Cowboy Dennis
Verified Member
Mark is at the table and the score is 3-3 in game one. He gets two from here. How would you do it?
S. Daulton vs. M. Jarvis 2000 D.C.C. #2
- Thread starter Cowboy Dennis
- Start date
lll
Verified Member
he probably straight backed the 1? and then banked the 5 or 9 depending on where the q ended up
but since im an expert banker and 4 railors are like hangers i like this out
i didnt know how to show the cue ball after i made the 4 railer
but since im an expert banker and 4 railors are like hangers i like this out
i didnt know how to show the cue ball after i made the 4 railer
lll
Verified Member
6 and half hours and no one wants to tell me my shot was crazy??
wgcp
Verified Member
lll
lll
set the four railer up on my table and made it 3 out of 5 times... can't be that crazy... the five cross sides is natural after the shot...
lll
set the four railer up on my table and made it 3 out of 5 times... can't be that crazy... the five cross sides is natural after the shot...
blackeee
Verified Member
The 1 back under you. You have to hit this shot a hair below center and medium hard so you figure to bump the 9 and have it cross corner or cross side.Cowboy Dennis said:
NH Steve
Administrator
If the 1-ball straight back was too close to a kiss, Mark might have shot the 9-ball three rails in the side, and followed up banking the 5-ball in the same pocket. You don't see them shoot those long three's into the side that often, but they will go and Mark is about perfectly lined up for the shot, hitting it straight ahead.blackeee said:
Attachments
-
Greenshot_2011-04-01_23-08-52.jpg
fred bentivegna
Verified Member
Where o' where...
Where o' where...
...were you guys when I was hustling? With the score 3-3, there is no good percentage shot available. If Jarvis got out he probably did it by doing the wrong thing. Not unusual in his case. He took lessons from me when he was younger. He was such a creep that I pulled up from going any further, even tho he was springing for $50 an hour. (that price is long gone)
While the straight back and 4 railer can both go, they are each laying just a little off from the position where it would be prudent to shoot them. You would need to stiffen the one ball to make it straight back and that probably would result in bumping the 9 ball into an easy cross corner. That means you would pretty much lose the game if you missed the straight back. Since a stiffened, and needing inside english, straight back is not an even money choice in an even money (3 to 3) situation, you will lose more games than you would win. Knowing a little about Jarvis, and the fact that Chicago bankers have an edge over most when it comes to "choking" a bank, I would venture Mark shot the straight back.
The four railer needs a little help, with a little cut or english, from the way it is laying; either way resulting in the cue ball moving off to the left and leaving an easy cross-side on the 5 ball. Since a four railer that you have to cut or put english on is not an even money shot, that makes that choice a stiff also.
If the four railer laid a little better where you could just stop the cue ball, you could shoot that with 4 rail pocket speed so if you missed, the ball would come to rest near the pocket but could not be banked cross corner because the one ball would be blocking it. If you made it, then your out ball would be the 5 ball straight back, crossing across the face of the 5 and following the cue ball down to the back rail, making it a free shot to win.
Another reason why the naturally laying four railer would be a good shot is that with pocket speed you have a good chance of blocking the straight back on the five ball if you miss the four railer.
Finally, what some may not know is that a naturally laying four railer when you are relatively close and assured of making the hit, is at the minimum an even money shot to make. The complimentary angle ratio is 3 to 2. (Third diamond on the long rail to the 2nd diamond on the short rail. Want more details, buy my books, or keep up with my bank pool column in Inside Pool mag. I have had a bank pool page in Inside Pool for the last 13 months -- that has received rave reviews incidentally -- and I havent seen a single comment about it on our forum in all that time. The editor of Inside Pool tells me that 400,000 people view the mag every month. Am I being paranoid again?)
Oh yeah, what would I shoot in this situation. I would cross the face of the 5 ball and send the cue ball one rail down to the back rail, leaving my oppo his choice of three, give-up 9 ft straight backs.
Beard
Where o' where...
...were you guys when I was hustling? With the score 3-3, there is no good percentage shot available. If Jarvis got out he probably did it by doing the wrong thing. Not unusual in his case. He took lessons from me when he was younger. He was such a creep that I pulled up from going any further, even tho he was springing for $50 an hour. (that price is long gone)
While the straight back and 4 railer can both go, they are each laying just a little off from the position where it would be prudent to shoot them. You would need to stiffen the one ball to make it straight back and that probably would result in bumping the 9 ball into an easy cross corner. That means you would pretty much lose the game if you missed the straight back. Since a stiffened, and needing inside english, straight back is not an even money choice in an even money (3 to 3) situation, you will lose more games than you would win. Knowing a little about Jarvis, and the fact that Chicago bankers have an edge over most when it comes to "choking" a bank, I would venture Mark shot the straight back.
The four railer needs a little help, with a little cut or english, from the way it is laying; either way resulting in the cue ball moving off to the left and leaving an easy cross-side on the 5 ball. Since a four railer that you have to cut or put english on is not an even money shot, that makes that choice a stiff also.
If the four railer laid a little better where you could just stop the cue ball, you could shoot that with 4 rail pocket speed so if you missed, the ball would come to rest near the pocket but could not be banked cross corner because the one ball would be blocking it. If you made it, then your out ball would be the 5 ball straight back, crossing across the face of the 5 and following the cue ball down to the back rail, making it a free shot to win.
Another reason why the naturally laying four railer would be a good shot is that with pocket speed you have a good chance of blocking the straight back on the five ball if you miss the four railer.
Finally, what some may not know is that a naturally laying four railer when you are relatively close and assured of making the hit, is at the minimum an even money shot to make. The complimentary angle ratio is 3 to 2. (Third diamond on the long rail to the 2nd diamond on the short rail. Want more details, buy my books, or keep up with my bank pool column in Inside Pool mag. I have had a bank pool page in Inside Pool for the last 13 months -- that has received rave reviews incidentally -- and I havent seen a single comment about it on our forum in all that time. The editor of Inside Pool tells me that 400,000 people view the mag every month. Am I being paranoid again?)
Oh yeah, what would I shoot in this situation. I would cross the face of the 5 ball and send the cue ball one rail down to the back rail, leaving my oppo his choice of three, give-up 9 ft straight backs.
Beard
Cowboy Dennis
Verified Member
The camera view here skews the shot a little. It's tough to see the shot from up and farther back as the camera is placed. I still thought that someone would take a flyer and choose this shot, hell, if we were playing one-pocket everybody would've said "bank the 5 and run out" .
.
fred bentivegna
Verified Member
Shoulda been a footnote...
Shoulda been a footnote...
...Shoulda been mentioned that the pocket was open for the cross corner because even if he only had a 1/2 pocket to shoot at, that would have been the correct shot. That whole 1/2 page ramble that I put up was based on the corner pocket being closed for repairs.
So, for those interested in strategy, approach my suggestion from the point of view of, no cross corner available.
Beard
Shoulda been a footnote...
...Shoulda been mentioned that the pocket was open for the cross corner because even if he only had a 1/2 pocket to shoot at, that would have been the correct shot. That whole 1/2 page ramble that I put up was based on the corner pocket being closed for repairs.
So, for those interested in strategy, approach my suggestion from the point of view of, no cross corner available.
Beard