what dennis said made the difference this time

[lll]

jay helfert posted this on azb
...
The biggest difference between match one and match two as far as Dennis was concerned was the tighter table (4.25" pockets) used in the second match. He prefers it tough. He said the first table was too loose for him. He felt that gave Tony an advantage. bolded for emphasis by me

I will agree that Dennis may still be a 9-8 underdog (half a ball) against Shane or Alex at One Pocket. It doesn't sound like much but it is, especially in a long match. Given 9-8 then it would be a good match. I seriously doubt he wants to play either guy even, but I could be wrong. If he has a backer of course he will get up there. One thing about Dennis, he will give it his best shot to win no matter what the game is.

You would think that after his two losses to Shane in the U.S. Open finals he wouldn't want to gamble with him. You would be wrong. Dennis will play Shane some Ten Ball in a heartbeat and Shane knows that. When it comes to money games Dennis may be the King and that includes Alex. Alex is in no hurry to tangle with Dennis, you can believe that. I think they both have a grudging respect for each other, but I know who has the bigger cajones.

There are other very good One Pocket players right here and one or more of them might get the backing they need to challenge Dennis. I suspect the next big match we see will feature one of them, someone like Justin Hall or Danny Smith. Dennis loves playing the BIG match, the bigger the better. You might see him giving weight to one of the high rollers in pool just to make a game. He knows the real money is in One Pocket so he's ready to make a game if asked.
........
we debated whether a tighter table favors the weaker or stronger player
( i think we can say dennis is the stronger ball maker)
at least for dennis the tighter table favors the stronger player

 

[LSJohn]

I will agree that Dennis may still be a 9-8 underdog (half a ball) against Shane or Alex at One Pocket.

You should love taking a piece of Shane against Danny then, right?
........

we debated whether a tighter table favors the weaker or stronger player
( i think we can say dennis is the stronger ball maker)
at least for dennis the tighter table favors the stronger player

I think odds are that Dennis knows the table set-up that's best for him, but we can't carve that in stone. There's a chance that even though he's most comfortable and confident on tight, certain potential opponents may benefit from it even more (but I'm not thinking of anyone in particular, just the possibility.)

 

[BRLongArm]

jay helfert posted this on azb
...
The biggest difference between match one and match two as far as Dennis was concerned was the tighter table (4.25" pockets) used in the second match. He prefers it tough. He said the first table was too loose for him. He felt that gave Tony an advantage. bolded for emphasis by me

I will agree that Dennis may still be a 9-8 underdog (half a ball) against Shane or Alex at One Pocket. It doesn't sound like much but it is, especially in a long match. Given 9-8 then it would be a good match. I seriously doubt he wants to play either guy even, but I could be wrong. If he has a backer of course he will get up there. One thing about Dennis, he will give it his best shot to win no matter what the game is.

You would think that after his two losses to Shane in the U.S. Open finals he wouldn't want to gamble with him. You would be wrong. Dennis will play Shane some Ten Ball in a heartbeat and Shane knows that. When it comes to money games Dennis may be the King and that includes Alex. Alex is in no hurry to tangle with Dennis, you can believe that. I think they both have a grudging respect for each other, but I know who has the bigger cajones.

There are other very good One Pocket players right here and one or more of them might get the backing they need to challenge Dennis. I suspect the next big match we see will feature one of them, someone like Justin Hall or Danny Smith. Dennis loves playing the BIG match, the bigger the better. You might see him giving weight to one of the high rollers in pool just to make a game. He knows the real money is in One Pocket so he's ready to make a game if asked.
........
we debated whether a tighter table favors the weaker or stronger player
( i think we can say dennis is the stronger ball maker)
at least for dennis the tighter table favors the stronger player

Nobody wants to play Dennis, man. Danny and Justin both want 8-7. I know. We offered Danny 9/8 and he passed.

 

[Tom Wirth]

jay helfert posted this on azb
...
The biggest difference between match one and match two as far as Dennis was concerned was the tighter table (4.25" pockets) used in the second match. He prefers it tough. He said the first table was too loose for him. He felt that gave Tony an advantage. bolded for emphasis by me

I will agree that Dennis may still be a 9-8 underdog (half a ball) against Shane or Alex at One Pocket. It doesn't sound like much but it is, especially in a long match. Given 9-8 then it would be a good match. I seriously doubt he wants to play either guy even, but I could be wrong. If he has a backer of course he will get up there. One thing about Dennis, he will give it his best shot to win no matter what the game is.

You would think that after his two losses to Shane in the U.S. Open finals he wouldn't want to gamble with him. You would be wrong. Dennis will play Shane some Ten Ball in a heartbeat and Shane knows that. When it comes to money games Dennis may be the King and that includes Alex. Alex is in no hurry to tangle with Dennis, you can believe that. I think they both have a grudging respect for each other, but I know who has the bigger cajones.

There are other very good One Pocket players right here and one or more of them might get the backing they need to challenge Dennis. I suspect the next big match we see will feature one of them, someone like Justin Hall or Danny Smith. Dennis loves playing the BIG match, the bigger the better. You might see him giving weight to one of the high rollers in pool just to make a game. He knows the real money is in One Pocket so he's ready to make a game if asked.
........
we debated whether a tighter table favors the weaker or stronger player
( i think we can say dennis is the stronger ball maker)
at least for dennis the tighter table favors the stronger player

Humm....Reminds me of a thread awhile ago. "tight pockets vs loose"

Looks like I've got a real shooter in my camp of thinking with that quote in bold red. Maybe he's wrong too.

Tom

 

[beatle]

tony should have known that so in effect he was a sucker to play on the tighter tables. if he was getting staked then he essentially dumped off his backer by playing on a tight table.

there is more to pool and gambling than playing well.

 

[Jeff sparks]

I don't think Shane can play either Tony, Alex or Dennis even one pocket...
He's a great rotation player IMO but isn't in the same league as these guys playing for the cash... Tournament one pocket, (i.e. Short races) doesn't prove a lot among the top tier players... Any one of them is capable of winning 3 games against any of the others... But stretch it out and the cream will usually rise...

 

[cincy_kid]

Humm....Reminds me of a thread awhile ago. "tight pockets vs loose"

Looks like I've got a real shooter in my camp of thinking with that quote in bold red. Maybe he's wrong too.

Tom

Yea Tom, I am with you too..IMO tighter pockets favor the better player/shooter...

 

[cincy_kid]

Nobody wants to play Dennis, man. Danny and Justin both want 8-7. I know. We offered Danny 9/8 and he passed.

that's pretty strong although I am not surprised. I would not stake Danny or Justin getting 8-7 vs Dennis even though either one is liable to win on a given day.

 

[Jeff sparks]

Nobody wants to play Dennis, man. Danny and Justin both want 8-7. I know. We offered Danny 9/8 and he passed.

Give him 9/8 on his break and 8/7 on Dennis's break... 10 ahead, I like Dennis... I ain't backin it... but I'd bet it...especially on a tight Diamond...

 

[wincardona]

Humm....Reminds me of a thread awhile ago. "tight pockets vs loose"

Looks like I've got a real shooter in my camp of thinking with that quote in bold red. Maybe he's wrong too.

Tom

Allow me to add a little something to this debate on what type of player tight pockets favor. As I have said in the past tight pockets IMO favors the better ball striker.

When playing on a tight pocket table defensive moves are more available and because of that players that aren't as experienced in the moving part of the game will have the tight pocket to aid him making better decisions as opposed to playing on tables with larger pockets. So, the tighter pocket kinda levels the playing field in the defensive moving part of the game..advantage goes to the better ball striker because of that. Lets now discuss the pocketing advantage the better ball striker has. The better ball striker will consistently averave a higher pocketing % simply because of his ball striking ability which in turn will enable him to pocket balls to start runs and also to sustain runs. Plus better ball strikers will stay more confident playing players that have problems pocketing balls on tight pocket tables because of always having the edge in terms of pocketing balls.

Whenever I play a champion I want to play on a table where I can pocket balls and thats not on a tight table. However, whenever I play a lesser player I try to pick a table where the pocket size affects them but nkt me as much.

So its not a mystery to me why Orcollo prefers a tighter pocket table.

Dr. Bill

 

[crabbcatjohn]

Allow me to add a little something to this debate on what type of player tight pockets favor. As I have said in the past tight pockets IMO favors the better ball striker.

When playing on a tight pocket table defensive moves are more available and because of that players that aren't as experienced in the moving part of the game will have the tight pocket to aid him making better decisions as opposed to playing on tables with larger pockets. So, the tighter pocket kinda levels the playing field in the defensive moving part of the game..advantage goes to the better ball striker because of that. Lets now discuss the pocketing advantage the better ball striker has. The better ball striker will consistently averave a higher pocketing % simply because of his ball striking ability which in turn will enable him to pocket balls to start runs and also to sustain runs. Plus better ball strikers will stay more confident playing players that have problems pocketing balls on tight pocket tables because of always having the edge in terms of pocketing balls.

Whenever I play a champion I want to play on a table where I can pocket balls and thats not on a tight table. However, whenever I play a lesser player I try to pick a table where the pocket size affects them but nkt me as much.

So its not a mystery to me why Orcollo prefers a tighter pocket table.

Dr. Bill

Certainly the way i feel. It also helps me with being more confident in banking.

 

[baby huey]

Tighter pockets playing One Pocket add to the drama of game in that you'll see more moves and longer games. I know Dr. Bill feels that tighter pockets favor the better ball striker but I don't know if I agree totally with that premise. He is certainly correct in the last match between Tony and Dennis. One Pocket comes down to execution like all pool games. If you're giving up weight tighter pockets do not favor the better ball striker imo because it is more difficult to put runs together. Perhaps playing heads up it might but remember this match still has to have a decider for anyone to claim superiority over the other. If we add rotation games into the mix, the player with the better break has a big advantage in that they will run more racks and tight pockets or not the better breaker is going to get the cash assuming the skill sets are comparable. I think speed of the table might actually be more important than anything else. A slower table favors the mover over the shooter because he can pound the balls more and thus move balls without fear of selling out as much imo. That table looked pretty fast too me and the tables at the California Billiard Club for the first match were slower. Tony's moving skills showed up more the first time they played.

 

[wincardona]

Tighter pockets playing One Pocket add to the drama of game in that you'll see more moves and longer games. I know Dr. Bill feels that tighter pockets favor the better ball striker but I don't know if I agree totally with that premise. He is certainly correct in the last match between Tony and Dennis. One Pocket comes down to execution like all pool games. If you're giving up weight tighter pockets do not favor the better ball striker imo because it is more difficult to put runs together. Perhaps playing heads up it might but remember this match still has to have a decider for anyone to claim superiority over the other. If we add rotation games into the mix, the player with the better break has a big advantage in that they will run more racks and tight pockets or not the better breaker is going to get the cash assuming the skill sets are comparable. I think speed of the table might actually be more important than anything else. A slower table favors the mover over the shooter because he can pound the balls more and thus move balls without fear of selling out as much imo. That table looked pretty fast too me and the tables at the California Billiard Club for the first match were slower. Tony's moving skills showed up more the first time they played.

Jerry, I made no mention of players giving up weight but what I did say is that tighter pockets favor the better ball striker. Now if you want to get technical about what size pocket is better for the player giving up weight I will give you my opinion on that too. When i'm giving up weight I want to play on a table that I can run balls on and my opponent will have problems. Now I clearly don't want to play on a table with 4" pockets because that pocket size will hurt my pocketing ability, and I don't want to play on a table with 5" pockets because my opponent will not have problems pocketing balls in a 5" pocket. So the pocket size I would look for is a pocket size that I can perform on and one my opponent will have problems. That would be a pocket around 4-1/2"

Now when two players that are playing even and one is the better ball striker and the other is the better mover, the tighter pocket table will favor the better ball striker.

Dr. Bill

 

[Tom Wirth]

Now when two players that are playing even and one is the better ball striker and the other is the better mover, the tighter pocket table will favor the better ball striker.

Dr. Bill


Humm...Where else did I read this?

Tom

 

[El Chapo]

The thing that sort of twists my brain, doesn’t everything favor a better ball striker? They are better, so things will favor them. I suppose Bill is saying relative to large pockets, tight pockets will be more favorable for better ball strikers.

Maybe I was incorrect in my assumptions, but If a fair game between me and another player is me giving him the 7, I always “felt” I could not give him the 7 when we moved to a poolroom with tighter pockets. I can’t give him more than the seven now that were on tighter pockets for sure. Wouldn’t that be true if what bill is saying is correct?

It’s confusing because I know billy obviously knows more than me, I obviously had it wrong all these years or what he’s saying perhaps doesn’t apply to my level?

 

[Tom Wirth]

The thing that sort of twists my brain, doesn’t everything favor a better ball striker? They are better, so things will favor them. I suppose Bill is saying relative to large pockets, tight pockets will be more favorable for better ball strikers.

Maybe I was incorrect in my assumptions, but If a fair game between me and another player is me giving him the 7, I always “felt” I could not give him the 7 when we moved to a poolroom with tighter pockets. I can’t give him more than the seven now that were on tighter pockets for sure. Wouldn’t that be true if what bill is saying is correct?

It’s confusing because I know billy obviously knows more than me, I obviously had it wrong all these years or what he’s saying perhaps doesn’t apply to my level?

Go ahead Bill, you explain it. I'll provide a post of mine from a year ago to help set you up. If anyone wishes to search back, the thread name was "Tight pockets vs Loose." Then if they don't get it they don't get it.

Old 10-03-2016, 04:05 PM
Tom Wirth's Avatar
Tom Wirth Tom Wirth is online now
Verified Member

Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delray Beach, Florida
Posts: 2,273
Default

Many of the points which have been brought up here focus on how tighter pockets lessen the shooter's ability to pocket balls, but doesn't this also affect the mover's ability to do the same?

Frank, you point out how you might lag a straight back toward your hole and leave a long straight in shot to your straight shooting opponent knowing that if he shoots at it, he can score only one ball. Isn't this is a strategy shooters will also be aware of and employ? I'm not talking about shooters who are entirely ignorant of the game but even if I were, logic tells us that these shooters will still pocket balls on tight tables better the fellow that relies on his moving skills. Just because the mover thinks out the game better than the shooter does not mean the shooter plays recklessly or stupidly on all occasions. And guys, who do you think in long sessions will improve their game quicker? If the shooter's IQ is anything above double digits, his shooting skills will remain strong while progressively learning the various traps and using them against his opponent. Conversely, the mover's shooting skills will not change with anywhere near the same speed.

A shooter's ball pocketing skills will certainly be adversely affected the tighter the pockets but he will still pocket balls better than the mover won't he? And what happens when the mover is placed in a position where his best option is to shoot at his hole a "must make" shot where the safety is more difficult? Wouldn't you rather be the guy with the shooting skills in that situation? Even shooters can set traps!

It was pointed out that Mr. 400 won't be running many balls on a table with 4 1/4 inch pockets and this is true, but if you look at the other side to that coin if the pockets are now 5 inches in width, isn't it true that a player who on average can run only 4 or 5 balls on tight equipment should now be able to run eight balls nearly as well as the shooter? Wouldn't this neutralize much of the shooter's advantage while doing little to affect the mover's ability to set traps?

This is why I lean towards the belief that the mover will fare better on looser equipment than he will on very tight tables. I welcome your responses and I'm still open to arguments on the other side.

Thanks,

Tom
__________________

"Controlled Aggression" trwirth369@gmail.com

 

[Kybanks]

Didn't they play an event this year at Buffalos where the T.V. table was super tight with worn cloth? I believe Dennis won that if I am not mistaken. I believe if you tighten any playing surface it will always favor the guy who is more accurate.

 

[BRLongArm]

Didn't they play an event this year at Buffalos where the T.V. table was super tight with worn cloth? I believe Dennis won that if I am not mistaken. I believe if you tighten any playing surface it will always favor the guy who is more accurate.

I staked Dennis. The match lasted three games at $300 a game and Tony couldn't make a ball. He quit after three games.

 

[vapros]

Seems to me the size of the pockets makes very little difference to the mover. So, this discussion should be about the relative shooting skills of the players.

 

[Kybanks]

I staked Dennis. The match lasted three games at $300 a game and Tony couldn't make a ball. He quit after three games.

I didn't know they matched up gambling. I was talking about the actual tournament event. Thanks for the info.