I don't think it could be anything else.I honestly think missing the money ball is more of a mental error
Just giving my two cents on this, while I agree with the general premise about fully committing to one intention (that is, the singular shot outcome that you chose), I wouldn't generalize it into avoiding two-way thinking as a whole. It is often useful to select a shot with such a cue ball route/pace that if you miss the pot, the cue ball will land in a tougher spot, typically at the other end of the table, as long as the path/speed doesn't sacrifice the pot success % at all. A simple example is shooting the spot 9 in 9-ball at a large/missable cut angle, where shooting with such a pace/path that you play the cue ball back into the other end rail is natural (doesn't require sidespin or excess power).Avoid “Two-Way Thinking” Steer clear of strategies like: “I’ll aim the eight ball here, and if I miss, the cue ball will end up there and the eight ball will drift over there, making it tough for my opponent.” While clever, this kind of split-focus is mentally demanding—even for pros. Instead, fully commit to one intention: either pocket the eight ball (while planning shape for an imaginary nine ball), or play a deliberate safety.
I agree with most of your post, but I think this part is a little wrong.... as long as the path/speed doesn't sacrifice the pot success % at all. ...
I agree with you 100%, I oversimplified my post for the sake of not having it be too long. Should've not used the "at all" phrasing there.I agree with most of your post, but I think this part is a little wrong.
If you are shooting a shot that is 99% without leaving the cue ball in a tough position and 95% if you take care of the cue ball, then yes, keep your shot percentage.
If you are shooting an 80% shot that will leave a hanger, versus a 79% shot that will leave a 20% shot for your opponent, then include safe in the play.
I think that no player knows the percentages of all the options well enough to do such a calculation, so it is the player's experience and feel for the situation that determines the choice. That choice will depend on the particular skills of the player and to some extent, the opponent.
Respectfully, I believe you've misunderstood my post. I never said to ignore the cue ball—what I actually wrote was to play shape on an imaginary next ball. And yes, it's entirely possible to play shape that puts the incoming player at a disadvantage.Just giving my two cents on this, while I agree with the general premise about fully committing to one intention (that is, the singular shot outcome that you chose), I wouldn't generalize it into avoiding two-way thinking as a whole. It is often useful to select a shot with such a cue ball route/pace that if you miss the pot, the cue ball will land in a tougher spot, typically at the other end of the table, as long as the path/speed doesn't sacrifice the pot success % at all. A simple example is shooting the spot 9 in 9-ball at a large/missable cut angle, where shooting with such a pace/path that you play the cue ball back into the other end rail is natural (doesn't require sidespin or excess power).
You still have to 100% commit to the pot (as you said), but as long as you don't sacrifice the pot success % at all (e.g. selecting sidespin when there's no need for it and it makes it tougher to pot it, or shooting very hard/soft), it is a good idea to select the CB path with a two-way mindset in some situations. It is simply playing position for a certain place with the CB, where you maximize your odds if your opponent does get back to the table. Psychologically I think it's good to focus on just the playing shape there part, not on the "if my opponent gets back on the table" part, because that, as you said, might cause mental issues with not fully committing to the pot.