Do We Really Need Perfect Racks in 9 Ball?

sjm said:
I feel that in any match having a referee, the referee should rack the balls. In bowling, each player is permitted to request a rerack of the pins once per match, and I'd allow the same in permitting one rerack in pool.

In an unrefereed match, I agree with almost everything you wrote, but don't have any problem with nine on the spot, which in American pro pool is the exception, not the rule. Your are dead on with your assessment that there's no reason a player should expect to get the exact same rack every time, and as you note, rack reading is a skill that has its place in our sport.

I have never and probably will never see the need for a template, but that said, in tournaments that permit rack your own, I think they have become a necessary evil. As you suggest, opponent racking the balls is far better in an unrefereed match.

Excellent post, Fran. Well judged and well presented.
Click to expand...

Thanks Stu! Also, I'm okay with racking your own, but as long as the rules aren't changed, like spotting the 9 if its made on the break. In a rack your own situation, there can still be a time limit with the opponent checking the rack, and in the case of a dispute by the end of the time limit, the ref can be called over to rack. But the 9 on the break is an integral part of the game and shouldn't be changed.
 
Paul Schofield said:
The game was never purposely designed as you describe. Nine-ball rules and strategies evolved. I don't think we will ever go back. We can't.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Racking was understood to be imperfect. The game was designed knowing this fact because the equipment today didn't exist back then.
 
It's not feasible for all tournaments, but I say ditch the template, let a "rack boy" rack the rack, then give the player 30 seconds to examine. No re-racks, but give them time to examine and adapt accordingly. Or, alternately the same thing with opponent racking. Might be fun to watch some drama with slugs.

Wing balls on the break every time is boring. Even a ripe amateur like me can do it most of the time with a template.
 
boogieman said:
Wing balls on the break every time is boring. Even a ripe amateur like me can do it most of the time with a template.
Click to expand...

Agreed... This is why I actually like the 9 on the spot, in the kitchen, and 3 point rule.

Putting the 9 on the spot doesn't change the game at all. There's still nine balls, that need to be ran in rotation. Add "in the kitchen" and now the one can still be made, but the CB is more of a flyer. Now add, the 3 point rule. The CB now is really a flyer, and there's a decent percentage of hard, ball pocketing breaks, ending up being a loss of turn.

Allowing the opportunity to slug rack will quickly get out of hand, and the game will slow to a hault with unnecessary drama.
 
Two very important parts of the game that are missing in pro 9 ball.

Non shooter/seated player, should always rack for the breaker.

As the player sitting in their chair, it's their job to break serve legally.

Meaning, rack em tight with HEADBALL ''anywhere on the paper spot''.

It's your job to be in tune with your opponents break shot abilities...and to rack the balls in such a place on the spot ''tight and right'' to give you ''WITHIN THE RULES OF PLAY'' the best chance possible at getting back to the table sooner than later.

The US Open 9 ball event, with winner break format/dbl elimination race to 11 is the real deal for this particular game for the pros, on a 9 foot table.

But using that template rack, and no longer hearing the Sounds of a wooden rack doing it's job, is sad.

I hate seeing THE TEMPLATE on the table after the break with multiple balls sitting on it, it's just wrong for the game/sport.

The sounds of a Good wooden rack are part of the sounds of play and a real pool room. Plus in the long run, they are cheaper to own and no theft.

Bring back a good Wood Works rack, the ones that a good friend of Vivian's outta TX made.
 
Island Drive said:
Two very important parts of the game that are missing in pro 9 ball.

Non shooter/seated player, should always rack for the breaker.

As the player sitting in their chair, it's their job to break serve legally.

Meaning, rack em tight with HEADBALL ''anywhere on the paper spot''.

It's your job to be in tune with your opponents break shot abilities...and to rack the balls in such a place on the spot ''tight and right'' to give you ''WITHIN THE RULES OF PLAY'' the best chance possible at getting back to the table sooner than later.

The US Open 9 ball event, with winner break format/dbl elimination race to 11 is the real deal for this particular game for the pros, on a 9 foot table.

But using that template rack, and no longer hearing the Sounds of a wooden rack doing it's job, is sad.

I hate seeing THE TEMPLATE on the table after the break with multiple balls sitting on it, it's just wrong for the game/sport.

The sounds of a Good wooden rack are part of the sounds of play and a real pool room. Plus in the long run, they are cheaper to own and no theft.

Bring back a good Wood Works rack, the ones that a good friend of Vivian's outta TX made.
Click to expand...
This guy makes nice stuff: http://www.billwestleyracks.com/standard-racks.html
 
either push out on the break or

player racks up the balls with a wood rack on the short rail. then he gets one push of the rack with the balls in it up to and on the spot no fiddling with them. he takes what he gets.
the opponent then gets a chance to make him repeat if the rack is tilted or the head ball is not on the spot.
 
I'm not a bowler, but grew in the the midwest Brunswick area. The sounds of a bowling ball and the pins going down are special. What's interesting also, if your a pool room owner and a table is getting too rambunctious or players matched up are starting to go at it, the sounds of the wooden rack speak all their own. I'm sure there are good wooden racks out there, BUT they should not be too heavy. When they are dropped they will cut the cloth, and also when too heavy, they wear the racking area CLOTH out Allot. A good example is some of the older Diamond racks, they had too be at least 2 lbs. Not good.
 
Last edited:
One thing you will be able to count on for sure, is that if there are no perfect racks , one player will be getting racks with better opportunities than the other, 100% of the time, unless they are both clueless.
If you don't think a racker could be persuaded to help one player vs another, you are being naieve. it may even be something as simple as they hate one of the guys and they d...c rack him for an old hurt. Or ,more likely , they have money on the other guy in the calcutta.
 
FranCrimi said:
Do we really need perfect racks in 9 Ball?

Why do the racks have to be perfect? Reading imperfect racks is a skill that's very much a part of the game.

Yes, I know how it started --- back when players started taking 15 minutes to rack the balls. But years before players started getting nit-picky, they would quickly read the rack, analyze it and then break accordingly. And guess what? The best players still won.

So where are they now with these perfect racks? They now rack with the 9 ball on the spot instead of the 1 ball, otherwise a wing ball would fly into the pocket every time. This changes the game completely.

That's like playing 14.1 and racking the balls with the center ball on the spot instead of the head ball. It's not the same game.

I'd like to see a 9-Ball tournament played the way the game was meant to be played --- with imperfect racks where the breaker actually has to do some work in analyzing the rack and the one ball is racked on the spot. I bet the best players will still win just like before.

Let the opponent rack. Just put a time limit on racking. The breaker can ask for reracks within the time limit. If the breaker is still unsatisfied by the end of the racking time limit, then the breaker can have the ref rack the balls. But he has to accept the ref's rack. All this can be done within 2 minutes or less.
Click to expand...

Terrible ideas and I'm done with this thread.

Another example of what is wrong with pool and the people who'd like to control it.

Jason<-----not gonna sugar coat it.
 
book collector said:
One thing you will be able to count on for sure, is that if there are no perfect racks , one player will be getting racks with better opportunities than the other, 100% of the time, unless they are both clueless.
If you don't think a racker could be persuaded to help one player vs another, you are being naieve. it may even be something as simple as they hate one of the guys and they d...c rack him for an old hurt. Or ,more likely , they have money on the other guy in the calcutta.
Click to expand...

Sounds like life too me. The perspective of reality.
 
jasonlaus said:
Terrible ideas and I'm done with this thread.

Another example of what is wrong with pool and the people who'd like to control it.

Jason<-----not gonna sugar coat it.
Click to expand...

I think you've got it backwards. The reason for the perfect racks and the templates and racking the 9 on the spot and all the things designed to stop any sort of randomness are all because of players' need to control the game. A true warrior knows how to assess, adjust and adapt.
 
Bob Jewett said:
That's what Paul Schofield does in his tournaments. You may want to look up his previous extensive comments about the other details.

The break at nine ball is broken. The winner of the match should not be determined by who got more or different gaps in the racks they had to break. Or at least, I don't think that should be the determiner.

I'd like to see "breaker must push out on the shot after the break". Everyone gets to shoot every rack. Or at least a chance to shoot. There would be a lot more interaction. The players are starting to make runouts routine if they have a good shot on the one ball.
Click to expand...
My opinion is that we shouldn't tinker with the rules of 9 ball. It simply won't be 9 ball anymore. Although I agree your rule tweak may increase "interaction", it'll completely kill runout pool which many fans love.

To solve the breaking issue, I'd rather we shift entirely to a version of 12-ball in which the breaker has a free shot at any ball immediately following the break, regardless of whether a ball is made on the break or not (exception is scratching on the break). That way it is possible to play runout pool and string packages together, without the obsession of forming a perfect rack every single time.
 
I have a one liner joke...

A friend and I were playing about 15 years ago. Either a cheap set or a weekly $5 tournament, I forget. Neither one of us could break and run. We were having a good time, chatting while shooting, etc. I go to rack the balls, very fast and sloppily, and sit down while opponent goes to break. Opponent says "Nothing is even touching!" I respond: "They are all touching the table". ha ha, we all had a big laugh.
 
FranCrimi said:
I think you've got it backwards. The reason for the perfect racks and the templates and racking the 9 on the spot and all the things designed to stop any sort of randomness are all because of players' need to control the game.
Click to expand...

I think you have it have wrong.

Perfect racks are meant to even the playing field. Yes I agree that reading imperfect racks is a skill that is lost in today's game. However, the problem is how "imperfect" is acceptable...?..., and the randomness of the imperfections will be lopsided against one player more than another. Is that fair...? Would it make any sense for me to be able to crush SVB in the USopen merely because the racks I received were better than his...?

We've all seen some of the garbage racks players give each other. Worst yet the "controlled garbage" they will give themselves in an effort to wire a ball on a difficult table.

A true warrior knows how to assess, adjust and adapt.
Click to expand...

BS... how does one adapt to something that's completely random...?

The break is meant to be an advantage. It will be a sad day when players opt not break after winning a rack.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top