sjm said:

Can't stand it for two reasons.

1. It shortchanges the provider of the added money
Somebody has put up money to stage an event and has a right to expect that event to produce a measurable amount of entertainment for anybody who chooses to watch. Splitting in the final shortchanges both the sponsor and the fans. Of course, the examples of top players ignoring the interests of sponsors and fans are countless and have and will always continue to devalue the pool product.

2. Players who forego playing for titles don't develop as well as they might
Reaching one's potential as a player requires getting comfortable with maximum pressure situations, and opting not to play a final gets in the way of such development.

One time, in about 2002, I reached the final of an event in New Jersey and my opponent was, somewhat improbably, the person who was going to drive me home. I was asked to split and refused, offering that "even if it means losing my ride home" I want to play this out. I won, still got my ride home, and there were no hard feelings. I knew that it was by playing in finals that my game would best develop.

Especially at a time when the competitive pedigree of American pool players is in decline relative to their foreign counterparts, I hate seeing finals foregone. Yes, I get it if it's very late and tomorrow's a workday, but event producers must ensure that it doesn't come to that and, if they do not, it's on them.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you responded.

Funny thing is that when I solicited opinions on this, your's was one of several that I wanted to hear.

I didn't lead with this because I didn't want this thread to sound like a backdoor brag, but I won/split a small tournament recently and it was my first time ever splitting. The circumstance was that it was a weeknight, small field, no money added, getting late, and the money difference between first and second was nothing that would raise anyone's heart rate.

With that said...

I am on the same page as you to your first point. I described the tournaments that I think have to play it out as the multi-day, weekend tournaments with more significant prize money. You are adding the situation in which there is money added, which I agree makes finishing even more necessary. I also think those are the tournaments in which there are spectators and other interested parties that are shortchanged if there is no final. I do and have always believed those need to be played to a conclusion.

As to your second point, even though I did a split, I think I am tending to agree with you and will take this into consideration if the situation arises again. Even though the money didn't matter, "outcomes" do matter. At some point we (I) probably should consider the binary stake of answering the question, "Did you WIN a pool tournament or did you NOT win a pool tournament?" That is what we could have played for, and while the money would not raise my heart rate, maybe answering that binary question would, and that could be good for my (or anyone's) development.

Appreciate your thoughts.

To the top

alstl said:

I have a similar Dufferin with butterfly veneers in the butt and pin in the shaft. I paid $10 for it at a pawn shop and after the tip on my phenolic break cue got messed up I pulled out the Dufferin and have been using it for a few months. Still rolls straight and breaks as good or better than the break cue.

They were built to last.

Click to expand...

Do you still have that cue? I'm looking for a Dufferin with the pin in the shaft.

Danny 314 said:

I have one of Scot's sneaky pete cues. Great build and hit. I wish I had bought one of his Titleist conversion cues when I had the chance. I personally like his logo.

These pictures are taken off his website.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

What was the ballpark cost of that conversion? I have several Dufferins I'm going to convert and looking for something similar.

DieselPete said:

What do you think of players agreeing to split?

Click to expand...

Can't stand it for two reasons.

1. It shortchanges the provider of the added money
Somebody has put up money to stage an event and has a right to expect that event to produce a measurable amount of entertainment for anybody who chooses to watch. Splitting in the final shortchanges both the sponsor and the fans. Of course, the examples of top players ignoring the interests of sponsors and fans are countless and have and will always continue to devalue the pool product.

2. Players who forego playing for titles don't develop as well as they might
Reaching one's potential as a player requires getting comfortable with maximum pressure situations, and opting not to play a final gets in the way of such development.

One time, in about 2002, I reached the final of an event in New Jersey and my opponent was, somewhat improbably, the person who was going to drive me home. I was asked to split and refused, offering that "even if it means losing my ride home" I want to play this out. I won, still got my ride home, and there were no hard feelings. I knew that it was by playing in finals that my game would best develop.

Especially at a time when the competitive pedigree of American pool players is in decline relative to their foreign counterparts, I hate seeing finals foregone. Yes, I get it if it's very late and tomorrow's a workday, but event producers must ensure that it doesn't come to that and, if they do not, it's on them.

skor said:

There is an on-going argument around here about what is needed to reduce cue ball deflection and a lot of people here says that only front end mass matters, yest in this video as well, it is explained that a lower mass shaft will be the thing that moves away from the path instead of the cue ball, yet neglecting to explain that in order for it to move, it needs to be flexible.
two shafts with same mass but different flexibility will perform differently.

Click to expand...

greyghost said:

False.

Click to expand...

From Dr Dave at https://drdavepoolinfo.com/faq/squirt/endmass/ and Shaft Endmass and Stiffness Effects,

Dr Dave explains how its easy to change the amount of deflection by adding front-end mass (to increase deflection) or removing front-end mass (to decrease deflection) while not changing shaft stiffness. His example is fine for decreasing deflection by replacing a heavier ferrule with a lighter one with presumably no effect on shaft stiffness. His other example for that --- cored-out wood shafts decrease weight and deflection while having no significant effect on shaft-end stiffness. Does coring a wood shaft have no significant effect on shaft-end stiffness?

jimstone said:

I'm considering buying the ICA pro system. Are you able to create your own drills from books or other pool content with the pro bundle, or is it an add-on you have to buy?

Click to expand...

best to send an email to them but i would think the answer is yes

InsertCleverNameHere said:

Just remember every time you say it’s more enjoyable for spectators that you’re talking about like minded pool players.

Who you are absolutely NOT talking about is people curious about pool or might be, people who aren’t indoctrinated already, and people who play pool as a means to hang out with others socially only but occasionally will watch pros on tv. We as a community keep trying to meddle with a game to make it “more spectator friendly” when in reality none of the changes have accomplished that.

They may at times make it better for pool players viewing pleasure but that absolutely in no way shape or form brings new eyeballs to the arena.

And No, I definitely don’t know the answer to accomplish that either.

Click to expand...

Scantily dressed ring girls and a pro wresting level of storyline. Imagine how fun it would be to see your favorite player cut a promo before and after the match. The storyline would basically need two branches depending on who wins. I know this sounds stupid, but do you remember liking player's idiosyncrasies, style, and antics before they all turned into robots?

Jason Shaw challenges SVB to an arm wrestling contest before the match and we get to see it. Real "ring" entrances, complete with theme music and pyrotechnics. The current reigning champion comes to the ring with the championship belt and must defend it, etc.

Again

fuggles said:

9 ball last.

Click to expand...

I was with you up until this point. In my opinion this removes the very soul of 9 ball. We have a Monday night league that has this rule. It beats not playing pool but it's not 9 ball.

The reason we do it is because it's 5 person teams and we play each opposing player 1 game, so you play all 5 opponents once. This makes sense for single games, but if you're doing anything over a race to 5, the 9 riding tends to not make a huge difference in the outcome.

Don't get me wrong, it's okay to play that way, but it really does take a lot of excitement from the game.

Check dm

skor said:

There is an on-going argument around here about what is needed to reduce cue ball deflection and a lot of people here says that only front end mass matters, yest in this video as well, it is explained that a lower mass shaft will be the thing that moves away from the path instead of the cue ball, yet neglecting to explain that in order for it to move, it needs to be flexible.
two shafts with same mass but different flexibility will perform differently.

Click to expand...

False.

cuefan6969 said:

Where are you located?

Click to expand...

Currently in Durham NC, moving soon near Dallas, TX for work.

Please walk into your local club and play this somewhat makable shot - if the opponent objects ask
them to produce the rule in writing..