Is "pattern" racking cheating in 9 ball?
- Thread starter Shortside K
- Start date
Agreed. I am just wondering what is Shortside K's arguement is...Harvywallbanger said:
1. Breaking the rules.... Yes he is correct... Sorta. It should be clarified in more details since 'random' is used loosely. I believe the statement was structured this way on purpose. Although the word definition is clear, the full statement presented from the Rules is not, or that is, it should state that the set of racks must be random. Which brings another arguable debate if the statement of that particular rule changes: if a player notices the set of racks that aren't at random, what will be used to prove it?
2. Doesn't prefer players who racks in patterns.... Well, it is something he will need to overcome, which can be overcome purty quickly if it is a race.
3. Finds racking patterns as cheating... well I think that's just a personal opinion. I don't find it cheating. Some do and some don't. And everyone here definitely has good points on both sides.
The problem
is the rules state 'may be' not 'have to be', so the problem comes from 'reasonable doubt'. No pattern is proved to be more beneficial than another, and you can not prove intent anyway.
It is simply a subjective conclusion on a racker's best guess that they think is based on their experience and reasoning.
And yes, I have a sequence I prefer when breaking, and another for an opponent when he breaks.
SOMETHING that might surprise a few people is that when breaking, driving 4 balls to a rail DOES NOT INCLUDE THE CUE BALL for a legal break.
is the rules state 'may be' not 'have to be', so the problem comes from 'reasonable doubt'. No pattern is proved to be more beneficial than another, and you can not prove intent anyway.
It is simply a subjective conclusion on a racker's best guess that they think is based on their experience and reasoning.
And yes, I have a sequence I prefer when breaking, and another for an opponent when he breaks.
SOMETHING that might surprise a few people is that when breaking, driving 4 balls to a rail DOES NOT INCLUDE THE CUE BALL for a legal break.
Last edited:
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.
(Not really though, my feet are lethal weapons).
I may be wrong, but I think he was joking.
-Andrew
Handsumm
Banned
I think the concept of random here was blown way out of proportion.
To be totally random, that would mean the racker would have to reach down inside the ball return while not looking and pull up "random" balls.
The BCA rules that you have read are intended to specify that they may be placed in any manner chosen by the racker. This could be seen as random.
There is not, and should not be a rule against racking in any particular order. Not much is gained, especially on the pro level, by knowing "how to rack."
BTW it should be something like this to make a runout more difficult.
1
3 5
7 9 8
6 4
2
1
To be totally random, that would mean the racker would have to reach down inside the ball return while not looking and pull up "random" balls.
The BCA rules that you have read are intended to specify that they may be placed in any manner chosen by the racker. This could be seen as random.
There is not, and should not be a rule against racking in any particular order. Not much is gained, especially on the pro level, by knowing "how to rack."
BTW it should be something like this to make a runout more difficult.
1
3 5
7 9 8
6 4
2
1
xidica said:
X-man,
I think he was just kidding. It WAS kind of funny.
Shortside K said:
This is ridiculous, just break the balls and run out. You should be happy to see the 2 ball in the same position every rack...and your racker should realize that he's wasting his time.
Donovan said:Hmmm. I really can't stand to play 9-ball much anyway, but when I do, this is how I rack. The funny thing is, I've been doing it this way so long, that I even stopped looking to see if it does any good.
.....1
..8...3
6...9...5
..2....7
.....4
That's the one from the Monk, if I remember correctly...I did this maybe a dozen times this lifetime before I realized that I was wasting my time. Guess what happens when your oppenent misses? ...you now have a "difficult" run out.
That is assuming that it worked, which it probably won't anyway.
i've used this pattern rack. This comes from Precision Pool by Gerry Kanov and Shari Stauch.This is Chapter 4 Game Breaks.And yes you could semi predict where some of the balls will end up by doing a pattern break if your that good a player,I'm not that good.I wouldnt go so far to say its cheating, as its more of an edge, just like playing with a great cue.Should we all play with the same cue so no one gets the edge.
.....6
....5 7
...4 9 8
....2 3
.....1
Whew didnt think i"d ever get that rack design to look right on here
.....6
....5 7
...4 9 8
....2 3
.....1
Whew didnt think i"d ever get that rack design to look right on here
Shortside K said:
And I think you have misinterpreted the rule and it couldn't be clearer! <grin>
If I rack this way...
...1
..2.5
.6.9.7
..4.3
...8
That is a totally random rack. The rule does not say that I can't rack that way again. Others have presented there "patterns" and they all seem to be randomly random to me.
What would a non-random 9 ball rack be?
Nick B said:
I agree with your logic. However, I suspect there is little difference between the two mirror image racks (ie middle row = 2-9-3 compared to 3-9-2), since the breaker can break from either side.
That would mean there are only 2520 different possible racking combinations in 9-ball! In a race to 2000, you might see all of them.
Good Rolls,
Rasta
Last edited:
Hah yea well I am gonna try that ten breaks thing I might have to do it a few times and make it look like it was my first but I'll get it done I made 4 yesterday in a tournament and there was a staight shot on the 2 ball and the rest hangers, it was for the match. But on the subject of the thread I usually rack in a random order. I have tried patterns and people have tried them against me. I don't think it makes a big difference if any at all when you sink a ball or two. The most important thing is a tight rack.
Eric.A.
I made 4 yesterday in a tournament and there was a staight shot on the 2 ball and the rest hangers, it was for the match. But on the subject of the thread I usually rack in a random order. I have tried patterns and people have tried them against me. I don't think it makes a big difference if any at all when you sink a ball or two. The most important thing is a tight rack.Eric.A.
The vast majority of players have never read the rules and have little idea of what they say. They play by what the other players seem to be doing. One of the things the IPT seemed to be doing right was to get the top players more aware of the rules, even if there were a few glitches in the implementation. (Climbing on the table?!?!)Shortside K said:
The proposed wording for the 2008 revision of the WPA rules says for racking nine ball:
The object balls are racked as tightly as possible in a diamond shape, with the one ball at the top of the diamond and on the foot spot and the nine ball in the middle of the diamond. The other balls will be placed in the diamond without purposeful or intentional pattern.
Even under the old wording, the intent was to prevent pattern racking. The problem is to figure out how to implement the rule fairly. Having a referee rack would help.
This is a rule that is made to be gamed.
If I sense my opponent is doing this to me, I just figure he's afraid I might run out, which will strengthen my resolve. If the rack is loose, I don't care; heck, I don't care if I'm slug racked. If the balls end up in a bloody mess at the end of the table, I know how to play that, and relish the opportunity.
It's a mental thing, an attitudinal thing. Break 'em big? No problem. Break 'em softly. Ditto....
Deal with it......
Flex
If I sense my opponent is doing this to me, I just figure he's afraid I might run out, which will strengthen my resolve. If the rack is loose, I don't care; heck, I don't care if I'm slug racked. If the balls end up in a bloody mess at the end of the table, I know how to play that, and relish the opportunity.
It's a mental thing, an attitudinal thing. Break 'em big? No problem. Break 'em softly. Ditto....
Deal with it......
Flex
seymore15074 said:That's the one from the Monk, if I remember correctly...I did this maybe a dozen times this lifetime before I realized that I was wasting my time. Guess what happens when your oppenent misses? ...you now have a "difficult" run out.
Is it?
Hmmm, I've read too many articles...For some reason I guess I thought it was from Joe T? Like everyone else says, I have no idea if it makes a difference or not, it just kind of a dumb habbit now.
seymore15074 said:That's the one from the Monk, if I remember correctly...I did this maybe a dozen times this lifetime before I realized that I was wasting my time. Guess what happens when your oppenent misses? ...you now have a "difficult" run out.
I don't think that patten racking is cheating or a waste of time. I believe that the BCA rules are simply stating that there is no prescribed position for the balls other than the one and the seven.
As to whether putting certain balls in certain positions in the rack is important at advanced levels--absolutely! For example, the rack in seymore's example is pretty good, but if you want to increase your chances of losing against a runout player, go ahead and rack the two as the back ball or rack the eight in the row behind the nine ball! If you notice, a well-hit break from the side rail generall sends the one ball uptable if it doesn't go in the side. The back ball usually banks one rail of the foot cushion and heads uptable, and the balls behind the nine ball generally stay down table, along with the nine ball. Simply logic tells us that runouts become significanty easier if you don't have to travel far between the one and the two, or between the eight and the nine. I suspect that just about all top players put this knowledge to use when they rack.
I don't like pattern racking. It reduces the number of possible layouts, and adds a little predictability to the position of the balls after the break, thereby simplifying the game. Equipment specfications and the rules should be used to ensure that the skill required to run a rack is not inappropriately diminished. Enforcement may be a challenge, but it is necessary.
With pattern racking and Simonis 860, Lassiter might have run a 45-pack! He might come back from the grave just to try. Of course, he might not.
With pattern racking and Simonis 860, Lassiter might have run a 45-pack! He might come back from the grave just to try. Of course, he might not.
Last edited: