Does the Score Dictate Your Shot Selection? Should It?

[BasementDweller]

You are destroying your opponent. You're up 6-1 in a race to 7 and you are faced with a difficult shot and you're contemplating playing safe. Then you think that since you are so close to the finish line that maybe you should just go for it.

In a different scenario, you are well behind in your match and you are faced with another difficult choice between going for the shot or playing safe. You figure you will go for the shot in hopes of stealing the momentum and fighting your way back.

Over in his "How Would You Play This?" Thread, Old Nine Baller said:

The goal is to win this game the best way possible. The set score does not figure into that and never should. Beginners trying to learn to play should disregard this info about shot choice changing based on set score. The best shot for you is the right shot for you.

I will never give the set score when I post a layout.

ONB

I tend to agree with ONB but sometimes you just get that feeling that you need to go for the shot. Maybe that's just my emotions getting the best of me or maybe that's my inner mathematician figuring things out -- who knows?

I think a case could be made for at least considering whether or not you are playing winner breaks or alternate breaks (in 8, 9, & 10 Ball).

Do you consider the score before you shoot or is the shot -- the shot no matter what?

 

[sjm]

No, probably not, although there may be the occasional psychology reason for doing so. Momentum is not imagined but real. Still, one of my all time favorite quotes is form Nick Varner:

EVERY RACK IS A RACE TO ONE

In other words, do everything you can to win that race to one, which includes employing shot selections that are high percentage.

 

[Black-Balled]

I think it undoubtedly influences shot selection, but it doesn't dictate the selection.

One example as to how it often appears when I play: a wide disparity in score, I am either far ahead or behind and am faced with a bank that I think will probably allow me to run the rest of the balls needed to win. Should I choose to pass on the bank, I expect my opponent will have a shot of similar choice...

With a wide disparity in score, I will probably go for it. If the score is close, I will be less inclined to do so.

The above example envisioned a rotation game, but playing the score in 1p is absolutely known to providing a benefit. You will acknowledge players with a lead will often knock balls up table or tie them up to effectively eliminate any chance of their opponents running out.

To claim the score does not influence shot selection is myopic, IMO.

 

[naji]

You are destroying your opponent. You're up 6-1 in a race to 7 and you are faced with a difficult shot and you're contemplating playing safe. Then you think that since you are so close to the finish line that maybe you should just go for it.

In a different scenario, you are well behind in your match and you are faced with another difficult choice between going for the shot or playing safe. You figure you will go for the shot in hopes of stealing the momentum and fighting your way back.

Over in his "How Would You Play This?" Thread, Old Nine Baller said:



I tend to agree with ONB but sometimes you just get that feeling that you need to go for the shot. Maybe that's just my emotions getting the best of me or maybe that's my inner mathematician figuring things out -- who knows?

I think a case could be made for at least considering whether or not you are playing winner breaks or alternate breaks (in 8, 9, & 10 Ball).

Do you consider the score before you shoot or is the shot -- the shot no matter what?

It is a game of chance, you pick the best possible chance.. you are the one that has to make that decision, everyone has different confidence and knowledge level that dictates how they play.. it could be at times extremely high level at that match, or worst possible at other match.
But normally when the score is extreme, like 6-1 and needing one game, odds are you will get it, since you already got 6 of them..But if score was say 6-4! then different story..that is where you evaluate your percentages fore safe and go for it stuff..

 

[Double-Dave]

The score most definitely affects my shot selection and I think it should.

Quite a lot of times you will be faced with chosing between playing an offensive shot
and a defensive one, if I am well ahead I tend to go more offensive. If my oppenent is
on the hill I will almost always chose a good safety over a less then 90% shot.

gr. Dave

 

[Masayoshi]

Yes and yes. There is no reason to take chances going after difficult shots when you are up by a lot. Likewise, when you are down by a lot, the best way to make a comeback is to take anything your opponent leaves you rather than duck and wait for something better because it may not come at all.

 

[Bambu]

You are destroying your opponent. You're up 6-1 in a race to 7 and you are faced with a difficult shot and you're contemplating playing safe. Then you think that since you are so close to the finish line that maybe you should just go for it.

In a different scenario, you are well behind in your match and you are faced with another difficult choice between going for the shot or playing safe. You figure you will go for the shot in hopes of stealing the momentum and fighting your way back.

Over in his "How Would You Play This?" Thread, Old Nine Baller said:



I tend to agree with ONB but sometimes you just get that feeling that you need to go for the shot. Maybe that's just my emotions getting the best of me or maybe that's my inner mathematician figuring things out -- who knows?

I think a case could be made for at least considering whether or not you are playing winner breaks or alternate breaks (in 8, 9, & 10 Ball).

Do you consider the score before you shoot or is the shot -- the shot no matter what?

Excellent advice by Varner, merciless! I know what you mean though. I feel that if I'm down I need to develop a rhythm. Varner is right though, the time to be aggressive will come. Better to be patient when you need to be, and grind it out.

 

[thekaiserman]

If you are playing well and pocketing balls well during this game and are full of confidence then I say take the shot.

 

[onepocket1]

Excellent advice by Varner, merciless! I know what you mean though. I feel that if I'm down I need to develop a rhythm. Varner is right though, the time to be aggressive will come. Better to be patient when you need to be, and grind it out.

Nick Varner was the most aggressive player, when behind, I every saw playing
nineball. No safes - total aggression. He was dangerous when behind and had many come from behind wins with that style of play. But, playing onepocket, he was a very conservative player when behind. (The Wedge) He made bolth these styles work for him. He is one of my all time favorites.

 

[hang-the-9]

If I had a big lead, I would likely take a lower % shot than I would otherwise. Lets say I had a bank or a safe where I leave the other guy a bank. I would be more likely to take the shot for the win. If I was down, I would play the % more and if I thought the other guy has a less chance to make the bank than me, I'd play the safe and have him try it.

I actually did that during a partners match not long ago, we were discussing if we should shoot a bank or play a safe, we were up 4-1 in a race to 5. I said lets go for it. Missed the bank but won the set 5-1.

 

[BasementDweller]

I think it undoubtedly influences shot selection, but it doesn't dictate the selection.

One example as to how it often appears when I play: a wide disparity in score, I am either far ahead or behind and am faced with a bank that I think will probably allow me to run the rest of the balls needed to win. Should I choose to pass on the bank, I expect my opponent will have a shot of similar choice...

With a wide disparity in score, I will probably go for it. If the score is close, I will be less inclined to do so.

The above example envisioned a rotation game, but playing the score in 1p is absolutely known to providing a benefit. You will acknowledge players with a lead will often knock balls up table or tie them up to effectively eliminate any chance of their opponents running out.

To claim the score does not influence shot selection is myopic, IMO.

If you want to consider one-pocket, I think the question would still be -- do you consider the score before shooting? It wouldn't be -- do you consider the ball count. Of course you consider the ball count and the lay of the table. I think the only reason you would consider the score would be when you come to the realization that your overall strategy isn't working and you need to become more or less offensive in order to compete.

Overall, I like the Nick Varner quote and I'm thinking trying to play every rack like it's a race to one would be a worthy goal.

 

[BasementDweller]

If I had a big lead, I would likely take a lower % shot than I would otherwise. Lets say I had a bank or a safe where I leave the other guy a bank. I would be more likely to take the shot for the win. If I was down, I would play the % more and if I thought the other guy has a less chance to make the bank than me, I'd play the safe and have him try it.

I actually did that during a partners match not long ago, we were discussing if we should shoot a bank or play a safe, we were up 4-1 in a race to 5. I said lets go for it. Missed the bank but won the set 5-1.

This is the crux of the matter right here.

Why would you ever take a shot that would give you a lower probability of winning?

The only legitimate reason I can see for playing the shot differently based on the score would be if you were losing and you figure you need to try something different. When you are winning, why would you ever change your strategy?

 

[StuartTKelley]

If you are playing well and pocketing balls well during this game and are full of confidence then I say take the shot.

I think this is a big factor in the equasion as well. It's much easier to make decisions with confidence when you're shooting well. If you've gotten way up on your opponent by grinding it out then you might want to be conservative and hang on a bit longer. If you're shooting great and just rolling over your opponent you should go with your gut and take that shot to get you to your out ball or to win that rack or match. This happened last night twice in my match....I was shooting very well but had two eight balls that either had to be banked or played safe on...My captain called time out and said don't you want to play safe and I said and I quote " hell no, I'm banking this ball in the corner" and I made it. The next one was a bank in the side..same scenario, no safe, just a win. I was shooting very well so I went for it. I won 5-2 in an even race to 5. If I hadn't been shooting well I probably would have played safe.

 

[hang-the-9]

This is the crux of the matter right here.

Why would you ever take a shot that would give you a lower probability of winning?

The only legitimate reason I can see for playing the shot differently based on the score would be if you were losing and you figure you need to try something different. When you are winning, why would you ever change your strategy?

If I make the bank I finsh them off. I was calculating the chance of me making the shot vs the ability to finish the set with that shot vs them getting a good shot off my miss vs them still needing 2 more after that if I leave a duck after my miss. The "make the ball and win" choice won out in my head. Plus I take into account the abilities of who I am playing although that is a person by person thing and should not really go into influencing this specific question.

Plus you can be just "feeling good" about the shot vs the safe, so if 4 out of 5 times you decide one thing, this one time you just feel like you will make the bank 95%.

 

[nginear]

This is the crux of the matter right here.

Why would you ever take a shot that would give you a lower probability of winning?

The only legitimate reason I can see for playing the shot differently based on the score would be if you were losing and you figure you need to try something different. When you are winning, why would you ever change your strategy?

I gotta go with this one. You should be looking to win each individual game and ultimately the match. Taking the lower percentage shot (if you miss) could allow your opponent to shift the momentum over to his favor.

It's different if you're behind as BasementDweller has so clearly pointed out. You gotta do what you gotta do to climb back into the match.

 

[onepocketron]

Hard shot, easy safe, take the safe. Hard shot, hard safe, shoot the shot. No matter what the score.

 

[BasementDweller]

Hard shot, easy safe, take the safe. Hard shot, hard safe, shoot the shot. No matter what the score.

I like keeping it simple like this. Why overcomplicate things?

I think when some people get ahead they like to shoot at a couple of flyers in an attempt at demoralizing their opponent. But there's really nothing more demoralizing then stepping to the table and being frozen to the backside of a blocking object ball, especially if this happens several innings in a row.

The right shot is probably the right shot regardless of the score.

Shooting at flyers because you really don't respect your opponents game is also a bad idea. I think this is part of the reason many players struggle with playing lesser opponents. They don't respect the game and they end up playing too loosely. Then when they need to play their best -- they struggle. I've certainly been guilty of this myself.

Play the right shot.

 

[Pidge]

Score never comes into it. If say I'm 6-1 down, I'd rather get back into the game by clearing the table than by a safety battle. If I mess up and lose, so be it. I play on the more aggressive side, always have done always will do. I've never been on for scraping my way back into a match from behind with safety play. I tend to either blow my opponent out of the water with a pack, or lose. Its how I enjoy playing and how ill continue to play.

 

[Inaction]

I had a game in league a few weeks ago that is a good example.

I was down to the 8 and opponent had 6 balls left. We needed a win. The shot I had was a cut in the corner and the cueball would be very near the other corner. I thought that I could miss the scratch with follow.

I did not expect the opponent to run out in three innings.

If I needed a large win, I would have taken the shot instead of banking (and missed).

If the round was in the bag, I might have attempted it for the ERO.

That shot had several nested IF/THEN components to it.

I did win the game.

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

No, probably not, although there may be the occasional psychology reason for doing so. Momentum is not imagined but real. Still, one of my all time favorite quotes is form Nick Varner:

EVERY RACK IS A RACE TO ONE

In other words, do everything you can to win that race to one, which includes employing shot selections that are high percentage.

I really do like what SJM has to say about this. Reiterating his point, there's a degree of personal preference that's allowed here. From my perspective, I hate being up by a lot or down by a lot and playing safe. I'm looking to fire away, get the blood flowing and either keep the pressure on or put the pressure on him.

When I competed more, I used to keep track of my hill-games. That's to say, I kept track of my w/l percentage in situations where I could win or lose the set on that single game. It kept me focused in situations that seemed conclusive.