Do you think 9-ball would be better or worse if a mandatory push out after the break became a standard rule?

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
If you want to make 9-Ball a good game again then just go back to the old "roll out" rules, where all balls spot up on a foul/scratch, and you shoot from behind the line after a scratch. Then you will see some good pool being played and there will be far less luck involved. Roll Out or Push Out pool was a great game with a lot of strategy and shot making involved game after game.
 

Dan_B

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
firming up an option on the break/opening shot when racking ugly on the 1 ball duck;
with the money ball now established as appropriate to be the head ball, the breaker, must,
when thinking I'm going to win by pocketing the money ball on the opening/break shot, is required to call it,
the money ball to win on the opening shot/break.
If,
the money ball pots in an uncalled pocket or the cue ball pots, it is a lost, the opponent receives the win as a 1/2 skin.

..note,
there is a reasonable opening shot/break for a well seasoned player too hit good with a kiss on the duck ugly 1 (one ball),
cue ball 2 cushion kicks on the money ball in the N or 8ball pocket (side pockets).

...note2,
the push out is a no show in such a scenario.


note2, revised and extended,
the no show of a push out is apparent if the money ball is pocketed in either scenario, however,
if, an object ball pockets only on a called money ball on the opening shot/break,
its a loss of turn/inning and the ball point/spoils go to the incoming shooter,
with, the roll out/push out option in hand.
 
Last edited:

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
As we saw at the Mosconi Cup, nine ball is fantastic as long as the pockets are tight.

This year, every runout had to be earned and minor errors in pattern play were routinely penalized. Less than ideal strokes brought far more bad results than in past years. Having the break ensured nothing, as Team USA won just 46% of the racks in which it broke. No gimmicks, just a stiff test. Such conditions befit top players. The quality of both nine ball and ten ball are compromised when the pockets aren't tight enough, but the Mosconi showed us that nine ball is anything but broken.

Nine ball's Texas Express format is superb, and with tough equipment, it presents a very difficult test even for the world's best.
 

maha

from way back when
Silver Member
you are right in a bad way though. sjm. you are now changing the equipment to suit the rules..

yes with the larger amount of super players nowadays there are run out players every where. so yes making the pockets much tighter for those players is fine. but then it also changes the game to precision shooters winning and shutting out smart players.

the newer rules over the years have made the break much stronger in determining the winner, except on very tight tables and
no shoot out has made jump shot players king
 

surlytempo

Member
As we saw at the Mosconi Cup, nine ball is fantastic as long as the pockets are tight.

This year, every runout had to be earned and minor errors in pattern play were routinely penalized. Less than ideal strokes brought far more bad results than in past years. Having the break ensured nothing, as Team USA won just 46% of the racks in which it broke. No gimmicks, just a stiff test. Such conditions befit top players. The quality of both nine ball and ten ball are compromised when the pockets aren't tight enough, but the Mosconi showed us that nine ball is anything but broken.

Nine ball's Texas Express format is superb, and with tough equipment, it presents a very difficult test even for the world's best.
Debatable. What you're describing may well have been attributable more to pressure itself more than the conditions of the table, though I'm sure both factored in to some extent. Every one of those players have routinely played and practiced on tight equipment before.
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
Debatable. What you're describing may well have been attributable more to pressure itself more than the conditions of the table, though I'm sure both factored in to some extent. Every one of those players have routinely played and practiced on tight equipment before.
Yes, all these players have played on tight tables before, but these are the conditions in which the cream is most likely to rise to the top, and that's as it should be. The Europeans possess better fundamentals, and these are the conditions that they have made clear in interviews that they want. The pressure was no different this year than any other year and eight of these ten players had lots of Mosconi experience. The two rookies, Chris Robnson and Fedor Gorst, both played well, so the pressure didn't get them.
 

surlytempo

Member
Yes, all these players have played on tight tables before, but these are the conditions in which the cream is most likely to rise to the top, and that's as it should be. The Europeans possess better fundamentals, and these are the conditions that they have made clear in interviews that they want. The pressure was no different this year than any other year and eight of these ten players had lots of Mosconi experience. The two rookies, Chris Robnson and Fedor Gorst, both played well, so the pressure didn't get them.
I think this goes back to that infinitely regressive argument of, does tighter pockets make better players? Would Mosconi be Mosconi if tighter pockets were the standard back then? All of these pros cue straight. And of the misses that I saw, it wasn't because the pocket was tighter, they missed because they missed. They weren't familiar with the conditions of the table, and they played some shots poorly. It's not like there were an inordinate number of hangers due to pockets rattling. The players either made the shot, or they straight up missed. Fedor Gorst on Day 1 shot the object ball dead into the rail. Was that because of tight pockets? I think the pressure came from the added drama surrounding the event. Tight pockets don't necessarily make better players, but they do change the conditions, but I don't think the size of the pockets had anything to do with America losing. At this point, we may as well just play 9 ball on a snooker table or Chinese 8 ball table if all the hoopla is going to be about making the game tougher.
 

livemusic

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
For those of you who think the break is luck, Corey Deuel has proven that isn't true in 9 ball or 8 ball. Watch his break is these matches. In the 8 ball match, watch the how the solids and stripes spread and group.

9 ball match

8 ball match
Wow, you are right, I watched the 8 ball match. That's quite something. Why isn't there a set way one must rack.
 

trob

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
9 ball allows the player to completely dominate when they are executing. Alternating break or mandatory push outs take away from the offensive nature of the game.
That’s 9 ball.. if you want a more defensive game play 8 ball or straight pool.
 

livemusic

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
There is, sort of, and it is not the way Corey racked. This is covered in the rules: https://wpapool.com/rules-of-play/
Bob, you are right. He used a 'purposeful pattern.' So, I wonder why a pro is not called on it? Are other players doing this, is this a trend?

Copied from rules you provided link to:

2.2 Nine Ball Rack

The object balls are racked as tightly as possible in a diamond shape, with the one ball at the
apex of the diamond and on the foot spot and the nine ball in the middle of the diamond. The
other balls will be placed in the diamond without purposeful or intentional pattern.
 

maha

from way back when
Silver Member
have the opponent set the rack up as he chooses. then let the breaker move the balls in the rack in one motion to the spot, tighten them by pushing only from behind, and remove the rack.
 

Jimbojim

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
have the opponent set the rack up as he chooses. then let the breaker move the balls in the rack in one motion to the spot, tighten them by pushing only from behind, and remove the rack.
I actually like that! Fair for everyone
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
One advantage of "breaker must push out" is that the players would learn a lot about the strengths of their own game.

Pushes out to easy bank -- misses by a ball and a half.

Pushes out to an easy kick-and-stick -- hits the OB half ball and sells out.

Pushes out to an easy swerve/kick/hide -- scratches.

Pushes out to an jump -- hits the 8 full.
 

HawaiianEye

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Have a heavy cloth bag at each table. The balls are placed in the bag and the racker reaches in and pulls the balls out one by one. The balls are placed in a preset order, (I.e., left to right, back to front) in the rack. The only exceptions are the one and nine. They have 20 seconds to get the balls out and place them in the rack. They then have 10 seconds to set the rack.
 

Dan_B

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
...and the foul if the dilly dialing fails to get the rack in on time?
 

bb9ball

Registered
Bob, you are right. He used a 'purposeful pattern.' So, I wonder why a pro is not called on it? Are other players doing this, is this a trend?

Copied from rules you provided link to:

2.2 Nine Ball Rack

The object balls are racked as tightly as possible in a diamond shape, with the one ball at the
apex of the diamond and on the foot spot and the nine ball in the middle of the diamond. The
other balls will be placed in the diamond without purposeful or intentional pattern.
It is a trend, at least for the rotation games. A few people were disqualified from one of the virtual events(streamed ghost matches) this year. I haven't seen any other players do it in 8 ball, but I bet it does happen. I don't watch much 8 ball. For any game, it would be hard to call them out on it without video proof.

Here's another player pattern racking. It is the first time I saw it happen, but I didn't play for several years.

 
Top