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

[Mich]

If the 1b is on the spot the corner ball is going in. Simple as that.

Just alternate the break and they can break wherever they want, and use any rack.

 

[garczar]

Just alternate the break and they can break wherever they want, and use any rack.

Rack the 9b on the spot will stop a lot of it. They're not going to alternate break.

 

[CESSNA10]

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.

As an old timer {75} I think template racks are ridiculous. Just get the triangle
and rack the damn balls. How did pool survive all these yrars without template racks?

 

[KMRUNOUT]

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.

The fact of the matter is this. A frozen 9 ball rack creates a dead ball in the corner from a range of locations and speeds.

Once you learn that idea, most of the conversation becomes irrational nonsense. A template creates a frozen rack. A triangle, with a competent racker and good conditions, can also create a frozen rack. The behavior of a frozen rack will be nearly identical to...wait for it...another frozen rack. Same hit speed spin will produce the same result. Any variability is the result of a a wide array of possible failures in producing a frozen rack.

If you have a problem with the wired corner ball, then your problem is with the game if 9 ball, not racking. It would be irrational on many levels to hold the position that the result of the 9 ball break should be random, and subject to the competence of the racker, which will always fluctuate rack to rack.

I have yet to hear a rational argument supporting rack for opponent. To be honest, don’t really recall a rational argument supporting referee racking either. Anyone have one?

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

 

[CaptainBly]

The fact of the matter is this. A frozen 9 ball rack creates a dead ball in the corner from a range of locations and speeds.

Once you learn that idea, most of the conversation becomes irrational nonsense. A template creates a frozen rack. A triangle, with a competent racker and good conditions, can also create a frozen rack. The behavior of a frozen rack will be nearly identical to...wait for it...another frozen rack. Same hit speed spin will produce the same result. Any variability is the result of a a wide array of possible failures in producing a frozen rack.

If you have a problem with the wired corner ball, then your problem is with the game if 9 ball, not racking. It would be irrational on many levels to hold the position that the result of the 9 ball break should be random, and subject to the competence of the racker, which will always fluctuate rack to rack.

I have yet to hear a rational argument supporting rack for opponent. To be honest, don’t really recall a rational argument supporting referee racking either. Anyone have one?

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

Totally agree with you.
I think the rational for referee rack is to eliminate the arguments over rack mechanics. I don't agree that Refs will always give a standard rack, think John Leyman. Everyone complains about his racking. Unfortunately refs are susceptible to giving bad racks as well. Sometimes they even seem to only give one player a bad rack the whole match!
Personally for pro events I think the templates should be used. At this time, it gives the most consistent rack from game to game. 99% of the time the guys are breaking the same rack over and over with very few arguments.

 

[middleofnowhere]

The fact of the matter is this. A frozen 9 ball rack creates a dead ball in the corner from a range of locations and speeds.

Once you learn that idea, most of the conversation becomes irrational nonsense. A template creates a frozen rack. A triangle, with a competent racker and good conditions, can also create a frozen rack. The behavior of a frozen rack will be nearly identical to...wait for it...another frozen rack. Same hit speed spin will produce the same result. Any variability is the result of a a wide array of possible failures in producing a frozen rack.

If you have a problem with the wired corner ball, then your problem is with the game if 9 ball, not racking. It would be irrational on many levels to hold the position that the result of the 9 ball break should be random, and subject to the competence of the racker, which will always fluctuate rack to rack.

I have yet to hear a rational argument supporting rack for opponent. To be honest, don’t really recall a rational argument supporting referee racking either. Anyone have one?

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

If you what you say is true then ideally would be to use a template rack and move it about an inch or two forward so you don't have a dead ball all the time.

The fact is though something is actually different. A template rack is holding the balls in place and they're all Frozen. If you rack with a wooden rack and manage to get the balls all Frozen they're not being held in place and will react differently when struck by the cue ball.

The template rack just by the fact that it's laying there on the table under the balls holding them changes something as opposed to the balls just sitting on the surface of the table on their own accord.

Could be a good project for Dr Dave to figure this out with high speed photography.

The corner balls though are not actually dead. When a corner ball goes in it's because the ball just below it moves slightly and ushers it in. If you notice in any 9 ball break if you break from the side, if the corner ball does go in it'll be the one on the same side that you're breaking from almost never the other side.

But then in reality the answer is to play 10 ball which I think everybody would agree is a better game.

 

[L.S. Dennis]

If you what you say is true then ideally would be to use a template rack and move it about an inch or two forward so you don't have a dead ball all the time.

The fact is though something is actually different. A template rack is holding the balls in place and they're all Frozen. If you rack with a wooden rack and manage to get the balls all Frozen they're not being held in place and will react differently when struck by the cue ball.

The template rack just by the fact that it's laying there on the table under the balls holding them changes something as opposed to the balls just sitting on the surface of the table on their own accord.

Could be a good project for Dr Dave to figure this out with high speed photography.

The corner balls though are not actually dead. When a corner ball goes in it's because the ball just below it moves slightly and ushers it in. If you notice in any 9 ball break if you break from the side, if the corner ball does go in it'll be the one on the same side that you're breaking from almost never the other side.

But then in reality the answer is to play 10 ball which I think everybody would agree is a better game.

Eliminating the side rail break should be a must to partially rectify the wing ball problem in nine ball, but like you I like
10 ball, a much better game.