"Text Book"

AOyster

AOyster

Banned
In response to some other thoughts here lately...

1. Promoting our sport ("pool, billiard, cueing arts"), your call here.
2. Smoking ban - creating changes
3. True Love of the game

?????????
Is there a true "text book" most correct way to play "any shot" in any game? i.e. 9 ball, 8 ball, straight, one pocket, etc.

Yes... there are many ways of playing "a shot" in any game to win, but question/thought for everyone is....Is there a "most" correct design-path of the balls?

I have an idea to help the average television viewer understand, and so am interested in everyones thoughts!

Thanks
 
AOyster said:
In response to some other thoughts here lately...

1. Promoting our sport ("pool, billiard, cueing arts"), your call here.
2. Smoking ban - creating changes
3. True Love of the game

?????????
Is there a true "text book" most correct way to play "any shot" in any game? i.e. 9 ball, 8 ball, straight, one pocket, etc.

Yes... there are many ways of playing "a shot" in any game to win, but question/thought for everyone is....Is there a "most" correct design-path of the balls?

I have an idea to help the average television viewer understand, and so am interested in everyones thoughts!

Thanks
Click to expand...

I think the way a player takes the "right" shot totally depends on his playstyle. Some players would rather draw than follow etc etc. But I agree, there is always the logical way to play a shot.

Anyway, I am interested in hearing your idea.. becuase most people that come across a television program have no idea what is going on, and quite frankly the commentaors talk away about nothing and never really explain what the heck is going on!
 
I believe firmly that yes, there is always a best way to play a shot in SOME games, mostly 9 ball and maybe 8 ball too. Straight pool not so much tho I think you might get maybe half the great players to agree on right shot half the time, lol :P

Sometimes that best shot might be only 1% better than another shot or another leave, and some players have holes or blind spots in their games that makes it so they can for some reason do the harder shot better than something easier.

I don't feel that way about 1 pocket. It has endless variety and requires judgment of the opponent's abilities (i.e. if he's a great kicker but can't see long tough cuts anymore then you might play to leave him long rather than leave him a kick). So even though there are plenty of wrong shots in 1p I wouldn't say there's always 1 right shot.
 
The simpler the better, Buddy Hall has proven this. By minimizing swing speed, cue ball movement, working the middle of 'whitey' and using natural angles for shape one will accomplish with simplicity.
 
AOyster said:
?????????
Is there a true "text book" most correct way to play "any shot" in any game? i.e. 9 ball, 8 ball, straight, one pocket, etc.

Yes... there are many ways of playing "a shot" in any game to win, but question/thought for everyone is....Is there a "most" correct design-path of the balls?
Click to expand...

In 9-ball, absolutely; you shoot THE shot. There are never two options that are "equal."

I haven't developed my 1P game enough to be sure, but a local semi-pro seems to think so, and until proven wrong I am assuming yes.

In other games, though, I just do not know...
 
8-Ball Player said:
I think the way a player takes the "right" shot totally depends on his playstyle. Some players would rather draw than follow etc etc. But I agree, there is always the logical way to play a shot.

Anyway, I am interested in hearing your idea.. becuase most people that come across a television program have no idea what is going on, and quite frankly the commentaors talk away about nothing and never really explain what the heck is going on!
Click to expand...


What I am talking about here is not the individual "players" right shot, but more of a computers determination of the right shot. Much like playing chess against a computer. The computer has a formula that it uses to choose the most correct shot.

I have a way of making this happen on TV so that there is a most correct shot that would appear on the screen based on a computer formula not the commentators 'thinking of what the palyer might do" and yes, never really explaining what the heck is going on to the average "Joe" out there in TV land.

I have been playing for 30+ years now and still do not have that instant correct shot every time, so what are the common folks tuning in thinking? They are thinking these are professionals and they should never miss...meaning they have no clue about defense play and think that these shots were just misses.

Instead of listening to the commentators thinking, why not have a computer program overlay on top of the table the most correct shot. On the TV screen for the viewer, with the formula in a box. (Angle - Speed - Spin) Then the commentators can discuss the shot as what the player needs to do to make this happen and how close he came each time to that most correct shot. What happens afterwards? I think I have the system that will work. It would make it very simple for anyone tuning in to see what the ball(s), path(s) should be based on a formula. It would inlcude a most correct defensive shot (safety) and a most correct offensive shot.

Just imagine the stats we could gain from this.
 
I some situations, especially in 9-ball, there's one shot that almost every person who's very knowledgeable about pool would agree is the best.

But in many cases, there's a compromise going on between what a player perceives is "the best shot", and what other less optimal shot might be available that the player might have a higher probability of executing perfectly. If there are two ways I can shoot my next shot, A and B, and A makes the rest of the rack totally cookie-cutter but it's an 80% shot, and B makes the rest of the rack very runnable but not as easy and it's a 100% shot, then I have a dilemma. I have to analyze, not necessarily numerically, my percentages of the 80% shot plus the very easy run, or the 100% shot plus the moderately easy run, and see which one is better overall. The answer might be different for different players, or even for the same player on different nights, depending on how well he's running balls.

And then in games like 8-ball, 14.1, and 1-pocket, there are usually so many permutations of how a run can be put together, that any small variances in player ability or player preference can be reflected in the choices they make, without necessarily having a clear-cut right or wrong. In 8-ball, I may have a very strong and reliable draw stroke, but I'm not as good at thinner cuts. I might choose a different order in which to run the balls, or a different spot in the run to play a break-out, so that it does contain 2 strong draw shots, but leaves me easier angles, versus a player with the opposite preferences, who might take a thin cut down the rail to get the break-out now, so they don't have to execute the power draw two shots down the road.

So in short, maybe sometimes there's "one correct way", but definitely not all the time.

-Andrew
 
I feel that in most cases, the "best" way to play a shot is the simplest. Not using any more english than necessary and moving the cueball as little as possible. I think for beginners, they should stick to this until they gain the knowledge and control to do more. Also, consider that the easiest shot isnt always the best shot.

Southpaw
 
AOyster said:
What I am talking about here is not the individual "players" right shot, but more of a computers determination of the right shot. Much like playing chess against a computer. The computer has a formula that it uses to choose the most correct shot.

I have a way of making this happen on TV so that there is a most correct shot that would appear on the screen based on a computer formula not the commentators 'thinking of what the palyer might do" and yes, never really explaining what the heck is going on to the average "Joe" out there in TV land.

I have been playing for 30+ years now and still do not have that instant correct shot every time, so what are the common folks tuning in thinking? They are thinking these are professionals and they should never miss...meaning they have no clue about defense play and think that these shots were just misses.

Instead of listening to the commentators thinking, why not have a computer program overlay on top of the table the most correct shot. On the TV screen for the viewer, with the formula in a box. (Angle - Speed - Spin) Then the commentators can discuss the shot as what the player needs to do to make this happen and how close he came each time to that most correct shot. What happens afterwards? I think I have the system that will work. It would make it very simple for anyone tuning in to see what the ball(s), path(s) should be based on a formula. It would inlcude a most correct defensive shot (safety) and a most correct offensive shot.

Just imagine the stats we could gain from this.
Click to expand...

Wow, I think that is a GREAT idea!!! That would make TV pool a ton more interesting, and it would get non-pool players into the game. You should take your ideas to a new level, introduce them to the big TV stations. If you knew how to make the program you could put a patend on it and make lots of $$$. Thanks for sharing, that would be awesome, hopefully it comes to pass someday.
 
Oyster, I like that idea a lot, it's something I think about too. I think it would be complex to calculate, but not THAT complex. It would still require SOME judgment tho. I doubt there's any mathematical reason that the ideal angle on a particular ball might be 40 degrees instead of 39 or 41.

I would try it on 9 ball first, and just have it first figure out a 'good' angle on the next ball to get to the 3rd ball in line. Once it knows that angle, it has an 'ideal line'. Then it would calculate where the cueball is going with natural speed and no english on the current shot, then figure out what kind of speed and spin is needed to come as close as possible to that ideal line.

Really, the judgment of good players in the booth drawing up a path is as good as a computer program. The japanese do it really nicely... any match that isn't broadcast live has clean diagrams and colored lines showing the path of the ball instead of wobbly hand drawn telestrater lines. But I think the computer calculation would be interesting as hell just on its own merits and could be marketed to help people learn, not just limited to tv use.
 
CreeDo said:
Oyster, I like that idea a lot, it's something I think about too. I think it would be complex to calculate, but not THAT complex. It would still require SOME judgment tho. I doubt there's any mathematical reason that the ideal angle on a particular ball might be 40 degrees instead of 39 or 41.

I would try it on 9 ball first, and just have it first figure out a 'good' angle on the next ball to get to the 3rd ball in line. Once it knows that angle, it has an 'ideal line'. Then it would calculate where the cueball is going with natural speed and no english on the current shot, then figure out what kind of speed and spin is needed to come as close as possible to that ideal line.

Really, the judgment of good players in the booth drawing up a path is as good as a computer program. The japanese do it really nicely... any match that isn't broadcast live has clean diagrams and colored lines showing the path of the ball instead of wobbly hand drawn telestrater lines. But I think the computer calculation would be interesting as hell just on its own merits and could be marketed to help people learn, not just limited to tv use.
Click to expand...


Hey Creedo,

Glad you like the idea. I have been using almost this same idea in my classes for a few years now. Each student assembles the entire shot with tools I designed and had made, over 30 of them. Each one is a segment of a math which playes into th edirection, distance, spin, optimum vector angle, + and - for each cushion and much more. It is real fun for every student to build the shot with these tools at the end of the course. This is where the idea came from. I have it all worked out to a T. (tangent)

It would be easy to even use these on a screen and bring each one in onto screen like the telepromter drawings.

Anything different than the way it is done now would be an improvement and an enlightening enjoyment to others who don't understand the complexities as much.

The people at home could see exactly what the player is trying to do with the ball before it happens and most importantly the "why's" based on physics.
 
haharound up some child labor (your students) and have a bright programmer build a tool that automatically lines up a successful center ball shot with medium speed and 0 english, drawing a line displaying the path (with some assumed friction etc) then see if they can program in the english to redraw the path.

Actually so much of this work has been done before (and done nicely I think) in games like Virtual Pool 3 (or whatever they're up to). The physics in that game seem nice and it already can draw a predicted path with english. Maybe a lot of the grunt work for your concept is already done and you just need to contact one of the developers.
 
Selecting the "right" shot... even in 9-ball... is a matter of percentages based on the ability of the individual making the shot selection... and the percentages of making several shots in a row of that type for that individual. The "right" shot for you is not necessarily the "right" shot for me.

And selecting the "right" shot involves the lay of the table... that is, which path is the preferred due to the layout of the table to get the best position on the second ball that will allow you to get easily to the third ball... and so on. The lay of the table would have to be mathematically modeled... in some form or fashion.

It's a great idea... but it's certainly more complex than the simplistic video games that are currently available.
 
Southpaw said:
I feel that in most cases, the "best" way to play a shot is the simplest. Not using any more english than necessary and moving the cueball as little as possible. I think for beginners, they should stick to this until they gain the knowledge and control to do more. Also, consider that the easiest shot isnt always the best shot.

Southpaw
Click to expand...


this is a common point that gets me. many people, (not you here), suggest both as little cue ball movement as possible, and also using natural angles and positions. but surely these two points contradict each other? for instance a nice natural two rail position shot coming into the angle has a lot more cue ball movement than a one rail position coming onto the angle. just something i've noticed people always say...
 
beef: yeah, you have a good point. I've heard advice that says 'try for as few rails as possible' and I've heard advice that says 'try for more rails'. Both of these would be bad advice cuz it depends on each situation. I think minimize cueball movement is good for your margin for error, and taking certain longer routes with the cueball can also be good for your margin for error, so you must weigh in your mind which helps the margin for error more... a better angle coming towards the ideal line? Or a softer shot that won't have as much difficulty with speed control? I find that the better angle of approach is almost always the right shot and will bail me out more often when my speed is bad.

I think the mathematically right shot doesn't need the entire layout of the table, just 3 shots, the current shot... and the right leave on the next shot to get to ball 3... just like humans do (at least for 9 ball). So that part of it will be simple. I think it can also factor out some human skill by figuring out an angle on ball 2 that will get an acceptible angle on ball 3 at medium speed or less. The 'acceptible angle' could be calculated using something like bob jewett's method for calculating shot difficulty (since a 40 degree cut on a hanger is a lot different from a 40 degree cut on a longer shot). The calculated difficult would average out distance and angle to find the right position or the right line or at least the right area for each shot.
 
Human vs. Machine?

Neil said:
I suggest getting some videos of the pros and trying your computer program on them. If your program shows something different from what they did very often, it's not tweaked good enough yet.

Even if your program is perfect and 100% right, if the pros are doing something different a lot of the time, youre' going to come off looking like an idiot.
Click to expand...

Hey Neil,

Thanks for the input.

As for the majority of the comments here on this post, many seem to still look at this question from a human aspect and not the computers calculation. Do we agree with computer games, that the computer will most likely always win???

Chess, for example. Bridge (the card game), golf, and even military and flight simulators. The reason the computer is used is that it calculates the correct move every time and very fast. Humans can't do that so we create computer programs to test and strengthen our abilities and reasonsing.

"It takes a comuter to error, it takes a human to really screw things up." Old quote I remember.

So, there must be a most correct play every time for every shot. Not adding in the human element. Do we agree that every table in every game can be run out by a computer? Humans factor in their individual skill level, knowledge, situation (offensive v. defensive) opponent, etc. A computer will not do any of these things, hense given and playing the perfect shot every time. If the angle, speed and spin are all perfect, the shot will be perfect every time, by the computer.

If we can agree that the computer will always choose, play the most correct shot then we can move on to the situations of the pro's playing against these perfect shots. How close will each player come to the correct formula, path of the ball, etc. This would be very cool to see on a tv screen during a game. The gereral public would surly learn very fast what the player is attempting to do and why. The computer will display the formula and the correct path it calculated, then we see what the human does and the results. One interesting change would be, the match can be won by the player who ends witht he highest percentage of correct plays.

Yes the table can be played out many different ways. Somewhere within these different plays lies the most correct one based on a formula the computer will use. Human vs. machine. Who will win?

We build machines for everything to do the jobs of humans. In the gym, we (well some of us) use these machines to perfect and strengthen the correct movements of certain body parts.

We build and continue to perfect machines that move us.

We build machines (robots) to test products. Golf clubs, bats, balls, cueing instruments, cue balls, etc. etc.

These machines are built to the specifics based on scientific formulas of correct movements. Even the simplest of movements we still create robots to do. We can learn a lot from the science behind these machines we create.

Once we focus in on and accept the direction of a perfect robotic movement we can begin our quest to add in our human element.
 
It seems to me that one could theoretically calculate the least distance and the fewest or lowest average degree of angles needed to make a shot and get exact position for a third to get to a fourth shot etc in 9-Ball. A second level of calculations would be based on the effects of English, follow or draw to get to the same spot. This would result in a hierarchy of shots from least difficult to most difficult and could be displayed on the screen as with or without cue ball control.

The player’s selection would be based on personal preferences given their strengths and weaknesses. A comparison of the three lines of travel would help viewers see what players prefer in different situations.

This works in a rotation game where we know what ball(s) will be played next. It may or not work in a nomination game such as 8-Ball or 14.1 because the player’s selections would need to be known.

I can hear the commentator, if you want to play like Efren then learn to use stop and draw against the odds -- or some such.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top