Yes, players option, but as I've already explained, there ARE penalties for violating the time clock.
Dr. Dave's Billiards Digest piece on the racking debacle
- Thread starter Paul Schofield
- Start date
Yes, players option, but as I've already explained, there ARE penalties for violating the time clock.
This thread took a left turn. 
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
A special marque match between the 2 top dogs, race to 21, once in a while, is good.
An entire tournament, of race to 21, even with a 3 hour limit, is horrible. No one will watch. Waste of time. Mosconi cup has the best format. Short races is what's enjoyable for fans to watch. Not endless matches.
YMMV, but I'm a paying customer
True
For 3 hr limit and If average game is 6 mins ( including breaks ) , winner has to beat his opponent about 21-10. Win by 10 racks + is not common if elite players play each other . Most matches will be close totalling close to 40 racks.
Race to 8 or 9 is probably most optimum since it will be close and runs to around 1.5 hrs when top players play each other . There is reason movie length and soccer matches are around 1.5 hrs. Average human has at most attention span of about 1.5 hrs in one session
I'm sure you're right about the human attention span, but if so, how do you explain this statement.....with millions of viewers from all around the world!!!!True
For 3 hr limit and If average game is 6 mins ( including breaks ) , winner has to beat his opponent about 21-10. Win by 10 racks + is not common if elite players play each other . Most matches will be close totalling close to 40 racks.
Race to 8 or 9 is probably most optimum since it will be close and runs to around 1.5 hrs when top players play each other . There is reason movie length and soccer matches are around 1.5 hrs. Average human has at most attention span of about 1.5 hrs in one session
Female tennis matches can last up to 3 hours as they only have to win 2 sets however the average is about 2 hours total. For men, a match can go up to 5 hours (playing 5 sets) but the average is about 3 and 1/2 hours altogether.
These statistics are for Grand Slam tournament games, other regular season games can be much shorter.
I can't believe how many experts there are when it comes to why pool WON'T work, and yet not one of those experts and come up with even one single idea that makes sense to MAKE it work....wow!!
True
For 3 hr limit and If average game is 6 mins ( including breaks ) , winner has to beat his opponent about 21-10. Win by 10 racks + is not common if elite players play each other . Most matches will be close totalling close to 40 racks.
Race to 8 or 9 is probably most optimum since it will be close and runs to around 1.5 hrs when top players play each other . There is reason movie length and soccer matches are around 1.5 hrs. Average human has at most attention span of about 1.5 hrs in one session
Ray Harroun won the first Indy 500 in 1911. The race itself lasted nearly seven hours and Harroun's average speed was 74.59 mph. More than 100 years later, Juan Pablo Montoya won last year's Indy 500 with an average speed of 161.34 mph. The race lasted just over three hours.May 28, 2016
Once again, I'm sure you're right, after an hour and a half, people just turned their Tv's off because they ran out of their attention span...LOL
You're no more an expert on saving pool than any of the other hundreds of regular posters here. Until you get your tour with your rules and your glue sponsorship off the ground, [And back for a second event, and then a second year] you're just pounding sand
Now go make grass grow in feet! ha ha
Does it really need to be said?
Tennis is wayyyyyy more exciting than pool. It's really not even close.
A special marque match between the 2 top dogs, race to 21, once in a while, is good.
An entire tournament, of race to 21, even with a 3 hour limit, is horrible. No one will watch. Waste of time. Mosconi cup has the best format. Short races is what's enjoyable for fans to watch. Not endless matches.
YMMV, but I'm a paying customer
Race to 5? for pros? Why even bother. They could just flip a coin. Then your 5 second attention span won't be compromised. Or how about rock/paper/scissors?How do you find out who's best in a race to 5?
"That book's too long....it should only have 1 page like a magazine article or a blog....What a waste of time"
Now, I will grant you that a whole tournament of race to 21 would be brutal on the players, and would have to be single elimination. But race to 13, or if 10 ball, race to 10 or 11, winner breaks, single elimination, would be eminently watchable for me
I have long been a proponent of much longer races, single elimination format
What happened to this thread. Just opened it up and I cannot find a post on topic. No big deal. Continue on with "Format for the Pros".
Last edited:
Time limit on a match and you can expect someone to stall when they are ahead.
Agreed, Paul.
Guess it’s not being discussed or brainstormed enough in other threads.
Better start another one
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My customers were watching a Derby City Video on YouTube on my TV at my counter last night. The racking and breaking shenanigans between Orcollo and Melling was over the top. Is this really the best our sport can do after all these years? This is one of our long-standing premier events promoted by an icon of our sport. Fix it!
There is no solution. That’s the crux of it.
Paul, you have started a dozen threads over the years with your modified break rules and modified brackets. It might just well be the greatest rule set ever. But in all these years, and all the promotion you’ve done on it, not a single other promoter has tried it.
I think in the end, we will always have racking and breaking problems. There is no solution that people will like. 50 years of tournament 9 ball proves it.
Paul, you have started a dozen threads over the years with your modified break rules and modified brackets. It might just well be the greatest rule set ever. But in all these years, and all the promotion you’ve done on it, not a single other promoter has tried it.
I think in the end, we will always have racking and breaking problems. There is no solution that people will like. 50 years of tournament 9 ball proves it.
Got to tell you something that I know. Everyone wants to shoot after the break....and I do mean everyone: novice and pros alike. It satisfies and makes everyone happy. This is not a big deal. The decades of this foolishness is a big deal.
I will just keep doing what I do. I like my results.
Last edited:
personally I feel shooting after the break solves everything
even with a good break and good rack I always feel like I'm watching a roulette wheel
even with a good break and good rack I always feel like I'm watching a roulette wheel
and let's keep in mind this is a solution that is rarely if ever employed
No doubt. Kinda goes without saying, you'd think. A three hour pool match would be torture for the most ardent pool fans. Casual viewers would hop WAAAAAAAAAAY before that.
I have used it for everything that I have done over the last 10 years. It works fine.
Last edited:
I think it depends on who is playing. Two monster serves + four slow feet = six hours of tennis.
From Wikipedia:
- 11 h 05 Wimbledon 2010, 1st Round: United States John Isner def. France Nicolas Mahut, 6–4, 3–6, 6–7(7–9), 7–6(7–3), 70–68 (3 days).
- 7 h 02 Davis Cup 2013 1st Round tie:Czech Republic Czech Republic team of Czech Republic Tomáš Berdych and Czech Republic Lukáš Rosol defeated the Switzerland team of Stanislas Wawrinka and Marco Chiudinelli 6–4, 5–7, 6–4, 6–7(3–7), 24–22.
- 6 h 43 Davis Cup 2015, 1st Round: Argentina Leonardo Mayer def. Brazil João Souza, 7–6(7–4), 7–6(7–5), 5–7, 5–7, 15–13 (1 day).
- 6 h 33 French Open 2004, 1st Round: France Fabrice Santoro def. France Arnaud Clément, 6–4, 6–3, 6–7(5–7), 3–6, 16–14 (2 days).
- 6 h 31 Central Fidelity Banks International 1984, 1st round: United States Vicki Nelson def. United States Jean Hepner, 6–4, 7–6(13–11).
- 6 h 22 Davis Cup 1982, Quarterfinals: United States John McEnroe def. Sweden Mats Wilander, 9–7, 6–2, 15–17, 3–6, 8–6 (1 day; before tiebreak era).
- 6 h 21 Davis Cup 1987, World Group Play-offs: Germany Boris Becker def. United States John McEnroe, 4–6, 15–13, 8–10, 6–2, 6–2 (1 day; before tiebreak era).