14.1 not fair both players should be given a chance to run balls

[naji]

So your idea is to fix a personality flaw with a rule change? Some people make excuses. Some people are sore losers. That has everything to do with that individual and nothing to do with the format in question. The same people will still be sore losers and make excuses no matter what you change. The format is fair enough, IMO, and the cream still rises to the top. If there were any changes that could be made to make it 'more' fair, I would say something like a best of five, 150 point frames, lag for the first break only, and alternate the opening break shot for the remainder of the match. That would make for a very long match, however, and I don't really feel it would be prudent.

Man where were you hiding

I would say something like a best of five, 150 point frames, lag for the first break only, and alternate the opening break shot for the remainder of the match. That would make for a very long match, however, and I don't really feel it would be prudent

Great post, ok, now i like this better, best of 3 frames, 3 fouls rules, 100 or 150, or even 75! ball run, they can alternate the break ok, not necessary, and keep everything else the same


I added-, players allowed to continue run only one time, for a high run prize! Maybe could combine all runs and who ever has highest win!

 

[Pushout]

Sean common, a player shoots three hours running balls, and you want to tell me the 1st shot is critical! if both pros playing, both are capable of running 150 and out, why give the advantage to either of them this way!

Again, if you put in the time and effort, you would know exactly why the first shot, whether a shot or a safe, as in the break, are so critical. You're way, way too much into 9 ball!

 

[Joe T]

So your idea is to fix a personality flaw with a rule change? Some people make excuses. Some people are sore losers. That has everything to do with that individual and nothing to do with the format in question. The same people will still be sore losers and make excuses no matter what you change. The format is fair enough, IMO, and the cream still rises to the top. If there were any changes that could be made to make it 'more' fair, I would say something like a best of five, 150 point frames, lag for the first break only, and alternate the opening break shot for the remainder of the match. That would make for a very long match, however, and I don't really feel it would be prudent.

Funny, I just read through all of this and right before I got to your post I was thinking how bout leaving the game alone and try a lil different tournament format when dealing with champions in single examination stages? Was thinking more like 2 out of 3 to 100 or 150. I don't think too many traveling players would object to that.

 

[sfleinen]

Funny, I just read through all of this and right before I got to your post I was thinking how bout leaving the game alone and try a lil different tournament format when dealing with champions in single examination stages? Was thinking more like 2 out of 3 to 100 or 150. I don't think too many traveling players would object to that.

Joe:

Exactly. This guy is tilting at windmills. And notice how be breezes right past my challenge to him to put his keyboard away, and run 3 racks. Just 3 racks(!). Just to reset his expectations that this game "is so easy." He breezed over that one faster than wet ice against wet ice.

I think if someone wants to see "equality" as the OP is so passionate about, to go to a different tournament format. Don't mess with the game of 14.1 as it is. Create a new tournament format, 's all.

I'm both scratching my head, and chuckling at the futility of this all. I think this is a thread by a really bored person who just wants social interaction of some kind.

-Sean

 

[NitPicker]

Changing the rules to allow someone to shoot AFTER the RACE has already been won, IS NOT FAIR.

14.1 is a race. Just like a sprint or marathon. Currently, both players begin at the same starting line, which is the lag. If player A wins the lag, and finishes the race first from there, they have won.

In a foot race, if someone is slow out of the blocks, they don't get a do over all by themselves to see if they can match the same time of the one that beat them across the finish line. If you were the person that won the race and then had to let someone else have a SECOND chance, how fair would you feel that is?

Fair is fair...

 

[sheffield6]

I hear you! i got my argument they got theirs, it is free forum!

Again, i am not buying a stream where my horse just racks balls, hell i excel in racking balls! a friend of mine called me racker for a year back in the days!

been there, done that

 

[TCo]

Not everyone gets a ribbon

Ugh. 14.1 rules are fair. The game is played fair.

The OP suggests to give the other person a chance is to be "fair".

Fair is something without bias, which the rules are. Making an exception to the rules if someone runs (game point) and out, to allow the other player a chance is textbook UNfair.

If everyone getting a chance constitutes fair, I'd suggest Kindergarden T-Ball for you - just leave 14.1 alone.

 

[cleary]

Calm down, it's just straight pool...

 

[NitPicker]

A lag is a luck shot? How in the hell does someone figure that? A breakshot...in straight pool...lucky?

Dear lord....

I've read in this thread something to the effect of "they got their argument, I got mine". In some cultures, it's not about being right or wrong, it's about winning the argument. I believe someone is just trolling.

 

[naji]

Joe:

Exactly. This guy is tilting at windmills. And notice how be breezes right past my challenge to him to put his keyboard away, and run 3 racks. Just 3 racks(!). Just to reset his expectations that this game "is so easy." He breezed over that one faster than wet ice against wet ice.

I think if someone wants to see "equality" as the OP is so passionate about, to go to a different tournament format. Don't mess with the game of 14.1 as it is. Create a new tournament format, 's all.

I'm both scratching my head, and chuckling at the futility of this all. I think this is a thread by a really bored person who just wants social interaction of some kind.

-Sean

Ok Mr. Sean, i did not !!! funny boy! meet me in Arlington, VA for a race to 3 , 14.1 100 points each.

OK i agree on tournament format change, race to 3 on 14.1 , to me kind of like changing the rules of 14.1 but if you want to call it tournament format great, i am all for it.

 

[naji]

A lag is a luck shot? How in the hell does someone figure that? A breakshot...in straight pool...lucky?

Dear lord....

I've read in this thread something to the effect of "they got their argument, I got mine". In some cultures, it's not about being right or wrong, it's about winning the argument. I believe someone is just trolling.

Getting close, looks like some in agreement of calling it "changing tournament format of 14.1" to race to 3 instead of one race of 100 or 150, hay i am all to 75 points even each race..! Mainly so stream viewers get to see their horse racing, and not sleeping!

 

[NitPicker]

Getting close, looks like some in agreement of calling it "changing tournament format of 14.1" to race to 3 instead of one race of 100 or 150, hay i am all to 75 points even each race..! Mainly so stream viewers get to see their horse racing, and not sleeping!

What your asking for is a change to format to better accommodate the spectators. 14.1 isn't the most viewer friendly game, I'll give you that...neither is one pocket, imo. However, the current rules of 14.1 are fair. What you're complaining about is that you're fond of a lame horse in a race of thoroughbreds. Ok, if that's your thing. Just understand that while a format change may suit your viewing better, you've effectively made the tournament more conducive to lame horses that can't step up and perform with the same single opportunity as other horses. Since you like horseracing so much, how many races do they run at the Derby?

 

[sfleinen]

Ok Mr. Sean, i did not !!! funny boy! meet me in Arlington, VA for a race to 3 , 14.1 100 points each.

OK i agree on tournament format change, race to 3 on 14.1 , to me kind of like changing the rules of 14.1 but if you want to call it tournament format great, i am all for it.

Oh yeah, here we go -- the long-distance challenge to gamble that will never come to be. "Blustering from the bleachers," as we say. I asked you to run 3 racks on video, not a personal challenge to gamble. But hey, folks know that I'm game. I'm just not traveling to Arlington VA, so there we go -- a match that won't happen.

Changing the tournament format is not changing the rules of 14.1. What you initially proposed -- of setting up a break ball and taking ball in hand behind the line -- *IS* changing the rules of 14.1. You can't have it both ways.

And besides, why are you expending so much effort tilting at windmills in a chat forum? Do you really think your efforts here is going to make any difference? Why don't you write letters to the WPA, if you're so focused on changing the game of 14.1 itself?

-Sean

 

[Kim Bye]

14.1 is not like 9 ball where luck plays a big part

Trying to get the luck part of it out (the 1st few shots in the game are useless and opens the door for luck! allowing 2nd player opportunity to say "hay your 150 and out wont scare me, watch me do it!!!!"

Plus what in the hill you comparing snooker to 14.1 1st, the difficulty level in snooker is 10000000000000000 times that of 14.1 . One day walked in the pool room, played a guy wanted to shoot 14.1, i ran 50 points cold before i even practice!! the game is very very easy to those that shoot good pool! so many options and selections!

Your so wrong!
Making a good break shot is in itself a skill, so is taking the tough first shot, so you can start your run... Have you ever played 14.1?
When i said it resembles snooker, I meant that as in snooker it`s not uncommon to be in your seat for long periods a time and not even getting to the table.
Good for you that you make a 50 ball run, you should start playing in competitions then...
But claiming 14.1 is easy is naive!

 

[naji]

Oh yeah, here we go -- the long-distance challenge to gamble that will never come to be. "Blustering from the bleachers," as we say. I asked you to run 3 racks on video, not a personal challenge to gamble. But hey, folks know that I'm game. I'm just not traveling to Arlington VA, so there we go -- a match that won't happen.

Changing the tournament format is not changing the rules of 14.1. What you initially proposed -- of setting up a break ball and taking ball in hand behind the line -- *IS* changing the rules of 14.1. You can't have it both ways.

And besides, why are you expending so much effort tilting at windmills in a chat forum? Do you really think your efforts here is going to make any difference? Why don't you write letters to the WPA, if you're so focused on changing the game of 14.1 itself?

-Sean

Who said gambling!! just kidding. Seriously Sean, i proposed a change when i did not think about race to 3 like others suggested, true i would have liked to have both try by setting a break ball; but race to 3 keeps 14.1 rules the same and give fair advantage to players and stream viewers. I felt changing from single 100 or 150 to win to 3 sets runs is a rule change, but i guess not!

AZB is gaining popularity and i feel tournament directors read AZB and will change the way they run tournaments to the best possible outcome.

 

[Inaction]

Obama rule: When a player reaches a lead that is equal to half of the race, every other ball made will be counted for the opponent. Just to even things out a bit and spread the points around.

 

[NitPicker]

Who said gambling!! just kidding. Seriously Sean, i proposed a change when i did not think about race to 3 like others suggested, true i would have liked to have both try by setting a break ball; but race to 3 keeps 14.1 rules the same and give fair advantage to players and stream viewers. I felt changing from single 100 or 150 to win to 3 sets runs is a rule change, but i guess not!

AZB is gaining popularity and i feel tournament directors read AZB and will change the way they run tournaments to the best possible outcome.

There is no such thing as a "fair advantage". It's either equal (fair) or weighted to a specific side (advantage).

NO ALTERNATING BREAK FORMAT IS FAIR WHEN YOU MUST WIN TO HAVE THE FIRST BREAK.

 

[krupa]

Obama rule: When a player reaches a lead that is equal to half of the race, every other ball made will be counted for the opponent. Just to even things out a bit and spread the points around.

Reagan/Bush/Bush Rule: The player with the most money wins.

 

[naji]

There is no such thing as a "fair advantage". It's either equal (fair) or weighted to a specific side (advantage).

NO ALTERNATING BREAK FORMAT IS FAIR WHEN YOU MUST WIN TO HAVE THE FIRST BREAK.

Oh Man you do have a good AZB name!! NitPicker i agree equal advantage, is that better?

 

[sfleinen]

Who said gambling!! just kidding. Seriously Sean, i proposed a change when i did not think about race to 3 like others suggested, true i would have liked to have both try by setting a break ball; but race to 3 keeps 14.1 rules the same and give fair advantage to players and stream viewers. I felt changing from single 100 or 150 to win to 3 sets runs is a rule change, but i guess not!

AZB is gaining popularity and i feel tournament directors read AZB and will change the way they run tournaments to the best possible outcome.

Actually, I think tournament directors read AZB for the same reason that folks driving in the opposite direction on a highway, slowdown to gawk at an accident that happened in the other direction.

You know, morbid fascination.

-Sean