Hand Rack vs Template vs ...

[BasementDweller]

I understand the reason behind the hand racking that Predator is using but I don't think it's the long term answer. Taking what is the most exciting shot to many spectators (especially the novices) and turning it into something significantly less than a skilled shot is something I'm not a fan of. Also, when Predator has such a top-notch production, it really stands out when there is a slug rack.

The alternative is a template rack and I recognize this CAN make the racks too predictable. So what's the answer?

What could further separate Predator from Matchroom?

I would be interested in seeing how the racks would play out if they used a template AND there was a "blocking" ball placed on the center spot before the break. The blocking ball would just be a specially designed, Predator logo'd ball that would remain on the table throughout the rack and would add strategic opportunities to play safe behind during the rack, including at the end of the rack when all that's left is the cue ball, the ten, and the blocker.

Maybe that sounds crazy, or maybe it's just 20 or 30 years ahead of its time. I imagine the game will continue to evolve as the players continue to improve.

What can the promoters do in light of the fact that the players are going to continue to get better? They can continually tighten the pockets, but at some point it makes the game too distinct from the game the local amateurs play. Or they can go backwards -- to the hand rack which is the current solution, but that makes the break something that's not worth practicing for many players. So my thinking is, there must be a way to move towards perfection in regards to the break, while increasing the difficulty for the players. Maybe not quite yet, but I think the future answer may be found in adding balls to the table, but not adding them to the rack.

 

[skip100]

It took a full 5 minutes to rack for the hill-hill Immonen vs. De Luna game.

 

[Dan_B]

5 minutes! amateur's,

yes sir, I call it an honest break, money ball spots in the center, must be hit first with contact (on) object ball for a legal break. I suppose it would be TD discretion on creative rack formation, here, the winner of the game choice makes the call.

Haven't had the chance lately to make a call, I'm thinking of an offer for the win on the break, that is, call the money ball, say the 10ball, for the win on a legal break, just call which pocket, you miss you lose the game. if no joy and the 10 pots on the break, it re-spots in the center.

We're playing games here, right, just put together a tournament, make the rules, see what happens...

 

[BigBoof]

It took a full 5 minutes to rack for the hill-hill Immonen vs. De Luna game.

On my first trip to watch the Joss tournament at Turning Stone a few years ago, I watched Mika and Thorston argue over a rack for at least 20 minutes.

I think about this every time cornhole or lawn mower racing is on ESPN and pool is not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DynoDan]

On my first trip to watch the Joss tournament at Turning Stone a few years ago, I watched Mika and Thorston argue over a rack for at least 20 minutes.

I think about this every time cornhole or lawn mower racing is on ESPN and pool is not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought players were prohibited from challenging when the ref. racks (?), so if your opponent is acting as referee, shouldn’t that apply?
I deal with this issue routinely (opponent gives a slug-rack, nothing drops…he runs out. I rack tight….he breaks and runs out). Mostly it’s due to inexperience/incompetence, not malice, so I bite the bullet. Nit-picking the rack is chickenshit (IMHO). Observing from the headrail could influence your breaking style though.

 

[hang-the-9]

On my first trip to watch the Joss tournament at Turning Stone a few years ago, I watched Mika and Thorston argue over a rack for at least 20 minutes.

I think about this every time cornhole or lawn mower racing is on ESPN and pool is not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think there have only been a handful of live pool matches on TV since the 80s, so racking time does not matter much there at all since they edit out 1/3rd of the racks anyway. We now return 3 racks later with the score 4-1...

 

[jasonlaus]

I thought players were prohibited from challenging when the ref. racks (?), so if your opponent is acting as referee, shouldn’t that apply?
I deal with this issue routinely (opponent gives a slug-rack, nothing drops…he runs out. I rack tight….he breaks and runs out). Mostly it’s due to inexperience/incompetence, not malice, so I bite the bullet. Nit-picking the rack is chickenshit (IMHO). Observing from the headrail could influence your breaking style though.

If you think "nitpicking" the rack is chickenshit then you clearly know nothing about pool.

The break is by far the most important shot in the game.

I'm guessing you probably throw 50cents up on the table occasionally and proceed to lose, I guess that would explain why you don't think the rack is important because you never win and get to break

 

[Taxi]

If you think "nitpicking" the rack is chickenshit then you clearly know nothing about pool.

The break is by far the most important shot in the game.

You're absolutely right about the importance of the break, but that still doesn't address the issue of how constant re-racking in pro tournaments is a MAJOR turnoff to spectators. It's the viewing equivalent of watching baseball players re-adjusting their batting gloves between every pitch, and pitchers throwing over the first 5 or more times to hold the runner in place. This is why MLB has finally decided to crack down on these practices.

And this is why I favor the universal adaptation of the Accu-Stats template for all pro matches where a referee can't be present, and leave the traditional triangle rack to amateur events where nobody cares if it takes 5 minutes to get a "perfect" rack. If the template makes the break outcome too predictable, then require players to break from the exact center of the table, no more than one diamond from the back rail.

 

[DynoDan]

If you think "nitpicking" the rack is chickenshit then you clearly know nothing about pool.

The break is by far the most important shot in the game.

I'm guessing you probably throw 50cents up on the table occasionally and proceed to lose, I guess that would explain why you don't think the rack is important because you never win and get to break

I occasionally throw $50 up the table, because I understand that sometimes ‘losing‘ is an unavoidable aspect of gambling. I tend to avoid playing those who can never stand to lose, since I can’t shake the suspicion re: what they might be tempted to do in order to win.
A ‘bad rack’, much like a ‘bad roll’, to me is just another part of traditional (sportsman) gambling luck. If you can’t trust your opponent to try his best to rack tight every time, then you find another opponent.
I DO empathize though with pros who need to make a living, and are thus forced to play unsavory tournament opponents.
Likely those who must thoroughly scrutinize every rack, should thus also order the CB cleaned before every slow cut (?). I mean, why leave anything to chance? Some will never even shoot into a drop pocket that already contains balls. Where do you draw the line before the ‘fun’ is gone from the game?

 

[MitchAlsup]

The whole problem with 9-ball and 10-ball is that so much is entirely dependent on the rack.

Snooker, 3-C, 1-14 continuous, 15-rotation, and to a large extent 8-ball do not have this problem.

 

[Zerksies]

I’m not a fan of the template rack. I’ve seen too many times the template rack has interfered with the way a ball rolls

 

[jasonlaus]

The whole problem with 9-ball and 10-ball is that so much is entirely dependent on the rack.

Snooker, 3-C, 1-14 continuous, 15-rotation, and to a large extent 8-ball do not have this problem.

That would be wrong

 

[boogieman]

You're absolutely right about the importance of the break, but that still doesn't address the issue of how constant re-racking in pro tournaments is a MAJOR turnoff to spectators. It's the viewing equivalent of watching baseball players re-adjusting their batting gloves between every pitch, and pitchers throwing over the first 5 or more times to hold the runner in place. This is why MLB has finally decided to crack down on these practices.

And this is why I favor the universal adaptation of the Accu-Stats template for all pro matches where a referee can't be present, and leave the traditional triangle rack to amateur events where nobody cares if it takes 5 minutes to get a "perfect" rack. If the template makes the break outcome too predictable, then require players to break from the exact center of the table, no more than one diamond from the back rail.

I think template racks are the most fair thing to ever happen in pool. They are great and avoid many shenanigans. The trouble is, they are so consistent that you can literally engineer breaks that "break" the game and how it's supposed to be played. Corey Deuel is a genius on "solving" breaks. The problem is, pool wasn't made to be solved on the break. It makes for a boring spectacle.

There has to be some randomness to it. When even an amateur like me can take a template, pot two balls on the break and get perfect shape on the next ball with all balls spread beautifully, any pro can run out often off of a template.

I love when people figure out a way to manufacture a "ran rack" on the break shot, but it probably isn't great for the general viewership.

 

[Cornerman]

The whole problem with 9-ball and 10-ball is that so much is entirely dependent on the rack.

Maybe I dont know exactly what you mean. I think the template has made today’s players look better because the racks always come up nice. The hand rack makes things tougher, so no B&R fest. That may mean something to the fans, but the reality is that the 2023 winner was the World 10-ball champion just a couple years ago, and he beat the hottest player on the planet. They were followed by three of the other four top players in the world. And the rest of the top 8 also had no surprises.

My personal opinion is that this World 10-ball played like what a true Major should play like: difficult format to runout with all skill set range used to win. The cream of the 10-ball players rose to the top. I think SVB might be rethinking why he didnt smash break from the center.

 

[Nyquil]

I understand the reason behind the hand racking that Predator is using but I don't think it's the long term answer. Taking what is the most exciting shot to many spectators (especially the novices) and turning it into something significantly less than a skilled shot is something I'm not a fan of. Also, when Predator has such a top-notch production, it really stands out when there is a slug rack.

The alternative is a template rack and I recognize this CAN make the racks too predictable. So what's the answer?

What could further separate Predator from Matchroom?

I would be interested in seeing how the racks would play out if they used a template AND there was a "blocking" ball placed on the center spot before the break. The blocking ball would just be a specially designed, Predator logo'd ball that would remain on the table throughout the rack and would add strategic opportunities to play safe behind during the rack, including at the end of the rack when all that's left is the cue ball, the ten, and the blocker.

Maybe that sounds crazy, or maybe it's just 20 or 30 years ahead of its time. I imagine the game will continue to evolve as the players continue to improve.

What can the promoters do in light of the fact that the players are going to continue to get better? They can continually tighten the pockets, but at some point it makes the game too distinct from the game the local amateurs play. Or they can go backwards -- to the hand rack which is the current solution, but that makes the break something that's not worth practicing for many players. So my thinking is, there must be a way to move towards perfection in regards to the break, while increasing the difficulty for the players. Maybe not quite yet, but I think the future answer may be found in adding balls to the table, but not adding them to the rack.

Hand racking I wish would be banned in league play. What they do at the highest level I don't really care. I can't tell you how many times some guy spends 5 minutes trying to get a tight rack with balls that have seen better days and a $2.00 rack. Almost every rack it's breaking cluster after cluster. Super annoying.

 

[straightline]

Hand racking I wish would be banned in league play. What they do at the highest level I don't really care. I can't tell you how many times some guy spends 5 minutes trying to get a tight rack with balls that have seen better days and a $2.00 rack. Almost every rack it's breaking cluster after cluster. Super annoying.

Leaguers around here by and large are not at all concerned with the quality of rack. I think they suffer less stress from no run layouts. Good, tight, properly placed racks are decidedly counterproductive. That and most of them are never in action and could GAF. So they never bother to learn racking.

 

[kanzzo]

And this is why I favor the universal adaptation of the Accu-Stats template for all pro matches where a referee can't be present, and leave the traditional triangle rack to amateur events where nobody cares if it takes 5 minutes to get a "perfect" rack. If the template makes the break outcome too predictable, then require players to break from the exact center of the table, no more than one diamond from the back rail.

Amateurs don't run out that often and can't rack the balls with triangle that well. So exactly for amateurs a template is a great thing.

9 Ball with a good break is too easy for pros. 10-Ball or (if too easy) 10-Ball with break from the side and longer races will solve the problem. But its only fair to give every player the same perfect rack and template is the best way to get it done without needing to argue 10 minutes about the rack.