There were 10 foot Brunswick snooker tables in many places in the 60's , know of 2 in smaller towns in Texas.You just needed to use pool ball sets instead of snooker sets to equal Chinese 8 ball .
US Open 10 ball & 8 ball is Back!
- Thread starter tduncan
- Start date
There were 10 foot Brunswick snooker tables in many places in the 60's , know of 2 in smaller towns in Texas.You just needed to use pool ball sets instead of snooker sets to equal Chinese 8 ball .
I don't agree that it's tougher...
I agree that it takes more skill and knowledge of the game to play 8 ball at a high level on bar boxes than on big table....
As to your feelings on my "rude" comments, I could give two shits...The us open tenball should be on at least 9 foot tables. Calling bar box tenball the us open is demeaning to the game and if it's only about logistics or mass appeal, then call it something else.
Hell, call it the world tenball barbox championship...but not simply the US Open Ten Ball championship...
Jaden
I agree that it takes more skill and knowledge of the game to play 8 ball at a high level on bar boxes than on big table....
As to your feelings on my "rude" comments, I could give two shits...The us open tenball should be on at least 9 foot tables. Calling bar box tenball the us open is demeaning to the game and if it's only about logistics or mass appeal, then call it something else.
Hell, call it the world tenball barbox championship...but not simply the US Open Ten Ball championship...
Jaden
Let me correct your rude ass. You are uncouth on how you say things. If you left out the vulgarity you would have more credibility. Cursing doesn't help your arguments and debates, especially on a forum where it will get bleeped out. It just shows your ignorance.
Regarding your points, I agree that a 10 ball event on bar boxes shouldn't be called a US Open.
Regarding your points, I agree that a 10 ball event on bar boxes shouldn't be called a US Open.
It hurts, but yes I agree with you, sort of !
Way more clusters and tighter position play.
But shots are more friendly. I don't know really if
tougher or just a different game than on 9 footers.
Going to 7 footers I think, is not the way to go though. IMO
8 ball probably is harder on a 7 footer. However, after I watched the Earl/Shane 8 ball match that they played on a 7 footer in Montana I'm not entirely sure. The pros are so good at breaking out clusters that it didn't seem like a major challenge for them.
The best table size, in my opinion, is the 4/8, it's the best of both worlds.
It's not really tougher, although it's more strategically oriented because of the size.
Eight-Ball on a big table is much too easy to run out on, so the strategic movement is diminished. The best table size, in my opinion, is the 4/8, it's the best of both worlds.
It's not really tougher, although it's more strategically oriented because of the size.
Eight-Ball on a big table is much too easy to run out on, so the strategic movement is diminished. The best table size, in my opinion, is the 4/8, it's the best of both worlds.
Stupid Break Shot
I like the ideas you suggested!
Are they being considered by organizers?
Colin
I agree that the break shot is ruining 8-ball and rotation games, not just US forms but English and the Chinese form.
I like the ideas you suggested!
Are they being considered by organizers?
Colin
Time for some stats relevant to this issue.
Here are some stats from 3 8-Ball events, all with top players -- the Shane/Earl Decider from 2013 (7-footer), the CSI Invitational 8-Ball Championship from July of 2014 (9-footer), and 7 of the 15 matches from the Accu-Stats Make-It-Happen Invitational from November of 2014 (9-footer).
• Break-and-run games:
Shane/Earl -- 46% (24 of 52)
CSI -- 54% (118 of 218)
Accu-Stats -- 50% (59 of 117)
• Breaker run-outs on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Shane/Earl -- 77% (24 of 31)
CSI -- 77% (118 of 154)
Accu-Stats -- 69% (59 of 85)
• Non-breaker run-outs in 1st inning after unsuccessful breaks:
Shane/Earl -- 86% (18 of 21)
CSI -- 69% (44 of 64)
Accu-Stats -- 66% (21 of 32)
• Run-outs by first player to shoot after the break:
Shane/Earl -- 81% (42 of 52)
CSI -- 74% (162 of 218)
Accu-Stats -- 68% (80 of 117)
Comments -- The game is too easy (for my taste) for the top pros on either 7-foot or 9-foot tables. In these 3 events, the player who came to the table after the break ran out about three-quarters of the time. That percentage was a little higher on the 7-footer than on the 9-footers, but the sample size on the small table was small.
[Note -- Both events on 9-footers used racking templates. I don't know what was used for racking in the Shane/Earl match.]
I wonder how much these percentages would be affected (if it all) if they weren't playing open after the break.
A seven foot table is NOT a pool table. The long ball is what separates the men from the boys. This is a sad joke. Screw it. I'm not going. World class players on a seven foot table is run out or snookered. This level of player get's a shot and it's over. THIS ISN'T PRO LEVEL POOL.I have no interest in watching this travesty.
Don't watch it then ....... I think that whole post Is a bit narrow minded.
The 8 ball is a bit easy on either table but in the rotation games the run out % is very similar. If your a "B" player then your a "B" on either table
2 Things.
First, don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
While I don't really enjoy watching truly world class players play on bar tables that DOES NOT mean that bar tables don't have their place in the game. There are too many players on this site and some even in this very thread that lump THEIR game together with the world class players and say how pointless bar table pool is. Well, I've seen some of these players play on bar tables and they make plenty of mistakes and miss plenty of balls. The bar table is still challenging enough for just about all of us. So stop confusing watching world class players play on bar tables with what you think you look like when you're playing on a bar table because it probably doesn’t look nearly as flawless as you think it does. I learned this the hard way and I’ll never again fool myself into disrespecting the bar table.
Second, others have already touched on this so I'll just join the chorus -- CSI made a mistake with the naming of these tourneys. I like the idea of having the U.S. Open 9 Ball (even if it's Barry's), U.S. Open 10 Ball, U.S. Open 8 Ball, and even the U.S. One Pocket (when played). I think it is obvious CSI likes this too. So they really, really wanted to use these titles. The problem is they just don't fit and they shouldn't be named this way. Oh well, what can they do now?
Third (I know I said 2 but I changed my mind), these tournaments could very well be the method used to bridge the gap between the pros and the amateurs. If local players could win paid entries into these fields through a serious of local tourneys sanctioned by the BCAPL (or equivalent) it could potentially litter the field with known local players that amateurs could be emotionally invested in. Then they would have to focus their streaming coverage on these local players in the hopes that the locals would check out the streams and then become interested in watching ALL the coverage. This would actually give CSI a chance to get new players to watch these streams instead of it always being the same old diehards.
First, don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
While I don't really enjoy watching truly world class players play on bar tables that DOES NOT mean that bar tables don't have their place in the game. There are too many players on this site and some even in this very thread that lump THEIR game together with the world class players and say how pointless bar table pool is. Well, I've seen some of these players play on bar tables and they make plenty of mistakes and miss plenty of balls. The bar table is still challenging enough for just about all of us. So stop confusing watching world class players play on bar tables with what you think you look like when you're playing on a bar table because it probably doesn’t look nearly as flawless as you think it does. I learned this the hard way and I’ll never again fool myself into disrespecting the bar table.
Second, others have already touched on this so I'll just join the chorus -- CSI made a mistake with the naming of these tourneys. I like the idea of having the U.S. Open 9 Ball (even if it's Barry's), U.S. Open 10 Ball, U.S. Open 8 Ball, and even the U.S. One Pocket (when played). I think it is obvious CSI likes this too. So they really, really wanted to use these titles. The problem is they just don't fit and they shouldn't be named this way. Oh well, what can they do now?
Third (I know I said 2 but I changed my mind), these tournaments could very well be the method used to bridge the gap between the pros and the amateurs. If local players could win paid entries into these fields through a serious of local tourneys sanctioned by the BCAPL (or equivalent) it could potentially litter the field with known local players that amateurs could be emotionally invested in. Then they would have to focus their streaming coverage on these local players in the hopes that the locals would check out the streams and then become interested in watching ALL the coverage. This would actually give CSI a chance to get new players to watch these streams instead of it always being the same old diehards.
Nah, for the finals, they can play checkers!
Excellent post, and great idea! If they want to tap into the league numbers, they have to include them in some way, not just be next to them.
Why does it have to be 7' or 9/10'? Why not compromise and play everything on 8 footers?
What size should the board be though? Regulation sized or smaller? Gotta separate the checkers boys from men.
You probably weren't gonna go anyway. People that make posts like yours just wanna complain.
RBC
Deceased
I would imagine that money has a lot to do with it.
I don't think anyone makes a portable table in an 8 foot model. Not even Diamond.
If I remember correctly, they can fit about 50 of the 7' smart tables on a truck with lights. They can only fit something like 16 of the 9' smart tables on a truck.
CSI owns the US Open names for 10 ball, 8 ball, and one pocket. Barry owns it for 9 ball. If they don't call these events by the US Open titles then there just won't be any events with those titles. CSI has had them in conjunction with the BCAPL National Amateur events because it both saved them production money and it also gave them a captive audience. Well, that didn't work. The events still cost them significant money to hold, and there has been very little interest from the amateurs already there. CSI only really has a few choices. They can continue to run the events at a loss. Or, they could drop them entirely and put that expense into the amateur event. Or, they could try to find a way to pull off the events that would catch the attention of the amateurs that are already there. I side with number 3.
I've said many times that what Pro Pool needs is a fan base. And it needs to be a fan base that is passionate about pool enough to spend money being fans. It's the only way it can work.
Advertising won't bring fans, it can only help to grow an existing fan base. Advertisers aren't interested in creating an audience to advertise to, they want to find one that already exists.
In every main stream sport, the players and all those involved cater to the fans. After all, it's the money that the fans spend that makes it all possible. Until Pro Pool can make a connection with the amateurs, which is about the only thing successful in the current pool world, they will suffer financial hardships.
Something to consider is that the viewership here on AZ, while it seems like the real pulse of the pool world, is very small relative to all the true amateur players out there. A vast majority of them probably don't even know about AZ, or the Pro's. That doesn't mean that they aren't pool players. And it doesn't mean that they couldn't be fans of both the Pro's and the sport. To me they are the low hanging fruit. They already have at least some passion for pool, and are prime candidates to become fans. Pool just needs to recognize that they are the best potential fan base, and figure out what would motivate them.
I know that I like to play on 9 footers more than I like to play on 7 footers. But I also know that I'm already committed to pool and the industry. It's not what I like that matters, it's what the thousands or more potential fans out there would like.
It's all about the numbers. Of fans, that is.
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
I do not think that when one is presenting something as a national open championship it should be held on Bar Boxes.
In the Golf world the US Open is a great event because the course is set up to challenge the players to the utmost. In fact, all PGA level tournaments are set up to be harder than what the everyday hacker is experiencing; from where the pro's T-off to the way the rough is set up and the challenging pin placements it's all geared to show the skill required to be a Pro.
From a typical fan/spectator point of view, it is boring to watch predictable break and runs that now dominate 9 Ball. While one pocket, for example, is more interesting to me because I have taken the time to understand the strategies and nuance of execution, I know that the majority of potential fans would not have the same appreciation. It is no secret that the Bigfoot 10 Ball invitational is now the crown jewel of the DCC.
I think that 8 ball has a lot of potential to be used to expand the fan base for the reasons that many on this forum have already outlined and I became even more convinced of it after watching some of the matches from the recent 8 Ball tournament from China. The tables are set up to require accurate shooting and positional play demands a good stroke.
I would suggest that, for the credibility of the sport, CSI not only has to hold these events on a 9 foot table but they should partner with Diamond tables, or another table manufacturer (I prefer Diamonds) to come up with a “Pro level tournament” line of tables that would mirror the difficulty found on the Chinese tables. Anything less would seem to show CSI as being somewhat opportunistic for registering the names US Open 8 ball and US Open 10 ball and then allowing them to become a bar box tournament.
In the Golf world the US Open is a great event because the course is set up to challenge the players to the utmost. In fact, all PGA level tournaments are set up to be harder than what the everyday hacker is experiencing; from where the pro's T-off to the way the rough is set up and the challenging pin placements it's all geared to show the skill required to be a Pro.
From a typical fan/spectator point of view, it is boring to watch predictable break and runs that now dominate 9 Ball. While one pocket, for example, is more interesting to me because I have taken the time to understand the strategies and nuance of execution, I know that the majority of potential fans would not have the same appreciation. It is no secret that the Bigfoot 10 Ball invitational is now the crown jewel of the DCC.
I think that 8 ball has a lot of potential to be used to expand the fan base for the reasons that many on this forum have already outlined and I became even more convinced of it after watching some of the matches from the recent 8 Ball tournament from China. The tables are set up to require accurate shooting and positional play demands a good stroke.
I would suggest that, for the credibility of the sport, CSI not only has to hold these events on a 9 foot table but they should partner with Diamond tables, or another table manufacturer (I prefer Diamonds) to come up with a “Pro level tournament” line of tables that would mirror the difficulty found on the Chinese tables. Anything less would seem to show CSI as being somewhat opportunistic for registering the names US Open 8 ball and US Open 10 ball and then allowing them to become a bar box tournament.
RBC
Deceased
Whiffer
You do realize that the game of Chinese 8 ball is played on a completely different kind of table, don't you?
It's a cross between a pool table and a snooker table.
In order for Diamond to build such a table, there would have to be a market to sell them to. It just doesn't make sense to build a table just for one or two events.
Royce
Greg Sullivan is considering some changes in 9 ball at Derby City and I think would appreciate any feedback on this idea.
Roll out at any time during the game. If whoever takes the shot after the rollout misses the shot, it is ball in hand for the opposing player.
This would eliminate lucky hooks or bad leaves after missing shots and more importantly, keep players from playing position to play a safety. It would actually speed up play and make the game more offensive again.
I am old and traditional do not like change much, but after mulling this over, think this will work to speed up the game and make it more offensive and exciting for the fans.
We should probably start a separate thread on this to get some feedback from the AZ community.