3 foul in 9 ball?
- Thread starter racer rx
- Start date
sjm said:
i agree with SJM........it is exceptionally hard to 3 foul anyone. i've only seen a pro lose this game less than 5 times, and been the victim of it 10 or less. i don't think i've won a game this way but about 4 or 5 times either.
most of the time, after fouling them twice, they have hit enough other balls that its very hard to find blocker balls, not to mention you really have to freeze them up good to get the foul.
VAP
However in handicap tournaments
It can be a tremendous advantage to a better player in a handicap tournament such as the usppa when you have to play catch up. It is a lot harder for lesser players to extricate themselves from being hooked and cannot kick very well so it is a good strategy to try and 3 foul. You would be surpised how often you can do it to a lesser player. It definitely helps you catch up in a match.
It can be a tremendous advantage to a better player in a handicap tournament such as the usppa when you have to play catch up. It is a lot harder for lesser players to extricate themselves from being hooked and cannot kick very well so it is a good strategy to try and 3 foul. You would be surpised how often you can do it to a lesser player. It definitely helps you catch up in a match.
Davis used 3-foul strategy to near perfection
Did everyone follow the Platinum Reports for the tourny today? In a match with Jeremy Jones, Mike Davis nearly used the three foul rule to perfection. JJ was positioning the cue ball for the break and accidentally tapped it with the tip causing it to cross the line, but not disturbing the pack. Mike Davis took ball in hand, and instead of breaking, placed the cue ball near the one, barely tapping it, hiding the cue ball behind the pack. JJ missed kick attempt # one, and was on 2 fouls. Mike repeated this, but this time JJ did a 4-rail kick and amazingly hit the one. But, he left a shot for Davis, so Davis' strategy was still very effective even though he didn't technically get JJ on three fouls. I thought this was a very sneaky maneuver, I would never have thought of trying that one!
Did everyone follow the Platinum Reports for the tourny today? In a match with Jeremy Jones, Mike Davis nearly used the three foul rule to perfection. JJ was positioning the cue ball for the break and accidentally tapped it with the tip causing it to cross the line, but not disturbing the pack. Mike Davis took ball in hand, and instead of breaking, placed the cue ball near the one, barely tapping it, hiding the cue ball behind the pack. JJ missed kick attempt # one, and was on 2 fouls. Mike repeated this, but this time JJ did a 4-rail kick and amazingly hit the one. But, he left a shot for Davis, so Davis' strategy was still very effective even though he didn't technically get JJ on three fouls. I thought this was a very sneaky maneuver, I would never have thought of trying that one!
World Standard Rules and Pro Rules cover this situation exactly like the post states. Incoming player has BIH and breaking player is on a foul.
SJM,
Looks like you need to play in some different tournaments.
Or, you might be thinking about 8 ball World Standard rules.
SJM,
Looks like you need to play in some different tournaments.
Or, you might be thinking about 8 ball World Standard rules.
sjm said:
Tom In Cincy said:
Actually, this exact scenario arose in a recently televised matched from WPBA Florida played in December. Jennifer Barretta fouled in this way against Julie Kelly. All Julie Kelly was given was ball in hand in the kitchen.
The rule is played the exact same way here in New York on the Tri State Tour.
Tom, you might still be right, maybe I SHOULD get out more!
i consider safe play my biggest strength. if using the 3 foul rule was considered cheap i would really suck at this game. i do it to players fairly often in B tournaments. ive done it to an A player in a money game, but still lost the set. i find that good safeties require a great deal of creativity and control because its usually not enough to just snooker your opponent, you have to freeze him to something to really be effective.
a player did this to me at a tournament....too bad he didn't hook me good enough, i managed to hit one rail to the one and some how it broke the cluster and the 9 went in tough luck for himbeetle said:
beetle said:
I look at the 3-foul option almost every time my opponent fouls on their break. Many (most) times I do not try, but when the balls are poorly positioned to run out, watch out ... the way I see it the first foul is free to you (no safety was required to get the foul), then there are lots of balls on the table to use. Safetys after a poor break that leaves big clusters tend to be easier. It's still hard to 3-foul better players who kick well, but it's easier than later in the game.
When I first started playing 9 ball about 4 years ago I hated the safety play and kicking aspects of the game. Now I love them. Potting a ball and taking the CB where-ever is fun and challenging, but finding a good safety and kicking out of one takes more creativity and imagination, imho.
Dave
I think almost every decent player thinks the three foul rule is a good one and that winning on three fouls is ok...but no one likes having it done to them.
If you're playing your friends and they don't kick too well, playing safe instead of shooting open shots can get a bit old... kind of like friendly poker games where you don't want people folding every hand, playing tourney style (boring) 5-card stud.
I LOVE to do it to people I don't like. Three fouls burns worse than slamming into the balls and having the nine bang around into a pocket. The frustration of missing kicks also gets into some peoples' heads and they start missing shots or looking for ways to hook you, instead of running out.
Three fouls is also one of the best ways for quieting the know-it-all B players who tell you how to play...once they miss a couple kicks (by a diamond) and realize they're not J. Archer, they pipe down a little bit.
If you're playing your friends and they don't kick too well, playing safe instead of shooting open shots can get a bit old... kind of like friendly poker games where you don't want people folding every hand, playing tourney style (boring) 5-card stud.
I LOVE to do it to people I don't like. Three fouls burns worse than slamming into the balls and having the nine bang around into a pocket. The frustration of missing kicks also gets into some peoples' heads and they start missing shots or looking for ways to hook you, instead of running out.
Three fouls is also one of the best ways for quieting the know-it-all B players who tell you how to play...once they miss a couple kicks (by a diamond) and realize they're not J. Archer, they pipe down a little bit.
beetle said:
I think this is perfectly legal and only tournaments with special rules (WPBA) have prevented this, probably because of televised matches.
But, I'm very surprised that JJ took a kick at the rack. It's surprisingly difficult to take a kick at the headball (1-ball) if you're stuck behind the rack. What I have done for years is that if someone starts this game on me, I take a second intentional foul, and shooting under the rack I put the 1-ball in the other end of the table and try to keep the rest of the rack as intact as possible. I think no one has ever made 3 fouls on me with this strategy. For my opponent, he could now thin the one-ball and drive the cueball around the table behind the rack, but he'd still leave an easier kick for me. If he decides to shoot the 1-ball in and try to foul me from the 2-ball, he needs to play good position for the 2-ball in the rack to play a safe.
I'm a good kicker but I'd never tried to hit the 1-ball on top of the rack. Usually you only have a half ball if you try to escape the short way from the long cushion. And escape shooting in the kitchen and back is way too risky, it's easy to scratch in the corner off the 1-ball...
If you don't get my point, I'll post some wei diagrams here.
To beat a better player ...
When intermediate level of playing is reached, the best way for the intermediate player to beat a better player is with defense. You are not going to beat them
with offense. By hooking or freezing up on a ball, they will probably hit the
object ball, but now you have a good chance to have a better shot than you
first had, and therefore the opportunity to win the game.
As I tell players, "don't shoot for the shot, shoot for the game".
When intermediate level of playing is reached, the best way for the intermediate player to beat a better player is with defense. You are not going to beat them
with offense. By hooking or freezing up on a ball, they will probably hit the
object ball, but now you have a good chance to have a better shot than you
first had, and therefore the opportunity to win the game.
As I tell players, "don't shoot for the shot, shoot for the game".
I was playing a friend for $20 a set, race to 4. I was getting the last 4, and I was up 2-0 in the match. In rack 3, I played a safety, and he fouled. I then 3 fouled him. With one game left to win the match he conceded, and refused to play me unless I only got the last 3.
I'm a C+ player who plays B+ safeties.
I'm a C+ player who plays B+ safeties.
bud green said:
Three cushion billiards is a very good game that helps you not only with kicks but making kicks work against the player who tried to hook you. I know it is boring for some but it has improved my kicking tremendously. I almost never jump as I have much better control of the cue ball via a kick.
Regarding this post, I consider playing safe on your opponent is at least 15% of the game and a win when done correctly is far from cheap.
