Isn't it unfair that lag winner breaks last rack when hill hill in alternate break?

Swighey said:
The OP makes a lot of sense.



Yes.



You can play until a 2 game advantage. It's been done and it works.



Yes they did.



There is nothing remotely odd about the OP. Do you deem anything you disagree with to be odd?



Resolve? We are talking about who breaks last rack of an alternate break race. Too many keyboard warriors on this thread - how about a discussion about the merits of the OP? Whether you agree or not.
Click to expand...

Few things wrong with the OP, the reasoning is faulty, although the idea itself may not be. The lag is not a "coin toss" it takes skill. It's also not a "rule" that the lag winner breaks on a hill hill game, it will only happen on alternate break with an odd race. It's just how it ends up being due to math.

If you play winner break, the other guy can run out the set on you fully, that's a lot more unfair than just losing a final game. Or winner break you can be down 3-4-5 to 0 before you even have a chance to make a shot. That's also not fair. The idea is OK, the reasoning behind it is bad. But it's not really a bad thing, try to lag better.

I'd rather have longer races with winner break rather than races to 5 or 7 with alternating break, in pro level events that are scheduled for a few days.

Win by 2 is not bad but can make matches take an unknown amount of time longer (see baseball ties), plus it's more exiting for the audience to watch a hill-hill knowing it's one game to win, what will happen? Could there be a dry break with an easy run? A scratch on the 9? A 1 inch position or safety error that loses the set?
 
Last edited:
Nullus said:
Yes, it's tied/drawn/equal/the same...all except for that loss of the lag...remember? There was no tied, etc there. The guy that won it, won it. Who's trolling who here Swighey? The guy asked for opinions and folks are giving them and you're in here blasting everyone who took the time to respond. If you don't want to hear the answer, don't ask the question.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not blasting everyone. If you actually read my posts, including my first one, you'll see that I'm not defending the OP at all. I get the who won the lag thing. Won it, won, it. I know that. I'm discussing the rules, not what happens because of the rules that are so often played. As for the "who are you his big brother" thing - really? And "trolling"? I think that word is becoming a little throwaway these days.
 
The lag takes skill. It's supposed to be an advantage to win the lag, hence why the coin toss "more luck than the lag" is not used in professional matches.

It is fair, practice the lag and win it if you want the end of match advantage. Isn't this common sense??
 
The point of winning the lag is to get an advantage. So is totally fair. If you lose the lag , practice :thumbup:
 
You got to be kidding me. Just play pool. It's real simple. You lost the lag or flip and that's it. Maybe we should play triple elimination so as to insure that the best player really wins. This kind of commentary gets old. We can't think about anything to say but who wins the lag and isn't it a shame that we can't break in the last game?
 
MOJOE said:
The lag takes skill. It's supposed to be an advantage to win the lag, hence why the coin toss "more luck than the lag" is not used in professional matches.

It is fair, practice the lag and win it if you want the end of match advantage. Isn't this common sense??
Click to expand...

Yes.......
 
Nullus said:
Yes.......
Click to expand...

But we all know that already. The question isn't this. It is, should the advantage of winning the lag lead to a breaking advantage in the deciding game of a match that has an alternate break format? Or should this advantage be neutralised so that the winner is determined, more so, by what goes on in a game of pool? I could be wrong but that's how I interpret the sentiment of the OP and I think it is more about how the game should be structured than whether the way it is structured is fair (which it is).
 
spartan said:
Have seen a number of close matches with alternate break where when it is hill hill and the lag winner breaks final rack and runs out. The other guy does not get a chance. That is like deciding winner by flip of coin.
Shouldn't the rule that lag winner breaks final rack when it is hill hill be changed? Like tennis where winner has to win at least 2 but maybe up to a maximum in order that the match does not take forever. Or like in one tourney I think it is International Challenge of champions where the players lag again for the final rack. Actually lagging is like flip of coin. Maybe better way to decide breaker is position some long balls to pot, some balls to kick or bang and whoever does better will break.. :grin:
Click to expand...

So essentially they should have a tournament to see who wins the opportunity to break in a hill/hill match to win the tournament?:shrug:
 
Look, the lag is a test of skill. Deal with it. Practice it and get better at it. Or, better yet, play better so it doesn't get to hill-hill. The lag has been around for a long time, it ain't broke so don't fix it.
 
trinacria said:
seems to me u should have won the lag. or make the set an even number.

hang-the-9 said:
Also it's not a "rule" that the lag winner breaks on hill-hill, it's just how it works out in an odd number of games played going back and forth with alternating break. If the race was to 10, the lag loser would break on the hill hill game.


Winner of lag breaks the odd racks (rack# 1,3,5,etc.) other guy breaks even racks, so no matter what the race is played to the winner of the opening lag will always break the hill/hill match.
Race to 5--score tied at 4 (hill/hill 8 racks played) winning rack to be played is #9
Race to 10--score tied at 9 (hill/hill 18 racks played) winning rack to be played is #19
I cant believe nobody noticed this, I certainly am not the sharpest knife in the drawer.:eek:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
fastone371 said:
So essentially they should have a tournament to see who wins the opportunity to break in a hill/hill match to win the tournament?:shrug:
Click to expand...

Actually, lagging before the final rack would add a bit of drama (it works wonders in snooker with a re-spotted black). It would also dispense with the first lag determining both the first break and who breaks on the tie-break. And it would add a bit of drama if I haven't mentioned that already. I still prefer 2 racks ahead to win though.
 
I've only seen this happen one time, but I haven't been following pool that long.

I think dazz vs sky woodward in the u.s bar table 8b event. Race to 5, dazz won the lag, and both players BNR the entire match. Hill-hill, dazz BNR the final game and won.
 
fastone371 said:
Winner of lag breaks the odd racks (rack# 1,3,5,etc.) other guy breaks even racks, so no matter what the race is played to the winner of the opening lag will always break the hill/hill match.
Race to 5--score tied at 4 (hill/hill 8 racks played) winning rack to be played is #9
Race to 10--score tied at 9 (hill/hill 18 racks played) winning rack to be played is #19
I cant believe nobody noticed this, I certainly am not the sharpest knife in the drawer.:eek:
Click to expand...

Yes, my thinking was bad on that one. But at least I know how to use the QUOTE tags LOL ;)
 
hang-the-9 said:
Yes, my thinking was bad on that one. But at least I know how to use the QUOTE tags LOL ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah about the quote thing, I was having trouble quoting 2 different posts in the same reply. You may also have noticed the disclaimer where it said I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer. You can also substitute--- a few slices short of a loaf. elevator doesn't go to top floor, not playing with a full deck,if brains were dynamite I couldn't blow my nose etc, etc................:rotflmao1::rotflmao1:
 
Swighey said:
I think he will have not lost the rest of the race. Methinks it will be tied/drawn/equal/the same. I have no problem with the status quo but defending it wrongly is inexcusable.Especially when you know your stuff.
Click to expand...

Lemme rephrase.

You'd said the guy who lost didn't have a chance.
But he did - he had chances during the rest of the set to prevent the hill-hill situation.
He was supposed to win before it came to that point.
If he didn't, that's his fault.

OK, occasionally we get a spectacular performance like SVB vs. Biado,
where both players alternate breaking and running for 14 racks in a row.

But typically, it doesn't go like that, and each players gets chances
to take advantage of the other guy's mistakes. Especially if it's 9 or 10 ball.
If you don't make those mistakes as often as your opponent, and win when you're supposed to,
then you don't have to deal with the 'unfair' hill-hill break.
 
fastone371 said:
Yeah about the quote thing, I was having trouble quoting 2 different posts in the same reply. You may also have noticed the disclaimer where it said I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer. You can also substitute--- a few slices short of a loaf. elevator doesn't go to top floor, not playing with a full deck,if brains were dynamite I couldn't blow my nose etc, etc................:rotflmao1::rotflmao1:
Click to expand...

A few clowns short of a circus?
 
Why shouldn't the winner of the lag break the final game? It wouldn't be alternate break if you allowed the other player to break. What's next the player who makes the money ball should not win the game? Step up win the lag and run out the set. What's better then pressure of a hill hill game and someone has to break it. Maybe all pool should be loser break then it won't matter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nullus said:
Sorry, but the OP makes absolutely no sense here. At least a lag has some sort of skill involved, where a coin toss is random. How else would you decide who breaks the final rack? You can't play til a 2 game advantage at that point, it could go back and forth all night. They won the lag...therefore the advantage should go to him or her, at that point. They 'earned' it. The OP is so odd, it tested my resolve not to be sarcastic here.
Click to expand...

I would have said this if I got to it first! Spot on! I think the lag should be a practiced part of your game. I played in some tournaments when you do actually flip a coin for the break. I friggin hated it. No skill involved whatsoever. And some of my opponents couldn't even keep the coin on the table! Lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top