"Hit the pro side of the pocket" myth.

ShootingArts said:
You are going to have a hard time persuading me that you can change the aim line a bit and change the sellout percentage drastically. If anything, moving away from the "pro side" and more towards center pocket probably increases my chances of pocketing the ball and keeping control of the table. We have a handful of variables to consider that we haven't talked about yet. However, I am certain that pocketing the ball will have a higher value than a safety the greatest percentage of the time. The discussion in this thread seems to place equal value on pocketing the ball and the safety and they aren't equal.

Hu
Click to expand...
Fair point, my word choice may have oversold how beneficial it is by a bit. That said, the percentage difference between going for 2 in football after scoring a TD down 14 isn't massive compared to kicking a PAT....but now that is the accepted winning play. Absent pool analytics, I will guesstimate that aiming at half a pocket on the proside will have at least as much effect if not more on winning percentage and should similarly be widely adopted by pros (leading to a pro side to begin with).

Highly hypothetical example with guesses for percentages incoming:

Let's say we have an iffy shot that we can make maybe 70-75% of the time. If we miss, a str8 50/50 split of misses to either side has us staying at the table say 72% of the time but selling out for a loss on the wrong side 14%. Assuming we are dealing with the common thin cut that is chronically hit thick, I think we can safely move our sellouts up to about 20% that miss the entire pocket on the wrong side or jar and sit over the pocket. So every time we shoot that shot we are dead 20% of the time.

If we adjùst our aim on the same shot to the thin side of the pocket let's say our pocketting % drops all the way to 60%. Now we miss way more but have far from a 50/50 split of misses to each side. Assuming the same dispersion as for shot 1, the first 1-2 inches or so of balls hitting the sellout rail are now falling in the pocket. High level players precise enough to be playing at halves of pockets arent going to be missing by much more than that very often at all so the actual misses to the sellout side will damn near disappear save for a real bad stroke or skid. At most, I'd estimate they sell out 10%, but probably more like 5 if they are a high level precision player like the pros playing for these pro sides.

The caveat is that due to aiming to a side of the pocket, now previous makes are pushed out to the pro side rail leaving a difficult leave.

In this entirely made up scenario of assumed percentages, we have the choice between going for a 72% make and 15-20% sellout with say a small favorite leave of 60/40 for the last 10ish %. total win probability: 78ish%. Shot 2 has us win 60%, sellout 5%, and have 60/40 edge on remaining 35%. Win probabiliy 81ish%.

I honestly threw these numbers out as I went along not knowing how they would turn out. Now that I did em, seems fair and a slightly bigger edge than going for 2 in out football example. Obv u can nitpick exact percentages but I think experience teaches us to take the shot that keeps us in action. If you are mostly selling out on the misses for a shot, trading in some percentage of makes for even the exact same percentage of good side misses makes sense from a longterm win % perspective.

So ye, even ignoring the specific numbers (bc i think my conservative estimates made the gap seem smaller than it actuàlly is), if you take the same shot dispersion and shift it over, you are basically trading bad side misses, for slightly more good side misses given that the good side misses are closer to ur intended line and occur more often. So ur make percentage drops a bit, but your wrong side miss selloutpercentage drops drastically.
 
for textwall skippers....

A shot aimed at the heart of a pocket will have a given dispersion of outcomes. The misses will at best be 50/50 to either side but given the thin cuts proside is often applied to are chronically undercut, lets assume 2/3 misses will be wrong side sellouts.

Take the same dispersion pattern and aim it at the thin side of the pocket. The slight misses from CIT now go in and only the big misses on that side still miss. Due to aim point being closer to the side of the pocket, slight misses on that side now miss on the proside and outnumber the misses from bad side they replace in the shift bc there are more shots that fall closer to the actual aim line.

The result is u miss more often but almost always on the pro side. Pot % drops a bit, sellout% resulting from missing on the wrong side drop alot more.
 
WobblyStroke said:
Fair point, my word choice may have oversold how beneficial it is by a bit. That said, the percentage difference between going for 2 in football after scoring a TD down 14 isn't massive compared to kicking a PAT....but now that is the accepted winning play. Absent pool analytics, I will guesstimate that aiming at half a pocket on the proside will have at least as much effect if not more on winning percentage and should similarly be widely adopted by pros (leading to a pro side to begin with).

Highly hypothetical example with guesses for percentages incoming:

Let's say we have an iffy shot that we can make maybe 70-75% of the time. If we miss, a str8 50/50 split of misses to either side has us staying at the table say 72% of the time but selling out for a loss on the wrong side 14%. Assuming we are dealing with the common thin cut that is chronically hit thick, I think we can safely move our sellouts up to about 20% that miss the entire pocket on the wrong side or jar and sit over the pocket. So every time we shoot that shot we are dead 20% of the time.

If we adjùst our aim on the same shot to the thin side of the pocket let's say our pocketting % drops all the way to 60%. Now we miss way more but have far from a 50/50 split of misses to each side. Assuming the same dispersion as for shot 1, the first 1-2 inches or so of balls hitting the sellout rail are now falling in the pocket. High level players precise enough to be playing at halves of pockets arent going to be missing by much more than that very often at all so the actual misses to the sellout side will damn near disappear save for a real bad stroke or skid. At most, I'd estimate they sell out 10%, but probably more like 5 if they are a high level precision player like the pros playing for these pro sides.

The caveat is that due to aiming to a side of the pocket, now previous makes are pushed out to the pro side rail leaving a difficult leave.

In this entirely made up scenario of assumed percentages, we have the choice between going for a 72% make and 15-20% sellout with say a small favorite leave of 60/40 for the last 10ish %. total win probability: 78ish%. Shot 2 has us win 60%, sellout 5%, and have 60/40 edge on remaining 35%. Win probabiliy 81ish%.

I honestly threw these numbers out as I went along not knowing how they would turn out. Now that I did em, seems fair and a slightly bigger edge than going for 2 in out football example. Obv u can nitpick exact percentages but I think experience teaches us to take the shot that keeps us in action. If you are mostly selling out on the misses for a shot, trading in some percentage of makes for even the exact same percentage of good side misses makes sense from a longterm win % perspective.

So ye, even ignoring the specific numbers (bc i think my conservative estimates made the gap seem smaller than it actuàlly is), if you take the same shot dispersion and shift it over, you are basically trading bad side misses, for slightly more good side misses given that the good side misses are closer to ur intended line and occur more often. So ur make percentage drops a bit, but your wrong side miss selloutpercentage drops drastically.
Click to expand...


I did some cyphering several times yesterday but decided it got too convoluted to post. One thing, your cyphering makes no mention of the point you are moving over towards. You are going to find it more often too. There goes your three percent! That was one issue if I moved over from where I shoot this shot for my own reasons, I am now aiming directly at the point. Careful stroke on this tough shot, hello point!

A detail that will help your cyphering I believe, the 50-50 dispersal doesn't happen. I would guess it is closer to 10-20% overcut, the rest undercut or deflected by skid, cling, or throw. That is why I shift my shot to the front part of the pocket to begin with. I don't really need to flirt with the point though so I am moving away from it a quarter or three-eighth inch in my attempted aim. Add the fudge factor from the round ball sliding into the pocket off of the point for some shots and I think I'm golden.

What neither of us are considering are other options. If I don't like that shot I may choose to go for the plain safety or the bank. We haven't talked about other balls on the table so impossible to say what shot is more appealing. Banking the ball to a safety is often a viable option if we aren't comfortable with the cut.

While I didn't come around to your way of thinking I did think about the shot enough while in this thread to change how I shoot it just a little bit or at least give it a try a hair thicker. Knowing the likelihood of the ball undercutting I am usually trying to rub the front point with the edge of the ball. I'm going to move it a little deeper in the mouth.

Merry Christmas!
Hu
 
ShootingArts said:
I did some cyphering several times yesterday but decided it got too convoluted to post. One thing, your cyphering makes no mention of the point you are moving over towards. You are going to find it more often too. There goes your three percent! That was one issue if I moved over from where I shoot this shot for my own reasons, I am now aiming directly at the point. Careful stroke on this tough shot, hello point!

A detail that will help your cyphering I believe, the 50-50 dispersal doesn't happen. I would guess it is closer to 10-20% overcut, the rest undercut or deflected by skid, cling, or throw. That is why I shift my shot to the front part of the pocket to begin with. I don't really need to flirt with the point though so I am moving away from it a quarter or three-eighth inch in my attempted aim. Add the fudge factor from the round ball sliding into the pocket off of the point for some shots and I think I'm golden.

What neither of us are considering are other options. If I don't like that shot I may choose to go for the plain safety or the bank. We haven't talked about other balls on the table so impossible to say what shot is more appealing. Banking the ball to a safety is often a viable option if we aren't comfortable with the cut.

While I didn't come around to your way of thinking I did think about the shot enough while in this thread to change how I shoot it just a little bit or at least give it a try a hair thicker. Knowing the likelihood of the ball undercutting I am usually trying to rub the front point with the edge of the ball. I'm going to move it a little deeper in the mouth.

Merry Christmas!
Hu
Click to expand...
One option that this proside is often used for is a lower percentage shot than the 70% or so in my made up model. For these, many players will literally aim to miss on the overcut side and ensure that only their mishit undercuts and CITs actually make it into the pocket. Really like playing a safe where the most common miss is a pot.

I actually don't think we were all that far apart as many in here agree there is a proside and tend to favor that side in their aiming. We just didn't agree on the reasoning, with one side saying you aim it there bc the miss is thick so aiming thin makes the ball more often (true), while the other side saying you aim it there to manage the miss and leave a tougher shot for your opponent as a miss on the other side sells out (also true). Almost like both sides are on to something ;).

Point is, proside is not a myth and only exists among pros because it offers an advantage. Chalk another one in the loss column for OP.

Merry Chirstmas!
 
Last edited:
what is most important is the thinking of wobbly stroke. not his percentages. or when or how often you use it. but to understand his thinking is paramount.
 
Interesting discussion. I always thought ,"if you are going to miss it, miss it on the pro side" meant you hit the ball down/close to the rail with "pocket speed" so that it is more likely to go in if you "miss" the center of the pocket and it hits the rail first.
 
Swighey said:
Interesting discussion. I always thought ,"if you are going to miss it, miss it on the pro side" meant you hit the ball down/close to the rail with "pocket speed" so that it is more likely to go in if you "miss" the center of the pocket and it hits the rail first.
Click to expand...


The "pro side" was first used when commentating on nine and ten ball, or that is where I first heard it used. playing eight ball and one pocket the pro side is the opposite side of the pocket. On a table with well worn cloth there is a gully running down by the base of each cushion. If the object ball is already at a very shallow angle to the rail then shooting to just trickle into the pocket and taking advantage of the gully can be the shot a pro uses despite that meaning to undercut the ball and use that side of the pocket.

The more knowledge a player has the better able they are to choose the "pro side" for the particular shot and situation. Spectators often misjudge the true pro side of a particular shot and the people in the booth aren't always right either.

Those that say the pro side is the side that gives the best chance of success are right, but there are too many variables to be able to make a blanket statement that overcutting a ball a little like I usually choose to do is always the pro side.

We can make general statements on here but the pro is going to look over the situation on the table and choose the best side or even shoot in the middle of the pocket. It is worth noting that the people in the booth almost always use the term "on the pro side" after the shot!

This has been one of the most pleasant discussions I have had in ages on AZB but the truth is that rules of thumb like "the pro side" are just that. They aren't written in rock. Most of the time overcutting the ball a little to "the pro side" is good advice. Always pays to consider the unique situation you are facing though. How are you going to shoot an object ball frozen on the rail? One inch off the rail? Four inches off the rail? If the ball is over a diamond out from the pocket these are three different shots.

Hu
 
Sorry if this is a step backwards...

Do you all think the label, 'pro side' was created before being applied to a shot type, or was the shot type created first?
 
thenaturalpoolplayer said:
What the heck is this? So if I "aim" to over cut the shot to one side of the pocket, and I over cut the shot and miss, then I am pleased with myself because I didn't leave a hanger from under cutting it? Um, if I didn't "aim" to over cut the pocket then I would have made the shot! Come on people.
Click to expand...

Heck yeah , keep doing it your way , meanwhile I’m Your Huckleberry!
 
Last edited:
I first heard the term in the 90s when a room owner held an impromptu discussion with some of his junior players a couple tables over. They covered stuff like can you hit the outside line of the Jim Rempe ball and the currently contested "pro side".

I kept quiet about it but my then and still opinion is much like Shooting Arts'. To me, on those long cuts, you don't hit the pocket at all. You bank the ball off the side cushion. Further these shots are functionally ducks. The ball is often less than two feet from the pocket the only issue is where's the cue ball going? Well, DUH. LEARN.

Set up those cuts and practice running the ball up and down the table. I call them perpendiculars but once you get the hang of hitting those at speed, you may find many impossible outs only require familiarity with these shots.
 
Black-Balled said:
Sorry if this is a step backwards...

Do you all think the label, 'pro side' was created before being applied to a shot type, or was the shot type created first?
Click to expand...

I think the shot already existed, so it definitely came before any such label. The shot is simply how the pros shoot most shots - into the most acceptable side or portion of the pocket.

Doing this just happens to leave the ob a little tougher many times if the ball misses to that particular portion or side of the pocket. So somebody started calling it the "pro side" based on the result of missing the shot, not based on the aiming of the shot. The aiming is 100% focused on pocketing the ball, not on missing it just right. Lol

Aiming to the pro side gives you the best chance of pocketing the ball. Pocketing the ball is the objective. The bonus tough leave in case you miss the shot is not the objective. It is simply the result of missing a shot just outside the most accessible portion or side of the pocket.

So when someone says, "At least he missed it on the pro side", they are absolutely correct, meaning that the player was aiming to hit the best place in that pocket in order for the ob to drop. If the ob goes in exactly as planned, then the player hit the pro side of the pocket accurately. But a miss could easily land inside or outside of the desired portion of pocket you're aiming to hit. In other words, you can aim for the pro side of the pocket, but missing to the outside of that is better than missing to the inside. Nevertheless, the intention is to hit the pro side just right, not to miss it just right.
 
WobblyStroke said:
Welp, now I have to watch Tombstone.

I imagine your match with Natural would finish similarly...assuming missed 6 balls count, I mean.
Click to expand...


Tombstone was free on youtube a couple weeks ago when I watched it. The best acting I have seen Val Kilmer do. I think he based his version of Doc heavily on Jason Robards who did another great job in the role.

A bit of Tombstone trivia if you are into such things. Kurt Russell isn't billed but did most of the directing or this movie would probably never have been completed.

Also, the gunfight at the OK corral is fairly accurate, at least Wyatt Earp's version. He really did go Hollywood in later years and Tom Mix and another western actor or two really were pall bearers. One more thing reminding us these things weren't really all that long ago, Wyatt told John Ford how things happened at the OK corral and even diagramed the gunfight for him.

I generally watch Tombstone once or twice a year along with a bunch of old westerns from good to stinkers. I can't tell you much that has been on TV in the last ten years or so but I might be a wealth of useless trivia on older stuff.

Hu
 
BC21 said:
I think the shot already existed, so it definitely came before any such label. The shot is simply how the pros shoot most shots - into the most acceptable side or portion of the pocket.

Doing this just happens to leave the ob a little tougher many times if the ball misses to that particular portion or side of the pocket. So somebody started calling it the "pro side" based on the result of missing the shot, not based on the aiming of the shot. The aiming is 100% focused on pocketing the ball, not on missing it just right. Lol

Aiming to the pro side gives you the best chance of pocketing the ball. Pocketing the ball is the objective. The bonus tough leave in case you miss the shot is not the objective. It is simply the result of missing a shot just outside the most accessible portion or side of the pocket.

So when someone says, "At least he missed it on the pro side", they are absolutely correct, meaning that the player was aiming to hit the best place in that pocket in order for the ob to drop. If the ob goes in exactly as planned, then the player hit the pro side of the pocket accurately. But a miss could easily land inside or outside of the desired portion of pocket you're aiming to hit. In other words, you can aim for the pro side of the pocket, but missing to the outside of that is better than missing to the inside. Nevertheless, the intention is to hit the pro side just right, not to miss it just right.
Click to expand...
Yes but if he wasn't aiming for the "pro side" he would have made the shot and probably won the game. I bet the stats on making the ball and winning the game are better versus missing the ball on the "pro side" and leaving your opponent tough. It's word play really...dumb. The ONLY reason to slightly over cut a ball is on a soft (1/2-3/4 cut for those of you that can't visualize without fractions) cut to compensate for push. But this adjustment should be subconscious not deliberate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top