Pool has a "FATAL FLAW"

[nancewayne]

Fatal Flaw ?

Wasn't the IPT (International Pool Tour) successful? I know the $$$ ultimately screwed it up, BUT the interest WAS there and IT WAS 8-BALL !!! The IPT was talked about constantly in the pool halls and leagues and MANY amateur players followed it all the way to its' demise. The Pros are still playing 8-ball in some of the biggest tournaments.
F.Y.I.


Q[UOTE=Wags;2959363]I agree. 8-ball is the most played game in the world. Leagues are doing well, amateurs are doing well, pros not so good (they have trouble making a living out of it, which isn't neccessarily pool's fault). I still can't figure out why pros aren't playing the game the whole world relates to.[/QUOTE]

 

[Paul Schofield]

Wasn't the IPT (International Pool Tour) successful? I know the $$$ ultimately screwed it up, BUT the interest WAS there and IT WAS 8-BALL !!! The IPT was talked about constantly in the pool halls and leagues and MANY amateur players followed it all the way to its' demise. The Pros are still playing 8-ball in some of the biggest tournaments.

Was there interest outside the pool community? Did it expand our demographic and get more people to play pool?

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

Sound like this is heading in the direction of some type of 2 cue ball game where both players are at the table at the same time. I can't wait to hear it.

 

[Paul Schofield]

It doesn't HAVE to have a "defensive" side to it.

Once again.....just my $.02 worth!!!

Maniac

I agree. It does not have to have a defensive side to it. My post cited golf, bowling, swimming, and fishing as being perfectly fine.

 

[12ozCurl]

Saftey = Defense?

Besides there is always the psychological warfare element. Look at "The Pearl" he is a damn fine shot but he often beats people before picking up the cue.

 

[Paul Schofield]

I agree. 8-ball is the most played game in the world. I still can't figure out why pros aren't playing the game the whole world relates to.

Wags - I am with you. Eight-Ball is the best thing we have going right now because it is a game that everyone relates to. It is not the first choice of the pros and it is understandable. As a matter of fact, anyone who improves quickly, moves beyond it.

 

[Grilled Cheese]

The reasons pool isn't popular on TV or as a spectator sport are numerous. I don't think the way it has played is one of the reasons.

I prefer that pool not be a sport where you are entitled to your turn at the table. Pool is the ultimate control game. It punishes mistakes more than anything else (except perhaps Chess). If you're sitting in the chair - it's YOUR fault. The responsibility is all yours.

Each player has the same opportunity at the lag to earn first control or to pass. Don't like getting run out? Tough. You win the lag and run the other guy out. Can't? Oh well, the other guy is better.

That's why alternate break sucks. Why give the opponent a chance? Want a chance? Earn it. Or wait until the guy at the table fails. That's the beauty of pool. No sympathy for missing, losing or anything like that. Weakness isn't subsidized by silly rules giving chances to everyone. That's new school thinking. Kind of like the crap we see these days where every kid gets an award or medal for participating. Modern society wants to see egalitarianism prevail in everything, even at the expense of competition. This destroys excellence. It hinders the best from reaching greater heights. Our civilization has always celebrated the ideal and the greatest. Pushing higher limits. Modern rules amount to handicapping and equalizing. Equality and sports don't mix.


I could care less about watching two pros each have a chance at the racks. I don't want to see that. I want to see them struggle against one another, and for each of them to try to maintain control and shut the other out. That's the beauty of pool. It's a celebration of excellence in being able to maintain table control and dominate the opponent. Alternate break kills all that. Pool then becomes like bowling where everyone gets to bowl. The interaction is lost. Darts is the same. Each player has their turn at the board. Pool is different, you interact with the results on the table. Different players play different safeties and have different abilities in escaping safeties.

I'd much rather watch a player run out a 7 pack on another than watch a 7-6 match that was on the hill. Double Hill can be exciting, but it's inferior to watching someone control the table and continue winning. That's excellence. 7-6 score most often means there were errors in the match. They were each letting one another back into it. Rarely is each exchange of control a result of control being taken away via successful safety battle. Some are errors, like misses or botched safeties. These mistakes degrade the overall match. Mistake free matches, or matches with the least errors are the greatest to watch. The ultimate match is the one where the only error was losing the LAG.


I remember watching a match between Alex Pagulayan and Rodney Morris, went something like this. Alex breaks and runs 6 racks. He messes up shape or there was a nasty cluster and plays safe. There's a safety battle - Rodney comes out on top and has control. Rodney then proceeds to win then break and run 5 after that equalizing. There was a safety battle in the last game, and Rodney (IIRC) came out on top winning the last game. Not flawless match. A couple mistakes.

But that was one of the better matches I've seen in this era of boring alternate break. Imagine that same race if it were alternate break?


BORING. zzzzzzz Like all alternate break matches. Whiners don't like winner breaks because they cry that the good breakers have an edge. Tough shit. Breaking is part of the game, and if someone is better at it - then too bad for you. You have every opportunity to learn a good break too. Any complaints about breaking is an attempt to handicap the game.

Anyway, the beauty of it is - sometimes the player in control dominates and they win 9-0 or 9-1. Or sometimes they put up a 6 pack or more and it all looks lost, but guess what? The opponent, if they earn the right at the table, has the same exact opportunity once at the table to return with their own 6 pack. And that's beautiful. If they can't and win only 1 rack, then their opponent runs the rest out - oh well. They deserve to lose and deserve to lose by that margin.

I love matches like that. Watching one player dominate and all looks lost for the guy in the chair, then the opponent gets in and strings racks together and wins or equalizes. What that does is, it makes watching the player in control more interesting - not more boring as others suggest because he/she is at the table alone for a long time. Because even though they might be on the 6th run out in a row, or on the 140th ball - they still suffer the pressure that one miss, just one miss or worse, one error whatever it may be, could result in the loss of the match. Imagine that, running racks and racks and everything is looking great - but total defeat is one mistake away. If the one player runs the other out completely without them having a chance - even better! Far better and more memorable is such a display of excellence than the excitement of a struggle made possible by repeated blunders. The best way to ensure victory is to never give the other guy a shot. In pool, no one is entitled to a shot. You have NO RIGHTS. You have to earn everything. People who think they are entitled to chances at the table are weak minded.


That's how straight pool was. Some players could run to 140 - a great run by any standard, and make a mistake and lose control and watch their opponent go 150 and out. Just like that. Sitting in the chair, watching helplessly and nearly hopelessly as your opponent buries you. Shot after shot. The chances of them missing is slim. Harsh punishment for missing.


Cold. Brutal. Unforgiving.


That's the beauty of pool.

 

[duckie]

Wags - I am with you. Eight-Ball is the best thing we have going right now because it is a game that everyone relates to. It is not the first choice of the pros and it is understandable. As a matter of fact, anyone who improves quickly, moves beyond it.

To me, this is the FATAL FLAW in pool, thinking that 9 ball or even 1 pocket is harder or better than 8 ball.

If there was the money in 8 ball tourney's and more of them, the pros would play. For true pro's, the game does not matter. It's the money.

The FLAWS you are addressing are related to 9 ball, 10 ball.

There is way more going on in a good game of 8 ball than 9 ball. Traffic, clusters, blocked pockets, the other player moving your balls to bad spots, true safety battles.

 

[BasementDweller]

Cold. Brutal. Unforgiving.


That's the beauty of pool.

Very well said. You summed it up for me. This is the sort of thinking Americans were known for not too long ago. Now, like you said - every kid gets a trophy.

"Hey cute little Timmy, I just wanted to pull you aside and let you know that you will not be getting a trophy this year because you really didn't contribute anything to our team. As a matter of fact, the only reason you were on the team was because I couldn't find anybody else to try out. So I couldn't justify cutting you. You ever thought about giving skateboarding a try?"

 

[Sharkey]

Through out all of this, no one seems to really have any real idea or knowledge of whats actually going on in the pool world and why pool is where it is.

The IPT was not a hit because Kevin poured a bunch of money into it. It was a pyramid scam that he executed well. Praying off of amateur and semi pro players with the dream of a big payout (I guess we all kind of fit into that one) but that's what it was, and that is what Kevin does the best.

In my opinion, for pool to be successful on TV they need to change the format to a points earned event. Like most other sports where coverage jumps from table to table and no knows who is going to win until the end and anyone has the chance to make a come back.

Then there are the issues with ESPN and them making it ridiculously expensive to televise pool events while leaving some of the others that are much more difficult to produce much less.

Just a few of the issues that I have had experience with in the past.

 

[hunger strike]

Switching to the voice of Dr. Eric Berne, psychiatrist

Through out all of this, no one seems to really have any real idea or knowledge of whats actually going on in the pool world and why pool is where it is.

The IPT was not a hit because Kevin poured a bunch of money into it. It was a pyramid scam that he executed well. Praying off of amateur and semi pro players with the dream of a big payout (I guess we all kind of fit into that one) but that's what it was, and that is what Kevin does the best.

In my opinion, for pool to be successful on TV they need to change the format to a points earned event. Like most other sports where coverage jumps from table to table and no knows who is going to win until the end and anyone has the chance to make a come back.

Then there are the issues with ESPN and them making it ridiculously expensive to televise pool events while leaving some of the others that are much more difficult to produce much less.

Just a few of the issues that I have had experience with in the past.

I believe I posted earlier in this thread so you can look that up. Now you need to be specific about "where pool is." Do you mean the ability of people to go find a place to play pool? Not a problem, bars everywhere. Making a living at it? I already addressed that regarding tv viewers wanting to see something impressive that they cannot do themselves, like run a table of ten ball on a ten footer. The popularity issue and why it is not a more popular pastime? Look up my post on the fat kid. Adding to my comments on the etiquette of gambling, I am hoping that you will all read the following then click on the link, because pool lends itself to a social game called nigysob and many people have a distaste for being "taught a lesson." Here goes: "This can be seen in classic form in poker games. White gets an unbeatable hand, such as four aces. At this point, if he is a NIGYSOB player, he is more interested in the fact that Black is completely at his mercy than he is in good poker or making money." Here is the link if you really want your eyes opened about how people work and why some have a distaste for what the title of this thread calls "pool's fatal flaw."
http://www.ericberne.com/games/games_people_play_NIGYSOB.htm

~enjoy

 

[Paul Schofield]

if he is a NIGYSOB player, he is more interested in the fact that Black is completely at his mercy than he is in good poker or making money.http://www.ericberne.com/games/games_people_play_NIGYSOB.htm

~enjoy

How about a link to your post on the fat kid.

Yes, I am very aware of this. You are coming from a different angle but essentially, we are talking about the same thing. Now, what makes pool a game of NIGYSOB? I am pointing my finger squarely at it.

Is pool fatally flawed?...only to the people who don't and won't play it. That is the group I am interested in.

 

[HawaiianEye]

Uh, golf has pretty broad based appeal, has major sponsorship, hugely successful tours, network TV plus it's own dedicated cable channel, and even the second tier & journeyman pros are millionaires.

In golf your competitor also doesn't play defense against you.

With all due respect, I don't think that's it.

Your competitor doesn't get to play defense against you, but he or she gets a play in the game. They DON'T sit on the sidelines holding their clubs, like pool players do when they don't ever get a turn at the table.

In order to more "even up" the game, the breaks must be alternated to ensure somebody doesn't get up and run a complete set without the other player having a turn at the table.

On numerous occasions, I've strung together 4-, 5-, and 6- rack runs when playing winner breaks. On a bar table I even ran 13 one time. In small local tournaments, with races to 3 or so in a set, it isn't uncommon for players to never get to the table in a set.

 

[sebas]

Golf

Your competitor doesn't get to play defense against you, but he or she gets a play in the game. They DON'T sit on the sidelines holding their clubs, like pool players do when they don't ever get a turn at the table.

In order to more "even up" the game, the breaks must be alternated to ensure somebody doesn't get up and run a complete set without the other player having a turn at the table.

On numerous occasions, I've strung together 4-, 5-, and 6- rack runs when playing winner breaks. On a bar table I even ran 13 one time. In small local tournaments, with races to 3 or so in a set, it isn't uncommon for players to never get to the table in a set.

I have no business doing this but....Golf started out with people playing defense. The rules have changed. The original game allowed for you to be able to putt into you oponents line blocking him from putting directly at the hole. Just an FYI.

 

[HawaiianEye]

Here is the “FATAL FLAW”: A player is entitled to play on offence and score without limit while an opponent sits idly without influence.

I remember back in 1972, or so, when "St. Louis Louie" Roberts came to my hometown and destroyed everyone and took all their money. He was playing so well that he spotted all of his opponents everything from the 7, to the 7, 8, 9 and the break and he still won.

When everyone quit, one old man, who had been staking some of the players, said, "If I could play pool, I'd play you."

Louie responded, "You don't have to know how to play pool to bet with me. You don't even need a stick. You give me the break and the ball in hand after the break and if I don't run the table, you win."

The old man took him up on the offer for $20 a game and Louie ran the racks way more often than not and he took quite a bit more of the guy's money before the guy surrendered.

Maybe something like this should be incorporated into the game. Alternate breaks and each guy get's ball in hand after his break. He gets a point for each ball he runs and maybe a five point bonus if he runs the table. After a predetermined set of so many games, the points are totaled and the person with the most points wins.

 

[Paul Schofield]

Very well said. You summed it up for me. This is the sort of thinking Americans were known for not too long ago. Now, like you said - every kid gets a trophy.

"Hey cute little Timmy, I just wanted to pull you aside and let you know that you will not be getting a trophy this year because you really didn't contribute anything to our team. As a matter of fact, the only reason you were on the team was because I couldn't find anybody else to try out. So I couldn't justify cutting you. You ever thought about giving skateboarding a try?"

You are missing the point. This is not about self esteem. This is about engaging the players and improving competition and in the long run, upping participation.

Here is the shocker that few people know or understand. The closer play gets to even participation, the more of a lock it is for the better player to win. It is a huge advantage to the better player. But not surprisingly, the matches are much closer.

Here is something that I know. Players will gladly welcome more back and forth if their winning percentage improves (just look at One Pocket). Everything is give and take.

 

[BasementDweller]

You are missing the point. This is not about self esteem. This is about engaging the players and improving competition and in the long run, upping participation.

Here is the shocker that few people know or understand. The closer play gets to even participation, the more of a lock it is for the better player to win. It is a huge advantage to the better player. But not surprisingly, the matches are much closer.

Here is something that I know. Players will gladly welcome more back and forth if their winning percentage improves (just look at One Pocket). Everything is give and take.

I really do understand what you are saying and you make as good of an argument as you possible can. I just really enjoy watching good nine-ball and ten-ball. A big part of these games that I personally enjoy is seeing people string racks together.

Having said that, I do understand that the alternating break format actually favors the stronger player but I don't really care about that. I have mentioned this several times in other threads but I'll say it again - I think the problem with nine-ball is the super short races. When pros find a way to reach the finals of a big tournament, only to finish it off with a race to 7 or something similar, that to me is a joke. They might as well, just flip a coin. If we are going to be stuck playing races to 5 or something similar than go ahead and play alternating breaks, but don't fool yourself into thinking this is somehow more exciting than seeing someone come back from being down 6-1 by running out the set! That is exciting to most people.

If you don't allow the stringing of racks then I believe all matches will eventually have the exact same feel. To me that's boring. Now if two people were playing a race to 21 or 25 and you wanted to switch the break after every 5 racks that would make it interesting, while still leaving open the possibility of stringing some racks together. Of course I know that will never happen.

 

[HawaiianEye]

I really do understand what you are saying and you make as good of an argument as you possible can. I just really enjoy watching good nine-ball and ten-ball. A big part of these games that I personally enjoy is seeing people string racks together.

Having said that, I do understand that the alternating break format actually favors the stronger player but I don't really care about that. I have mentioned this several times in other threads but I'll say it again - I think the problem with nine-ball is the super short races. When pros find a way to reach the finals of a big tournament, only to finish it off with a race to 7 or something similar, that to me is a joke. They might as well, just flip a coin. If we are going to be stuck playing races to 5 or something similar than go ahead and play alternating breaks, but don't fool yourself into thinking this is somehow more exciting than seeing someone come back from being down 6-1 by running out the set! That is exciting to most people.

If you don't allow the stringing of racks then I believe all matches will eventually have the exact same feel. To me that's boring. Now if two people were playing a race to 21 or 25 and you wanted to switch the break after every 5 racks that would make it interesting, while still leaving open the possibility of stringing some racks together. Of course I know that will never happen.

I agree with most of what you said; however, I read an article (with statistics) stating that the person who breaks actually wins the game less often than the person who isn't breaking. It wasn't by more than a percent or two, but that is what the article stated and it used statistics from analyzing the matches.

I also think that races to 7 are nowhere near what it takes to separate the better players when they are playing at the professional level. A minimum of race to 11 should be the norm and race to 21 would be even better.

I enjoy watching people run rack after rack, but I also think the person sitting in the chair needs a chance to get to the table to show their skills.

 

[hunger strike]

Great concept

I remember back in 1972, or so, when "St. Louis Louie" Roberts came to my hometown and destroyed everyone and took all their money. He was playing so well that he spotted all of his opponents everything from the 7, to the 7, 8, 9 and the break and he still won.

When everyone quit, one old man, who had been staking some of the players, said, "If I could play pool, I'd play you."

Louie responded, "You don't have to know how to play pool to bet with me. You don't even need a stick. You give me the break and the ball in hand after the break and if I don't run the table, you win."

The old man took him up on the offer for $20 a game and Louie ran the racks way more often than not and he took quite a bit more of the guy's money before the guy surrendered.

Maybe something like this should be incorporated into the game. Alternate breaks and each guy get's ball in hand after his break. He gets a point for each ball he runs and maybe a five point bonus if he runs the table. After a predetermined set of so many games, the points are totaled and the person with the most points wins.

Well thought out.... I am going to try this out. I have several pool tables in my house, and my house rules say that unless you run the table on your first inning it is not a win; you still play the game out but it does not count toward your win total on the string unless you did it on your first inning. So you can play serious and for fun at the same time. Tell me that ain't a killer scoring idea. People LOVE to play at my house, the money players and the fun players.

 

[Paul Schofield]

Admittedly, there is a unique excitement and interest when a player is on a high run. Like I have said before, "everything is give and take".

Do any of you do this on a Saturday afternoon in the Fall? I flip through the stations looking for a good football game. When I happen upon two noted colleges playing and the score is 44-14 in the third quarter, I move on to something else. I try to find a game that is within a touchdown and less than 5 minutes remaining. I flip until I find a good game.

If I walk into a tournament room and the first thing I see is an 8-1 score in a race to 11, I will probably move on to another match. I am looking for a hill-hill match or at least a close one.

Sacrificing increased viable competition for high-runs does not sound like a good trade off to me.