Which game has the least luck factor?

[PGHteacher]

I don't feel that most are paying attention to the question properly. All games have luck in it but the game to have the least overall should be 3CB. if this is not so then by what the others (banks players) are saying then 10 ball should also be considered since that is a call game also, now i knwo that you would rule it out cause of the "clean" factor but lets look at banks for a sec.

A: was it luck or skill when there is one ball left and the player at the table plays his shot and hangs it
or
B: misses and rolls dead on for a short rail shot
or
C: two balls left on the table, misses but leave the other guy kissing the other ball or something like that

LUCK can show it ugly face at any time in practically any game, but 3CB, now that's different. See the player played exactly for what the out come was going to be with far more precision that pocket games. Now I am by no means a 3CB player put "properly" looking for none bias fact I would have to say that this game has the least amount of luck to it, with the most luck being when the ball rolls so slow that the Ref has to stand over the ball to look for the contact.

P.S.
I would like to think that 14.1 may be second, but i'm just spit balling at this point.

^^^^^ This guy is correct and is actually what I have been trying to say. ^^^^^

I think many people that have taken this poll have not considered how big and diverse the meaning of “luck” is. Many are just probably thinking to themselves “well in bank pool the ball & pocket has a stipulation; IT CAN’T contact another ball and that makes it less of a luck factor” I think what (many) people are not thinking about is the other types of luck that can happen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luck

When you say:

So, a bunch of us bar stool pundits were bringing up the talk of which cue game has the least luck factor. For what it's worth, we were talking about the games that are still played these days i.e. 8/9/10 ball, 1 hole, Banks, 3 Cushion/Billiards and 14.1.

The consensus was that either Banks or 3 Cushion had the least amount of luck built in.

What do you think? Why?

Eric

And people come up with over 50% saying bank pool that leads me to believe that bad, positional and other forms of what can happen in a pool game have not really been considered.

If I had a dollar (while playing bank pool) for every time me or my opponent got a breakout that he didn’t intend, just barely be not able to see the intended ball, scratch on the most unlikely of scratches, get hooked, line up for an easier bank than was my/his intention (hope you get the point) I would be a rich man.

It is the same with one-pocket, straight pool or any other pool game in addition to the stuff that can happen in the above paragraph think about this; you could have the intention of playing a really good safe up table and the balls move into a dead cluster and BOOM you LOSE THE GAME (sometimes).

So what in 3CB could happen to you that is REALLY good or REALLY bad? You could get a ball close to the rail or in a corner that you didn’t intend to put there, you could miss your 3 rail and have it come around again. And there is about the end of the list; even if you miss this “routine” shot (and in 3CB that is a stretch in the 1st place) what is it most likely to cost you? 1 point yup there is your medicine 1 point; now your playing a “world beater” oh no!!! Wait it will probably cost you 2 points OMG!

So all in all I don’t think 3CB should be in there; now comparing pool games sure the debate of one-pocket vs. bank pool is a good debate and arguments could be made that are solid on both sides. But there just isn’t very much good or bad that can happen to you on a billiard table that is as bad or good as something that can happen to you on a pool table.

 

[Black-Balled]

3C sure seems the game that is most resistant to scoring, at least by a novice like me. Once in a while a friend and I will take the billiard table and say something like "Let's play to 20." After about an hour and a half one of us will say "Let's just go to 5." ...nothing looks like a hanger in billiards so I wouldn't even know if I got left lucky or unlucky.

Truth!
When you play 15 min and fail to score, you know it is time to move on!

 

[sfleinen]

I know, I know, the age old question.... Just humor me.

So, a bunch of us bar stool pundits were bringing up the talk of which cue game has the least luck factor. For what it's worth, we were talking about the games that are still played these days i.e. 8/9/10 ball, 1 hole, Banks, 3 Cushion/Billiards and 14.1.

The consensus was that either Banks or 3 Cushion had the least amount of luck built in.

What do you think? Why?


Eric

Eric:

I think bank pool. In my mind, you can still "get lucky" with a good carom in 3C, because you don't have to call the exact particulars of the carom. (That is, you don't have to say, "contact, 3 cushions, contact" or "cushion, contact, 2 cushions, contact" in 3C. I enjoy 3C, and I've definitely seen inadvertent -- but still good -- caroms when the cue ball went an extra rail or two before making contact with the second ball.)

In bank pool, the shot must go as you call it -- *CLEAN* -- exact number of cushions, and no caroms off of another ball (even if the object ball goes into the pocket you called).

JMHO, however. I enjoy *both* games, and in fact, all of the games on your list.

Good pool... I mean... poll! :-D
-Sean

 

[Samiel]

I vote Banks by a long shot!

In 3C, you can just shoot hard at a ball and still somehow come up with a point.

In Banks, you need to call your pocket, the number of rails and it must go in clean!

They are different types of games, played on different types tables of tables, but as far as scoring a point goes, Banks will involve less luck.

 

[Eric.]

Great insight in the replies so far, thanks!

Here are some of the luck factors that we found in 3c and Banks:

Banks:

-accidental break out of a cluster
-fluke CB carom off another ball to put the CB into a good spot for another bank
-lucky bump of an OB to an easy bank
-unlucky kiss/carom of teh CB to get corner hooked or on the end rails
-making a ball on the break (to stay at the table)
-playing a safety that sells out an easy shot

3C:

-bumping the other balls close together
-missing a 3 railer that goes 5 rails for a good hit
-getting stuck on the rail
-getting frozen to a ball or both balls

I feel 3C has less luck only because for the most part, you are playing all offense, all the time. Because of this one point, I feel like there is less luck due to the fact that you rarely come to the table and flat out give up a scoring opportunity. That also doesn't give your opponent an extra, unearned offensive shot.


Eric

 

[TSW]

Every one of these games has some measure of luck. If you really want to eliminate luck, you need to design a new game.

Most of the examples of luck given here are based on one opponent leaving the other one an unintended position, for good or ill.

The best way I can think of to eliminate that sort of luck is to eliminate the alternating shot. Posit a game consisting of a series of fixed layouts, and the challenge is to run each layout successfully (either in rotation or in any order). Similar to a PAT drill. After a predetermined number of layouts, the competitor with the highest score wins.

No alternating shots. No opening break. No luck. Also no fun, but who needs fun when you have skill and skill alone?

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

...I feel 3C has less luck only because for the most part, you are playing all offense, all the time. Because of this one point, I feel like there is less luck due to the fact that you rarely come to the table and flat out give up a scoring opportunity. That also doesn't give your opponent an extra, unearned offensive shot.


Eric

Good synopsis, but I'm not sure about this last part, that it's all offense. I've had experienced 3C players tell me there is defense. For example, if faced with a difficult shot they will play it in a way that, should they miss, will leave the opponent with a relatively difficult shot in return. It is also interesting to note how often the good player will leave his opponent's CB on the rail for him, not allowing him all the options to use spin.

 

[pt109]

Great insight in the replies so far, thanks!

Here are some of the luck factors that we found in 3c and Banks:

Banks:

-accidental break out of a cluster
-fluke CB carom off another ball to put the CB into a good spot for another bank
-lucky bump of an OB to an easy bank
-unlucky kiss/carom of teh CB to get corner hooked or on the end rails
-making a ball on the break (to stay at the table)
-playing a safety that sells out an easy shot

3C:

-bumping the other balls close together
-missing a 3 railer that goes 5 rails for a good hit
-getting stuck on the rail
-getting frozen to a ball or both balls

I feel 3C has less luck only because for the most part, you are playing all offense, all the time. Because of this one point, I feel like there is less luck due to the fact that you rarely come to the table and flat out give up a scoring opportunity. That also doesn't give your opponent an extra, unearned offensive shot.


Eric

I've seen a game of 3-c for $5,000 end with a shot that was meant to
RUN 5 rails....instead, he caught the short rail going into the corner and
it CHECKED 3 rails for the win....Jimmy Mataya was the shooter...

I've seen Dick Jaspers playing 3 rails (run-run-run) catch the long rail
going into the corner and made the billiard (run-check-check-check)

I have NEVER seen the cash won on a fluked bank.

 

[PGHteacher]

Bank pool has always been the only no luck game with no margin of error. It has to go in the way you call it not touching any extra rails or balls. You can always get a little "luck" in the other games.

No contest....full rack banks.
You gotta bank 'em clean...you gotta move good...you gotta call 'em.

I'm putting 1-pocket second.

I've seen lots of flukes at 3-c and snooker.....
...sometimes when I was shooting...

Well the easiest way to answer that question is to ask, which games allow for some sloppiness? That would be all games except banks. Because in banks, it's a true called shot (bar rules style), if anything except what was called happens, it's a bad shot. ALL other games allow for room for some slop. But the games themselves, minus APA 8ball which is pure slop, will hardly ever be played with sloppy shots being made.

Eric:

I think bank pool. In my mind, you can still "get lucky" with a good carom in 3C, because you don't have to call the exact particulars of the carom. (That is, you don't have to say, "contact, 3 cushions, contact" or "cushion, contact, 2 cushions, contact" in 3C. I enjoy 3C, and I've definitely seen inadvertent -- but still good -- caroms when the cue ball went an extra rail or two before making contact with the second ball.)

In bank pool, the shot must go as you call it -- *CLEAN* -- exact number of cushions, and no caroms off of another ball (even if the object ball goes into the pocket you called).JMHO, however. I enjoy *both* games, and in fact, all of the games on your list.

Good pool... I mean... poll! :-D
-Sean

I vote Banks by a long shot!

In 3C, you can just shoot hard at a ball and still somehow come up with a point.

In Banks, you need to call your pocket, the number of rails and it must go in clean!They are different types of games, played on different types tables of tables, but as far as scoring a point goes, Banks will involve less luck.

See the pattern? Only seen from the view of the OB. Hey guys let me remind you of something that you know very well but might not have considered in this particular question. In pocket games (all pocket games) the CB is at least as if not more important than the OB.

:wave3::wave2:

Many are just probably thinking to themselves “well in bank pool the ball & pocket has a stipulation; IT CAN’T contact another ball and that makes it less of a luck factor” I think what (many) people are not thinking about is the other types of luck that can happen. Notice that with all of these posts there is no mention of the CB; and the main emphasis is on the “clean” factor of the OB by all caps and symbols I have put those in red for ease for the reader but have made no other alterations.

 

[chevybob20]

There is only one call shot game on the list so this poll is a "Hanger". 3 ball on a box.:grin:

 

[PGHteacher]

I've seen a game of 3-c for $5,000 end with a shot that was meant to
RUN 5 rails....instead, he caught the short rail going into the corner and
it CHECKED 3 rails for the win....Jimmy Mataya was the shooter...

I've seen Dick Jaspers playing 3 rails (run-run-run) catch the long rail
going into the corner and made the billiard (run-check-check-check)

I have NEVER seen the cash won on a fluked bank.

Not a bad point in fact a good one; but IMHO (I haven’t tested it obviously) for every “fluke” point made in 3CB there are 100 “flukes” both good and bad that happen in a bank pool game;

-accidental break out of a cluster
-fluke CB carom off another ball to put the CB into a good spot for another bank
-lucky bump of an OB to an easy bank
-unlucky kiss/carom of teh CB to get corner hooked or on the end rails
-making a ball on the break (to stay at the table)
-playing a safety that sells out an easy shot

are just some of them; give me a week and I can double or triple this list as I said there just isn’t very much good or bad that can happen to you on a billiard table that is as bad or good as something that can happen to you on a pool table. So by the sheer number of “things that can happen” is where the chance factor in 3CB becomes the lowest. Sure if you just consider the OB and not the CB, take it as a single point/ball question or just the last point of an entire game sure I can see where you might come up with bank pool but this is IMHO a bigger question.

 

[sfleinen]

See the pattern? Only seen from the view of the OB. Hey guys let me remind you of something that you know very well but might not have considered in this particular question. In pocket games (all pocket games) the CB is at least as if not more important than the OB.

:wave3::wave2:

Many are just probably thinking to themselves “well in bank pool the ball & pocket has a stipulation; IT CAN’T contact another ball and that makes it less of a luck factor” I think what (many) people are not thinking about is the other types of luck that can happen. Notice that with all of these posts there is no mention of the CB; and the main emphasis is on the “clean” factor of the OB by all caps and symbols I have put those in red for ease for the reader but have made no other alterations.

Yes, but while we're in our "my way is right, and let me lynch a couple people in the public square to show you that I'm right" mode, let's also take into consideration that those folks have tried to demonstrate that bank pool eliminates the object ball from the luck equation. So, in bank pool, the luck factor is limited to only the break, and the cue ball. The other games in the poll (including 3C) have to deal with luck on the object ball that bank pool has already eliminated.

-Sean <-- uses his Ka-bar survival knife to cut the noose that PGHteacher placed around his neck

 

[AtLarge]

... in bank pool, the luck factor is limited to only the break, and the cue ball. ...

Sean, in post #6 I listed this as one of the ways in which bank pool involves luck: "how the balls are rearranged by intended or unintended collisions." I think that includes things beyond the break and the cue ball (although, of course, it starts with hitting the CB).

 

[sfleinen]

Sean, in post #6 I listed this as one of the ways in which bank pool involves luck: "how the balls are rearranged by intended or unintended collisions." I think that includes things beyond the break and the cue ball.

It sure does, but I was using a little strong license in my reply to PGHteacher to drive home a point. He tried to frame it as a "pattern of neglect" for the cue ball, when that was not what the posters he quoted were saying.

-Sean

 

[PGHteacher]

-Sean <-- uses his Ka-bar survival knife to cut the noose that PGHteacher placed around his neck

:rotflmao1::rotflmao1:

I already like you, seriously that’s wonderful. I usually put lots of IMHO’s, JM2C’s and JMO’s in my posts I just didn’t that time; just forgot.

Yes, but while we're in our "my way is right, and let me lynch a couple people in the public square to show you that I'm right" mode, let's also take into consideration that those folks have tried to demonstrate that bank pool eliminates the object ball from the luck equation. So, in bank pool, the luck factor is limited to only the break, and the cue ball. The other games in the poll (including 3C) have to deal with luck on the object ball that bank pool has already eliminated.

Well you can’t “eliminate” it in the true sense but that is another question all together. Think about what your saying (see underlined/bolded); objectively speaking if this was said to you wouldn’t you say “ONLY!”? If you say “no I wouldn’t” then I will concede and say ok you’re right.

 

[sfleinen]

:rotflmao1::rotflmao1:

I already like you, seriously that’s wonderful. I usually put lots of IMHO’s, JM2C’s and JMO’s in my posts I just didn’t that time; just forgot.

I'm glad you caught the <nudge, nudge> humorous intention with that.

Well you can’t “eliminate” it in the true sense but that is another question all together. Think about what your saying (see underlined/bolded); objectively speaking if this was said to you wouldn’t you say “ONLY!”? If you say “no I wouldn’t” then I will concede and say ok you’re right.

Again, just a little strong license, 's all. Of course it's not "only" limited to the break and the object ball, and I should've been more clear by saying something along the lines of, "for the most part, bank pool's luck is limited to..." etc.

One thing I think we all seem to agree on, is that 3C and bank pool are very close in this poll. I disagree that one pocket has a high degree of "luck limitation" -- and I *play* one pocket -- because I've seen all matters of crazy lucky things happen with both the object balls and the cue ball. Just because 14.1 and one pocket have "defensive" breaks doesn't mean those games have implemented a "luck limiter" as one poster seemed to frame it. Even on that defensive break, I've seen some crazy stuff happen.

-Sean

 

[PGHteacher]

It sure does, but I was using a little strong license in my reply to PGHteacher to drive home a point. He tried to frame it as a "pattern of neglect" for the cue ball, when that was not what the posters he quoted were saying.

-Sean

Actually I do consider it a “pattern of neglect” because once you ask someone who makes the statement “the ball has to go in CLEAN that eliminates all the luck involved” you go ahead and ask them “well what about the CB and the other OB’s on the table?” I am willing to entertain any logical answers to that but so far haven’t seen one. I don’t mean to be malicious, nah-nah-na-nah-nah, obtuse, snobbish or the like (even if it comes off that way) I really want to know how do you answer that question?

 

[PGHteacher]

Quite frankly I wish that 3CB was not part of this poll/question because then it would be easy to answer (BTW I DO respect everyone’s opinion on this subject). I don’t think that games played on a pocket table and billiards table are really comparable in the larger sense. Sure for short games, at certain points in the game etc.. etc.. they are; but once you throw in what can happen with a CB (dedicated CB) as far as the interaction with the other OB’s, the pockets and the points of the pockets the 2 become apples and oranges. And it is JMO that the element of chance is lower on a billiard table (if you factor in everything during the course of an entire game).

Because of the “luck factor” I would prefer to play almost any other game other than 8ball & 9ball; especially against a weaker opponent. I group them together because in my mom’s time (Cora Fischer/Libby national collegiate 14.1 champion 1949). They were for people that didn’t “really” know how to play pool or just wanted to gamble small stakes. FTR I suck at 3CB worse than I do pool, but I do understand both I have played lots of 3CB (although I know 100x more about pool).

The debate in and of itself is insightful, cheers all but
uttahere:

 

[dr9ball]

When we worry about "Luck" we deny our responsibility to out play our opponent. Everyone gets a good and bad roll in all games from time to time. If you get to shoot and you loose, it is your fault for not playing better, especially over the long haul. JMHO. Out perform the opposition by out practicing, playing smarter, gaining knowledge and never giving up nor making excuses. Easy to say, tough to do and yet I believe it is the secret to success.