This has been argued on here many times. However, the current thread going on Earls million dollar package proved what the answer is. If the insurance company that had to pay out a million bucks didn't have a problem with the 9 on the break, or with early combos on the 9, then I say it is settled. 9 on the snap and early combos on the 9 count towards a package.
What constitutes a "package"?
- Thread starter Neil
- Start date
I dunno exactly? When I speak of a package I just say....so n so ran a 5 pack on ...so I guess I never really include how the racks were finished, but they do have to be in a row to include the term "PACK"!
IMO Earls XXL pack to win the $$$ was IMO a pack-o-rama!
G.
IMO Earls XXL pack to win the $$$ was IMO a pack-o-rama!
G.
Yeah, I think I would agree with that. A "package" is a continuous run at the table and is comprised of games won consecutively regardless of whether there were combos or money balls on the break.
I agree. A package is how many racks you string together without letting ur opponent shoot. Doesnt matter how theyre done.
Packages: Term used allot by Kieth McCready during his earlier days at the Original Hard Times in Costa Mesa California and his out and abouts around los angeles area and elsewhere. He used this term allot, in an amusing way when talking about the gifts your gave to your opponent while philfering his wallet. There's all kinds, small, medium, large and groups of packages, kinda like Christmas when nothing seems to go wrong. Ether had a special way of using this terminology against his opponents and even made losing seem fun, but only to those watching. 
Well, technically it's simply amount of games won in a row without missing. So for nine ball that includes 9s on the break and early combos.
Few people remember this but when Jim Williard sponsored his big events in the 90s they had a large bonus if anyone ran five racks. But the five racks had to be complete runs with no early ends to the game. Only Buddy Hall came close with four racks and a miss in the last rack.
Personally, while I feel that the pressure to get out in the last five racks of Earl's run were enormous, I feel that there is no way on earth that any sort of package bonus should EVER be presented in a rack your own event.
I once lost $100 betting on the side against someone who either made the nine or hung it in the corner for an easy combo 7 out of the 9 racks he racked for himself. His opponent was super frustrated and the TD declared that he could not intervene.
Since then I became a solid believer in the power of the rack mechanic. After studying Joe Tucker's book I used to make prop bets with good players who hadn't read Joe's book and who thought that they could break anything wide open. I would bet drinks that I could rack the balls so that the nine would not get to a rail. I always won.
Few people remember this but when Jim Williard sponsored his big events in the 90s they had a large bonus if anyone ran five racks. But the five racks had to be complete runs with no early ends to the game. Only Buddy Hall came close with four racks and a miss in the last rack.
Personally, while I feel that the pressure to get out in the last five racks of Earl's run were enormous, I feel that there is no way on earth that any sort of package bonus should EVER be presented in a rack your own event.
I once lost $100 betting on the side against someone who either made the nine or hung it in the corner for an easy combo 7 out of the 9 racks he racked for himself. His opponent was super frustrated and the TD declared that he could not intervene.
Since then I became a solid believer in the power of the rack mechanic. After studying Joe Tucker's book I used to make prop bets with good players who hadn't read Joe's book and who thought that they could break anything wide open. I would bet drinks that I could rack the balls so that the nine would not get to a rail. I always won.
Well considering that they had a legal fight that cost 300k to fight over paying off I don't think that the insurance company was all too happy about the way "packages" were defined.
But in pool-speak it is settled, winning x# of games in a row without the opponent getting to shoot is a package no matter how they were won.
I put a four pack on him is clear to everyone and no one ever says "did you run all the balls or make the nine on the snap a couple times". No instead they say, "wow you're really playing good these days, I will take the seven and try you some if you like....."
Not if the other player got to shoot somewhere in there.
This reminds me of the old pool joke. I first heard it with the guy telling me using Gary Nolan, the Bushwhacker, as the houseman.
The story goes that a road player shows up and offers to play and Bushwhacker agrees to a race to nine. They flip and Bushwhacker wins and runs five racks. In the sixth rack he makes a ball and has no shot so he plays safe. The road player misses and gives up ball in hand and Bushwhacker runs out the set. The road player says he will play some more but he needs some weight. Bushwhacker says, "weight?? I haven't even see you play yet."
Last edited:
I think to a lot of people a "package" means the number of games broken and run in a row.
So if my opponent hangs the 9 and I knock it in then break and run the next 4 games then break dry -- I won 5 games in a row, but, to many people, that's a 4-pack not a 5-pack.
Sure, the game where the opponent got to shoot does not count as part of the package. It's the same thing.
I agree. When we had the break and run contests at our tournaments they were always only paid off on full rack runs. No matter what you had to make all nine balls.
However in nine and ten ball there is almost never a way to do this in competition due to the rules allowing for the rack to be ended early.
I think each player has to know for themselves what they really did. If I play someone and I make three nine balls in a row then I would never tell someone else I put a three-pack on him. But if I ran out three times and got two nines on the break then I would say I put down a three pack and got lucky on the snap twice.
They do as far as I'm concerned (but then, who am I???). I don't care for ANY game to be won on the break, but if that's the rules, then that kind of win should count as a part of the "package", IMO.
Maniac
Simply stated,,,,Genetics!!!!!!!
Correct, you must break, make a ball and run out, or break and make the nine. Now if you break, make a ball and are hooked, and roll out and your opponent gives you the shot back and you run out, this is a nebulous area, but it def. could be considered a legit package, as your opponent never shot during your package delivery time. :thumbup:
I don't view that as a break and run out and, therefore, the package has ended. Your opponent participated in the game by returning the shot -- he had a "mental" inning as opposed to a shooting inning. But I wonder how Accu-Stats used to count those in their performance numbers. Could go either way.
Any 2 or more racks strung together where your opponent doesn't have a chance to do anything at the table (except maybe rack for you).
A Pushout given back to you doesnt count because the opponent technically took a turn by passing it back.
A Pushout given back to you doesnt count because the opponent technically took a turn by passing it back.