one pocket handicap question

[Salamander]

I've been wondering for some time now about a handicap situation. Let's say that the handicap is 12-5. The traditional way of playing this spot is for the player needing 12 to owe 1 ball before the break and essentially play to 11. Is there ever a reason to spot the balls differently?, for example....

Handicap is still 12-5, however let's say that the person who needs 12 will owe 5 prior to the break, hence he would need 7 (after he eventually spots the 5 balls) to win. This method would put more balls in play, which if I am thinking clearly, would help the better player? Is something like this ever done, if so, what are the advantages/disadvanteges for adjusting the ways the balls spot?

 

[lfigueroa]

I've been wondering for some time now about a handicap situation. Let's say that the handicap is 12-5. The traditional way of playing this spot is for the player needing 12 to owe 1 ball before the break and essentially play to 11. Is there ever a reason to spot the balls differently?, for example....

Handicap is still 12-5, however let's say that the person who needs 12 will owe 5 prior to the break, hence he would need 7 (after he eventually spots the 5 balls) to win. This method would put more balls in play, which if I am thinking clearly, would help the better player? Is something like this ever done, if so, what are the advantages/disadvanteges for adjusting the ways the balls spot?

My opinion is that the better player is most at risk when there are many balls on the table, particularly during the opening part of the game -- one foo-pa and the weaker player can get two or three and has a chance of getting on the hill or getting out. Once the game gets to the middle game with fewer balls on the table, and certainly once you get to the end game with fewer balls still, the odds go way up in favor of the better player who, presumably, will be able to out move, out banks, and better run balls that are up table. So... I've never heard of it being done that way and if I'm giving up 12-5 (hey, it could happen I want the traditional way of spotting of the balls.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Gerry]

spots that large can get strange when the better player makes a run of 8 or 9 and has to spot a bunch......then you get a long line of balls down to the foot spot.

If anyone is giving up 12/5.....I think the last thing they worry about is not winning. I have found that by playing very tight and giving the lesser player a "flyer" you can all but control the table and the game.

Most times I have lost big spot games by the guy finding a dead one in the pack and .....SPLASH!

G.

 

[Salamander]

My opinion is that the better player is most at risk when there are many balls on the table, particularly during the opening part of the game -- one foo-pa and the weaker player can get two or three and has a chance of getting on the hill or getting out. Once the game gets to the middle game with fewer balls on the table, and certainly once you get to the end game with fewer balls still, the odds go way up in favor of the better player who, presumably, will be able to out move, out banks, and better run balls that are up table. So... I've never heard of it being done that way and if I'm giving up 12-5 (hey, it could happen I want the traditional way of spotting of the balls.

Lou Figueroa

Thank you Lou for your take. My initials thoughts were that the more balls on the table, the better for advanced player if he/she is good at ball running.

I've actually given this spot (please note that that does not necessarily make me a good player) and found that I do best early on when I can run balls. Later, say....if playing the traditional way I've got 10 and my opponent has 3, since there are fewer balls on the table there are less "moves" available, and also less likely hood for me to run out.

 

[Salamander]

spots that large can get strange when the better player makes a run of 8 or 9 and has to spot a bunch......then you get a long line of balls down to the foot spot.

If anyone is giving up 12/5.....I think the last thing they worry about is not winning. I have found that by playing very tight and giving the lesser player a "flyer" you can all but control the table and the game.

Most times I have lost big spot games by the guy finding a dead one in the pack and .....SPLASH!

G.

I hear you. Also painful is the occasional wild bank that goes in and the guy runs out on you.


I'm still not convinced that more balls on the table is not better for the advanced player. Either that or my end game has to get better.

THanks for the feedback.

 

[lfigueroa]

Thank you Lou for your take. My initials thoughts were that the more balls on the table, the better for advanced player if he/she is good at ball running.

I've actually given this spot (please note that that does not necessarily make me a good player) and found that I do best early on when I can run balls. Later, say....if playing the traditional way I've got 10 and my opponent has 3, since there are fewer balls on the table there are less "moves" available, and also less likely hood for me to run out.

Salamander, I think a lot depends on the individual nature of the two players. Scott Frost giving someone 12-5 is not the same as you or I giving up 12-5, so shooting styles and skills, including that of the lesser player all come into play. There are probably different answers depending on who is playing.

Lou Figueroa

 

[stljohnny]

Playing the traditional way, when the score is 10-3, each needing two is what most would call the nuts and bolts of one pocket. From there it's almost nothing to do with pocketing ability and everything to do with strategy and out-moving the opponent. It's not nearly as fun for shooters to try and play that type of game, but it's a crucial part of the game. I'd rather have more balls on the table so I can run out at the first mistake of the opponent - but I have lost so many games by keeping unnecessary balls in play waiting for that mistake to come that I no longer take that risk. And I've won more games lately because of that.

 

[onepocketron]

Salamander, I think a lot depends on the individual nature of the two players. Scott Frost giving someone 12-5 is not the same as you or I giving up 12-5, so shooting styles and skills, including that of the lesser player all come into play. There are probably different answers depending on who is playing.

Lou Figueroa

Lou, I agree. The skill of the players will make a huge difference.The really good players, from what I've seen, prefer to have more balls on the table so when they get a shot, the game ends there (they run out). Most of the better players don't like for balls to be shoved up table since it makes it very difficult for them to run out. If they can't run out, this gives their opponent (who only needs 4 balls) more attempts.
I know when I am playing a much better player, I try 1) not to give him an easy shot, 2) push balls up table while keeping him stuck in the rack so he can't run out.

 

[Salamander]

Lou, I agree. The skill of the players will make a huge difference.The really good players, from what I've seen, prefer to have more balls on the table so when they get a shot, the game ends there (they run out). Most of the better players don't like for balls to be shoved up table since it makes it very difficult for them to run out. If they can't run out, this gives their opponent (who only needs 4 balls) more attempts.
I know when I am playing a much better player, I try 1) not to give him an easy shot, 2) push balls up table while keeping him stuck in the rack so he can't run out.

Yes. That's pretty much how I feel about it. Thanks for explaining.