HUGE Action match Day 3 Gabe Owen vs Danny Smith

terryhanna said:
The Shredder takes it down he won 8 out of of the last 9 games i think

What a match these guys played
Click to expand...

Great match and nice job by Danny, he really turned it on at the end both yesterday and today to snap it off. Gabe had flashes of brilliance but I think he ran out of steam yesterday and today as Danny won 9 of 10 to close out yesterday and 8 of 9 today.

As I said before I thank the players, stake horses, venue, and streamer for having the honor to watch this epic match.

A happy and safe holiday season to everyone!!!
-don
 
Thecoats said:
Great match and nice job by Danny, he really turned it on at the end both yesterday and today to snap it off. Gabe had flashes of brilliance but I think he ran out of steam yesterday and today as Danny won 9 of 10 to close out yesterday and 8 of 9 today.

As I said before I thank the players, stake horses, venue, and streamer for having the honor to watch this epic match.

A happy and safe holiday season to everyone!!!
-don
Click to expand...

Thank you Don, right back atcha!
 
jay helfert said:
Sorry Lou, but this only proves to me that you are NOT a "knowledgeable" One Pocket player, as you purport to be. There IS a significant difference between 9-8 and 8-7!

As an example of the difference a half ball makes, when Ronnie Allen was the best One Pocket player, he could give Jersey Red or Ed Kelly 9-8 and beat either one of them. If he increased that spot to 9-8 on their break and 8-7 on his break he didn't win! A minute adjustment in the spot but it was telling.
Click to expand...


Once again, I wasn't speaking about myself.

And sorry, Jay but I've watched you play 1pocket and you certainly don't fall into the "knowledgeable" category, lol.

Lou Figueroa
 
As I've tried to point out, there is a s small, sophisticated differentiation between 8-7 and 9-8 but they are both considered a "one ball" spot. Here's someone who explains it a bit better:

"A one ball spot means that the handicapped player is required to score one ball more than his opponent. The most common usage of the one-ball spot is when one is playing an opponent 9-8 or 8-7…

The general value of such spots can be estimated by figuring what percentage of the total required is being spotted. Let’s take, as an example, the one-ball handicap of 8-7. If we divide the point (ball) being spotted by the total of eight points that the opponent is required to make, we would arrive at the handicap’s approximate value of 12.5%. On the other hand, if the game was 9-8, instead of 8-7, the value of the spot would only be 11.1%. In other words, giving up a ball by playing your opponent 9-8 is not quite as large a handicap as playing him 8-7, but the difference is only 1.4%. This shows why a one-ball spot is worth a bit less in a longer game."

Eddie Robin
Winning One-Pocket

Lou Figueroa
 
I’d like to thank Terry Hanna for keeping us updated, as usual.
I’ve been a serious reader since I was a seven year old....
...but when Terry posts, I’m in it for the pictures also.

72EAF375-11AA-46A2-95BA-D3E321548863.jpeg
 
Calculating the comparative value of handicaps

I hesitate to enter into this exchange, but I want to remark anyway that the waters are deeper here than they look.
First, there is the question of percentages. Lou is right that the advantage of 9-8 is 11.1 % and that the advantage of 8-7 is 12.5 %. So the difference in absolute advantage between the two spots is a measly 1.4 %. But to compare the two spots you have, it seems to me, to divide that 11.1 % advantage of 9-8 by the 12.5% advantage of 8-7. That comes out to just about 89%, which means that the player getting 8-7 has 11% the better of it than the player getting 9-8. (11% is the difference between 89% and 100%.) That’s one reason why, as Jay recollects, Ronny Allen could offer Eddie Kelley 9-8 on his break but not 8-7.

Second, I’m not at all sure that calculating a spot is a purely mathematical exercise. Elements of the actual play of the game must play a role, and I think the determining feature there is how many turns it takes the weaker player to get to whatever his required number of balls is. I play a player who will give me 9-7 but will not stand for 9-6. (Hey! I never said I could play well!) The difference lies not so much in the percentage difference between the two spots as it lies in the fact that if he sells out twice at 9-6 I am likely to get out, but I am much less likely to get out at 9-7 if he sells out twice. I probably need a third mistake from him to get to 7.

With larger spots this factor of the play of the game can become even more significant for calculating the percentage value of a spot. Suppose a top player is playing an amateur 15-5. Apparently the lesser player has a 66% advantage, and can probably get out in two or three chances at the table. But we all know that in reality this spot is much more difficult for the player getting the handicap than arithmetic by itself would make it appear. Part of the reason must be that the balls that that the better player has to spot come right back into play when they are put back on the table. They don’t go up table. They come right back into the action area where the better player can more easily pocket them. So a purely mathematical calculation of the spot would contain what is sometimes called “a conceptual error.”
 
Holding your opponent to 6 balls (when giving 8-7) is much more difficult than holding them to 7 ( when giving 9-8). They may both be considered giving a ball, but 8-7 is much more of a spot. Doesn't sound that much, but no question it's bigger. Also when giving 9-8 if you get to where you both need 1, it's much easier to play safe because you have only 1 ball on table. When playing 8-7 there are 2 balls on the table when you both need 1.
 
lfigueroa said:
As I've tried to point out, there is a s small, sophisticated differentiation between 8-7 and 9-8 but they are both considered a "one ball" spot. Here's someone who explains it a bit better:

"A one ball spot means that the handicapped player is required to score one ball more than his opponent. The most common usage of the one-ball spot is when one is playing an opponent 9-8 or 8-7…

The general value of such spots can be estimated by figuring what percentage of the total required is being spotted. Let’s take, as an example, the one-ball handicap of 8-7. If we divide the point (ball) being spotted by the total of eight points that the opponent is required to make, we would arrive at the handicap’s approximate value of 12.5%. On the other hand, if the game was 9-8, instead of 8-7, the value of the spot would only be 11.1%. In other words, giving up a ball by playing your opponent 9-8 is not quite as large a handicap as playing him 8-7, but the difference is only 1.4%. This shows why a one-ball spot is worth a bit less in a longer game."

Eddie Robin
Winning One-Pocket

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

From God's mouth to Lou's ears. :grin-square:
 
Last edited:
Tobermory said:
I hesitate to enter into this exchange, but I want to remark anyway that the waters are deeper here than they look.
First, there is the question of percentages. Lou is right that the advantage of 9-8 is 11.1 % and that the advantage of 8-7 is 12.5 %. So the difference in absolute advantage between the two spots is a measly 1.4 %. But to compare the two spots you have, it seems to me, to divide that 11.1 % advantage of 9-8 by the 12.5% advantage of 8-7. That comes out to just about 89%, which means that the player getting 8-7 has 11% the better of it than the player getting 9-8. (11% is the difference between 89% and 100%.) That’s one reason why, as Jay recollects, Ronny Allen could offer Eddie Kelley 9-8 on his break but not 8-7.

Second, I’m not at all sure that calculating a spot is a purely mathematical exercise. Elements of the actual play of the game must play a role, and I think the determining feature there is how many turns it takes the weaker player to get to whatever his required number of balls is. I play a player who will give me 9-7 but will not stand for 9-6. (Hey! I never said I could play well!) The difference lies not so much in the percentage difference between the two spots as it lies in the fact that if he sells out twice at 9-6 I am likely to get out, but I am much less likely to get out at 9-7 if he sells out twice. I probably need a third mistake from him to get to 7.

With larger spots this factor of the play of the game can become even more significant for calculating the percentage value of a spot. Suppose a top player is playing an amateur 15-5. Apparently the lesser player has a 66% advantage, and can probably get out in two or three chances at the table. But we all know that in reality this spot is much more difficult for the player getting the handicap than arithmetic by itself would make it appear. Part of the reason must be that the balls that that the better player has to spot come right back into play when they are put back on the table. They don’t go up table. They come right back into the action area where the better player can more easily pocket them. So a purely mathematical calculation of the spot would contain what is sometimes called “a conceptual error.”
Click to expand...


Your point is well taken.

In the abstract the difference between 9-8 and 8-7 is relatively small and that's what I was trying to point out. In real life, the difference is somewhat elastic due to a number of factors from the true speed of the players involved, their styles of play, and the equipment they're going to be playing on. Regardless, I think that sometimes guys get carried away making seeping generalizations about how significant the difference is. Sometimes it is a significant difference and sometimes it is not.

Lou Figueroa
 
Danny has run threw all the middle weights now. Does anyone think he's ready for the heavy weights: Tony or Scott. At some point everyone has to step up.
 
Dave714 said:
Danny has run threw all the middle weights now. Does anyone think he's ready for the heavy weights: Tony or Scott. At some point everyone has to step up.
Click to expand...
Danny lost to Justin Hall in their last Fight Night Match might be time for a rematch.
 
Nostroke said:
The last game just ended and they put up the starting score for the next game.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I knew that...I was just being funny...there were some weird posts going on so I
thought I’d give them something to pile on...... but they didn’t notice...or care..
I got broad shoulders...:)
 
Dave714 said:
Danny has run threw all the middle weights now. Does anyone think he's ready for the heavy weights: Tony or Scott. At some point everyone has to step up.
Click to expand...

Danny is lucky that Gabe's nerves AND execution just weren't there. I think in his U.S. Open days he would have ran through Danny.

Danny is NOT ready for the heavy weights.

He does not play the score correctly, and someone like Orcollo or Pagulayan will absolutely crucify him for it.

He is used to playing people who, if he waits, will just eventually sell out to him. When he has played those who do not sell out, he gets beat.

Short Bus Russ
 
my 2 cents regarding the 9/8 spot

for guys at the very upper level
running 9 vs 8 is not that big a deal
the percentage of running 8 vs 9 for the best players is less than the ball percentage
the only way to tell if the spot was an advantage
how many games went down to 1 ball
those game would have gone to danny with no spot
jmho
icbw
 
Respectfully disagree with your opinion on an earlier Gabe vs Danny. However, time will tell about Orcullo or Pagulayan I think/hope because Danny has earned the chance/right to match up with them. They would be favored to win I think but doubtful they would offer a ball or two due to Danny not being at their level of expertise. That would assure them a match up quickly. And I believe there would be more than one stakehorse available Danny! Obviously I am a big fan of Danny but also Dennis and Alex.
 
pt109 said:
Yeah, I knew that...I was just being funny...there were some weird posts going on so I
thought I’d give them something to pile on...... but they didn’t notice...or care..
I got broad shoulders...:)
Click to expand...

Im falling for all kindsa stuff lately, I'm too old to remember all the personalities on here-who is a jokester and who isn't.
 
:withstupid::withstupid:

Very good observation.

I think game has become a bit more nervous, now that he is a man.

I also agree that it is a lot harder to beat someone who doesn't turn the table over in an accidental manner.

ShortBusRuss said:
Danny is lucky that Gabe's nerves AND execution just weren't there. I think in his U.S. Open days he would have ran through Danny.

Danny is NOT ready for the heavy weights.

He does not play the score correctly, and someone like Orcollo or Pagulayan will absolutely crucify him for it.

He is used to playing people who, if he waits, will just eventually sell out to him. When he has played those who do not sell out, he gets beat.

Short Bus Russ
Click to expand...
 
Doug said:
Respectfully disagree with your opinion on an earlier Gabe vs Danny. However, time will tell about Orcullo or Pagulayan I think/hope because Danny has earned the chance/right to match up with them. They would be favored to win I think but doubtful they would offer a ball or two due to Danny not being at their level of expertise. That would assure them a match up quickly. And I believe there would be more than one stakehorse available Danny! Obviously I am a big fan of Danny but also Dennis and Alex.
Click to expand...

Wait until orcullo gives him some 11-8 for six fig..

Ku-pow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top