Do We Really Need Perfect Racks in 9 Ball?

FranCrimi said:

The randomness is a combination of different variables that show up in a different order or position each time. That doesn't mean it's unfair or impossible for a player to assess and adjust. It just means that it's not the same each time.

Click to expand...

I agree to a point. Everything needs to be within reason. I was being tongue in cheek earlier on, but I think "opponent racks, subject to challenge" to control the severity of "imperfections" is a viable option.

As for intentionally bad-racking, as a sport, we haven't been tough enough on players who cheat. Maybe it's time we are.

Click to expand...

ah ha... but what constitutes cheating in terms of a bad rack...? That's why templates and the like were created. Cheap, easy, fast, repeatable, and even keel for both.

The_JV said:

It will be a sad day when players opt not break after winning a rack.

Click to expand...

[/B]


This is bad info, Because it depends on the conditions. I played Steve Gumphries at Weenie Beanie's Devalles' pool room on the East Coast early 70's, he spotted me the wild 8 roll out 9 ball and He gave me the break shot also. Weeeeeeeeeeeel the table we played on, a 9' Gold Crown had worn out cloth, dirty balls, it was very damp, and the pool room was below ground, making it even more damp. I never made a ball on the break, he knew the table and it was a stone trap, he got the first shot every game and I lost the set easily.

jsp said:

My opinion is that we shouldn't tinker with the rules of 9 ball. It simply won't be 9 ball anymore. Although I agree your rule tweak may increase "interaction", it'll completely kill runout pool which many fans love.

To solve the breaking issue, I'd rather we shift entirely to a version of 12-ball in which the breaker has a free shot at any ball immediately following the break, regardless of whether a ball is made on the break or not (exception is scratching on the break). That way it is possible to play runout pool and string packages together, without the obsession of forming a perfect rack every single time.

Click to expand...

Are you aware of Paul Schofield's approach: http://www.goldcrownbilliardseriepa.com/no-conflict-rules/

The_JV said:

It will be a sad day when players opt not break after winning a rack.

Click to expand...

Island Drive said:

This is bad info, Because it depends on the conditions. I played Steve Gumphries at Weenie Beanie's Devalles' pool room on the East Coast early 70's, he spotted me the wild 8 roll out 9 ball and He gave me the break shot also. Weeeeeeeeeeeel the table we played on, a 9' Gold Crown had worn out cloth, dirty balls, it was very damp, and the pool room was below ground, making it even more damp. I never made a ball on the break, he knew the table and it was a stone trap, he got the first shot every game and I lost the set easily.

Click to expand...

I've given up the break as weight in similar situations as well... If you know the equipment tends to dictate bad breaks. The why would you want to hit one. Just like if the equipment is friendly, but you can't count on a decent and/or consistent rack.

I didn't mean for my comment to be taken as gospel. Just a thought that pro players could pass the break in tournaments that are allowing "bad racks" because people want to see bad racks hit. Which is what the thread is insinuating.

The_JV said:

I've given up the break as weight in similar situations as well... If you know the equipment tends to dictate bad breaks. The why would you want to hit one. Just like if the equipment is friendly, but you can't count on a decent and/or consistent rack.

I didn't mean for my comment to be taken as gospel. Just a thought that pro players could pass the break in tournaments that are allowing "bad racks" because people want to see bad racks hit. Which is what the thread is insinuating.

Click to expand...

Starting 9ball with a break that can be exploited, its like starting a baseball inning with a runner on 1st.

Fran never said anything about seeing bad racks get hit.

In any other sport no one can consistently predict how the first score will be made.
But in 9 ball everyone knows which balls can be pocketed using the punch-hole rack.

justnum said:

Starting 9ball with a break that can be exploited, its like starting a baseball inning with a runner on 1st.

Fran never said anything about seeing bad racks get hit.

In any other sport no one can consistently predict how the first score will be made.
But in 9 ball everyone knows which balls can be pocketed using the punch-hole rack.

Click to expand...

Wow, a post that not only makes some sense but one i also tend to agree with. Miracles never cease i guess. Template-racked 9b is far too predictable AND boring.

The_JV said:

I've given up the break as weight in similar situations as well... If you know the equipment tends to dictate bad breaks. The why would you want to hit one. Just like if the equipment is friendly, but you can't count on a decent and/or consistent rack.

I didn't mean for my comment to be taken as gospel. Just a thought that pro players could pass the break in tournaments that are allowing "bad racks" because people want to see bad racks hit. Which is what the thread is insinuating.

Click to expand...

Your right, but that depends on the :banghead: Numb factor principle.

Everyone can feel free to attack my stance. However, if a rack is not perfect, then it's bad. How bad is acceptable the great question, and for some reason some feel the need to ignore this.

I'm not insinuating anything... I'm not the one that says we should prefer less then the best possible rack for sake of the game...lol.

What I'm saying is, imo template racks aren't bad. Providing players the most consistent rack to hit, isn't bad. Changing how a player has to hit the rack and said position of rack is something I rather see, then lack luster players taking advantage of hand racking rules to prevail over their opponent.

Once again.... 9 on the spot, CB in the kitchen, and mostly in combination with the 3 point rule has made even the strongest breakers suffer. Best part is they have nothing to complain about, and no one has an advantage over another.

The only way you can have fair and impartial racking by hand, is if it's done by a ref. Which I'm all for. Unfortunately you're not going to get that until the later rounds of a tournament.

justnum said:

Starting 9ball with a break that can be exploited, its like starting a baseball inning with a runner on 1st.

Click to expand...

I agree... Loose hand racking can be exploited just as much as template racks, or vice versa.

Fran never said anything about seeing bad racks get hit.

Click to expand...

No he said he wanted players to have study less than perfect racks (aka: bad) rather than having perfect racks (in the thread title) that everyone can make a ball with.

**Note: "hand racking" in this context is any rack that is done without the aid of a template.

Pool is an odd sport in which rules for some tend to dominate over having fun playing the game. I play hockey and softball and we don’t care less about professional rules. We make up rules for our house leagues to suit whatever seems best for us. When we were kids we made up our own rules for marbles, hide and seek, etc.

I really don’t care how Reyes and Strickland Break in 8 ball, 9 ball or whatever. My friends and I still play the way we want to. 99,9% of players aren’t pros and are never going to be or have no desire to be pros. Average Joes just want to enjoy playing the game. We sometimes play 9 ball where the breaker turns over the table after the break regardless if a ball is sunk or not. It completely changes the Whole strategy. It’s not ‘better’ but just a fun variation we dabble at once in a while.

Pro 9 ball is almost dead as a pro sport. I would not go watch if given a free ticket. Like fishing, I’d rather be playing than watching.

Anyways, break at 9 ball however you and your friends agree to.

Geosnooker said:

Pro 9 ball is almost dead as a pro sport. I would not go watch if given a free ticket. Like fishing, I’d rather be playing than watching.

Click to expand...

Totally agree. It's boring as hell to watch. 10 ball isn't much better, though the break is at least not completely wired. It's fun to play. I'd rather see a game of rotation/61. At least then there is some strategy to encourage caroms, billiards, and combos. It's probably too much to ask for people to be able to do math in their head today though, but it's a fine game to watch.

9 ball and 10 ball are boring at professional level. Maybe they could do like the old 7 ball rules where the non breaking player chooses a side after the break and the players have to make the money ball in their side. This would at least add another layer of strategy and we would get to see some bank shots at minimum.

repeat precision with hand racking is not as consistent as template racking.

In some pool halls they have staff available for neutral racking.

The_JV said:

I agree... Loose hand racking can be exploited just as much as template racks, or vice versa.



No he said he wanted players to have study less than perfect racks (aka: bad) rather than having perfect racks (in the thread title) that everyone can make a ball with.

**Note: "hand racking" in this context is any rack that is done without the aid of a template.

Click to expand...

Nine Ball as it evolved in the 80s was a TV game for pros. It really belongs in gambling circles only. As a true pocket billiard pro event, I would favor eight ball- with perhaps one added level of difficulty for pro players- perhaps last ball or a designated pocket for the last ball . I would also favor alternate breaks for a Pro match. Non- rotation games at least require a higher level of shot selection , strategy, and pro level pattern play. If match times are a major concern for pro events, then just lower the match race required wins to 5 games or so; but have the game be more cerebral than 1 thru 9 or 1 thru 10.

My ideal would be change the format to 14.1 to 75 points, single elimination. On 4 1/2 inch pockets a 75 ball run is pro caliber no matter how you slice it. You can complete a 16 payer bracket ( 4 match wins ) in one day. Multiple bracket winners meet on day 2 to declare a champion. The runs would be exciting, fast and furious at times. Early safety play would become paramount. All skill, no luck, true champions. You show up, play great right from the start- all the way through- or go home a loser - true pro tournament conditions. Plenty of pressure right from the opening break, a pro could be down 74-0 and still win off an opponent scratch, miss or poor safety- no match is over until it is over- the fan is in it all the way!

There have been a ton of rule changes that imo should be changed back. Maybe even go back to the old cloth.

In an earlier thread I suggested a template that gives everyone the same slug rack.

JohnnyP said:

In an earlier thread I suggested a template that gives everyone the same slug rack.

Click to expand...

Now that's an idea....

Couple more thoughts:
You can play 9 ball from a full rack. This can be done in a number of ways. 1 thru 9 in the standard diamond with the remaining six balls forming the rear apexes.
1 thru 9 distributed throughout the rack ala 8 ball or interspersed with concessions to symmetry.
The extra balls (5 for 10 ball) can be left in place as obstacles or removed from the field before play begins.

Make up rules and betting options. One marketing angle I like is a set of 6 grey balls for this type of game.