How Many Shots To Get Out Of Break?

[tylerdurden]

Me: we get these opinions in pool because good players are total wasters
Duck: <--'Sez who ?

Perhaps that was not my finest moment, or choice of words, but says the guy that actually watched (and heard) players winnings add up to at least a million dollars, and having zilch to show for it.

Question in the midst of all this: what would you guys estimate the take home winnings from Say Mcready or Ronnie were in GAMES BEING backed. So forget their losers (where i assume they didn't pay), and add up all their % of matchups won. A million minimum, but i'm betting it is a LOT more, right? I'd be curious to hear people's answers.

You know I like to do this, but I'll just sum up Duck's rather unbelievable assertions:

1) Practice isn't important in pool
2) Stats mean nothing and only clutter your mind if you gamble on pool


Vegas, take note.... spend no time with pesky stats on the making of the odds, just go out and get drunk, rely on no information and watch the money roll in lol.

Is it starting to become clear why pool players have no money or what??

 

[androd]

Me: we get these opinions in pool because good players are total wasters
Duck: <--'Sez who ?

Perhaps that was not my finest moment, or choice of words, but says the guy that actually watched (and heard) players winnings add up to at least a million dollars, and having zilch to show for it.

Question in the midst of all this: what would you guys estimate the take home winnings from Say Mcready or Ronnie were in GAMES BEING backed. So forget their losers (where i assume they didn't pay), and add up all their % of matchups won. A million minimum, but i'm betting it is a LOT more, right? I'd be curious to hear people's answers.

You know I like to do this, but I'll just sum up Duck's rather unbelievable assertions:

1) Practice isn't important in pool
2) Stats mean nothing and only clutter your mind if you gamble on pool


Vegas, take note.... spend no time with pesky stats on the making of the odds, just go out and get drunk, rely on no information and watch the money roll in lol.

Is is starting to become clear why pool players have no money or what??

I was playing BlackJack in Vegas. I went in the Horseshoe about 4:30 AM. There was a young guy in a leather jacket and a well dressed Mexican with his paramour. the kid was betting 2/3 and 4 hundred a hand.
The couple were betting $2.00 a hand.
The kid hit a bad streak and lost his money. He called the pit boss over and bit him for some cash and left. I heard his bike start.
The Mexican gentleman said " he came in and cashed his payroll check for 200 dollars and some change, and got winner about $4000 dollars and lost it all back. He said I'd never do that.
" I said "no you'd have to lose 2000 hands at 2.00 a whack"
The same thing that make people lose a lot of money makes them win more than most people in the 1st place.
Rod.
P.S. Most of us live in a different mind set than people who'll really gamble, so we shouldn't really knock what we don't understand.

 

[Cowboy Dennis]

You know I like to do this, but I'll just sum up Duck's rather unbelievable assertions:

1) Practice isn't important in pool

TD,

I've always believed in practicing a lot but then I love hitting balls around on a pool table and that's always been my 1st priority or love when going to a pool room. Playing for money has always been second to that and that's why I still love to play.

Some guys are wired differently or play for other reasons. Cornbread almost never hit a ball when not in action and it didn't seem to bother him any. Some guys are like that.

I think practice is very important but I've never had the tremendous natural physical talent that these guys have and I needed the practice.

Did you ever see AI's rant on "practice". I always said that if AI was "the answer" then it was a dumb question.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d29VsG35DQM[/ame]


Dennis

 

[Cary]

Me: we get these opinions in pool because good players are total wasters
Duck: <--'Sez who ?

Perhaps that was not my finest moment, or choice of words, but says the guy that actually watched (and heard) players winnings add up to at least a million dollars, and having zilch to show for it.

Question in the midst of all this: what would you guys estimate the take home winnings from Say Mcready or Ronnie were in GAMES BEING backed. So forget their losers (where i assume they didn't pay), and add up all their % of matchups won. A million minimum, but i'm betting it is a LOT more, right? I'd be curious to hear people's answers.

You know I like to do this, but I'll just sum up Duck's rather unbelievable assertions:

1) Practice isn't important in pool
2) Stats mean nothing and only clutter your mind if you gamble on pool


Vegas, take note.... spend no time with pesky stats on the making of the odds, just go out and get drunk, rely on no information and watch the money roll in lol.

Is it starting to become clear why pool players have no money or what??

Tyler, how much did you net off of pool last year?

 

[tylerdurden]

I was playing BlackJack in Vegas. I went in the Horseshoe about 4:30 AM. There was a young guy in a leather jacket and a well dressed Mexican with his paramour. the kid was betting 2/3 and 4 hundred a hand.
The couple were betting $2.00 a hand.
The kid hit a bad streak and lost his money. He called the pit boss over and bit him for some cash and left. I heard his bike start.
The Mexican gentleman said " he came in and cashed his payroll check for 200 dollars and some change, and got winner about $4000 dollars and lost it all back. He said I'd never do that.
" I said "no you'd have to lose 2000 hands at 2.00 a whack"
The same thing that make people lose a lot of money makes them win more than most people in the 1st place.
Rod.
P.S. Most of us live in a different mind set than people who'll really gamble, so we shouldn't really knock what we don't understand.

I'm not even sure what your point is, please excuse me. Do you feel that the use of statistics will harm a gambler? That was the discussion.

 

[tylerdurden]

TD,

I've always believed in practicing a lot but then I love hitting balls around on a pool table and that's always been my 1st priority or love when going to a pool room. Playing for money has always been second to that and that's why I still love to play.

Some guys are wired differently or play for other reasons. Cornbread almost never hit a ball when not in action and it didn't seem to bother him any. Some guys are like that.

I think practice is very important but I've never had the tremendous natural physical talent that these guys have and I needed the practice.

Did you ever see AI's rant on "practice". I always said that if AI was "the answer" then it was a dumb question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d29VsG35DQM


Dennis

That is a good one.

 

[tylerdurden]

Tyler, how much did you net off of pool last year?

I don't play anymore, I did used to play for a "living" about 4 years ago and the 5 or so years prior to that. Not so bad of a life, a lot of cheap vacations and fun stuff in there, can't complain. I'll pm you the number if you'd like, not sure what bearing it has on anything.

It is interesting how this all ties in though. My point is that stats are so good at looking past all the bs, that is what they are. Much of the bs put in front of us over the years is the "fortunes" of money won by keith, or whoever. But look at the actual stats and ALL his gambling endeavors (include say the track) and I guarantee you will see a much different story. The stats will objectively tell the truth. There is way too much egoism in pool, who plays the best etc. Who cares! Who makes the most money! Why do we deny that is the only question?? And, if you want my opinion, the answer is probably a guy who is grinding it out and not taking too many chances... but there are people more qualified to answer that than me.

There is always a bottom line that stats will give, and our perceptions are a lot different.

I don't know how we even got here, my only real point is that you can make a lot more money in pool intelligently using stats. In the very saying of "playing the percentages" lies statistics. Look at it this way... you want to improve your game, so you put some time into it. Maybe you improve 1%. Great, I have nothing against that of course. But, if you know the actual numbers about something you are about to bet on, that is much more potent and able to pay off than this meager 1%, right?

Interestingly, the movie I recommended, moneyball, starts off with a quote by Micky Mantle that goes "it's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you have been playing all your life".

 

[SJDinPHX]

Cont. of my post #56...Response to TD post #50 !

Cont. of my post #56...Response to TD post #50 !

i respect duck to no end and he has no respect for me, lol. in short, ill admit to ducks "corretedness" in the long run, but when you start saying things like practice aint important, and stats dont matter when gambling, you're wrong. sorry. i'll add this as a ps, NOT that this PROVEs me correct or anything...<---WTF ??????
TD

Tyler...I DO respect you, for a being a tenatious detractor, to just about every point I try to make...We appear to have a HUGE generation gap, as is visible by your taste in music, and your very limited time, (your words) actually involved in the game of pool..However, we do have a very similar appreciation, for the female anatomy..(1 outta 3 ain't bad)

I'm sure it has not gone unnoticed, (at least by us) that you have spent many, many, pages of reponses in this thread, trying to PROVE yourself right...to some pretty good minds on the forum...Most with MUCH more life experience than you..(Just like my new hero, 'Allen Iverson' for instance )

However, in all your, anti-Duck/pro-Tyler musings,.. you have done the same thing you did, in your "anti-smoking" thread...And, you are facing a lot of adversity, (note; "STAT"..97.0355%) or anti-Tyler viewpoints, because of it...Your "stat" was even worse, in the "anti-smoking" thread !

This is not due to your 'lack' of intelligence..(I think your IQ is much higher than A.I.)...but rather due to your failure to slow down, and absorb what I'm saying....For instance, in the anti- smoking thread, I was NOT defending smoking...I was defending my RIGHT to smoke...Big difference, as you soon found out...You had guy's who hate smoking, as much as YOU do, jumping all over you, defending ME !..Did that smart a little ? You should have learned SOMETHING from that experience !

You are headed down that same path here, on this subject...I am not defending, "NOT PRACTICING", many people NEED it, (guy's like 'Cowboy Denise) many don't..(guy's like Cornbread, RA, etc) Who would you rather play like ? .. I am also NOT saying 'stats' are not important, if you are opening a Vegas casino, (or even a Donut shop).. I am saying, that the value of keeping track of YOUR 'ghost ball runs' is a total waste of time, unless thats all you ever wager on..(Ask the book in Ceasar's how much 'stats' meant, in the '92 pool match with Hall and LeBron,...or the 2nd Clay (Ali)-Liston fight... But thats OK, they still keep 'stats' in boxing too..(LOL LMFAO)

You seem to like hypotheticals, Let me pose one...RA and Keith, are getting ready to play a set, with RA giving Keith 9/6 and the break. You are considering a huge wager, taking Keith..You are armed with the 'statistic' that they played that way, just last month, and Keith won a gazillion $$$$...The thing you don't know, is (A) Every game went down to the last ball..(B) One, or both was dead drunk..(very likely)..Or,(C) They were doing business, then or now !..(very far fetched, but still possible )

That is the point I am trying to make about the value of STATISTIC'S in pool..When compared to almost ANYTHING else, (except maybe BOXING ! )

Wise Ole Duck <--Another successful high-jack. of one of Denise's 'going nowhere' idiotic threads..Nice [sic] question though, RBL.. (start another one...No one has more free time than me n' Tyler...:lol

PS..Tyler, as your pennance for arguing semantic's with the poor old Duck..Let me sentence you, to re-read every post, in this entire thread, and the smoking thread, (they are 87.0056% your posts anyway) ..Please do this BEFORE you apologize..Thank You !

PIECE OFFERING !--Heres an interesting "STAT"; 99.978% of men, love Jessica. (incl. gays)
View attachment 7665

 

[vapros]

How many of you combatants are aware that 64.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot? :heh

 

[lll]

there is a saying that goes something like this
after you win
think how much you lost if you would have bet higher!!!
dont know where this fits in the conversation but i thought id throw the concept out there

 

[tylerdurden]

THE PREDICTIVE POWER OF STATISTICAL DATA IN THE WORLD OF POOL AND BILLIARDS: AN ANOMOLY

By Broke McDuck et. al. 2013
University of Lesser "knowledge"

Abstract: we analyzed 50 pool players in trying to ascertain if statistical knowledge of their opponents would increase or decrease their winning percentage in their financial interactions with other players. 25 players were given detailed statistical analyses of all 50 players, and the other 25 given no data. Remarkably, we found that the 25 players given no data came out ahead in their financial interactions with other players. This is in direct contrast to every other sport in the history of the world, where the greater the statistical analyses attained, the greater will be the predictive power to the user. We feel that this anomalous result can be explained by the pool player’s lack of understanding of the data, and sheer need to sit and drink beer and not have unwanted knowledge cluttering their minds. In essence, even though a player had the ability to know he was a 65% loser in a game, he would just go ahead and play anyway, without regard for the data.

Preview of our current research: “How college can clutter your mind”. Our initial data indicate that knowledge imparted to students in college tends to clutter the mind and make it impossible for the student to process the most basic of tasks. As it is turning out, the pen is NOT mightier than the sword folks.

 

[tylerdurden]

Well, in all seriousness, we don't ask the right questions: ie who won the most money.

Keith could win 100k in the afternoon by running 6 and out in an 8 ahead set, lose 50k in the evening, and then 50k at the track and sleep in the gutter. There could be another guy for that given one day who played a 200 dollar set and player good consistent pool, and went home with about 200. Who wins? Easy, the guy that went home with the most. The stat does not lie; yet we all think keith was the big "winner" and amazing player. You may say, well, the next day keith has the ability to come out 100k WINNER again, the other guy doesn't. That's true, but in the long run, the guy grinding it is the only winner. Keith will be near even. Since it comes down to a profession of "professional gambling", you have to take all the bets into account, not just the bets on pool. So, admire who you want, but the stats would tell a different story about who is really great I bet. Who is most entertaining and fun to watch is just a whole different question. This is a whole other topic, but the real truth is we must bet it the hell up when we get a good game, and break the guy, get backed in the 50/50 or thereabouts propositions, and play on ours when we have the nuts. That's the only way, and the stats would not hurt it is my contention. btw I am by no means knocking keith, really, I am actually a big fan and was fortunate enough to see many of his matches in the 90's. Just making a point.


And, we don't use data at all, not because it doesn't work, but because we don't know that it does work. ONE simple stat, like knowing the winning percentage for players when they break can be monumental, all sorts of implications and wise side bets could be made from that. All you'd have to do is have a little tablet and mark down the data quickly in say weekly tournaments for the guys who gamble. You could so easily set up a spreadsheet like when you watch the baseball games.... "batista is 1 for 30 lifetime against maddux"..... do you think managers don't know this stuff? And you really think to effectively manage a pool gambling "business" it would hurt you to know this stuff? Anyway, maybe we are talking about different stuff... I have said my peace and will maintain my "I am just peeon shortstop 9ball player with a brain and a love for one-pocket" status, hehe. Really though, thanks guys, I find this an interesting topic obviously, even though i strongly disagree.

 

[Tom Wirth]

And there are those who when the concept of the "dark bulb" ( a bulb which when screwed into a light socket and the switched turned on would bathe a sunny room in total darkness) was explained; they believed it. I for one never drank alcohol when playing serious pool. Like any machine, the more complicated the mechanisim the more things can go wrong. Information can work the same way.

Depending on the data provided I can see where an over abundance of information can be detrimental and cause overthinking. Analysis paralysis.
If one keeps the information simple and direct the data can be very helpful in matching up and in forming a stratigic plan.

One simple example might be where you know from experience that your opponent shoots long straight in shots very well when there is little to no possibility of giving up easy shots in return, but when those long shots if missed is certain to give up open shots to their opponent, that same player is likely to dog it. Well, in a case like that I'm going to be banking balls off the top rail and offering up those long teasers untill he proves he will shoot at his hole with confidence and pocket those shots.

There are many such examples which can help a pool player win games, but if the information becomes overly analytical it can certainly be detrimental. The trick is in knowing how much is too much.

Tom

 

[Tom Wirth]

Tyler,
I agree entirely with your assertion that many pool players acquire legendary status simply because they are willing to bet high. Their bottom line however may show little profit in the long run. This is meerly an example of poor use or misuse of the statisical data. I've no doubt there are many out there who know how to apply the data properly, and those guys are not what I would call gamblers. I believe true gamblers are in it more for the high it brings them. Though they may not admit it.

Take day traders, or guys who play the horses, as two obvious examples. I don't know about the rest of you but every horse player I've known swears that he knows how to apply the information but they all seem to be driving around in heeps. Does this bolster your point? I think it does.

Please, all you horse players, if you happen to be one of the rare few who have been brilliant enough over the years to turn a steady profit, be awear that I am speaking of the thousands at the track you are betting against.

There are many great pool players over the years who stayed under the radar and who raised famlies with just income from gambling at pool. Don Willis from Ohio immediately comes to mind. He was a great player as we here all know but he also kept his head about him and didn't get out of line too often. He was using statistics while matching up though I doubt he had them written down anywhere. He had them in his head.

Tom

 

[tylerdurden]

He was using statistics while matching up though I doubt he had them written down anywhere. He had them in his head.

Tom

Yeah, and that is another thing I have thought about recently. Some guys are just more natural at keeping track of these things (data), and if I had to guess, they are the more successful ones. And, just like anything, if you are not as talented, you could refine those skills in your own and different way. Maybe akin to a naturally gifted swimmer, and one who isn't as gifted, yet gets some training, and he can easily beat the natural. In pool, i'm asserting the same can happen, even to a greater extent, because the natural isn't going to "catch up" in this case by doing the training as well (ie collecting the data). ha, I love to talk in riddles, hopefully I got my point across

 

[SJDinPHX]

Yeah, and that is another thing I have thought about recently. Some guys are just more natural at keeping track of these things (data), and if I had to guess, they are the more successful ones. And, just like anything, if you are not as talented, you could refine those skills in your own and different way. Maybe akin to a naturally gifted swimmer, and one who isn't as gifted, yet gets some training, and he can easily beat the natural. In pool, i'm asserting the same can happen, even to a greater extent, because the natural isn't going to "catch up" in this case by doing the training as well (ie collecting the data). ha, I love to talk in riddles, hopefully I got my point across

I feel better now...I thought it was just me !...I sent a few of your 'rambling' posts to a friend of mine, who is a Harvard Law School Graduate, smartest guy I know...He replied, ver batum,..."This guy talks in riddles, how does he EVER expect to get his point accross"?..

You're OK Tyler...You could replace Joe Biden any day, for my cash ! ..Heres a little treat for you...Jessica makes your Jlo look kinda like Ellen, don't she ? :lol [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f6jdM7bJcQ[/ame]

Reply in MO thread...Our work (hi-jack) is done here ! :focus

 

[Cowboy Dennis]

Well, in all seriousness, we don't ask the right questions: in who won the most money.

TD,

It would be an extremely rare thing to find a pool player who actually played "for the money". Most of them play for other reasons, as I'm sure you know. That's why you are beating a dead horse to think otherwise.

As long as you brought it up, what type stats do you think poolplayers can learn from?

Poolplayers don't have a team behind them to help out with managing decisions, they are on their own, which also is a big part of why most of them have no money. MLB players don't have to "match-up" with other teams, the games are scheduled. They "won" their cash when a team signed them to a contract. Of course, the better they play and the more they win the better chance their next contract will be larger. MLB players also played when they were 10 yrs. old, played in High School, played in college, and maybe stuck around with a semi-pro team or a minor-league team until being found and signed with a Major League team. They put in the work all their lives and most of them did it for one reason: They dreamed of being in the HOF with the greatest that ever played the game. That's what pushes kids to play ML baseball. Pool has no such equivalent and never will.

I think Rod made a great point when he said that the same mentality that allows these players to win a lot of money also causes them to lose a lot of money. These guys are wired differently, having $100k in their pocket makes them just as happy as having nothing in their pocket. It's not about the money and you can't change that. They simply are not playing to make money.

Dennis

 

[SJDinPHX]

TD,

It would be an extremely rare thing to find a pool player who actually played "for the money". Most of them play for other reasons, as I'm sure you know. That's why you are beating a dead horse to think otherwise.

As long as you brought it up, what type stats do you think poolplayers can learn from?

Poolplayers don't have a team behind them to help out with managing decisions, they are on their own, which also is a big part of why most of them have no money. MLB players don't have to "match-up" with other teams, the games are scheduled. They "won" their cash when a team signed them to a contract. Of course, the better they play and the more they win the better chance their next contract will be larger. MLB players also played when they were 10 yrs. old, played in High School, played in college, and maybe stuck around with a semi-pro team or a minor-league team until being found and signed with a Major League team. They put in the work all their lives and most of them did it for one reason: They dreamed of being in the HOF with the greatest that ever played the game. That's what pushes kids to play ML baseball. Pool has no such equivalent and never will.

I think Rod made a great point when he said that the same mentality that allows these players to win a lot of money also causes them to lose a lot of money. These guys are wired differently, having $100k in their pocket makes them just as happy as having nothing in their pocket. It's not about the money and you can't change that. They simply are not playing to make money.

Dennis

Leave my buddy Tyler alone, you doorknob !...In a 'rambling, non-sensical contest', you guy's
would be about dead even !..(albeit, well above Mr. PC)

PS..Besides, its our hi-jack, so kindly butt out,..with your PC immitation !

 

[androd]

I think Rod made a great point when he said that the same mentality that allows these players to win a lot of money also causes them to lose a lot of money. These guys are wired differently, having $100k in their pocket makes them just as happy as having nothing in their pocket. It's not about the money and you can't change that. They simply are not playing to make money.

Dennis

When you've been around these guys, you realize
"It's not money, it's pool coupons"
Rod.

 

[tylerdurden]

TD,

It would be an extremely rare thing to find a pool player who actually played "for the money". Most of them play for other reasons, as I'm sure you know. That's why you are beating a dead horse to think otherwise.

As long as you brought it up, what type stats do you think poolplayers can learn from?

Poolplayers don't have a team behind them to help out with managing decisions, they are on their own, which also is a big part of why most of them have no money. MLB players don't have to "match-up" with other teams, the games are scheduled. They "won" their cash when a team signed them to a contract. Of course, the better they play and the more they win the better chance their next contract will be larger. MLB players also played when they were 10 yrs. old, played in High School, played in college, and maybe stuck around with a semi-pro team or a minor-league team until being found and signed with a Major League team. They put in the work all their lives and most of them did it for one reason: They dreamed of being in the HOF with the greatest that ever played the game. That's what pushes kids to play ML baseball. Pool has no such equivalent and never will.

I think Rod made a great point when he said that the same mentality that allows these players to win a lot of money also causes them to lose a lot of money. These guys are wired differently, having $100k in their pocket makes them just as happy as having nothing in their pocket. It's not about the money and you can't change that. They simply are not playing to make money.

Dennis

As was pointed out here, others who even have family's have as well. Unsung, but we all know they are there.

In your last paragraph, i'm really not wanting to change them, just saying that I am not that impressed with their "winnings"... yet I enjoy watching them just like anybody else. But I would tend to respect the actual winners myself.

I'll just throw one or two stats out there for your other question. If you knew your games winning percentage (or a sidebetter knew it) against a guy you play in a weekly tournament, that would be a very strong indicator of what you need or don't need. Or, if you played him one hole, your percentage against him, or your percent wins when you (or he) breaks.... these could all be huge, even if only to give you a slight edge. I don't know about you guys, but in pool rooms your games are only a small part of the pie, you need to be gambling well on other games going on as well.