Darren Appleton vs. Mika Immonen PPV THIS FRIDAY @ Sandcastle in Edison, NJ!!!

The accu-stats arena is beautiful. Pat has a nice setup.
Sandman is doing a great job to promote the game. Many posts about why pool is dead. Sandman is trying to keep is alive.
COME OUT TO SUPPORT THE SPORT AND A GREAT LOCAL POOL HALL.
 
kaznj said:
The accu-stats arena is beautiful. Pat has a nice setup.
Sandman is doing a great job to promote the game. Many posts about why pool is dead. Sandman is trying to keep is alive.
COME OUT TO SUPPORT THE SPORT AND A GREAT LOCAL POOL HALL.
Click to expand...

All very true, they make a great team to promote the game !
 
From what I understand, PAt feels the forced push out adds an extra level of strategy to each rack.


Eric
 
Actually, I read it as "the first shot after the break is a push-out." Is that correct?

If you broke and made something, you can opt to push-out or have your opponent push-out.

If you broke and made nothing, your opponent can push-out or have you push-out.

In either case, the first shot after the break is a push-out.
 
KoolKat9Lives said:
What is the reasoning behind this forced push-out rule? This negates the advantage of the better breaker.
Click to expand...

And thank goodness it does. I personally am tired of seeing a better breaker win matches over a [better] player who is clearly the better shot maker, better position player, better safety player, better kicker, and better strategist. I am not opposed to the break giving a small advantage, but unfortunately that isn't the way it is. The advantage is huge, and all too often nothing else even ends up mattering at all.

These rules:

-Ensure every player gets a turn at the table in each rack. It means that every match is just that, a match, with no chance that one guy just ends up effectively playing the ghost. I want to see two guys compete against each other, not one guy competing only against the table.

-Cuts down or eliminates all the problems associated with racking since the break just isn't that important any more. Some of the issues it helps with are rack mechanics, arguments, cheating, excessive time taken to rack, rack checking, sharking, neutral rackers being needed, etc, etc.

-Makes the matches closer. Matches that are blow outs tend to be boring. This format should make for more close and hill hill matches.

-Brings more thinking and strategy back into the game. Less mindless outs, more strategy.

-Eliminates those boring matches where the wing ball seems to be wired. The most boring matches in the world are the ones where a ball is going on every break, particularly when they are getting perfect shape on the one ball every time as well.

-Ensures the best player wins, not the best racker/breaker.
 
Also, these rules do not allow a jump cue, so pushing out to a jump shot may not be the best option unless you jump very well with your playing cue. :p

Pushing out to a kick though...
 
Sandman said:
I agree with how you feel but...

I am trying to raise pool awareness in my area by working with everyone in the industry and doing the right thing to bring the top players and great events to your backyard. It costs money to put on these events, and promoters and venues put up the money for these things up front. We then try to recoop the expenses through PPV or Admission fees to hopefully break even, or if we're lucky, make a small profit that usually just buys us all dinner to celebrate at the end of that night. LOL

Your comment is understood but only hurts Accu-Stats and Sandcastle.
Thank you for understanding.
Click to expand...

QFT

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
 
Oldzilla Answer the question

04-03-2012, 09:22 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What's on the line for this match? Money match? Exhibition? Or??

OLDZILLA why won't you answer the question !!!!!!!!.

Are they playing for fun?

What does the winner get?
What does the loser get?

Is it winner take all?
I would pay for PPV for winner take all, not a funsie(SP) match.

I can see Daz an Mikka matches on youtube for free, or Efren, Willie, etc..
What is the incentive?
 
Poolplaya9 said:
And thank goodness it does. I personally am tired of seeing a better breaker win matches over a [better] player who is clearly the better shot maker, better position player, better safety player, better kicker, and better strategist. I am not opposed to the break giving a small advantage, but unfortunately that isn't the way it is. The advantage is huge, and all too often nothing else even ends up mattering at all.

These rules:

-Ensure every player gets a turn at the table in each rack. It means that every match is just that, a match, with no chance that one guy just ends up effectively playing the ghost. I want to see two guys compete against each other, not one guy competing only against the table.

-Cuts down or eliminates all the problems associated with racking since the break just isn't that important any more. Some of the issues it helps with are rack mechanics, arguments, cheating, excessive time taken to rack, rack checking, sharking, neutral rackers being needed, etc, etc.

-Makes the matches closer. Matches that are blow outs tend to be boring. This format should make for more close and hill hill matches.

-Brings more thinking and strategy back into the game. Less mindless outs, more strategy.

-Eliminates those boring matches where the wing ball seems to be wired. The most boring matches in the world are the ones where a ball is going on every break, particularly when they are getting perfect shape on the one ball every time as well.

-Ensures the best player wins, not the best racker/breaker.
Click to expand...

Why dont we just use the Disco Bucket Break rules? In order to stop someone who actually practices and learns how to break well you dont let anyone actually break. Before each game you take all the balls, put em in a bucket...shake them around....and dump them on the table. Start from there.

That way no one will ever have an advantage on the break, no one will ever run any packages and pool will do the impossible by getting even more boring to watch.
 
Poolplaya9 said:
I personally am tired of seeing a better breaker win matches over a [better] player who is clearly the better shot maker, better position player, better safety player, better kicker, and better strategist. I am not opposed to the break giving a small advantage, but unfortunately that isn't the way it is. The advantage is huge, and all too often nothing else even ends up mattering at all.

These rules:

-Ensure every player gets a turn at the table in each rack. It means that every match is just that, a match, with no chance that one guy just ends up effectively playing the ghost. I want to see two guys compete against each other, not one guy competing only against the table.

-Cuts down or eliminates all the problems associated with racking since the break just isn't that important any more. Some of the issues it helps with are rack mechanics, arguments, cheating, excessive time taken to rack, rack checking, sharking, neutral rackers being needed, etc, etc.

-Makes the matches closer. Matches that are blow outs tend to be boring. This format should make for more close and hill hill matches.

-Brings more thinking and strategy back into the game. Less mindless outs, more strategy.

-Eliminates those boring matches where the wing ball seems to be wired. The most boring matches in the world are the ones where a ball is going on every break, particularly when they are getting perfect shape on the one ball every time as well.

-Ensures the best player wins, not the best racker/breaker.
Click to expand...

I do not understand the reasoning. It's like making a ball on the break in one pocket would automatically make it the other guy's shot. People put a lot of work into figuring out the break and that is something they have earned. I break horribly, so I should love a rule like this, but I feel there are much better ways of doing it.

I understand where you are coming from, but then play a different game. If you want an execution and strategy game - 9/10 ball is not that type of game. If you are really talking about fairness, there have been games in the past where players each took turns playing the exact same layout of balls and trying to run out. This was one of those strange things that lasted about half a millisecond.
 
JCIN said:
Why dont we just use the Disco Bucket Break rules? In order to stop someone who actually practices and learns how to break well you dont let anyone actually break. Before each game you take all the balls, put em in a bucket...shake them around....and dump them on the table. Start from there.

That way no one will ever have an advantage on the break, no one will ever run any packages and pool will do the impossible by getting even more boring to watch.
Click to expand...

iba7467 said:
I do not understand the reasoning. It's like making a ball on the break in one pocket would automatically make it the other guy's shot. People put a lot of work into figuring out the break and that is something they have earned. I break horribly, so I should love a rule like this, but I feel there are much better ways of doing it.

I understand where you are coming from, but then play a different game. If you want an execution and strategy game - 9/10 ball is not that type of game. If you are really talking about fairness, there have been games in the past where players each took turns playing the exact same layout of balls and trying to run out. This was one of those strange things that lasted about half a millisecond.
Click to expand...
I understand where you both are coming from and actually agree to a large extent. I think the break is a skill that should be rewarded just like every other skill such as shot making, strategy, safety play, position play, kicking, etc. The problem in my eyes is that the break carries a disproportionately large advantage (and it is arguably requires the least skill of all the main skills), and so much so that it can and often does trump all of the other mentioned skills combined.

My problem doesn't lie with the better breaker getting some advantage from having a superior break. My problem is when that advantage is so great that it can trump the advantages another player has from being a better shot maker, strategist, safety player, position player, kicker, etc, all combined, and unfortunately this happens far too often. The break should afford about the same advantage that comes with being say either the better shot maker, or the better strategist, but never many of those above things combined. Maybe these rules do go to far and ideally what I would like to see is a way to bring the break advantage more in line and equal to the advantage that one gets from being superior in any one of the other main skills.

And to use a similar analogy as to one that was used above, if you enjoy the break carrying so much advantage that it can trump many or even all of the other skills combined, then just have breaking contest tournaments. I personally want to see who the best (well rounded) player is, not just the best breaker.

Full disclosure: I'm not the best breaker either so perhaps there is some bias there too...lol.
 
I been drinkin and watchin this match. I am on the fence on this break rule. Leaning toward not liking it. Interesting to watch though. Just wish DA would stop missing so many easy shots.....
 
These rules made me so mad I didn't watch. I did post I thought mika was stealing in this format before. The break matters, thats all I can say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top