lol no way. That would definitely be requesting a re-rack.
International 9-Ball Open Rules-2018
- Thread starter kkdanamatt
- Start date
Well, yes, but.... I think most people worry too much about tilt. They seem to think that if the rack is turned 0.1 degrees it's going to change the angle of the balls out of the rack by 10 degrees. Nope. Everything turns together.
A rule of thumb: if you look at the 1-9-2 line to the head rail, however much it is off-center at the head rail is 2.5 times as much as the change in where the wing ball arrives by the corner pocket. If you want to move the wing ball a whole ball, you have to have the 1-9-2 pointing almost six inches off-center at the head rail.
I suppose it could be argued either way. Therein lies a problem.
No one likes to see a 10-minute racking session caused by repeated re-racks. As long as the refs are as picky about eliminating gaps as the players, there should be no problem. I hope the refs are aware of the particular gaps that make the wing ball dead when the 9 is on the foot spot (as in this event).
I echo the comment above about replacing the templates as needed. They can get worn or bent during a tournament.
Last edited:
PoolRookie....This is not the US Open 9-ball Championship. It is the International Open 9-ball Championships...a first time event, with no connection to the Behrmann's or to the new owner of the US Open 9-ball Championships, Barry Hearn, who will hold the continued US Open 9-ball event in Las Vegas next April. This is Pat Fleming's event, and he can charge whatever he wants as an entry. The Behrmann's did not "cut ties" with this tournament...they were never part of it, to begin with. Add to that, they acted very poorly towards Pat Fleming, by keeping him in the dark about their plans for their tournrmant, even though he attempted to contact the Behrmann's numerous times via telephone, text and email, to no avail. This is after Pat saved their collective asses by taking over the tournament and running it successfully for 3 years. The Behrmann's are DIRT in my opinion. 
I also am going, and hope to help Pat make this a great annual event.
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
I also am going, and hope to help Pat make this a great annual event. Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Love the rack rules. No rerack so no more #rackwhine :grin:
But this spot shot for 9 ball scratch is bizzare
"When the 9-Ball is the last remaining object ball on the table, if you pocket the 9-Ball and scratch or foul, the 9-Ball is spotted and the incoming player has cue ball in hand behind the head string."
Yes, spot shots should be used in deciders or when it is tied . In fact, it should be used here when after a number of racks, still no winner by 2 racks and it is still tied then go for spot shots.
But when someone scratches on the 9, spot shot for that is unheard off.
OP justification previously for this rule is because of Daulton/Boyes incident in match that he was ref.
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5919595&postcount=11
I am not sure changing a rule based on just 1 incident which rarely happens is sufficient justification.
Isn't changing the rule "helping" a player who commits same foul as Daulton in future?
But this spot shot for 9 ball scratch is bizzare
"When the 9-Ball is the last remaining object ball on the table, if you pocket the 9-Ball and scratch or foul, the 9-Ball is spotted and the incoming player has cue ball in hand behind the head string."
Yes, spot shots should be used in deciders or when it is tied . In fact, it should be used here when after a number of racks, still no winner by 2 racks and it is still tied then go for spot shots.
But when someone scratches on the 9, spot shot for that is unheard off.
OP justification previously for this rule is because of Daulton/Boyes incident in match that he was ref.
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5919595&postcount=11
I am not sure changing a rule based on just 1 incident which rarely happens is sufficient justification.
Isn't changing the rule "helping" a player who commits same foul as Daulton in future?
"I disagree. I think it's bad for each tournament director in each event to make up rules that are used nowhere else. I suspect it is actually a violation of the sanction agreement with the WPA. I imagine all the foreign players are saying, "Stupid Yanks."
I bet if you polled the pros -- they wouldn't care one bit about what the WPA thinks and very few would question anything Pat has his hands in. If a reputable promoter wants to change a rule or two -- oh well. If that's the price they have to pay to KNOW they are going to get paid -- you won't hear a peep.
This rule change is miniscule in comparison to the nearly infinite racking rules that have been rolled out over the years. Honestly, 9 ball has been a crapshoot since it's inception. Even during the PBT days it was a joke how influential poor racking was on the outcome of matches.
I've just accepted the fact that the rules are going to be a bit different from tourney to tourney. I don't buy the idea that this is what has held pool back. Honestly, I know some on this board have been involved with the WPA in some form or fashion over the years, but I just don't think they are adding much if anything to the game all while continuously getting a slice of the payouts. I guess that's a topic for another thread.
I bet if you polled the pros -- they wouldn't care one bit about what the WPA thinks and very few would question anything Pat has his hands in. If a reputable promoter wants to change a rule or two -- oh well. If that's the price they have to pay to KNOW they are going to get paid -- you won't hear a peep.
This rule change is miniscule in comparison to the nearly infinite racking rules that have been rolled out over the years. Honestly, 9 ball has been a crapshoot since it's inception. Even during the PBT days it was a joke how influential poor racking was on the outcome of matches.
I've just accepted the fact that the rules are going to be a bit different from tourney to tourney. I don't buy the idea that this is what has held pool back. Honestly, I know some on this board have been involved with the WPA in some form or fashion over the years, but I just don't think they are adding much if anything to the game all while continuously getting a slice of the payouts. I guess that's a topic for another thread.
Bob - I agree 100%. Personally, I couldn't care less how the balls are racked when I'm playing. If I feel my opponent is handing me bad racks deliberately, I'll just pull up and never play them again. I think far too much importance has been assigned to whether or not the balls are frozen or the rack is tilted. The reason I mentioned it here was the seeming rigidity of the "No re-rack request". Given how absurdly time consuming and nit-pick-ity certain players have become concerning racking over the past 15 years or so, making rules to circumvent that is more than welcome. But that rule just seems to be veering from one extreme to the the other. If a player has, within reason ( and therein lay the rub, I suppose ), a legitimate concern, it seems they should be able to voice it. On the other hand, I am absolutely behind any effort to stop the nonsense so prevalent over the past years. No one wants to see or listen to an endless stream of back and forth between players over the balls being racked. Rack the balls, break, play. Sounds good to me.
Addendum: In 83, I ref'd 9ball at Grady's All-Around tournament in Tampa and I did the finals between David Howard and Ray Martin. Ray was coming out of the left side and it was a true double-elimination so Ray had to win twice. David was heavily favored and was thought to, generally, have the best break in the game at the time. But he was breaking dry and Ray was making a ball or two almost every break and won the first set 11-2. Needless to say, David wasn't happy. He had been checking each rack each time and due to the tables being brand new and the balls cleaned just before the match, the balls were all frozen each time he checked. After Ray continued making balls and David coming up dry, about 1/3 of the way into the deciding match, David demanded someone else rack. Grady asked David if the balls were frozen when he checked and he said yes so Grady asked him then why do you want someone else to rack? David didn't really have an answer, but insisted someone else rack. Grady agreed to it and though I continued to ref, someone else racked the rest of the match. Ray won that match 11-2 as well to take the tournament. I think David was so concerned Ray was making a ball and he wasn't that he was sharking himself.
Somewhere in there is a lesson.
Last edited:
This format has been used in the last 2 years in Darren Appleton's WPS events. In the recent 8-ball final Shaw complained that he lost to Melling because of the racking
I believe the right to inspection is there 1) so the player can check if the fixed position balls are in the right place and 2) they can "read" the rack and decide how and from where to break depending on what they see. Julian
Thanks again for your suggestion.
There are positions where ball in hand on the 9-ball is more difficult than a spot shot on the 9 ball.
That's why we are continuing to implement this rule.
Last edited:
This format has been used in the last 2 years in Darren Appleton's WPS events. In the recent 8-ball final Shaw complained that he lost to Melling because of the racking
Julian
Makes sense, thanks Julian.
Yes, OB against the side rail close to the side pocket can be kind of tough even with BIH. [Players should practice those!]
Thanks for giving your reason.
Yup, you got it.
Thanks for your support.
Speaking of practice, at the International 9-Ball Open there will be plenty of time and tables for use each night after the last matches end. Tables should be available until about 6am.
Also, Q-Masters Billiards will be open 24/7 Wednesday through Saturday during the International.
Attachments
Love the no re-racking rule. Constant re-racking is IMO the single worst aspect of pool from a spectator's POV.
Love the spot shot after a scratch on the 9. Any pro who can't make a spot shot doesn't deserve an automatic win, any more than a basketball player who gets fouled in the act of shooting should be awarded two automatic points.
Wish there'd be a 40 second shot clock for all matches, with one allowable extension per game.
And I wish that jump cues would barred from all tournaments once and for all. Kicking is a skill that should be featured and rewarded, and the best players don't need a jump cue to jump over a ball. I've seen local players do it, why can't the pros?
Love the spot shot after a scratch on the 9. Any pro who can't make a spot shot doesn't deserve an automatic win, any more than a basketball player who gets fouled in the act of shooting should be awarded two automatic points.
Wish there'd be a 40 second shot clock for all matches, with one allowable extension per game.
And I wish that jump cues would barred from all tournaments once and for all. Kicking is a skill that should be featured and rewarded, and the best players don't need a jump cue to jump over a ball. I've seen local players do it, why can't the pros?
This one I agree with wholeheartedly.
Once you are a pickle, you cant go back to being a cucumber.
Tens of millions of dollars in jump cue revenue would slowly evaporate if they were to be barred universally so that is not happening.
I agree, it would be difficult. But I feel like if one or two of the major tournaments (US Open, World 9-ball, Mosconi Cup, etc.) dared to make that step (it's questionable that they would even want to, but one can dream), more would follow and we'd go back to playing pool the way it was meant to be played - in 2 dimensions.
In the WPS events jump cues are only allowed when the oponent snookers you and in the very last one I think the were completely banned.
Julian
Zuglan has banned them for years (Turning Stone Northeast Tour)
WPS and Turning Stone are probably third tier events, but it's a start. I honestly think the game of pool would benefit from banishing jumping in the long run. Although I started a thread no so long ago where people voted, and it turns out only about 1/3 of players feel that jumping should be disallowed altogether (additionally ~1/3 feel jumping with your playing cue is ok).