Crack is whack.
Quitting Winners Question
- Thread starter WobblyStroke
- Start date
xX-Wizard-Xx
Well-known member
playing with backers is weak .....
I remember when I was just learning pool, (still on that phase actually) the vibe of competition was the main thing. There is an arch to it that must be completed or there is no satisfaction. So I'd call the posted situation a draw.
Most of you don't get it because you probably think exclusively about the money and not about the pride in one's game, reputation and honor. Literally anyone can get a set/game ahead and run away. There's not much to it. That's pathetic. It's also cowardice and an admission you're not confident you can reproduce this. If you're this desperate for a few bucks, maybe pool gambling isn't for you. There's more to gambling in pool than just cash. You should only quit when behind or even.
There's no glory in quitting as a winner. The idea is to not only win, but to have the loser concede this by them quitting. To beat them down where they want no more. Get them to say mercy, or cry uncle or tap out. So long as they keep wanting a piece of you, if you're ahead - you should play. This is the only way to prove you're the true winner since it is unanimous. Your opponent confirms it, not you alone. When you quit ahead, you're just declaring yourself winner. This is the equivalent of when you were a child and some kid in the middle of a game or arbitrarily just declares themselves winner like some brat. When opponents quit when behind, they agree with you and confirm you the winner. It's that simple. Surprised so many people don't understand this basic concept.
The fundamental difference is in defining what the "game" is ...the quit while ahead types think the game is literally the set or whatever they won and ran away with. The quit only when even or behind crowd believes the "game" is the struggle and contest between two people facing off, regardless of the games/sets. The "game" doesn't end with the completion of a rack or a set, it ends when the loser has had enough.
There's no glory in quitting as a winner. The idea is to not only win, but to have the loser concede this by them quitting. To beat them down where they want no more. Get them to say mercy, or cry uncle or tap out. So long as they keep wanting a piece of you, if you're ahead - you should play. This is the only way to prove you're the true winner since it is unanimous. Your opponent confirms it, not you alone. When you quit ahead, you're just declaring yourself winner. This is the equivalent of when you were a child and some kid in the middle of a game or arbitrarily just declares themselves winner like some brat. When opponents quit when behind, they agree with you and confirm you the winner. It's that simple. Surprised so many people don't understand this basic concept.
The fundamental difference is in defining what the "game" is ...the quit while ahead types think the game is literally the set or whatever they won and ran away with. The quit only when even or behind crowd believes the "game" is the struggle and contest between two people facing off, regardless of the games/sets. The "game" doesn't end with the completion of a rack or a set, it ends when the loser has had enough.
When I was 19 and gambling my brains out, I thought quitting winner was only outdone by knocking. Now that I'm 44, I wouldn't fault my opponent for quitting winner. We all have sh!t to do and life goes on.
All that said, playing for table time is a social game, and should not even be a consideration for getting mad if the winner quits. I would not have been mad at that when I was 19. I think the guy in this specific scenario is way out of line getting made. IMO
All that said, playing for table time is a social game, and should not even be a consideration for getting mad if the winner quits. I would not have been mad at that when I was 19. I think the guy in this specific scenario is way out of line getting made. IMO
a 1000x over? I did the math
Take half of what CJ says and throw it away. Take the other half with a grain of salt.
I was the same way when I was that age. So afraid of being called a nit or quitting a winner. I felt obligated to let everyone get unstuck. I think I was just trying to prove myself. All young and dumb.When I was 19 and gambling my brains out, I thought quitting winner was only outdone by knocking. Now that I'm 44, I wouldn't fault my opponent for quitting winner. We all have sh!t to do and life goes on.
All that said, playing for table time is a social game, and should not even be a consideration for getting mad if the winner quits. I would not have been mad at that when I was 19. I think the guy in this specific scenario is way out of line getting made. IMO
Now if I match up, I tell the guy I can play till a certain time so he is fair warned that I am not playing the game indefinitely. Keeps it pretty simple come quitting time.
Relax
first of all realize that gambling is to win the money not beat the opponent or -prove something-.
again you are playing to win the most money you can from him and must handle it in that manner.
game by game is just that with no finality until someone quits. which is usually the loser. unless you set a time limit or something before the match.
or after playing a long time, winner or loser can say over in an hour. you are never required to play till you fall down . or see that your game is deteriorated so much you cant win from there.
and after playing for a time if you now decide you can no longer win this game, ahead or behind you should find a way to quit.
you have no obligation to lose all you won back just to appease the person you were trying to beat in the first place.
playing a set is final. game is over and negotiation starts all over again. either side can quit or ask for a different game or spot.
and why would you after playing a set and winning it, and realizing you were lucky and cant beat your opponent play another set and lose the money back. that's stupidity.
again you are playing to win the most money you can from him and must handle it in that manner.
game by game is just that with no finality until someone quits. which is usually the loser. unless you set a time limit or something before the match.
or after playing a long time, winner or loser can say over in an hour. you are never required to play till you fall down . or see that your game is deteriorated so much you cant win from there.
and after playing for a time if you now decide you can no longer win this game, ahead or behind you should find a way to quit.
you have no obligation to lose all you won back just to appease the person you were trying to beat in the first place.
playing a set is final. game is over and negotiation starts all over again. either side can quit or ask for a different game or spot.
and why would you after playing a set and winning it, and realizing you were lucky and cant beat your opponent play another set and lose the money back. that's stupidity.
What do you call a guy who loses a set and quits?
When if he won, he would have kept playing.
I'm real curious!
One shot clucker?
When if he won, he would have kept playing.
I'm real curious!
One shot clucker?
smart gambler
Just split the time at that point.
It is a bit rude abd the guy probably just looking for the competition.
Acting like a 5 year old probably killed the future for him playing this guy. Though maybe it will spark a wager.
Far as really quitting winner, I'd say don't.
I'd say keep the window open if you got them stuck. Let them jack the bet to up to half what they owe. Only way to make big scores. I've taken guys from 20 a set to losing a grand. If somebody wants to go off, it's your job to let them.
I'd say keep the window open if you got them stuck. Let them jack the bet to up to half what they owe. Only way to make big scores. I've taken guys from 20 a set to losing a grand. If somebody wants to go off, it's your job to let them.
Last edited:
If you have a set time you can play to you need to say so. Likewise if you are waiting for someone else.
I was in a similar place as the guy in the OP's post. I was just poking balls around without too much effort and was down a little. When the other player announced they wanted to leave to play someone else after a game that had just started I dropped into serious mode and ran out the rack in double time. The guy was confused, he hadn't realized I had just been coasting.
Similar thing happened playing short sets too. I'm the old geezer now and the kid was banging around with me. Only nine footer in the place so I wouldn't refuse play when someone came in wanting to play on the nine footer, just courtesy to the owner who was a friend. The kid comes in with enough stickers and patches on a case to hold it together. APA, TAP, BCA, A few I didn't recognize, maybe one from the PTA.(Parent and Teachers Association) He pointed them out to me including a couple of rewards for a break and run. Obviously I should be impressed with my old case without even my name on it. After playing by the game for maybe an hour he said it was getting time for him to go but he would like to finish it out with a short set if I didn't mind. I knew his plan was to leave on a winning note. Being a reasonable fellow I dropped things down into passing gear. If the set was important to him, it was important to me. Now I was moving around the table with purpose in my stride and gliding to where the cue ball was coming to, meeting it as it arrived. The youngster quit me halfway through the set, getting trounced wasn't what he wanted to remember.
A possibility the old guy was upset because he thought he was working around to make a score and gave away a few games then found the fish had slipped the hook too! Tough paduki if so, chumming the water always carries a little risk.
I thoroughly enjoyed the story later in the thread about the old man with the hundred dollar bills. A master shark move and it worked perfectly. It does remind me of Jackie Gleason in the Hustler. After playing all night Newman looks like a skid row bum. Jackie freshens up a bit in the bathroom, slips his jacket on, puts a fresh carnation on his jacket, looks as fresh as he was when he walked in. Newman thought he was getting ready to leave. Jackie looks over at Newman, "Ready to play some pool Eddie?" The smirk on Newman's face crumbles and you can see he is toast. Perfect acting by both of them!
Hu
I was in a similar place as the guy in the OP's post. I was just poking balls around without too much effort and was down a little. When the other player announced they wanted to leave to play someone else after a game that had just started I dropped into serious mode and ran out the rack in double time. The guy was confused, he hadn't realized I had just been coasting.
Similar thing happened playing short sets too. I'm the old geezer now and the kid was banging around with me. Only nine footer in the place so I wouldn't refuse play when someone came in wanting to play on the nine footer, just courtesy to the owner who was a friend. The kid comes in with enough stickers and patches on a case to hold it together. APA, TAP, BCA, A few I didn't recognize, maybe one from the PTA.(Parent and Teachers Association) He pointed them out to me including a couple of rewards for a break and run. Obviously I should be impressed with my old case without even my name on it. After playing by the game for maybe an hour he said it was getting time for him to go but he would like to finish it out with a short set if I didn't mind. I knew his plan was to leave on a winning note. Being a reasonable fellow I dropped things down into passing gear. If the set was important to him, it was important to me. Now I was moving around the table with purpose in my stride and gliding to where the cue ball was coming to, meeting it as it arrived. The youngster quit me halfway through the set, getting trounced wasn't what he wanted to remember.
A possibility the old guy was upset because he thought he was working around to make a score and gave away a few games then found the fish had slipped the hook too! Tough paduki if so, chumming the water always carries a little risk.
I thoroughly enjoyed the story later in the thread about the old man with the hundred dollar bills. A master shark move and it worked perfectly. It does remind me of Jackie Gleason in the Hustler. After playing all night Newman looks like a skid row bum. Jackie freshens up a bit in the bathroom, slips his jacket on, puts a fresh carnation on his jacket, looks as fresh as he was when he walked in. Newman thought he was getting ready to leave. Jackie looks over at Newman, "Ready to play some pool Eddie?" The smirk on Newman's face crumbles and you can see he is toast. Perfect acting by both of them!
Hu