Eliminating luck, US Open 9-Ball

Like any other sport, luck plays a factor in determining the result. A poorly tossed jump ball in basketball can cause a team to lose in a tightly played game. Same for pool where inconsistent racking can give a slight advantage to either player. Without changing the rules and take away the heart of the game of the 9 ball, there should be more consistent racking.

The best product that comes to mind is the Magic rack and should be done with random racking, possibly a small electronic thing that can generate random numbers. Its not something difficult to develop and I think its very fair for the game.

Who cares if the same balls position keeps dropping in the same pocket. At least it is consistent for both players and who ever finds that sweet spot will be the one that is given the advantage of breaking. I know there are still inconsistencies with the magic rack, but it is the closest thing to perfect as with the sardo rack.

As technology improves, I am sure eventually we will be able to have a close to perfect consistency in racking. And whatever the technique is, no one should complain because the same rack is given to both players.
 
Magic Rack would take care of that...........

SpinDoctor said:
The more I look at the idea the less sense it makes. I just don't get it....why try and change the way the game is played instead of just dropping 9 ball altogether and playing 10 ball where the rack isn't nearly as much of an issue.
Click to expand...

I used this little plastic molding and it works great. If a guy runs 11 and out he deserves it.

Can you imagine if they did alternating breaks or something stupid like that to level the playing field.

I think it's good for the game to see racks run. Especially at the US open.
 
JarnoV said:
Having watched couple of games from the US Open 9-ball, I've been kind of shocked to see how the rule for racking and breaking works. It's rack your own, but not a single word about making the 9-ball on the break? I've seen more than one break where the 9-ball goes straight into the corner pocket, which most probably means that the rack was loose behind the 9-ball. The opponent can of course inspect the rack, but no one's going to inspect every single rack of their opponent. Moreso if either is somewhat intimidated about about his/her opponent.

Now, I'm not saying anyone racks like this on purpose (though I've been accused of being a little bit naive on this topic, which I readily admit :-)) but whether or not it's intentional is irrelevant. Why not just have a rule that you should spot the 9-ball if it goes to either of the bottom corners? Why not just spot the 9-ball if it goes in any pocket?

Rack your own, no referee and not spotting the 9-ball on the break seems just incredibly catastrophic mix.

Among these top professionals, race to 11 is too short to begin with, never mind some player making three 9-balls on the break in a single match on top of that. It just seems shocking to see that professionals have to deal with this sort of luck as there are rules that could easily prevent it.
Click to expand...


Seems like some players have already figured out how to eliminate some of the "luck" in 9-ball. :-)

I once lost a hundred betting on someone whose opponent in a rack your own race to nine made the nine ball five times in the same corner and floated to the same corner for an easy tap in combo about three more times. The set was over in ten minutes.

What I think would be funny is is AccuStats would make a video of all the various ways that the balls have been racked at the Open over the years. And the epic rack arguments. I think that would be an entertaining montage.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Probably expense. 250 matches, $20 per match, $10,000. $20 is on the low end for trained referees.
Click to expand...

I would bet anything that given enough time Barry could have a full compliment of qualified refs who would work the event for FREE.

A VIP seat costs what? $500

Offer them to people willing to work X-# of matches. Full access to the Open - a goody bag of merchandise and whatever other little enticements can be given away at low cost - like say a one hour autograph session with the pros at the Player's meeting. Something like that is priceless and I would work the event to a degree for that.

With a little creativity I bet that it could work. How about weekly tournaments where the "grand prize" is being able to go to the US Open as a Ref? If the BCA were on board then it could end up with a lot more registered and qualified refs in the USA.

With enough planning and foresight it should be entirely possible to field a full compliment of refs for not much money.

Not having a qualified ref at each table has always diminished this event for me. I think it was Luat that lost to Medina one year because of this very issue.

Luat was going to shoot a ball to the rail very thin and leave the cueball long. Medina was hovering and as soon as Luat shot it Medina said he told him not to shoot and wait for a ref. But in fact he had not called for a ref.

Someone had to go out of the arena and find a ref, who happened to be Scott Smith the TD.

Scott turns to the audience to ask them and half the sweators are betting on Medina and the other half on Luat. Scott eventually awards ball-in-hand to Medina despite the fact that Luat made a good hit. Medina takes ball in hand and runs out three to send Luat back to the Phillipines. I saw Luat later at the airport and he looked pretty dejected.

If nothing else they should have a little "ref" flag that the player who wants a ref should put up on the table. Then if the player at the table shoots it's an automatic foul.

16 tables - they need at least 32 refs so that they can work one on one off. But ideally they have more to rotate them even more so the refs can enjoy the event.

I'd love to work the US Open someday and I bet I am not alone.
 
SpinDoctor said:
The more I look at the idea the less sense it makes. I just don't get it....why try and change the way the game is played instead of just dropping 9 ball altogether and playing 10 ball where the rack isn't nearly as much of an issue.
Click to expand...

Please explain how problems with Nine-ball are erased by going to Ten-Ball.
 
Again, please forgive my ignorance, but do they currently have a ref for all 16 tables? If so, the racking should be a non-issue already.

My guess is that they don't have ref's for all 16 tables. So that nixes that solution.

However, I don't think you would need 16 "rackers" either. I would think you could get by with a minimum of 4, maybe 6-8 would be optimal. The games aren't ending all at the same time, and any wait would be minimal. These "rackers" wouldn't have to be trained to the level of a ref, just well enough to be able to rack the balls properly.

Problem solved. Oh yeah, paying them. As JB said, I would think that with such a prestigious event, volunteers shouldn't be that hard to find, especially if given the "goody bag" or VIP seating examples JB suggested.

Perhaps this idea has been floated about and found not workable. But it seems to make sense to me, and stop with the rigging the rack foolishness. Neutral racker sets the balls, go play. Period.

Of course, I'm such a noob this can't make sense or work in the real world.
 
justadub said:
But it seems to make sense to me, and stop with the rigging the rack foolishness. Neutral racker sets the balls, go play. Period.
Click to expand...

A neutral racker has its own problems. Who approves his racks? What if the wing ball does not go? That would mean that the neutral racker did not freeze the balls properly. That would mean the breaker was "cheated". This is just for starters.
 
Black-Balled said:
Wing ball not go straight in...general players no yet figured out 10b rack.

No racking secrets dvd on it.
Click to expand...
Except most of this isn't entirely accurate...

First, the "wing" ball may not go in every time, but there are plenty of other balls that can be manipulated into the pockets. And people have DEFINITELY found ways to make the 10 ball on the break.

Second, if general players haven't figured how to pattern rack yet, that doesn't mean that it will NEVER happen, just that it hasn't happened yet. HOWEVER, it HAS happened with the pros. They are most definitely using a pattern.

Third, there is a Racking Secrets DVD for 10-ball, it is on the SAME DVD that 9-ball is on.

I think that about covers all your points.
 
AtLarge said:
510 matches, right? [2n-2, where n = no. of players]
Click to expand...
Yup. Make it $20,000 min., then.

JB is right that you might be able to get volunteers, but it still takes a lot of work to set up and execute. You'd need at least one full-time ref scheduler.
 
Last edited:
Paul Schofield said:
A neutral racker has its own problems. Who approves his racks? What if the wing ball does not go? That would mean that the neutral racker did not freeze the balls properly. That would mean the breaker was "cheated". This is just for starters.
Click to expand...

That is a load of "stuff". If the rackers rack the balls properly, as instructed by those qualified to do so, that should be enough. Especially if it goes for everyone. No one is entiteled to having the wing ball go in. No one needs to approve any racks. (Yes, there could be a mechanism in place in the event a racker was thought to be doing an unacceptable job. Just like any process involving officiating in any "sport". We do play a "sport" don't we?) No one needs to feel "cheated", unless they want to admit to feeling entitled to rigging the racks.

Set them up and play. Sheesh.
 
Point taken - organising refs might take some work, and perhaps be quite expensive.

Getting back to the question "Why does the nine count on the break in all pockets?"
I've followed many tournaments recently, and played in a few as well. Racking for yourself is getting popular, maybe even the norm these days. What I have NEVER seen done (in rack-your-own) is to allow the nine in the corner pockets closest to the rack.

When the US Open people switched over to rack-your-own, did they talk to anyone first?

By the way, I noticed on their website they say "Loser Racks" under the heading "Rules for 2010".
Mind you, they also say "3 Balls past Head String" closely followed by "...it will not be a foul if three balls do not pass the headstring."
 
justadub said:
No one needs to feel "cheated", unless they want to admit to feeling entitled to rigging the racks.

Set them up and play. Sheesh.
Click to expand...

If it was that simple, that is exactly what we would be doing. It changes every year and from event to event because there are numerous problems. Solve one problem and two more appear. I mentioned the "cheated" sentiment because that is what is out there and it is real.
 
Paul Schofield said:
If it was that simple, that is exactly what we would be doing. It changes every year and from event to event because there are numerous problems. Solve one problem and two more appear. I mentioned the "cheated" sentiment because that is what is out there and it is real.
Click to expand...

Fortunately for me, I'll never be at the level where I'll have to worry about it.

Too bad it has to become so complicated.
 
How about a mandatory break machine !

Set up a lil break machine that hits the cue ball at say 20 mph straight on..no rail breaking and shooters have to take what ever the machine gives em..each of em...I'm sure somebody could come up with a compact devise that can be easily taken off table once the cue ball is struck....That would be the only true way both players were playing equal after the break....It would never happen...just saying !:shrug:

Just thinking a lil outside da box..lol
 
ridinda9 said:
It's 9ball .

9 on the snap counts .

early out (kiss shot ) counts.

loser should rack.

winner should break .

change any of those things , then call it what you want , but it won't be 9ball anymore

that's why they invented 7ball . and 10ball. and whatever the h_ll kind of cr_ap Schofield wants to play . But it won't be 9ball , so don't try to call it that . . . .
Click to expand...

That's just BS right there. letting your opponent rack for you is something you do if you like getting slug racks. bet anything over $20 sets and you should be racking your own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top