8 BALL - A true test for world class players?

[supergreenman]

(quote from Merlinium) "I live in the UK and I primarily play UK version 8ball and I have to say that I think the American version of 8ball is pretty embarassing, the 9ft tables are just far too easy to play on for 8ball and the pocket size is huge, this makes the game too easy. In the UK there is a lot more emphasis on the tactical side of the game and whilst the top players can run out they are maybe looking at a 30-40% success rate.

I have played 9ball maybe 8 or 9 times in my life and I think that on the bigger table it is a far more challenging game (than 8ball on the same table) but I do hate some of the early combos on the 9 (think they should all be call shots), I am a reasonable pool player (county standard) and I was able to run out a rack on only my third time of playing 9ball (this equates to about 5-6 hrs table time), the one thing I would say though that seperates 9ball is the cue ball control for position is far harder in 9ball so although a player like myself can run the occasional rack a good player would do this far more frequently."

I've played 8ball in the uk and find it less of a challenge than American(International) rules. having all your balls the same color and the 2 shot foul rule make the UK game ridiculously easy to a good player. I'll take BCA rules anytime.

 

[AlterEgo]

That's not what I'm contending. I'm saying that the PHP stand a better chance against Efren if they're playing a simpler, easier game, not that he/she would actually win half the time...regardless of what game they choose to play.

Let's pretend that 8ball is played with a total of 5 balls: two stripes, two solids, and the 8; everything else stays the same...would you be making the same argument? There's still no luck involved, or at least no luck that revolves around ending the game early. Would you still argue that since there's a luck factor to 9ball, a 5-ball version of 8ball is still the harder game for a lesser player to win?

My point is that 8ball is the easier, simpler game, and that negates any luck factor which might or might not come into play in 9ball. To me this is completely uncontroversial, and that a lesser player stands a much better chance against Efren when the game in question can be controlled by either party, ie the game does not test the upper reaches of Efren's talent and to a large degree can be played perfectly by the average A player.

-Roger

Actually, in reading this I think I see where our thinking diverges. I had assumed that you would agree that the 10% chance of the PHP winning on skill was constant whether the game was 8 ball or 9 ball - but reading what you wrote above, it now seems to me that what you're actually saying is the 10% would be higher in 8 ball due to the nature of the game itself.

It looks like what you're asking is, what would happen if you made the game itself so easy that any half decent player could run out the majority of the time? Would you want luck to be a factor in that game, or not?

My thoughts on that would be that with a game that easy, unlike in a more difficult game, odds of winning on skill would be close to even, and the shooter is in control of his play. Odds of getting lucky would also be close to even, but the shooter is not in control of luck - it can go against him. So you wouldn't want luck to be a factor - you'd want as much control as possible. If the game were really easy, you'd want the one without luck as a factor. 8 ball is probably the better choice than 9 ball if the game is truly that easy for both players shooting.

If on the other hand you think that in either 8 ball or 9 ball you have less than a 50/50 shot of winning on skill alone, pick 9 ball because the luck might help you, while your skills aren't able to.

Bottom line - if you know you'll lose on skill alone, pick a game where you can get lucky.

I don't think most of us shoot so well that 8 ball is *that* easy - even if you think it's easier than 9 ball, in my opinion it wouldn't be easier enough to invalidate the luck factor, so we don't agree on that. But I can see what you're saying and it makes sense.

Thanks for the perspective.

 

[jsp]

Let's pretend that 8ball is played with a total of 5 balls: two stripes, two solids, and the 8; everything else stays the same...would you be making the same argument? There's still no luck involved, or at least no luck that revolves around ending the game early. Would you still argue that since there's a luck factor to 9ball, a 5-ball version of 8ball is still the harder game for a lesser player to win?

Of course not, because then it wouldn't be 8ball. 8ball is difficult because you start out with all 15 balls on the table, which makes the likelihood of forming clusters higher than that of 9ball.

No one is arguing that 8ball is a simpler game to runout IF you have a wide open rack. That fact is pretty obvious. But you are assuming you have a wide open rack 100% of the time. I don't know the exact statistics, but it seems that after the break, it is more likely to have an open rack in 9ball than in 8ball. And an open rack in 9ball, even for the PHP, is pretty much a done deal. The racks that do NOT have a clear and obvious runout solution, we're arguing, a player of Efren's caliber would dominate the PHP player, especially in 8ball.

For argument's sake, just assume after each break, there would be a number of clusters that need to be solved, and that no rack has an obvious runout solution. Would you still argue that the PHP would have a better chance against Efren in 8ball than 9ball? Why would you still think 8ball is the "easier" game for these racks.

 

[TheOne]

There is only one step above shortstop, are you hear now claiming you are right there with Alex, Efren, Earl, Niels, Wu ect...?

You have self admitted ignorance about what "shortstop" means, despite countless efforts to enlighten you.

Sorry, but Efren Reyes, Alex Pagulayan, Neils Feijen, ect... are better then you and on a higher level. You have done nothing to prove otherwise. I think any one of them likely would have made it through the WPA qualifiers with relative ease. It would be shocking if any of them went 2 and out to Lee Holt and BJ Ussery at the US Open. Their shining moment is not getting 3rd in a Hard Times event with a strong field full of very good shortstops and few (2) top pros and few second teir pros (2) in the top 24. It is not surprising when they get 3rd in an event like that, it is a disapointing showing for them.

You play shortstop level pool. It is a high level of play. It is not the top level of play. Deal with it or get better and change it by winning a couple premier events and not getting drilled by "other" shortstops like Gerald Jamito, Lee Holt, Ussery, ect...

I think this thread has proven everyone has their own definition of a short stop, I didn't realise the "celtic" definition was the correct one? My interpretation of it is prob still different to yours since you bunch past US Champions and Santos as short stops, I think thats ridiculous!! I just think the term sucks, and as others have said isn't exactly a compliment, but then to some its a compliment to some its an insult.

Of course Im not as good as Neils or Alex, but I never claimed I was. I just beleive if I played 6 hours a day like Neils does I could be I could be in a year or two. Why do I think that, well I'm simply looking at how I played this year (and the decent, not great) results I got and comparing it to how I know I used to play. Nothing more nothing less, just self belief, I dont think there's anything wrong with that.

I have great respect for the fields in the Hard Times, Korea etc and I wouldn't suggest they where as poor as you suggest. But your'e entitled to your opinion.

 

[Jaden]

I agree with you....

I think this thread has proven everyone has their own definition of a short stop, I didn't realise the "celtic" definition was the correct one? My interpretation of it is prob still different to yours since you bunch past US Champions and Santos as short stops, I think thats ridiculous!! I just think the term sucks, and as others have said isn't exactly a compliment, but then to some its a compliment to some its an insult.

Of course Im not as good as Neils or Alex, but I never claimed I was. I just beleive if I played 6 hours a day like Neils does I could be I could be in a year or two. Why do I think that, well I'm simply looking at how I played this year (and the decent, not great) results I got and comparing it to how I know I used to play. Nothing more nothing less, just self belief, I dont think there's anything wrong with that.

I have great respect for the fields in the Hard Times, Korea etc and I wouldn't suggest they where as poor as you suggest. But your'e entitled to your opinion.

I think that a big difference between the top notch known players who win big tournaments regularly and other top notch players, is the level of dedication and amoount and type of practice. A lot of top notch players who don't win big tournaments have regular jobs and can't justify the practice time necesary to achieve that level. If they truly dedicated themselves and entered the bigger tournaments, I'm sure that there are many unknowns who could dominate the sport.

 

[TheOne]

When do you plan on coming out here again? To the west coast? I'll play you some even up, 9 ball, for as much as you want. Then, after we get done, there's 10 more guys that will be waiting in line to play you, win or lose. All shortstops. If you beat all of us, which ain't gonna happen, but if you do, then you can be whatever you want. You're a shortstop at best Craig, what's the problem with that? Until you can prove otherwise, be happy. Where are all your championship match wins? Did you go 2 and out at the U.S. Open? Maybe not, but I thought I read that somewhere, maybe in this thread. Who have you beat for the money that was better than a shortstop? I can't believe how much attention you're getting over this shortstop label. You play good, but how good do you really think you are? Better than a shortstop, you already said that, but how much better? Name a top pro, or just a pro, that you think you play even with. That's all you gotta do, then beat him, then see what people say about your game.

Sure I'll play you John whenever Im there next. I wouldn't pressume to be better than you though or label you anything as I've never seen you play. I wouldn't even be able to predict what "ain't going to happen either" again as I havent seen you play and don't know who youre refering too. As for the attention, don't get upset with me, I started a thread about 8 ball and got called a short stop, maybe lost in translation but I took offence to it thats all.

 

[TheOne]

There are 200 players in Taiwan alone who shoots between a shortstop level and an Alex, Efren, Earl...at least by every def of "shortstop" I've ever come across, except for your's.

-Roger

TAP TAP TAP

 

[TheOne]

I think that a big difference between the top notch known players who win big tournaments regularly and other top notch players, is the level of dedication and amoount and type of practice. A lot of top notch players who don't win big tournaments have regular jobs and can't justify the practice time necesary to achieve that level. If they truly dedicated themselves and entered the bigger tournaments, I'm sure that there are many unknowns who could dominate the sport.

Couldn't agree more, u get out what you put in. I don't think its unreasonable to suggest that any player who gets decent results from putting in minimal effort would probably get better results if they put in the same amount of dedication the top players put it. Neils for example is an outstanding player, but I am told he puts in an outstanding amount of effort, he desrves everything he gets.

 

[Celtic]

My interpretation of it is prob still different to yours since you bunch past US Champions and Santos as short stops, I think thats ridiculous!!

Tommy Kennedy is a fraction of the player that he was when he won the US Open (and still the people there were shocked he won it, he was in serious dead stroke and made everything). Santos I may actually make a pro class player these days based on his 2nd at the BCA and his more recent playing of the true top pro events and making it fairly high in some of them.

While you were going 2 and out of the US Open a guy from my home town was beating Buddy Hall, Tony Chohan, Bobby Hunter, Tommy Kennedy, and Chris Bartrum on the b-side to get 17th through 24th. He plays strong shortstop level pool, he missed the money in the recent Stan Janes event in Calgary. Shortstops have the ability to beat anyone, but they dont have the consistency or the ability to yet go the distance and possibly win the big ones or dominate the little ones like the true pro's do. The skill is there, the potential is there, the results and big wins are not.

Anyone above a shortstop is a threat to win the WPC or US Open. Anyone of shortstop level is a threat to win any specific match but they are not likely to go the distance or be a serious threat to win the event. You throw today's Tommy Kennedy into the World 9-ball and there is almost no chance he will come out on top but he can win a match against anyone if he gets hot.

If you want to get a proper definition of the term then might I suggest you listen to RudeDog, Mark Tadd, and the people who spent time within the pool scene where the term is actually used with real meaning.

 

[TheOne]

Tommy Kennedy is a fraction of the player that he was when he won the US Open (and still the people there were shocked he won it, he was in serious dead stroke and made everything). Santos I may actually make a pro class player these days based on his 2nd at the BCA and his more recent playing of the true top pro events and making it fairly high in some of them.

While you were going 2 and out of the US Open a guy from my home town was beating Buddy Hall, Tony Chohan, Bobby Hunter, Tommy Kennedy, and Chris Bartrum on the b-side to get 17th through 24th. He plays strong shortstop level pool, he missed the money in the recent Stan Janes event in Calgary. Shortstops have the ability to beat anyone, but they dont have the consistency or the ability to yet go the distance and possibly win the big ones or dominate the little ones like the true pro's do. The skill is there, the potential is there, the results and big wins are not.

Anyone above a shortstop is a threat to win the WPC or US Open. Anyone of shortstop level is a threat to win any specific match but they are not likely to go the distance or be a serious threat to win the event. You throw today's Tommy Kennedy into the World 9-ball and there is almost no chance he will come out on top but he can win a match against anyone if he gets hot.

If you want to get a proper definition of the term then might I suggest you listen to RudeDog, Mark Tadd, and the people who spent time within the pool scene where the term is actually used with real meaning.

I probably agree with much of what you've said in this reply, but dont you find it interesting that there are so many diferent interpretations of the term short stop. I think where we disagree though is that you are judging me on my first 6 months in 9 ball, I'm refering to my level if I turned pro and played seriously. Nothing wrong with that of course, you have nothing else to judge me on. I'm just telling you what I beleive. Anyway, back to 8 ball!...

 

[Rude Dog]

Sure I'll play you John whenever Im there next. I wouldn't pressume to be better than you though or label you anything as I've never seen you play. I wouldn't even be able to predict what "ain't going to happen either" again as I havent seen you play and don't know who youre refering too. As for the attention, don't get upset with me, I started a thread about 8 ball and got called a short stop, maybe lost in translation but I took offence to it thats all.

I'm not upset with you at all Craig. Several people have defined what a shortstop is and you say that you don't fit into that category. I'd just like to know where you think your game should be rated. Let's drop the term, "Shortstop", and use what you're used to being called. Is it a top pro? A champion? A pro? Semi pro? Anything else? You haven't won any major tournaments, have you? So, scratch top pro and champion label. You've played all over the world in the past year or so, with many great players, I assume, did you win any of those tournaments? Did you have any high finishes? Anyway, I don't presume that I play better than you either Craig, nor do I think we'll ever have the chance to play each other unless you made the effort to come here. I just think your definitions of players ratings are different than mine and others here in the forum. Not a big deal, carry on.

 

[TheOne]

I'm not upset with you at all Craig. Several people have defined what a shortstop is and you say that you don't fit into that category. I'd just like to know where you think your game should be rated. Let's drop the term, "Shortstop", and use what you're used to being called. Is it a top pro? A champion? A pro? Semi pro? Anything else? You haven't won any major tournaments, have you? So, scratch top pro and champion label. You've played all over the world in the past year or so, with many great players, I assume, did you win any of those tournaments? Did you have any high finishes? Anyway, I don't presume that I play better than you either Craig, nor do I think we'll ever have the chance to play each other unless you made the effort to come here. I just think your definitions of players ratings are different than mine and others here in the forum. Not a big deal, carry on.

Several people have, but most definitions are different so I agree lets stop using the term "short stop". I don't look at it from a player perspective. I just look at how I matched up with the best players given my input. I got better results than I expected given all the changes I had to make (eg never used a 9 ball cue before, never played on a 9 ball table before, never played with the large/heavy balls before). I don't think it unreasonable for me to beleive I can do better than 3rds or 2nds in tournaments if I got my own table and played full time for a year. Or turn around close losses in my favour with players who I consider the best players in the world?

I'll play you if we're at the same tourney, I'd play anyone (well if I had a stake hourse lol )

 

[Tickets]

ill play you for that Australian shirt. Shortstop!

 

[buddha162]

For argument's sake, just assume after each break, there would be a number of clusters that need to be solved, and that no rack has an obvious runout solution. Would you still argue that the PHP would have a better chance against Efren in 8ball than 9ball? Why would you still think 8ball is the "easier" game for these racks.

You seem to think that cluster management in 8ball (on a big table!) is actually a difficult skill to acquire. Do you have any idea how easy 8ball is to any solid A player? Do you think a few clusters on a big table will disrupt his runout?

I suppose it's pertinent what your definition of a PHP is. If your PHP is a C player, then A.) you might be correct, and B.) you need to leave that poolhall. But if we're talking about A players, or even very good B players, they will work out clusters faster than you can say "cluster management."

As Ironman mentioned, there tends to be a group of self-styled 8ball specialists who think there's a complex, secret way of approaching what is essentially a simple, easy game. If you can get some solid A players to play 8ball, you'll quickly see that it's a runout game, regardless of the layout and for open/pro levels you can forget about seeing any drama in the matches, just sit back and watch them clean the table from anywhere and everywhere.

-Roger (almost done beating this horse...)

 

[LastTwo]

Tommy Kennedy is a champion, there is no way he is a shortstop. Not to take anything away from him, but I don't think he is a great shotmaker compared to other pros, but his cueball control and patterns are amazing. Santos has played at the pro level for a long time, it's just that a few years ago before he became a big name, he was a really streaky player. I used to practice with him all the time when he was the house pro at a poolhall that recently closed. Back then he still played world class pool, but now he plays like that more consistently.

 

[Merlinium]

(quote from Merlinium) "I live in the UK and I primarily play UK version 8ball and I have to say that I think the American version of 8ball is pretty embarassing, the 9ft tables are just far too easy to play on for 8ball and the pocket size is huge, this makes the game too easy. In the UK there is a lot more emphasis on the tactical side of the game and whilst the top players can run out they are maybe looking at a 30-40% success rate.

I have played 9ball maybe 8 or 9 times in my life and I think that on the bigger table it is a far more challenging game (than 8ball on the same table) but I do hate some of the early combos on the 9 (think they should all be call shots), I am a reasonable pool player (county standard) and I was able to run out a rack on only my third time of playing 9ball (this equates to about 5-6 hrs table time), the one thing I would say though that seperates 9ball is the cue ball control for position is far harder in 9ball so although a player like myself can run the occasional rack a good player would do this far more frequently."

I've played 8ball in the uk and find it less of a challenge than American(International) rules. having all your balls the same color and the 2 shot foul rule make the UK game ridiculously easy to a good player. I'll take BCA rules anytime.

It depends on the rules, the ruleset I play does give 2 visits for a foul although this does not carry, combination shots are allowed (hitting your own ball first and potting both your own ball and opponents), I am curious as to how easy you found the game as I have watched the top players at this ruleset and as I said the percentage of break and finishes are under 40%, the only time it is much higher is when the events are played on the bigger tables (when all pool is much easier).

 

[TheOne]

ill play you for that Australian shirt. Shortstop!

LOL, my Auzzie shirt v your sister and you got a game mate!

 

[csf914]

I know this post is a little late...

This is just my opinion and I know it doesn't mean much and might not make any sense. I like 8 ball as a game in general and just found a new respect for it. Only because in 9ball or 10ball...someone will make a mistake not always but it always happens. In rotation oriented games you screw up on the 8, your oppenent has either the 8,9 left, or the 8,9,10. Or you hang the money ball. Your opponent just won. Say for instance in 8ball you run out and hang the 8ball. Your opponent is still left with 7 balls on the table and has the 8ball hanging in the back of his mind know if he misses you won the game. Now it might not make as much sense for the pros, well because they are pros. I think 8ball tests more areas than 9ball. 9ball cueball control is key. 8ball strategy is key. Being able to look at rack right after the break and be able to see if its runable from both sides of the 8ball stripes or solids takes imagination and execution. I could be totally of here but I like the individuality of 8ball over your opponent just picks up where you left off. I like the more crucial safety aspect of 8ball as well. Not only are safeties more crucial the types of safeties are much different from 9ball. You cant simply hide the cueball from 1 ball, its all the balls, then safes get intricate where you can set up your opponent to shoot a shot that is hard and will ultimately lead to your balls being opened up. All in all its more creative and mentally based game. Just my opinion, not trying to stir anything. Thanks for reading thus far.

Chris

 

[Tickets]

LOL, my Auzzie shirt v your sister and you got a game mate!

you know what scares me. you havent seen my sister, so you obviously realise im a good looking bloke and my sister must be alright looking. cheers mate!

Now i know your racking you brain to think of something to come back with, dont bother. it wont be funny.


Ill vouch for the way the one plays. he played some great players in the U.S and also won me a bit of cash playing. The only problem he has with his game is when people talk s%$t while he is playing. im sure he will work that out. Everything else he does seems to work well for him.

cheers,
Dave.

 

[cfrandy]

Sorry, but I need to rehash this debate for a moment. Many here have said 8-ball is an easier game because it is easier to run the balls. I have a question...is 8-ball an "easier" game for the person running the balls, or the person watching their opponent running the balls?