Full Time Push Out...
- Thread starter 1971
- Start date
Old Nine Baller
Banned
There's no reason you can't both be right.
ONB
You can win matches playing both styles, but if we are talking matches that people would watch I'm going for the "offensive oriented" game every time.
How do you think Willie Mosconi was able to run 100-plus ball runs on people almost daily? He could have beaten most of his opponents without doing it, but he had the "guts" to not play SAFE on one or more shots that may have given him a problem. People WATCHED Willie Mosconi. People watched Earl Strickland. People watched Keith McCready. People watched Ronnie Allen.
Who are they watching now? Nobody...or Oprah...or Better Homes and Gardens.
gambler's used to always say "I'm not going to kick for my money"
That's exactly the reality of the two games, and Two Foul is strategically superior.
No one will ever see the offensive levels playing one foul except for the simple "rack running," and that gets boring quick. Two Foul brings out an entirely more advanced level of shot-making, especially off the end rail.
The worse thing about one foul is being rewarded for playing conservatively. What happens time and time again is a player will almost hook themselves, then play a simple safety that puts their opponent in a bad spot......and it's a result of them not being able to run out.
The gambler's used to always say "I'm not going to kick for my money" when ask to play one foul as opposed to two foul rules.
That's exactly the reality of the two games, and Two Foul is strategically superior.
No one will ever see the offensive levels playing one foul except for the simple "rack running," and that gets boring quick. Two Foul brings out an entirely more advanced level of shot-making, especially off the end rail.
The worse thing about one foul is being rewarded for playing conservatively. What happens time and time again is a player will almost hook themselves, then play a simple safety that puts their opponent in a bad spot......and it's a result of them not being able to run out.
The gambler's used to always say "I'm not going to kick for my money" when ask to play one foul as opposed to two foul rules.
ONE PLAYER DISAGREES. There is the proof I needed. LMAO!
Old Nine Baller
Banned
Maybe when you are done LYAO you will notice the very obvious sarcasm in my post. You seem to have overlooked it.
ONB
Currently we just see a shadow of what their true skill level and knowledge really is
I would watch pool if they were using the 2 Foul rules, it would be very, very interesting to see the level of shot-making and strategic moves performed by players like Efren, Earl, Johnny, Justin, Dennis Hatch, Bustamante, and Rodney Morris.
Currently we just see a shadow of what their true skill level and knowledge really is, hopefully, in the near future, everyone will be able to witness how extraordinary the game can be in it's purist form.
I would watch pool if they were using the 2 Foul rules, it would be very, very interesting to see the level of shot-making and strategic moves performed by players like Efren, Earl, Johnny, Justin, Dennis Hatch, Bustamante, and Rodney Morris.
Currently we just see a shadow of what their true skill level and knowledge really is, hopefully, in the near future, everyone will be able to witness how extraordinary the game can be in it's purist form.
Push a Piece Per Player
Should be tried.
Paul S. your pool room tho is barred from trying this
....
If the breaker is allowed one push, his opponent should also be allowed. If the breaker gets hooked and rolls out, you also should have the choice to roll out or take the shot if your unlucky and get hooked by your opponents miss....save your roll out for later in the game. But some form of this is realistic, and it'll give the commentators allot more to talk about....and the fans allot more to talk about also.
Should be tried.
Paul S. your pool room tho is barred from trying this
....If the breaker is allowed one push, his opponent should also be allowed. If the breaker gets hooked and rolls out, you also should have the choice to roll out or take the shot if your unlucky and get hooked by your opponents miss....save your roll out for later in the game. But some form of this is realistic, and it'll give the commentators allot more to talk about....and the fans allot more to talk about also.
Should be tried.
Paul S. your pool room tho is barred from trying this
If the breaker is allowed one push, his opponent should also be allowed. If the breaker gets hooked and rolls out, you also should have the choice to roll out or take the shot if your unlucky and get hooked by your opponents miss....save your roll out for later in the game. But some form of this is realistic, and it'll give the commentators allot more to talk about....and the fans allot more to talk about also.
That is a good START and would be an improvement over the current game.
once a game you could play one, "two way shot," or a "two way safe"
Yes, this is a step in the right direction.
The game that we've developed is the perfect mix of the two foul rules with components that force the action. This doesn't mean more strict penalties, like "ball in hand" every time a ball is missed. We are more interested in bringing out the strategic and shot-making qualities.
The challenge inventing this game wasn't the rules, it was the name that could be branded, marketed and tailor made for a certain type of sponsor. A type of sponsor that I've never heard mentioned, yet has billions of dollars and are typically aggressive advertisers.
To be successful we must have the complete package - the game's rules must be professionally generated (I spent many hours with Earl Strickland and George Breedlove creating the rules we used on the Professional CueSports tour), and designed to bring out predictable strategic situations in EVERY game.
In the PCA rules were played a race to 15, incoming player could make their opponent shoot again on a missed shot - and once a game you could play one, "two way shot," or a "two way safe". These were example of the differences, which immediately made the game more challenging and the matches more entertaining.
Yes, this is a step in the right direction.
The game that we've developed is the perfect mix of the two foul rules with components that force the action. This doesn't mean more strict penalties, like "ball in hand" every time a ball is missed. We are more interested in bringing out the strategic and shot-making qualities.
The challenge inventing this game wasn't the rules, it was the name that could be branded, marketed and tailor made for a certain type of sponsor. A type of sponsor that I've never heard mentioned, yet has billions of dollars and are typically aggressive advertisers.
To be successful we must have the complete package - the game's rules must be professionally generated (I spent many hours with Earl Strickland and George Breedlove creating the rules we used on the Professional CueSports tour), and designed to bring out predictable strategic situations in EVERY game.
In the PCA rules were played a race to 15, incoming player could make their opponent shoot again on a missed shot - and once a game you could play one, "two way shot," or a "two way safe". These were example of the differences, which immediately made the game more challenging and the matches more entertaining.
That is a good START and would be an improvement over the current game.
Calling balls, race to 15, push-out, option after a miss...... I am not being sarcastic. Please, bring it on. Show the way. Do it.
These were the rules we used in our PCA events (1996), they're not the rules I'm suggesting. Although they are much better than what's currently being used.
Last edited:
uttahere::rotflmao1:
The offensive element of the game goes up dramatically
In one foul you have three options:
1) Try to run the table
2) Play Safe (duck)
3) Kick
In 2 Foul there's a battle between the two players for the first shot (after the roll out), this means you can't win playing "safe," you usually must pocket a difficult shot to win.
The offensive element of the game goes up dramatically, because you must strategically out shoot and out maneuver your opponent to win a game.....and against players like Buddy Hall and Mike Siges this was a challenging task.
In one foul you have three options:
1) Try to run the table
2) Play Safe (duck)
3) Kick
In 2 Foul there's a battle between the two players for the first shot (after the roll out), this means you can't win playing "safe," you usually must pocket a difficult shot to win.
The offensive element of the game goes up dramatically, because you must strategically out shoot and out maneuver your opponent to win a game.....and against players like Buddy Hall and Mike Siges this was a challenging task.
Cliff Said
How can we increase play/viewership/interest for the sport...for non players.
How can we increase play/viewership/interest for the sport...for non players.
Old Nine Baller
Banned
No doubt that 9 Ball is a "pig" so-to-speak. One-Pocket is a much better game and so is Full-Rack Banks but 9 Ball is what's being discussed here and if 2 Foul is lipstick then I say "put it on that there pig
". It'll still be a pig but it'll look a lot better.P.S. I don't give a damn what viewers want to see. I'm not a T.V. executive. I care what I want to play (and gamble at) and what I want to see. I would pay the going rate for a 2 Foul BIH 9 Ball tournament but I wouldn't pay a quarter for a 1 Foul tournament.
ONB
Maybe "Old McDonalds Pool Room" could be a nation wide chain.
All this time we thought you were a TV executive.
So 9 Ball is a "pig" and 2 Foul is a prettier pig and one pocket is a cow, or chicken?
Maybe "Old McDonalds Pool Room" could be a nation wide chain.
All this time we thought you were a TV executive.
So 9 Ball is a "pig" and 2 Foul is a prettier pig and one pocket is a cow, or chicken?
Maybe "Old McDonalds Pool Room" could be a nation wide chain.
No doubt that 9 Ball is a "pig" so-to-speak. One-Pocket is a much better game and so is Full-Rack Banks but 9 Ball is what's being discussed here and if 2 Foul is lipstick then I say "put it on that there pig
P.S. I don't give a damn what viewers want to see. I'm not a T.V. executive. I care what I want to play (and gamble at) and what I want to see. I would pay the going rate for a 2 Foul BIH 9 Ball tournament but I wouldn't pay a quarter for a 1 Foul tournament.
ONB
Let me get this straight, in earlier posts you advocated push out using the analogy that all other sports have defense but 1 foul pool doesn't. Now your advocating it stating its about the offensive element of the game going up, really? Seriously? I've heard of arguing both sides of a point but usually that contains a coherent argument. 1 foul has defense, it's called a safety. It also has offense, it's called getting out. 2 foul push out is about moving, that's all. If I want to outmaneuver an opponent I'll play one pocket. 1 foul is the MOST offensive form of the game, period. Oh, before you write me off as someone that "doesn't get it", all the while thinking it's because I haven't played push out as many younger players today haven't, let me nip that in the bud by saying I cut my teeth in this game playing push out before Texas Express rules came about so I've played plenty of both & prefer 1 foul. Why? I have plenty of offense to get out & if a low percentage shot arises, I've got a safety game & I can kick when necessary.
Perhaps you're trying to reinvent the wheel thinking promoting 2 foul will be your ticket back in to the show. It won't sell. As I stated earlier, 2 foul is about moving, I know it, you know it. The difference is nowadays 1 pocket is probably at the pinnacle of its popularity & if you like to move instead of shoot you can play that.