How to get rid of the shot clock.

[Nostroke]

I know I've posted this before.

Countdown clocks for each player. 5 min per player, clock doesn't run while the balls are in motion. If you need to take 2 minutes to analyze a shot, fine, but you better be able to run out in the remaining 3. Clock runs out on your turn, you lose the game.

Seriously, why won't that accomodate 99% of the situations?

What about tough table lay outs where there are extended safeties? I think that occurs more than 1% of the time.

 

[Mungtor]

What about tough table lay outs where there are extended safeties? I think that occurs more than 1% of the time.

Then clock managment becomes part of the game. Having to get up and pick a shot will probably cut down on extended safety battles, which will help from an average spectator's point of view. I suppose you could announce your intention to play safe and stop the clock, but there would have to be some specific rules for how to deal with a legally pocketed ball made after a called safety, etc... I don't think it will be a huge problem tho.

 

[catscradle]

... THE FIVE BALL! IT TOOK THEM 20 MINUTES TO POCKET FOUR BALLS!!!
...

Might Ralf Souquet and/or Johnny Archer have been involved? I'd rather have Chinese water torture than watch Souquet.

 

[Nostroke]

Might Ralf Souquet and/or Johnny Archer have been involved? I'd rather have Chinese water torture than watch Souquet.

Im pretty sure it was Basavich vs ? at Grand Central Station

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

Might Ralf Souquet and/or Johnny Archer have been involved? I'd rather have Chinese water torture than watch Souquet.

As a matter of fact, it was Johnny Archer v. Jeremy Jones. I'm watching them and I said to a friend, "Obviously, these guys grew up with tables in their homes!" The Double J literally powdered his hands before EACH shot.

 

[CaptainJR]

As a matter of fact, it was Johnny Archer v. Jeremy Jones. I'm watching them and I said to a friend, "Obviously, these guys grew up with tables in their homes!" The Double J literally powdered his hands before EACH shot.

Bad decision on saying who it was. Either of those players I'll enjoy watching no matter how long it takes. If Johnny is thinking about what he is going to do, I'll wait there is excited suspence to see his final decision.


Then again, I never once in this thread said I endorced slow play. I only said that the shot clock use right from the start for both players is the wrong solution. And I'll now say the what the spectators think shouldn't matter at all.

More later, lesson time.

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

Bad decision on saying who it was. Either of those players I'll enjoy watching no matter how long it takes. If Johnny is thinking about what he is going to do, I'll wait there is excited suspence to see his final decision.


Then again, I never once in this thread said I endorced slow play. I only said that the shot clock use right from the start for both players is the wrong solution. And I'll now say the what the spectators think shouldn't matter at all.

More later, lesson time.

Don't get me wrong, they're both GREAT players and I agree, I love watching them play, as well. BUT, it was excrutiating to watch. The match went well over 3 hours and that's really too much. It really surprised me. I've seen Archer on tape and he never seemed to take a long time and he always appeared to be fluid, decisive and downright perfect in execution. However, that wasn't the case that day. It really wasn't a pleasure to watch. Many people complained by how long it took and rarely did the added scrutiny seem justified.


What you say about your lack of endorsement for slow play is correct. You didn't say anything like that. I think the WPBA probably has the best policy in use. In their events, a shot-clock is only employed if, after a certain time, the match has not progressed to the half-way mark. They do this to keep with the intended schedule which I think is ideal. That way, if two players have been playing at a crisp pace throughout the match and decide to slow-down for the final 2 racks, nobody is penalized. If they've been playing slow throughout, they'll need to pick it up.

It also should be mentioned that slow-play doesn't only penalize spectators and event organizers. It also penalizes other players. In the match I mentioned, this was the finals but in earlier rounds, having a single match hold-up a tournament can be a royal pain for the other players. There's nothing like having to wait 2 or 3 hours for the loser's side to catch up.

The bottom line is, a match should only take a certain amount of time. In the World Summit of Pool 2003, I once saw a match take 4 hours in a race to 10. It held up the tournament. I think people should have a right to take an extended amount of time, even whatever is necessary when executing a critical shot. However, a system needs to be in place that protects both aspects. The shot-clock may not be the answer but the lack of a policy is even more damaging.

 

[Ronoh]

Bottom line: It's the rules of the tournament. If a person doesn't like the rules, then don't enter the tournament.

There are plenty of tourneys that don't have a shot clock. But, because it's TV related, time is a factor (even though they edit for air time). Besides, who wants to watch someone do laps around the table on TV? I sure don't. I want to see balls made.

The shot clocks also adds another layer of difficulty.

Plus, the sponsers of the tournament have rented the venue for only a certain period of time and have to abide by that contract as well.

Not trying to disagree, just pointing out some things that might have been over looked.

 

[drivermaker]

Okay, I just read this! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


This really does drive the point home. The fact is, this game has a pace to it. It's meant to be played within a reasonable amount of time. 30 seconds is plenty of time for most shots and allowing an extension per game should be more then sufficient.

You got it now...

 

[FLICKit]

I know I've posted this before.

Countdown clocks for each player. 5 min per player, clock doesn't run while the balls are in motion. If you need to take 2 minutes to analyze a shot, fine, but you better be able to run out in the remaining 3. Clock runs out on your turn, you lose the game.

Seriously, why won't that accomodate 99% of the situations?

------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's exactly what I was talking about, I just did a piss poor job of explaining it.

Ha Ha...

I can see it now! Just install those little chess clocks in pool halls throughout the country. Hit the clock after every miss. Your flag drops, you lose.

Pool would require better athletes - have to be able to run quickly to the clock. Get in shape, if you wanna beat me. [need Rocky background music - Getting strong now]

Got a limp. I can use that to my advantage.

Losing the game, or don't like the table layout. Hey! Check the clock. If opponent is low on time, let's lock up the balls.

New defensive strategy. Your opponent is a much better shotmaker. From get go, just play safeties. Make em run out of time.

I win 7-5 and never made a shot.


Would we ever use advanced clocks - where time can be added after each shot. Thus, good safety battles would allow the players to have the adequate time they need in order to play the game based on their skill.

 

[FLICKit]

Just having a little fun.

I understand where you're coming from JR. Rushing a shot based on time, is not an adequate reflection of the player's pool skill.

Of course, the opposition is true as well, don't want marathon matches.

A reasonable compromise could be adding a little more time (i.e. 45 second clock). That wouldn't be extreme. Most players wouldn't need to use it. While at the same time, with the current 30 second clock, the shot clock becomes an issue a little too frequent. Often times it occurs at a point where the player needs a bit more imagination, or has to handle some calculations of what are the best odds.
In these moments, the current shot clock kills all that. There isn't enough time. Thus it eliminates a level of skill and imagination that these players are capable of.

A different solution, would be to simply allow 4 (15 second) timeouts per game. This would allow those players the extra time needed to fully display their skill. Yet, it would only extend the game a minute per player at the most.

The point is, if 30 seconds is hindering players from displaying their full capabilities. Maybe it is time to consider some other solutions. It's easy to stick with status quo, but sometimes there really are some better solutions.

I think a minor change is in order, on this one.

 

[christopheradam]

clock doesn't run while the balls are in motion.

The Pool balls or the Pool player's balls? The WPBA may have something to say about this . When you have a tough layout, just run around the table a few times while analyzing the rack.

Has anyone ever seen Earl Strickland ever need to use an extention/time out? I would like to hear his comments on this thread. I am a pretty fast 9ball player and think 30 seconds is plenty of time to analyze your run out and get your shot off. I wouldn't be against a 45 second or 60 second shot clock though or even a 30 second shot clock with 2 or 3 extentions per rack.

 

[vapoolplayer]

i like the way the wpba does it. if you haven't finished so many games in 2 hours, you go on the clock.

i think this should apply to the T.V. matches as well. if the set is lasting too long, or if one player is really dragging things out.......you get the clock.

i don't believe the US OPEN used a clock AT ALL last year, and had no problems.

it also remained a race to 11 the entire time.......hopefully it will do so again this year.

so as far as shot clocks, i think they should be imployed when needed, if they aren't needed, don't go to the trouble of timing everything.

VAP

 

[Kevin]

I agree with Jude about the WPBA rule, but... I am old enough to play the age card, so at least I will enjoy this playing the role of the 2,000 year old man.

All you young whippersnappers assume everyone plays 9-ball nowadays, supposedly a fast-paced gambling shooters game, but not really a championship level game. Some old folks or hung-over folks need to take their time to play well, to think out each and every shot to do well. Some fast folks get flustered by this, can't handle the pressure or pace or something, instead they want pressure their way, speeding things up. 'Tain't fair. Sometimes slow folks get flustered into fast. Just moving to make a game to one's advantage, one might say. Fast folk get bothered by slow folk more than slow folk get bothered. Should "the game" be skewed toward young pups if TV isn't involved? Deal with it. It isn't my problem, probably it is your young hormones boiling over embarrassingly and spilling unsightly on your clothes or something.

There is something to be said for stately 150 point 3 hour 14-1 safety battle games, or hour-long one-rack one-pocket battles, but if all you folks can agree about "pool" in the main forum is it has to be 2 minute 2 inning 9-ball games or the other guy is playing too slow or safe or chickenshit for your tastes, then it can be said you may appreciate 9-ball, but you don't appreciate or likely have the experience with or patience for "pool" in all it's myriad forms.

Slow down and try something else instead of boring old 9-ball, short attention span TV may be the reason for it's popularity initially, and MTV culture its continued popularity, but really, "pool" has more facets than a simple diamond-shaped 9-ball rack.

Slow play is just a fast players hell, deal with and overcome the pressssssssssssssssssssssssssure, like you tell the rest of us to when you are applying the heat.

 

[Mungtor]

And I'll now say the what the spectators think shouldn't matter at all.

Depends on what your goal is. If it is to make all the players feel comforatble playing in a competition where the grand prize will barely cover their travel expenses, then you're exactly right. If it is to add something to pool so that non-experts can get interested in it, then the spectators are the ones who have the potential to bring the money. Everybody talks about how cheap pool players are, so the money obviously has to come from somewhere else.

In a match at that level where one mistake can cost you the set. I don't think the clock should factor in to a win or loss....

It already is a factor. You only get one extension, so if your opponent safes you twice, the clock is probably major factor on your second shot.

Losing the game, or don't like the table layout. Hey! Check the clock. If opponent is low on time, let's lock up the balls.

New defensive strategy. Your opponent is a much better shotmaker. From get go, just play safeties. Make em run out of time.

Yep. Allows for new strategy. Your oppenent has to manage their clock wisely so you can't put them in that position. It's just like running down the clock in basketball, football, hockey (to some degree) and almost every other possession based sport. Hell, even tennis only gives you 30 seconds to serve and has specified change-over times.

(offtopic rant) One of the only major sports without a clock is baseball, and baseball sucks. The only thing more boring than playing baseball is watching baseball. Of course, I wish I could have gotten a job where I get paid millions of dollars to stand in the sun, scratch my ass, and occasionally try to hit a ball with a stick. Oh yeah, and re-read that substituting "golf" for "baseball" and it's still perfectly true. (/offtopic rant)

All that said, what Jude said the WPBA does makes a lot of sense too. But unless it's regulated, a close match with a good number of safety battles could end up hurting some otherwise fast players. Putting everybody on the clock from the get-go makes sure that everybody is playing the same game with the same rules.

 

[sjm]

There's no real need for a shot clock in pro pool --- that is, unless somebody has to watch it. The real problem I have with the shot clock is that there are pro matches played in front of paying fans WITHOUT it.

Does anyone think pool is more cerebral than chess or bridge? Each of those games penalizes you for slow play in a tournament situation --- why shouldn't pool?

Pool is not rocket science, and the extension says you can treat it like rocket science once a rack, even though no game played on a pool table requires less thought than nineball. It one extension is not enough, tough luck.

All of us who paid good money to attend the final day of the Big Apple Nine Ball Challenge at Master Billiards last August were victims of the shot clock, which must have been misplaced that day. The result? There were eight players left at about 1:00 PM but there were still three left when the clock struck midnight, with many thanks to Jeremy Jones, whose lethargic play, that seemed to include wiping his cue with a towel on most shots, saw to it that just a handful would see the finals.

Get rid of slow play, not the shot clock.

 

[drivermaker]

Bad decision on saying who it was. Either of those players I'll enjoy watching no matter how long it takes. If Johnny is thinking about what he is going to do, I'll wait there is excited suspence to see his final decision.

Why was it a bad decision to say who it was? They aren't GODS. They're pool players, that's it. They're also major offenders when it comes to slow play and their names need to be mentioned so that it sinks into THEIR heads too. Besides, the Jeremy Jones/Johnny Archer match was probably only the SECOND slowest match out there. It could have been Jeremy Jones/Danny Basavich going at it...that would REALLY have been a record setter.

You're seeking extra time on the occasional tough layout that requires thinking through all of the options and saying that 30 seconds is unfair in those scenarios. Well, maybe it is at times but it's the same for everyone, even a fast shooter can be stumped and have to think and move quicker.

But if you're going to give extra time PER SHOT throughout the entire match, then that's also bullshit because a slow player will eat that time up like it was nothing on ALL shots, and I've seen it done. For each shot that might require 45 - 60 seconds instead of 30, you have many more that require only 5 -10 seconds. I couldn't even come close to estimating the millions of times I've seen a layout, whether at the beginning of the rack or the end, with 3 balls sitting in a small area of the table that are all HIT/STOP...HIT/STOP...HIT/STOP shots that require 5-10 seconds and get dragged out to BEYOND 30 seconds if no shot clock is involved. How do you combat or penalize that? And if you think it shouldn't be, well that's where we have a major difference. I wouldn't mind extra time to be given for certain situations, but would you mind for less time to be given for the most simple and natural shots that a 10 year old could make? 30 seconds SURELY isn't required for those, yet the slow snail player will use it. Hell...they'd use 45-60 seconds if it was available and they could have it.

 

[catscradle]

...
Pool would require better athletes - have to be able to run quickly to the clock. Get in shape, if you wanna beat me. [need Rocky background music - Getting strong now]
...

At least it might end the game vs. sport debate.

But to the point ... There's careful play and there is sloooooow play. Sometimes time must be taken for decisions, even a significant amount of time, but what people like Souquet and JJ frequently do is ridiculous. Souquet will ponder shots that are so obvious that even a rank amateur 'C' player like myself will see it immediately, then 2 minutes later he'll take that exact shot. On the other hand, I've seen Efren ponder the table for a very long time before his FIRST shot, but then he knows exactly what his plan is and flows from shot to shot with no time wasted. That's what I consider the appropriate use of time.
Personally I couldn't care less if pool grows as a spectator sport, but if it is going to grow a shot clock is a must. If people who play every day like us get frustrated watching these guys, what must the general public and once a week players think? I'll tell you what the think "Good god, watching grass grow is more entertaining than this".
As far as playing a sloooow player personally , hide the guns when I do. BTW, many people consider me a slow player, so when I refer to a slow player, you know I really mean slooooow.

 

[CaptainJR]

Today I'll talk about two things and use some examples. The first is very current in my life. My daughter is playing in a recreational Girls softball league. The term 'recreational' is key here. You can have a 15 girl team. Most of the teams have a girl or two that just can't play softball. They try hard but just can't get it done. So that it is assured that these girls get to play, there are two rules. Everyone must field at least 3 of the 6 innings and the batting order includes everyone on the team, everyone bats. Two weeks ago one of our girls playing left center field was running for a fly ball. We saw her go down and after the play was over (right center fielder had to make the play) she was still down. We ran out and she had sprained her ankle. We helped her off the field. When it was our at bat again, she was 4th up that inning. Two outs a player on second and it is her turn to bat. She can't even walk. We tell them she can't bat, the umpire calls the out and our at bats are done. Yup, you read it right. If a player gets injured and can't bat, it is an automatic out. You see several years back there were some complaints about coaches having the weak players fake injuries at key moments so that they could skip there weak (almost automatic stakeout players) to get their better players to bat. Thus taking advantage of the other team that had everyone batting. So they came up with the rule that if your player can't bat it is an out.

So last week my daughter comes up to bat. She bats clean up. I notice she is not swinging like she usually does, hits a weak ground ball and easily gets thrown out at first. Turns out that she threw her right arm out while warming up. She said to me, "but if I don't bat it is an automatic out". So I have two choices now. I can say, just make sure to swing easy or I can be in the dog house with my daughter for who knows how long. And I've seen this before, an injured player batting when they shouldn't be, because of this stupid rule caused by some jerk x number of years ago.

What does this have to do with pool?

I was going to preamp this reply with a question. Just how big a problem is this 'slow play'. How many out of say every 20 players play that slowly. The reason that I didn't preamp with this question is because no matter what your answer is, you can't win. If you put to large a number in here, say 3-5, then it is enough players to say that they have rights too. If you put a small number in there 1,2 then your putting constraints on the large majority of players because of a small minority of players. I would guess it is the second, and you need to find a way to make that small minority conform to the majority with out effecting that majority.



I said two things. Secondly, about the spectators. I think the rules of professional baseball need changed so that the batter is out if he hits a file ball on the third strike because I get bored after sitting there through 6 or 7 consecutive file balls. Not! If your there to watch the game then watch and enjoy the course of the game as it is played, don't try to tell the players how to play it, your already out.

 

[vapoolplayer]

no matter what your answer is, you can't win. If you put to large a number in here, say 3-5, then it is enough players to say that they have rights too. If you put a small number in there 1,2 then your putting constraints on the large majority of players because of a small minority of players. I would guess it is the second, and you need to find a way to make that small minority conform to the majority with out effecting that majority.



I said two things. Secondly, about the spectators. I think the rules of professional baseball need changed so that the batter is out if he hits a file ball on the third strike because I get bored after sitting there through 6 or 7 consecutive file balls. Not! If your there to watch the game then watch and enjoy the course of the game as it is played, don't try to tell the players how to play it, your already out.

actually, we can win..........we already did.......there is a shot clock........LMAO.

for the most part, the shot clock is used in conjunction with the race to 7 format to ensure that the entire match will run in the alotted T.V. time. thats it, the whole reason, money, and t.v. both are neccesary evils to get the game broadcast on national telivision.

as far as other tournaments, shot clocks are not enforced unless one or both players in a match are taking too long.

you are basically trying to create a solution for a non-existant problem.

the shot clock helps more than it hurts. 15 years ago players were playing STRAIGHT POOL with a shot clock!!! there were no problems at all.........why can't someone play 9 ball with a shot clock?

VAP