9ball without the break is NO 9ball...

P

Petros Andrikop

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
There are ways to make the break more difficult and that's ok.
Taking the break almost completely out of play in this game creates a parody.
9ball has always been the best ambassador of pool after the straight pool era, and if we want to preserve pool in today's rough conditions we need players - prototypes.
Such talented players work hard in order to reach the necessary level of running a few racks, making every mistake of their opponent really count, inspiring young people to follow the legacy.
There's almost no beauty in the game when you take out essential elements like the break and bring everybody down to the same level, and that is bad for the game and it has to end in prestigious tournaments. It should be used in specific occasions but not in the big no-team events.
The game has to return where it belongs, to the maximum thrill situations.
Amen.
Petros
 
S

SakuJack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Petros Andrikop said:
There are ways to make the break more difficult and that's ok.
Taking the break almost completely out of play in this game creates a parody.
9ball has always been the best ambassador of pool after the straight pool era, and if we want to preserve pool in today's rough conditions we need players - prototypes.
Such talented players work hard in order to reach the necessary level of running a few racks, making every mistake of their opponent really count, inspiring young people to follow the legacy.
There's almost no beauty in the game when you take out essential elements like the break and bring everybody down to the same level, and that is bad for the game and it has to end in prestigious tournaments. It should be used in specific occasions but not in the big no-team events.
The game has to return where it belongs, to the maximum thrill situations.
Amen.
Petros
Click to expand...

Two questions:

1. What do you mean by "taking the break out of play"?

2. If you mean rules like 9 on the spot, small breakbox, 3 point rule, etc., how does this constitute bringing everybody down to the same level?
 
Colonel

Colonel

Raised by Wolves in a Pool Hall
Silver Member
Petros Andrikop said:
There are ways to make the break more difficult and that's ok.
Taking the break almost completely out of play in this game creates a parody.
9ball has always been the best ambassador of pool after the straight pool era, and if we want to preserve pool in today's rough conditions we need players - prototypes.
Such talented players work hard in order to reach the necessary level of running a few racks, making every mistake of their opponent really count, inspiring young people to follow the legacy.
There's almost no beauty in the game when you take out essential elements like the break and bring everybody down to the same level, and that is bad for the game and it has to end in prestigious tournaments. It should be used in specific occasions but not in the big no-team events.
The game has to return where it belongs, to the maximum thrill situations.
Amen.
Petros
Click to expand...

Great post, I agree.
 
P

Petros Andrikop

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
SakuJack said:
Two questions:

1. What do you mean by "taking the break out of play"?

2. If you mean rules like 9 on the spot, small breakbox, 3 point rule, etc., how does this constitute bringing everybody down to the same level?
Click to expand...

If due to the setup both players can't make a ball breaking most of the times, the one who is a better breaker and "run outer" (talented 9ball skills which are perfected by hard work, a better "run outer" plays better position too) is brought down to the level of a player who can't break and run as good.
No reason to do that ("equalize" chances), in any sport...
Petros
 
Last edited:
S

SakuJack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Petros Andrikop said:
If due to the setup both players can't make a ball breaking most of the times, the one who is a better breaker and "run outer" (talented 9ball skills which are perfected by hard work) is brought down to the level of a player who can't break and run as good.
No reason to do that ("equalize" chances), in any sport...
Petros
Click to expand...

If due to setup both players can't make a ball breaking most of the times, the one who is a better overall player (talented pool skills which are perfected by hard work) should have a clear advantage.

I think it's a question of what we want to hold more importance in a match: the first shot, or all of the subsequent shots combined. The rules should not help the better breaker to beat the better player. If anything, that's what brings people down to one another's level.
 
P

Petros Andrikop

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
SakuJack said:
If due to setup both players can't make a ball breaking most of the times, the one who is a better overall player (talented pool skills which are perfected by hard work) should have a clear advantage.

I think it's a question of what we want to hold more importance in a match: the first shot, or all of the subsequent shots combined. The rules should not help the better breaker to beat the better player. If anything, that's what brings people down to one another's level.
Click to expand...

If any of the skills which one player performs better than the other are taken out of play that is against talent and hard work (a better break also comes from more work and not luck) which are "punished", it's against parts of the game so it's against the game.
What we want to hold as important is all parts of the game, not just some of them.
I have already explained that a player who runs out more is a better position player too, more consistent, that is common knowledge, you don't run out more just because of a better break.
There is no reason in any sport worldwide to give more chances of winning to a player who is behind in some parts of the game compared to another. They already have equal chances when the match starts at 0-0.
If the player that doesn't break and run as good wants better chances, he has to work for them in the game and not getting them through any special setup. Even if he has less talent, he can compensate through even more work. Otherwise he gets the wrong message, and the better players become the "fools" of the situation...
Not "protecting" the better players (by acting against them), drives away the young generation from every sport.
 
Last edited:
P

Petros Andrikop

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
LNCPA said:
The best players will adjust and adapt to whatever the setup is and still find a way to win.
Click to expand...

That is only partly true, even if you could find a good reason in any sport of giving more winning chances to a lesser player, there should be a limit in that approach in order to preserve excellence in the game.
 
justadub

justadub

Rattling corners nightly
Silver Member
Its become a compromise....

If there were enough manpower to have a neutral racker for each table, these changes wouldn't be necessary. Sadly, with all the rack manipulation (by either player) its no longer a fair contest. Not to mention the time lost by checking, re-checking and re-checking of the racks. Because of said rack manipulation, and the major advantage it provides.

So, short of providing a neutral racker, rules have had to be implemented to thwart those problems. Sad that its come to this, but necessary.
 
sjm

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
To be fair, I think everyone is making sense in this thread.

That said, though, take a look at the US Open golf tournament. The rough is longer and the fairways are narrower. Consequently, the tee shot, the first shot played on every hole, is made more difficult. The US Golf Association feels that such a setup befits our national championship.

Pool players always talk about wanting pool to be more like golf. If so, a tougher setup in a national championship should not rub them the wrong way. On the contrary, the tougher setup befits the occasion.

As one poster noted, however, whatever the setup, the same guys are always the ones standing when the smoke clears.
 
I

itsfroze

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Petros Andrikop said:
There are ways to make the break more difficult and that's ok.
Taking the break almost completely out of play in this game creates a parody.
9ball has always been the best ambassador of pool after the straight pool era, and if we want to preserve pool in today's rough conditions we need players - prototypes.
Such talented players work hard in order to reach the necessary level of running a few racks, making every mistake of their opponent really count, inspiring young people to follow the legacy.
There's almost no beauty in the game when you take out essential elements like the break and bring everybody down to the same level, and that is bad for the game and it has to end in prestigious tournaments. It should be used in specific occasions but not in the big no-team events.
The game has to return where it belongs, to the maximum thrill situations.
Amen.
Petros
Click to expand...

Well stated, and true !
 
T

takeitdown

Banned
justadub said:
Its become a compromise....

If there were enough manpower to have a neutral racker for each table, these changes wouldn't be necessary. Sadly, with all the rack manipulation (by either player) its no longer a fair contest. Not to mention the time lost by checking, re-checking and re-checking of the racks. Because of said rack manipulation, and the major advantage it provides.

So, short of providing a neutral racker, rules have had to be implemented to thwart those problems. Sad that its come to this, but necessary.
Click to expand...

The racking game is just a way for people who can't break to slow down those who can.
With Neutral racking the guys who know how to break would still excel as they should.
We have big tournaments now with alternating break, just ridiculous. No way to make a big comeback or run packages, which just isn't 9 ball.
 
S

SakuJack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Petros Andrikop said:
If any of the skills which one player performs better than the other are taken out of play that is against talent and hard work (a better break also comes from more work and not luck) which are "punished", it's against parts of the game so it's against the game.
What we want to hold as important is all parts of the game, not just some of them.
I have already explained that a player who runs out more is a better position player too, more consistent, that is common knowledge, you don't run out more just because of a better break.
There is no reason in any sport worldwide to give more chances of winning to a player who is behind in some parts of the game compared to another. They already have equal chances when the match starts at 0-0.
If the player that doesn't break and run as good wants better chances, he has to work for them in the game and not getting them through any special setup. Even if he has less talent, he can compensate through even more work. Otherwise he gets the wrong message, and the better players become the "fools" of the situation...
Not "protecting" the better players (by acting against them), drives away the young generation from every sport.
Click to expand...

Making the break a wired shot does take a lot of other skills out of the game, though. Maybe not in theory but certainly in practice.

If you make the break harder, then the best breakers should still be able to make a ball more often. You say both players have an equal chance when the match starts at 0-0, well guess what? The match still starts at 0-0 if you rack the 9-ball on the spot, or use a breakbox, or a 3-point rule, or whatever. So what's the difference?

Why should the break be more important than the 8+ shots that come after it combined?
 
I

itsfroze

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
SakuJack said:
If due to setup both players can't make a ball breaking most of the times, the one who is a better overall player (talented pool skills which are perfected by hard work should have a clear advantage.

I think it's a question of what we want to hold more importance in a match: the first shot, or all of the subsequent shots combined. The rules should not help the better breaker to beat the better player. If anything, that's what brings people down to one another's level.
Click to expand...

The word overall, says it all -------> that includes the break.

That"s why the break should be protected, not changed to be used as an equalizer.


If you're going to play 9-Ball then play 9-Ball. If you want to made up your rules for a new game
then made up a new name too, and play that game, but it won't be 9-Ball.
 
Last edited:
sjm

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
takeitdown said:
With Neutral racking the guys who know how to break would still excel as they should.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. I really have a hard time believing that in this nine table event, they can't find the staff to do this. Not asking for a referee here, just a neutral person to do the racking.
 
S

SakuJack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
itsfroze said:
The word overall, says it all -------> that includes the break.

That"s why the break should be protected, not changed to be used as an equalizer.


If you're going to play 9-Ball then play 9-Ball. If you want to made up your rules for a new game
then made up a new name too, and play that game, but it won't be 9-Ball.
Click to expand...

It does include the break, but not at the expense of all other shots/skills in the game. That's the point.
 
P

Petros Andrikop

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
SakuJack said:
Making the break a wired shot does take a lot of other skills out of the game, though. Maybe not in theory but certainly in practice.

If you make the break harder, then the best breakers should still be able to make a ball more often. You say both players have an equal chance when the match starts at 0-0, well guess what? The match still starts at 0-0 if you rack the 9-ball on the spot, or use a breakbox, or a 3-point rule, or whatever. So what's the difference?

Why should the break be more important than the 8+ shots that come after it combined?
Click to expand...

The difference is that the better breaker doesn't make balls either under a too hard setup, like the guy who doesn't break as good under normal conditions.
The difference between their skills is lost.
The break is not a "more important" shot, is one of the shots in this game, taking it out of the equation takes out the skill of the one that performs this shot better.
Why taking out any part of the game in any sport? No good reason for that.
 
S

SakuJack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Petros Andrikop said:
There is no "expense" anywhere someone practices more and performs better any part of the game, this one too.
Click to expand...

You don't think being a better breaker is more advantageous than being, say, a better safety player, or kicker, or jumper, or long shot maker... or take your pick?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top