Do you play the table or your opponent?

Halfjack87

Halfjack87

In Training
Silver Member
Thought of this in the thread about distractions, but wanted to break out the question in a separate thread.

In chess, there's generally 2 schools of thought on how people play - many try to focus on the board very technically, almost to the exclusion of their opponent, :cool: others like the eye of the tiger approach and play a heavily psychological game.:grin-devilish:

I figure pool has the same division of "playing the table" or "playing the opponent" and I'm betting we have both kinds of players - which are you?

For me, I'm always competing against myself and measure my success or failure by the shot, far more than by the game, and my opponent is the challenge of the shot, not the other human also at the table.
 
Play runouts according to the table layout and your abilities, play safeties according to the table layout and your opponent's abilities.
 
I'm not great by any means, but even I find it's a mix. If I'm playing someone that is clearly a lower speed I will take more chances at times, and I will also play more defense at times. Same goes if I'm clearly outmatched.

If I don't think there's any measurable difference in speed I am just playing the table, I don't know my opponents well enough to know their strengths/weaknesses (can they bank, etc.)

Interesting question..
 
Halfjack87 said:
I figure pool has the same division of "playing the table" or "playing the opponent" and I'm betting we have both kinds of players - which are you?
Click to expand...

In the beginning Chess has set moves and the opponent has set options. They are quite limited. Once the board opens up a little, it is no longer playing the board but trying to outsmart your opponent. Pool is the opposite to me. In the beginning you are going to be presented with 1 of a trillion possibilities and only a few would have a "open board" that you can just play the table. Most presented to you will cause you to have to consider your opponent, their layout and their ability at playing pool. Thus I will not commit to either one as it changes depending on what Skill Level the player is that I am playing along with what the table presents. Which sounds like I am a playing the opponent type, but I would disagree as no 2 breaks are the same.

If the break offers a run out, then it is me and the table. However, if it does not then you have to consider other things. If I am playing a low level player I will not worry about breaking out my balls or running all the way down to my last ball or 2 which need to be broken out. I will try and learn from it. However, if I am playing a good player I will play the table and only take what it gives me, when it decides to give it to me. I will not disturb balls I don't need to disturb and I will not try to force a run out and try to be sure when I leave the table I have an opportunity to return.
 
To me, all pool games are war games....you fight your opponent.
...but in war or pool, the terrain cannot be ignored.
 
From time to time, it's mandatory that you consider the strength of your opponent. Anyone that tells you otherwise is kidding themselves.

For 9ball, for example, pushes require you to evaluate your opponent's strength and if you're significantly better, offer you a great opportunity to create a situation you can handle but they can't.

As well, 1hole and 14.1 have moments where you can bait an aggressive player into opening the table for you.

That said, there are plenty of routine instances where your decisions are going to be the same no matter who you're playing and that should represent at least 90% of your decisions. The mantra is meant to be advice for someone who would switch-up their strategy simply because they're intimidated or want to be intimidating. But if you have inside knowledge on your opponent that you feel you can exploit, you should do so.
 
run-out

Atlatlien said:
Play runouts according to the table layout and your abilities, play safeties according to the table layout and your opponent's abilities.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm the weirdo, but if I'm playing a weak player, I'll take more chances in planning a table run. If I'm playing a strong player, I look for two-way shots to make my run-out less risky.

I've never seen any advantage in completely separating offense from defense...
 
Donny Lutz said:
Maybe I'm the weirdo, but if I'm playing a weak player, I'll take more chances in planning a table run. If I'm playing a strong player, I look for two-way shots to make my run-out less risky.

I've never seen any advantage in completely separating offense from defense...
Click to expand...

Nothing weird about that in my mind. Two way shots are the key to playing a better player (talent-wise or technique-wise) They are also the road to being as good as those players and then better. Every shot should be a two way shot to some degree - even when you go all out on a shot it should still be two way to a little bitty teeny weeny degree?

Donny Lutz said:
I've never seen any advantage in completely separating offense from defense...
Click to expand...

I want you as my scotch doubles partner.
 
Donny Lutz said:
Maybe I'm the weirdo, but if I'm playing a weak player, I'll take more chances in planning a table run. If I'm playing a strong player, I look for two-way shots to make my run-out less risky.

I've never seen any advantage in completely separating offense from defense...
Click to expand...

You'r not the only 'weirdo', Mr. Lutz.

I was playing one pocket a couple of weeks ago & had a choice of two rather easy shots. One was about 20* cut & the other was about 30*.

I chose the 30* shot because IF I missed I would not leave a shot on my opponents ball that was only about one diamond straight out from his pocket.

I've played similarly when playing 8 ball for decades.

To me, you yourself are your first opponent & many of us have that under control.

Then the table layout is your next chore...

but... that other guy is their too & his ability can be an aid or a deterent to just how one should proceed.

At least to me... & you.

Best 2 Ya,
Rick
 
Atlatlien said:
Play runouts according to the table layout and your abilities, play safeties according to the table layout and your opponent's abilities.
Click to expand...

Same here. In any sport you have to analyze and play both.

You need to know the conditons of the area, and table , plus the tendencies, strengths and weakness of your opponent.

The biggest problem is not letting the opponent get into your head or think before hand that you will lose because of who they are.

🎱
 
Halfjack87 said:
Thought of this in the thread about distractions, but wanted to break out the question in a separate thread.

In chess, there's generally 2 schools of thought on how people play - many try to focus on the board very technically, almost to the exclusion of their opponent, :cool: others like the eye of the tiger approach and play a heavily psychological game.:grin-devilish:

I figure pool has the same division of "playing the table" or "playing the opponent" and I'm betting we have both kinds of players - which are you?

For me, I'm always competing against myself and measure my success or failure by the shot, far more than by the game, and my opponent is the challenge of the shot, not the other human also at the table.
Click to expand...
Play both.

Like all good sayings, they come with caveats. If you play a game where you are leaving the table (safety or whatever), then if you're not playing the table AND the opponent, then you're losing a bit of your advantage.

Freddie <~~~ polygamist
 
I think about it like this: The only thing the opponent changes for me is how many opportunities I get at the table and what those opportunities will look like. That's it. For all intents a purposes, the opponent doesn't matter at all.

The odds of winning any given match comes down to how many opportunities one needs, at a given playing ability, to win. It's the quantity and quality of those opportunities that determines ones chances of winning, which is the only thing that the opponent can influence.

On a related note, pool is the only sport I can think of where it is possible for one competitor to simply not participate at all. You can lose the flip and have a set run out on you, without even hitting a ball. This is a fundamental part of pool and part of what makes pool such a singular game. It is possible for the opponent to not exist at all.
 
Both if you ask me, to ignore you opponent is wrong.
I mostly think people confuse the term, playing your opponent is simply to play based on his ability not mentally.
 
DelawareDogs said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlatlien View Post
Play runouts according to the table layout and your abilities, play safeties according to the table layout and your opponent's abilities.
I like the way you think, sir!
Click to expand...

Glad I'm not the only one who thought so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top