Sequences - What Do You Think?

[Jude Rosenstock]

Not at all surprised there's disagreement even on the first example.
I tried to come up with an example that screamed "no brainer" but I don't think I succeeded.

4 is a great key ball for the 8, any angle into the head rail sends the cue ball along the shotline.
So in the first diagram I couldn't criticise 2 (stop), 5 in the side (1 rail), 1,4.

The reason I considered my route a no brainer is because you can start with 2 stop shots.
2 (stop), 1 (stop), and then unless you're a total spaz you can work with that angle to get
straightish on the 5 in the side. Either angle on the 5 is fine as long as it's not severe.
Dead straight is fine too.

I probably should have set up something that could be done with all stop shots,
or with balls hanging, something less debatable. Maybe anything over 2 balls is debatable.

In the second route, I agree with the thought that balls near the center suck.
They're as far as they can be from pretty much all pockets.
At the same time I hate going across the whole table.
Even with a natural angle on the 4, I feel like I can fall straight,
fall on the head rail, get stuck on the side rail, etc.

Something else I've noticed... if someone subconsciously doesn't like a pattern, then shoot it anyway,
it just always seems to go wrong. Doesn't matter how bulletproof it looks on paper.
So it's hard to get a concensus because even the easy ones go awry and people say
"see, my way was better".

You make an excellent point. Sometimes you have to go the way you're comfortable with even if there are people out there that say there's a better way. Oftentimes, you're arguing between a 95% chance of success versus a 98% chance. The truth is, both are probably great but how you feel about it can make a huge difference.

 

[Cornerman]

You make an excellent point. Sometimes you have to go the way you're comfortable with even if there are people out there that say there's a better way. Oftentimes, you're arguing between a 95% chance of success versus a 98% chance. The truth is, both are probably great but how you feel about it can make a huge difference.

Yes, but let's keep it real here. The original sequence by Creedo wasn't 95% vs 98%. And I'm not saying you're saying it is. But I do think for people who don't realize how important patterns are in 8-ball, there is way more than 3% difference between choosing 4-5-8 as your last three vs 2-5-8 vs 1-4-8.

I honestly believe most people don't realize just how bad 4-5-8 for a pattern is. It's not 95 vs 98%. It's more like 60 vs 90% for non-A players.

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

Yes, but let's keep it real here. The original sequence by Creedo wasn't 95% vs 98%. And I'm not saying you're saying it is. But I do think for people who don't realize how important patterns are in 8-ball, there is way more than 3% difference between choosing 4-5-8 as your last three vs 2-5-8 vs 1-4-8.

I honestly believe most people don't realize just how bad 4-5-8 for a pattern is. It's not 95 vs 98%. It's more like 60 vs 90% for non-A players.

Obviously, these percentages are going to vary according to a player's skill level and debating exactly what the percentages are is silly. Yes, if you're looking at an APA s/l 4, perhaps using the 5 is questionable. If you're looking at a BCA advanced player, very little can go wrong with the 5. It's a wide-open table and the 5 is a hanger. We need a more complex layout if we're going to have a real discussion. Seriously, there are a dozen guys in my home room who wouldn't even bother thinking about the correct pattern here and they'd run-out every time.