World Summit Results - Saturday

[Williebetmore]

Sometimes, the safety is the best percentage. I know where you're coming from, though. It's always exasperating when you play a safety with opponent on the hill and never see the table again. Been there, done that.

SJM,
Truer words were never spoken. You must consider the offensive skills of your opponent when deciding on your safety. Last week I was playing straight pool against a professional player (our mutual aquaintance), I had a large lead (I am the recipient of a large spot), and we were exchanging safeties below the rack. I had a somewhat tough cut on a ball even with the bottom of the pack (about 1 diamond from the long rail). Instead of shooting it, I chose to play a safety, leaving my opponent on the bottom rail with an even tougher cut. My opponent however, cut the ball IN THE SIDE (table with brutally tight pockets) - I thought it would be impossible to cut it in the far corner, much less the side. That was my last chance at the table - I should have shot it.

 

[Rich R.]

And yes, there is a reason that I don't have coverage. Hopefully it won't happen in the future. Sorry guys.

Mike, would you like to expound on this?

Is there a problem between you and the UPA, or was there just a lagistics problem with getting the necessary information?

On the other hand, if you do not want to comment further, I understand and I'm sorry for asking.

 

[piglit]

It would be an unwise decision to play to bank the 7, even if you had BIH the shot before. You'd have to be well below the side pocket to bank it back- crossing it over would tough too- you'd lose control of CB either way.

As stated earlier, the execution of the safe was poor AND Schmidt did make a hell of an out.

And one more item...you don't want to go around 2nd guessing JJ. You'll end up broke!!

-pigo

 

[Williebetmore]

And one more item...you don't want to go around 2nd guessing JJ. You'll end up broke!!

-pigo

Piglit,
You are so right. Even if the safety wasn't perfect, you have to feel fairly good about the result. No one is going to runout from there without a lot of luck and skill. I would have bet any amount Schmidt would not get out from there. Maybe we shouldn't go around betting against him either.

 

[Rod]

Piglit,
You are so right. Even if the safety wasn't perfect, you have to feel fairly good about the result. No one is going to runout from there without a lot of luck and skill. I would have bet any amount Schmidt would not get out from there. Maybe we shouldn't go around betting against him either.

Jeez I don't play these guys speed and even I would not feel good about that safety playing someone my speed. He didn't have to run out granted but by making the ball he is still at the table. You just never know and JJ gave Schmidt an opening. If that 5 ball is two or three inches down JJ has played a very good safety.

My thought on JJ's runout would be shoot the 5, leave a good angle on the 6 to play position about a balls width or so off the rail. From there 7 to the corner, cut in the 8 and games over. I don't know why he didn't want to shoot the 7, there's no scratch, just aim well. It's water under the bridge now.

Rod

 

[Williebetmore]

Jeez I don't play these guys speed and even I would not feel good about that safety playing someone my speed.
Rod

Rod,
Point well taken. I misspoke. I meant I would feel good about getting to the table again (of course I would have been wrong yet again). I also assumed that the 7 was a scratch in the side shooting toward the corner pocket.

I did set up the balls and try the safety (the runout took me a bunch of tries making the six), and it seems in retrospect easiest to just freeze the cue ball behind the 9 if you don't care about the position of the 7 (if it's makeable in the corner). Getting from the 6 to the 7 in the corner is not possible/easy from a lot of places after the 5 is made.

P.S. - the exact position of the balls is somewhat important. I generally assume that these guys know what they are doing (hard personal experience), and the position may have been a little different than we think.

 

[Rod]

Yep the position of balls is everything, I'm just going by the set up we see. Scratch on the 7 wasn't part of the program, obviously the 5 didn't go. Also i'm sure JJ knew it would'nt or he would not have hid the c/b not to mention just playing the 5 carom off the 7.

With BIH on the 5 it's not difficult to leave a good angle on the 6 to play position on the 7. If one errors a little just make sure the angle is a little long rather than short. A short angle means leaving whitey closer to the 7 with perfect speed. A longer angle is a bit farther away from the 7 but speed isn't as critical.

All that being said he must have been trying to control two balls when the emphasis probably should have been on the c/b. I think JJ shoots way to strong to have passed up this run out. Funny things happen though.

Rod

 

[Williebetmore]

I think JJ shoots way to strong to have passed up this run out. Funny things happen though.

Rod

I think you probably hit on the correct answer - it may have been a little tougher layout than it looked. On the other hand I've noticed that at the end of a tight match, shots look much tougher than they are, and the judgement becomes a little suspect. There is a funny Accu-Stats video that includes tons of really bad shots and crazy decisions at hill - hill, by players that are otherwise champions.

 

[sjm]

I'm pleased to see that I'm not the only one that was truly fascinated by this position. It isn't everyday that Jeremy Jones will be so perplexed by a position involving ball-in-hand on the five ball that he'll spend five minutes deciding what to do. What it teaches all of us on the forum is how tough some of the decision over the green felt really are.

When two wonderful players like Schmidt and Jones provided such a memorable finish to a great match, it made me feel very lucky to have been there, and I think I'll remember that rack for a long time.

Bravo to all of you who helped to analyze this very tricky position, and congratulations on a job well done.

 

[Williebetmore]

Bravo to all of you who helped to analyze this very tricky position, and congratulations on a job well done.

SJM,
Not so fast, what is your opinion on the difficulty of running out with ball in hand on the 5 (since Schmidt seemed to have succeeded even when confronted with a kick shot to start)? What do you think Schmidt's chances were of running out after pocketing the 5 (my percentage success seems to be quite low when I set up the balls - perhaps I should not gamble with John)?

 

[sjm]

SJM,
Not so fast, what is your opinion on the difficulty of running out with ball in hand on the 5 (since Schmidt seemed to have succeeded even when confronted with a kick shot to start)? What do you think Schmidt's chances were of running out after pocketing the 5 (my percentage success seems to be quite low when I set up the balls - perhaps I should not gamble with John)?

Well, Willie, barring the double kiss that gave Schmidt shape on the six otherwise unattainable, he can only get shape off the kick in of the five if he kicks at it hard. Otherwise, he ends up with a bank or safe on the six ball. I doubt John is much better than one out of three to get out even if he kicks the five in. But, you have to factor in that if he kicks the five in, he has control of the table, and that, even if he has to play safe on the six, it's probably his rack.

 

[cardiac kid]

There is a funny Accu-Stats video that includes tons of really bad shots and crazy decisions at hill - hill, by players that are otherwise champions.

Hi Willie,

Your mention of the "bloopers" disc is the second of the week. I was speaking with Guido Orlandi, the cue maker and repair guy. He suggested that I buy the same disc! Thanks for the reminder.

 

[Rod]

Well for what it's worth this is the way I see this runout. The key shot here is not really the 7 it's position from the 5 to 6 to leave a good angle to the 7. That's where the avg person fails, they miss the angle so bad, getting to the 7 can be very difficult and still have a decent shot. Come into the angle from the end rail as opposed to comming across off the long rail. A, B, C is the appx cueball position. Even if the c/b touches the point shooting at the 7 it's still good. I don't know about everyone else but I'm going for this out. Of course it won't be in a major championship. LOL

Someone mentioned JJ taking 5 minutes to shoot. Well he takes a long time anyway, I think he might have out thought himself.

OOPS forgot the wei diagram --- ha ha ha

START(
%EG4J4%Fk5Z7%G]7D0%HN4M6%II4D6%PK2L7%QV9T4%RR5D3%S]2E1%UW2T9
%VC6M1%WD4L7%XG6K5%YU7D2%Zj7[4%]S8D7%^U2C5%eB4a2
)END

Rod

 

[malaguista]

The referee finally stepped in and put Corey on notice that if three balls don't pass the middle of the table on the break (sunk balls count as a ball), Earl would get ball in hand.

Where did that rule come from or was it invented just for this tournament?

 

[TheOne]

I know this was hill hill and in a big comp but unless the 7 was much nearer the middle pocket this was not a difficult run out for a pro. I can only conclude that her bottled it and lost some faith in his own ability.

IMO Tony Drago would have thought for about 2 seconds before smashing all of these balls in. I alos think that a top pro with ball in hand would run out in this position atleast 8 out of 10 times.

As I said it was either the pressure or the balls where not set up right.

Just my thoughts

 

[sjm]

I know this was hill hill and in a big comp but unless the 7 was much nearer the middle pocket this was not a difficult run out for a pro. I can only conclude that her bottled it and lost some faith in his own ability.

IMO Tony Drago would have thought for about 2 seconds before smashing all of these balls in. I alos think that a top pro with ball in hand would run out in this position atleast 8 out of 10 times.

As I said it was either the pressure or the balls where not set up right.

Just my thoughts

Trust me, The One, this was the position, and as you sense, it was possible to make the seven in the corner if you found a way to get really good on it. The problem was that the frozen-to-the-rail six offered very poor prospects to get good on the seven in the corner, and the defense available off of the seven would be minimal if that shape were missed. Access to the bank shot on the seven in the side was far greater. The runout was difficult, and I doubt any pro, other than Drago if your assertion is correct, would do anything before studying the options for a while. As I've already noted, I really thought JJ would go for this runout, but the choice he made was reasonable, and had he executed his safety better, he'd have surely prevailed in this rack. First and foremost,The One, thanks for your insights.

 

[cardiac kid]

Where did that rule come from or was it invented just for this tournament?

Good Morning,

The rule you question was instituted a few years ago when Corey decided to experiment with very slow speed "soft" breaks in nine ball. If you've had ever watched him practice, he would break for hours. Inspected every rack. Chose an angle to break from. Broke the balls only hard enough to drive three or four balls to one of the top corners. In most cases, the balls would carom off each other and drive one of them into the pocket. The cue ball was in the center of the table. The rack was open to run. Some here questioned why he suddenly stopped dominating. My guess was the break rule change.

 

[JustPlay]

Good Morning,

The rule you question was instituted a few years ago when Corey decided to experiment with very slow speed "soft" breaks in nine ball. If you've had ever watched him practice, he would break for hours. Inspected every rack. Chose an angle to break from. Broke the balls only hard enough to drive three or four balls to one of the top corners. In most cases, the balls would carom off each other and drive one of them into the pocket. The cue ball was in the center of the table. The rack was open to run. Some here questioned why he suddenly stopped dominating. My guess was the break rule change.

Actually, that rule was implemented on the spot, it had to be. In 2001 when Corey won the US 9-ball open, he used the soft break only because the 9 ball was racked on the spot where the 1-ball would go. Every time the balls are racked like this at a tournament, Corey uses the soft break and is successful at it and then other players complain about it when he runs out on them. When the 1-ball is racked on the spot, the soft break is useless. And no other players complain. The rule is BS and is aimed at Corey only. For some reason, other players cannot seem to bring themselves to execute a soft break. So they just complain to the tournament director at each tournament.

 

[TheOne]

Trust me, The One, this was the position, and as you sense, it was possible to make the seven in the corner if you found a way to get really good on it. The problem was that the frozen-to-the-rail six offered very poor prospects to get good on the seven in the corner, and the defense available off of the seven would be minimal if that shape were missed. Access to the bank shot on the seven in the side was far greater. The runout was difficult, and I doubt any pro, other than Drago if your assertion is correct, would do anything before studying the options for a while. As I've already noted, I really thought JJ would go for this runout, but the choice he made was reasonable, and had he executed his safety better, he'd have surely prevailed in this rack. First and foremost,The One, thanks for your insights.

No problem with him taking time to study it at hill hill but sometimes that makes the problem seem worse than it is. But I bet you he wouldn't have played the safety in practice. I agree that it would have been hard to play a good safe if he really screwed up position on the seven but really with ball in hand on the 5 I can't see how he couldn't get the right position on the 6?

How manyt times do you see a guy play safe with victory in sight just to "make sure" and then they don't get back to the table. Anything can happen when you allow your opponent back to the table. Knowing when to "seize the moment"and when to play safe is one of the big differences between the very good players and the "great" players.

Great thread though, a bit more interesting than usual. It wouldn't be a bad idea to pick a few classic moments from past matches and aybe get feedback before revealing what actually happened - that would be fun LOL!

 

[Kerry Impson]

The idea that one should always "go down shooting" is one of pool's greatest myths.

You're right; however, I didn't make myself clear - what I should have said was, "All things being equal, it's better to lose shooting," meaning that if the difficulty of the safety attempt is equal to the difficulty of the run-out, I believe it's better to go for the run-out. I didn't mean to attempt a crazy, low-percentage run-out when there's a simple, effective safety available. I hope that clarifies things a little.