14.1 Gurus, Did Irving Crane Get This Right?

[sjm]

Since I’ve shown favoritism to the nine-ballers in recent “what would you do here?” threads, it’s time to bring the straight pool geeks (and I’m certainly one of those) back into the mix.

I’m going to deviate from my usual format, and just tell you what happened in a famous match. Then, you’ll be asked to consider whether a good decision was made by the player. Setting the scene, the match took place in 1979 (I think, but I’m not that sure) and the players were Irving Crane and Joe Balsis, two of the all-time greats and two BCA Hall of Fame members.

The score was about 120 – 110 in Irving’s favor in the race to 150, and tight equipment was in use. Crane badly misplayed the shape on the previous rack’s final ball, and in the first table below, you will find the position he faced. He was dead straight on the five in the side, but it was possible to cheat the pocket and draw into the pack. In the second table you’ll find that shot, the one I thought he’d play, with a safety or intentional foul next if he didn’t break the balls. In the third table shown below, you’ll find a safety, involving pocketing the five, that I thought he might consider, with the resulting layout taking the spotted five ball into account. In the fourth table, you’ll find the shot Crane actually played, a shot we all have played many times, but one that I think left Balsis quite astonished.

Irving was a good friend of mine and I thought I knew his game pretty well, but this choice absolutely shocked me. I asked him what the reasoning behind the shot was when the match ended. After I hear from the forum about the advisability of Irving’s shot, I’ll share what Irving said to me. Also, does anyone care to guess what Joe Balsis tried from the resulting position in table four?

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Also, does anyone care to guess what Joe Balsis tried from the resulting position in table four?

Balsis may have played three cushions off the rack (4 ball) to return the cue ball to the same spot. I think the orthodox shot is to take a foul by pushing the cue ball into the rack. On tight equipment, maybe thin the four and leave the cue ball frozen to the head rail.

I like the draw for the break, but if it misses (or the pocket is the kind that rejects those shots) the result could be disastrous. I'd want a better angle than you've shown.

Crane starts in the perfect spot for the safety on the side of the rack. He might draw the ball back to the same place and then play the safety, but if he leaves the five up, it's harder for Balsis to play safe in case no ball from the side of the rack gets playable, such as the 14. I think that Crane felt the single ball was not worth the opportunity to play a much tighter safety.

 

[TATE]

Crane for sure made the right move - it was brilliant. He put Balsis in a tough situation - no shot and a difficult safe.

If I were Balsis and I wasn't going to take the intentional scratch, I would kick softly 2 rails at the 12 and try to hit it straight into the side rail. If you do leave a shot, a break out would be tough without the 12. Those guys didn't really play kick safes too much so I doubt that's what he did.

I might be tempted to thin hit the rack and put the cueball near the lower right hand corner pocket, with a clear shot at the 5 but blocking the shot at the 14. Crane would then have the long shot but it's no gimme and that doesn't mean he can automatically get a break shot

In any case, at this point I definitely like Crane's odds of winning from this position.

Chris

 

[Nostroke]

I would kick in the 12 and then go 2 rails for perfect shape on the 14 for the break shot.

Then i would tell Carmen Electra to stop hitting on me until she got herself back in shape or until she at least changed out of those Gym Teacher clothes!

 

[macguy]

Since I’ve shown favoritism to the nine-ballers in recent “what would you do here?” threads, it’s time to bring the straight pool geeks (and I’m certainly one of those) back into the mix.

I’m going to deviate from my usual format, and just tell you what happened in a famous match. Then, you’ll be asked to consider whether a good decision was made by the player. Setting the scene, the match took place in 1979 (I think, but I’m not that sure) and the players were Irving Crane and Joe Balsis, two of the all-time greats and two BCA Hall of Fame members.

The score was about 120 – 110 in Irving’s favor in the race to 150, and tight equipment was in use. Crane badly misplayed the shape on the previous rack’s final ball, and in the first table below, you will find the position he faced. He was dead straight on the five in the side, but it was possible to cheat the pocket and draw into the pack. In the second table you’ll find that shot, the one I thought he’d play, with a safety or intentional foul next if he didn’t break the balls. In the third table shown below, you’ll find a safety, involving pocketing the five, that I thought he might consider, with the resulting layout taking the spotted five ball into account. In the fourth table, you’ll find the shot Crane actually played, a shot we all have played many times, but one that I think left Balsis quite astonished.

Irving was a good friend of mine and I thought I knew his game pretty well, but this choice absolutely shocked me. I asked him what the reasoning behind the shot was when the match ended. After I hear from the forum about the advisability of Irving’s shot, I’ll share what Irving said to me. Also, does anyone care to guess what Joe Balsis tried from the resulting position in table four?

I might take a foul and soft kick the cueball two rails to the 3 ball area hoping to get against the rack so safty play can begin.

 

[Rod]

A draw shot to break the rack isn't ideal unless you hit the one ball near the top or if the angle was there (which I assume it wasn't) or draw into the 13 & 14. In any case the c/b can get stuck in the side of the rack leaving him no shot. Rather than take the risk which he decided against was use the 10 ball to put Balsis in a perfect trap. Crane could of been stuck against the rack and he knew it.

My guess is Joe took a three foul. It sure beats the trap he was in and if he hits a perfect break he "might" have the advantage on Crane. With the score so near 150 who ever gets the first shot is going to win.

I can't see the angle on the 4 but it gives up a shot trying to leave it on the end rail.

If Joe did play agressive I'll say he tried to kick in the 12 . That could leave a cut on the 5 and although the 14 is not a good break ball it could be used.


I'm liking crane a lot from here, but were just guessing what Joe decided to do.

Rod

 

[Williebetmore]

SJM,
Danny D. and I spent about 20 minutes on this very common position. The safety that Irving played was perfect, the theory is to get a ball half way between the pack and the foot rail, and one half way between the pack and the long rail (Danny had some very good advice on exactly how to position the cue ball to succeed). If you successfully accomplish that, Danny believes you are the strong favorite to win control of the rack. The presence of the 5 ball makes this safety almost air tight - Balsis is in jail. Knowing Crane's reputation as a safety game master, are we sure he didn't purposely put the cue ball there instead of trying a more difficult shot to obtain better position on the 5?

I have been told that the correct response (for Balsis) is to gently nudge the cue ball into the pack. Not randomly, but with the idea of pushing far enough into the pack so that you can eventually shoot the cue ball off the edge of a pack ball, towards the long rail and back into the pack. Crane's job in the resulting battle of intentional fouls is to prevent any cue ball position that would allow this.

I'm betting on Crane from here every time (as soon as I can withdraw the kid's college money).

 

[sjm]

Fantastic job, guys. One thing we all seem to agree on is that Irving put Joe in some pretty big trouble with this shot. Let’s face it, only Nostroke gets out from there. It was tough enough to win a safety battle against Crane from a neutral position, but starting form this position, Balsis was a dead duck.

By the way Willie, this shape on the five was not intentional, for Irving wore a look of disgust after misplaying the last ball of the previous rack.

Joe’s escape attempt was philosophically similar to that recommended by Tate, but Joe simply tried to take a foul by sending the cue ball one rail to finish below the twelve. Actually, I like Tate’s idea better, as it seems to have more room for error.. Bridging over the pack, however, Joe overhit the speed just a bit, leaving Crane a break-shot on the twelve, and Balsis never saw the table again in the match.

The reason both I and, maybe, Joe Balsis, found Irving’s choice surprising, is that the five in the side with draw appeared to be a free shot. It seemed that as long as Irving pocketed the five, whether he hit the pack or not, no harm could come his way, and as well as he played his safeties, he would be the favorite to ultimately control the table. When I discussed the position with Irving, he agreed that it might appear to be a free shot, but that it isn’t. Irving noted that as the draw into the pack might not produce a good result, a point made by Rodd, he didn’t want to chance the shot. By his reckoning, there was a danger of leaving a position like the one below, one that would give him a problem. That, he said, was why it wasn’t a free shot, but instead one with a subtle downside. Irving saw the shot he chose as the one most likely to give him control of the table with no downside. Like most of you, I think Irving got it right on this occasion. Genius at work!

 

[Koop]

Awesome threads SJM. Nothing like seeing what the legends did in certain circumstances and then hearing why to boot. Thank you for these tidbits.

Dave

 

[sjm]

Awesome threads SJM. Nothing like seeing what the legends did in certain circumstances and then hearing why to boot. Thank you for these tidbits.

Dave

Thanks, Dave. I'm glad you're enjoying these threads, which sometimes give some insight into how the best players think out and execute shots. Still, these threads are presented mostly a) in the interest of giving the forum members a chance to compare notes on tricky shots and positions, and b) to motivate others to share interesting shots and positions from their own experiences as either a player or spectator. We all learn from each other through these threads, and it is because of my delight with both the quantity and quality of the replies that I have continued to produce threads like these.

 

[TATE]

Bridging over the pack, however, Joe overhit the speed just a bit, leaving Crane a break-shot on the twelve, and Balsis never saw the table again in the match.

That's exactly why I wouldn't have shot it that way. The 12 needed to be moved or it was a sitting duck for a break out. The second reason is that even if he pulled it off, as long as it was a foul Crane could just push the cueball back the same way and Joe would be right back in the mess.

I think taking the three foul would have been the way to go in this situation.

Chris

 

[sjm]

That's exactly why I wouldn't have shot it that way. The 12 needed to be moved or it was a sitting duck for a break out. The second reason is that even if he pulled it off, as long as it was a foul Crane could just push the cueball back the same way and Joe would be right back in the mess.

I think taking the three foul would have been the way to go in this situation.

Chris

I wonder, Tate, whether, if Balsis left him under the twelve, Irving would have tried to send the cue back to where it was. Seems like he'd be chancing giving the five up if he didn't hit it just right. My guess is that had Joe left Irving under the twelve, they'd be on nearly even footing in the safety battle to follow, with a slight edge to Crane.

Like I said, though, I liked your idea of the two rail kick to move the twelve.