Corner ball goes straight in every rack, WTF!!!

MJB

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
sounds like 9ball shouldnt be played at all then
open easier tables with no gaps from template rack that also makes a ball every break
worn out spots? like from being played on in a tournament? lol really?
wood rack that doesnt get perfect break that also makes balls every break


pool just cant win
Calm down, drama queen. I was just pointing out that some tables leak balls because of the conditions. You didn't have to go all hissy fit on the state of 9 ball. :ROFLMAO:
 

BasementDweller

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Works the same for everyone. Fair game
Nobody is arguing that it's not fair. The question is -- is it the best way? I don't think it is, although I've been quite surprised how this tourney has played out so far with this breaking combo.

When it comes to the pursuit of perfection, the cue sports may be the greatest, aside from the less physical pursuits like darts, archery, shooting and that sort. For this reason alone, I'm in favor of the perfect racks, in other words -- use a template. These guys are in a lifetime pursuit of perfection, so why screw that up with random slug racks? So at least they got the template part right for the preliminary rounds. Now just eliminate the wired ball and the break becomes another skill these players can work at perfecting.

Why have a nearly perfect game that begins with a lucky rack?
 

Fatboy

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Nobody is arguing that it's not fair. The question is -- is it the best way? I don't think it is, although I've been quite surprised how this tourney has played out so far with this breaking combo.

When it comes to the pursuit of perfection, the cue sports may be the greatest, aside from the non-physical pursuits like darts, archery, shooting and that sort. For this reason alone, I'm in favor of the perfect racks, in other words -- use a template. These guys are in a lifetime pursuit of perfection, so why screw that up with random slug racks? So at least they got the template part right for the preliminary rounds. Now just eliminate the wired ball and the break becomes another skill these players can work at perfecting.

Why have a nearly perfect game that begins with a lucky rack?
I don’t think it’s the best way.

looking at the scores every match, we’ll almost every session is a blow out. That’s not a good format.

what would be a interesting stat is what is the average score of the losing player in every match of this years US Open and precious years. My $ is the average score for the loser this year is lower than before-which is a equipment issue. Not that the winners are playing better.

I’d like to see those numbers first then address the situation and possibly corrections to rules or equipment or both.

Blow outs in any sport suck. Comebacks are fun.

the guy from Estonia and Shaw today played a great match. 11-9 was the final. Not all matches will be great or bad. But that one was great and the only one I seen this week that rated high on the entertainment meter. It was fun no matter who you wanted to win.

best
Fatboy
 

L.S. Dennis

Active member
That's right and it wasn't supposed to be happening then either. Balls randomly scattered if something finds a hole or gets kicked in or collides and goes in that's fine that's what the break is supposed to be. But if the rack creates a trick shot and a dead ball every time that's not good.
I say break from the box, no side rail breaks allowed and pockets the tighter the better
 

Gunn_Slinger

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm watching the match being played on table 2 and every single rack the corner ball goes straight in. It's like the player is getting break and first shot.

Has this been discussed? Is that the nature of using that template rack, if that's the case and just throw that thing in the garbage and get out the wooden rack.
Years ago, I got a magic rack. I made 8 out of 10 wing balls on the break ! Piece of junk IMO.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member

Here was the post I made prior to the event. I believe it was to speed things up and also maybe to help MR's main attraction compensate for his breaking inexperience.
I also think the prospect of Judd playing was a major consideration in Matchroom's decision on the breaking rules that were chosen. Every single aspect of the breaking rules would have been thought to be to Trump's benefit: referee to rack, template rack, one ball on the spot, break from anywhere in the kitchen, no three point rule, players must use a forceful break and must not slow cut break.

I also think the prospect of Judd playing was a major consideration in Matchroom's decision to seed this tournament. Seems likely that it had a heavy influence on their move to go to the tighter 4.25 inch pockets as well.

So it would seem like either A) consideration for Trump was a big factor in all their rule decisions for the tournament this year since they had such high hopes on capitalizing on Trump and wanted him to have the conditions that would allow him to do as well as possible (and to help ensure there was almost no chance he could go two and out which would have been a nightmare scenario), or B) it is the coincidence of the century that all the changes they made just so happen to look like they should give benefit to Trump but that never even occurred to them or at least wasn't an influence in any way.
 
Last edited:

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I also think the prospect of Judd playing was a major consideration in Matchroom's decision on the breaking rules that were chosen. Every single aspect of the breaking rules would have been thought to be to Trump's benefit: referee to rack, template rack, one ball on the spot, break from anywhere in the kitchen, no three point rule, players must use a forceful break and must not slow cut break.

I also think the prospect of Judd playing was a major consideration in Matchroom's decision to seed this tournament. Seems likely that it had a heavy influence on their move to go to the tighter 4.25 inch pockets as well.

So it would seem like either A) consideration for Trump was a big factor in all their rule decisions for the tournament this year since they had such high hopes on capitalizing on Trump and wanted him to have the conditions that would allow him to do as well as possible (and to help ensure there was almost no chance he could go two and out which would have been a nightmare scenario), or B) it is the coincidence of the century that all the changes they made just so happen to look like they should give benefit to Trump but that never even occurred to them or at least wasn't an influence in any way.

not possible, since all of those aspects except the one ball spot were in place at the US open 2019. the pocket dimensions have been a feature of (atleast) the latest two MR events and is likely a permanent standardization they are enforcing.

funny how memory works. in the world championship thread we had the same discussion, minus the trump conspiracy ofc, until someone reminded everyone of the US open 2019 rules.

about the pocket dimensions i think this ongoing tournament has showed the necessity of going down that route. even with those tight pockets we see matches where top players just don't miss. orcullo, fortunski, de luna, svb etc have all played almost perfect matches
 

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
People like to complain about the template rack making the game too easy.

How many players broke and ran the set out from the start this week?
 

JAM

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I was discussing this winners-break format with Keith McCready, and he said one format to consider would be mandatory pushout after the break, even if you pocket balls. Whatever ball is next to shoot after the break, even if you pocket a ball on the break, you must pushout to your opponent. If the opponent does not take it, then you can keep shooting. It goes something like that, at any rate. If you don't make any balls on the break, then your opponent must pushout on the 1 ball. I'm not quite sure how it works or if this is the exactly what he said, but it would make the game more of who's the best shot-maker instead of who's the best break mechanic or what rack is used. Just a thought.

I'm not bitching. I like it when a player like Shane runs a 5-pack twice in a row, leaving his opponent benched. The first time he did it, Francisco Ruiz managed to win the match. It was intense and fun to watch.

And the best, best, best commentators in the booth this Open for me is Nick Schulman and Jeremy Jones. Wow! I was hanging into every single word these two were saying. It was informative, fun, and made the match more exciting. Nick Schulman is very comfortable in front of the microphone, as is Double J, and the fact that he knows pool games well, the strategy, and its players makes Nick a perfect fit. Nick and Jeremy both complement each other in the booth with their back-and-forths. It was great. I hope Matchroom continues to use Nick. He's a shoe-in!
 

CaptainBly

Registered
I have been watching and have seen quite a few dry breaks. The template hasn't made it automatic for everyone. Yes the top tier guys have it dialed but they have most of the game dialed due to their hard work. How is this any different?
 

middleofnowhere

Registered
I have been watching and have seen quite a few dry breaks. The template hasn't made it automatic for everyone. Yes the top tier guys have it dialed but they have most of the game dialed due to their hard work. How is this any different?
I would hope that occasionally they would have a dry break. I watched a match last night played on table 2 and both players broke from exactly the same place with exactly the same speed and 100% of the time the corner ball went straight in.

It's a little bit like a trick shot even though it's set up you still got to hit it right to make it work. When you're breaking on a table where the corner ball seems to go in, the one that goes in is on the side you're breaking from. It seems to just get ushered in by the balls around it.

The corner ball on the other side rarely goes straight in. it comes out of the rack so fast it just goes right into the rail. I would consider making the 1 ball in the side as somewhat of a skill shot. It takes just the right hit and speed to get it to do it on any regular basis.
I keep using the phrase corner Ball but of course I'm referring to the more commonly referred to as the wing ball.
 

BlueRaider

Registered
People like to complain about the template rack making the game too easy.

How many players broke and ran the set out from the start this week?
Not to mention the guys who went deep into the tournament are the same guys who go deep in every tournament regardless of break rules.
 

spartan

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm watching the match being played on table 2 and every single rack the corner ball goes straight in. It's like the player is getting break and first shot.

Has this been discussed? Is that the nature of using that template rack, if that's the case and just throw that thing in the garbage and get out the wooden rack.

Wooden rack should be compulsory for all major events. Matchroom was using wooden rack before
 

middleofnowhere

Registered
Not to mention the guys who went deep into the tournament are the same guys who go deep in every tournament regardless of break rules.
That's because the better players benefit more regardless of rules. Not stringing racks does not negate the power of making balls on the break.

The breaker making a ball on the break has the first opportunity to run out, play safe, push out, make a few balls and play the first defensive shot.

Even if you are hooked the breaker is in control if he makes a ball.
 

BlueRaider

Registered
That's because the better players benefit more regardless of rules. Not stringing racks does not negate the power of making balls on the break.

The breaker making a ball on the break has the first opportunity to run out, play safe, push out, make a few balls and play the first defensive shot.

Even if you are hooked the breaker is in control if he makes a ball.
Isn't the point of the tournament to allow the cream to rise to the top? It's the same guys going deep tournament after tournament. Winner break, alternating break, 9 on the spot, 1 on the spot, 3 point rule, etc. Doesn't matter.

Different break rules might shuffle things around for the last 64 or whatever but the 800+ Fargo guys are gonna be the ones sticking around in the end regardless. They shoot straighter, kick better, jump better, play better safeties, etc.
 

middleofnowhere

Registered
Isn't the point of the tournament to allow the cream to rise to the top? It's the same guys going deep tournament after tournament. Winner break, alternating break, 9 on the spot, 1 on the spot, 3 point rule, etc. Doesn't matter.

Different break rules might shuffle things around for the last 64 or whatever but the 800+ Fargo guys are gonna be the ones sticking around in the end regardless. They shoot straighter, kick better, jump better, play better safeties, etc.
Yup, as one of my teachers used to say,
"You have a firm grasp of the obvious".
 

L.S. Dennis

Active member
I would hope that occasionally they would have a dry break. I watched a match last night played on table 2 and both players broke from exactly the same place with exactly the same speed and 100% of the time the corner ball went straight in.

It's a little bit like a trick shot even though it's set up you still got to hit it right to make it work. When you're breaking on a table where the corner ball seems to go in, the one that goes in is on the side you're breaking from. It seems to just get ushered in by the balls around it.

The corner ball on the other side rarely goes straight in. it comes out of the rack so fast it just goes right into the rail. I would consider making the 1 ball in the side as somewhat of a skill shot. It takes just the right hit and speed to get it to do it on any regular basis.
I keep using the phrase corner Ball but of course I'm referring to the more commonly referred to as the wing ball.
I would hope that occasionally they would have a dry break. I watched a match last night played on table 2 and both players broke from exactly the same place with exactly the same speed and 100% of the time the corner ball went straight in.

It's a little bit like a trick shot even though it's set up you still got to hit it right to make it work. When you're breaking on a table where the corner ball seems to go in, the one that goes in is on the side you're breaking from. It seems to just get ushered in by the balls around it.

The corner ball on the other side rarely goes straight in. it comes out of the rack so fast it just goes right into the rail. I would consider making the 1 ball in the side as somewhat of a skill shot. It takes just the right hit and speed to get it to do it on any regular basis.
I keep using the phrase corner Ball but of course I'm referring to the more commonly referred to as the wing ball.
Here‘s an idea why not make every player break from the foot spot? No side rail, no break from the box or anywhere in the kitchen, the foot spot for everyone. And while we’re at it, no soft break either. What’s a soft break? Some 20 mph or greater, a speed gun at the table could verify similare to what they do with pitchers in baseball. Don’t reach 20 mph or more on the break FOUL BALL IN HAND FOR THE OPPONENT
 

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
If there are going to use a triangle for these last few matches I would suggest they get a Delta 13 rack. The best engineered triangle I've seen to date.
 

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm watching the match being played on table 2 and every single rack the corner ball goes straight in. It's like the player is getting break and first shot.

Has this been discussed? Is that the nature of using that template rack, if that's the case and just throw that thing in the garbage and get out the wooden rack.
If the 1b is on the spot the corner ball is going in. Simple as that.
 
Top