This is a really odd post. Nobody ever suggests playing alternate break because it suits them. There are, however, people who say it should always be winner breaks because it suits them.
Alternating Break Poll
- Thread starter Willowbrook Wolfy
- Start date
If I'm playing against dead money and they believe that alternate break gives them a better chance , then I want to play alternate break.
If I'm the dead money, I want to play either way for the experience.
If however you want my opinion on how the game should be played them I'll say alternate break for reasons that have been stated over and over again by people with solid arguments.
My post was mostly tongue in cheek. However I've been playing a long time, and don't necessarily need anymore experience with being run over by a superior player...lol
Alt vs winner, doesn't motivate or prevent me from playing in anything. Unless you add handicapping in which I'm usually on the donating side.
Not it’s not odd but you are. It should be winner breaks because that is the way the game is played. The 1 should rack on the spot, winner breaks, 1 push after the break, 1 foul BIH, 3 foul loss of game. That is 9 ball. If it “suits you”, play it, if it doesn’t play something else.
That's only 9 ball, if you weren't aware of the original version.
I started playing 2 foul/pushout and actually prefer that. Sadly when they tried to market the game for TV it was changed to the “Texas Express rules” noted in my previous post back in the 80’s to make it faster and easier to understand. Either version is winner breaks, as it should be.
Hogwash
In practice I don't think it matters much. The better player is going to win under any format.
I did vote it favors the lessor player. With winner break against a 700 plus player, one mistake by the lesser player could cost 3 games if the opponent wins that rack, then breaks and runs a couple.
With alternate break, mistakes can at max cost the current rack, plus the next (if its the opponent's break).
If the players are under 600, it makes zero difference, as both players will miss each rack.
Another way to look at this question is playing straight pool under the rules run 15 and stop.
I did vote it favors the lessor player. With winner break against a 700 plus player, one mistake by the lesser player could cost 3 games if the opponent wins that rack, then breaks and runs a couple.
With alternate break, mistakes can at max cost the current rack, plus the next (if its the opponent's break).
If the players are under 600, it makes zero difference, as both players will miss each rack.
Another way to look at this question is playing straight pool under the rules run 15 and stop.
Twocylndr
Well-known member
Don't recall which set of rules it is, ABC maybe, from the mid '70s. States for 9 ball, loser breaks.
I'm at werk, rule book at home.
EDIT: BAC, Billiard Congress of America, 1974
Last edited:
The problem with 9-ball has nothing to do with where the 1-ball is racked....
amateurs get no money from playing so the rules should be what gives them the most fun and chances to win.
the pros hardly ever miss and get paid for the viewers that watch. so their rules and games need to be what keeps the viewers happy.
why foist the pro rules on amateurs who then suffer and get no benefit from viewers
the pros hardly ever miss and get paid for the viewers that watch. so their rules and games need to be what keeps the viewers happy.
why foist the pro rules on amateurs who then suffer and get no benefit from viewers
Anytime your opponent is given a chance at the table, be it another shot, break or whatever, it favors that player. Common sense.You all know my take. I hate alternating break format. But hey if my opponent is dropping packs on me all night I might throw it out there.
I prefer old school 9 ball. But when in Rome... Hopefully I'll come out on top no matter what silly rules I have to play by under that tourney's format.
Doesn't mean I gotta like it. Showing that dislike however, is crass unsporstmanlike conduct. Nobody forced me to play. My choice, so why whine about it during??
I would say and have experienced that the better player is usually the better breaker, and depending on what type of break the better player uses can definitely play a roll in the play-ability and cadence of the match given:
- If the better player tries a safety break wanting to keep the balls clustered more (or if the lower player does not break them as well), yes the better player will usually win with additional and follow-up safety and skill break shots. This is true when I see 8 ball pocket attempted on non-first ball breaks, the balls can end up more clustered on one side of the table.
- If the better player can hit them hard and true and go for the non-clustered break, it can benefit both players (higher risk / higher reward). Again, it comes down to who can control the table to win, but this time with a more run out focus.