New game. thoughts?

rheester

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
what is one pro and con of 9 ball. pro - if ur playing well, it feels awesome to run balls. cons - when u suck, ur sitting and its frustrating.

pro and con of 1 pocket. pro - it's a chess match. con - slow as **** sometimes.

introducing a new pool game which reduces the cons of both 9b and 1p, while maintaining the pros.

15 balls racked - each players plays rotation from either end of rack.
P1 breaks - P1 then starts to play rotation from the 1ball or 15ball.
if P1 misses, then P2 starts to play rotation from the other side of the rack
the default end of game is when either player pockets total of 8 balls.

this is designed to be contrary to 9b, when, for example, P1 breaks and runs out to 8 and misses 9 and then P2 only has to make one total ball and win when P1 did most of the work.

in this game, both players have to pocket the same number of balls (can be changed for handicap).

the strategy is harder to explain in words, but it will be more involved than 9b and different than 1p

scratch
if lowest # ball is not hit by P1 or highest # ball for P2
no rail
pocketing cue ball
cue ball goes off table

penalty for scratch
one ball gets spotted, if you don't have any, then one is owed.
ball in hand for other player

3 consecutive scratches is a loss

combinations
can be played with the other side of rack as long as the appropriate side of rack # ball is hit first
all balls stay down regardless of the # of the ball if above is met - it is counted towards the total ball count.
for example, P1 hits 4ball and combos the 13ball, then P1 keeps 13 ball for his ball count.

the table gets crowded in the beginning, therefore a lot of safeties and strategy may be needed.

it's a longer game than 9b, but can be shorter than 1p games.

what you think?
 

Cron

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I like it, but I feel if you dare use another ball to play your own or to just save your inning, the other player should get it. Honestly, I'd remove that all together, else the other player will be stuck using a combo for each time you do. In its place you could add in something like the 7-ball rule where each player had to use only 1 side of the table (that would get back a little of the 1 pocket feel too).

Either way, I like the fullduplex rotation idea, I'll definitely play that. Maybe call it Fullduplex, Bidirection or just 2-Lane or something.

P.S. im stealing it right now to play it, i'm calling it 2-lane until you name it.
 
Last edited:

Boxcar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Dumb question...does P1 have to make a ball on the break to keep shooting?

Thanks.
 

rheester

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Dumb question...does P1 have to make a ball on the break to keep shooting?

Thanks.

Yes

if P1 does not make a ball, then, just like 9b or 8b, P2 comes to table and has a choice to go from 1ball up or 15 ball down.
 

rheester

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I

Either way, I like the fullduplex rotation idea, I'll definitely play that. Maybe call it Fullduplex, Bidirection or just 2-Lane or something.

P.S. im stealing it right now to play it, i'm calling it 2-lane until you name it.

I like the idea.

I think 2way may be more intuitive.

thanks for the idea.
 

jimmyco

NRA4Life
Silver Member
Are you saying on the combo, as long as you hit your lowest (or highest) ball first you can drop any ball on the table, or of their group, the current ball in play only?
 
Last edited:

rheester

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Are you saying on the combo, as long as you hit your lowest (or highest) ball first you can drop any ball on the table, or of their group, the current ball in play only?

correct, if you hit the lower (or highest) ball first, you can drop any ball on the table and it will count towards your ball count, as long as you call it.
 

Boxcar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've got some old geezer buds who will like this. I can't wait to see what they think.

Would it make sense to call it "Hi-Lo Rotation"?
 

Cron

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
2way is sort of taken already isn't it?

I lost my first game of 2way. The combo idea is a nice corner tactic though. I like how if you take combo, they're forced to take a combo as well. But, 2 people weren't keen on that so we subbed the 7-ball rule. I think people will have to warm up to that style of corner tatic. I play something called Honolulu 2 (Hon.2), there's a built in corner tactic in that, so i'm glad to see others factoring it in as well.
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
The first shooter after the break would get an easy snooker too often.
....lotta games will be won on three fouls.

Too many

I may try it though....after I master the games I already play.....
...9-ball, one-pocket, 8-ball, 3-cushion, snooker, 10-ball........
 

logical

Loose Rack
Silver Member
You might prevent shenanigans on the break by adding this.

If P1 breaks dry, P2 can take his turn or require P1 to play first.
 

Ralph Kramden

BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Silver Member
.
Like the game.. This could be added to the game rules...
All opponent balls you incidentally pocket stay down and add to his ball count.

.
 
Last edited:

strmanglr scott

All about Focus
Silver Member
The first shooter after the break would get an easy snooker too often.
....lotta games will be won on three fouls.

Too many

I may try it though....after I master the games I already play.....
...9-ball, one-pocket, 8-ball, 3-cushion, snooker, 10-ball........

I don't know if he wrote it wrong but he said 3 consecutive scratches is a loss, not 3 consecutive fouls.

Gonna give this a try tonight.
 

LowRight

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I like it.

Here's a possible change or variation off the top of my head. Since all that matters is the number of balls pocketed, how about if the incoming player always has the option to play in forward or reverse order? This would keep the first shooter after the break from having that exclusive advantage. It would also make it a bit more difficult to play safeties since you'd have to worry about hiding the cueball from two balls. This would help alleviate Pt109's criticism:

The first shooter after the break would get an easy snooker too often.
....lotta games will be won on three fouls.

Too many
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
I like it.

Here's a possible change or variation off the top of my head. Since all that matters is the number of balls pocketed, how about if the incoming player always has the option to play in forward or reverse order? This would keep the first shooter after the break from having that exclusive advantage. It would also make it a bit more difficult to play safeties since you'd have to worry about hiding the cueball from two balls. This would help alleviate Pt109's criticism:

The first shooter after the break would get an easy snooker too often.
....lotta games will be won on three fouls.

Too many

The Pinoy scratch rule about spotting the ball with cue ball in the kitchen may work,
 

btal

Registered
Like it. The option for the incoming shooter to go both ways would decrease games lost by the 3 foul rule (as said) and cut the game duration. This new game idea is definitely intriguing.
 

johnnysd

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It's an interesting concept. I had a thought for a different variation that I think would work especially well for TV but I havent 100% gotten it all together. One statement that I will make:

If pool is ever going to be popular as a spectator sport it needs a new game (or a very old on in straight pool) I do not think 9 ball, 10 ball or 8 ball or one pocket will bring in viewership.

It needs to be something like snooker to be honest. Snooker is a FANTASTIC game to watch on TV because of the limited ball colors and specific spots they go to. In fact, its such a good game that it's popularity is due in large part to it being the best thing to watch on very early color TV broadcast.

I applaud your effort because I truly think for pool to become popular again it needs a completely new game.
 

Cron

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I suggest playing it as is before burning the candle from both ends. I lost my first ever game of this in under 3 minutes played on a regular table with a magic rack. Burning from both ends will undoubtedly make this game much simpler once even 4 balls are made. So much in fact, that you'll even have 2 money balls to shoot at.

It's different than Saratoga as it goes by ball count and not suit. It's VERY different if that cornering rule stays in. If the only thing that bothers people is one rule, the foul rule, just change that.
 
Top