Frosty said:

Really? It’s like this, a lot of players cried like girls when the wing ball went all the time when the 1 was racked on the spot, and as it still should be. So then some genius changed the rules of the game to rack the 9 on the spot to stop the automatic wing ball. Then good players did what they do, they experimented and discovered with the cut break they could make the 1 in the side and often the wing ball as well. They’ve made up new rules for break boxes, racking the balls in a way never intended, putting the 2 in the back all the time, then making it be randomly placed when guys figured that out.

Good players experiment and find a way, and the only thing that has been consistent the last 25 years or so is the constant whining about it. It’s 9 ball, it’s meant to fast and action packed, that’s its appeal. If you don’t like it, don’t watch or play it, watch or play something else. Many say 10 ball is the way but that’s no different with the 2 balls behind the 1 going to the sides and the corner balls going 4 rails. Many say alternating breaks, that’s changing the rules and game into something it’s not. This isn’t golf or tennis where everyone always gets a turn. Most people that really appreciate the sport like to watch packages strung together. If you’re a fan of “safety battles” then play or watch 1 pocket or 14:1.

I once heard someone describe 9 ball as a game for gunslingers, that’s very true. It’s a test of a players ability to control the table when it’s their inning. It’s also a test for players to maintain their composure in the chair and whether they can rise to the occasion when an opportunity presents itself. They need to put the 1 back on the spot, no break box and let the game be what it is. If they don’t like the game as it is, then play 15 ball 61 rotation or go back to 14:1. This constant changing of the rules to appease the “everybody gets a chance to play, everyone gets a participation trophy” generation borders on ridiculous. Leave the game alone, if you don’t like it as it is, take up a different game. I’d rather watch lopsided shellackings than “safety battles”, those are as boring as watching p

Click to expand...

Great post. It is what it is.

For whatever my opinion is worth and if it were my tournament, I think that racks in major events should be set by a neutral ref using a hand rack and players should not be able to inspect them or ask for a rerack. The rack is what it is. Remove any predictability by not allowing the players to have any say in the rack. Just break the balls and play.

Again, you dont like the rules, dont play. As Frosty said, you are a good player...."find a way".

Nine ball is supposed to be fast and loose in my opinion. Safety play is a huge part but certainly not more important than overall firepower. When it comes to making it appealing for viewers, people love watching Strickland (back in his prime), Filler, Shaw, SVB, etc because they run out and they run out at a reasonable pace. Offense with pace is good for the casual viewer for sure. And though its not about the casual viewer, the idea that it is good product for the casual viewer may be something to consider given the current state of trying to grow nine ball into something that creates tv revenue, drives prize pools and is overall more appealing. It could become a win win for both the players and the promoters. Hopefully.

Look at the PGA. A lot of players were not fond of Tiger, for whatever reason, early in his career. But, once they realized that they could become millionaires by simply making the PGA tour because of what he was doing for viewership, they were all for it. Even finishing top 20 in a single tournament was more money than the average person was making in a year. Finishing at that level in a number of tournaments and you were making more than doctors and lawyers.

The game grew because he ran over people with his firepower. He became a brand as much as a golfer and the smart golfers knew that his presence and the product that the PGA was putting on tv each week was making them rich. A couple years after he came along, second place was paying as much or more than what first place was prior to his arrival. And first place was at levels that nobody couldve dreamt of.

There are a few pool players now who are becoming a brand. Certainly that makes good business sense. Those windows are small. Capitalize when you can. Imagine if Archer had the opportunities back then that players have now with social media. I bet the stability (or lack thereof) in his life would be way different that it is now. He was never a brand. He was just a top tier pool player. And we all know that a status like that by itself isnt worth a whole lot in the big picture. It might be going forward given the current growing posture of prize funds, but a world champion in the 80's or 90's, though an incredible accomplishment, simply doesnt carry much weight these days.

If the prize money is right, players will show up no matter what the rules.

If you have the firepower to run rack after rack after rack, then why shouldnt you be able to even it means the corner ball going on the break over and over and over. We are playing on the same table. If I dont like watching you run out, then I need to make that same corner ball and run those same racks. Otherwise, I am going to get sent packing. In straight pool, running huge numbers is celebrated. In nine ball, its almost taboo. To me, that makes no sense.

Now, this is my personal opinion. Certainly if Matchroom feels that growing the game and driving their revenue is best with break boxes and trying to slow the game, then have at it. I am a believer in free enterprise much the same as I am a not a believer in participation trophies or everybody getting a turn. Its their product. Sell it, grow it, mold it or whatever however you see fit.

And I am a huge Matchroom fan. They are injecting so much money into the game that regardless of what or how they do it, I will support them because at least they are doing something for me as a fan. Would I prefer things the way I mentioned.....sure because I love to watch offense. But I am going to watch regardless.

I guess my whole point is that I agree with Frosty.