Roy Steffensen
Verified Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2007
- Messages
- 129
During the final of the one-pocket tournament here in Norway, I played against a seasoned player who loves one-pocket. I had never played him before, but knew he plays the game, and I knew that he knows many of the moves.
When I was up 2-1 and we both needed 4 balls in the next rack, he wanted to make it an uptable game. On all his oppurtunities he sent a ball/balls uptable, and the cueball to the shortrail downtable.
On most of my shots I tried to either bank a ball in the direction of my pocket, or pocket a ball in the 4 neutral pockets to get the ball spotted, and I always placed the cueball either frozen (or as close as possible) to the longrail or the shortrail uptable.
It's hard to explain a game, and not single shots, but I felt that my strategy was good. I was always making him do defensive shots moving balls away from my pocket, and when it was my time shooting I could just move balls back there, and maybe get a lucky roll and make the ball.
I ended up winning that game, because in the end he left me just too many chances to bank (1, 2 or 3-rails) balls.
He said afterwards that in the last game he felt that his strategy of trying to make it an uptable match was correct, and he said I attacked too much. As I said in the beginning, this is a guy I know plays the game a lot, and he knows moves and strategies, so I thought it over, but I still felt that my strategy was better than his. (When I say he is good, he is not good compared to American standard. He is a 100-ball runner in 14-1, but in this game we are both still beginners. We only play against beginners, so no one to learn from)
I also noticed in the last game that he chose to play uptable even if he had a low percentage bank to his pocket.
I would most likely have gone for the low percentage bank, because that would force my opponent to move that ball away if I missed, instead of keep attacking.
So, my purpose of this thread is that I would like some ideas/comments about different strategies. I like to be an attackive player, because I look at it as a great way of defending. Might call it "Attacking defense". If I can force my opponent not to do an attacking shot, plus move a ball to my corner, I will not lose.
After reading your inputs on the Efren-Corey thread, I realize that I am probably too attacking compared to the book. If any of you have any good examples of layouts where you can choose to play either defense or attack, I would like to see and discuss them.
Thanks in advance.
When I was up 2-1 and we both needed 4 balls in the next rack, he wanted to make it an uptable game. On all his oppurtunities he sent a ball/balls uptable, and the cueball to the shortrail downtable.
On most of my shots I tried to either bank a ball in the direction of my pocket, or pocket a ball in the 4 neutral pockets to get the ball spotted, and I always placed the cueball either frozen (or as close as possible) to the longrail or the shortrail uptable.
It's hard to explain a game, and not single shots, but I felt that my strategy was good. I was always making him do defensive shots moving balls away from my pocket, and when it was my time shooting I could just move balls back there, and maybe get a lucky roll and make the ball.
I ended up winning that game, because in the end he left me just too many chances to bank (1, 2 or 3-rails) balls.
He said afterwards that in the last game he felt that his strategy of trying to make it an uptable match was correct, and he said I attacked too much. As I said in the beginning, this is a guy I know plays the game a lot, and he knows moves and strategies, so I thought it over, but I still felt that my strategy was better than his. (When I say he is good, he is not good compared to American standard. He is a 100-ball runner in 14-1, but in this game we are both still beginners. We only play against beginners, so no one to learn from)
I also noticed in the last game that he chose to play uptable even if he had a low percentage bank to his pocket.
I would most likely have gone for the low percentage bank, because that would force my opponent to move that ball away if I missed, instead of keep attacking.
So, my purpose of this thread is that I would like some ideas/comments about different strategies. I like to be an attackive player, because I look at it as a great way of defending. Might call it "Attacking defense". If I can force my opponent not to do an attacking shot, plus move a ball to my corner, I will not lose.
After reading your inputs on the Efren-Corey thread, I realize that I am probably too attacking compared to the book. If any of you have any good examples of layouts where you can choose to play either defense or attack, I would like to see and discuss them.
Thanks in advance.
Last edited: