controlling time in 1P tourney

P

plague

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
i am organizing a 1P tournament, for 1st time. to have some control on finishing time the third and deciding game will be 3-ball 1P if the 2nd game wasn't finished within 35 minutes.
16 man, double elimination untill last 8.....they hardly know the game....6hrs?
 
plague said:
i am organizing a 1P tournament, for 1st time. to have some control on finishing time the third and deciding game will be 3-ball 1P if the 2nd game wasn't finished within 35 minutes.
16 man, double elimination untill last 8.....they hardly know the game....6hrs?
Click to expand...

never heard this. who gets to break that last game?
 
There's been discussion around here about speeding up game times by playing (IIRC) where once 4 balls are in the kitchen the ball closest to the head rail spots up, or something like that. There is also the idea of playing games to 6 instead of 8, for instance.

Here's a thread from a couple of years ago that has some good discussion:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=105215

Good luck!
 
How about, for new players as it seems you have, using a 10-ball rack for 1-p games in the tournament? Will speed things up by quite a bit and will be more fun to shoot at a more open table.

Maybe a way crazy idea, but may work. You will have less ball pocketed to win and more open path to the pockets.
 
DogsPlayingPool said:
There's been discussion around here about speeding up game times by playing (IIRC) where once 4 balls are in the kitchen the ball closest to the head rail spots up, or something like that. There is also the idea of playing games to 6 instead of 8, for instance.

Here's a thread from a couple of years ago that has some good discussion:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=105215

Good luck!
Click to expand...


Considering that you have players that are still learning the game this is the way to go - you still have a full rack game but you eliminate the lengthy "up table" game by keeping majority of balls in play closer to the pockets. You could even go with 3 balls in kitchen instead of 4.

In order to really learn the game they need to be playing a full rack - controlling traffic & also taking advantage of it. They can learn more about the "up table" game once they have a good grasp on the rest.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the game of 1-hole should be changed in any way. I would rather play 14.1 than 1-hole, but I'd rather watch two top 1-hole players than two top 14.1 players. But thats just me. Far more to think about in 1-hole than any other game. Johnnyt
 
I've run a DE race to 2 One Pocket tournament for the last 7+ years.
One day event. A record 43 players in one day, playing One Pocket.
Usually there are 28+ players.

I've learned that those players that play slow do it because that is the only way they know how to win or at least be competitve. I've talked to those players and told them if they want to be able to play One Pocket under tournament conditions, they cannot run 15 balls uptable. If they continue to play defence and not shot at their pocket, then they won't be allowed to play in the tournament. It worked.

plague said:
i am organizing a 1P tournament, for 1st time. to have some control on finishing time the third and deciding game will be 3-ball 1P if the 2nd game wasn't finished within 35 minutes.
16 man, double elimination untill last 8.....they hardly know the game....6hrs?
Click to expand...
 
plague said:
i am organizing a 1P tournament, for 1st time. to have some control on finishing time the third and deciding game will be 3-ball 1P if the 2nd game wasn't finished within 35 minutes.
16 man, double elimination untill last 8.....they hardly know the game....6hrs?
Click to expand...
A 16-player semi-double format has 6 rounds if you have at least 8 tables available. I think there is no way for that to finish in 6 hours. The only thing that might save you is that no one will know how to play safe. Do four rounds of single elimination but put the first-round losers into a consolation tournament.
 
There used to be a double elimination 1-pocket tourney every 1st Sunday of the month in Denver: race to 2 on the winners side, race to 1 on the losers side. This is a very difficult game to regulate the time each match takes w/seasoned players, no telling how new 1-pocket players will take.

Maybe make a rule that if the game is taking too long (you set the time) than if the shooter has a makable shot in front of them, they must take it. I have never seen this and it sure changes the game, but if they make it the game moves faster, if they miss they may sell out. Just a thought.

But I would definitely have the losers side go to 1.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top