My secret to APA 9-ball success

[42NateBaller]

Last night, I played an APA SL6 in 9-ball. I'm a SL7. Normally, we're a pretty even match at the 55 to 46 pt race. For those that don't know, APA 9 ball is more like straight pool scoring. There are 10 pts per rack with the 9-ball counting as 2 pts. Therefore I have to get to 55 before my opponent in this case gets to 46. Also, there is no pushout after the break.

Normally we're within about 2-5 pts of each other. Last night I smashed him 55-24. My secret? With the exception of one break, I never pocketed a ball, and every break left him no shot on the 1-ball! And, I mean NO shot. I broke 7 times!

I know what everybody is thinking. This guy's break sucks. He must be losing the CB all over the table. Well truthfully, the CB did get knocked around the table a few times. But I was parking it near the center of the table, and it was getting pushed around by flying object balls.

My opponent and most of the people watching were amazed at how break after break I would: Hit them solid, Spread the table, Not make anything, And even when I parked whitey in the center of the table, I didn't leave my opponent any kind of a shot. (Multiple times either the CB or the 1-ball was surrounded by more than two or three balls, and the kick angles were cut off.)

Just plain weird, but it works!

Now I'm going to go back to work and have even more caffine (I've obviously had too much already).

 

[DeadPoked]

I've just had an epiphany! After all these years I was under the mistaken notion that pocketing a ball on the break was key to winning at 9-ball. Now that I know what has been holding me back from playing professional level pool I'm sure that I'll find success in the big tournaments.

Wait till the pro's see my new tactic of not making a ball on the break. It'll be the biggest innovation since Reyes' patented kick safety!

 

[42NateBaller]

I've just had an epiphany! After all these years I was under the mistaken notion that pocketing a ball on the break was key to winning at 9-ball. Now that I know what has been holding me back from playing professional level pool I'm sure that I'll find success in the big tournaments.

Wait till the pro's see my new tactic of not making a ball on the break. It'll be the biggest innovation since Reyes' patented kick safety!

You're probably more qualified to answer than me, but I think the pros aren't playing by APA rules, and therefore might not want to use that strategy.

Fortunately for me, I wasn't making a ball on the break and leaving myself hooked on the 1-ball with the requirement of taking a flier, or just giving BIH. Otherwise, this post would have been, "My 9-ball break sucks! And I got my a$$ kicked".

Normally, I have a pretty solid 9-ball break; just got funny rolls last night. I was surprised at how "breaking safe" (if I may coin a new term) worked from a strategy standpoint in this format. Doubtful I could ever repeat that performance.

 

[Gregg]

Just plain weird, but it works!
Now I'm going to go back to work and have even more caffine (I've obviously had too much already).

I don't think this is far fetched at all.

I don't know if you mentioned, but with the congestion on a bar table (if that's what you were playing on) with no pushout, the chances of "seeing" the one are not great, and can be used to your benefit.

Of course, being a solid nine ball player as an SL7, you are likely to find guys who can run out on you given the chance as well. But what you did sure seemed to work.

 

[whitewolf]

Just plain weird, but it works!

QUOTE]

No, it DOESN'T WORK. Leaving the cueball in the middle of the table is a dummy move. I would consider you lucky.

 

[42NateBaller]

I don't know if you mentioned, but with the congestion on a bar table (if that's what you were playing on) with no pushout, the chances of "seeing" the one are not great, and can be used to your benefit.

You are so correct, sir. The 7'er was my friend. And, my opponent did play pretty good when he had open shots. He missed a couple 9-balls that ended up leaving me out and thus breaking again. The total match was 12 innings.

 

[42NateBaller]

Just plain weird, but it works!

QUOTE]

No, it DOESN'T WORK. Leaving the cueball in the middle of the table is a dummy move. I would consider you lucky.

You too are correct, sir. I was very lucky, hence the wink on the post title.

I wouldn't say leaving the CB in the middle of the table is a dummy move. I think its generally accepted that making a ball on the break and parking whitey in the center of the table is optimal. I just wasn't making a ball.

When you play 9-ball, where do you want the CB after the break on a consistent basis?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

After all these years I was under the mistaken notion that pocketing a ball on the break was key to winning at 9-ball.

I think AccuStats calculated once that the breaker actually loses a slight majority of the time.

pj
chgo

 

[dabarbr]

I think AccuStats calculated once that the breaker actually loses a slight majority of the time.

pj
chgo

AccuStats would have different results in their calculations if they were done for a bar table.

I once won the APA National title in 9 ball as a SL 9. No one got pass 30 balls. I knew that by making a ball on the break and taking control of the table would give me the best opportunity to win the match.

One match was against a guy that could break a ton. A good player and I felt that if he made balls on the break I would be in trouble. He won the lag and broke in two balls and ran out. Score 10 to 0. Broke again and made two balls again but scratched. From there he never broke again. I was able to make a ball on the break everytime and kept control of the table. Final score 75 to 14.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Me:
I think AccuStats calculated once that the breaker actually loses a slight majority of the time.

dabarbr:
AccuStats would have different results in their calculations if they were done for a bar table.

I wonder... somebody else commented that on the smaller table it's harder to get a look at the 1 after the break.

pj
chgo

 

[Dawgie]

That's right. The smaller the table the less your chances of seeing the 1 ball. Think about it this way. On a fulll size table you have 16 balls on a table surface of 36 sq. ft. That is over 2 sq. ft. per ball on average. Now take these same balls and place them on the bar table, about 25 sq. ft. Now you have less space per ball but you still have 16 balls.

The larger the table the more space the balls have to spread out. The smaller the table the less space per balls have to spread out. So it just stands to reason if the balls are congested onto a smaller table the less chance you will see the 1 ball nor any predeterimed object ball.

 

[dabarbr]

I wonder... somebody else commented that on the smaller table it's harder to get a look at the 1 after the break.

pj
chgo

After the break on the big table many times you can look at the one all you want but doing somethig offensive with it is another story.

I'ts true that the percentages to be hooked on the one ball are higher on the small table. But when you can see it your chances are good for starting your run with what you have. Cuts, caroms, and combinations are more manageable than on the big table. I will even start with a straight back bank that I would rarely attempt on the big table. Even kicking at the ball can be done with a higher degree of control on the small table

For these reasons players like SVB can put so many racks together on the bar box.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Another thing is that on the bar table, you are so close to the rack that you can play pretty decent position off the break. It is much easier to control the cue ball and it is also much easier to predict the path of the one ball. I haven't done the research, but I bet my break and run % is MUCH higher on a good quality 7' bar box than a good quality 9'.

KMRUNOUT