Ball Spot/Games on the Wire/Odds on the Money

I'd take games on the wire over a ball spot.
Now, it's greatly dependent on how many games I get or how big of a ball spot I get.

If someone is good enough to give me the 5 out, I have no business playing them.
If someone is good enough to give me 4 on the wire in a race to 7. I might have a shot if they goof up.

Granted, those are a big extreme, but you can see my point.

I've tried all three spots with my friends, but never got the money spot myself. You're right in that it can be the hardest to outrun. Most of the time, i knew i could still give it up because i ran out often enough(8b). I've played 9 on both sides where the spot didn't matter as well.

Personally, i prefer to get games on the wire, too. Nobody around here is giving up fat 9b spots that i know of. This is all part of the wonder of matching up.. finding the right spot for you and knowing your game.

mikeyfrost said:

I think it's an interesting topic. You gotta know how to ask for something you can win with?

Click to expand...

It's like buying a car.. ask for more than you need and try to finish before it gets to less than you want. If it's close, ask for a small spot anyways. A friend of mine that i gave the $ spots to, said.. "You're the one that wants to play. I can ask for whatever i want."

Spots can definatly change a player- the lamb, is now a lion.

That said it can go the other way also- I was playing a guy with the last two. Game

Was close but I was getting the worse of it. He spoutted off that I

couldnt win with the 7. I said you have the 7! Proceeded to drill him.

Giving him the spot turned him into the dog, giving up the spot made

me the stronger player, and I played like one.

mikeyfrost said:

This is true, your friend sounds like a seasoned game maker. Gambling gets fun when there is more criteria than only figuring out if you think you can win or not. We're painting the picture, cant tell people where to hang it though.

Click to expand...

Against my friends, i give up some pretty good spots. For me, it has helped figure out how the different spots play and just how much it takes to outrun some of them. I also saw it as pool exercise, forcing myself to play better.

It can be humbling, too, when you turn down a big spot that you'd normally offer to players a few steps below yourself. A couple of people in vegas for apa offered me the 7 and the breaks. My rotation break and game are spotty, while i saw them running racks. Not as dumb as they tell me i am.

Odds on the money are like the carrot on the end of the stick. If I can't beat him even then odds on the $$ aren't gonna help me, just entice my greed and ego.

Personally I would rather get games from stronger players and give games to weaker players instead of ball spots in either case.

Vs a strong player I run out often enough for a ball spot to not really matter so I would want games on the wire.

Vs weaker players I feel I have more of an advantage giving games than a ball spot. Them having to run out vs having multiple balls to fire at during a game makes a big difference.

J SCHWARZ said:

Odds on the money are like the carrot on the end of the stick. If I can't beat him even then odds on the $$ aren't gonna help me, just entice my greed and ego.

Click to expand...

It depends on how often you think you can win and how many sets you plan to play. If you have no shot of beating someone even then you are burning money. If you win say 40% on average and can get 2:1 on your money. Then you will come out ahead long term.

Ehh.. What are we talking about here?

I'm confused.

nine_ball6970 said:

Personally I would rather get games from stronger players and give games to weaker players instead of ball spots in either case.

Vs a strong player I run out often enough for a ball spot to not really matter so I would want games on the wire.

Vs weaker players I feel I have more of an advantage giving games than a ball spot. Them having to run out vs having multiple balls to fire at during a game makes a big difference.

Click to expand...

Bingo! We have a winner.

Spot

I always try to get games on the wire.


I played a guy that I usually robbed and he got 2 times the money, each game. That was pretty rough, and I would rather give balls.

Ken

Giving up balls scares me the most.
I have a better win percentage giving up games.
In prop bets, I'd rather give odds on the money than tries.

But table conditions and player's personalities can change all that.

mikeyfrost said:

I generally like to talk about pool interactions and gambling so this is nothing new just a question of preference and examining the thought process of you guys.

When you match up, do you prefer to get a ball spot, games on the wire, or odds on the money? What is the reasoning for it?

Me personally if I feel like I can get there on my opponent even, but he's perceived to be the better player I'll fight for the odds on the money. If I'm just a slight underdog and I play even I ideally want to be ahead money if we split sets.

The games on the wire debate is a little tougher. Some of it depends on you, like are you a slow starter or can you run out etc? Some of it depends on them, do they run out or can they come back from being behind?

For me I will almost always take the ball spot over the games on the wire. At my level people still miss often enough and if I break well I can get on a decent run.

For great players though, what good is the 7-ball if the guy who's giving it gets out from any open ball most of the time and the guy getting it rarely can break and run to his money ball? I've seen a lot of sets where the spot didn't make too much of a difference but just a couple games on the wire would have made the loser into the winner. Common places we have all seen this is the guy who loses hill-hill getting the last 2 vs 1 game on the wire. It's clearly a close game anyway but the matching up is everything.

What are the thoughts on these ways of matching up and the logic associated?

Click to expand...

It is really all subjective, and based on experience. This is because there's no direct way to calculate the chances of two players winning based on any of the spots you proposed.

A lot of people have a knack for judging player's games and coming up with a pretty fair spot. This comes from years of watching players, and seeing the results of different match-ups.

In this case, I don't think there is any logical way to fully explain why one method of handicapping is better than another, or why one spot would be fair and another wouldn't. It really just comes with experience.

Of course, everyone will have a different opinion that attempts to explain the different spots.

dont forget, if you are willing to lose more games/sets than the guy you are playing, you are already giving odds on the money

mikeyfrost said:

I think it's harder for some people to give up or get a ball spot than to give or get games on the wire. It's a preference

Click to expand...

I think you're spot on that its a preference but it shouldn't be. Depending on a number of factors one is better than the other in different circumstances if you can accurately weigh the odds of a given situation.

1. Can you run out, can your opponent do this also? If the answer is no to either then how many balls can both of you consistently run?
2. Are you a fast starter, is your opponent a fast starter? This is a factor that is huge that needs to be calculated before making the choice of balls or GOTW when either giving or getting a spot.
3. Length of set in a race.
4. Is it a race to a defined # or are you playing ahead sets instead, this is big & depending on how you match up with a particular player skill wise & also in mental toughness & whether you or he are quick starters or grinders makes this choice one of the most important ones.

Most important of all in matching up is an individual's nature to be able to HONESTLY appraise his own skill & that of his opponent without letting ego get involved in the calculation. You have to be able to accurately & honestly appraise yours & your opponents abilities for what they are if you want to consistently book winners. Ego needs to be left out of the equation on your part but if you can manipulate your opponents ego during the process of matching up this one factor can be more important than all of the others mentioned above.

Matching up is like a recipe for a meal, there are a lot of ingredients & depending upon how you assemble the ingredients it either turns out great or disastrously. A man doesn't have to only know his limitations or strengths but also to be able to objectively assess his opponents also, it's a delicate dance.