Opinions regarding a former top pro playing in and dominating a Poolroom‘s weekly handicapped tournament?

Agree with your first sentence Maha, but RESPECTFULLY, not your 2nd. Played a 44 man double-elim 10-ball tourney last night. 4 different opponents I knew nothing about when we met at the table. No idea "how" they played other than their 600+ Fargo numbers on the big screen. One played like a 700, two played like their rating, and one I slaughtered and would have pinned the 425 ribbon on him. Fortunately, I beat three of the four. So case in point, one does not always know how a person plays unless they've played them, watched them, or otherwise. And as you and I, and the rest of you pool freak readers out there all know, one has good evenings and bad ones. So no judgment here on anyone. It's life in pool land. So back to my original position: I play (in competitive and tournament situations) the table only, and play it to the best of my abilities. It really doesn't matter if they are 700+ or 400-. I am going to play defense if it's low percentage, and offense when I feel the shot and know I can still get position. You may disagree, and that's okay.
You really don't think there is ever a time where you'd want to take your opponents skill level into consideration before deciding how you play a ball? Not one scenario? That's the part I have a hard time believing. If you're a serious player anyway, which you seem to be.
 
Apologies, I didn't mean to sound like I was crapping on your take. Just that it read as very scripted, reviewed and ran through the ChatGPT diplomatic algorithm. Definitely not the language you normally see on AZB to describe a negative aspect of a situation.

We do agree though. Although I lean more toward the Euros simply being better vs the Americans not having a secret handshake

No problem! Well, except the one everyone has with the written word including you and I. Usually no tone other than what the reader puts on the message. The reader's tone is apt to be entirely different after a rough night with no sleep or at three on a lazy afternoon.

I think we disagree a little about the Cup, that is fine though, this place would be very boring if we all held the same opinions. When the captain rode herd on the Americans they won. Without a babysitter they didn't treat it as a sporting event and lost. I think a part of that is a lack of team spirit. Our newcomers usually play comparatively better than the old hands on the team. I think it is because they are pumped to be on there while the older hands are more concerned with after hour activities than they should be.

I'd like to add something to the above that came to a head for me over the last week or so.

Based partially on reflection on my comments in this thread. I've decided to add that I will no longer be mortgaging against my own game in giving up weight to make a game. However there is situational criteria to this. Note, I'm not a heavy gambler in any terms. When bets get serious it's only when I'm stepping up in weight class.

When will I give up weight:
  • When a bet is so small it's equal to table time and maybe a drink. This number I was already willing to give up just by being in the room, so I see no actual bet in this case. $10-20
  • When the player that I'm negotiating with has an established plateau, and I know the likely hood of them beating me in a even race exceedingly unlikely.
When won't I give up weight:
  • When someone just wants to gamble. I have no need for their money, so why risk mine.
  • When someone wants to tout a win over me. You want to tell everyone in the room that you beat JV..?.., then actually do it and don't pretend a participation ribbon is the same as a trophy.
  • When a player who is developing wants to "step out of their weight class" but needs to hug a weighted blanket when doing so. When I was cutting my teeth I played straight races to actually get a measure of my ability. Under enough weight you alter how you play weaker players. A "winning" result doesn't tell you anything imo. It literally costs nothing to get a game with me, so if you're afraid of losing your money then don't bet it. At that point all you risk is pride and the stronger player has more to loose.
So, what I've done is limit my 'action' to possibly $10 sets once every couple of weeks to the one guy who just wants the challenge but feels there needs to be something wagered. I'm fine with that. The young guy that tried to goat me into a heavily weighted game over the holidays got my new reply to such conversations. Told him when his balls finally drop and he wants to see how his game holds up. We can play even whenever he wants. I got into this weight debate with the regional APA rep couple of days ago as well. Surprise surprise, but he thought I should always be the dog to every snot nose kid that wants a game.


I agree with every word written here! When I played regularly, I would have strangers come up wanting to play. "Sure, what for?"

"I need weight" Never saw them before in my life, they came to me wanting to play, now they are wanting weight before we hit a ball!

Might not have been the brightest thing but I would play anyone in the world heads up in my peak years. Can't brag about beating someone and then admit you were getting the sun, the moon, and a half dozen stars! Somebody wanted to bring in AJ Foyt to race on the local track. The track owner asked what I thought. "Hell yeah. Best chance I will ever have of beating him. If he beats me nobody will notice. If I beat him I'll rent a billboard!" I would have been as happy as a pig in crap just to be on the same track as him.

Hu
 
i guess im different . i will make a game with anybody that wants to gamble. whether i give or get weight i dont care. i care about whether i have the best of the bet or not. what the game is , is of no concern to me.
and as long as i like the game i will bet whatever they will. and immediately try to change it if i dont like it anymore. if they wont, i quit. being winner or loser has no basis on those decisions.
and before i start i make it clear both can quit anytime winner or loser just like playing in a casino.
if you dont like my action dont gamble with me.
 
Though I see your point somewhat, I still disagree because we all know 9-ball can, and unfortunately be, anybody's game. Slop, luck, etc. Sure, the higher skill should be the winner the majority of the time. But... (and there's always a but), there have been occasions when I used your strategy and my Fargo 450 opponent banged, got lucky in some unexplainable way, and I LOST. While racking for the next game, tail between my legs, the little voice in my head said, "why didn't you play that first shot like you would have played it with Gorst?" So, it was back to my original game plan. Play the table. Play to win. Again, unless it's with your kids, a 2nd date, your grandfather in a wheelchair, yada yada.
Luck over time is skill.

Honestly I know it's tough to think about for someone who is used to call shot games, but there are a myriad of ways to bump up the percentage on luck. And guess what... it makes the game of 9B more strategic, creative, and fun.

My favorite is the "ride and hide." Just as it sounds, ride the 9 like a mofo but in reality it's a free shot. Do you know why? Because I'm putting the CB in jail. I'm playing a safe but I'm also letting the 9 have a chance. You can often send the 9 on a 2 or 3 rail journey to the edge of another ball. When doing this against my buddies I'll say "Oh, the old ride and hide." Of course I've heard it a few times from them. 😂

There are a lot of subtle things people don't see. Study some trick shots and other disciplines. They might be low percentage but as long as you keep the CB safe they are free rolls. Sometimes you may be in a desperate enough situation to even get a hit on the ball that you give it extra speed to carrom into another ball. And/or enough speed/spin to put the ball and CB frozen to opposite rails. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

It's not just "slop" though, you have to have the speed correct, the spin correct, recognize tangent lines and natural carom angles. Related, if I'm kicking or having to attempt some stupid tough safety escape, I NEVER just "go for a hit." A legal hit usually sells the game to your opponent. Try to make something happen, even if it is risky it's about percentages. Get separation or leave them an off angle shot if you can.

Half ball hits produce some really consistent CB angles. I might use a half ball hit to cross bank a ball. All's fair, but remember to protect whitey. If I know the CB will be safe, I'll use caroms/billiards to do cross banks, 2 rail shots, 3 rail shots, rail first shots on another ball etc. It's all situational and it's about percentages.

Say the balls are horribly clustered. Say there's no real shot. If I can hide the CB/play safe, I'll blast them (not necessarily a hard blast, but rearranging the furniture in 1P parlance). But guess what? Whitey is safe. If I slopped something and left myself a tough shot, so what, I turned an unwinnable mess into something where I have a chance. And if you can read racks and clusters with all the stuff in mind, you might be sending 3 balls at pockets... low percentage sure, but it has a 3X chance.

Knowing and practicing tangent lines, caroms, cross banks, z shots, billiard shots, half ball hits, ball seperation (and gathering as in straight rail billiards) all will help your "luck" be higher percentage.

But if I'm playing anyone serious and they think it's luck, I won't correct them. They may be starting to think they are getting unlucky when I "accidentally" safety them. I mean, a 2 rail and "accidentally" caroming off another ball to hide behind blockers?! Look at this lucky dog! All I'm getting is bad rolls. And the mental game has started with no sharking/input from me. Can they let it go or will their own thoughts destroy them? It's not for me to say but some don't do so well after a few "bad rolls." Being on tilt is a choice you have to get over.

Sorry for the book but I really like this aspect of 9B. I also like call shot games but it's fun to play around too.
 
You really don't think there is ever a time where you'd want to take your opponents skill level into consideration before deciding how you play a ball? Not one scenario? That's the part I have a hard time believing. If you're a serious player anyway, which you seem to be.
No, not really. Truth be told, I don't even entertain the thought of how good they are, because that's just another thing in my head that I don't need. In fact, I'd rather NOT know. A good player (or any player) is going to do what they do best, with the table they have, to the best of their abilities. So am I. If facing a mid-to-low percentage shot, I'm playing the best safety I can. If they're a Fargo 750, they may or may not get out of it. It's a chance I have to take. Playing a weaker safety only insures they might, or will. If they're a Fargo 450, they probably won't get out of it. So either way I may get a chance back at the table which is EXACTLY what what I'm looking for.
 
actually having slop in a game increases the skill level, which seems counterintuitive.
although more luck does come in. but helps the "better" player as he can play properly to get those lucky shots to go.
 
No, not really. Truth be told, I don't even entertain the thought of how good they are, because that's just another thing in my head that I don't need. In fact, I'd rather NOT know. A good player (or any player) is going to do what they do best, with the table they have, to the best of their abilities. So am I. If facing a mid-to-low percentage shot, I'm playing the best safety I can. If they're a Fargo 750, they may or may not get out of it. It's a chance I have to take. Playing a weaker safety only insures they might, or will. If they're a Fargo 450, they probably won't get out of it. So either way I may get a chance back at the table which is EXACTLY what what I'm looking for.
Do you ever play shape based on which hand you naturally shoot with?

Do you ever play the middle finger safe where you leave the other guy a fine shot except for the fact he's stuck to a ball and can't reach over it without a bridge?!

C'mon! You want to be at them or break them?
 
He's still around? Never hear about him, I mentioned him not that long ago in another thread from a game 30 years ago
So you're saying you don't wanna take half of Santos in this thread?

I haven't heard back about that dude in decades. I think he's still in N. CA though.
 
So you're saying you don't wanna take half of Santos in this thread?

I haven't heard back about that dude in decades. I think he's still in N. CA though.
Fargo has him in CA, isn't this thread about NC?

I'm ahead $$$ betting on him, I'll keep it that way 😁
 
Do you ever play shape based on which hand you naturally shoot with?

Do you ever play the middle finger safe where you leave the other guy a fine shot except for the fact he's stuck to a ball and can't reach over it without a bridge?!

C'mon! You want to be at them or break them?
LoL Love it. :)
I play the best safes I can, always, and with everyone I am playing, except for casual friends, my wife, my neighbor's son, the dog, etc. Even in practice sessions when I play the ghost I try to f**k myself then get out of it with either a shot or a re-safe. I try to create real-world scenarios as much as possible because that's exactly what the table oftentimes gives me whether I'm playing a 750+ or a banger. It's up to ME to figure it out. The layout, the pattern, the roadmap, IF there is one. The other guy's skill-set is of no importance to me nor is his name, rating, history, trophies or persona. Again, as stated earlier somewhere up in this thread, I fear no one and doing so only allows potentially negative thoughts in one's head when the ONLY thought should be how YOU play your game with what's on the table in that very moment. But that's just me. I'm not telling anyone here how to play. Never would I be that arrogant. And though I do instruct as a side hustle, I'm not a certified instructor, coach, manager (or a hustler), nor do I pretend to be. And I would NEVER cheat. I have too much respect for this very difficult game.
 
you have to play the opponent. the table layout takes care of itself it doesn't move.

against every different opponent you play differently. some to more safes . some you may have to shoot at less makeable shots.

some to speed up the tempo and some to slow it down. some to talk to. some to ignore. some to shark, and some not to.
we argue about playing the pool table or playing the person one time I’m playing Cliff my good friend eight ball and we play about even and I am faced with this very very difficult cut shot that I really do not want to shoot but I don’t have any choice it’s like the worst longshot ever nobody would ever want to shoot this shot to a blind pocket off angle through traffic full table cut shot with no idea where the cue ball will end up


I was in trouble I look at Cliff and ask who was your grade school geometry teacher?


and he looks me right in the eye and says my grade school geometry teacher, miss Lazarus


I said Miss Lazarus


this shot is for her and it was a magnificent beauty of a shot with all the elements of a great and grand perfect shot that happens once a year the speed was divine the spin was unreal all the complex problems and dangers dissolved and the sound of the ball dropping exactly in the center of the pocket was music and the cue stopped in the only place it could have to give me an easy runout


i tried to get a smile out of him but he wouldn’t look at me
 
No, not really. Truth be told, I don't even entertain the thought of how good they are, because that's just another thing in my head that I don't need. In fact, I'd rather NOT know. A good player (or any player) is going to do what they do best, with the table they have, to the best of their abilities. So am I. If facing a mid-to-low percentage shot, I'm playing the best safety I can. If they're a Fargo 750, they may or may not get out of it. It's a chance I have to take. Playing a weaker safety only insures they might, or will. If they're a Fargo 450, they probably won't get out of it. So either way I may get a chance back at the table which is EXACTLY what what I'm looking for.
You're missing an opportunity to develop another angle to your game. A "moves game" is more than just playing a solid safety at the appropriate time. It's about manipulating your opponent by creating 'fight or flight' situations for them. The trick or "the move" is take a small risk in an effort to make them take a gamble. It isn't a lock that you'll always come out on the positive side, or you can get them to bite in the first place. However, it's the game within the game so to speak.

Two quick examples.
-A <500 player is going to have an inconsistent stroke, and will typically struggle with long pots. You don't snooker those players. You focus on creating distance and welding the CB to the rail. If you leave them a clear shot, they'll normally go for it. Odds are strongly in your favour of them hanging it up.
-A young <700 player is focused on runout pool. They should be somewhat well rounded but typically eager to show off their CB control. Whether that be tight positional play or cluster management. You can put them in positions to take dumb risks, especially if they believe they are superior to you. The older version of the <700 player (somewhat like myself) are only at that level because they have rounded out their game with table IQ. Suckering them in will take a lot of patience.

So, I agree the logic of playing the table and not the opponent is solid. However there is way more to take advantage of, if you're willing to entertain it. I played in a heavily handicapped charity event last week, and won a ton of easy racks simply by purposely leaving low percentage shots rather than snookers to players and allowing them to develop the table for me.
 
Last edited:
Of course there are honorable players that play better than me and I'd probably be a better player had I gambled more often but a large part of the culture I've just always found annoying. Guess the stars just didn't align for me. Honesty, I may be reaching the end of my pool playing days. I either need to start playing a lot more, or find something else to do with my time.
I'm exactly in the same boat. These days I couldn't care less about gambling, and I only did it in my youth because that's what I was supposed to do. That said I love competing but don't have the time required to keep my game at a level that allows me to run in the circles that will entertain me.

So I'm stuck in a world where locally I'm a gate keeper and regionally I'm merely a threat not to be taken lightly but unlikely to cash. A reputation without substance it would seem. It's mildly frustrating but I've come to terms with it. Fortunately for me, it takes minimal effort to maintain enough of a game to keep my local stature. I highly doubt I'll ever hang up the cues so it will have to be good enough.
 
A "moves game" is more than just playing a solid safety at the appropriate time. It's about manipulating your opponent by creating 'fight or flight' situations for them. The trick or "the move" is take a small risk in an effort to make them take a gamble. It isn't a lock that you'll always come out on the positive side, or you can get them to bite in the first place. However, it's the game within the game so to speak.
Great explanation, love it. 1P is a great game to teach this. It's all about percentages too. It's fun to leave an open table safe where they think they can make it, even though it's a 5-10% chance, there may be just enough bait for them to forget about playing a safe.

It's not really the default way to play a tournament, but it's real fun on sets where you have an idea of how the guy plays. You can also learn a lot about your opponent with this kind of stuff. Leave them little testers and see how they react. I always say it's best to leave a little meat on the bone. Gotta tempt them, give them an option to try something they might regret. If you make it completely obvious they must play a safe you come back to the table with little to work with. Give them a hail Mary chance and they might give you the world. :)
 
Last edited:
No, not really. Truth be told, I don't even entertain the thought of how good they are, because that's just another thing in my head that I don't need. In fact, I'd rather NOT know. A good player (or any player) is going to do what they do best, with the table they have, to the best of their abilities. So am I. If facing a mid-to-low percentage shot, I'm playing the best safety I can. If they're a Fargo 750, they may or may not get out of it. It's a chance I have to take. Playing a weaker safety only insures they might, or will. If they're a Fargo 450, they probably won't get out of it. So either way I may get a chance back at the table which is EXACTLY what what I'm looking for.
Always play the percentages, that includes your opponent's ability.
If I end up with a mid% makeable shot i'm much more likely to take it if i'm playing a better player (especially with an open table). They are much more likely to get out of a safety. Whereas a weaker player i can just leave a ton of cloth and they're likely to miss it.

Stronger opp: Attack fringe shot because if you make it at least you're still at the table. If you miss the shot OR the safe you can expect to not see the table again.
Weaker opp: Find a decent safe and expect to be back at the table soon.

Obviously having the option to play a 2-way shot is ideal, but that's not always the case.
 
You're missing an opportunity to develop another angle to your game. A "moves game" is more than just playing a solid safety at the appropriate time. It's about manipulating your opponent by creating 'fight or flight' situations for them. The trick or "the move" is take a small risk in an effort to make them take a gamble. It isn't a lock that you'll always come out on the positive side, or you can get them to bite in the first place. However, it's the game within the game so to speak.

Two quick examples.
-A <500 player is going to have an inconsistent stroke, and will typically struggle with long pots. You don't snooker those players. You focus on creating distance and welding the CB to the rail. If you leave them a clear shot, they'll normally go for it. Odds are strongly in your favour of them hanging it up.
-A young <700 player is focused on runout pool. They should be somewhat well rounded but typically eager to show off their CB control. Whether that be tight positional play or cluster management. You can put them in positions to take dumb risks, especially if they believe they are superior to you. The older version of the <700 player (somewhat like myself) are only at that level because they have rounded out their game with table IQ. Suckering them in will take a lot of patience.

So, I agree the logic of playing the table and not the opponent is solid. However there is way more to take advantage of, if you're willing to entertain it. I played in a heavily handicapped charity event last week, and won a ton of easy racks simply by purposely leaving low percentage shots rather than snookers to players and allowing them to develop the table for me.

2 more examples of this.
1 I was playing in an end of session tournament against a teammate who I knew could not shoot off the rail. Every time I left the table he was glued to the
opposite rail from his next ball.

2 I played 1 of the strongest local players in regular BCA league play, so 1 game. My break. Against a lesser player than him (but still higher ranked than me), I
would typically use a second ball break in 8 ball to leave a clustered up mess knowing that in a tactical game I at least stood a chance of out moving them
and winning the game. When I stepped to the table to play the strongest player, I set the cue ball for a second ball break. As I started my psr, I realized that I
could not beat him playing my usual strategy. So I moved the cue ball to just off center and hit a nice head ball break and proceeded to run out. I never
considered a safety.
 
Back
Top