What effects did you observe from call shot rules during this tournament?
Impact of call shot on US Open 10 ball
- Thread starter David_Smith
- Start date
SVB would have probably won the tourney if it wasn't (He should have anyway IMO lee van missed too many easy shots in their match). When it was 8-6 Shane I believe Lee Van missed a fairly easy shot in the side leaving Shane a tough bank in the side on the 6. He called the 6 but also was caroming into the 7. The 7 went straight into the corner so he lost his turn. Would have been into the finals and probably a strong favorite.
All in all I wouldn't say it plays a huge part in the game. Even the SVB example he was aware he was going to be pushing the 7 toward the pocket so really wasn't like he just slopped it in. I don't know, before the tourney I was all for call 10-ball but now I almost feel like at that level it almost just doesn't matter.
All in all I wouldn't say it plays a huge part in the game. Even the SVB example he was aware he was going to be pushing the 7 toward the pocket so really wasn't like he just slopped it in. I don't know, before the tourney I was all for call 10-ball but now I almost feel like at that level it almost just doesn't matter.
I don't get it....so he nails the shot he called and in the process nails another ball..shouldn't he be rewarded the next shot since the ball he called for went in the pocket he called for?
Even straightpool will give you a point for having an extra ball pocketed as long as you pocket the ball you called for.
Even straightpool will give you a point for having an extra ball pocketed as long as you pocket the ball you called for.
Shane failed to make the 6-ball, which was the ball he called.
ahhhhhh never mind then lol wooops my bad i read the whole thing wrong
This tournament was played under WPA rules as opposed to the 10 Ball rules used in the SBE.
Under WPA rules the incoming player has the option to give it back ONLY if a ball goes down that wasn't called (i.e. the called ball goes in the wrong pocket or an uncalled ball drops). On a simple miss if nothing goes down, the incoming player must take the balls in position. Under the rules at the SBE, the incoming player has the option on ANY miss, whether a ball falls or not, unless a safety is called.
LVC had a situation were he was playing a safety and trying to hook his opponent (Po) and did so, but the ball he struck banked into the corner pocket. Po gave him back the table so LVC essentially hooked himself.
I'm not sure I like the rule where the player calls a safety and may have to come back to the table and face the hook he set up for his opponent.
Essentially the WPA rules still allow for two-way shots (as long as a ball doesn't go) whereas the SBE rules pretty much eliminate the 2-way.
What I noticed at the U.S. Open was that many players, if facing a kick shot, would call a ball anyway (even an almost impossible shot like a three rail kick/bank shot) just to avoid giving the opponent the option on the off chance that the ball actually goes in the hole. So you were seeing some rather ridiculous shots being called that were only being called to avoid a problem with the rules.
I think the pros prefer the SBE rules. The idea is you should have to commit to either calling a shot or a safety and you should not be penalized for an opponent's miss (i.e. your opponent plays a 2-way shot).
It really comes down a preference for the 2-way shot in 10 Ball.
Under WPA rules the incoming player has the option to give it back ONLY if a ball goes down that wasn't called (i.e. the called ball goes in the wrong pocket or an uncalled ball drops). On a simple miss if nothing goes down, the incoming player must take the balls in position. Under the rules at the SBE, the incoming player has the option on ANY miss, whether a ball falls or not, unless a safety is called.
LVC had a situation were he was playing a safety and trying to hook his opponent (Po) and did so, but the ball he struck banked into the corner pocket. Po gave him back the table so LVC essentially hooked himself.
I'm not sure I like the rule where the player calls a safety and may have to come back to the table and face the hook he set up for his opponent.
Essentially the WPA rules still allow for two-way shots (as long as a ball doesn't go) whereas the SBE rules pretty much eliminate the 2-way.
What I noticed at the U.S. Open was that many players, if facing a kick shot, would call a ball anyway (even an almost impossible shot like a three rail kick/bank shot) just to avoid giving the opponent the option on the off chance that the ball actually goes in the hole. So you were seeing some rather ridiculous shots being called that were only being called to avoid a problem with the rules.
I think the pros prefer the SBE rules. The idea is you should have to commit to either calling a shot or a safety and you should not be penalized for an opponent's miss (i.e. your opponent plays a 2-way shot).
It really comes down a preference for the 2-way shot in 10 Ball.
I don't think the addition of the call shot was necessary. In my opinion it takes a little something away from the game watching guys calling obvious shots, and the amount of 'luck' that there is in the game tends to visit everyone equally. Basically I think it took a little something away from the game we're all used to without really adding much at all. That makes it a fail in my books.
Just judging from the Shane vs Lee Van match I would say I don't like the rules used at US Open 10 ball. I really felt like Shane played better than Lee Van yet Lee Van won. Any rule set that ends up with a situation like that needs to make some improvements.
The only improvement that we gain with this rule set is the fact that an opponent cannot be rewarded for a missed shot by slopping a safe.
The decision comes down to whichever you dislike less, slopped safes on missed shots or lack of 2-way shot opportunites. Take your pick.
The only improvement that we gain with this rule set is the fact that an opponent cannot be rewarded for a missed shot by slopping a safe.
The decision comes down to whichever you dislike less, slopped safes on missed shots or lack of 2-way shot opportunites. Take your pick.
I like it. You still have two way shots. You can still shoot a tough bank and play the cue ball in to a safe position if you miss. You just can't try to pocket two balls at once and hope one or the other goes. I think it's fair that you should have to commit to one shot.
The thing that drives me crazy about 10 ball or 9 ball are those occurances (however rare at the top level) wherein a player kicks and ends up slopping in the winning ball. One should not be rewarded for that.
I will agree though that it adds very little to the professional game, as it is not like these guys are slopping 5 or 6 balls in per game. But I have seen some pretty flukey matches.
Perhaps the greatest contribution of call shot to the rotation game, probably comes at the amateur level. No more do I have to put up with players slamming the balls around hoping to make the 10 ball.
The thing that drives me crazy about 10 ball or 9 ball are those occurances (however rare at the top level) wherein a player kicks and ends up slopping in the winning ball. One should not be rewarded for that.
I will agree though that it adds very little to the professional game, as it is not like these guys are slopping 5 or 6 balls in per game. But I have seen some pretty flukey matches.
Perhaps the greatest contribution of call shot to the rotation game, probably comes at the amateur level. No more do I have to put up with players slamming the balls around hoping to make the 10 ball.
a solution for a problem that doesn't exist
This seems to me like a solution for a problem that doesn't exist at the elite level. Consider which is more common, a pro slopping in a ball or trying a two way shot to pocket two balls. I think without any rules interfering they try to pocket two balls at least as often as they slop in a ball.
I am a big believer in cue ball control so it isn't uncommon for even a player like myself to have designs on another ball when I'm hitting the lowest ball in a rotation game. Also is it really slop when you cross bank at a side pocket knowing that if you miss without hitting the point that the spin will pocket the ball in the other side?
Hu
This seems to me like a solution for a problem that doesn't exist at the elite level. Consider which is more common, a pro slopping in a ball or trying a two way shot to pocket two balls. I think without any rules interfering they try to pocket two balls at least as often as they slop in a ball.
I am a big believer in cue ball control so it isn't uncommon for even a player like myself to have designs on another ball when I'm hitting the lowest ball in a rotation game. Also is it really slop when you cross bank at a side pocket knowing that if you miss without hitting the point that the spin will pocket the ball in the other side?
Hu
Just like in 14.1, they really don't verbally or physically call all the obvious shots. It's usually just shots where there could be some question -- banks, combos, caroms, billiards, etc. And I don't think such "calling" takes anything away from the game. I've never heard a 14.1 player say that he thinks having to "call" the ball and pocket takes away from the game.
As to luck visiting everyone equally, that may be probabilistically true over a long lifetime, but not for any given game, match, or tournament. When it is so easy to reduce the effects of luck (it cannot be eliminated), as is done with WPA 10-ball rules and several other sets of rules, it is a breath of fresh air to see the game played that way.
Are you overlooking the primary improvement -- that you can't keep shooting or win by slopping in a ball (unless the called ball somehow "slops" into the called pocket)?
I, for one, don't like "call shot" Ten Ball. IMO they're heading in the wrong direction, but no one asked me anyway. Texas Express has worked pretty well for the last 25 years. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! Let the pros play two way shots and let the ten count on the break! They are slowly taking all the excitement out of the game.
Exactly what I was getting at. Shane played much better than Lee Van. Broke the balls like his usual self and Lee Van missed 4 or 5 EASY balls that should have costed him at least a game each. A couple of those he got a lucky safe and was able to win the game. I felt for Shane, I feel like he plays 10-ball at a different level then the rest.
Can you give us some examples of this primary improvement during this touirnament?
Completely agree Jay, it ain't broke and yet they continue to push these changes and yet it really didn't do what its intentions were. If the best playing player was supposed to win then SVB should have beat Lee Van and the call pocket rule only came into effect once or twice at most per match anyway it seemed.
Kind of a tangent but look at the popularity and the money in poker after the boom. What caused it? The general public interest in the game spiked everything and more and more people starting participating in the World Series and so on. Honestly, even if it is slightly questionable, we need to devise some tournaments so a larger population of players are able to compete. This to me is what would allow the popularity and money to boom in the sport. When the game is regulated to this extent it limits who can even compete in a tournament. Could be completely wrong as I'm 20 years old and haven't been around the game like you Jay but thats just IMO.
Sorry, I wasn't taking notes, and I watched so many matches over the last few days that they now are kind of blurring together. But, yes, I did see some slopped-in balls, including a Bustamente (I think) 10-ball on the break, that would have counted under "slop-is-OK" rules.