this whole inspecting every rack for 10 mins is just silly! get a mutual person to rack and you break what is given to you. good for the flow of the game!
cant belive i agree with earl strickland!
- Thread starter breakandrunrob
- Start date
I watched a few games in both Dechaine/Shaw matches. And I was surprised by the rack inspection.
Then I started timing it, in a general sense. (Meaning I didn't use a stopwatch, but watched the time on my tablet.) None of the racking and inspecting took more than 2 minutes, and most times it was less than 1 minute.
It seems like quite a long time, but in reality, it really wasn't much.
Still seemed silly, the re-racking, but the time expended really wasn't a lot.
Then I started timing it, in a general sense. (Meaning I didn't use a stopwatch, but watched the time on my tablet.) None of the racking and inspecting took more than 2 minutes, and most times it was less than 1 minute.
It seems like quite a long time, but in reality, it really wasn't much.
Still seemed silly, the re-racking, but the time expended really wasn't a lot.
I thought it was interesting to hear him say it's not the worst thing to not make a ball on the break. You can still win the game if any number of scenarios occur after a dry break.
Neutral rackers, random racking order except the 1 and the 9. No inspecting the rack, just break the rack you are given. I like those rules a lot.
Neutral rackers, random racking order except the 1 and the 9. No inspecting the rack, just break the rack you are given. I like those rules a lot.
Well, I agree with you agreeing with Earl.
Actually, I didn't think they were doing it all that long. I have seen players fuss about, argue and take a ton more time than what was happening there.
I'm not a huge fan of Mike D's but the guy can read a rack. Least thats the way it looked to me.
Actually, I didn't think they were doing it all that long. I have seen players fuss about, argue and take a ton more time than what was happening there.
I'm not a huge fan of Mike D's but the guy can read a rack. Least thats the way it looked to me.
Rack
I don't know if the rule book states that the balls must be frozen to each other.
I believe all that the rule book states is that you provide a tight rack of balls.
I don't play 9 ball but I can understand why a player would want the ball frozen in the rack. I am sure at the upper upper levels of 9 ball every any little thing can determine an outcome of a match.
MCP.
I don't know if the rule book states that the balls must be frozen to each other.
I believe all that the rule book states is that you provide a tight rack of balls.
I don't play 9 ball but I can understand why a player would want the ball frozen in the rack. I am sure at the upper upper levels of 9 ball every any little thing can determine an outcome of a match.
MCP.
I don't know when the non stop rack inspection trend started but it does get annoying to watch after a while, that 1 to 2 minutes doesn't sound like that much until you add up that best of 9 or whatever many games and see that you just lost 15-20 minutes watching guys pointing out hairs between balls.
I've watched plenty of old matches on youtube, earl playing Keith McCready, earl playing Buddy Hall..., hell almost anything from 10+ years ago and they just racked and played, but i guess those guys didn't really know the game.
I've watched plenty of old matches on youtube, earl playing Keith McCready, earl playing Buddy Hall..., hell almost anything from 10+ years ago and they just racked and played, but i guess those guys didn't really know the game.
Like I mentioned, Mike seemed to know how to break a rack.
If one were to buy Tucker's Racking Secrets, with a little study, all ya gotta do is have a quick glance and you know which side to break from and how to do it.
Have to get that DVD again, I think the Dog either chewed or hid it. Was on the PC too and the hard drive got wiped.
If one were to buy Tucker's Racking Secrets, with a little study, all ya gotta do is have a quick glance and you know which side to break from and how to do it.
Have to get that DVD again, I think the Dog either chewed or hid it. Was on the PC too and the hard drive got wiped.
In other sports the Referees are trusted - pool should be no exception
The players shouldn't be able to look at the rack. Let them "slug" each other, at least it'll stop the easy "break and run" that makes the game monotonous.
The ideal way for Pros to play is with a Referee and they have to break without inspecting the rack for "cracks".....if the Referee accidently leaves a spit it's ok if the player doesn't benefit from it......not looking is the only fair way to achieve uniformity.
In other sports the Referees are trusted to put the ball where it should be placed, and perform all other aspects of their job without the players being allowed to "look over their shoulder" (so to speak). There's a VERY GOOD REASON players are not allowed to "double check" the referees....they would do the same thing the pool players are doing.....slow down the game to try to achieve a physical, or mental advantage.
.....it's not "bad," it's just human nature when a real competitor is in "BATTLE"!!! :thumbup:
Athletes can sometimes be very "picky" and borderline O.C.D. - the other players, fans and referees should NOT be at the mercy of this type behavior. The sure fire cure is have a neutral racker and NO ONE can inspect the rack. That's how we used to do it and it and it worked just fine.......why did they "fix" it when it wasn't broken?
It's simply a matter of management, implementation and supervision.
'The Game is the Teacher'
The players shouldn't be able to look at the rack. Let them "slug" each other, at least it'll stop the easy "break and run" that makes the game monotonous.
The ideal way for Pros to play is with a Referee and they have to break without inspecting the rack for "cracks".....if the Referee accidently leaves a spit it's ok if the player doesn't benefit from it......not looking is the only fair way to achieve uniformity.
In other sports the Referees are trusted to put the ball where it should be placed, and perform all other aspects of their job without the players being allowed to "look over their shoulder" (so to speak). There's a VERY GOOD REASON players are not allowed to "double check" the referees....they would do the same thing the pool players are doing.....slow down the game to try to achieve a physical, or mental advantage.
.....it's not "bad," it's just human nature when a real competitor is in "BATTLE"!!! :thumbup:Athletes can sometimes be very "picky" and borderline O.C.D. - the other players, fans and referees should NOT be at the mercy of this type behavior. The sure fire cure is have a neutral racker and NO ONE can inspect the rack. That's how we used to do it and it and it worked just fine.......why did they "fix" it when it wasn't broken?
It's simply a matter of management, implementation and supervision. 'The Game is the Teacher'
The Rack is the Teacher.
I think it's more then in the last 10 years players have studied the rack more to understand how the balls separate. 10+ years they just hit them hard and solid but this generation of players has turned the break into more skill then luck.
It's about perception, though, surely. A minute isn't a long time, but when it's a minute spent watching someone watch a rack of stationary balls, it can feel like an age.
Pool is hardly the most exciting sport to watch as it is. The less time the players spend just standing, staring at the table, the better it is for the viewer, in my opinion.
Agreed.
I just wanted to point out that it wasn't 10 minutes. It really wasn't long. It surprised me, to be honest, because it seemed longer to me.
Yeah I've noticed the same. It's the same with shot time. When a player is on a, say, 45 second shot clock, and they spend 35 seconds just looking at the table before getting down and playing it, it feels like they've been standing there for a couple of minutes.
It's one of the things that makes pool frustrating to watch. That and the practice strokes; good lord some players take a lot of practice strokes.
Pathetic Shark
Banned
We don't live in the age where we can watch someone doing nothing, slowly, for no apparent reason. I think us bangers and fans have a responsibility to do something about this - clearly, the majority of pool fans have voted with our feet and left the building, but those that have remained should get their white hankies out, hold their collective noses and boo these tedious robots who pass for 'pro' pool players until they're shamed into mending their ways. There's no governing body to do it, so we must.
As for agreeing with Earl Strickland, I do that a lot. He's clearly batshit crazy but I always like what he has to say about how the game should be played. His love for the game is obvious.
Pathetic Shark
Banned
It's one thing for the pros to do this, but it REALLY irritates me when I see rank amateurs doing the same. At least pros have an excuse.
Quite why this is allowed to continue is beyond me. What should be a fast, exciting game has descended into a grinding, joyless, farce.
Two minutes is long a time when a game of 9 ball only take about five minutes. I still say that if they can't or won't have refs racking the MR is the next best thing. Johnnyt
We're picking nits here, and I could have been clearer in my description, but what I meant to say was that none of the racks I kept track of went a full two minutes, meaning less than two minutes. I was watching the minutes oisplay of the current time on the clock of my tablet. Meaning some of them were over a minute, but by how long I cannot say.
Most were less than a minute.
It still seemed like a long time, even once I started watching the clock.
Just pointing out the difference between the perception and the reality. Someone should use a more accurate method of clocking these, in future streams. It would be interesting to see the results.
My wife wanted to watch television so I was forced to watch the match on my iPad with the sound off. What did Earl say about the general pace of play? I thought both players kept a reasonably quick pace. In fact, I thought it was a real pleasure to watch.
Whatever happened to the strange looking rack machine that made all the balls touch each other, anyone else remember this, it had handles?