Not sure why you feels so strongly about the 2-way shot...your choice though.
Opinions regarding a former top pro playing in and dominating a Poolroom‘s weekly handicapped tournament?
- Thread starter ChrisinNC
- Start date
Greatly agree with most everything you've said (and you said it well) and it makes a lot of sense to some degree, especially with Fargo 500 +/- players, but often I do not know who's opposite of me on the table at match time. Especially as I sometimes play matches in other states and I am the new face. Most of them in 2024 were non-Fargo reported, unfortunately. Again, we are talking about competitive and tournament situations here, not friends, family or the neighbor's dog. Regarding Fargo, my regular practice partner is a high 600 and even went to the ’24 US Open, only to get his ass handed to him by Immonen. Further, most of the guys I train with range from 600+ to 722 and you don't "entertain" these guys by baiting them, enticing them, or testing them; leaving a “long cloth special” on the 6 or a “half-ball view” on the 8. Ability-wise, we are all pretty much level as far as Fargo ability, so I will just leave it at that. Depending on the day, we could each be one ball better or worse and the 700 club players a rack or two better which is usually the case. These guys are surgeons, and if you miss, they will remove your liver. So, I play the best safety possible when the opportunity presents itself which means keeping the CB in jail, or close to it. And I usually ONLY “bait” on the pushout or when the OB is on or near an opposite rail hoping to see the little stick come out and the CB possibly fly off the table. They play exactly the same way against me. We don’t drink, and we barely speak unless we choose an “open mic” game where we discuss “how would YOU play this shot?” We learn a lot from each other and we mainly play 9/10, so rotation games give us the most effective CB practice. Speaking with a VERY disappointed Fedor at this year’s Mosconi, he told me many guys choose defense even if it’s a 40-50% shot. He said if you want to gamble like that, just go to Vegas and play craps. Remember, those Rasson pockets were one-pocket tight, and of course, those guys play at the highest level so one can easily be cemented to his chair in a short race to 5.
Last edited:
One pocket in particular is a lot like boxing. You feint, you feint, you feint, about the time you opponent is getting bored you throw that same feint again but this time you follow through and rip his head half off. In pool you throw three or four lock up safeties then you slide that low percentage bait out there. Hard for the other player to not think this is the best he is going to get and try to start a run. Of course sometimes he does start a run, got to risk a little as has already been said.
"I hate it when people leave me crossover banks" says Br'er Rabbit! Acting a little annoyed and putting on a show can be part of the game too.
Hu
"I hate it when people leave me crossover banks" says Br'er Rabbit! Acting a little annoyed and putting on a show can be part of the game too.
Hu
weak players don't learn... they miss... they sit down and don't pay attention to what the good player does. players who really want to improve pay attention, remember and even ask questions about what takes place in a rack or a match.
that may be true on many occasions, but even if weaker players do pay attention and ask questions, that doesn't mean they can actually execute the shots
I knew that, just a (lack of) context funny.
And the 2way thing was a near post, not my input.
Last edited:
I think your approach is the best. I think many players over complicate the game. Part of it is just what we are doing here on AZ -- thinking about the game when we are away from the table. We have to spend our time thinking about something I suppose. Some of the stuff I think while ruminating, falls away once I step to the table.
The rotation games tend to be quite binary. Can I runout from here? Yes or No. If not, play safe. It's quite player independent really. Some of the other games your strategy can be modified based on the player I suppose. 8 ball is sort of this way. How you answer the runout question may be modified based on the opponent's skill level. Still the modification isn't all that extreme once you're playing all runout players.
Even if you could benefit marginally by "playing the player" you lose the mental advantage of keeping the game psychologically simple. It can be quite freeing to step into a match and not focus on your opponent.
Last edited:
I'd ask all the players in one group, how do you feel?
I've been to memorial events that seemed to have nothing to do with the pa$$ing.
Cept the buck.
He may be broke and needin' it.
Hard to argue against this. However I view the opponent ability assessment "complication" no differently then any other skill that should be developed and utilized. Like learning to manage top/inside english on the CB. You don't always need to do it, but having a sense of it and ability to execute is a great tool in the bag.
This is a neat one. While safe play in rotation games seems quite a binary decision, it's really only seen as such because it so easy to play it that way. With the opponent only having a single OB to swing at. Placing that OB in a safe location should be rudimentary. Now the same can't be said about 8b. Safe play in 8b usually only happens when it's either a lock to execute, or the opponent truly lacks runout power. Being able to pull off a safe in 8b boils down to what end of the pool you swim in.
Guess what I mean is that 8b is more binary imo. Either you have a lock down safe possibility or you're attempting the runout regardless of the percentages. In rotation you can generally take a couple 2way swings without too much risk.
It is a great thing when you're swinging so well and your opponent is struggling enough that you don't need to alternatively manufacture opportunities. This probably speaks more to my level play and the opponents I choose to engage. It's rare for me to lock horns with what should be an equal and not need to employ some level of gamesmanship to squeak out an advantage.
Yeah, I agree; ya gotta consider your opponent in almost everything you do that's not an easy, routine runout.
Here's an interesting story on that topic. Years ago, I regularly played a guy significantly better than myself. Not only did he play better, for some reason, I always played bad against him (every time). We somehow got separated and stopped playing each other. Years after we stopped playing, we were reminiscing about our old days banging heads. When I told him I always played my worst pool against him, he said he knew that. He said once I got my confidence up, I was tough to beat. So he intentionally left me long tough shots to "get me used to missing". He said once he got me used to missing and dented my confidence, he changed styles and went back to hiding balls. I'm telling ya....there's a real lot to this game besides playing the table.
CanadianGuy
Well-known member
this is a pre fargo problem imo
why rooms skip this system is just silly at this point
i suspect the matches would play out drastically different under fargo
sounds like the player in question has found the loophole within a fuzzy and inaccurate handicap system
why rooms skip this system is just silly at this point
i suspect the matches would play out drastically different under fargo
sounds like the player in question has found the loophole within a fuzzy and inaccurate handicap system
I don't thing a player gets better playing a better player.
I disagree, unless the skill difference between the two players is huge. If it is, then I would agree with you.
needs a new flux capacitor.
Yeah, I'm not buying it. You can though. So we can simply agree to disagree. You stated "you always played bad against him." The fact is, you just played bad. Period. And he got you "used to missing." It sounds like he was in your head. So you "allowed" an opponent to either get in your head or you needed more practice, or both. Two completely destructive things to which BOTH can be corrected. Tell me, rather than leaving long tough shots, if the guy hid balls from day one, wouldn't that have dented your confidence even more? After handing him the cue ball every other shot and continually holding the triangle, one would think that's all the poison needed.
In Europe, many tournaments don't even handicap. If you get blown out, you accept the outcome and simply go practice more. Or not.
Imagine a world where everyone took accountability for their own short comings and didn't force restrictions on those willing to put the work in.
Nope, missing damages confidence, gets in your head, and makes you play bad, completely different than your opponent playing well and making you kick (if I lose from needing to kick, I credit my opponent, not get down on myself for playing bad).
So let me ensure I understand your viewpoint of NEVER having to play your opponent in addition to the table. Here's two scenarios:
- You step up the table playing Joshua filler. You have a shot on the 4 ball that you believe you could make 40% of the time. The 5/9 is dead. All you need to do is make the 4 to win the game. You believe your chances of executing a safe to hide the cue ball is extremely slim. Your other option is to leave the ball on the end rail and let Filler either play safe or go for the bank. Because your normal chances to win a game against Filler is far lower than 40%, odds would dictate you need to go for the 4 ball all day long and keep Filler in his chair.
- The second scenario is exactly the same only you're playing someone you believe you're a slight favorite over. Plus, the guy is old, has bad eyesight, and is a terrible shot maker. In this case, you believe leaving him that long bank or difficult safe is something he would successfully execute 30% of the time. The other 70% of the time, he's going to leave you an easy shot to win the game. So, if you're playing to win, you play safe all day long against this opponent.