New hybrid breaking rule.

8

8ballr

Banned
Instead of winner or alternate breaks...how about a hybrid where it is alternate break unless the player breaks and runs the rack...then they get to break again.
 
8ballr said:
Instead of winner or alternate breaks...how about a hybrid where it is alternate break unless the player breaks and runs the rack...then they get to break again.
Click to expand...

Very interesting...that would enable a player to still put some racks together...both to get a lead or to erase one...something that the alternate break only does not allow.
 
not a good idea. alternate breaks limits the ability of the stronger breaker to dominate the match. your idea makes it even more unlikely the weaker breaker will have a chance to win the match.
 
owll said:
not a good idea. alternate breaks limits the ability of the stronger breaker to dominate the match. your idea makes it even more unlikely the weaker breaker will have a chance to win the match.
Click to expand...

Why are we trying to make it easier or weaker players.?
 
8ballr said:
Why are we trying to make it easier or weaker players.?
Click to expand...

i wouldnt necessarily say weaker players. i think it is more accurate to say weaker breakers, because weaker players can't win, irregardless of what the rules are.

i'm not advocating for/or against alternate breaks. All im saying is that the idea the original poster put forward is bad. The idea put forward, in my opinion, gives a player with a weak break a smaller chance of winning than winner breaks does, and substantially less chance than alternate break does.


edit; I didnt realize you were the original poster... ok, we have winner breaks which alot of us are most comfortable with.....and then we have alternate breaks which some believe benefits weaker players (it doesnt, but it does benefit weaker breakers)......and then we have YOUR IDEA.........why dont do you break it down for us, and tell us what your wonderful idea is supposed to accomplish (other than trolling)?
 
Last edited:
owll said:
i wouldnt necessarily say weaker players. i think it is more accurate to say weaker breakers, because weaker players can't win, irregardless of what the rules are.

i'm not advocating for/or against alternate breaks. All im saying is that the idea the original poster put forward is bad. The idea put forward, in my opinion, gives a player with a weak break a smaller chance of winning than winner breaks does, and substantially less chance than alternate break does.
Click to expand...

I hear ya.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top