Game changer at the DCC

straightline said:
Ok. Why or how then is there a minus 5 loss of game limit?
Click to expand...
What a shit show of a rack it would be to see someone go -5 while the other guy must be in the + column.

How is that possible?

4 intentional and then a accident to go -5????

I’m confused?
Fatboy🎄🎄
 
Fatboy said:
What a shit show of a rack it would be to see someone go -5 while the other guy must be in the + column.

How is that possible?

4 intentional and then a accident to go -5????

I’m confused?
Fatboy🎄🎄
Click to expand...
It is possible for the score -5 to 0😉
Like Young Sheldon's engineering professor said figure it out for yourself.
 
I like the both players can't have negative scores rule.
I don't like that no flying removal rule but I do understand it. Pool is a table game.
I don't understand why shot clocks are not used. They are the only true way to speed up the game.
 
alphadog said:
... I don't understand why shot clocks are not used. They are the only true way to speed up the game.
Click to expand...
A shot clock is used at the DCC for the 1-Pocket matches streamed by Accu-Stats -- 60-second clock with one automatic 60-second extension per player per rack.
 
iusedtoberich said:
Sure you are. When opponents ball is hanging, you jump the CB at it. OB goes in pocket. CB flies off table. Standard move in one pocket.
Click to expand...
That is the move they want to put a stop to with this new rule. If you shoot this shot, the ball will count for the opponent and you will lose one and give up BIH behind the line. Also when both players are on fouls they will cancel each other out. So if a player is on -1 and his opponent fouls they will both go back to zero balls owed. If a player is on -2 and his opponent fouls, he will go back to -1 and his opponent will be on zero. I hope I explained this clear enough for everyone to understand. Greg wants to put an end to games where each player owes multiple balls.
 
chalkdust said:
If they want to speed up the game allow the ball on the break. IMO the ball on the break is not just LUCK, it takes a sweet hit to make that ball. Why is it luck in one pocket and not in any other game?
Click to expand...
All you have to do is rack em right and you can make a ball. It ain't skill. Look people, they're not trying to change the game for every one-pocket match just DCC's. Some of these matches go on FOREVER and totally f&*k up the scheduling. In '07 there was a match with two guys who had NO SHOT at winning that took 6+hrs. WTF?????? You can't let shit like that happen. Have to find ways to expedite the matches.
 
garczar said:
All you have to do is rack em right and you can make a ball. It ain't skill. Look people, they're not trying to change the game for every one-pocket match just DCC's. Some of these matches go on FOREVER and totally f&*k up the scheduling. In '07 there was a match with two guys who had NO SHOT at winning that took 6+hrs. WTF?????? You can't let shit like that happen. Have to find ways to expedite the matches.
Click to expand...
That's why you eliminate rack your own.
I agree, the matches need to move faster.
 
chalkdust said:
Rack your own is more BS, player A should rack for player B if A and B can not agree on rack both players disqualified. There is always the option of a neutral racker, rack your own sux.
Click to expand...
I'd rather break a slug rack than go through all that effort of racking after a win. Not racking is the reward for winning. Loser racks, and slugs beget slugs. My rack will always be as perfect as humanly possible for an opponent. If they don't respect the game enough to return the favor, then I stop caring how their rack is as much. I won't intentionally slug them but I sure won't show much care if I'm "gifted" a slug.

Ironically (and probably stupidly) I pay more attention to getting a perfect rack for my opponent than on rack your own. Balls will break either way, you just gotta adapt to the rack at hand. In a tournament, I'll look at the rack if my opponent racks, but I won't say a word. I'll break it accordingly. Pool is a mental game. Use the energy to your advantage and don't just stew over it.
 
garczar said:
All you have to do is rack em right and you can make a ball. It ain't skill. Look people, they're not trying to change the game for every one-pocket match just DCC's. Some of these matches go on FOREVER and totally f&*k up the scheduling. In '07 there was a match with two guys who had NO SHOT at winning that took 6+hrs. WTF?????? You can't let shit like that happen. Have to find ways to expedite the matches.
Click to expand...
I was told that if you cut the middle ball to go into your pocket then the apex ball on the other side goes. Never tried it.
 
boogieman said:
I'd rather break a slug rack than go through all that effort of racking after a win. Not racking is the reward for winning. Loser racks, and slugs beget slugs. My rack will always be as perfect as humanly possible for an opponent. If they don't respect the game enough to return the favor, then I stop caring how their rack is as much. I won't intentionally slug them but I sure won't show much care if I'm "gifted" a slug.

Ironically (and probably stupidly) I pay more attention to getting a perfect rack for my opponent than on rack your own. Balls will break either way, you just gotta adapt to the rack at hand. In a tournament, I'll look at the rack if my opponent racks, but I won't say a word. I'll break it accordingly. Pool is a mental game. Use the energy to your advantage and don't just stew over it.
Click to expand...
Great post, I 100% agree with you.
 
This is an odd rule addition about not being allowed to jump the ball off the table to take a foul as the room Greg Sullivan typically plays at allows this and its common practice.

The negatives canceling each other out makes more sense as players could both get way into the negative and prolong a game indefinitely. They still have a tournament to run in a timely fashion.
 
mattb said:
... The negatives canceling each other out makes more sense as players could both get way into the negative and prolong a game indefinitely. They still have a tournament to run in a timely fashion.
Click to expand...
In one Scott Frost game, I think there were 12 coins on the rail at one point, not all Scott's. Scott won. He seems to be the player most likely to intentional, and since he can run the balls well, it works for him.

As for timely at DCC, I think the record was a match between Darren Appleton and Tom Spencer (a well-known 1970s-80s player, GF column). Darren was supposed to play in one of the TV table ring games, but had to finish his one pocket match with Spencer. He was leading 2-0 and ahead in the final game. He thought he would make the start time. Appleton lost the match 2-3 about six hours later. The match took 7.5 hours, IIRC.

Chess clock is my answer.
 
alphadog said:
I like the both players can't have negative scores rule.
I don't like that no flying removal rule but I do understand it. Pool is a table game.
I don't understand why shot clocks are not used. They are the only true way to speed up the game.
Click to expand...

i'm with ya. i think the flying scratch is part of one pocket but i suppose i understand the reasoning, they want to speed things up and in a big tournament like this there might also be a point in not having balls flying around and rolling on the floors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top