Making the wing ball from the box?

The problem with the wing ball, is playing shape on the one if it goes in also. It can and does happen if you hit the headball a bit thick. It can screw up your position plans then. That is why it is best to keep the CB in the middle of the table.


If given a high rack, I would rather plan for making the one in the side, and play position on the two, which is harder cause you really need to study were it is in the rack to figure out where it will go.


All of this just really illustrates how goofy, the 9 ball rack is anyway.


SakuJack said:
I find it better, simply because you're making the one and so are unable to play shape on it. When you have a wired wing ball and are able to play shape on the object ball, I think that's a bigger problem than decent players being able to make the one in the side fairly consistently.
Click to expand...
 
Tony_in_MD said:
The problem with the wing ball, is playing shape on the one if it goes in also. It can and does happen if you hit the headball a bit thick. It can screw up your position plans then. That is why it is best to keep the CB in the middle of the table.


If given a high rack, I would rather plan for making the one in the side, and play position on the two, which is harder cause you really need to study were it is in the rack to figure out where it will go.


All of this just really illustrates how goofy, the 9 ball rack is anyway.
Click to expand...

It being harder to play shape on the two when racking the nine on the sport is the reason I prefer it. I think it's tougher to make the one in the side and also play shape on the two than it is to make a near wired wing ball and play shape on the ball you're striking, the one. Nine on the spot makes it a better game, IMO.

I definitely agree that the nine ball rack is goofy, though.
 
Well worded summary.

SakuJack said:
It being harder to play shape on the two when racking the nine on the sport is the reason I prefer it. I think it's tougher to make the one in the side and also play shape on the two than it is to make a near wired wing ball and play shape on the ball you're striking, the one. Nine on the spot makes it a better game, IMO.

I definitely agree that the nine ball rack is goofy, though.
Click to expand...
 
SakuJack said:
It being harder to play shape on the two when racking the nine on the sport is the reason I prefer it. I think it's tougher to make the one in the side and also play shape on the two than it is to make a near wired wing ball and play shape on the ball you're striking, the one. Nine on the spot makes it a better game, IMO.

I definitely agree that the nine ball rack is goofy, though.
Click to expand...

Nine on the spot, or Any ball on the spot Other than the 1 ball, if 9 ball is made, doesn't spot till the run is finished.
 
Tony_in_MD said:
The problem with the wing ball, is playing shape on the one if it goes in also. It can and does happen if you hit the headball a bit thick. It can screw up your position plans then. That is why it is best to keep the CB in the middle of the table.


If given a high rack, I would rather plan for making the one in the side, and play position on the two, which is harder cause you really need to study were it is in the rack to figure out where it will go.


All of this just really illustrates how goofy, the 9 ball rack is anyway.
Click to expand...
All the more reason for TV matches to have a referee rack the balls---the same rack for everyone. I know the refs get exasperated by players inspecting their racks, but maybe there should be a limit on that. From what I saw at the USOpen I don't think Shane was doctoring the rack. He just has an awesome break with the simplest possible mechanics.
 
Island Drive said:
Which pros endorse your tournament model?
Click to expand...


No Conflict Rules

For starters, I will just copy and paste from a previous post. Thanks for asking. These are just a few notables.

Bob Jewett: “I think Paul's rules above solve the problems.”

Danny DiLiberto: “I will talk about these rules every chance I get when I commentate.”

Fred Bentivegna: “I personally think he has a great new idea.”

Joe Tucker: “I believe this rule will cost me MONEY! But I still think it should be implemented”

John Schmidt: “this is exactly how the games should be played”

Pat Fleming: “I think Paul’s new rules are in the game’s best interest.”

Robert Byrne: “You can use my name as a strong advocate for a rules change for the break.”

Scott Lee: “I like your no-conflict rules”
 
Last edited:
Paul Schofield said:
No Conflict Rules

For starters, I will just copy and paste from a previous post. Thanks for asking. These are just a few notables.

Bob Jewett: “I think Paul's rules above solve the problems.”

Danny DiLiberto: “I will talk about these rules every chance I get when I commentate.”

Fred Bentivegna: “I personally think he has a great new idea.”

Joe Tucker: “I believe this rule will cost me MONEY! But I still think it should be implemented”

John Schmidt: “this is exactly how the games should be played”

Pat Fleming: “I think Paul’s new rules are in the game’s best interest.”

Robert Byrne: “You can use my name as a strong advocate for a rules change for the break.”

Scott Lee: “I like your no-conflict rules”
Click to expand...
I'm not a pro, but I also endorce the "No Conflict" racking/breaking rules. FYI, here's a quote from my pattern racking resource page:
I personally recommend that everyone (including all leagues and tournaments) use the "No Conflict Rules" for racking and breaking in 8 ball, 9 ball, and 10 ball.​

I hope everybody eventually sees the wisdom in these rules.

Regards,
Dave
 
Well these rules sure will keep a match even, and remove all emphasis on the break shot.

You also, will never see a player run a nice package following this format.

Personally I would miss that.



Paul Schofield said:
Everyone is welcome to use these rules:

http://www.goldcrownbilliardseriepa.com/no-conflict-rules/

I have run 12 events with them:

http://www.goldcrownbilliardseriepa.com/tri-state-open/

Some other room owners have begun to use them. All the issues discussed in this thread just go away. They work for all levels. Our short games are more fun.
Click to expand...
 
For me the most consitent way to make the wing ball is straight on with a full hit (slight cut) and slow speed.

Usually I will try the right side wing ball and if its not going then switch to the left.IMO the 1 doesnt have to be frozen to both ball just to 1 of them.
 
Tony_in_MD said:
Well these rules ................. and remove all emphasis on the break shot.
Click to expand...

Tony, I have read many of your posts. I know you are knowledgeable. I am sure that you know better than this.


Tony_in_MD said:
You also, will never see a player run a nice package following this format.
Click to expand...


Everything is give and take. The package is still there. Think about it. Can a golfer put together a "package" of 4 birdies in a row? Can a bowler put together a "package" of 7 strikes in a row? I can tell you what is really exciting. Two great players each putting together a 4 pack simultaneously (as the way golfers and bowlers do).

The Break and Run with the No Conflict Rules is so clean and simple. What we have now is a convoluted mess. The idle player sitting and waiting through a "package" is destructive to our sport in every way.
 
Last edited:
Thanks all for the great replies. Based on what I've read:

• There was probably a gap. As joe noted, sometimes that left wing ball went in even when shane hit to the right side of the 1 accidentally. If there's no gap then this might result in the right-side wing ball going, but it should never make the left wing ball go.

• This probably means that theories about shane using a special speed or english don't apply.

Speed: Shane's 10b break is around 23-24. This 9b break looked maybe just 1-2 mph softer than that. Tons of guys can hit at that speed. If speed is all you need to 'beat the break box', we'd have heard by now... I think the break box has been around 10 years or more.

English: it can affect the top ball of the rack and the next 2. But the third row? IMO no way. Not enough to matter.

Side note - the one in the side is easy to manipulate with varying amounts of draw. With no draw and a corner break it goes high, with full draw it goes low, so you need a pretty nice controlled amount. Much more challenging than the wing ball. It's what I try to make when I'm playing on tables where the wing ball just refuses to go. I would have no problems with a player who can consistently make this. As others have noted, it also means you don't know what you'll be looking at for a shot afterwards.

I can't take the "airborne wing ball" thing seriously. Sorry.

• The table was racking friendly, and shane took advantage of it.
But the more I think about it, the more I think a player should be required to freeze the balls. The WPA rules for 9b say the balls should be racked "as tightly as possible". By definition that's zero gaps.

A TD might allow players to slide on that rule if
A: every player is struggling to freeze the balls and
B: nobody gains an advantage if there's a tiny gap.

But, what if some players are seemingly able to freeze the balls with minimum fussing?
And leaving a gap gives the breaker a huge advantage?

Then you have to make it fair for everyone and the TD must enforce a "zero gaps policy".
Some seem to think Jay missed the back ball. I dunno how they can act sure about that, did they watch his eyeballs? Were they standing a foot away from the rack or jay?
Only jay knows for sure if he checked the back ball or not.

• I also don't want to take away from shane's win. Without a magic rack, or tapping/templates, you simply can't guarantee perfect racks, it takes forever to get them just right, and they can still roll apart as you walk away! I saw him rotate those back three balls with his thumbs, and try multiple times to cinch them.

Just because some guys failed to make the wing ball, doesn't mean their racks were perfect and shane's had gaps. It probably just means they had different gaps.

Still...

Dynomite got it right (how sweet is that rhyme?) - you either labor away at it, or switch to 10 ball.

• Or, you go to magic racks. But I can virtually guarantee that if you do that, it will only result in more wing balls, not less. And anyway I think delta-13 is one of the sponsors. So probably won't happen.

AtLarge: Obviously you watch this stuff closely, but this is how I remember it:
Shane runs the first rack.
Shane blows his 2nd runout missing the 8 in the side.
Dennis finishes rack 2, and then runs rack number 3.
He breaks dry on 4.
Shane runs 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, then scratches in the side breaking rack #10.

That would be a 5 pack, with one being a rack'n'run instead of a break'n'run.
What am I missing, did dennis sneak in another visit to the table before rack 10?
 
Last edited:
CreeDo said:
Thanks all for the great replies. Based on what I've read:

• There was probably a gap. As joe noted, sometimes that left wing ball went in even when shane hit to the right side of the 1 accidentally. If there's no gap then this might result in the right-side wing ball going, but it should never make the left wing ball go.

• This probably means that theories about shane using a special speed or english don't apply.

Speed: Shane's 10b break is around 23-24. This 9b break looked maybe just 1-2 mph softer than that. Tons of guys can hit at that speed. If speed is all you need to 'beat the break box', we'd have heard by now... I think the break box has been around 10 years or more.

English: it can affect the top ball of the rack and the next 2. But the third row? IMO no way. Not enough to matter.

Side note - the one in the side is easy to manipulate with varying amounts of draw. With no draw and a corner break it goes high, with full draw it goes low, so you need a pretty nice controlled amount. Much more challenging than the wing ball. It's what I try to make when I'm playing on tables where the wing ball just refuses to go. I would have no problems with a player who can consistently make this. As others have noted, it also means you don't know what you'll be looking at for a shot afterwards.

I can't take the "airborne wing ball" thing seriously. Sorry.

• The table was racking friendly, and shane took advantage of it.
But the more I think about it, the more I think a player should be required to freeze the balls. The WPA rules for 9b say the balls should be racked "as tightly as possible". By definition that's zero gaps.

A TD might allow players to slide on that rule if
A: every player is struggling to freeze the balls and
B: nobody gains an advantage if there's a tiny gap.

But, what if some players are seemingly able to freeze the balls with minimum fussing?
And leaving a gap gives the breaker a huge advantage?

Then you have to make it fair for everyone and the TD must enforce a "zero gaps policy".
Some seem to think Jay missed the back ball. I dunno how they can act sure about that, did they watch his eyeballs? Were they standing a foot away from the rack or jay?
Only jay knows for sure if he checked the back ball or not.

• I also don't want to take away from shane's win. Without a magic rack, or tapping/templates, you simply can't guarantee perfect racks, it takes forever to get them just right, and they can still roll apart as you walk away! I saw him rotate those back three balls with his thumbs, and try multiple times to cinch them.

Just because some guys failed to make the wing ball, doesn't mean their racks were perfect and shane's had gaps. It probably just means they had different gaps.

Still...

Dynomite got it right (how sweet is that rhyme?) - you either labor away at it, or switch to 10 ball.

• Or, you go to magic racks. But I can virtually guarantee that if you do that, it will only result in more wing balls, not less. And anyway I think delta-13 is one of the sponsors. So probably won't happen.

AtLarge: Obviously you watch this stuff closely, but this is how I remember it:
Shane runs the first rack.
Shane blows his 2nd runout missing the 8 in the side.
Dennis finishes rack 2, and then runs rack number 3.
He breaks dry on 4.
Shane runs 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, then scratches in the side breaking rack #10.

That would be a 5 pack, with one being a rack'n'run instead of a break'n'run.
What am I missing, did dennis sneak in another visit to the table before rack 10?
Click to expand...

Just read through this. I contend that what we have now is a convoluted mess.
 
it is what it is

Leave 9 ball alone.

IMO 9-ball is not the best game for the pros to play.9-ball is what it is,it a game that has a luck factor.It is a fun game and a good practice game.

The pros should play 10-ball but when they do play 9-ball just accept it for what it is.Play 9-ball the way it was 10 years ago.Winner breaks,rack for your opponent,no call pocket crap,no spoting the 9,break from anywhere in the kitchen.Have a ref rack for finalls or when there are issues with challenging racks.Have fun,string racks together,and play 9-ball not some bastardized version of 9-ball!

There is a luck factor in 9-ball and IMO it can be good for pool.
 
CreeDo said:
... AtLarge: Obviously you watch this stuff closely, but this is how I remember it:
Shane runs the first rack.
Shane blows his 2nd runout missing the 8 in the side.
Dennis finishes rack 2, and then runs rack number 3.
He breaks dry on 4.
Shane runs 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, then scratches in the side breaking rack #10.

That would be a 5 pack, with one being a rack'n'run instead of a break'n'run.
What am I missing, did dennis sneak in another visit to the table before rack 10?
Click to expand...

According to my notes, the final match between Shane and Dennis went like this:

Game 1 -- Shane made two balls on the break then played safe on the 1-ball. Dennis kicked and hit the 1-ball. Shane shot in a long 1-ball and ran out. (Score 1-0)

Game 2 -- Shane made a ball on the break, ran to the 7-ball and missed it on a fairly easy cut shot at the side pocket. Dennis ran out. (Score 1-1)

Game 3 -- B&R for Dennis. (Score 1-2)

Game 4 -- Dennis broke dry. Shane ran to the 4-ball and played a good safe on it. Dennis kicked into the 4-ball, which then hit both points of the side pocket. Shane ran out. (Score 2-2)

Game 5 -- Shane made two balls on the break and pushed. Dennis returned the push. Shane played safe on the 1-ball. Dennis kicked and hit the 1-ball. Shane ran out. (Score 3-2)

Game 6 -- Shane made two balls on the break and played safe on the 1-ball. Dennis kicked and hit the 1-ball. Shane ran out. (Score 4-2)

Game 7 -- B&R for Shane, his first of the match. (Score 5-2)

Game 8 -- Shane made two balls on the break and played safe on the 1-ball. Dennis played safe on the 1-ball. Shane ran out. (Score 6-2)

Games 9, 10, and 11 -- B&R's for Shane, his highest package (3 games) of the match. (Score 9-2)

Game 12 -- Shane scratched on the break. Dennis ran out. (Score 9-3)

Game 13 -- Dennis broke dry. Shane made the 1 & 2, then slopped in the 3-ball and 4-ball on the same shot. He was snookered for the 5-ball, kicked and hit it. Dennis ran out. (Score 9-4)

Games 14, 15, and 16 -- B&R's for Dennis. (Score 9-7)

Game 17 -- Dennis made two balls on the break, then jumped with his break cue to hit the 1-ball. Shane took a break, came back and ran out. (Score 10-7)

Games 18 and 19 -- B&R's for Shane. (Score 12-7)

Game 20 -- Shane made a ball on the break. He made the 1 & 2, then the 3-5 combination, then played safe on the 3-ball (which was not hidden). Dennis fired hard at something (a carom?) but missed. Shane ran out. (Score 13-7)

B&R's -- 6 for Shane (a single, a 3-pack, and a 2-pack) and 4 for Dennis (a single and a 3-pack)
 
Last edited:
Kid Dynomite said:
Not true they only checked the gap in front of wing ball and never checked the two ball in back was FROZEN!


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Xparent SkyBlue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

One possibility when they finish racking, they remove the rack and they push the cloth with their finger nail behind the rack a little that stretches the cloth and opens the gap. But i do not think SVB was doing anything wrong, he was consistent in the contact point of CB to the 1 ball.

The other possibility someone mention in the post earlier, because the pounding of CB by the ref to get the 2 ball to sit made a big dent of which causing the wing ball to throw a little or gets lots of draw (due to CB has slight follow, the 1 ball gets draw, 2nd ball have follow, wing will have draw ) due to the resistance from the dent and it goes in, maybe similar to the one pocket two balls spot shot, 1st ball gets kicked by CB due to the 2nd ball obstructing its path.

GOD only knows!!
 
I played with the magic rack and breaking from the box last nght...and the wing ball went pretty regularly, using a medium speed cut break.

Not that I remember what this thread is about...
 
FWIW, I was sitting first row ringside for all of Saturday's matches. Every time Shane was asked to re-rack, he did. Once Jay said it was a good rack, he headed back up and broke. Every time, he made the wing ball in the side and from my position, I could see it going dead center in the pocket, and at warp speed. Frankly, it didn't seem to matter who racked the balls; he did when Jay racked them, and when he racked them.

After the match was over, Alex took over the table and tried to replicate what Shane was doing for 30 minutes. (There were probably several dozen people who remained to watch and wait for the next match.) I didn't count but I'd bet he racked and broke at least 30 times. Not once did he make the wing ball! He racked quickly, he racked slowly, trying to hit on something that would work. On his last attempt, he dropped his cue in frustration and hung his head. He appeared to be completely gobsmacked about his inability to do what Shane had been doing.

I don't know how Shane was doing what he did. I'm no rack mechanic, frankly don't know enough about it to give an opinion, but I can tell you that no one else I saw in 3 days of matches was able to do what Shane did.

Because of that, and the fact that Shane appeared to outplay everyone after the break, too, I believe the tournament identified the best player in the field. In other words, it worked.

That's just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

Brian in VA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top