diamond open template/break questions

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
two things:

I thought ten ball racks the deuce and triple on the corners, but this tourna not
controlling the one is obv most essential, but I couldn't help but wonder how come
is there any advantage to *not* regulating the two and three?

also
jj said the template rack has been breaking "different"
I have outsville templates and have no prob getting all balls to touch
so just wondering if jj's comment meant they break different after the rack somehow?
or was he commenting on the fact that refs were racking and not players
or ?
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
two things:

I thought ten ball racks the deuce and triple on the corners, but this tourna not
controlling the one is obv most essential, but I couldn't help but wonder how come
is there any advantage to *not* regulating the two and three?

also
jj said the template rack has been breaking "different"
I have outsville templates and have no prob getting all balls to touch
so just wondering if jj's comment meant they break different after the rack somehow?
or was he commenting on the fact that refs were racking and not players
or ?

Always racking the 2-ball and 3-ball on the back corners actually violates the WPA (world-standardized) rules, which specify the location of only the 1-ball and 10-ball. The other 8 balls are to be racked "without purposeful or intentional pattern." But some events think they know better and do specify the back corners for the 2-ball and 3-ball. The Diamond Las Vegas Open followed WPA rules on this.

When Jeremy Jones talked about the balls breaking differently in the last 2 matches, it was with the referees racking (vs. the breaker racking his own prior to that). Perhaps he feels the players can rack more advantageously, even with the template.
 

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Always racking the 2-ball and 3-ball on the back corners actually violates the WPA (world-standardized) rules, which specify the location of only the 1-ball and 10-ball. The other 8 balls are to be racked "without purposeful or intentional pattern." But some events think they know better and do specify the back corners for the 2-ball and 3-ball. The Diamond Las Vegas Open followed WPA rules on this.

When Jeremy Jones talked about the balls breaking differently in the last 2 matches, it was with the referees racking (vs. the breaker racking his own prior to that). Perhaps he feels the players can rack more advantageously, even with the template.

thanks AL
I know you watch enough of these matches with scrutiny
what do you think of that wpa rule? is it a good one?
I wonder if players are looking where the two goes in the rack
in nine-ball, I'm keeping an eye on it
seems like it would matter in ten-ball
but I'm honestly not 'hip
 

jrctherake

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
thanks AL
I know you watch enough of these matches with scrutiny
what do you think of that wpa rule? is it a good one?
I wonder if players are looking where the two goes in the rack
in nine-ball, I'm keeping an eye on it
seems like it would matter in ten-ball
but I'm honestly not 'hip

Hey buddy,

In 10 ball....upon breaking with a medium-hard break the two balls behind the head ball will be close to side pockets.

The two balls behind the 10 ball in the back of rack will be closer to up table toward headstring or farther up to corners.

The two balls on eitjer side of 10 ball will move straight out to long rails and bounce back depending on how hard the break.

The two corner balls will go 4 rails and end up in the same corners they started from.


Of course all of that is dependent on the breaker hitting the head ball square and getting the cb back out of the way and even then, if even one ball has a wreck, half the rack will be off line.

Jeff
 

jrctherake

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
two things:

I thought ten ball racks the deuce and triple on the corners, but this tourna not
controlling the one is obv most essential, but I couldn't help but wonder how come
is there any advantage to *not* regulating the two and three?

also
jj said the template rack has been breaking "different"
I have outsville templates and have no prob getting all balls to touch
so just wondering if jj's comment meant they break different after the rack somehow?
or was he commenting on the fact that refs were racking and not players
or ?

If a person knows how, a rack can be "loaded" to help certain balls get to the pockets.

In 10 ball, after the balls are in place push the two back center balls forward just a hair until you create a very, very small gap between the two balls behind the head ball while keeping them frozen to head ball.

In 9 ball, feather the 1 ball back till you have the infamous L train to wire the wing ball.

BTW, you can load a 10 ball rack by feathering the head ball but, its not as dependable as from the rear.

All of that works well with wooden rack and even better with templates.

It's pretty much a GUARANTEED ball on the break.

Jeff
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
thanks AL
I know you watch enough of these matches with scrutiny
what do you think of that wpa rule? is it a good one?
I wonder if players are looking where the two goes in the rack
in nine-ball, I'm keeping an eye on it
seems like it would matter in ten-ball
but I'm honestly not 'hip

Jeff explained in post #5 where the balls tend to go with the 10-Ball break. Putting the 2-ball and 3-ball on the back corners will tend to send them 4 rails back to the foot end of the table (where one or both might go in) while the 1-ball goes back up table to the head end. So racking that way can be used to try to separate the 1-ball from the next ball, depending on what is pocketed. I favor more randomization of the balls after the break, so I prefer not to rack any of them (other than the 1- and 10-) in the same spot every time.

But with breakers racking their own, you'll often see them not following the requirement to rack "without purposeful or intentional pattern." And some events seem to not give a hoot about preventing pattern racking. So a player might, for example, put the 2-ball and 3-ball in the middle of the back row rather than in the corners. That may increase the chances of one or both of those balls being driven to the head end of the table with the cue ball and 1-ball to start the run.
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
There’s a lot of knowledge with racking and reading it.
But templates or not, as the tournament goes on, the cloth starts to give you different results.
....I think that’s what JJ was seeing the last day.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
There’s a lot of knowledge with racking and reading it.
But templates or not, as the tournament goes on, the cloth starts to give you different results.
....I think that’s what JJ was seeing the last day.

For the semifinal and final matches, he wasn't talking about just normal changes in the cloth as the tournament goes on. It was differences caused by the refs racking as opposed to the players. Check at about 13:45 and 28:30 in the semifinal match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Yx02qtkYlE and 19:00 in the final match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0MCnBkRX3g
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
For the semifinal and final matches, he wasn't talking about just normal changes in the cloth as the tournament goes on. It was differences caused by the refs racking as opposed to the players. Check at about 13:45 and 28:30 in the semifinal match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Yx02qtkYlE and 19:00 in the final match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0MCnBkRX3g

Yeah, I see what you mean, and what JJ is saying....the first break you mentioned, the
sound was almost rubbery.

Aside, what do you think of the lighting?....I haven’t seen it in person, but I suspect It
might be the best I’ve seen.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Yeah, I see what you mean, and what JJ is saying....the first break you mentioned, the
sound was almost rubbery.

Aside, what do you think of the lighting?....I haven’t seen it in person, but I suspect It
might be the best I’ve seen.

I didn't see it in person, either. The commentators said that just 1 of the new lights was ample over the outside tables, but they had 7 such lights (perhaps higher) over the streaming table. Yet the 7 didn't seem to produce too much light; I didn't really notice much difference from what we see on other well lighted streams.

Perhaps the new LED lights would be better in terms of heat and their effects on the cloth. Also, each light was in a rectangular configuration (no light coming from inside an outer rectangle). Maybe that produces more uniform lighting on the table than other styles.
 

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
For the semifinal and final matches, he wasn't talking about just normal changes in the cloth as the tournament goes on. It was differences caused by the refs racking as opposed to the players. Check at about 13:45 and 28:30 in the semifinal match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Yx02qtkYlE and 19:00 in the final match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0MCnBkRX3g

AL, that's exactly the comment I was referring to, at 13:45 on lin's break
jj kind of insinuated that the bum rack was on john, but played it off
I wasn't sure, so I asked
so are we saying that john just didn't get the balls tight?
it looked like chang hit it good, but the camera didn't catch the whole crack
 

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Jeff explained in post #5 where the balls tend to go with the 10-Ball break. Putting the 2-ball and 3-ball on the back corners will tend to send them 4 rails back to the foot end of the table (where one or both might go in) while the 1-ball goes back up table to the head end. So racking that way can be used to try to separate the 1-ball from the next ball, depending on what is pocketed. I favor more randomization of the balls after the break, so I prefer not to rack any of them (other than the 1- and 10-) in the same spot every time.

But with breakers racking their own, you'll often see them not following the requirement to rack "without purposeful or intentional pattern." And some events seem to not give a hoot about preventing pattern racking. So a player might, for example, put the 2-ball and 3-ball in the middle of the back row rather than in the corners. That may increase the chances of one or both of those balls being driven to the head end of the table with the cue ball and 1-ball to start the run.

thanks AL
maybe I get the idea
but if the two being in a particular spot is an advantage
the randomization could end up being unfair
especially in a short race
maybe it's relatively insignificant
but I don't get why not just make it the same for everybody?
 

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If a person knows how, a rack can be "loaded" to help certain balls get to the pockets.

In 10 ball, after the balls are in place push the two back center balls forward just a hair until you create a very, very small gap between the two balls behind the head ball while keeping them frozen to head ball.

In 9 ball, feather the 1 ball back till you have the infamous L train to wire the wing ball.

BTW, you can load a 10 ball rack by feathering the head ball but, its not as dependable as from the rear.

All of that works well with wooden rack and even better with templates.

It's pretty much a GUARANTEED ball on the break.

Jeff

whew, hey jeff
thanks for racking 101, and 102!
look forward to testing your teaching:thumbup:
 
Top