When are you better than someone??

Wybrook

Wybrook

A. Wheeler
Silver Member
I see it all the time and was just wondering what the general consensus was?

Player A beats Player B out of $100 at $10/game, but Player B says that if they were betting X amount, he would definately beat Player A.

Player A beats Player B in races to 7, 9 ball, but Player B says that if they played races to 15 he would never lose.

Player A doesn't gamble but beats Player B in every tournament they play in. Player B says if they gamble he would win every time.

(personally, I think Player B has some issues, but back to the topic)

You can take any of the examples above and modify them to extremes, such as betting $500, $5000 or $50,000 a set, or races to 100 or more, but the same thing applies.

Why can't people take being beat to the point that they have to discredit their opponent for some benign reason?

Do any of you have guidelines you base your opinions on or are they random and case specific?
 
If they were playing pool, you'd swear Bill Sadler was firing an air barrel here

Some people can't admit when they were outplayed. So they have to make excuses, in any way, shape or form.

It is what it is. I just laugh when they start making excuses...
 
Neil said:
The second example is too short a race. I have beaten players that I am no match for in the long run in a short race. Many of us have. Short race win doesn't necessarily equate to the better player.
Click to expand...

OK, but maybe this happens every day? Then does it matter, or is the argument only good for small intervals?

Say, A beats B every day 3 games ahead at $10/game
or A beats B every time they play one (1) race to 7.

If this is the case, let's mix the bets and do a race to 7 for $500... Now does it matter? And for that matter, who is to say $500 is a lot of money? Maybe its pocket change to the two players playing....

And why does 10 games ahead somehow equate to being a better player? I have been down 14 or 18 games and come back and been up by 20 or more. Here, depending on when the session was over would dictate on who was the "better" player....
 
I dunno...I have a friend w/ whom I have probably played prob thousands of games with. Everything from $5 to $100/ game and each time we play I end up 2-10 games winner.

I think I am better, but he beats a couple of guys that steam-roll me...in tourneys.
 
I'm the best you ever seen, Fats. I'm the best there is. Now even if you beat me, I'm still the best.
 
Wybrook said:
Why can't people take being beat to the point that they have to discredit their opponent for some benign reason?
Click to expand...

Just sounds like a self-preservation response from a fragile person hanging onto pride. Personalities like that can be explosive when forced to confront themselves. Maybe the bigger issue here is how "Player A" responds to this; pushing "Player B" into the corner of admittance, or allowing them a graceful exit with their false pride intact. Both have good and bad outcomes.

Why does "Player A" need "Player B's" worship at any rate? "Player A" won already.
 
Wybrook said:
I see it all the time and was just wondering what the general consensus was?

Player A beats Player B out of $100 at $10/game, but Player B says that if they were betting X amount, he would definately beat Player A.

Player A beats Player B in races to 7, 9 ball, but Player B says that if they played races to 15 he would never lose.

Player A doesn't gamble but beats Player B in every tournament they play in. Player B says if they gamble he would win every time.

(personally, I think Player B has some issues, but back to the topic)

You can take any of the examples above and modify them to extremes, such as betting $500, $5000 or $50,000 a set, or races to 100 or more, but the same thing applies.

Why can't people take being beat to the point that they have to discredit their opponent for some benign reason?

Do any of you have guidelines you base your opinions on or are they random and case specific?
Click to expand...
I have known a prime example of Player B. Some bought into his bullshit... most knew he was just a blowhard. Just gotta ignore it and let him think otherwise. Keep grinding out those races to 7 with him :)
 
In my first 9 ball match last night, the race was 4 -5, me having to go to 4.

For some reason, the guy I was playing was trying to fire all the shots in, trying to use ungodly amount of spin. He could make few balls, but this type of shooting tends to be inconsistent.

Anyway, it was a 4 zip win for me. After the match he started with the usual excuses-table too fast, balls dirty....so on.

At about the fourth excuse, I looked at him and said " You shot way to hard. Did you notice the speed of my shots? How they all were just the right speed and not a hard stroke used?"

He kinda got the deer in the headlight look and replied, "Ah, no. And I don't shot to hard either."

With a nice little smirk, I replied "Who just won the match."

Not another word from him. Sometimes you just got to give it back to them.
 
Neil said:

True, I have been way down also, and came back to win. So, ten ahead is not necessarily a true test. But, outside of the pros, where 5 or 6 packs can happen, 10 games ahead USUALLY means that one player is better than the other player.
Click to expand...

I believe Grady says...pull up @7 down!
 
Plus I think most of the time... both players know when someone plays better then them or not.

You know when you eeked out a win against someone you shouldnt have beaten, just gotten lucky. They know it as well.

Same applies when you consistently beat someone. Can't just get lucky/unlucky all the time.
 
you are better when you win most of the time or they deserve a spot to have a chance
jmho
 
Wybrook said:
Why can't people take being beat
Click to expand...

I blame schools and the "everybody wins" versions of <lower grade> scholoastic sports these days.

It may very well be that the person that got beat has simply never be able to see himself ase actually having been beat. This is a reality disconnect.
 
Well here is mine.

Example 1
race to 11 and at the end of the set both player are ranked at 1000 having break and ran every rack, guy that won the toss has the last break and wins............... who is the better player.

Example 2
player A is ranked as an AA or A++ (what ever you want to call him) goes up against a Strong B+ who has been practicing his A$$ off. He wins the Flip/lag and breaks and runs 5 racks and snaps the 9 twice in a race to 7..........who is the better player

Example 3
we can all create more examples


So here is my thing. No matter what happened during the match the better player is the one who won the match end of discussion. If you want to prove that you are the better player then come back another day or run the money back again. However, it is also in my opinion that this is something that only comes up in any 1 v 1 sport for the money but mainly in Pool for some reason.
i.e. boxing, golf, poker/cards and so on. Team sports seldom if at all have these complaints and just admit to "not showing up" when the don't win, but pool players ooooooh boy, we have a tendency to think that the only way a person can beat us is by getting lucky (because we never have an off day, not even on our off day)

9 in the corner.......... Yup, i think i'll call it quits having just taken this set.
but i'm sure some "pool player" out there is going to say that they could make a better post than me any day of the week.......lol
 
First off, what's up Adam? Long time no see! How're you hitting 'em?

Now to the question at hand: I think it has to do with self-image and denial. When a player has too much of their self-esteem bound up with the question of where they rank on the totem pole, and when a player would prefer to make excuses and live in denial rather than admit reality and/or put in the work to actually become the better player, then you have the perfect recipe for making a "Player B".

We have a player here on St. Thomas who I've actually heard say, "Well, Professor is more consistent than I am, and he plays better position and he plays smart, but I can beat him anytime. He practices everyday and I don't need to practice." Yeah, it irks me to hear such trash, but if he happens to have some cash on him and a little infusion of liquid courage when he's saying it, then it's all good. :D
 
I thought this was well known. You put up some money for a set, keep playing those sets, and when one guy quits, the other guy is "better," at least until the guy asks for a rematch.

Further, it doesn't matter who won the times before, or how many times. Like boxing, the best player is the one that made the other guy quit most recently. You know, there are some pro players we all admire that have never beat ANYONE like this. It amazes me, but most could care less I guess.
 
To me, the question of who is better than whom has become irrelevant. The only thing that matters to me is whether or not I have played to my potential. While this may seem to be a lack of a competitive spirit, I have found that this perception actually allows me to compete more effectively. I especially think that this is true with pool, as one is really only playing the table anyway. Even those who shark tend to become irrelevant to the outcome and comical most of the time.

Sounds like you must have just "gotten some lucky rolls" he he he.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top