What would you do?

would it have been possible to billard the 8 in, leaving the 3 somewhere more away from the rail, giving you a long shot to the other corner, but with automativ position of the cb at the opposite rail for the 4 into the same pocket as the 8?
sure, thats a risky way.

less risky: play the 3 with lot of left english, don't pot anything, just leave the cb behind the 9+4 while the 3 should go to the short rail in one line with the 9 / 4. without jump not possible so pot then the 3.
 
Neil, the jump off over the 4 to the bank, and then into the 3 was a brave shot.....you sir have got cahones....

The answer lies in the first shot.....it appears that using draw on the 3-8 combo would have left you in the middle of the table, avoiding the 4 altogether....I think you did what you had to do, but the key was the shape on the 3....nice out....
 
Why not do a one rail kick? From the layout seen here the angle was there for a one rail kick off the head rail to put the 3 ball in....

Brian
 
i think a billiard off the three to make the eight, then long shot back to other corner on three, should still have shape enough for the four, just imho.
 
Neil,

Your first solution is the correct one IMHO. You lost the cue ball as an after effect. Incorrect "english" on the cue ball. Right shot, wrong execution. Played Jason in the semi's at SBE one of the years he won. I understand your not wanting to allow him back to the table. Great player.

Lyn
 
Neil you played it right you just lost the CB because you concentrated so much on pocketing the combo you forgot about the CB. It happens. Your thought process was right though you must get out at all cost and not let that man anywhere near the table. Nice recovery and good win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top