Filler’s 3-Rail Kick in the Reyes Cup … Was it the Right Choice?

dr_dave

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
FYI, I just posted a new video that does a deep-dive analysis of Josh Filler’s missed 3-rail kick shot in the recent Reyes Cup to help gain insight into whether the shot was the right choice or not. Check it out:


Contents:
  • 0:00 - Intro
  • 1:06 - Was It the Right Shot?
  • 2:36 - Top Player Choices
  • 4:25 - 1-Rail Kick Option
  • ---- 5:35 - faster speed
  • ---- 6:47 - even faster speed
  • ---- 7:21 - slow speed
  • ---- 7:41 - good approaches
  • 8:04 - 3-Rail Kick Option
  • ---- 9:29 - spin and speed effects
  • 10:13 - Slick Cloth Effects
  • 11:25 - Conclusions
Supporting Resources:
As always, I look forward to your feedback, comments, questions, complaints, and requests.

Enjoy!
 
Truthfully, the first thing I did was to check the end of the match to see who won. I think using time to contemplate the situation was big.

Still undecided as to Filler's motivation for the shot but on that, there may be a variety of reasons to try it - not the least of which is to test the table.
 
Nice video. It's a close choice for sure.

Respectfully, I disagree with one aspect of your analysis. Some of the results that you deem acceptable off the slowish one rail kick may not leave a good shot but leave a two-way bank shot. To me, one part of the gospel of tactical play is to avoid leaving two-way shots of any kind at all costs. Leaving one, to me, is, practically selling out.

Still, most of your analysis is dead on. If I'm going one rail here, I'm never going soft. My intent would be to send the 7ball to the top rail if at all possible. It requires neither a soft nor hard hit, just a medium speed hit. Going three is reasonable, increasing the risk/reward nature of the shot.

Hence, I think it's a very close choice between a medium speed one railer and the three railer with intention to pocket the ball. We don't know whether this type of three-rail kick is something Josh practices, so we can't be certain of what the right play here was for him.

Josh' choice was reasonable, but there are arguments for the one-railer. I do not believe that the score was a factor in Josh' choice. As Nick Varner once said: "every rack is a race to one." Josh surely felt that the three-railer was his best path to winning that rack.
 
u12armresl said:
I understand why you make videos about how to, but a video on whether a #1 in the world player played the right shot seems a bit outside of your wheelhouse. Way too many variables that the viewer cannot know, that Joshua does.
Click to expand...
You just showed how dumb you really are..he's a certified instructor and has a Dr. degree in the field..HAHAHA!!

How much more knowledge does he need?? PLEASE TELL US....MORON
 
Xdecemberguy said:
You just showed how dumb you really are..he's a certified instructor and has a Dr. degree in the field..HAHAHA!!

How much more knowledge does he need?? PLEASE TELL US....MORON
Click to expand...
Oh, forgive me. A certified instructor knows far more than the consensus #1 player in the WORLD.

One of the 2 of them has played on the biggest stages in the world, under the most pressure you can be under. The other made a video after the fact.
 
sjm said:
Nice video. It's a close choice for sure.

Respectfully, I disagree with one aspect of your analysis. Some of the results that you deem acceptable off the slowish one rail kick may not leave a good shot but leave a two-way bank shot. To me, one part of the gospel of tactical play is to avoid leaving two-way shots of any kind at all costs. Leaving one, to me, is, practically selling out.

Still, most of your analysis is dead on. If I'm going one rail here, I'm never going soft. My intent would be to send the 7ball to the top rail if at all possible. It requires neither a soft nor hard hit, just a medium speed hit. Going three is reasonable, increasing the risk/reward nature of the shot.

Hence, I think it's a very close choice between a medium speed one railer and the three railer with intention to pocket the ball. We don't know whether this type of three-rail kick is something Josh practices, so we can't be certain of what the right play here was for him.

Josh' choice was reasonable, but there are arguments for the one-railer. I do not believe that the score was a factor in Josh' choice. As Nick Varner once said: "every rack is a race to one." Josh surely felt that the three-railer was his best path to winning that rack.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of this.

What is an acceptable leave depends greatly on your opponent. If Josh was playing a 600 level player, many of the leaves are fine, but against another elite pro they are sell outs. In general the elite pros know that they are big underdogs if they let their opponent see the whole ball even if it it’s not pocketable. So I think going for the “make” on the three railer makes sense for him in this situation.

I also would expect Josh and all the elite players to shoot some reference kick shots on the table. For me, I will always try the standard 3 rail corner to corner on any new table and find the required adjustment. I’m actually surprised he missed it, given how close the starting position was to a standard 3 rail kick. That said, the cloth seemed *extra* slippery at the Reyes Cup and maybe he just underestimated it.
 
u12armresl said:
I understand why you make videos about how to, but a video on whether a #1 in the world player played the right shot seems a bit outside of your wheelhouse. Way too many variables that the viewer cannot know, that Joshua does.
Click to expand...
What other way to learn is there than trying to analyze the reasons though? It's not like Joshua is using some black magic to make those decisions. They are logical and deductible, even if tricky to do so. You can disagree with Dr Dave's opinion about what the correct shot was, but I don't think criticizing him for stating his opinion is very fruitful.

As for the actual topic of the video, IMO it all boils down to what % Filler felt like he would make contact with the OB with the 3-railer. If he deemed the percentage high enough, then he might've felt that the overall probabilty of winning the frame is higher with that route giving better leaves on average with the speed he hit it with.

For example, if I was faced with that situation, aiming to maximize odds of hitting the ball, I'd estimate my 3-railer to make contact maybe 40%, and the 1-railer like 98%. I'd probably think that the 3-railer gave slightly better leaves on average, but nowhere near enough to justify choosing a 40% contact path over a 98% contact path. It's not like I'd be calculating probabilities while playing, but just the general feeling of "almost guaranteed hit with slightly worse leaves on average" vs. "less than 50% to hit with slightly better leaves on average" makes me select the first option as the correct one for me.

As for what % Joshua would make contact with the 3-railer, we'll never know for sure. But seeing that he selected it, I suspect he estimated it to be high enough for it to be worth it. Even at 80% contact (just guessing at a figure for the sake of an example) it might flip the 3-railer into giving better overall odds than the 1-railer. Judging this more precisely would require analyzing the leave odds of both routes more deliberately. My analysis is simply based on the general feeling of the 3-railer giving somewhat better leaves on average with the speed Joshua hit it with compared to the 1-railer, most notably due to the cue ball staying near the end rail with high likelihood.
 
Oikawa said:
What other way to learn is there than trying to analyze the reasons though? It's not like Joshua is using some black magic to make those decisions. They are logical and deductible, even if tricky to do so. You can disagree with Dr Dave's opinion about what the correct shot was, but I don't think criticizing him for stating his opinion is very fruitful.

As for the actual topic of the video, IMO it all boils down to what % Filler felt like he would make contact with the OB with the 3-railer. If he deemed the percentage high enough, then he might've felt that the overall probabilty of winning the frame is higher with that route giving better leaves on average with the speed he hit it with.

For example, if I was faced with that situation, aiming to maximize odds of hitting the ball, I'd estimate my 3-railer to make contact maybe 40%, and the 1-railer like 98%. I'd probably think that the 3-railer gave slightly better leaves on average, but nothing near enough to justify choosing a 40% path over a 98% path. It's not like I'd be doing this math while playing, but just the general feeling of "almost guaranteed hit with slightly worse leaves on average" vs. "less than 50% to hit with slightly better leaves on average" makes me select the first option as the correct one for me.

As for what % Joshua would hit the 3-railer, we'll never know for sure. But seeing that he selected it, I suspect he estimated it to be high enough for it to be worth it. Even at 80% contact (just guessing at a figure for the sake of an example) it might flip the 3-railer into giving better overall odds than the 1-railer. Judging this more precisely would require analyzing the leave odds of both routes more deliberately. My analysis is simply based on the general feeling of the 3-railer giving somewhat better leaves on average with the speed Joshua hit it with compared to the 1-railer, most notably due to the cue ball staying near the end rail with high likelihood.
Click to expand...
I respect your post.
 
Oikawa said:
What other way to learn is there than trying to analyze the reasons though?
Click to expand...
Exactly. The review of interesting choices that arose in big matches is nearly always productive. I'm not sure we need to determine whether one of the top few 9ball players that ever lived made the right choice here, for ultimately that's not what's important. Contrastingly, reviewing the positive and negative attributes of the two available choices is time very well spent and is useful in developing one's process in the analysis of positions and strategic design of shots.
 
I'm curious why he didn't play a jump shot. Maybe too much chance of leaving the table if you don't land right?

I also wonder if he had looked at how long the new cloth was playing for three rail kicks. If you have time before a match, testing the corner-5 (or maybe opposite-3 for this shot) is useful.

Related to playing the corner-5 on slick cloth, here is the comment from YouTube from someone who probably plays a lot of 3-C:

The choice was correct in my opinion, with high chance of several different defensive finishing results. However, his counting was terrible, not to mention that the counting on a new slick cloth needs to be adjusted too. He needed to finish fast on 18 point and he plays from 42 to 30...ball finished at 12 naturally!!​
 
Last edited:
sjm said:
That's the reason. You very rarely see a jump shot in a situation like this in world class play. Object ball on (or very near) the rail is a dealbreaker for most.
Click to expand...

Well, at least when combined with how far the blocking ball was (mid table). If the blocking ball was a diamond closer to the CB, he has much more room the get the CB down and rolling smoothly before it hits the 7.
 
u12armresl said:
Oh, forgive me. A certified instructor knows far more than the consensus #1 player in the WORLD.

One of the 2 of them has played on the biggest stages in the world, under the most pressure you can be under. The other made a video after the fact.
Click to expand...
HAHA!! Did Josh hit the ball...win that game?? HAHAHA!! I bet you would defend yourself in a murder trial also...clearly there were many more reasonable and easy ways to get out of that shot..your a joke. Clearly that wasn't the right shot but hey your keep being you..like my father said..the world needs ditch diggers too..
 
Xdecemberguy said:
HAHA!! Did Josh hit the ball...win that game?? HAHAHA!! I bet you would defend yourself in a murder trial also...clearly there were many more reasonable and easy ways to get out of that shot..your a joke. Clearly that wasn't the right shot but hey your keep being you..like my father said..the world needs ditch diggers too..
Click to expand...
Do you know why he shot it? I don't. Speaking of flat oits, a pool engagement between two players transcends the table and encompasses at least 4 dimensions. Besides the visible layouts, you have the battle of wills and treachery as well and, over time at that. I'm more concerned with the effect on the outcome than - oh, he missed a tough kick and shoulda shot a safer option. Further into the match Capito shot the 7 a half ball wide of that very same pocket. Coincidence? Only by definition.
 
i think the fact that he didnt execute his shot choice doesnt mean he made the wrong choice
3 rail kicks are very accurate once you learn how to aim them and hit them
we have to give filler the benefit of the doubt he knows how to aim them and hit them
if filler missed pocketing a ball would we say he made the wrong choice and should have picked a different pocket?
of course not
this is the same type of situation
he missed....he is human
he is number 1 in the world
for me he gets the benefit of the doubt
he made the right choice FOR HIM ...just missed it
jmho
 
Xdecemberguy said:
HAHA!! Did Josh hit the ball...win that game?? HAHAHA!! I bet you would defend yourself in a murder trial also...clearly there were many more reasonable and easy ways to get out of that shot..your a joke. Clearly that wasn't the right shot but hey your keep being you..like my father said..the world needs ditch diggers too..
Click to expand...
You could sound like a bigger dipshit but you would really have to bare down and try hard.
 
bbb said:
i think the fact that he didnt execute his shot choice doesnt mean he made the wrong choice
3 rail kicks are very accurate once you learn how to aim them and hit them
we have to give filler the benefit of the doubt he knows how to aim them and hit them
if filler missed pocketing a ball would we say he made the wrong choice and should have picked a different pocket?
of course not
this is the same type of situation
he missed....he is human
he is number 1 in the world
for me he gets the benefit of the doubt
he made the right choice FOR HIM ...just missed it
jmho
Click to expand...
The way it missed on the deep side ( "short" in billiardese) makes me think he maybe went for that hit. No way to tell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top