30 Sec. Shot Clock

[Johnnyt]

I’m sure this has been discussed on here before. Why in the hell don’t they put a thirty- second clock on the players on TV? I know some players shoot slower than others. That’s tough…learn to shoot faster. The clock would be the same for both players.
With a shot clock you could get more games in an hour show.

I’ve been watching pool on TV since the sixties and notice the players take longer and longer between shots every year. I was watching Niels Feijen play on Bcn the other night. It took him over seven minutes to play a safety that he blew. Come on give me a break. The average watcher is not going to keep watching crap like that very long. So what if the players misses a ball every once in awhile because of the clock. The average Joe misses a lot. In fact it might be less boring if they did miss every once in awhile. Johnnyt

 

[Icon of Sin]

The average watcher doesnt watch pool on BCN either. They usually watch it on ESPN, where there is a 30 second shot clock. Or they caught the IPT on VS. which edited out a lot of the delay between shots.

 

[JPB]

I don't believe in a shot clock, but that said, something has to be done for undue delay. The problem is rational enforcement. You need a referee who understands that a player should take 20 seconds on some shots but needs a minute or two on a critical kick or something. Then there is a question of penalty. And the question of having a good referee. In the example above with Feijen, a referee should have the authority to put a player on the clock after maybe 2 minutes, giving him 45 seconds to shoot or something. Or warn him about undue delay, then call a foul, then a game penalty, then disqualification fromt he tournament or something. I am not sure. A shot clock on every shot is not right, but neither is ridiculously slow play.

 

[Johnnyt]

The average watcher doesnt watch pool on BCN either. They usually watch it on ESPN, where there is a 30 second shot clock. Or they caught the IPT on VS. which edited out a lot of the delay between shots.

I might have the letters wrong for the channel. It's on ch# 47 Brighthouse in Tampa almost every night around 1am. A lot of people watch it. I'm sure it is on in other areas too. Johnnyt

 

[Maniac]

My personal opinion is that the 30 second shot clock is just a tad too short of an amount of time to analyze some shots. The reason being that the referee announces to the shooter when there is ten seconds left on the clock, further breaking his/her focus on the task at hand. I would cast my vote for a 60 second clock with no 10 second warning. Maybe have a large, digital clock counting down the seconds at one or both ends of the table, near the stands (similar to the 23 second clock in basketball, but on a smaller scale). Geez, how much would that cost the tour???

Edit: Okay, have one 60 second extension per player per game for a really tough decision.

Maniac

 

[seymore15074]

I don't believe in a shot clock, but that said, something has to be done for undue delay. The problem is rational enforcement. You need a referee who understands that a player should take 20 seconds on some shots but needs a minute or two on a critical kick or something. Then there is a question of penalty. And the question of having a good referee. In the example above with Feijen, a referee should have the authority to put a player on the clock after maybe 2 minutes, giving him 45 seconds to shoot or something. Or warn him about undue delay, then call a foul, then a game penalty, then disqualification fromt he tournament or something. I am not sure. A shot clock on every shot is not right, but neither is ridiculously slow play.

I hate slow players. I know a guy that does this on purpose, and he always looses anyway...give me a break.

Honestly at the pro level, I don't think a shot clock is going to make much difference...what is there to think about? But then again, without one SOMEONE will definately try to delay things...

 

[seymore15074]

My personal opinion is that the 30 second shot clock is just a tad too short of an amount of time to analyze some shots.

No way, maybe on a REALLY difficult kick. Unless we're talking about beginners that need to analyse the table for a much longer time, that is acceptable. They don't recognize the patterns in a split second yet, that kind of slow playing should be encouraged so that they learn the right path...but that's not on TV or in any big event.

 

[Johnnyt]

The 30 second clock is needed for the average Joe to watch it on TV. Us die hards will watch it anyway. The only way pool is every going to get better ratings or enjoy another boom is faster play on TV and/or a Color of Money 2. Johnnyt

 

[Slider]

After watching a lot of ESPN pool, I come away thinking that 30 seconds is too little time, considering that the incoming player eats up a few seconds making their way to the table, and that several balls may have moved in the interim, which can change the run pattern. (I assume that the shot clock starts when the cue ball comes to rest)

Seems to me that with 30 seconds to evaluate the table and shoot, about all a player has left is enough time to worry about when the ref is going to say "10". Interestingly, I've not yet noticed a ref say "10" when a player is down and actually pulling the trigger on a shot, but I'm sure it's happened, and it can't help but have an effect on the player's concentration. 45 seconds would be a lot more 'natural' a pace for most players, and would not significantly lengthen the average game. Even if it did, all they would have to do is cut down on the number of "Shot of the Match" replays, showing a professional player drilling in a hanger. Wow. Come to think of it, only about 10% of the "Shot of the Match" clips actually depict a shot that requires skill or exceptional tactics.

Ken

 

[VIProfessor]

I’m sure this has been discussed on here before. Why in the hell don’t they put a thirty- second clock on the players on TV? I know some players shoot slower than others. That’s tough…learn to shoot faster. The clock would be the same for both players.
With a shot clock you could get more games in an hour show.

I’ve been watching pool on TV since the sixties and notice the players take longer and longer between shots every year. I was watching Niels Feijen play on Bcn the other night. It took him over seven minutes to play a safety that he blew. Come on give me a break. The average watcher is not going to keep watching crap like that very long. So what if the players misses a ball every once in awhile because of the clock. The average Joe misses a lot. In fact it might be less boring if they did miss every once in awhile. Johnnyt

I think it is important to distinguish between matches that are televised and matches that are produced by and for television. While the shot clock and the short races have been deemed necessary by the ESPN powers that be, they do not necessarily lend themselves to world class competitive play.

In those crucial initial safety battles that usually determine the outcome of the game, players are faced with truly tough situations that require very careful analysis, decision making, and planning. Some of these situations require more than 30 seconds, and sometimes they will come up more than once in a game. In those situations, the 30-shot clock is an impediment to championship caliber pool, and I don't believe that anything under a 45-second shot clock should be used in tournament play except for events produced by and for television.

For other tournaments that will be televised you can edit it out or fill the time with knowledgeable commentary, player information and anecdotes. When Grady and Danny and others in the Accu-stats booth told road stories and whatnot while a player comtemplated his situation, you would hardly notice that a minute had gone by!

 

[seymore15074]

In those crucial initial safety battles that usually determine the outcome of the game, players are faced with truly tough situations that require very careful analysis, decision making, and planning. Some of these situations require more than 30 seconds, and sometimes they will come up more than once in a game.

Let me change my stance on this, PLANNING the safety that you are playing definately takes time. For example, even with ball-in-hand, you could play safe in no time...but I spend a minute picking out the exact spot that I want to leave the cue ball to cut off as many rails as possible.