I was watching a match on youtube. I think it was 10-ball, race to 10. SVB wins the lag and goes up 5-0, then misses. Rafael Martinez gets to the table, makes one shot, miscues, and doesn't get back out of his chair.
They came to see a pool match and they did. Nothing the sponsors or promoters can do can guarantee they're going to like the outcome.How would those WHO PAID to see Rafael play feel about it? Think about a bigger picture of this game, guys!
Why not just stream practicing by the pros if you want packs? There will be lots of runs. Lots and lots...what excitement!!! I remember watching Don McCoy practice for hours at 9-ball. He could run racks all the time and did. I was alone most times watching.
Jeff Livingston
I'm not talking outcome; I'm talking process of entertaining.They came to see a pool match and they did. Nothing the sponsors or promoters can do can guarantee they're going to like the outcome.
If that is the intent to just entertain, then yes. If you want to play a sport then rules have to be designed to govern the game. As rules are in effect they prove themselves to be good or bad and are often changed. I realize the original question in this thread was what would you rather watch. You would rather watch a horse race go back and forth.I'm not talking outcome; I'm talking process of entertaining.
I'd not come back, that's for sure. Like I said, if I want only runnout pool, I'll watch a pro practice. If I want a competition, a real honest match, I'll watch some sport where each guy gets his chance to show his stuff. What's the best viewing experience for sports fans? Overtime.
Jeff Livingston
Pool is more like gladiators trying to kill each other, it is direct competition. Players try to control the game and dominate the opponent. However once a player has control of the table it now becomes him against the table and the opponent no longer matters. That is an interesting difference from many sports. Your opponent becomes helpless and can only watch.What is it about pool that is different from other sports?
I don't get it.
Jeff Livingston
No matter what format you use, pool is different. You can’t influence your opponents turn (outside of what position you leave) and don’t shoot until your break or your opponent leaves the table. In alternate breaks, if your opponents gets the first break you are reliant on them making a mistake. The only way to truly make it fair is to allow each player to keep shooting until they miss.What is it about pool that is different from other sports?
I don't get it.
Jeff Livingston
Alternating breaks or loser breaks is not by themselves an improvement but just an element. See my post #8. I put on a lot of tournaments, dozens where I played with the rules.Yea pool is different, and maybe it should not be different.
Name one sport that does not gives alternating chances of scoring. If a player runs out a set. is he really the better player if his oponent never gets a chance to play?
I understand the history of pool. But like all other things , it can be improved and alternate breaking is an improvement. IMHO
You sure it's not a spot shot shootout?What's the best viewing experience for sports fans? Overtime.
You are saying 2 out of 3 sets to 8? So, potentially 45 games? Or am I misunderstanding you? I like the idea that there can be tournaments that are winner breaks, alternate breaks, sets of differing lengths and quantity, etc.Alternating breaks or loser breaks is not by themselves an improvement but just an element. See my post #8. I put on a lot of tournaments, dozens where I played with the rules.
I did one tournament with single elimination race to 8, 2 out of 3. If it went to the third set win by 2 all sets winner breaks. Mike Massey won and told me it was a great format.
I played in a tournament in Germany they played single elimination race to 8, 3 out of 5. It was grulling I won my first match but had to play a young Ralf Souquet who beat me 3 to 2. You could see he was going to be a great player.
Hill-hill, no complaints here.I've got a cold beverage up for grabs that says if SVB was up 10-3 on Mika and then got to sit in his chair except to try and hit out of single safety until enjoying a 10-11 loss, this thread and voting would have gone differently...lol
Two out of three sets can be played shorter if the tournament organizers want. But what the multisets do is allow you to play a single elimination tournament yet the players feel like they played a legitimate match.You are saying 2 out of 3 sets to 8? So, potentially 45 games? Or am I misunderstanding you? I like the idea that there can be tournaments that are winner breaks, alternate breaks, sets of differing lengths and quantity, etc.
I see people complain about the different rules, but I don't think it's that difficult. The only thing you absolutely need to know is that you have to shoot the lowest numbered ball. Call shot, call safe, it doesn't happen so often that a viewer would be lost at sea. If I see the money ball drop on the break and they spot it, I know it doesn't count on the break. If they re rack, it does. If you can't follow the game past the 3 shots out of 100 that you don't understand, you are not interested in the game. I don't know what several of the penalties in football are but if I see the ref move the ball back 5 yards, I know someone did something wrong. I don't see some of the fouls that get called in basketball but if I see a guy shooting free throws I assume the ref saw something.
That can be a grueling set, I'm sure. I see your point that it's a similar number of games compared to a double elimination and gives the players enough games that the match does prove who was better that day, instead of who was ahead when they ran out of games. And you aren't getting geared up for several different matches in one day. Just like there are short films, feature length movies, and epics, pool matches can be different lengths.Two out of three sets can be played shorter if the tournament organizers want. But what the multisets do is allow you to play a single elimination tournament yet the players feel like they played a legitimate match.
lose a set you may get behind and the next set you start from scratch and you can come back. From a tournament standpoint you also cut the field in half every round so the fact that you're playing longer matches doesn't really matter.
I was at a tournament that was played like this and I remember Rempy commenting that he really liked it. You either win your match and move on or you go home no hanging around for days only to not make it into money.
It can be tough. You go to the table you get your cue and all your crap out and you get ready to play what might be three hour or more match. Not for the faint of heart.
Did anyone think to ask which game??? Sorry, I could not read all the posts.Due to a recent thread I saw, I thought I would see what everyone thinks.
This is not new. All the Brunswick world championships played in the early 90s were played race to 7, 2 out of 3 till the final 8. Then they switched to double elimination and race to 9.That can be a grueling set, I'm sure. I see your point that it's a similar number of games compared to a double elimination and gives the players enough games that the match does prove who was better that day, instead of who was ahead when they ran out of games. And you aren't getting geared up for several different matches in one day. Just like there are short films, feature length movies, and epics, pool matches can be different lengths.