Interesting scenario from an old match on video

[alstl]

https://youtu.be/jT3b5kX9M4U?t=9478


First, thanks to arenaldo for posting the match. Mizerak did a great job of laying out the shot and the options.

Two things:

First, a lot of 9 ball players go for "area" position. I believe that's what Kim was doing, he knew 3 rails would get him a shot. What he discounted was the scratch.

I'm far from a great player but to me, the decision of whether to go forward three rails or draw the ball depends on which shot you are more confident in. I'd have probably drawn the ball because I'm more confident in the angle coming up table than I am in exactly where the cue ball will hit on the third rail.

The decision to go 3 rails may have cost him the match.

 

[macguy]

https://youtu.be/jT3b5kX9M4U?t=9478


First, thanks to arenaldo for posting the match. Mizerak did a great job of laying out the shot and the options.

Two things:

First, a lot of 9 ball players go for "area" position. I believe that's what Kim was doing, he knew 3 rails would get him a shot. What he discounted was the scratch.

I'm far from a great player but to me, the decision of whether to go forward three rails or draw the ball depends on which shot you are more confident in. I'd have probably drawn the ball because I'm more confident in the angle coming up table than I am in exactly where the cue ball will hit on the third rail.

The decision to go 3 rails may have cost him the match.

I don't think the side was even a factor in his mind. He just hit it so bad Miz shown a three rail shot but it was actually a four rail shot. If he hit it right when it hits the forth rail he is right in line. It should have been a fool proof shot.

Going one rail a lot could go wrong least of which would be coming up short. Drawing off a ball that close to the rail you can easily hit it and lose the cue ball. I think it was the right shot he just did it badly. The three railer was essentially a natural position with a little speed control, where drawing the ball is not. Drawing the cue ball is almost never natural.

 

[alstl]

I don't think the side was even a factor in his mind. He just hit it so bad Miz shown a three rail shot but it was actually a four rail shot. If he hit it right when it hits the forth rail he is right in line. It should have been a fool proof shot.

Going one rail a lot could go wrong least of which would be coming up short. Drawing off a ball that close to the rail you can easily hit it and lose the cue ball. I think it was the right shot he just did it badly. The three railer was essentially a natural position with a little speed control, where drawing the ball is not. Drawing the cue ball is almost never natural.

You are right, it was actually 4 rails. Maybe because I play a lot of 14.1 and I'm used to going one rail into clusters - for me I can calculate the angle drawing one rail back up table than the exact spot the cue ball will contact the 4th rail.

I'm a little confused about the bolded part - hit what?

 

[Baxter]

It looks to me like he either didn't use enough english or the english didn't take enough off the first rail. New cloth can do that to you sometimes. It wants to slide instead of grab.

 

[macguy]

You are right, it was actually 4 rails. Maybe because I play a lot of 14.1 and I'm used to going one rail into clusters - for me I can calculate the angle drawing one rail back up table than the exact spot the cue ball will contact the 4th rail.

I'm a little confused about the bolded part - hit what?

I meant the shot in general. On a shot like that if you hit too much of the ball the cue ball may die. If you cut the ball too much the cue ball with hit the rail and fly across the table not coming back hardly at all. You could over draw it, under draw it, a lot to go wrong and you have to control all of it. I just remembered, you can actually hit the ball into the point and miss it. We have all done that.

 

[macguy]

It looks to me like he either didn't use enough english or the english didn't take enough off the first rail. New cloth can do that to you sometimes. It wants to slide instead of grab.

Watch it again you can see what happened. The cue ball had high english on it. It came off the first rail then hit the second rail. Before it hits the third rail you can see the cue ball straighten out from the over spin.

When it hit the third rail it wants to go more across the table rather then down the table because it still have top english on it. You can actually see it happen when the cue ball is about 18 inches from hitting the third rail.

 

[PoolBum]

Despite what Mizerak said, Kim couldn't draw the ball back for the 9 with that angle on the 8. The 8 was not sitting in the pocket, or close enough to the pocket, and it was too close to the side cushion to draw down table.

Kim played shape for the follow shot, which I think most top players would do in that situation (mainly because you can control the path and the speed of the cueball more easily on that follow shot than on a draw shot back for the 9), but he ended up with a little too much angle on the 8 which brought the side pocket scratch into play. With the right angle and the right stroke that follow shot normally doesn't come anywhere near the side pocket.

 

[pt109]

Anybody notice that Kim looked to see if the 8 was froze?
...if it was not froze, position is easy...3 or 4 rails.
But when the ball is froze, there are two contact points...ball first...
...or rail first.
When you catch rail first, the cue ball goes on the angle that Kim got.

There are proposition bets involving shots like this...a thinner angle..
...rail first hits the other long rail...
...ball first hits the short rail.

Try these on your table, Al

 

[macguy]

Anybody notice that Kim looked to see if the 8 was froze?
...if it was not froze, position is easy...3 or 4 rails.
But when the ball is froze, there are two contact points...ball first...
...or rail first.
When you catch rail first, the cue ball goes on the angle that Kim got.

There are proposition bets involving shots like this...a thinner angle..
...rail first hits the other long rail...
...ball first hits the short rail.

Try these on your table, Al

That happens a lot. Catch the rail you can end up scratching it the corner pocket across the table. Done that a million times.
There is also a way of using low english, not draw but low spin, I think some people refer to it as BHE. You can get the cue ball to go right into the short rail and around the table. I don't know if I am describing it correctly.

 

[detroitfan0877]

I can't figure out why he drew the ball back 2 1/2 diamonds when he shot the seven. Was this a mistake? It seemed like this really made his angle terrible to take this three or four rails. Just surprised he didn't take play it straight across the table and slightly past the center of the table and set a better angle.

 

[prewarhero]

I would have seen three rails the whole rack. Kim made the right shot he just hit it to full or didn't use enough inside. Maybe he just used a "touch".

 

[Colin Colenso]

It looks to me like he either didn't use enough english or the english didn't take enough off the first rail. New cloth can do that to you sometimes. It wants to slide instead of grab.

Exactly, heavy inside english is the key to avoiding the center pocket on that shot. A quarter tip or so is inviting the scratch.

This type of shot is very valuable and a good reason players should become familiar with back hand english and their cue's pivot point. It makes aiming for large tip offsets much easier that trying to guess the squirt.

A little chart I made recently attached. His shot is similar to the shot on the 3 ball, as the CB goes into the side rail at that angle. Note that only the CB paths for the 1 and 2 ball are drawn, to avoid unreadability. The other paths can be inferred.

Colin

 

[pocket]

Despite what Mizerak said, Kim couldn't draw the ball back for the 9 with that angle on the 8.

I'm sure you are a good player, good enough to know how you would play this shot successfully for your game.

Steve Mizerak was one of the best, if not the best, shot makers to walk the Earth. I'm confident if he said that shot was possible, it was.

 

[ideologist]

I'm sure you are a good player, good enough to know how you would play this shot successfully for your game.

Steve Mizerak was one of the best, if not the best, shot makers to walk the Earth. I'm confident if he said that shot was possible, it was.

Oh please, even in HD top players make bad calls all the time.

With the quality of view he had, it is incredibly easy to misread the angle by a few degreees, making a huge difference in positional shots over 8 feet!

 

[pocket]

Oh please, even in HD top players make bad calls all the time.

With the quality of view he had, it is incredibly easy to misread the angle by a few degreees, making a huge difference in positional shots over 8 feet!

Lol. Dude I'd put my money on it, oh wait that's not possible. :wink:

 

[pocket]

With the quality of view he had, it is incredibly easy to misread the angle by a few degreees, making a huge difference in positional shots over 8 feet!

Wait, with a far inferior view you can make the correct judgement?

 

[Colin Colenso]

This video link is timestamped to take you to the shot being discussed: https://youtu.be/jT3b5kX9M4U?t=2h38m23s

I captured the shot in the image below. Drawing straight back wouldn't seem an option. A draw with heavy outside can take the CB to the rail left of the top center pocket in the image. Easy to underplay this and scratch this shot or to overhit it and lose the CB.

The 3 rail is by far the best shot. Just have to get plenty of inside english on it.

 

[ideologist]

Wait, with a far inferior view you can make the correct judgement?

I said it is easy to misread the table with an inferior view...

 

[pocket]

I said it is easy to misread the table with an inferior view...

Yes and our view is significantly inferior to his.

 

[PoolBum]

Steve Mizerak was one of the best, if not the best, shot makers to walk the Earth. I'm confident if he said that shot was possible, it was.

No, I don't think Steve saw where the 8 ball was actually laying. You couldn't draw back the way he diagrammed it given the angle that Kim had and where the 8 ball was that close to the cushion.