Ipt a Mistake??

[Island Drive]

I think one major flaw, a small one but in reality a HUGE one. Ok, we are playing a game most everyone knows and understands, and one of the great games that brings many aspects of all games into one. 8 Ball, slow cloth thats fine, but in looking at the rules the open break rule is a huge mistake. Our culture knows from the bottom up, if you make a stripe and no solid you must shoot a stripe. If you make a solid you must shoot a solid, if you make from both ball groups then open table. Having the worlds greatest players on a 9 foot and having a choice to shoot either group is too much. What I mean, if you travel across country, spend the dollars to get in, and someone puts a 8 pack on you its not right. You may be shooting great but the luck of the table break etc. can throw you under the bus too quickly. They even upped the consecutive racks needed to get the extra 5 grand. I think they have to GO BACK to basic 8 ball, from its core beginning with this rule and take away the open table, leave that in the leagues/bar table arena.

www.worldbilliardtour.com

 

[Craig Fales]

There could be viewpoints on this either way for years....so it comes down to 'you can't please everyone' type situation...
BTW what is the 'worldsbilliardtour.com' ...when I clicked on it, it was a dead link....
________

 

[Billy_Bob]

Many players feel that "open after the break" is better for tournaments because it speeds the matches up.

Another thing is "Bar rules call shot" where you must call every ball contact on the way to the pocket (vs just which ball/which pocket). With the "Bar rules call shot", this causes too many arguments in a tournament.

So some rules are there to prevent arguments and help the tournament play proceed.

Having played in tournaments with both types of rules, I prefer open after the break and call pocket (or which ball will go in which pocket). These are BCA rules which are in the following book...

Billiard Congress of America (BCA) Rule Book
http://www.poolndarts.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/Catalog.Category/categoryID/120.cfm

 

[Island Drive]

Many players feel that "open after the break" is better for tournaments because it speeds the matches up.

Speeding the matches up doesn't address the sport. If thats a concern, you can always shorten the matches. 8 ball is such a much greater game if you have to shoot what you make, you can then see some extremely creative run outs/defense, and again, the publics 'mind' and in the 'bar rules' which we all know what those are, if you make a solid you must shoot a solid. I just abhoar the thought of myself traveling all the way across country, hotel, etc. which has gotta be at least $3,000+ and have a 8 pack put on me, that just takes the game out of the sport. If this is supposed to be a true test of the worlds best, then why even give someone a good chance to win from the lag and you probably never even getting to the table, its just not right for the sport and the player who traveled to compete. The IPT has done a marvelous job, and like all great ventures, they must evolve and change with the needs of the game. NFL changes rules every year to improve their product.

 

[Snapshot9]

Rules ...

The rules are fine with 1 exception: They should be playing rotational 8 ball, or what I call Dakota 8 ball. When I practice 8 ball, this is what I practice,
by myself.

These are the best players in the world, and the game should DEMAND them
to play their best. A big bonus could be offered to anyone putting up a 5 pack in rotational 8 ball, and would deserve it.

The IPT could faze this in by having 1 of the big tournaments a year where this was played in lieu of regular 8 ball, and perhaps become the standard later on. If they went to this game, I think a race to 7 would be okay, instead of going to 10, as to keeping the matches about the same length of
time.

 

[Scottster]

I agree ID, This is the professional ranks, and open table on a 9 foot is not how the game should be played. I think Big table 8-ball is easier then bar table 8 ball due to more area for balls to spread.
Scott I think Dakota 8 ball is the way to go too, but was told there was no chance of that due to TV and time constraints that rotation would produce.

 

[sjm]

Many players feel that "open after the break" is better for tournaments because it speeds the matches up.

Speeding the matches up doesn't address the sport. If thats a concern, you can always shorten the matches. 8 ball is such a much greater game if you have to shoot what you make, you can then see some extremely creative run outs/defense, and again, the publics 'mind' and in the 'bar rules' which we all know what those are, if you make a solid you must shoot a solid. I just abhoar the thought of myself traveling all the way across country, hotel, etc. which has gotta be at least $3,000+ and have a 8 pack put on me, that just takes the game out of the sport. If this is supposed to be a true test of the worlds best, then why even give someone a good chance to win from the lag and you probably never even getting to the table, its just not right for the sport and the player who traveled to compete. The IPT has done a marvelous job, and like all great ventures, they must evolve and change with the needs of the game. NFL changes rules every year to improve their product.

Tap, tap, tap. I agree 100%.

 

[Colin Colenso]

At the King of the Hill, the top 16 players averaged about 30% break and run out of about 50% wet breaks. That's about a 60% run out chance after making a ball off the break.

I expect these results will move up toward 45% break and run from 60% wet breaks (conversion 75%) as players adapt to the IPT game and the depth increases in future events.

Getting rid of open table would reduce conversions to around 50% for most participants, making the incentive to break, or attempt the run quite low. Payers might be tempted to foul their breaks with safety breaks. Compare this to the incoming player who would have open table choice after 40-50% of dry breaks. The advantage would go to the receiver.

As for rotational 8-ball, I suspect that at the high levels it would be suicide to try to be the first to go out, and open up the table for one's opponents. There would be a lot of tactical dueling early on in the frames which would lead to a lot of slow chess games, without some compensatory rules.

The only things I would change about the IPT rules would be to allow jump cues and any non-leather tips. Also, I would change the ball-must-hit-rail rule whenever a player is totally snookered (cannot directly hit any part of any of his balls). This and the jump cue would further reduce the incentive for safety play, and reward agressive play.

But generally speaking the rules are fine I think, and if the standard rises so much that players are BRO at 60%+ and regularly running 5 packs, then the pockets could be tightened to 4.25" or even 4".

 

[jjinfla]

APA which is for beginnners uses the "you get what you make on the break" rule. BCA, which has more advanced players uses the "open table" rule.

By taking the choice away from a player after the break you eliminate him from having to think and plan his strategy for playing the table. All it does is simplify the game for the weaker players.

And how often have you seen anyone run an 8-pack in 8-ball? I doubt you will be seeing too many of them on the tight Diamond tables.

Since the IPT will be there to draw the TV audiance they will have to provide the show that will draw that audiance. And having a player break and run the table is what the crowd will like.

And, as long as the players are going to be paid for their performance they should not mind at all.

Jake

 

[Gage]

What I mean, if you travel across country, spend the dollars to get in, and someone puts a 8 pack on you its not right. You may be shooting great but the luck of the table break etc. can throw you under the bus too quickly.

Isn't that why the tournaments are round robin?
I know that if I lost to someone who ran 8 in a row, I would be thinking that they deserved to win because of their excellent performance. Besides, the chances of running 8 in a row would be about (.3)^8 = .007 % according to Colin's stats for the average runout. And for his projection of 45%, this would increase the chance of running 8 in a row to (.45)^8 = .17 % (less than 2 out of 1000).

 

[Cane]

I think one major flaw, a small one but in reality a HUGE one. Ok, we are playing a game most everyone knows and understands, and one of the great games that brings many aspects of all games into one. 8 Ball, slow cloth thats fine, but in looking at the rules the open break rule is a huge mistake. Our culture knows from the bottom up, if you make a stripe and no solid you must shoot a stripe. If you make a solid you must shoot a solid, if you make from both ball groups then open table. Having the worlds greatest players on a 9 foot and having a choice to shoot either group is too much. What I mean, if you travel across country, spend the dollars to get in, and someone puts a 8 pack on you its not right. You may be shooting great but the luck of the table break etc. can throw you under the bus too quickly. They even upped the consecutive racks needed to get the extra 5 grand. I think they have to GO BACK to basic 8 ball, from its core beginning with this rule and take away the open table, leave that in the leagues/bar table arena.

www.worldbilliardtour.com

I think if you'll go back and look at the stats from the first IPT event, King of the Hill, you'll find that the scenario you describe did NOT happen. Rules may be changed in the future, as with ANY professional or amateur endeavor, however, for now, the game is there, the competition is there and the money is there. I think until it PROVES to be an unfair format, then it should stay lik it is.

JMO
Bob

 

[Cameron Smith]

Why penalize a player for making a ball on the break? Especially if there is no push out rule.

 

[Cameron Smith]

The rules are fine with 1 exception: They should be playing rotational 8 ball, or what I call Dakota 8 ball. When I practice 8 ball, this is what I practice,
by myself.

These are the best players in the world, and the game should DEMAND them
to play their best. A big bonus could be offered to anyone putting up a 5 pack in rotational 8 ball, and would deserve it.

The IPT could faze this in by having 1 of the big tournaments a year where this was played in lieu of regular 8 ball, and perhaps become the standard later on. If they went to this game, I think a race to 7 would be okay, instead of going to 10, as to keeping the matches about the same length of
time.

This would defeat the purpose of having eight ball as the tournament game to begin with. Newcomers would be back to thinking "what the hell is going on?????"

The players will challenge themselves. Its not necessary to keep thinking of new ways to make the games harder. I don't believe anyone would suggest that the rules of snooker be changed to having the regular potting sequence of balls being red, yellow, red, green, red, brown, red, blue, red, pink, red, black and then start over.

WIth a round robin format 8-0 losses will be less painful. Besides the World Pool Masters has has race to 8 matches and no one has ever run out the match.

 

[Flex]

At the King of the Hill, the top 16 players averaged about 30% break and run out of about 50% wet breaks. That's about a 60% run out chance after making a ball off the break.

I expect these results will move up toward 45% break and run from 60% wet breaks (conversion 75%) as players adapt to the IPT game and the depth increases in future events.

Getting rid of open table would reduce conversions to around 50% for most participants, making the incentive to break, or attempt the run quite low. Payers might be tempted to foul their breaks with safety breaks. Compare this to the incoming player who would have open table choice after 40-50% of dry breaks. The advantage would go to the receiver.

As for rotational 8-ball, I suspect that at the high levels it would be suicide to try to be the first to go out, and open up the table for one's opponents. There would be a lot of tactical dueling early on in the frames which would lead to a lot of slow chess games, without some compensatory rules.

The only things I would change about the IPT rules would be to allow jump cues and any non-leather tips. Also, I would change the ball-must-hit-rail rule whenever a player is totally snookered (cannot directly hit any part of any of his balls). This and the jump cue would further reduce the incentive for safety play, and reward agressive play.

But generally speaking the rules are fine I think, and if the standard rises so much that players are BRO at 60%+ and regularly running 5 packs, then the pockets could be tightened to 4.25" or even 4".

Tap, tap, tap! What a post!

Flex

 

[AuntyDan]

I can't people are still arguing over entirely the wrong thing - It is NOT a problem with an open table after the break (With which I entirely agree), it is simply the problem of not playing Alternating Break.

Just look at the percentages of Tennis games Pros win on their serve - Would anyone play Tennis where the winner of each game serves in the next? Of course not, and at the top level Pool is fundamentally unfair when played winner breaks.

The WPBA have moved to an alternating break format, why not the IPT?

 

[Captain Dan]

I can't people are still arguing over entirely the wrong thing - It is NOT a problem with an open table after the break (With which I entirely agree), it is simply the problem of not playing Alternating Break...

Couldn't agree more. In comp in Australia it's always alternating breaks, as when you get to a certain level, most pot 80%+ off the break. As for open table after the break, this is the same rule played in the World Pool-Billiard Association, and so many people in Europe and Austral-Asia as use to it. I've played both ways, and an open table usually leads to more aggressive play after the break. This makes it more interesting for spectators, especially those not fully versed in the intricasies of the game.

I might not be a great player, but the IPT interests me more than most competitions I have seen or heard about. It combines the sport I play (as do 99% of players in Australia), with large stakes and the possibility of a newcomer "making it big". Rules are there to add structure, not to hinder, and if this rule doesn't work (I think it will), I'm sure it'll go the way of the Dodo.

Daniel

 

[8-ball bernie]

as an ipt player, i like the open table no matter what rule after the break. it rewards the breaker, who made a ball off the break, and that's how it should be, if you make a ball off the break, you get rewarded, not punished by being forced to shoot, only the suit in which you just made, that's not fair. this way, players on our level, (world class) can pick their run outs, and are not hand cuffed, this is the way 8-ball should be,this makes 8-ball much more like 14.1 continious pool, giving the player freedom, rather than locking him up like 9-ball. Bernie Friend IPT player.

 

[The Piper]

I like the open table rule. I have played pool both ways, and believe that having the table open after the break isn't an advantage or a disadvantage. Because the player still needs to plot out his course.

 

[iacas]

Just look at the percentages of Tennis games Pros win on their serve - Would anyone play Tennis where the winner of each game serves in the next? Of course not, and at the top level Pool is fundamentally unfair when played winner breaks.

In tennis the percentage is something like 85%. It's nowhere near as high in pool.

 

[AuntyDan]

In tennis the percentage is something like 85%. It's nowhere near as high in pool.

You are right that the percentages are not as high, but IMHO the priniciple is the same - The break is a major advantage for top-class players. Instead of deliberately crippling the game by enforcing a non-open table on the break it is much easier and fairer to simply use an alternating break.

Although watching great players run multiple racks is certainly exiting it is simply not a fair format for a professional sport of any kind. No other sport I know of has a format that allows someone to win without their opponent being able to play.