Fair enough. I didn't spend enough time in the action pit at SBE to realize that they were calling middle amounts.
Frost vs Alex - 1 Pocket Match on Monday for $40,000
- Thread starter Fast Lenny
- Start date
Fair enough. I didn't spend enough time in the action pit at SBE to realize that they were calling middle amounts.
Here are two posts from Jay Helfert that if you read carefully should help shed some light. And remember, this was before TAR:
Jay describes Walden/Cooney at DCC as a 100k match
And this is one year after TAR hit the broadcast waves:
where Jay clarifying what each side was in that match being 50k each
So these two posts should show that old-timers described matches by the whole freeze amount before TAR, yes? And we all remember them calling this match a 100K match back in 2000 or whenever that match was.
Freddie <~~~ pays a little attention to the action
Last edited:
"In the middle" is pure marketing hype, but technically I guess this was a two man tournament w/$20k entry fee, winner take all: $40K. But no matter how you slice it, they played for $20K 
. One person or corporation wins $20k, the other loses $20k.
Sorry.
Dave <----- but I only really care if it's my money, so as my niece says "whatever"
. One person or corporation wins $20k, the other loses $20k.Sorry.
Dave <----- but I only really care if it's my money, so as my niece says "whatever"
By the way, thank you POV for the stream - this was an excellent match to watch even tough I didn't make past Alex up 5 games. The second game (I think) was worth the price of admission (yes, I donated). Scott coming all the way back only to have the cue ball roll off slightly leaving Alex a bank...which he nailed. I think if Scott wins that game they would still be playing now.
I loved what I saw and want more! Thanks again for bringing it into our homes.
Dave
I loved what I saw and want more! Thanks again for bringing it into our homes.
Dave
Didn't Efren and Earl play for 100k in the middle one time?
They did but I don't think it was a gambling match, it was a race to 120 put on by a promoter that put up the money for the event. Totally different.
"In the middle" is pure marketing hype, but technically I guess this was a two man tournament w/$20k entry fee, winner take all: $40K. But no matter how you slice it, they played for $20K
Sorry.
Dave <----- but I only really care if it's my money, so as my niece says "whatever"
I agree....it was a head set for $20k... Loser loses 20k... Winner wins 20k...
But if you "in the middle" it's 40k..
They show ONE old timer talking about a match. I promise you Freddie that the term "in the middle" as refers to pool match ups is a recent development. I do understand pool room exaggeration but most of the time when talking about the bet it's one side.
By the way, I have seen that Cooney match talked about a lot and Jay is the only one who referred to it as a $100,000 match. Even in Vegas at the room they say it was a $50,000 match.
John <------ has been in the action
Is it really totally different? Scott and Alex were getting staked. The stakehorses and promoters can't even be compared?
A gazillion posts @ $20k vs $40k terminology? Seriously?
KK9 <-- thinks not all here should multiply by two in a squirt
KK9 <-- thinks not all here should multiply by two in a squirt
I'd like to see a rematch. Def would be closer, even think I like Scott.But man Alex doesn't miss many long touch but makeable shots.
Oh, and if you're playing a set for $10,000 then you are playing a set for $10,000. Not $5000 each. That would be a set for $5000.00.
Oh, and if you're playing a set for $10,000 then you are playing a set for $10,000. Not $5000 each. That would be a set for $5000.00.
A gazillion posts @ $20k vs $40k terminology? Seriously?
KK9 <-- thinks not all here should multiply by two in a squirt
Count me in as one of the dumb ones. I grew up talking about gambling on pool one way and now at least on AZB it's changing/changed to another way. NO biggie I am fine with it. Makes my piddly exploits sound twice as big which means they are still piddly. However I like the sound of $1200 per game action rather than $600. Always a touch more respect if you can add digits to the amount.
For Sydbarret, the ahead set is for $20,000, not for $40,000. If anyone barks in a pool room they don't bark about the "middle" and say I will play you for $40,000. They say flip it and let's play for $20,000.
Players are playing for whatever amount that they can WIN above what they put in. The only time we disregard the stake is when it's a tournament entry fee as in $100 entry and first place is $3000.
And as far as THAT goes even commentators on streams make a POINT of saying that players are playing for the DIFFERENCE in place money rather than playing for ALL of the higher place money.
Jay Helfert pointed out several times that the match between Orcullo and Shaw was worth $500 because that was the difference in places. He doesn't say well they are playing for $1500 because that's not actually what they are playing for.
Any pool room I have ever been in if you see two guys playing and you ask what they are playing for you will hear answers like race to 8 for $1000 or 8 ahead for $1000 and that $1000 ALWAYS refers to the amount of money bet by ONE SIDE.
You never hear anyone say that they are playing a race to 8 for $2000 or an ahead set for $2000. I don't care where you go on the planet no one refers to action on pool tables this way. And I have gambled in Turkey, Germany, China, The Netherlands, Mexico, and California
aces805
non iphone user
"In the middle" is a poker thing as well. Once a player puts money into the pot, or middle, it is no longer his money and is considered part of the pot.
When calculating pot odds to determine the mathematically correct play (fold, call, raise), the pot size includes the money you have put in the middle.
Many pool players dabble in poker. Many poker players dabble in pool. A lot of the strategy translates pretty well.
Like when you've just got to shoot a tough shot in order to win that rack, knowing that if you miss you sell out. In poker, thats going all in.
When calculating pot odds to determine the mathematically correct play (fold, call, raise), the pot size includes the money you have put in the middle.
Many pool players dabble in poker. Many poker players dabble in pool. A lot of the strategy translates pretty well.
Like when you've just got to shoot a tough shot in order to win that rack, knowing that if you miss you sell out. In poker, thats going all in.
If I go up to you and say let's play a set for 100, that means we both are putting up 100 dollars... It's obvious. The key word here is "for". Playing "for" 100 means that if I win, I got there, I got a hundred dollars that I didn't originally have. No one on earth say let's play for a hundred and only puts up 50 because they wouldn't be playing "for" 100 in that case, because the fifty is already theirs.
A gazillion posts @ $20k vs $40k terminology? Seriously?
KK9 <-- thinks not all here should multiply by two in a squirt
There are two sides to this argument...
..shouldn't that be two gazillion?
Count me in as one of the dumb ones. I grew up talking about gambling on pool one way and now at least on AZB it's changing/changed to another way. NO biggie I am fine with it. Makes my piddly exploits sound twice as big which means they are still piddly. However I like the sound of $1200 per game action rather than $600. Always a touch more respect if you can add digits to the amount.
For Sydbarret, the ahead set is for $20,000, not for $40,000. If anyone barks in a pool room they don't bark about the "middle" and say I will play you for $40,000. They say flip it and let's play for $20,000.
Players are playing for whatever amount that they can WIN above what they put in. The only time we disregard the stake is when it's a tournament entry fee as in $100 entry and first place is $3000.
And as far as THAT goes even commentators on streams make a POINT of saying that players are playing for the DIFFERENCE in place money rather than playing for ALL of the higher place money.
Jay Helfert pointed out several times that the match between Orcullo and Shaw was worth $500 because that was the difference in places. He doesn't say well they are playing for $1500 because that's not actually what they are playing for.
Any pool room I have ever been in if you see two guys playing and you ask what they are playing for you will hear answers like race to 8 for $1000 or 8 ahead for $1000 and that $1000 ALWAYS refers to the amount of money bet by ONE SIDE.
You never hear anyone say that they are playing a race to 8 for $2000 or an ahead set for $2000. I don't care where you go on the planet no one refers to action on pool tables this way. And I have gambled in Turkey, Germany, China, The Netherlands, Mexico, and California
And they didn't say that here either.
They said "in the middle" for the total amount.
What is so hard to understand? People just aren't thinking this through.
:banghead::deadhorse:
Thread title
Yes I totally understand. It's not about THIS match. It's just a conversation on the general terms. No biggie either way really.
Many years ago Grady Matthews complained about people on forums discussing dollar amounts and after some discussion we had back then on that forum agreed to use the word jellybeans. So if we all agree to use "in the middle" and it's understood that whenever "in the middle" is not expressly used then it means "in the middle" then no has to ever ask if the amount means in the middle or per side.
I vote for just totally dispensing with "in the middle" and going back to the old way of calling out the actual bet per side. 8 ahead for $20,000 is the way I vote for such matches to be described.
Yea.........no.
Pretty much no way to compare poker mathematics to pool. In poker after you call a bet, you still have decisions to make and you make those based on the total amount of money in the pot after what was your money was put in the pot. In pool you don't make any decisions after you put your money up that require you to consider the total amount of money in the "pot." You can learn a lot about gambling in general from poker which will make you a better gambler at pool, but there are no real comparisons such as the one posted above.
Shooting a risky shot is nothing like moving all in....at least not if you're doing it properly. Even if you're bluffing, you should have enough fold equity that its really not that big of a risk in the long run.
Last edited:
Correct, I'm in agreement with you and JB, maybe my post was confusing.:smile: