Fedor actually left his championship winning cue lying unwanted on the floor for many minutes. Even took photos not with his winning cue. Poor cue 
https://youtu.be/v2KD_vdtw9U?t=356
https://youtu.be/v2KD_vdtw9U?t=356
2019 WPA World 9 Ball - Qatar
- Thread starter Joe_Jaguar
- Start date
Here is everything we need to know in one great post above ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
30 sec shot clock is more than enough for professional 9 ball.
Pool instincts are a skill unto themselves, and instinctually the better, more experienced player will play the correct shot. If world champion snooker players can navigate a 12 foot table, with the various cue rests and extensions, make safety and strategy decisions, and pre shot, setup, execute pin point precision shots in less than 30 seconds...pool players should be able to survive just fine.
it will bring out the best play and excitement the game has to offer.
i would’ve grabbed it, thinking he didn’t want it
The Mosconi Cup has a 30 sec clock and seems perfect - not rushed, just focused, and enough time to get a jump cue or the cue ball cleaned if necessary. On Sky’s final shot, where he didn’t have a time out left, he pranced all the way around the table, gave a high five to an audience member and to his teammates, made the shot, and had more than 15 sec left.
Last edited:
Now we're cryin' over dropped Cuetec's??? WhateverFedor actually left his championship winning cue lying unwanted on the floor for many minutes. Even took photos not with his winning cue. Poor cue
https://youtu.be/v2KD_vdtw9U?t=356
View attachment 537213
Yes, but this as an argument in support of shot clocks is based on a false assumption. There was no shot clock at the Scottish Open. Yes the average was a little over 20s but this doesn’t mean that every shot was within a certain time limit. They play most of their shots quickly but take as long as they need when making a difficult decision that could have a significant impact on the outcome of the match. This is as it should be ideally, although for logistical reasons some tournaments have shot clocks. Mark Selby, 3 times World Snooker Champion recently took over 6 minutes to decide on a shot in the Northern Ireland Open. He is not a slow player and it wasn’t a problem, in fact it was a talking point. The snooker world isn’t shouting for shot clocks because of this.
There is absolutely no need to needlessly speed up the game (of snooker, or pool) just because some fans are bored when a player takes 40s to decide on a shot. If there really was a problem with slow play at the 2019 9 Ball WPC (I haven’t watched much of it yet, so I’m going with what people are saying on here) then maybe working out why there was a problem, including consulting the players, would be a way forward.
In the noughties, when the WPC was on TV and played for big prize money, there were no shot clocks. It wasn’t a problem.
Maybe they can do something like in chess. Chess clocks where they allocate you certain amount of time say 1 hr for the match (so maximum length of match is 2 hrs for 2 players) . Then you take as much time or as little time as you like on each shot but you may get into time trouble if you take too much time on easy shots and end up losing when you run out of your 1 hour allocated time. Requires time management optimises in a way that it gets players to spend sufficient time for each shot so that each shot will be their "best" shot.
If I am not mistaken, some tournaments (I think C8B tournaments) use this shot clock system
Maybe they can do something like in chess. Chess clocks where they allocate you certain amount of time say 1 hr for the match (so maximum length of match is 2 hrs for 2 players) . Then you take as much time or as little time as you like on each shot but you may get into time trouble if you take too much time on easy shots and end up losing when you run out of your 1 hour allocated time. Requires time management optimises in a way that it gets players to spend sufficient time for each shot so that each shot will be their "best" shot.
If I am not mistaken, some tournaments (I think C8B tournaments) use this shot clock system
Another approach that I've seen work is having the 30 second clock shot used only if a match falls behind schedule.
For example, the WPBA used to do it as follows. If a race to nine were scheduled for two hours, if fewer than eight racks were completed at the one hour mark, the remainder of the match was played using a thirty second shot clock. In most cases, players were incentivized to play at a decent pace, as they didn't want to be subject to the shot clock in the late stages of matches, and in practice the shot clock did not have to be used very often. Of course, the negative here is that both players might pay a price for the slow play of just one of them, but usually the approach worked.
The chess clock is a better solution, and it is an idea that has been kicked around for decades, but has never been adopted.
C8B has an overall time limit for the match. This does lead to situations where a player who is one ahead approaching the time limit either slows right down or plays ultra safe. Nobody complains about it as it’s within the rules. Bad rule though and a chess clock would be fairer.
But do we want to see players low on time rushing around under pressure like it’s a speed pool tournament? I think a mixture of the two systems would be fine - have a 20s shot clock and give each player a time bank like in online poker. The time bank kicks in automatically after 20s and the amount of time in the bank depends on the length of the race. If it’s 2 minutes and a player decides to use it all up so be it.
But do we want to see players low on time rushing around under pressure like it’s a speed pool tournament? I think a mixture of the two systems would be fine - have a 20s shot clock and give each player a time bank like in online poker. The time bank kicks in automatically after 20s and the amount of time in the bank depends on the length of the race. If it’s 2 minutes and a player decides to use it all up so be it.
What was the entire length of time on that Mark Selby match? I doubt it was extremely out of bounds long for a snooker match.
You are trying to justify a 4 hour race to 13 in 9 ball rotation pool. You simply cannot have the top title in a game/sport take that long and expect the players to be supported by audience/advertising dollars.
Basketball created a shot clock.
Football created a play clock.
Baseball is testing out a pitch clock in the minor leagues and from the games I have been to, it helps move things along.
Chess has a time clock (as pointed out by Spartan)
International Fencing very recently created a rule that if neither fencer gains a point in 1:00 then a yellow card is issued to both fencers (warning them of slow play or else move to 1:00 sudden death—this was done because some fencers are boring to watch and always on defense)
All sports and games find a way to adapt to make the game more intriguing to audiences. Without an audience, success will never be found.
The match length was about 3 hrs 20 mins. Race to 5 it went 5-4. I’m not justifying his 6 minute decision at all I was just responding to a point made about snooker players playing their shots faster while also stating that they can still take a long time if they wish in many tournaments without shot clocks. Those tournaments have both a live and a TV audience and are in good shape.
Basketball and football have shot clocks to speed up the play as the game is played within a set timeframe. Those shot clocks are actually designed to give both teams more game time, i.e. less time wasting by running down the clock. In the old days when chess was widely televised, the clocks gave both players much more time than they get now.
More generally, I’d go along with pretty much anything that gets pool better exposure, bigger audiences and more revenue. Shot clocks or no shot clocks should be up for discussion but there’s way more to think about before that.
As I said before, when pool was on TV in the noughties with a global audience and big prize money, there were no shot clocks at the WPC. Also, if we want to attract fans (in order to build the audience and therefore increase TV revenue)of other cue sports who have played pool and already have a casual interest in the game, many of them will find shot clocks at major tournaments an alien concept and will actually want to see players taking their time on difficult shots (while playing most of them quickly) as it adds to the tension, the drama, the intensity of a battle between two players.
Shot clocks? Yep, fine. But they are not the be all and end all and they won’t fix pool. There appears to a be lot wrong with the WPC but blaming a lack of shot clocks is a red herring.
Last edited:
Feel free to watch all the 10 minute 9 ball games you want, might I suggest watching apa 3's play - that should satisfy you.
I really don’t understand why people make comments like this. Oh well.
Of course, they can take as long as they need to on some shots in snooker. They have a greater number of options on each individual shot in comparison to 9 ball.
I think for most shots in both games it’s obvious which is the “correct” shot. I also think that rotation games more often than snooker have a shot that requires a bit more thought, time and therefore a longer decision.
I watch a lot of snooker and find this not to be the norm at all. There are a couple slow players(Ebdon is slowwww) but most don't mess around, they shoot pretty quick in most cases. That 9b final was the most painfully slow game of any cuesports i've ever watched and i only got thru half of it.
Snooker players understand they are on television and have responsibilities to their sponsors and the fans to put on a good show. Taking a long time on a shot actually can be part of a good show when it's warranted and doesn't mess with the flow of a match.
Pool players, unfortunately, don't have the same incentives. They can play as slowly as they want because there is no accountability.
Pool players, unfortunately, don't have the same incentives. They can play as slowly as they want because there is no accountability.
If pool were a proper organized sport where the world association were making sure there were a reasonable amount of tournaments each year with decent prize money, then there are ways to speed up play without shot clocks
With all due respect, based on the statement above, it is clear that you lack a basic understanding of the strategies of either game.
I see no reason for me to further my involvement in this discussion.
Yes absolutely. Hence my point that complaining about the lack of shot clocks at the WPC is a red herring.