Magic Rack and Joshua Filler's 7-pack

JAM

JAM

I am the storm
Silver Member
Though today I am a railbird, I used to play, competing on the leagues and in local tournaments., I also went on the road a few years in the '80s with a road player. As such, I really do understand all games of pocket billiards.

I made a thread on my Facebook page about Joshua Filler's 7-pack, and much to my surprise, my other half posted on my thread he thought the Magic Rack shouldn't be allowed. I asked him privately why. Well, I thought about it. Doesn't the Magic Rack create the perfect rack with no cracks? Doesn't a pool player have to break perfectly each time in order for the wing ball to fly in the side? In comparison, when pins are racked in a bowling alley, doesn't the bowler have to hit them perfeclty in order to make a strike?

Some pros today practice their breaks. I saw Earl Strickland do it over and over again at many tournaments. Shane Van Boening is also a break mechanic. The break, at least in my eyes today, is just as important as having the ability to run out. Without a good break, even if you can run out, you will never be able to dominate. The break is THAT important.

In my eyes, the only way the Magic rack cannot be perfect is if the placement is off a few millimeters on the spot. By my own admission, I've never played pool with a Magic Rack and would enjoy hearing thoughts from others who have.

magic-ball-rack-matchroom-nineball-official-rack~3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
Jimmy_Betmore said:
50,000 to 1 against running a ten pack but we're talking about changing the rules because it's too easy? We might as well make a rule where it's a rerack if all the balls go in on the break because they're both just as likely to happen.
Click to expand...
BS. The first time that there was a actual INCENTIVE to run 10+ racks (the million dollar challenge..), it was done at the VERY first tournament by Earl... And that quickly brought an end to any more such insurance deals.

The odds are only so low BECAUSE there is no incentive, and safeties are the route to get to the finals and win the money. You simply don't give your opponent a chance to run a package back on you... Because you need to get through 4-5 killers to make any money AT ALL.

Have a big prize fund set aside specifically to award running out a set from the break, enough to eclipse any money they might win in the event, and I GUARANTEE you somebody does it in the first tournament or two. You'll have 50 absolute killers practicing with the specific break rules, and they WILL figure it out.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
There's a whole lot going on here. But, if my limited reading comprehension is correct, it seems like people just want to ensure that both players get an opportunity at the table and there's less chance of lopsided set scores. So, as goofy as this sounds, how about this? We make it like onepocket or straight pool and you break for your opponent. The rack pattern would be standardized and all normal break rules apply, X number of balls to a rail, X number of balls must pass the side pocket or head string or whatever, etc... A scratch would still be ball in hand for the incoming player. The incoming player would also have the option of either spotting any pocketed balls or leaving them down. There would be no push out option.

I'll readily admit this sounds kind of goofy. But it would ensure both players get opportunities at the table and there would be no incentive that I can think of to making any balls on the break or leaving the cue ball in the middle of the table. I'll leave it at this, I'd be down for watching it if for no other reasons than to see how it turns out and how quickly the players can come up with effective strategies.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JAM said:
Would you please be so kind as to explain the difference between an Outsville rack and a Magic rack? I waa unable to locate online a 2025 Derby City Classic Outsville rack, but the one below in purple is an Outsville rack. Below that is a Magic rack. Is there a difference in how to rack the balls using these two racks? I am just curious.


View attachment 804679
View attachment 804678
Click to expand...
Neither of the above are a "Magic Rack". The above examples are both fabric. The Magic Rack is plastic.

Google "magic rack" and then select images. The balls react differently when breaking out of an actual magic rack, and although not apart of this conversation, also more likely to alter ball path when the OB has a lack of spd.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jimmy_Betmore said:
There's a whole lot going on here. But, if my limited reading comprehension is correct, it seems like people just want to ensure that both players get an opportunity at the table and there's less chance of lopsided set scores. So, as goofy as this sounds, how about this? We make it like onepocket or straight pool and you break for your opponent. The rack pattern would be standardized and all normal break rules apply, X number of balls to a rail, X number of balls must pass the side pocket or head string or whatever, etc... A scratch would still be ball in hand for the incoming player. The incoming player would also have the option of either spotting any pocketed balls or leaving them down. There would be no push out option.

I'll readily admit this sounds kind of goofy. But it would ensure both players get opportunities at the table and there would be no incentive that I can think of to making any balls on the break or leaving the cue ball in the middle of the table. I'll leave it at this, I'd be down for watching it if for no other reasons than to see how it turns out and how quickly the players can come up with effective strategies.
Click to expand...

No need for such complex arrangements, the solution is at hand and simple - alternative break ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
kris said:
No need for such complex arrangements, the solution is at hand and simple - alternative break ;)
Click to expand...
One would think. But people don't seem to like that either. Also, this thread really got going when people started talking about Filler making a ball and playing shape on the one in multiple consecutive racks. If he's the only one who can do that consistently, alternating break wouldn't help.

For the record, I think things are fine the way they are and we're just seeing the ebb and flow of skill. And I'm not going to sit here and say an opponent break format would fix anything for the folks who would like to see a change. But at least it would save the use of the template rack to make racking more efficient and it'd be an attempt at something that wouldn't change the game so much that it would be basically unrecognizable. And after thinking about it, I can't help but believe players would develop a defensive break that gave them the best chance of leaving the cue ball and one ball on opposite ends of the table. That should lead to either very aggressive offense or more safety battles at the beginnings of games.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jimmy_Betmore said:
One would think. But people don't seem to like that either. Also, this thread really got going when people started talking about Filler making a ball and playing shape on the one in multiple consecutive racks. If he's the only one who can do that consistently, alternating break wouldn't help.

For the record, I think things are fine the way they are and we're just seeing the ebb and flow of skill. And I'm not going to sit here and say the an opponent break format would fix anything for the folks who would like to see a change. But at least it would save the use of the template rack to make racking more efficient and it'd be an attempt at something that wouldn't change the game so much that it would be basically unrecognizable. And after thinking about it, I can't help but believe players would develop a defensive break that gave them the best chance of leaving the cue ball and one ball on opposite ends of the table. That should lead to either very aggressive offense or more safety battles at the beginnings of games.
Click to expand...

well, if they don't wanna narrow the break box like the rest of WNT promoters, then go back to race to 7 and alternate the breaks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Black-Balled said:
The 10b break has been figured out too, sorry.

They need to use the whole rack and whoever makes the final ball (irrespective of value) gets a point and breaks the next rack...play to a set amount of points.

And ball in hand for incoming player after any miss. Shoot for the holes, boys.
Click to expand...
I can get on board with this as well, I know 10 ball has been figured out pretty good but its still a more complicated rack and of course call shot and no 10 ball breaks, 10 always gets spotted.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top