The Thinking On Bigfoot Slop

[Jaden]

Well I would prefer...

A quick review of my notes indicates that it happened in more than half of the matches. One egregious example was Bustamante (vs. Appleton) slopping in the match-winning 10-ball on a missed shot at the 9-ball.

I would prefer to play texas express with the caveat that all money balls must be call pocket or spotted.

Jaden

 

[CreeDo]

A quick review of my notes indicates that it happened in more than half of the matches. One egregious example was Bustamante (vs. Appleton) slopping in the match-winning 10-ball on a missed shot at the 9-ball.

aka "HALLELUJAH!"

You'd think that if we need to "separate the men from the boys"...
by offering a tougher table with tougher pockets,
then you also need tougher rules.

Slop favors the weaker player (or rather, whoever is playing worse that day),
because the guy who is playing worse will have more missed shots
and therefore more opportunities for slop to affect the outcome.

So why change the equipment to favor the stronger player, but have rules that
favor the weaker player? It sounds inconsistent.

One reason (which is not totally illogical) -
slop adds to spectator entertainment value.

Taking that one step further, maybe the reason for tougher conditions
is NOT for a fairer tournament that ensures the best player wins.
Maybe it's because some people (possible the guy who organized the event)
feel that tougher conditions are more entertaining for the spectators.

I've heard it suggested that this is the reason golf and snooker get more viewers:
what the players do LOOKS tough (and it IS tough).
So maybe slop + tough equipment is consistent after all.

 

[Jaden]

When you change the rules to eliminate two way shots, that helps the lesser player.

aka "HALLELUJAH!"

You think that if we need to "separate the men from the boys"...
by offering a tougher table with tougher pockets,
then you also need tougher rules.

Slop favors the weaker player (or rather, whoever is playing worse that day),
because the guy who is playing worse will have more missed shots
and therefore more opportunities for slop to affect the outcome.

So why change the equipment to favor the stronger player, but have rules that
favor the weaker player? It sounds inconsistent.

One reason (which is not totally illogical) -
slop adds to spectator entertainment value.

Taking that one step further, maybe the reason for tougher conditions
is NOT for a fairer tournament that ensures the best player wins.
Maybe it's because some people (possible the guy who organized the event)
feel that tougher conditions are more entertaining for the spectators.

I've heard it suggested that this is the reason golf and snooker get more viewers:
what the players do LOOKS tough (and it IS tough).
So maybe slop + tough equipment is consistent after all.

When the rules change the ability to play two and three way shots, you help the lesser player not the better player.

If it's going to be call shot, then you should be allowed to call two and three way shots.

Jaden

 

[Joe_Jaguar]

Slops shots affected every match of the last day of 9 ball as well. Just no place for this in pro pool. Especially when someone sticks their opponent by accident.

Leaving someone hooked on a missed shot is a whole different story than slopping in non called balls. Personally I can't stand the Robles tour rules (mentioned above) where you can give a shot back if you don't like the layout you come in to. Sort of gives the ridiculous notion that people shouldn't be able to go for a shot and miss it. If you made a legal shot, that is what should matter. Just my opinion. The incoming person should be happy to get a chance to come to the table. Even Jeannette Lee in the booth during the Accu-Stats broadcast this weekend said how dumb that concept is of being able to pass it back.

 

[pt109]

When the rules change the ability to play two and three way shots, you help the lesser player not the better player.

If it's going to be call shot, then you should be allowed to call two and three way shots.

Jaden

This was said more concisely than I have ever said it....thanx.

Call shots takes skills out of the game.

Sometimes you're in a spot where you're an underdog to make the bank
and you're an underdog to make the carom....but if you play BOTH....
....you're a small favorite.

Call shot rotation reminds me of why I never took up bar pool.

 

[AtLarge]

...One reason (which is not totally illogical) -
slop adds to spectator entertainment value. ...

Yes, that is one of Jay's reasons for favoring slop rules (not a good reason in most competitions, in my opinion).

 

[AtLarge]

... If it's going to be call shot, then you should be allowed to call two and three way shots. ...

As I mentioned, WPA 10-ball rules do not eliminate the most common form of 2-way shot.

 

[lee brett]

I'd like to know the thinking behind the allowed slop in the Bigfoot 10 ball with mostly top tier players and many champions. It's one of my favorite events, but why the slop at that level? Johnnyt

I agree. I mentioned this to Jay, after it cost me my match last year against Kiamco. Spending a $1000 to lose due to balls slopping in, is hard to take.

 

[Jaden]

yeah but it does still prevent calling two balls etc..

As I mentioned, WPA 10-ball rules do not eliminate the most common form of 2-way shot.

Having to make a choice between the lowest numbered OB and say a ball sitting in the jaws, shouldn't be there, if you can control whitey enough to call both, you should get either one.

The best is playing to make a ball, get shape and be hooked on the ball you were going for if you miss. Technically a three way shot, and the rules you cited does allow for this, but I think it would be even better if you had to call the two and three way shots, that way slop doesn't play as big a roll.

I'm all for eliminating as many rolls as possible so long as the way you come up with to do so doesn't eliminate skill at the same time.

Jaden

 

[takeitdown]

As I mentioned, WPA 10-ball rules do not eliminate the most common form of 2-way shot.

Theres no convincing them.
Must be they never lose money and first places to rolls.
Personally when I takeitdown I want to know I was the best that day. Slop doesnt require that.
In pro level races to 9 there may be 5 turns at a table. If you have to kick on 2 of those turns because your opponent missed good thats just not right.

 

[sjm]

I watched eleven of the fifteen matches played, and I'd have to say that the Bigfoot 10-ball event was unimprovable. Yeah, the rules sure did create a jokish final four of Souquet, Feijen, Bustamante and Van Boening. Oh wait - those guys are pretty good. Never mind. And, of course, using slop rules in nine ball brought us Van Boening as the champion.

As I've noted before on AZB, those who suggest that nine ball with slop is broken and that it randomizes the results of matches need look no further than the list of Derby City nine ball champions. It's an absolute who's who of pool, and cinderella stories just don't happen at the Derby City Nine Ball event. The last eleven winners were 2014 Van Boening, 2013 Pagulayan, 2012 Van Boening, 2011 Orcullo, 2010 Reyes, 2009 Van Boening, 2008 Souquet, 2007 Feijen, 2006 Souquet, 2005 Reyes, and 2004 Souquet, every single one of them a current or future BCA hall of famer. Slop counts, rack your own and no jump cues, all of which so many suggest block the cream from rising to the top, have made no difference year after year after year.

Kudos to Jay Helfert. May the Bigfoot 10-ball with slop rules live on forever!

Great event, great field, great rules, great tournament director, and every match on the stream table. Don't want to make Jay's head too big, but there really is not much room for improvement.

 

[pt109]

I agree. I mentioned this to Jay, after it cost me my match last year against Kiamco. Spending a $1000 to lose due to balls slopping in, is hard to take.

I thought you came from snooker....
...how many shots did you call in that game?

And if they ever brought call shots into carombole....I'd stop watching it.
...on many shots, top players give themselves 3 ways of scoring.

 

[Dudley]

I thought you came from snooker....
...how many shots did you call in that game?

And if they ever brought call shots into carombole....I'd stop watching it.
...on many shots, top players give themselves 3 ways of scoring.

Agreed PT109,

Slop is one of those things that bothers some and is part of the game for others.. It's all about your perspective.

Regardless of your level you will get good rolls and bad. And this won't change with called pocket. There is a level of random when the balls are rolling around the table. This can be minimized by skillful play but it only takes a dirty ball to cause a skid or a piece of chalk have a ball roll funny.

I see both sides of the argument and they both have merit.. But the main thing I don't like about call pocket is that you have to pick 1 result when there are many situations in which multiple results could happen. I like playing creative combos and caroms with multiple balls while playing safe. These shots are unplayable with call pocket rules.

I really dislike the rule in which you can legally pocket a ball and call safe.. Just seems very odd to me.

Rarely is a slopped in ball the only factor in why a player wins a set in an open tournament.

Dudley

 

[Cornerman]

Theres no convincing them.
Must be they never lose money and first places to rolls.

You all make good points.

Just a note for all the players out there, if and when you decide to go to the Derby City Classic, don't be surprised if you don't see a single 10-ball game in the action room being played by anything resembling WPA rules. "Slop counts" will dominate if you happen to see 10-ball match-ups. And those players have a bit more experience than most about winning or losing due to rolls.

The only 10-ball match-up I heard of or saw this year that had call shot rules was with Jayson Shaw, who as far as I know never played 10-ball until after the WPA went to call shot.

If people like Jay Helfert and SJM are all for "slop rules" in 10-ball, shouldn't that give many of you pause to consider that they actually have valid points? We're talking about two guys that have seen it all in this game from more angles than most will ever see.

Freddie <~~~ has seen less angles than Stu and Jay

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Then the ones that can't shouldn't want to be there @ $1000 a pop.

Yes!

As far as the slop goes, I don't think it makes a big difference either way on those tables. 10' table, 4 5/16" pockets... not too many balls are gonna wander in those holes on accident. But to me, it's just a matter of principle. Pool should be a called shot game at the pro level. These guys aren't hit-and-hope weekend bar bangers. They should at least give the impression to the public that they are above all that.

 

[sjm]

These guys aren't hit-and-hope weekend bar bangers. They should at least give the impression to the public that they are above all that.

They should at least give the impression that they are players that are playing the same nine/ten ball game played by the bangers if they want any of them to watch.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

They should at least give the impression that they are players that are playing the same nine/ten ball game played by the bangers if they want any of them to watch.

OK... lets have them play 8-ball on beat-to-shit Valleys, using warped bar sticks with slip-on ferrules and flat, glazed-over tips and maybe some chalk somewhere. That's the pool I grew up on, but I really have no interest in paying to watch it.

 

[Paul Schofield]

I watched eleven of the fifteen matches played, and I'd have to say that the Bigfoot 10-ball event was unimprovable. Yeah, the rules sure did create a jokish final four of Souquet, Feijen, Bustamante and Van Boening. Oh wait - those guys are pretty good. Never mind. And, of course, using slop rules in nine ball brought us Van Boening as the champion.

As I've noted before on AZB, those who suggest that nine ball with slop is broken and that it randomizes the results of matches need look no further than the list of Derby City nine ball champions. It's an absolute who's who of pool, and cinderella stories just don't happen at the Derby City Nine Ball event. The last eleven winners were 2014 Van Boening, 2013 Pagulayan, 2012 Van Boening, 2011 Orcullo, 2010 Reyes, 2009 Van Boening, 2008 Souquet, 2007 Feijen, 2006 Souquet, 2005 Reyes, and 2004 Souquet, every single one of them a current or future BCA hall of famer. Slop counts, rack your own and no jump cues, all of which so many suggest block the cream from rising to the top, have made no difference year after year after year.

Kudos to Jay Helfert. May the Bigfoot 10-ball with slop rules live on forever!

Great event, great field, great rules, great tournament director, and every match on the stream table. Don't want to make Jay's head too big, but there really is not much room for improvement.

Very good. That's right. Call nothing......period! Calling balls is advantage weaker player and ruins pool. Increase the luck factor by having to call balls.

 

[KRJ]

Rarely is a slopped in ball the only factor in why a player wins a set in an open tournament.

Dudley

Then why have it if it makes little difference. Thus, the only possible benefactor is the guy who got lucky on one shot that could swing the set, so why give it to him?

9b and 10b are different animals, why keep putting them in the same cage ??

 

[pt109]

Then why have it if it makes little difference. Thus, the only possible benefactor is the guy who got lucky on one shot that could swing the set, so why give it to him?

9b and 10b are different animals, why keep putting them in the same cage ??

10-ball is not a new game, RJ.....saw and played lots of it from the 70s on.
....it's 9-ball with one more ball...other than that, it's the same game.

And great multi-choice shots have won more games by far, at a high level,
than luck shots....in my experience, of course.

..check this one out at 3:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IocXrswOU1o