PDA

View Full Version : Why 9-ball Mike?


Celtic
04-09-2005, 09:11 PM
With a new system forming to bring tours together and build a great ranking a qualification system for pool why use a antiquated and far too easy game like 9-ball whose days are numbered? Eventually 9-ball is going to have to go, that is a given because currently the cream has no chance to rise to the top in 9-ball on the mens pool scene. Alternate breaks become hill hill flips of the coin, non-alternate break formats usually see one player sitting twiddleing his thumbs as another player steamrolls through him. Skill does not matter in the top 50, they are all good enough to break and run a rack and luck on the break is alot more important then the skill because on a table where one pro can run out another can do it just as easily. Matches are like flips of the coin, who gets no bad rolls off the break, who gets the momentum, or in alternate break who has the break at 10-10. Just this weekend we see Mika lose a match to Bustamente 11-10, and last week we saw Efren win, next week it will likely be someone else because no one player can dominate a game that everyone has mastered to the same point where luck is the deciding factor.

We need a new game. Not 8-ball, not straight pool, not 1-pocket, a new game. All those games are great but they are all flawed. 8-ball will be no different then 9-ball in that top pro's will all have it mastered to the point of luck being the difference, TheOne showed us that (no offense man, you clearly shoot great but if you can put pressure on Efren like that then how is the game going to stand up to the top 20 players doing battle, it will be a runoutfest). 1-pocket I love but it is clearly too slow a game to use for TV and to interest the crowds, it is also not a game that would be taken up by the majority of Joe Public in the pool halls and familiarity of the common player is an important part of a sport becomming huge in viewership. Straight pool had it's moment in the sun, and again it is a game where the top 20 players would be a flip of a coin once they all played it for a few years. It is a game where one player gets hot and the other player gets to watch. I watched the 150 of Sigel against Rempe, I cannot say if Sigil was actually shooting better that day because Rempe never shot. A good competition needs sparing back and forth by top players, not whitewashes of one against the other.

1 point per a ball rotation would work as the game, it would be siffuciently difficult that no player could master it. Races to 75 points or whatnot also gives is a scoring that is alot more accepted by Joe Public who more times then not find 9-ball stupid in that the last ball is the only one that matters. 15 ball Rotation pool would also bring back the big break as a important feature and yet give the finesse players a playing ground where moving the cueball with skill is critical. The added bonus of such a game is it's possiblity of being played in the bars as a past time, as it uses all the 15 balls and is simple (a point per a ball, 8 points wins) to adapt to bar-pool.

That is one possible game, there could be others invented that would be alot better then 9-ball. Sooner or later 9-ball is going to be history as the premier game for pool, by making it sooner and testing out new games on a tour with the pro's and seeing how they work we could be saving ourselves 10 or 20 years dragging 9-ball along on life support that is destined to sooner or later simply fail. It is only going to get worse, 16 year old kids are playing as good as any pro in the world in 9-ball now, they can beat anyone because of the nature of the game. It has to go and people like you Mike Janis are the ones with the chance to try new things and get the shift into a better direction with a better game.

k-carson
04-10-2005, 12:59 AM
Mikes system a better way to climb the ranks
when/if the ranks are playing a different game
due to the public, promoter , player demand
his system can adapt

vapoolplayer
04-10-2005, 12:55 PM
i'm sure Joe T. will chime in, but i'm all in favor of 10 ball. even if the local and regional's want 9 ball, 10 ball should be the national game.

VAP

MikeJanis
04-11-2005, 05:52 AM
This simple answers to why 9-ball are:::::::::::

TIME CONSTRAINTS and FAN BASE

The time constraints for running a 10-ball vs 9-ball event are an impossible hurdle to deal with at most tournament venues. If we used 10-ball instead of 9-ball, the match races would become shorter. Example: 9-ball races to 9 usually go about 45 minutes to 1 hour and 15 minutes. 10-ball would take a minimum of 1/2 hour longer to complete the same race. Therefore, the match length would have to be dropped a minimum of 2 games. Races to 7 would now become 5. If we changed to 10-ball we would have a whole different complaint to deal with.

Fan Base - On TV, the safety play and less run-outs would get boring to the viewers. At this time, the sport can not afford to lose any viewership.


Mj

Celtic
04-11-2005, 06:13 AM
Thanks for replying MJ (must suck having those initials atm!). I think you may overestimate how interesting 9-ball is on TV, it bores me and most other pool players to tears, and we are the actual fans. Joe Public could not care less about pool as a whole no matter what game. Safeties and a non-trivial mastered game with less runouts so the cream rises to the top in battles where both players get to the table to work their magic are far more entertaining.

MikeJanis
04-11-2005, 07:43 AM
Thanks for replying MJ (must suck having those initials atm!). I think you may overestimate how interesting 9-ball is on TV, it bores me and most other pool players to tears, and we are the actual fans. Joe Public could not care less about pool as a whole no matter what game. Safeties and a non-trivial mastered game with less runouts so the cream rises to the top in battles where both players get to the table to work their magic are far more entertaining.


You said it best. Pool on TV bores pool players to death. The TV market in it's present state is not (is not) attractive to POOL PLAYERS. As a POOL PLAYER myself, I can't stand to watch it either. However, many people do enjoy watching pool on TV. Some are players but most are not. The ones that TV attracts the most are people that play pool but are not POOL PLAYERS.

I myself watch it but don't like many of the productions. Personally, I think it's boring to watch and I don't like most of the commentary I hear. On the other hand, ther are some productions that I do enjoy watching and listening to and they keep me in awe, but not many of them. When I watch the boring ones I find myself looking at the production of the event. Things like banner placement, camera angles and other visual and sound aspects.

I suggest you watch of some of the MatchRoom Sports productions or watch the Allen Hopkins "Skins Billiards Championship". Those are some of the better ones. The fast paced action that 9-ball can provide on TV over a slower more sluggish game definately has its advantages in the TV market. Please take the time to seek out the above mentioned good ones and you will see my point. I hope.

The cream will rise to the top no matter which game is played. But currently 9-ball is the game and I personally think it's all in the way it is presented. I hope in the near future you will see what I mean.


Mj

CaptainJR
04-11-2005, 09:09 AM
The cream will rise to the top no matter which game is played.


'The cream will rise to the top' I think is the key statement here. Also, you don't see the same players all the time. In another thread here I've seen it complained about that in the women's events, you see the same players all the time. Yes, I think 10-ball is a little more skillful, but that would mean that you would start to see less variety in who you watch in the finals.

I enjoy watching pool on TV. I've never seen one I didn't enjoy. I've never seen one the second time that I didn't enjoy it again. Tell you what, I can't say that about golf. If they would have re-runs on golf, I wouldn't watch them. I watch pool every time I can on TV, new or old re-run.

Personally I think the game should be 8-ball. It's more like straight pool and it is what I'm best at. It would eliminate one of Mj's issue "Fan Base". There are a lot of 8-ball players out there. But the "Time constraints" issue would still force the races to be to low.

AuntyDan
04-11-2005, 11:28 AM
I think you may be guilty of throwing out the baby with the bath water by trying to get rid of 9 Ball as the prevelant tournament game. Yes, it is a relatively simply and short game, but so is a single game of Tennis, and just like Pool the server has a huge advantage in each individual game if their serve is working well that day. What is needed in my opinion is smarter match formats.

I'd suggest 9 Ball matches in a format similar to Tennis, with a alternating break and the winner needing to win each set by a clear margin of at least 2 games. If the sets are short (Between 5 and 7) then each match would be a race to either 2 or 4 sets depending on the time constraints.

But if time continues to be the single most important limiting factor and any single match has to be over in approx. 60 minutes, then there is simply no game format that would allow 2 players to conclusively prove who is the better player in such a short time period. In this case then the next best thing is to make it fast and exiting for the audience, which brings us back to 9 Ball.

PrinsNick
04-11-2005, 11:34 AM
With a new system forming to bring tours together and build a great ranking a qualification system for pool why use a antiquated and far too easy game like 9-ball whose days are numbered? Eventually 9-ball is going to have to go, that is a given because currently the cream has no chance to rise to the top in 9-ball on the mens pool scene. Alternate breaks become hill hill flips of the coin, non-alternate break formats usually see one player sitting twiddleing his thumbs as another player steamrolls through him. Skill does not matter in the top 50, they are all good enough to break and run a rack and luck on the break is alot more important then the skill because on a table where one pro can run out another can do it just as easily. Matches are like flips of the coin, who gets no bad rolls off the break, who gets the momentum, or in alternate break who has the break at 10-10. Just this weekend we see Mika lose a match to Bustamente 11-10, and last week we saw Efren win, next week it will likely be someone else because no one player can dominate a game that everyone has mastered to the same point where luck is the deciding factor.

The fact is, luck is often the deciding factor in most games or sports. Tiger Woods' chip shot from the US Masters this weekend was not pure skill. Ask any player and/or team who has won a big tournament in any ball-sport, and if they are honest, they will admit that they had a fair run of the balls and that without it, they probably would not have won. If you take out the luck factor, you will lose thousands of players. Pool cannot afford that. In fact, just watching the big poker wave that has taken the world by storm, I think there should be more luck involved.

As for creating a whole new game, it is not as if it has not been tried in recent years. Just look at the ESPN 6-ball format. And then there is 10-ball, which has been around for a while but has not been able to fill the shoes of 9-ball (too much skill, IMO). Creating a new game is like starting a new sport... it takes more than just a few years for it to catch on.

What we need is a new format, and that is already in the process. The ring game and "skins" formats have proven very popular among the public and players alike, so I think we are already on track. The NUTS will help to give these new games exposure on a national level.

coolpoolfool
04-11-2005, 12:48 PM
The fact is, luck is often the deciding factor in most games or sports. Tiger Woods' chip shot from the US Masters this weekend was not pure skill.

I just don't know if an unskilled player could have made that shot...

PrinsNick
04-11-2005, 01:03 PM
I just don't know if an unskilled player could have made that shot...

Maybe not, but then again maybe... A blind golf player just made a hole-in-one two weeks ago. I didn't say Tiger's shot was ALL luck--but I would bet all my possessions against him doing that same shot twice in a row.

The point I'm trying to make is that there will always be a measure of luck in ball sports. A basketball bouncing out of the hoop instead of going in, a football rebounding off a player's hand and giving the other team an interception chance to a touchdown, you name it--there are countless examples of how luck plays a role in victory.

Then there are those who believe that we create our own luck. Gary Player's famous saying was "the more I practice, the luckier I get."

vapoolplayer
04-11-2005, 01:42 PM
I just don't know if an unskilled player could have made that shot...


that was LUCK. the skill ended when it got on the green. it takes skill to get it near the hole at that distance...........takes luck for it to fall.

just like when earl kick comboed the 9 in hill hill in the big apple 9 ball event. it took SKILL to HIT the ball............it took LUCK to MAKE the 9 ball.

VAP