Time limit instead of shot clock

K

kujuj

Banned
Currently you have a 30 second shot clock. If a player only takes 5 seconds to shoot he essentialy loses the remaining 25 seconds, when he should be able to bank it. Really this means he is being punished for shooting fast when he should be rewarded.

Solution:

Have a time limit. Lets say a game of nine ball each player gets 1 minute to play. The clock starts when a player is at the table and stops at the end of his turn. He can take however long he wants on each shot..but if he mismanages his time then he may run into time trouble at the end of the game.

This time limit can be reset every game, or it could be a match time limit...so in a race to 11 each player would get 11 minutes to play the entire match.

This would solve the problem of slow play, while rewarding faster players.

This would open up a bunch of interesting scenarios during a match...and also for tournaments and rankings. Every player would have a new stat (ATPS) average time per shot. In fact to be considered a "pro" and compete in the top tournaments you would have to have a certain ATPS along with an 800 Fargo rating.
 
Last edited:
hang-the-9 said:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?445240&p=5788709#post5788709

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?387869&p=5049494#post5049494

Thought of, did not happen.

There was at least one event on TV that had a match limit, I think they combined it with you must try to make all shots. Was horrible to watch.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly. This wasn't the clocks fault..it was the must try to make all shots part. This isn't blitz pool I'm suggesting...its not about deteriorating the level of play by putting ridiculous time constraints.
 
kujuj said:
Better players should be rewarded. A player who can hold a higher fargo rating and a lower time per shot is a better player.
Click to expand...

Time taken to shoot has nothing to do with being a better player. Are dragster drivers better drivers than F1 or NASCAR drivers because they go faster? No one will be sticking time limit clocks around pool halls and tournaments. Better players are rewarded now, they win.
 
hang-the-9 said:
Time taken to shoot has nothing to do with being a better player. Are dragster drivers better drivers than F1 or NASCAR drivers because they go faster? No one will be sticking time limit clocks around pool halls and tournaments. Better players are rewarded now, they win.
Click to expand...

Your analogy is flawed. If a player can run a rack in half the time you can...he is the better player. In a marathon, if one runner finishes in 2 hours and another in 3 hours...they both finished the race, but who is the better runner?
 
Last edited:
kujuj said:
If a player can run a rack in half the time you can...he is the better player.
Click to expand...

How does that make him better? There is no relation between speed of play and ability to pocket balls and play position. Pool players are not paid in how many racks they run in an hour, they are not making sneakers in some 3rd world country. Some people just play differently. You may not like watching slow players, but that does not make they any worse as a player.
 
kujuj said:
Your analogy is flawed. If a player can run a rack in half the time you can...he is the better player. In a marathon, if one runner finishes in 2 hours and another in 3 hours...they both finished the race, but who is the better runner?
Click to expand...

The whole point of a marathon is to run the race in the shortest time possible LOL, talk about flawed analogies. There is a competition for fast players, speed pool. In that game the fastest player that pockets the most wins.

Is the best pitcher in baseball the one that can send the most pitches in a minute to the catcher or one that pitches the balls that are hardest to hit? Is the best elephant the fastest one or the one that knows not to drink at a lake with 30 alligators and avoid having to run away in the first place? So many analogies so little time.
 
Last edited:
hang-the-9 said:
The whole point of a marathon is to run the race in the shortest time possible LOL, talk about flawed analogies. There is a competition for fast players, speed pool. In that game the fastest player that pockets the most wins.

Is the best pitcher in baseball the one that can send the most pitches in a minute to the catcher or one that pitches the balls that are hardest to hit? Is the best elephant the fastest one or the one that knows not to drink at a lake with 30 alligators and avoid having to run away in the first place? So many analogies so little time.
Click to expand...

Thats my point...speed should be a factor in pool...but not so a fast player should be rewarded as much as slow players should be penalized for being slow. AND this isn't about making pool "exciting" for tv or whatever...I couldn't care less about those kind of fans. I don't like blitz pool because it looks stupid and clearly has a detriment on play. Honestly this rule is purely for the faster players because if you are a faster player you know how excruciating it is to sit and wait around for your opponent...this isn't about the fans or about trying to make the game more interesting. I stopped going to the local tourney because it takes like 3 hours for a field of 8 to have a race to 4 and 3...a race to 4 should only take 10 minutes on average...not 30.
 
Last edited:
kujuj said:
Thats my point...speed should be a factor in pool...but not so a fast player should be rewarded as much as slow players should be penalized for being slow. AND this isn't about making pool "exciting" for tv or whatever...I couldn't care less about those kind of fans. I don't like blitz pool because it looks stupid and clearly has a detriment on play. Honestly this rule is purely for the faster players because if you are a faster player you know how excruciating it is to sit and wait around for your opponent...this isn't about the fans or about trying to make the game more interesting. I stopped going to the local tourney because it takes like 3 hours for a field of 8 to have a race to 4 and 3...a race to 4 should only take 10 minutes on average...not 30.
Click to expand...

With that theory, I suppose all shots should be hit very hard as well to get in the hole faster, so why not add a speedometer or a laser gun to the table as well.

OOH OOH OOH, I got one, two tables, one for each player, same rack of balls on each table, players shoot from a whistle, simultaneously, first guy out wins.

This is about the dumbest conversation I've seen lately.
 
Renegade_56 said:
OOH OOH OOH, I got one, two tables, one for each player, same rack of balls on each table, players shoot from a whistle, simultaneously, first guy out wins.
Click to expand...

I actually think that would be an interesting game...MYSTERY GHOST POOL.

Set the table up with the balls in random positions around the table and have both tables set up the same.

The players can NOT see what their opponents are doing on the other table and do not know how long it took them to get out, or how many balls they made before they missed.

Not allowing them to see their opponent keeps them from seeing what may have worked that they didn't see on their own table. Also, not knowing their opponent's time, makes them aware of the time factor.

The person who makes it to the end fastest wins the game...assuming they both made it to the end.

If neither person makes it to the end, the person who made the most amount of balls in the least time wins.

If both players make the same number of balls, the one who used the least time wins.

This game ensures that both players have exactly the same chances that the other player had...the shots are identical and nobody had an easier layout than the other. The game outcome is TOTALLY reliant upon the shooter. You decide how you will shoot, what pattern you will shoot, and how fast you will do it. How can you b1itch that you lost, when everything is decided by YOU.
 
I think he was using 10# line.
 

Attachments

  • 54d.jpg
    54d.jpg
    183.2 KB · Views: 316
I agree that the accumulated shot clock tied to the number of shot attempts could be a way to go.

Keep the 30 second shot clock. If you make two shots in a row that takes 10 seconds, you can bank the 40 seconds you saved as an extension towards your next shot.
 
Why does a player get to bank the unused time?
In all other sports where there's a time clock, it always re-sets.
But the reset does not provide the player with a cushion of unused time.

The 30 secs. is for overall pace of play; faster players are not entitled to a
reward for playing fasrer than their opponent. Quite the opposite, a slow
play may get penalized, just like the shot clock works in other sports.

The only analagous example I came up with is a chess match using chess clocks.
The faster player saves his time which is helpful since there is a fixed time limit.
If a player completes his shot within 30 seconds, that's suitably fast enough but
to reward his opponent with extra time because he played a little quicker is unfair.
 
ctyhntr said:
I agree that the accumulated shot clock tied to the number of shot attempts could be a way to go.

Keep the 30 second shot clock. If you make two shots in a row that takes 10 seconds, you can bank the 40 seconds you saved as an extension towards your next shot.
Click to expand...

OK, so who keeps track of all this time saving and banked seconds?

Wait, I got another one,,,,, who ever saves the most seconds wins,,,,,, or,,,,,,,, we could do a race to like 3 minutes or something,,,,,,,,, or,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 
I don't think the accumulated time should affect the outcome of the existing game. I like your idea, maybe use some of the rollover time as a clock extension, such as in the case of sudden death or tie breaker.

Renegade_56 said:
OK, so who keeps track of all this time saving and banked seconds?

Wait, I got another one,,,,, who ever saves the most seconds wins,,,,,, or,,,,,,,, we could do a race to like 3 minutes or something,,,,,,,,, or,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top