9 BALL: to modify or not to modify ?
- Thread starter Hail Mary Shot
- Start date
Johnnyt said:
The rest of the world have left us in the dust at 9 ball. The UPA switched to 10 ball, except fpr the US Open. Unless we start taking the game seriously and start producing CHAMPIONS instead of BACK ROOM GAMBLERS our country will continue to be looked upon as being in an uncontrollable downward spiral on the international scene.
It's not a "weak game" - it is a game that is being matered in Manila, Tokyo, Taipei City, the UK, Europe - while we sit here in the States with our nose in the air thinking we're still "King" in the world of pocket billiards.
I just made a post on another forum where I have expressed interest in starting a National Training Center for pocket billiards - so we can start to develop champions just like the other countries. We are way behind the curve, and it is because of ATTITUDE, not the game.
merit to what you are saying
There is merit to what you are saying, we must master the game as it is. However it has been changed over and over in the past and I can't see any justification for this moment in time to be when we lock in a set of rules never to be altered.
As tournament races get shorter and shorter in the interest of speeding things up one thing needed is a standard racking order with the player having the right to request the mirror image of that order. Random is only as random as the racker wants it to be and even a true random order can heavily favor one player in these short matches. This is something that shouldn't be left to luck or the racker.
Hu
sjm said:
There is merit to what you are saying, we must master the game as it is. However it has been changed over and over in the past and I can't see any justification for this moment in time to be when we lock in a set of rules never to be altered.
As tournament races get shorter and shorter in the interest of speeding things up one thing needed is a standard racking order with the player having the right to request the mirror image of that order. Random is only as random as the racker wants it to be and even a true random order can heavily favor one player in these short matches. This is something that shouldn't be left to luck or the racker.
Hu
1 simple change
could be made that would make matches better in the long run, at least at the pro level.
Anything made on the break is spotted up on the foot spot in ascending order.
That's it.
Even if players make the wing ball, and not the 1 or another ball, the spotting of the wing ball could make things much more difficult around the foot spot with other balls that might be there too.
If more than 1 ball is made, then 2 frozen balls or more on the foot spot would be more interesting to see how the player handled making or breaking them out.
could be made that would make matches better in the long run, at least at the pro level.
Anything made on the break is spotted up on the foot spot in ascending order.
That's it.
Even if players make the wing ball, and not the 1 or another ball, the spotting of the wing ball could make things much more difficult around the foot spot with other balls that might be there too.
If more than 1 ball is made, then 2 frozen balls or more on the foot spot would be more interesting to see how the player handled making or breaking them out.
jsp said:
I think this is a really good idea, and I've actually thought about this same set of rules and suggested it to some people. Usually they react as if I said I'd been abducted by aliens. But, like you say, the luck of the break would be mostly mitigated. You still want a good break, though, to get a good spread so you can run out.
I would also make the scoring like tennis. Best of 5 short sets, win by 2 each set, so you can't lose a set as long as you hold your break. As a tiebreaker, I would play a single rack, lag for choice of breaking or not, and with mandatory push-out after the break, so again the luck of the break is mostly gone.
In this format, good players would "hold serve" about 80%-90% of the time, and winning on the other guy's break would be a really huge deal. Another way of accomplishing this would be break-to-ball-in-hand, but I like the above rules better, since you don't get to start perfectly in line on the 1-ball.
Never gonna happen, I'm afraid, at least not until I get my infomercial empire going and start my own pool tour
. But it would make for really competitive, exciting 9-ball, and the cream would rise to the top much more quickly.Blackjack said:
I agree with this. As much as I think 9-ball needs severe revision, and I have my own "pet" set of rules I'd like to see enacted (see my last post), the fact of the matter is, 9-ball is the international game right now, and if you want to be world champion, you need to find a way to win 9-ball.
In some ways, it's like penalty kicks in the World Cup. How dumb is it that the biggest title in all of sports has been decided by what is basically a coin toss two of the last four times? Well, those are the rules, you want to win, better practice not kicking it over the crossbar...
The way 9-ball is played right now is: break soft, get shape on the 1, and run out. Actually, the soft break arguably reduces the amount of luck, since it's so reproducible. You don't need to rely on luck as much to make a ball or get a shot on the 1, it's more about running balls. But, whether you like it or not, if you want to win, learn to break soft, and don't miss.
BTW, in the current WPC, I think 9-ball has worked out pretty well. I think the 3 guys who have been playing best are Gomez, F. Bustamente, and Peach. Gomez and Peach may not be the biggest names around, but after watching them play, I don't think it's so much "luck" they got where they are. And who can argue that Busty-Peach wasn't an unbelievably exciting match?
icem3n said:
And you want me aside from your Prince right?
some people aren't just contented with one shaft. I meant you Iceman !
P.S. about the clever part, I don't just think that I'm clever but rather believe that I have the intelligence that you cannot even muster ! As for the Attention, thank you so much for it. please post more in my thread !
Personally, I have nothing against players using soft breaks, as most places i play at do not have sardos at use to make perfect racks. I personally use a hard side rail break because it allows me to slam as hard as i want with some accuracy. I will learn to soft break in the case that I get into a higher end tourney where they have "perfect" racks.
Aren't most tournaments in the US still nine ball? how is it that the rest of the world is running away from us. We (the US) are only a small segment of the world, we can't expect to dominate nine ball every year forever. We couldn't even manage that in basketball.
The US Open has a fair amount of foreignors in the tournament yet one of our good ole boys won. It has to be tough to travel to the other side of the world and dominate. SVB did well this year as did Cory and they will be back in years to come.
If any country should be upset from this years WPC it should be the Chineese Teipie (sp?). And if the rest of the world can run away from us they certainly can outrun Great Britain.
Fact of the matter is, the United States isn't going to win every world or domestic tournament, but we still fair quite well.
The US Open has a fair amount of foreignors in the tournament yet one of our good ole boys won. It has to be tough to travel to the other side of the world and dominate. SVB did well this year as did Cory and they will be back in years to come.
If any country should be upset from this years WPC it should be the Chineese Teipie (sp?). And if the rest of the world can run away from us they certainly can outrun Great Britain.
Fact of the matter is, the United States isn't going to win every world or domestic tournament, but we still fair quite well.
S
Snoogi
Guest
Just about same thoughts..It's almost always the scenario, like high-jump, when people jumps over the bar easier and easier, the bar is raised. Personally I'm not too sure if a change in 9ball at this moment is good or bad but in pool we talk about consistency. And I think somehow players have started to master this soft break, 1 shot, runout..not sure if this is the consistency that we all trying to get but the trend is there. I'm sure for those who got on to Sopcast first time, the Busty-Peach match or rather this year's WPC was definitely exciting as much as the finals.ineedaspot said:
I first rooted for Corey and Gometz but too bad..
how about this for basic rule changes
1. break with the cue ball on the spot
2. loser breaks
3. call pockets
4. 9 on the break gets spotted and you continue shooting
small tweaks to the rules that would take alot of the luck out of it and keep every match competitive between equally matched players. JMO
1. break with the cue ball on the spot
2. loser breaks
3. call pockets
4. 9 on the break gets spotted and you continue shooting
small tweaks to the rules that would take alot of the luck out of it and keep every match competitive between equally matched players. JMO
You're right, you did suggest this before. Actually, I'm pretty sure I got this idea from you. However, you suggested it for 8-ball for the IPT...and we're talking about 9-ball, so technically I'm not plagarizing.ineedaspot said:I think this is a really good idea, and I've actually thought about this same set of rules and suggested it to some people. Usually they react as if I said I'd been abducted by aliens. But, like you say, the luck of the break would be mostly mitigated. You still want a good break, though, to get a good spread so you can run out.
I would also make the scoring like tennis. Best of 5 short sets, win by 2 each set, so you can't lose a set as long as you hold your break. As a tiebreaker, I would play a single rack, lag for choice of breaking or not, and with mandatory push-out after the break, so again the luck of the break is mostly gone.
In this format, good players would "hold serve" about 80%-90% of the time, and winning on the other guy's break would be a really huge deal. Another way of accomplishing this would be break-to-ball-in-hand, but I like the above rules better, since you don't get to start perfectly in line on the 1-ball.
Never gonna happen, I'm afraid, at least not until I get my infomercial empire going and start my own pool tour
But yeah, I do like your ideas about scoring it like tennis, with sets and all. Hey, once you get your infomercial empire thing going and your own tour started, give me a PM and I'll give my support.
Hal said:
Yup, and what if a particular player really has a soft break. Does that mean he shouldn't be allowed to play.
In my opinion, players should be able to use the best technique a condition calls for.