to some 500 is big money ..... i could see doin it for good practice
Why Play $500 Or Less Ahead Sets?
- Thread starter Johnnyt
- Start date
Concerning playing races, now it's very common here in the Valley that if you're in a hill-hill match, you discuss a "re-set" and just turn the score back to zero and start the race over. (I don't like doing it myself because I like the excitement of hill-hill). I would say that happens more often than not but I don't know if it's common anywhere else.
Another anomaly is in an ahead match, offering a cash out to an opponent. Say you're down 8 in a 10 ahead, you're opponent might offer to cash out for half.
Why? Probably the same reason some people drive Chevys and some drive Hondas or VW or Buicks. Personal choice.
Everyone like different things.
I personally don't understand how anyone could play 50 games of 9 ball PERIOD without wanting to commit suicide after the first 5 games. So it boils down to what you like.
Everyone like different things.
I personally don't understand how anyone could play 50 games of 9 ball PERIOD without wanting to commit suicide after the first 5 games. So it boils down to what you like.
If I played for $500 and it took all day long, and somehow ended up stuck with a whopping $200 in table time, I still made more in a day than some guys make in a week.
I guess if it takes 2 days then the math doesn't work out, but most players don't set up games that are supposed to take 2 days. I dunno, for a lot of people it isn't really about the money anyway.
I guess if it takes 2 days then the math doesn't work out, but most players don't set up games that are supposed to take 2 days. I dunno, for a lot of people it isn't really about the money anyway.
Pool is not about the money for me, which is a good thing, as $500 is LOOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGG money for me these days, sad to say!!!
Gone are the free-wheeling days of my early 20's in which I would play $200 per roll at the dice table or wager high dollers at the pool room. I do miss staking my buddy Mark Tullis from Alaska though. Those were some good times. Nowadays, between home improvement projects, retirement contributions, sh$t my wife likes to buy, and just plain living expenses, I've got little to nothing left over to fire at pool.
Ah well, I like my life and I love the game, so I guess it's all good.
edit: RIP Mark. FYI, Mark was a helluva player, sporting a high run in 14.1 of 210. I miss ya' buddy...
I find it comical that people complain that $500 ahead is not enough money and you are considered nitty if you don't play for more. Even if the match took 10 hrs that equates to $50 an hr. Say net $450 after table time. That comes out to about $45/hr tax free or approx $65/hr taxed or over $133,000 a yr. I bet 99% of members here don't make that much money but cry about you not betting enough or it not being worth their time when they probably don't net $10 an hr or are living off Obama's tit.
Pool is not about the money for me, which is a good thing, as $500 is LOOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGG money for me these days, sad to say!!!
Gone are the free-wheeling days of my early 20's in which I would play $200 per roll at the dice table or wager high dollers at the pool room. I do miss staking my buddy Mark Tullis from Alaska though. Those were some good times. Nowadays, between home improvement projects, retirement contributions, sh$t my wife likes to buy, and just plain living expenses, I've got little to nothing left over to fire at pool.
Ah well, I like my life and I love the game, so I guess it's all good.
edit: RIP Mark. FYI, Mark was a helluva player, sporting a high run in 14.1 of 210. I miss ya' buddy...
I remember Peter Mark Tullis. Used to come down to Reno and play in our tournaments there. Did pretty well a few times as I recall.
I like to use ahead sets to double as a "lock up" amount. This has been previously mentioned, but there is another extremely valuable aspect. Because in theory it is going to be a longer set, I can give more "weight", especially game weight.
Example: If you spot someone 2 games in a race to 7 you cannot really ofset that spot. If they get a couple of short-racks then it is going to be doubly hard to win the set. However if I spot 2 games in 7-ahead, the weight is very negligible but sounds appealing to many.
On the contrary if I were taking a shot at a player I thought had the advantage... I would never want to get into an ahead race, nor would I want a game spot in such a race for the reason I just mentioned.
Sometimes getting the "fish" into the game is the beginning. Some may quit after one set but if they want to gamble, there is always the option of changing the game! They were going to quit pretty quickly if they quit after one ahead set anyhow.
Example: If you spot someone 2 games in a race to 7 you cannot really ofset that spot. If they get a couple of short-racks then it is going to be doubly hard to win the set. However if I spot 2 games in 7-ahead, the weight is very negligible but sounds appealing to many.
On the contrary if I were taking a shot at a player I thought had the advantage... I would never want to get into an ahead race, nor would I want a game spot in such a race for the reason I just mentioned.
Sometimes getting the "fish" into the game is the beginning. Some may quit after one set but if they want to gamble, there is always the option of changing the game! They were going to quit pretty quickly if they quit after one ahead set anyhow.
For me, playing by the game or a short race was just a way to gage my opponents game to mine. Once I had a good read on his game and knew what he needed as far as a spot goes, then I needed to figure out a way to get him into an ahead type of set, freeze out, play until someone wins.
Once you get him into an ahead set and you know what spot you can give you can stay away from that spot for at least a few sets. The idea is that you can stall and put the hammer down anytime you want. Losing a set now and then wasn't a bad idea because it would give you the opportunity to raise the bet. I never had any problem playing sets that lasted five or six hours or even longer, because if I wasn't playing, I probably would be sitting and watching. I could have won many of those sets quickly if I had wanted to. I played ahead sets because most of them were a lock and you could maximize your winnings. Of course these are road tactics, playing at home, short races or by the game were ok for me.
If you could have him thinking after each set that he lost because he didn't perform like he should have, and not that you just flat out beat him he'll most likely play another.
Of course in my time $500 was quite a bit and too much to play for in a short type of race. It was pretty difficult to try to keep it close if he caught a little bit of a run or you dogged it for a couple of games.
Playing by the game was a bit risky because if you layed down a bit he might quit before you got even. Back in those days it was always expected that you would get stiffed for the last game. Kind of like an unwritten rule. If I had to play a stranger by the game for a fair amount I would have both of us post the last game over the light before we started playing. We would pay after each game and if it ever got to the point that after he racked and wasn't making any movement to pay for the last game then you knew he was empty and then you simply pulled the last game off the light.
Once you get him into an ahead set and you know what spot you can give you can stay away from that spot for at least a few sets. The idea is that you can stall and put the hammer down anytime you want. Losing a set now and then wasn't a bad idea because it would give you the opportunity to raise the bet. I never had any problem playing sets that lasted five or six hours or even longer, because if I wasn't playing, I probably would be sitting and watching. I could have won many of those sets quickly if I had wanted to. I played ahead sets because most of them were a lock and you could maximize your winnings. Of course these are road tactics, playing at home, short races or by the game were ok for me.
If you could have him thinking after each set that he lost because he didn't perform like he should have, and not that you just flat out beat him he'll most likely play another.
Of course in my time $500 was quite a bit and too much to play for in a short type of race. It was pretty difficult to try to keep it close if he caught a little bit of a run or you dogged it for a couple of games.
Playing by the game was a bit risky because if you layed down a bit he might quit before you got even. Back in those days it was always expected that you would get stiffed for the last game. Kind of like an unwritten rule. If I had to play a stranger by the game for a fair amount I would have both of us post the last game over the light before we started playing. We would pay after each game and if it ever got to the point that after he racked and wasn't making any movement to pay for the last game then you knew he was empty and then you simply pulled the last game off the light.
Last edited: