Spots

[Artie Bodendorfer]

I agree with what you say, but at the same time i'm also agreeing with Dick and Stroud when they say that styles have a lot to do with the spot you should choose. Which simply means that certain styles offer different challenges to the better player, and vice-versa And based on your style of play..aggressive, or cagey, should determine the spot of either 11/7 (cagey) or 9/6 (aggressive)that you would prefer, being the weaker player. (in many's opinion)

In your situation you could have a better game with 11/7 than you have with 9/6..especially if you are a shrewd player as opposed to an aggressive player. And if so you just may have a tougher game with 9/6 because of your style. But of course it's hard to believe that if you're breaking even 9/6, simple math says that you should win 11/7.

I actually wouldn't mind going around the world and betting on players that broke even getting 9/6 and changed the game to 11/7. But of course that wouldn't be fair based off of the above bolded statement.

I'm confused too. I think. Maybe not.

Dr. Bill

Eleven to seven is a bigger spot than nine to six. Because the better player is giving up two more balls to the weaker players one ball. Again if some one knows how to do probabillites and does the math. Will give you the exact percentages. But in my head giving up two more balls for one ball. Is a bigger spot than 9 to 6. Because 9 to 6 for every ball is 3 to 2 and going to 11 to 7. you are giving two to one on balls.

 

[Artie Bodendorfer]

I simply described a situation that would be a good measuring stick of the value of both 9/6 in comparison to 11/7. Plus there may be players that are of equal ability that would play this as a proposition bet. I have often played similar props with players of my ability to determine what handicap was more, such as 8/7 in comparison to 10/8. Some players (like Artie) think that 9/8 is more than 9/7, at least he has said that he would rather have 9/8 over 8/7.

The only way I would take 9/8 over taking 8/7 is if I started out as the better player to begin with, feeling that I would lengthen the game and that would give me a better chance of winning. (if that makes sense)

Any ways 11/7 and 9/6 are fairly close to begin with, and imo closer than 8/7 and 10/8, so I can see why certain players would choose different sides for different reasons.

Dr. Bill

Ten to eight is a way better spot. Than 8 to 7 for the player getting the spot. Because if a player can play another player 8 to 7 the game is very close and, And a player getting 8 to 7. Can win sessions even up without the spot. The game is very close. And the one ball will not make much difference. With good players playing. Were 8 to 7 with two weak players is a big spot. Because balls don't come easy for a weak player to make.
And 10 to 8 for the good player giving up that spot. He will have real problems. Because in reality a player taking 8 to 7. Can win even up. And making ten balls against a good player is very hard. And if the game is almost even. why would the better player make two more balls to the other players one ball.
So we will extend the game the weaker player goes from 8 balls to 13 balls. And the better player goes from 10 balls to 20 balls. Now how much do you like the game. With two good players.When the game is very close to start with. I no 8 to 7 is night and day. From 20 to 13. And I replied a log time ago why I took 9 to 8 from bugs than 8 to 7. 9 to 8 made the game way harder for Bugs than 8 to 7.Me going from 8 to 7 didn't make it harder for me. Because If I would run 7 balls 8 balls wouldn't be much difference.And in reality I was a better shooter than Bugs. Not Banking.
I played Bugs even one time. And I told Bugs whatever happens next time we play I get the spot back. And we played and I beat Bugs 3 sets in a row. We played after hours. And Bugs had his click with him. And these Guy Chuck Maddox was drunk and making all kinds of remarks. And if we were on the south side of Chicago he wouldn't have made it through the night. And Chuck Maddox was a real dangerous and tough guy. His journey ended in Peoria when somebody put the gun to his head and blew him away.
And the only reason I played even was to cool things out. I never seen anyone in my life do and say what Chuck Maddox would say and do. And I also post a while back that 8 to 7 is a better spot than 9 to 8. There is nothing to talk about or discuss. 8 to 7 is a better spot than 9 to 8 for the weaker player. And I gave my reasons why I took 9 to 8. And I felt more comfortable Taking 9 to 8. And the reason I took a spot is because if I played even I would have to give up the same spots that Bugs gave up. To all the other people. And Bugs took shots at people giving up a tough game.
Because he was getting backed. And If he won he could make a good score. Because he gave up too much weight. And if he lost. He would also win and snap back consideration. And you cant do that betting your own money. Paul Jones asked Bugs if you had your own money would you play Artie. And Bugs told him.Why would he bet his own money. When he cant win with a backer. And I don't no about Ronnie one handed game. All I no is that I beat everybody who wanted to play. The only one handed player that one and quite one session ahead after I won 3 sets in a row.

And he said he will play tomorrow and I asked him to but up . And he wouldn't put up no money with his backer to play the next day. I new he was all done. And I played him in Chicago and made a good score when his click backed him coming from the bar tournament in Milwaukee. And I won so ease that I didn't start of playing my real game. And I have to say he shot way better on a bar table than the four and a half by nine. The bottom line is he couldn't win. And Ronnie got his reputation from the pool tournaments he went to. Could I have won we will never no. But I sure would have played.

And all the people that really new me and seen me play. Would have bet on me. And the people who say he was a better one handed player. Who are they. And I will bet that its just talk. And they never seen me play one handed. And ask people who seen both of us play. ask Mike Mansy Chris Mageean Goosatate Sergio Miami. And playing three cushion billiards one handed nobody could have one. And Rex Cannon Said Ronnie would have never gave him the spot I gave him playing one handed. I gave him 8 to 6 and the brake. You cant ask Mexican Johnny because he never seen Ronnie play. And Johnny and cannon ball would have played him one handed.

I am just curious who the people are that said Ronnie was the best one handed player. Who did he beat one handed. They ask me who I beat one handed. So now I am asking who he beat. Or do they want to keep it a secret. I would like to her the answers more specific. I don't want to her a bunch of nonsense. He beat every body. Will if he beat everybody.There must be a lot of names. And I no Two People that would have played him one handed. Toby and Monk. And Toby is the best one handed player I have seen. And Monk was a great one handed player.

 

[lll]

quote from artie above
And I replied a log time ago why I took 9 to 8 from bugs than 8 to 7. 9 to 8 made the game way harder for Bugs than 8 to 7.Me going from 8 to 7 didn't make it harder for me. Because If I would run 7 balls 8 balls wouldn't be much difference.And in reality I was a better shooter than Bugs. Not Banking.


......


artie
regarding your preference for 9/8 against bugs
could you explain alittle more why one more ball for bugs was so much harder to make than one more ball for you.......
thanks

 

[u12armresl]

IMHO too many variables that don't, or hardly get considered.

Are you a strong breaker, is your opponent a strong breaker
Is your first return shot one of your better abilities?
Are you a good kicker?

On another level

What happens to 9-6 or 11-7 if you have to intentionally scratch, or scratch on your break? you're pretty much back to even against a better player who can run the balls they need.

 

[boingo]

There is a chart here on OnePocket.org here: http://www.onepocket.org/handicaps.htm

However, please note that chart is based solely on the mathematical differentials, without consideration for longer counts in general tending to favor the better players and shorter counts giving the weaker players more of a chance for a quick strike.

My own opinion is that one of the big reasons stronger players prevail in longer games despite seemingly overwhelming handicaps is that weaker players are so much more likely to scratch accidentally. You can't really factor that into a handicap, but it is a killer for weaker players.

I like that table, it clarifies a complex handicapping scheme. I imagine that knowing the in's and out's of playing a string of spotted balls becomes important with long count games. A scratch seems like a double whammy, giving up a ball, and a defensive end to the inning.

 

[darmoose]

Eleven to seven is a bigger spot than nine to six. Because the better player is giving up two more balls to the weaker players one ball. Again if some one knows how to do probabillites and does the math. Will give you the exact percentages. But in my head giving up two more balls for one ball. Is a bigger spot than 9 to 6. Because 9 to 6 for every ball is 3 to 2 and going to 11 to 7. you are giving two to one on balls.

Artie,

Thanks for posting on this subject and sharing your viewpoint. If I may ask you a question, back in the day when you were playing, and with your style of play, did you feel like you could slow down a ballrunner a bit?:heh

 

[mr3cushion]

quote from artie above
And I replied a log time ago why I took 9 to 8 from bugs than 8 to 7. 9 to 8 made the game way harder for Bugs than 8 to 7.Me going from 8 to 7 didn't make it harder for me. Because If I would run 7 balls 8 balls wouldn't be much difference.And in reality I was a better shooter than Bugs. Not Banking.


......


artie
regarding your preference for 9/8 against bugs
could you explain alittle more why one more ball for bugs was so much harder to make than one more ball for you.......
thanks

Larry; I think Artie also mentioned this is another reason, ---> Taking 9 to 8. And the reason I took a spot is because if I played even I would have to give up the same spots that Bugs gave up. To all the other people. And Bugs took shots at people giving up a tough game. why Artie took the 9/8 game from Bugs, all but once!

 

[petie]

Artie,
I really appreciate you sharing your opinion on this subject. BTW, I also appreciate everybody else's opinion.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that my experience is that giving 11/7 was definitely easier than giving 9/6. I should qualify that by saying it was only one player and it was two different sessions. I'm thinking a different player or different day might change my perception a little. Their have been enough finer points of giving spots raised in this thread to make me realize that I'm playing with dynamite. There are a lot of considerations to contemplate. How good is your oppo's ball running ability? When he stops his run, does he miss and sell out or does he have the wisdom and discipline to play safe? What is the quality of his safes? How often do you get a shot? Many other considerations could come into play.

I'll have to test the results I have had with these spots against more players.

 

[androd]

There are a lot of considerations to contemplate. How good is your oppo's ball running ability? When he stops his run, does he miss and sell out or does he have the wisdom and discipline to play safe? What is the quality of his safes? How often do you get a shot? Many other considerations could come into play.

I'll have to test the results I have had with these spots against more players.

All these questions should be factored in before you give him 9/6
Rod.

 

[baby huey]

Sometimes we forget how people really played. I saw Ronnie Allen play good NINE ball players even up one pocket and win. That doesn't mean they played good one pocket. He played one handed in the Bars and won quite a bit. And, maybe he was a great hustler one handed more than he was a great player. But regardless, he played very good one pocket one handed. Was he the best? Probably not.

Regarding the spot proposition in whether 9/6 vs 11/7 which is better for the under dog. I think in this case 9/6 is much better. Here's why, in the 11/7 game at least two balls come back into play after they are made. The better player has more balls to work with to get you. Those two balls make absolutely no difference to the better player. As the weaker player what would you rather have from the better player, 8/4 or 20/8 and this is assuming you really need the weight? As the better player which would you rather give up? This is a twelve ball spot vs a four ball spot. I watched Dippy Dave play these games at DCC a few years where he was getting something in the area of 15,14/4 or 5 and he lost consistently. Don't you think he would rather play 8 to 3? instead of getting a 9 ball spot the other way? Bucktooth won a mint playing good players 2 balls to his 1. He wouldn't win playing 16 to 8. I think he be less inclined to play the 16/8 game but he still might win anyway but that's a story for another day.

 

[baby huey]

Ball spots can be very decieving. If I needed weight and I could get 8/7 or after the break be able to pick any ball off the table, I would take any ball off the table all day long. Why, because there are now only 14 balls available to the better player to work with.

 

[mr3cushion]

Which is better...

Which is better...

Which is a better spot for the weaker player, getting 9/6 break a piece?

Or, the weaker player gets ALL the breaks, and who ever makes the FIRST ball WINS the game.

 

[androd]

Regarding the spot proposition in whether 9/6 vs 11/7 which is better for the under dog. I think in this case 9/6 is much better. Here's why, in the 11/7 game at least two balls come back into play after they are made. The better player has more balls to work with to get you. Those two balls make absolutely no difference to the better player.

Plus, you're never in the position of the weaker player needing one and having the option of two balls on the table to choose from. Or you having to play safe against two balls instead of one.
Rod.
P.S> Jerry, thanks for pointing this out.

 

[Texdance]

Steve Booth's List of 1-Pocket Spots

Steve Booth's List of 1-Pocket Spots

This link shows Steve Booth's handy list of spots for one pocket, along with some incisive comments by Wincardona, and a link to Booth's original spot value page.

http://www.onepocket.org/forum/showthread.php?p=137743&highlight=texdance#post137743

Booth's chart states "Spotting 11-7, the player going to 11 spots their first two balls, then plays 9-7." Spotting balls can be a way to block your opponent into the stack, or set up a trap, suggesting that 11-7 is not much different from 9-6.

I've always believed that if my opponent is knowledgeable and still willing to give up a spot, any spot, I'm halfway to losing already, unless I play well above my normal game.

 

[darmoose]

Plus, you're never in the position of the weaker player needing one and having the option of two balls on the table to choose from. Or you having to play safe against two balls instead of one.
Rod.
P.S> Jerry, thanks for pointing this out.

Rod

I am not trying to be arbitrarily argumentative, but just trying to understand your logic here.

If two players are playing 9/6, and the player getting the spot needs one ball and there are two balls on the table:

1. how many balls does the player giving the spot need?

2. since the player giving the spot possesses "lopsidedly" superior skills over the player recieving the spot, and they both need one ball, who is in the most trouble in the above situation?

My view being that the relative degree of danger doesn't change for either player needing one ball, whether there's one ball or two balls on the table, does it? The lesser player is in the most trouble cause he doesn't possess the skills of the superior player.

Whatever you say above that the player giving the spot has to deal with, so too does the player recieving the spot have to deal with, only he has fewer weapons.

 

[androd]

Rod

I am not trying to be arbitrarily argumentative, but just trying to understand your logic here.

If two players are playing 9/6, and the player getting the spot needs one ball and there are two balls on the table:

1. how many balls does the player giving the spot need?

2. since the player giving the spot possesses "lopsidedly" superior skills over the player recieving the spot, and they both need one ball, who is in the most trouble in the above situation?

My view being that the relative degree of danger doesn't change for either player needing one ball, whether there's one ball or two balls on the table, does it? The lesser player is in the most trouble cause he doesn't possess the skills of the superior player.

Whatever you say above that the player giving the spot has to deal with, so too does the player recieving the spot have to deal with, only he has fewer weapons.

I Give.
Rod.

 

[darmoose]

I Give.
Rod.

Thats ok. I misunderstood. I thought you were continuing the discussion, but apparently you were just having the final word, and clarifying for all us peons.

Excuse me for not understanding.

 

[androd]

Thats ok. I misunderstood. I thought you were continuing the discussion, but apparently you were just having the final word, and clarifying for all us peons.

Excuse me for not understanding.

I never said anything about Peons.
You and Artie are correct. I was wrong !
I'll say again.
I give.
Rod.

 

[Cowboy Dennis]

I have a serious question that will no doubt expose my inexperience in this matter. Which is the greater spot: 9-6 or 11-7?

If you're are receiving the spot 9/6 is better. If you're giving 11/7 is better.
Rod.

Well, that settles that. Correctly I might add.

RBL

 

[androd]

If you're are receiving the spot 9/6 is better. If you're giving 11/7 is better.
Rod.

Well, that settles that. Correctly I might add.

RBL

Dennis now that you've sided with the "Illiterati", you'll be in hot water with the "Illuminati"
Rod.