They were standalone events with no time constraints. Duh
DCC... UPDATE
- Thread starter garczar
- Start date
There must be a financial reason for more hotel guests.
I think even if the time constraints with quicker game specific rules worked out, the sheer number of people with 500 player fields has outgrown the venue.
500 player fields have made the hotel rooms sell out.
500 player fields have made the action room non-existent.
500 player fields take forever.
Raise the entry to $300 per division and the field size will come down and self regulate. The whole experience will be more enjoyable “at this venue”.
Imo.
I think even if the time constraints with quicker game specific rules worked out, the sheer number of people with 500 player fields has outgrown the venue.
500 player fields have made the hotel rooms sell out.
500 player fields have made the action room non-existent.
500 player fields take forever.
Raise the entry to $300 per division and the field size will come down and self regulate. The whole experience will be more enjoyable “at this venue”.
Imo.
Another way to improve is to have two DCC’s per year. That could distribute the attendance a bit. The economy is great now, unlike the Tunica years. The pool scene is jumping again. It could even be at the same Indiana venue I suppose.
Last edited:
Baloney -- there are always time constraints. Owners want their rooms and business back.
Lou Figueroa
Most of the events you referenced were held in hotels.
I’ll let them know.
uh, so then there’s a contract with the hotel that expires.
Lou Figueroa
or do you think
you can just stay
as long as you want, lol
Last edited:
TY.
And while you’re at it let them know about some of the other comments on onepocket.org:
“Well, fasten your seat belts. The fun is about to begin in about a month. The more rules you put into a game the more likely you'll have to have rules to interpret the rules.”
“These rules are an absolute joke! Their greed to not limit the field for years has led to these rule changes. The flyer has always said 400 max but they can't turn away the opportunity to get extra buy-backs in their pocket.”
“Too many rules at too many different time periods to police. Doesn't make a lot of sense. Add that to the so many scratches negated etc.etc. Lol.”
“I dont think I'm smart enough to play in this one.”
“yep. Billiard industry strikes again. Jesus Diamond….."
“Completely unnecessary to do anything at the two hour mark. That's 24 mins/game for marches that go hill. Fukn stupid.”
“Then having different mechanisms/criteria at different intervals?!?! Are they trying to fuk it up as much as possible? I swear the pool establishment/brain trust is like the gang that can't shoot straight…..”
“If they are doing the weird shit with spotting/owed balls again, is this still considered one pocket?”
“I believe the banks is all I will participate in from now on. This tournament is losing its luster for me.”
“The two hour provision/rule is just ludicrous.”
“At least there’s RailYard now to go play some real 1P.”
None of these additional comments are mine, though the sentiment is.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
I don't think you can raise the entry anymore. Right now the whole tournament runs on dead money or people who just want the experience. Lack of rooms, lack of food, and the buy backs make it hard to have a $600 entry.
Pool seems to be gravitating towards the min $100 entry and a ton of $1000 entry (split bracket) tournaments. I miss the days of open $50 tourneys with $1000 added.
URGENT DCC UPDATE:
I've still never been...
I've still never been...
Clearly you are "not very smart" Jay doesn't need defending, but....you might wanna clear your calender
$300 ??? Isnt that a tank of gas now?
Sounds like you did for sure. Have to do something to speed up 1p tournament play.
InsertCleverNameHere
Well-known member
I totally agree something has to be done to speed up play, but do not think fundamentally changing the game is the way to go. That doesn't make me a "whiner".
Playing an up table game is an acceptable strategy and one that shouldn't be spurned and or removed from competition. Adding rules that discourage a valid strategy that is literally built into the game we all love can't be the answer.
Having said all that, if that's the only way we can have one pocket events of magnitude then I'm all for it because I don't want the game lessened(in terms of participation) even if the game is cheapened by Grady's rules.
If these rules are a placeholder for something better in the future, great. But a long term solution, this is absolutely NOT.
every game that wants to last puts a penalty on slow play. chess had to put a clock. and every sport has some kind of time limit.
except for pool in most cases.
to keep the game moving and being ruined for spectators and participants, only two options are there.
1. tell slow players to play fast or go home. and enforce it.
2. put a time clock in the game.
please dont change the rules for those that cant fit in.
except for pool in most cases.
to keep the game moving and being ruined for spectators and participants, only two options are there.
1. tell slow players to play fast or go home. and enforce it.
2. put a time clock in the game.
please dont change the rules for those that cant fit in.
I like option 2: Don’t change the game, just put a 2 hour (or whatever) time limit on the match. And have a shot clock at 40 seconds (or whatever). Whoever is ahead when the clock runs out wins, or if in the rare case players are tied, next ball wins. If a bunter wants to push all the balls up in the kitchen and keep them there, he better be ahead in the match when the clock runs out.
So someone could be ahead 1 nil and push all balls up table and win the match by running out the clock?
I played in a tournament like that once. Worst idea ever.
I doubt that would happen, but life's full of little trade-offs. How would you propose to prevent 3+ hour matches without fundamentally changing the game?