|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2006 7:33:19 GMT
Good point, Pete.
I have never been a fast player - that's why I haven't won anything! ;)
|
|
|
Post by fazza on Sept 13, 2006 8:11:56 GMT
.....you will rarely win anything...... Whilst you are "on parole" darling, try to work out how to read every word.......................i.e. rarely But you may win something this year, if only someone would let you into their team, but we will keep that for another thread for fear of the cane, and 100 lines.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2006 8:56:37 GMT
Johnny's made his most sensible comment yet with his latest assessment IMHO - all four are of more or less equal importance to make a good player. Nigel's conclusion also matches - he doesn't give any more than 35% to one attribute (choice of shot) at the expense of the others. I would be interested to see what Katie's view on it would be. Agree too with Pete that Speed of play is necessary to reach the pinnacle of success. An importance part of technique I suppose, and I rated technique as my choice of the most important out of the four.
|
|
|
Post by SirKT on Sept 13, 2006 14:08:29 GMT
Hi Tommo good topic this one. I do think that all the attributes are as important as each other but the "Concentration and Ability to read a table quickly" ones would edge it for me. If you`re chasing 21k in an Open or any singles match, you can`t afford the slightest hiccup bacause those vital seconds lost will cost you the match, so concentration is paramount.
There are always "dodgy" tables about, whether be it an AE table or Tarratt. Reading any table quickly, especially if chasing a score is also as important. Sometimes you just know by watching your opponent struggle on the break that it might be worth taking a chance on reversing the break shot or if that doesn`t work, just playing One-up and split shots. I`ve had to do it a few times, mainly to keep some sort of rhythm going.
One good example from a few years ago was at the Dr Martens open in Northants, i drew Steve Mariner on this dog of a table, both of us struggled to get the break, but nearing the end of the first leg i managed to get the balls back and reverse the break. It was just as hard the other way as well, so with my break to come, i played One-up and splits for most of the clock ( if people think that Bar Billiards is boring, try this for a whole game) and won the match. Most players moan when they get drawn on a bad-un, but if they were all easy, then it would be boring.
As for "Choosing the right shot", i personally think that comes with reading the table correctly, because if you haven`t then you wont play the right shots. If the cushions throw high and you haven`t spotted it , then you will play the wrong shot, if there`s a slight roll and you play a slow shot, then again, it will be wrong.
I think that all players at all levels of the game will place these attributes in different orders of importance.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2006 14:49:18 GMT
Thanks Tommo, about time I showed "some" sense ::)
KT, I would be honoured to watch you play this Sunday. If you see a little dude watching your games thats me :)
I must say that everything KT is saying is right, I struggle with rhythm sometimes. I try with Phil to get my game right on that, but I reckon watching KT do a 25K break is all I need!
I would love to play KT though (obviously with me breaking first), just to gain the experience of a "great player"! Would there be time for me to do that at the Berks Open?
I have never heard a player play the one up and split without the break, however that shows what a great player you are, you sound as if you can adapt to any table by the sound of things. However would he adapt to the Carpenters Arms table as quick :D ;)
I suppose you could also give me some tips ;) at Reading on Sunday? I will be all ears.
However coming back to my previous post, as flawless as it sounds has it ever been achieved? Has any player (maybe apart from KT) got those talents at equal levels and at the highest level?
|
|
|
Post by SirKT on Sept 13, 2006 15:06:40 GMT
Unfortunately Johnny there isn`t a spare table to use, they don`t have practice ones because that costs more to hire. I`m afraid the only chance to play me on sunday is if we both win through to the 4th round. Won`t be easy for me either though, possibly Barry Holt 2nd rd and then probably Milko again in the 3rd, if i get through the 1st that is! The only time i`ve played Dave Barnes in Wallingford, he put 12k past me, his 1st season in the top Division. Not a bad way to start eh? Let`s see what he can do on the big stage, it`s nice to see some more localish players having a go though.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2006 15:21:43 GMT
Thanks Sir KT, Any pearls of wisdom for us lesser mortals are greatly appreciated. Agree too that everyone will see the content of the required attributes slightly differently. They're all important, nobody seems to disagree with that... Funny you mentioning Tarratt tables - yes they can sometimes be dodgy - as you are about to find out !
It was actually I who scored that game for you at the Northants Open which you mentioned, and I have referred to it previously on the Forum: You switched to one up and split throughout as the cue ball kept rolling round and round the cup and wouldn't drop cleanly - using up too much time for your liking.
Playing that way certainly tests the concentration, but it's the absolute best way for a non-split player to practise in camera and learn how to split properly.
No-one seems to have found a higher-scoring method than the traditional three-down, one-up, split, though, and I can provide some statistics: 21k comes up in a minimum of 150 shots by this method. If you do one-up, split instead, 150 shots 'only' yield 18,750.
I have been experimenting at home and found a method that would theoretically yield 20k (haven't got it yet, my table only runs for 16 mins and I'm not that quick yet) and is less boring 'cos it uses three different shots instead of two. But I'm not going to tell everyone what it is (although the initiated can work it out) ! ;)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2006 15:21:54 GMT
Don't I play KP though ???
I don't know how the draw works! I even get confused on the table eg. last years Team Champs at Reading I watched table 2 instead of table 1 by accident, I lost ::)
|
|
|
Post by fazza on Sept 14, 2006 6:25:50 GMT
I have never heard a player play the one up and split without the break, however that shows what a great player you are, you sound as if you can adapt to any table by the sound of things. Being totally serious, this just proves that your bar billiards education has been very limited, being in Cambridge. If you really want to improve (tactically) you really must get to more big events. Many people are forced to either switch to what some call a "left-hand break" (and sometimes even a mirror image one-up aswell), or even this continual one-up and split sequence to avoid playing an awkward (or even impossible) normal break shot. You have so much to learn, honestly. But there is no rush!
|
|
|
Post by fazza on Sept 14, 2006 6:39:57 GMT
JG: Let me put my head on the chopping block and "guess" who you would play as you continue to wallop each opponent on Sunday. You have a very good Kent player Neale Chamberlain in the 1st round (Neale has played in the Grand Prix finals). You may play Leon Beer in the 2nd round (Leon has reached the late stages of many, many Opens and has played for England). You may play Richard Wooton in the 3rd round (another player on the edge of the England team and reached the final of the 2005 Oxford Final). You may play any one of 4 or 5 top players in the last 8. You may play Bernie McCluskey in the semi-finals. You may even play ME in the final, but don't hold your breath!
But it is not really important to be able to work the draw out. It is, however, important to get your priorities right and concentrate on every match as it comes up and not to look forward too much.
My honest advice is to enjoy the day, and not to expect too much.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2006 11:25:00 GMT
To add to what Fazza said, for Johnny's benefit, and we're saying this because a guy with your ambition and appetite for the game deserves to hit the big time : If you watch KT play, he just looks normal, very calm and collected but smooth and deadly accurate. Paul Sainsbury, England's No.2 - same comments apply. Look out for the guy in the black shirt - Keith Sheard ("Milko"). You will be amazed by the speed at which he plays and how the balls rattle straight into the pockets. He's after at least 20k every time he plays. And his son, Steven, only a couple of years older than you, obviously out of the same mould, also capaple of enormous scores and of winning Opens. At the Bucks open I stood watching three in a line - Steven, KT and Nigel Senior. They were racking up the thousands in synch, and got up to about 13k each. Katie and Steven eventually banked their scores but Nigel, who had been marginally faster, went on to play it out with 22k.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2006 13:55:47 GMT
Look out for the guy in the black shirt - Keith Sheard ("Milko"). You amaze me Tommo, can you really read the future :o If so what will I be wearing, also where will I finish in the Berks Open :) I aint going to just watch KT, I was planning on watching all the big names. Hopefully they will be kind in giving me some tips on the game to ::) I have a quick question for SirKT. Do you still learn new things about Bar Billiards or have you reached your limit? How far can people go and how do you know when you have reached your peak?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2006 14:46:19 GMT
I should let KT answer, and hope that he still does so, and shall be interested to hear what he says.
I would however refer you to the case of Tiger Woods at golf. Having honed his game to perfection, he (about two years ago) tried to experiment with his swing to make himself even better, and suffered a dramatic loss of form as a result.
I would also refer you to the quotation tag beneath my avatar : genius has its limits but there is no limit to peoples' propensity to stupidity. I have lost count of the number of different ways I have done something silly to lose a game.
For those who disagree that genius has its limits, I would refer you to the thread where I asked "What's the best shot you've ever seen ?" Response was surprisingly little, my offering where I saw a ball cut from immediately in front of the peg in a Competition Final with money on it when it appeared impossible being about the best one. Even a classy player like FeedTheGoat could only refer to one of his own shots where he had thrashed and got about five balls down in one go.
Milko usually plays in black by the way. Some people feel good in it. The late great Johnny Cash was known as "the man in black".
|
|
|
Post by milko on Sept 14, 2006 15:27:59 GMT
I believe most things have been mentioned now and nearly all the comments I agree with, on what makes a good player. At the top of my list would be good technique, stance though is not important as long as the player seems to have a good balance. My best attributes would be speed of play & the amount of side that I can put on a ball, to be able to do this helps enormously, because it can help you stay on the normal break & one up positions, even if the break is difficult due to a table being uphill. This also helps with the split as you can put left or right hand side to save playing a 50-20 or 50-10; this enables a player to get the highest score possible on the table. Being able to read a table is next on my list of importance, this helps a lot in Opens if you can work out what a table is doing before you get to play on it, that is why I look to see what tables I would be playing on further into the tournament so I will have some idea, a bit big headed I know but that is where “belief” (Jeans comment) comes into it. I agree with P.F speed for different situations is important & also getting used to a table before speeding up. You must also be able to concentrate or you will get out of position and miss. I would say my worst attribute at the moment is nerves in team matches, I know everybody suffers from this at some stage, but mine seems to be getting worse (old age) that is why I have retired from the international scene, but I will probably miss it !!!. I know you should not rely on drink “Regg3ys comment” but I like to have a few beers in matches to try to settle my nerves. In the Sussex Open (my favourite) it is more than a few (double figures) but it hasn’t done me any harm as my record shows. Being able to play the table out is a must if players want to win opens, the trouble with this is back pain, and this causes players to lose concentration. Boldness “tommos comment” with shots can help retrieve a situation, so you can keep a break going.
Tommo you don’t miss much do you, I see you have worked out that I nearly always wear my lucky black shirts to tournaments. :) I also agree with you about certain players standing too close, it annoys me as well. ;)
Blimey, I’m exhausted.
Keith.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2006 16:52:39 GMT
Thanks Keith for that insight. Playing shots accurately with side applied at speed is incredibly difficult for most of us. You must have what we call a "very good eye". It was however put to me once that "if you hit the ball right in the middle of the hole, boy, it's almost certain to go down." Wise words indeed.
|
|
|
Post by NigelS on Sept 14, 2006 17:32:04 GMT
One thing I do agree that has been mentioned is that top players are able to adapt. Making a score on a dog of a table is something I have tried to improve on over the years. It is so frustrating to be playing really well and then go out on a rubbish table because you couldn't work out a way to play it. It requires a cool head and a lot of patience.
I think technical knowledge also enhances a players standard. Knowing about how tables can change during the day because of chalk building up on the cushions, knowing about cue tips, knowing about what side spin actually does to the ball and why it makes certain shots work. I have seen a lot of players play with side without actually knowing what they are doing to the balls. I have seen some players play with the opposite side that they intended because they don't have that understanding, they are just playing from memory or what they have been told to do.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2006 18:05:33 GMT
Some loaded comments there, Nigel, especially in your second paragraph. One could be mistaken for thinking that you are covering "what makes a bad player" ;D ;D
I am interested by your comments on how tables can change during the day. A spot of rain and the wood gets sticky and the balls pick up crud in the channels. A clean set of balls can make a world of difference.
My table is in a conservatory and in the mornings plays slow. The best time to play on it is late afternoon if there's been a good bit of sunshine beating down - not directly on it, I hasten to add, it's protected by blinds. The difference is amazing once it's had a chance to speed up.
I must admit I have never even thought of chalk deposits on the cushions, but I recall from when we had a table in the Windmill, Crawley that a residue of chalk can build up around the D, causing an uneven path of the ball towards the 50.
You have just explained the mystery of why some players before they even start run their hand along the side cush by the right hand 50 pocket !
|
|
|
Post by SirKT on Sept 14, 2006 18:30:20 GMT
In answer to your question Johnny, yes. Occasionally i see a shot that i`ve never tried, probably invoving a lot of side or bottom on the cue ball. The Alternative rules open next month(not my favourite i might add) usually throws up some different shots, mainly because it is Off The Spot. In the Final last year, Tony Woolvin played a couple of cushion shots to get out of trouble, twice across the table to hit a ball behind the 10 hole, arguably winning him the match. In the Wallingford Off the Spot singles last season (played under "proper" rules), Mark Turner done the same thing against me on our Home table. After setting me 17k, i caught him up only to break down slightly ahead. One of the balls managed to find its way behind the 10 hole and with the bar dropped, Mark then proceeded to play the triple shot and extricate the ball from that position and go on to win by 200.
So yes, there are shots still out there i might not have seen.
|
|
|
Post by fazza on Sept 15, 2006 7:25:30 GMT
In the Final last year, Tony Woolvin played a couple of cushion shots to get out of trouble, twice across the table to hit a ball behind the 10 hole, arguably winning him the match. Not sure which match you are talking about Kevin, but the final last year was between Chris Saville and myself.... Sorry to have to correct you!
|
|
|
Post by SirKT on Sept 15, 2006 15:43:03 GMT
Sorry, the year before. My how time flies........ ::)
|
|
|
Post by mrmike007 on Sept 20, 2006 0:13:29 GMT
What makes a good Player?
Good Question one that us mere mortals will struggle to answer. If we knew the answer we would be those good players. anyway this mere mortal thinks the percentages should be:- 1.=50% no technique, no natural ability = no player 2.=20% accuracy, shot choice and positioning only come if you have 1 but is the difference between winning and losing when playing another good player. 3.=10% concentration will not help if your stood by the table watching your opponent because your non ability has let him in. its nearly always 1 or 2 that will let you down. 4.=20% ability to read a table very early on in a game is so important. we all know where the shots are but if the table does not send the ball where its supposed to go we have to adapt quickly or lose the game. If only i was this 100% player.
|
|
Ice Man
Full Forum Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by Ice Man on Sept 20, 2006 1:48:43 GMT
Totally agree with you ;)
To be a good player you need almost all of the above but to be a great player you need all of the above which is easier said than done ;)
Anyone can be a good player if they put in enough effort 8-)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2006 8:33:09 GMT
Anyone can be a good player if they put in enough effort 8-) MrMike put a slightly different angle on it and has given such good reasons that I'm now convinced once more that technique (no.1) is half the battle. Re: James's last comment that anyone can be good player with enough effort - good player maybe, but 'great' players tend to be blessed with natural ability in the first place. For an example you only have to look at the snooker player Alex Higgins - an absolute knobhead who wrecked his mind with alcohol, but so much skill which you could almost say he was born with.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2006 9:20:49 GMT
Good point - but the question above was what makes a good player. Very few of us can aspire to be great - but most would like to know how to be good.
|
|