8, 9, 10 ball racking & breaking conflict resolved

[Joe T]

Alrighty I’ll chime in but I’m not sure how much I’ll have to offer.

1st off I absolutely love what the new rule does when it comes to the racking portion of the show. One person racks and nothing is said, love it like you can’t imagine.
This part of the game is one reason I lost a lot of my zest for competing. I could not stand that the rack meant soo much and if I wanted the same fair rack I was giving I was looked upon as a troublemaker, it was disgusting trying to play people my speed and better while I had to break what I knew was a bad rack or be frowned upon when asking for a good rack. One player who knew I checked every rack actually gave me a super bad rack on purpose and when I looked at him with disbelief he immediately grabbed the balls (that had half inch spaces all around), turned to the crowd and said this guy is gonna ruin pool.
I’m still disgusted with all of it just writing this.

So besides my vent my point is this rule would help us all get along more without a doubt! And we desperately need that.

Next I think it would actually help raise the level of play as running out intentionally for all levels would become more of a focus. I ran a 10 Ball league where each player broke their own took ball in hand 30 times a night (I know we don’t have the ball in hand rule here) and my league improvement rate was 99% and I this would start a little more of that mentality.

Tennis you serve with an advantage based on your skill and this would be about the same with a nice controlled break but then you gotta back it up.

Last but not least (cuz I’m a golfer right now not a pool player and I gotta get up early) few people realize that when I wrote Racking Secrets around 1998 it was submitted as a FREE article to a pool mag and my intentions were to stop the unfair play, show why the 9 ball rack was a flawed configuration, reduce arguing amongst players and to promote 10 ball where the rack wasn’t as big of a factor or racking your own was a much better format. And I believe this rule will cost me MONEY! But I still think it should be implemented more often in effort to promote the sport.
(Then again all those bad rackers might actually wanna learn how to give a good rack if they had to rack their own?)

We could go on a long time with this one but I say lets get more events on local or regional levels playing like this and see what’s better, we sure can’t lose ANYTHING.

Clark thanks for emailing to give me a heads up on this one.

 

[ShootingArts]

something I have wondered about

Alrighty I’ll chime in but I’m not sure how much I’ll have to offer.

1st off I absolutely love what the new rule does when it comes to the racking portion of the show. One person racks and nothing is said, love it like you can’t imagine.
This part of the game is one reason I lost a lot of my zest for competing. I could not stand that the rack meant soo much and if I wanted the same fair rack I was giving I was looked upon as a troublemaker, it was disgusting trying to play people my speed and better while I had to break what I knew was a bad rack or be frowned upon when asking for a good rack. One player who knew I checked every rack actually gave me a super bad rack on purpose and when I looked at him with disbelief he immediately grabbed the balls (that had half inch spaces all around), turned to the crowd and said this guy is gonna ruin pool.
I’m still disgusted with all of it just writing this.

So besides my vent my point is this rule would help us all get along more without a doubt! And we desperately need that.

Next I think it would actually help raise the level of play as running out intentionally for all levels would become more of a focus. I ran a 10 Ball league where each player broke their own took ball in hand 30 times a night (I know we don’t have the ball in hand rule here) and my league improvement rate was 99% and I this would start a little more of that mentality.

Tennis you serve with an advantage based on your skill and this would be about the same with a nice controlled break but then you gotta back it up.

Last but not least (cuz I’m a golfer right now not a pool player and I gotta get up early) few people realize that when I wrote Racking Secrets around 1998 it was submitted as a FREE article to a pool mag and my intentions were to stop the unfair play, show why the 9 ball rack was a flawed configuration, reduce arguing amongst players and to promote 10 ball where the rack wasn’t as big of a factor or racking your own was a much better format. And I believe this rule will cost me MONEY! But I still think it should be implemented more often in effort to promote the sport.
(Then again all those bad rackers might actually wanna learn how to give a good rack if they had to rack their own?)

We could go on a long time with this one but I say lets get more events on local or regional levels playing like this and see what’s better, we sure can’t lose ANYTHING.

Clark thanks for emailing to give me a heads up on this one.

Joe,

I think it's a month or three late on this one but glad to have your input regardless! One thing I'd like to try a little strange is some type of a grid for a rack, maybe on top of the balls that would deliberately space the balls maybe a quarter inch apart. If we can't guarantee them frozen, we can guarantee a gap. Might be a terrible idea but something I'd like to at least try along with requiring a fixed pattern for all rotation racks. One pattern and it's mirror image only to accommodate breaking from the right or left side. I think a fixed pattern should be required regardless of anything else because "random" is only as random as the racker wants it to be.

This may be the thread you were told about, your name came up a lot in it. http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=61392


Hu

 

[Paul Schofield]

You have a lot to offer.

Alrighty I’ll chime in but I’m not sure how much I’ll have to offer.

1st off I absolutely love what the new rule does when it comes to the racking portion of the show. One person racks and nothing is said, love it like you can’t imagine.
This part of the game is one reason I lost a lot of my zest for competing. I could not stand that the rack meant soo much and if I wanted the same fair rack I was giving I was looked upon as a troublemaker, it was disgusting trying to play people my speed and better while I had to break what I knew was a bad rack or be frowned upon when asking for a good rack. One player who knew I checked every rack actually gave me a super bad rack on purpose and when I looked at him with disbelief he immediately grabbed the balls (that had half inch spaces all around), turned to the crowd and said this guy is gonna ruin pool.
I’m still disgusted with all of it just writing this.

So besides my vent my point is this rule would help us all get along more without a doubt! And we desperately need that.

Next I think it would actually help raise the level of play as running out intentionally for all levels would become more of a focus. I ran a 10 Ball league where each player broke their own took ball in hand 30 times a night (I know we don’t have the ball in hand rule here) and my league improvement rate was 99% and I this would start a little more of that mentality.

Tennis you serve with an advantage based on your skill and this would be about the same with a nice controlled break but then you gotta back it up.

Last but not least (cuz I’m a golfer right now not a pool player and I gotta get up early) few people realize that when I wrote Racking Secrets around 1998 it was submitted as a FREE article to a pool mag and my intentions were to stop the unfair play, show why the 9 ball rack was a flawed configuration, reduce arguing amongst players and to promote 10 ball where the rack wasn’t as big of a factor or racking your own was a much better format. And I believe this rule will cost me MONEY! But I still think it should be implemented more often in effort to promote the sport.
(Then again all those bad rackers might actually wanna learn how to give a good rack if they had to rack their own?)

We could go on a long time with this one but I say lets get more events on local or regional levels playing like this and see what’s better, we sure can’t lose ANYTHING.

Clark thanks for emailing to give me a heads up on this one.

Joe Tucker - you said a lot considering the caliber player, instructor, and promoter that you are. All the points in the "No Conflict Rules" are interdependent. In other words, in order to achieve the desired outcome, all the rules must be used in order for them to work.

The rules can be printed from here.
http://www.goldcrownbilliardseriepa.com/noconflict.html

For those who have used them (my locals, and players from my two regional events) the reaction is overwelmingly posative. They work and it makes the game more fun. I run my third event with the "No Conflict Rules" in August. In the mean time I will email this concept in response to every new posting under the TOURNAMENT ANNOUNCEMENTS section of this forum. I will encourage other promoters to try them.

The "No Conflict Rules" make pool better. Eight, Nine, and Ten-Ball become better games as a result. Change is hard. Pool can be more. This is a step in the right direction. This is also ideal for the pros!

 

[Paul Schofield]

From a players perspective

I will reflect on the "No Conflict Rules" from a player’s perspective.

http://www.goldcrownbilliardseriepa.com/noconflict.html

I have played 6700 racks under the “No Conflict Rules”.

I like the alternate breaks. When I am the favorite, I have found that the matches (using the No Conflict Rules) are much closer and at the same time I win more often than with winner breaks. As the underdog, I know that I am going to get to play. Alternating breaks under the No Conflict Rules works for me either way.

I really like the random racking process. It is just so easy. If the two ball winds up in the row behind the nine, so be it. My integrity is never questioned and I never have to wonder about my opponent. Most importantly, nobody gets pattern racked.

I find great comfort in racking my own and nobody has anything to say about it. I like the fact that nobody is going to come along and tell me that the rack is no good and force me to re-rack. I like the fact that I do not need any “racking gadgets”. Removing the ball-on-the-break requirement means that I don’t have to rack the balls 15, 20, and 25 times to get certain balls froze as to increase my chances of making a ball. That I really like. I can concentrate on my play rather than be distracted by all this racking nonsense. I like the fact that the “No Conflict Rules” erase all logic behind a rack checking process.

My favorite part of all this is the break itself. I love the fact that the break is now a control pool shot and not a chaotic smash shot and that means advantage goes to the better player. I do not need a break cue and that is a good thing. I have an entire process that I go through to execute my control break. The sound emitted on a perfect break is downright addicting. I like it now that the focus is on controlling the cue ball and the 1-ball in rotation games. I really like being rewarded for a good break. I do not have to depend on some lucked ball to capitalize on my good break. I break and then I shoot which makes perfect sense to me, instead of hit and hope I get to stay at the table.

I like the fact that I don’t have to check my opponent’s racks. He is going to get to shoot anyway after the break and the money ball spots so what would be the point? I really like how all the conflict at the beginning of every rack is erased. It makes the competition better and keeps the focus where it should be: on the table. I like the fact that my opponent cannot hit a “soft break”. He has got to hit em’. He has to play for three balls breaking the center string vertical plane. If he plays for two and one of the balls he is counting on to break the plane goes in a foot corner pocket, he is going to get stung time and again. So he has got to hit em’ with some force. I like the fact that when my opponent breaks poorly and leaves the cue ball on the foot rail, he is shooting and not me.

As a player, I prefer the No Conflict Rules. If I had my druthers, I would never play any other way again. Try them. I think you will like them too.

A growing list of recognizable potential supporters and advocates for a rules change:

Bob Jewett: “I think Paul's rules above solve the problems.”

Danny DiLiberto: “I will talk about these rules every chance I get when I commentate.”

Fred Bentivegna: “I personally think he has a great new idea.”

Joe Tucker: “I believe this rule will cost me MONEY! But I still think it should be implemented”

John Schmidt: “this is exactly how the games should be played”

Pat Fleming: “I think Paul’s new rules are in the game’s best interest.”

Robert Byrne: “You can use my name as a strong advocate for a rules change for the break.”

Scott Lee: “I like your no-conflict rules”

 

[duckie]

On Saturday in the middle of a blizzard, I ran a regional Nine-Ball event at Gold Crown Billiards at my room in Erie, PA. Forty-four snow-birds showed up from four states. The rules were as follows:

http://www.goldcrownbilliardseriepa.com/noconflict.html

Lag for break
Alternate breaks
No pattern racking (we have a simple procedure, takes 3 seconds)
Breaker racks his own then breaks
No checking the rack, no approval process
Nine on the break is not a win, it spots
Breaker shoots after a legal break (do not need to make a ball)

The event flowed quickly and smoothly. There was not one conflict over the racking and breaking process. The rules were accepted rather well. As a matter of fact, there turned out to be many hidden benefits as a result of these rules (I won’t mention them at this time).

Even though some players may play to pocket the head ball or second ball in the side or a wing ball in the corner, it is more often than not that an unintended ball in an unintended pocket is what enables the shooter to continue shooting after the break under the current rules. Slamming the balls with the hope of slopping a ball or two in, has little to do with playing good pool. At the same time, a control break, getting a good spread on the balls, controlling the cue ball, controlling the 1-ball, and getting that first shot, is what our game is all about and what ought to be rewarded, not slopping balls in. Get rid of the ball on the break requirement and we will clear up all the conflict and have better games (Eight, Nine, Ten-Ball).

This is no experiment. My players in my room have played upwards of a quarter of a million racks of Eight, Nine, and Ten-Ball removing the ball on the break requirement. They like it and have acclimated well to it. It does take some time to adjust. Change is hard. Think through it. It makes a lot of sense.

I encourage tournament and league organizers to consider and try these rules and if anyone would like more info and would like to discuss it, PM me.

Why even brother racking? Just throw the balls out there and have at it. I don't like the "you get to shoot after your break even if you don't make a ball." This makes no sense.