good percentage of them end with both players quiting and one guy getting paid for a few games. The table time remains the same and there is usually many hours of it. Am I missing something why anyone would want to play ahead sets unless it's for big money? Johnnyt

 

[8pack]

Playing ahead sets is very similar to playing by the game.I have a friend who once travel the roads tell me if your playing a guy that plays as good as you do, play by the game.

 

[foxcues]

If i`m betting $500 or more I will only play a ahead set with the stipulation that the money is frozen and someone has to loose.In a race you can get one or two bad rolls and it cost you the set.In a ahead set it is very unlikely(unless your bad roll is in the last game or two)that it will cost you the set.
How many times have you seen someone slop a 9ball or two to win a race,in a ahead set you have many chances to over come that.

 

[PaulieB]

If i`m betting $500 or more I will only play a ahead set with the stipulation that the money is frozen and someone has to loose.In a race you can get one or two bad rolls and it cost you the set.In a ahead set it is very unlikely(unless your bad roll is in the last game or two)that it will cost you the set.
How many times have you seen someone slop a 9ball or two to win a race,in a ahead set you have many chances to over come that.

Exactly. This is why I like short races to 5 for the cash. I feel like I have the skill to overcome my opponent if he gets a couple of slop rolls yet also have the ability to carom/run the cue ball in such a way that a short race favors me. It isn't the most traditional way to win a set and I'm sure many purists would berate me, but I am not a great shooter and I've won 5 figures in a night. So all the purists that have never won more than 500 for a set can critique my methods all they want.

 

[Johnnyt]

I have to ask, do you gamble? If so, what do you play and bet?

Yes, I gambled for over 50 years and prefered by the game. 9-ball $10- $20 a game was average bet for me although I played for $50-$100 more than a few times. Johnnyt

 

[Montana Mike]

If you agree to play someone 50 a game and would like to know that your opponent isn't firing a game or two at you then 10 ahead for 500 is the same thing. I don't think it matters at all what the bet is for as long as the opponents are willing to play for it. When I was younger we would play 10 or 20 a game and usually had to post up a hundred or two to prove you were at least willing to risk something. If the game stalemates the players can decide to quit or play. To me, I don't see the big deal of why lower ahead sets are knocked. I'd rather play by the game nowadays anyway, especially rotation games. If I have to freeze up something it is usually more comfortable for me than playing races to 7 or 9 when they can quit whenever they want.

 

[jay helfert]

The idea is the stronger player prefers an ahead set, regardless of the money.

There is far less chance that the weaker player will win one race, realize he's outgunned and quit.

Tate is right. We used to almost only play "Ahead" sets. Five to Ten Ahead was the norm for a long, long time. On the other hand, the filipinos almost only play Races, and long ones at that. Anything from a Race to 15 up to 25 or even more. You still will rarely see an Ahead set over there.

On the other hand, like Johnny I would often play by the game and pay off after two games. Five a game, pay at $10. Ten a game, pay at $20. Now if I played someone $20 One Pocket (a common bet back then), we paid off after every game.