I’ve only played with the Predator app. If you learn of others, I’d love to learn of them and also play with them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Racking VOLUNTEERS for Derby City Classic & US Open
- Thread starter JoeyA
- Start date
I’ve only played with the Predator app. If you learn of others, I’d love to learn of them and also play with them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I think one racker could handle 6-8 tables without a problem. The players can get the balls and template up on to the table.
What exactly are you trying to solve by having a volunteer racker? The nine ball rack has been figured out. You can't just have some random guy rack the balls however he wants and think you've solved the racking issues.
The wing ball goes if you rack the balls tight. If the wing ball doesn't go then the volunteer isn't racking the balls tight enough and he should be fired.
This will do nothing except introduce more corruption into the sport. Anyone side betting on a match with a "random racker" would be insane.
The wing ball goes if you rack the balls tight. If the wing ball doesn't go then the volunteer isn't racking the balls tight enough and he should be fired.
This will do nothing except introduce more corruption into the sport. Anyone side betting on a match with a "random racker" would be insane.
Yes golf uses amatuers but they are not doing anything that directly impacts the players game. They help keep the crowd quite and a couple other small things. Personally I think that if a racking template is used, it would be easier to have a number of people volunteer to be a racker. I don't think a person could handle 6-8 tables at once. You really need one person per table. What happens if they are handling 6 tables and 3 of them need to break. Some of the picky pros would upset that you are getting them out of the rythem and slowing down an event. You really need one person per table.
Racking with a template is as easy as it gets. Having a volunteer rack the balls would have the same outcome as having the players rack the balls using a template. There is no reason to have the volunteer at that point.
There are no racking issues with the template (as far as gaps). Many people dislike templates because the balls rack exactly the same every time which not only makes the wing ball go 100% of the time but it also produces a very consistent layout which can be replicated over and over again.
Players with a lot of racking and breaking skills no longer have an advantage when they use a template. Likewise, poor breakers/rackers are now on a level playing field with the best. The template is an equalizer which takes a lot of skill out of the break.
So it's ok to have a referee (not a professional pool player) rack the balls, but it isnt ok for me to do it?
PLEASE. Some of you act like it's building a house of cards. I am confident enough in my racking, I'm sure I can satisfy all of them.
Let's do it this way.....
Tell us, out of everybody here on AZ, who among you think they COULDN'T
rack balls as well as any referee? WITHOUT A TEMPLATE.
Is there anyone here that thinks they don't have the
ability to do it?
PLEASE. Some of you act like it's building a house of cards. I am confident enough in my racking, I'm sure I can satisfy all of them.
Let's do it this way.....
Tell us, out of everybody here on AZ, who among you think they COULDN'T
rack balls as well as any referee? WITHOUT A TEMPLATE.
Is there anyone here that thinks they don't have the
ability to do it?
As has been pointed out several times before, this is false. Several players at the US Open 9-Ball in 2016 were putting in gaps with the template. At the start of the tournament Jayson Shaw demonstrated how to do it so that players could protect themselves from the cheats.
Rack your own has problems.
Rack for your opponent has problems.
Neutral racking has problems but at least cheating will be less of a problem.
The ONLY way I would ever volunteer to rack at the DCC is if I was empowered to penalize a player a game for even looking at me sideways, to say nothing of questioning one of my racks. Some players are such prima donnas, and so demanding, it would not be worth it otherwise.
Given such a proviso, I can see some pros getting penalized the whole match one game at a time
Lou Figueroa
Given such a proviso, I can see some pros getting penalized the whole match one game at a time
Lou Figueroa
What’s the point of having rackets if a template is being used? All the balls freeze with a template.
I don't need rackers. I don't need templates. I don't have the problems that plague these events. A good break is when a player controls his cue-ball, controls the 1-ball, and makes a good spread. That takes plenty of skill and practice. That is enough.
Last edited:
It's too bad that the Texas Express people didn't figure that out a long time ago -- then we wouldn't be having this conversation over and over and ....
Back then, though, most people did not understand the rack and how important it would become at nine ball. Everyone revered the monster smash-em break and it was rack for your opponent on pitted tables and slug racks if you knew how and your opponent let you get away with it. It took the Sardos and Corey to teach them about the rack and break. And now we have a mess.
That is a lot of tables to keep up with imo but we will take this under consideration. If the players are required to get the balls and template on the table, I too, think the racker could handle 6-8 tables.
Thanks for the suggestion.
JoeyA
Thanks for the suggestion.
JoeyA
THIS!
No more pattern racking.
No more match delay with supposed racking problems.
No more ball gap selection.
No more rack tilting.
No more distractions to other players when arguments ensue about racking objections.
No more soft breaks.
What is the consensus of opinion on the following question? Should players be allowed to inspect the template rack? I say NO.
I also lean toward 9 ball on the spot. ANY OBJECTIONS? A centerline marking might reduce rack tilting "errors".
Thanks for all of your suggestions, even if we don't agree with them or use them.
JoeyA
No more pattern racking.
No more match delay with supposed racking problems.
No more ball gap selection.
No more rack tilting.
No more distractions to other players when arguments ensue about racking objections.
No more soft breaks.
What is the consensus of opinion on the following question? Should players be allowed to inspect the template rack? I say NO.
I also lean toward 9 ball on the spot. ANY OBJECTIONS? A centerline marking might reduce rack tilting "errors".
Thanks for all of your suggestions, even if we don't agree with them or use them.
JoeyA
Not necessarily Donny.
The balls don't always freeze in a template rack, unless the racker makes an attempt to insure they are frozen. A breaker or his opponent could also tilt the rack, move the rack around the spot and in essence create more advantages and disadvantages AND DISTRACTIONS for other matches going on by the arguments that ensue from the invested rackers.
It is also time wasted with players inspecting racks where they suspect intentional gaps and requesting re-racks but also the arguments and angst that arises from these situations. Time is critical for most pool tournaments.
JoeyA
The balls don't always freeze in a template rack, unless the racker makes an attempt to insure they are frozen. A breaker or his opponent could also tilt the rack, move the rack around the spot and in essence create more advantages and disadvantages AND DISTRACTIONS for other matches going on by the arguments that ensue from the invested rackers.
It is also time wasted with players inspecting racks where they suspect intentional gaps and requesting re-racks but also the arguments and angst that arises from these situations. Time is critical for most pool tournaments.
JoeyA
It’s very easy to freeze all the balls with a template. If the racker can’t do that then he should not be the designated racker. We deserve a tight rack.
volunteers/rackers: This is just a pile of work, an inconvenience, and a waste of time and effort. For what? The ball-on-the-break? It ain't worth it.