Is "pattern" racking cheating in 9 ball?

S

Shortside K

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I am amazed at the number of "players" that do not know the BCA World Standardized Rule regarding "racking the balls" in 9 ball. These same "players" routinely "pattern" rack in 9-ball to try to gain an edge against their opponents.

Without exception, the "players" I discussed the matter with, stated that (excluding the 1 ball and the 9 ball) the remaining balls DO NOT have to be racked "randomly", but may be racked in any order. This legitimizes their "pattern" racking. They were ALL very sure about this and some even became quite angry during the discussion.

Rule 5.2 of the BCA World Standardized Rules for racking for 9-ball states: "... with the 1-ball at the top of the diamond and on the foot spot, the 9-ball in the center of the diamond, and the other balls in RANDOM order, racked as tightly as possible."

Definition of "random" (from "web definitions"):

1. "lacking any definite plan or order or purpose",
2. "lack of predictability, without any systematic pattern",
3. "having no plan, seemingly haphazard",
4. "having no discernible structure or repetition",

I can't see how it could be clearer.

If the BCA rules stated that "the remaining balls may be racked in ANY order" I would agree that "pattern" racking is acceptable, but the definition of the word "random" makes "pattern" racking unacceptable in my way of thinking. It is an infraction of Rule 5.2 of the BCA World Standardized Rules.

I know that many tournaments specify that the 2 ball be racked at the bottom of the rack. Fine. This is "specified" by the tournament director. However, I have NEVER seen or heard of a tournament that specified that the balls may be racked in ANY order. Usually, BCA rules are specified which would exclude "pattern" racking.

I have played pool for a long time and clearly understand the reasons that the "players" want to rack the balls in defined patterns (both offensively and defensively), but isn't this just a form of "cheating"?

I know that many of you are going to respond with, "Its impossible to enforce... how can you prove that someone is "pattern" racking?" "Everybody does it so you have to do it to stay even".

Well, NOT everybody does it... I NEVER do it, and I consider that those that do are cheating. Nobody wants to be called a "cheater", so I'm sure that there are a lot of players out there that will take great offence to my statement. However, if you are deliberately breaking the rules... you are cheating. Simple. There will be a lot of you that will think of me as stupid for not doing it, but I feel that if I have to cheat to win, why even bother playing.

You may also think that I must lose a lot. Well, you're wrong. I play very well and win my share of tournaments and matches.

There was an earlier "post" which stated that with "random" racks, the "breaker" may get a rack which results in a "tough" run-out and with alternate breaks it would be unfair when one player may get several "tough run-out" tables while another player luckily gets easier tables to run-out.

This is a legitimate concern, but the rules are the rules. If the BCA had concerns about this, they would change the rule. They haven't as yet, so tough noogies... deal with it and play by the rules.

I welcome all responses with the hope that if I am wrong in my interpretation of the rule, clarification and correction can be made.
 
You just need to come up with your own pattern, and make it appear nice and random so the tight asses don't detect it.:D

Here's mine, and I love it.

.....1
...6...5
2...9...4
..7....8
.....3
 
Shortside K said:
I am amazed at the number of "players" that do not know the BCA World Standardized Rule regarding "racking the balls" in 9 ball. These same "players" routinely "pattern" rack in 9-ball to try to gain an edge against their opponents.

Without exception, the "players" I discussed the matter with, stated that (excluding the 1 ball and the 9 ball) the remaining balls DO NOT have to be racked "randomly", but may be racked in any order. This legitimizes their "pattern" racking. They were ALL very sure about this and some even became quite angry during the discussion.

Rule 5.2 of the BCA World Standardized Rules for racking for 9-ball states: "... with the 1-ball at the top of the diamond and on the foot spot, the 9-ball in the center of the diamond, and the other balls in RANDOM order, racked as tightly as possible."

Definition of "random" (from "web definitions"):

1. "lacking any definite plan or order or purpose",
2. "lack of predictability, without any systematic pattern",
3. "having no plan, seemingly haphazard",
4. "having no discernible structure or repetition",

I can't see how it could be clearer.

If the BCA rules stated that "the remaining balls may be racked in ANY order" I would agree that "pattern" racking is acceptable, but the definition of the word "random" makes "pattern" racking unacceptable in my way of thinking. It is an infraction of Rule 5.2 of the BCA World Standardized Rules.

I know that many tournaments specify that the 2 ball be racked at the bottom of the rack. Fine. This is "specified" by the tournament director. However, I have NEVER seen or heard of a tournament that specified that the balls may be racked in ANY order. Usually, BCA rules are specified which would exclude "pattern" racking.

I have played pool for a long time and clearly understand the reasons that the "players" want to rack the balls in defined patterns (both offensively and defensively), but isn't this just a form of "cheating"?

I know that many of you are going to respond with, "Its impossible to enforce... how can you prove that someone is "pattern" racking?" "Everybody does it so you have to do it to stay even".

Well, NOT everybody does it... I NEVER do it, and I consider that those that do are cheating. Nobody wants to be called a "cheater", so I'm sure that there are a lot of players out there that will take great offence to my statement. However, if you are deliberately breaking the rules... you are cheating. Simple. There will be a lot of you that will think of me as stupid for not doing it, but I feel that if I have to cheat to win, why even bother playing.

You may also think that I must lose a lot. Well, you're wrong. I play very well and win my share of tournaments and matches.

There was an earlier "post" which stated that with "random" racks, the "breaker" may get a rack which results in a "tough" run-out and with alternate breaks it would be unfair when one player may get several "tough run-out" tables while another player luckily gets easier tables to run-out.

This is a legitimate concern, but the rules are the rules. If the BCA had concerns about this, they would change the rule. They haven't as yet, so tough noogies... deal with it and play by the rules.

I welcome all responses with the hope that if I am wrong in my interpretation of the rule, clarification and correction can be made.
Click to expand...

I've had my patteren memorized for over 30 years. I'll be damed if I'm gonna memorize a random pattern now.
 
I've seen many players rack patterns. Good players and otherwise. Is it cheating? I don't think so. But I suspect they all think there is a distinct advantage in doing so.

Is a break box enforced to keep playes from cheating because there is a good chance with the expeienced players that the head ball will go into the side pocket?

Against the rules? only the World Standard Rules. The PROS play under their own set of rules. They often place the 9 ball on the spot (where the one usually goes).

Soft breaks are a thing of the past, Now the Pros say (not all tournaments) that 3 balls must past the center pockets to be a legal break.

Break cues designed to DENT the one ball with their powerful hitting ability isn't against the rules.

Jump cues are an avantage to anyone that owns one and knows how to use it. Yeah.. I know, lots of tournaments have banned jump cues.

Why does this rule exist and no rules against the other 'so called' advantages?

Ask the rules committiee.... oh yeah... does anyone know who is on the rules committee? WPA?Pros (men and women)?

Why don't all pool tournaments play under the same rules?

Oh... yeah.. that's why there are player meetings before every event.... to explain the rules and which version they are using.....

Why not just play 10 ball and get rid of 9 ball altogether?
 
Very good detective work. As the rule is explained I would say you would win in court but are you willing to take it that far during a match because I don't think anyone cares how you rack'em as long as they're tight. Racking them in a certain pattern could work for or against you. If you play under a guy and rack them so he has a harder out and he doesn't make a ball....guess what!? If you rack them so its an easy out and he makes a ball...guess what!? Assuming you are playing with A players that is. My opinion on lesser players is that they could care less as well. I myself just throw them in their. But you do have a point.
 
I agree with all that you have presented "Tom in Cincy". It seems that in the "pool world" the philosophy is,"if you can't beat 'em, join 'em".

It seems a shame that technology (jump cues, break cues, phenolic tips, etc.) is changing the game so much (for the worse I think).

I had forgotten about the game of 10-ball. That will definitely be my "game of choice", but the local tourneys will remain 9-ball. I will not, however, as yet change my views regarding "pattern breaking".

Thanx for your insight.
 
Question:
If I was giving you the wild 7-8....how many times per 100 would you expect them to show up on the wings to be random?

Number of available patterns
1-9 are set and thus you are working with 7 balls
7 x 6 x 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 = 5040 (factorial of 7)

I could be wrong.


Nick
 
bingo!

I played a nine ball tourney where the spot for women was the wild seven. I racked random patterns but you can be sure that the seven was a lot less random than the balls that weren't wild when playing a woman. No ball in a nine ball rack is unmakeable but a careful rack can sure lower the odds.

Very few people actually use random racks. However some are much better at stacking the rack as they go than others.

Hu


Nick B said:
Question:
If I was giving you the wild 7-8....how many times per 100 would you expect them to show up on the wings to be random?

Number of available patterns
1-9 are set and thus you are working with 7 balls
7 x 6 x 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 = 5040 (factorial of 7)

I could be wrong.


Nick
Click to expand...
 
Here's my standardized reply for any topic with 9-ball rack complaints, controversey and cheating accusations. The solution is VERY SIMPLE.......


Play 10-Ball.
 
Random?

I have been running tourneys for many years and I rack "random" until the first argument > then I rack one /two /three /four on the corners from that point on. Most of us "old timers" know the results of different balls in different positions. The handicap balls were always placed in the second row behind the one ball.
 
If your giving up weight than I don't think anyone can complaine about racking the 7 or 8 behind the one. You don't have a problem with that do you shortside?
 
I rack balls said:
Well I am used to making 4 balls on the break every break so I never really thought about an order.

Eric.A.
Click to expand...
Total BS, not even the top pros pull those kind of numbers.:rolleyes:
 
I rack balls said:
Well I am used to making 4 balls on the break every break so I never really thought about an order.

Eric.A.
Click to expand...

LOL. I'll put money down that says you can't knock 4 balls in on the break. You can repeat that as long as you like and I'll even give you "random" racks.
 
To the Rail

I rack balls said:
Well I am used to making 4 balls on the break every break so I never really thought about an order.

Eric.A.
Click to expand...
Yeah, making 4 balls to the rail is a legal APA break.:eek: :D
That is what you mean, right?:confused: :D
I don't think you need to call the order if you talking about making them.:confused::confused:
 
xidica said:
LOL. I'll put money down that says you can't knock 4 balls in on the break. You can repeat that as long as you like and I'll even give you "random" racks.
Click to expand...
I say he sets a camcorder up on a tripod, rolls tape and puts it up on youtube unedited. He gets ten break shots. If he makes four balls on the break five times out of ten, I'll put video on youtube of me eating my own shoe.:D

(Not really though, my feet are lethal weapons).
 
Klopek said:
I say he sets a camcorder up on a tripod, rolls tape and puts it up on youtube unedited. He gets ten break shots. If he makes four balls on the break five times out of ten, I'll put video on youtube of me eating my own shoe.:D

(Not really though, my feet are lethal weapons).
Click to expand...

LOL. We need more youtube video's anyway right? :D
 
If I do rack the balls in a certain order, which is seldom nowadays, I use the firing order of a small-block Chevy (1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2). It may not have any functional purpose, but it's the only 8-digit non-repeating sequence beginning with 1 that I'll never forget, so what the hell? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top