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
The magic rack's perfection causes the problem: the 9b rack is now too perfect.

With 1 on the spot, a wing ball will go in at pretty much any speed and it is also relatively easy to control the 1b and send it a side pocket or a head-rail corner pocket of the breaker's choice.

Add in intentional ordering of balls and repeatable speed, the run-outs begin to take similar paths

What then happens is 9b becomes 7 ball and players far worse than pro level can then play pretty much perfect pool.

9b is already too easy for the big boys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
Upvote 0 Downvote
Black-Balled said:
The magic rack's perfection causes the problem: the 9b rack is now too perfect.

With 1 on the spot, a wing ball will go in at pretty much any speed and it is also relatively easy to control the 1b and send it a side pocket or a head-rail corner pocket of the breaker's choice.

Add in intentional ordering of balls and repeatable speed, the run-outs begin to take similar paths

What then happens is 9b becomes 7 ball and players far worse than pro level can then play pretty much perfect pool.

9b is already too easy for the big boys.
Click to expand...
Except it ISN'T happening.

I'm still waiting to see the first set run out not the 10,000th.

Arguably the best 9 baller ever ran a 7 pack that's it, not the set, a 7 pack. Where are all the other 7 packs, 8 packs and 9 packs? They don't exist.

When Earl ran his 11 or whatever it was with a regular rack did everybody lose their mind and say regular racks shouldn't be allowed? NO

Show me all the people running 7 packs with the template - it's been used for a lot of years and yet nobody is doing it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just my personal opinion: allow the rack to be moved up and down a few inches and also tilt it randomly by an inch. Template is good way to get a perfect rack on a worn cloth, but it is the standardized position of the rack that creates the predictability of the break. I'd like to see old school 9-ball blast breaks without the contemporary predictability.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jasonlaus said:
Except it ISN'T happening.

I'm still waiting to see the first set run out not the 10,000th.

Arguably the best 9 baller ever ran a 7 pack that's it, not the set, a 7 pack. Where are all the other 7 packs, 8 packs and 9 packs? They don't exist.

When Earl ran his 11 or whatever it was with a regular rack did everybody lose their mind and say regular racks shouldn't be allowed? NO

Show me all the people running 7 packs with the template - it's been used for a lot of years and yet nobody is doing it.
Click to expand...
I'm with you on this one. Without the magic rack, people complain about rack mechanics and racking taking too long. With it, they complain that it's too easy to make a ball on the break. The thing is, this rack is available to both players so it's not like one person has some kind of wild advantage. On top of that, the breaker still has to run out. If we ever got to a point where everyone could use a magic rack and make the same ball on the break, the only real way I know to combat it would be to use alternating breaks. But then I'd bet we'd have people complaining that we don't get to see anybody put an X-pack on anybody anymore.

The magic rack adds consistency and efficiency to the game which, in my opinion, helps the better players win more often. And at it's core, that's what competition is all about.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
jasonlaus said:
Except it ISN'T happening.

I'm still waiting to see the first set run out not the 10,000th.

Arguably the best 9 baller ever ran a 7 pack that's it, not the set, a 7 pack. Where are all the other 7 packs, 8 packs and 9 packs? They don't exist.

When Earl ran his 11 or whatever it was with a regular rack did everybody lose their mind and say regular racks shouldn't be allowed? NO

Show me all the people running 7 packs with the template - it's been used for a lot of years and yet nobody is doing it.
Click to expand...
...some real good points...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
These players have come close to perfecting the game. I don’t believe the Magic rack is the solution or the problem. Great table conditions, an almost perfect rack, and the expertise of elite players will produce remarkable results. I think we must accept the game as it is. Extending the races, using imperfect racks, and tightening the pockets are not the solutions either. I believe we need to find a way to make the game more challenging, but I’m not certain how to achieve that.

I do believe that if a player runs 9 and out (if it happens), the opponent should at least have the opportunity to do the same. It should be written in the rules.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mjantti said:
Just my personal opinion: allow the rack to be moved up and down a few inches and also tilt it randomly by an inch. Template is good way to get a perfect rack on a worn cloth, but it is the standardized position of the rack that creates the predictability of the break. I'd like to see old school 9-ball blast breaks without the contemporary predictability.
Click to expand...
I played an event where they gave out a random rack order that was to be followed when players racked the balls.

Still allows Corey to solve it though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jasonlaus said:
Except it ISN'T happening.

I'm still waiting to see the first set run out not the 10,000th.

Arguably the best 9 baller ever ran a 7 pack that's it, not the set, a 7 pack. Where are all the other 7 packs, 8 packs and 9 packs? They don't exist.

When Earl ran his 11 or whatever it was with a regular rack did everybody lose their mind and say regular racks shouldn't be allowed? NO

Show me all the people running 7 packs with the template - it's been used for a lot of years and yet nobody is doing it.
Click to expand...
Check out the svb match in Greece, it was an exhibition type thing, maybe vs kazakis and it was 10b and svb manhandled him.

Svb broke damn near the same for about an hour and a half.

Your yardstick of large packs is thinking in absolutes: winners make shot choices that retain advantage and this often means the inning- but not the advantage- turns over.

And somebody recently shared a '25 DCC match (filler?) vid about repeated results.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Black-Balled said:
Check out the svb match in Greece, it was an exhibition type thing, maybe vs kazakis and it was 10b and svb manhandled him.

Svb broke damn near the same for about an hour and a half.

Your yardstick of large packs is thinking in absolutes: winners make shot choices that retain advantage and this often means the inning- but not the advantage- turns over.

And somebody recently shared a '25 DCC match (filler?) vid about repeated results.
Click to expand...
And? Where are all the huge packs that everybody seems to think are happening?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jason said:
These players have come close to perfecting the game. I don’t believe the Magic rack is the solution or the problem. Great table conditions, an almost perfect rack, and the expertise of elite players will produce remarkable results. I think we must accept the game as it is. Extending the races, using imperfect racks, and tightening the pockets are not the solutions either. I believe we need to find a way to make the game more challenging, but I’m not certain how to achieve that.

I do believe that if a player runs 9 and out (if it happens), the opponent should at least have the opportunity to do the same. It should be written in the rules.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of your points except a player getting to reply to their opponent running out the set. Don't get me wrong, I see where you're coming from. But, and I do not have numbers to back this up - just my gut, I don't feel that it happens enough to warrant a rule. And if a player is good enough to run out the set consistently enough, I think they're deserving of the win. I mean, back when 14.1 was the thing 150 and out was a celebrated occasion. And again, just my gut, I'd suspect that happened more often than players running out sets of 9 ball. Sure, there was more than likely a safety battle of some sort leading up to it. But still... At some point the losing player sat down and became a spectator for every following rack.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jimmy_Betmore said:
I agree with all of your points except a player getting to reply to their opponent running out the set. Don't get me wrong, I see where you're coming from. But, and I do not have numbers to back this up - just my gut, I don't feel that it happens enough to warrant a rule. And if a player is good enough to run out the set consistently enough, I think they're deserving of the win. I mean, back when 14.1 was the thing 150 and out was a celebrated occasion. And again, just my gut, I'd suspect that happened more often than players running out sets of 9 ball. Sure, there was more than likely a safety battle of some sort leading up to it. But still... At some point the losing player sat down and became a spectator for every following rack.
Click to expand...
Yep, I'm still waiting on that list of players running out the set - doesn't happen
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Obviously, a seven pack has become an endangered species under the new Matchroom rules, which include a tighter break box and 4" pockets. Loosen the pockets to 4 1/2" and widen the break box, as they did at the Derby, and it is a new ballgame. Still, as others have noted, nobody else was stringing them like Filler, so let's give credit where it is due.

Fans are taking a step backward if their focus is on why Josh Filler, already one of the greatest rotation games players of all time, was able to run a seven pack and whether there was something fishy about it. In fairness, many of us are asking the right question, which is "How great was that and how lucky am I to have witnessed it first-hand?" For Josh to produce that effort in a late round against a BCA Hall of Fame legend made it even more special.

Lest we forget, when the referee was racking in the final, Josh still made the corner ball time after time after time.

For all we know, SVB may do something similar to Filler in their next meeting. When the legends have their "A" game going, a magical performance is always possible.

I do not think it unfair to suggest that these conditions were a little too easy for the most elite players in the world, but everybody faced the exact same challenge and the one who best met it walked away with the
Derby City 9ball title

For now, the only sensible thing to say is "well played, Josh." What a performance!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jasonlaus said:
And? Where are all the huge packs that everybody seems to think are happening?
Click to expand...
I've blanked the ghost many times at home to 5 and 7.

I am not as good as filler (maybe when I grow up).

The ability is there for a filler and the format discourages the absolute you demand as proof.

If only there was a hi-run contest and a Jayson...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Maybe the real solution is a Magic rack with a specified different random rack order for every rack that is handed out by the tournament director at the start of play. They could just hand out little cheat sheets with the rack order for every game at the start of every match.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jimmy_Betmore said:
I agree with all of your points except a player getting to reply to their opponent running out the set. Don't get me wrong, I see where you're coming from. But, and I do not have numbers to back this up - just my gut, I don't feel that it happens enough to warrant a rule. And if a player is good enough to run out the set consistently enough, I think they're deserving of the win. I mean, back when 14.1 was the thing 150 and out was a celebrated occasion. And again, just my gut, I'd suspect that happened more often than players running out sets of 9 ball. Sure, there was more than likely a safety battle of some sort leading up to it. But still... At some point the losing player sat down and became a spectator for every following rack.
Click to expand...
I think each player should have an equal amount of innings to attempt to win.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top