I agree, but give the incoming player a decent chance to overcome the misfortune he/she has inherited (when a called shot is missed).
Maniac
Why Are They Not Playing True 10-Ball Rules?
- Thread starter ChrisinNC
- Start date
I agree, but give the incoming player a decent chance to overcome the misfortune he/she has inherited (when a called shot is missed).
Maniac
:rotflmao1:
The more I practice the "luckier" I get.
Yes, Efren said that but it applies to most anyone that puts enough quality time on table.
I for one say, "I got lucky" at times when in fact I meant to do it even though someone like you would "think" it was "luck".
In the end I was lucky, lucky to get them to play me without a bigger spot than they ask for.
I love it
The biggest risk in a 2-way shot - when you are thinking of intentionally pocketing the object ball in one side of the pocket or the other, with the thought process that if you miss it you want to miss it on a certain side of the pocket in order to leave the object ball in a certain position and at the same time getting the cue ball to a certain place for a shot on the next object ball in line if you do make it, while making sure you're leaving a tough shot (or no shot) on the previous object ball if you miss it.
All good and well in theory, but particularly in the case of a very good player, by intentionally playing to make the ball in only one side of the pocket, the chances of missing it just enough to not make it but to hang it up in the jaws, is greatly increased - so you'd better plan on covering up not only where the object will end up if it doesn't hang up in the pocket, covering it up if it does happen to hang up in the pocket, and getting the cue ball to where you'll have a shot on the next ball if you do make it. It's extremely hard to attempt to cover for all 3 possible scenarios on the same shot!
Last edited:
I pretty much try to do it only on the last ball or two as well and only on fairly hard shots that I realize there's a chance I could miss, mainly attempting to get the cue ball to the opposite end of the table from the pocket you're shooting at. It just sucks when by limiting yourself to only half a pocket in your aiming process (usually trying to make sure you overcut the ball if you miss) while controlling your cue ball speed and spin to try to get the cue ball to the opposite end of the table, you end up hanging up the ball in the pocket - whereby it doesn't matter where you leave the cue ball.
Last edited:
The last sentence is why I "always" commit to either make the ball or shoot safe on the last ball.
Of course, to me, that only matters when I'm playing someone that is capable of playing my speed or better because at that point I may not get back to table but ever second or third rack.......for a kick.
So, to me, two shot on last ball is usually not a great idea. If I'm playing someone that usually runs one rack or so at a time.....then, well, I think like you. Otherwise, I like money to much to sell out on half a55 attempts. After all, that is what your doing when only one remains.
Everyone thinks different, everyone has an opinion but only a few collect.
My grudge against call shots in rotation games.
When I was young and about a year away from being a decent money player, I started
to think about what would make me a good competitor.
I decided that when it’s not your shot, you have to give your opponent the table....
....in your heart, not just in the social sense where you are inwardly hoping he misses.
I gave pretty good account of myself with this attitude.
I felt that the players who sit there and hope you miss, or jump out of their chair to see if
you hooked yourself, were weaker competitors.....and often paid for it.
...I learned to save my energy for my turn, where Incould do something about it.
So I suspect that people that want call shots, and much worse, call shots with the option,
are players that are more concerned with the other guy’s game than their own.
...so I take offence to the nittiness that call shots bring to the game.
You don’t want your opponent getting lucky?....keep ‘em in their chair.
When I was young and about a year away from being a decent money player, I started
to think about what would make me a good competitor.
I decided that when it’s not your shot, you have to give your opponent the table....
....in your heart, not just in the social sense where you are inwardly hoping he misses.
I gave pretty good account of myself with this attitude.
I felt that the players who sit there and hope you miss, or jump out of their chair to see if
you hooked yourself, were weaker competitors.....and often paid for it.
...I learned to save my energy for my turn, where Incould do something about it.
So I suspect that people that want call shots, and much worse, call shots with the option,
are players that are more concerned with the other guy’s game than their own.
...so I take offence to the nittiness that call shots bring to the game.
You don’t want your opponent getting lucky?....keep ‘em in their chair.
I agree with PT (as is often the case).
A lot of the rules currently in play are specifically made to please people who whine. "Wah, wah, the opponent ran three racks on me, I want alternate break!", "Boo-hoo, the guy I was playing got a safe when he missed, i want call-safe!"
STFU and play!
Seriously, the only reason pools rules are what they are, is that there is no money in the sport. No outside sponsors means that you have to please the also-rans, who provide the meat of the price fund. Specifically the people who are somewhat decent players, not good enough to win, and not knowledgable enough to even recognize a two-way shot. So then you get stupid rules like call-safe.
Who bloody cares what a persons intentions are! Are the referees in soccer or tennis asking the guy who scored what he intended to do? Even in chess, your intentions are not asked, nor do they have to be clarified for any reason. Pool is not philosophy, nor are most other sports. The strategies and skills are plain to see for those who have eyes and a brain. Those who don't, can watch instructional tapes. It's not the players job to educate his opponent, unless he wishes to do so. Hidden skill shots are also fun to find. Watch Efren play some one pocket, and you realize that most commentators are completely clueless as to what is going on other than the very obvious things. Luckily Efren doens't have to tell everyone exactly what he intends to do in one pocket, so the subtle genius moves are there to be found only for the people who look.
Even if a guy is just plain lucky, that is thrilling for the audience and anyone really, other than the guy in the chair. Nothing gets the audience more excited that an highly unlikely fluke.
A lot of the rules currently in play are specifically made to please people who whine. "Wah, wah, the opponent ran three racks on me, I want alternate break!", "Boo-hoo, the guy I was playing got a safe when he missed, i want call-safe!"
STFU and play!
Seriously, the only reason pools rules are what they are, is that there is no money in the sport. No outside sponsors means that you have to please the also-rans, who provide the meat of the price fund. Specifically the people who are somewhat decent players, not good enough to win, and not knowledgable enough to even recognize a two-way shot. So then you get stupid rules like call-safe.
Who bloody cares what a persons intentions are! Are the referees in soccer or tennis asking the guy who scored what he intended to do? Even in chess, your intentions are not asked, nor do they have to be clarified for any reason. Pool is not philosophy, nor are most other sports. The strategies and skills are plain to see for those who have eyes and a brain. Those who don't, can watch instructional tapes. It's not the players job to educate his opponent, unless he wishes to do so. Hidden skill shots are also fun to find. Watch Efren play some one pocket, and you realize that most commentators are completely clueless as to what is going on other than the very obvious things. Luckily Efren doens't have to tell everyone exactly what he intends to do in one pocket, so the subtle genius moves are there to be found only for the people who look.
Even if a guy is just plain lucky, that is thrilling for the audience and anyone really, other than the guy in the chair. Nothing gets the audience more excited that an highly unlikely fluke.
I contend that unlike us amateurs who may enjoy the strategy of a 2-way shot, pro players are so good with their shotmaking and positioning, that they rarely think/plan 2-way shots. They are either all-out trying to make the ball and get shape, or playing an all-out safe in an attempt to lock up their opponent without a shot. Playing by traditional 10-ball call shot / call safe rules would not significantly change the way their games are played. All it would eliminate is the occasional unintended lucky leave after a missed shot.
Yes, by either rules the better player in any particular match is likely to win the match, but in a closely contested 10-ball match, when NOT playing call shot / call safe rules, the difference may be determined by one player getting a couple of good / lucky rolls. It may be exciting for the viewers, but for two touring pro players playing to make a living, it has to suck when you are on the receiving end of your opponent getting some lucky rolls.
Yes, by either rules the better player in any particular match is likely to win the match, but in a closely contested 10-ball match, when NOT playing call shot / call safe rules, the difference may be determined by one player getting a couple of good / lucky rolls. It may be exciting for the viewers, but for two touring pro players playing to make a living, it has to suck when you are on the receiving end of your opponent getting some lucky rolls.
Last edited:
Preach on, to many snowflakes..
Tap tap tap.
lol
10 ball has never been much more than 9 ball plus 1
always has been a bit of a gimmick, all these years later and the arguments continue
9 ball imo didn't really have any problems except the occassional lucky slop but it was accepted and no big deal
10 ball has become ridiculous, I'm ready for full time 9 ball again at the pro level, texas express rules
10 ball has never been much more than 9 ball plus 1
always has been a bit of a gimmick, all these years later and the arguments continue
9 ball imo didn't really have any problems except the occassional lucky slop but it was accepted and no big deal
10 ball has become ridiculous, I'm ready for full time 9 ball again at the pro level, texas express rules
On 9' diamond pro-am with worn cloth and old balls I string 3 or 4 racks on a very regular basis. If I can do that, the average pro match, played on new felt and new balls is determined by the lag or coin flip unless certain rules are put in place and longer sets than 7 to 11 are played. At that point though, time becomes an issue because the fan base for pool is not supportive enough to justify it.
Put pool back where it belongs on nine foot tables. Slow the cloth a little, go back to the wooden rack, let a ref throw the balls in the rack, slide till the one is on spot, take the rack off without touching the balls, break in box with long sets and it would be fine. But we all know that the average pro would have a stroke if they could not finger the balls after the rack is removed and that is just one thing they would cry about.
I am gonna agree with this guy and stop reading.
I'm on board with Jeremy Jones, too, but I can live with call shot.
As you note, call shot, call safe is much much worse, and is probably the single worst form of rotation pool ever played.
