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.
