Magic Rack

[junkbond]

I got an 8-ball version of the Magic Rack a few months ago to protect the break area of the cloth on my home table. Many people use a break cloth to keep from wearing out the head string area, so I figured maybe the MBR would help prevent wearing out the foot spot area. And it works. There is no noticeable wear in the rack area cloth after thousands of breaks.

It's no problem at all to use. I simply load my Diamond rack and roll it onto the MBR. It takes no longer than a normal rack on a table with an unworn rack area, and a lot less time than trying to get a tight rack on a table with wear on the spot.

I would not use the MBR in a tournament or money game, but only for practice and friendly matches. Many times, I have seen a ball stop too soon or change course when it rolls slowly into the rack, especially if it has some spin on it. Occasionally, a ball will come to rest several inches from where it would have been without the MBR on the table. I have noticed occasions when a ball is tied up when it shouldn't have been, or not tied up when it should have been. True, the serious interference doesn't happen often, but it does happen. And one time can change the outcome of a game or match.

Some have compared the MBR interference to that of the foot spot. It would be more accurate to compare it to the interference of a giant foot spot the size of the rack.

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

The possibility of interference on the break with the path of a ball perhaps being changed slightly doesn't bother me that much mainly since the break is by nature pretty much a random event. But as I noted regarding the instance in the woman's tournament last night the ball and rack were left in place during play of the rack and it did cause a problem. During play of the rack we are no longer dealing with primarily random events and this type situation is not good. But it could have easily been remedied by the ref removing the rack immediately after the break.

 

[Johnnyt]

The possibility of interference on the break with the path of a ball perhaps being changed slightly doesn't bother me that much mainly since the break is by nature pretty much a random event. But as I noted regarding the instance in the woman's tournament last night the ball was left in place during play of the rack and it did cause a problem. During play of the rack we are no longer dealing with primarily random events and this type situation is not good. But it could have easily been remedied by the ref removing the rack immediately after the break.

I agree with the above and will add that the few times a ball rolls off on the the on the break...the rolls will even out in the long run. Maybe one time it rolls into a shot that wasn't there if it didn't hit the rack and the next time it takes a shot away from you. Johnnyt

 

[Qstix]

It's definitely an improvement over traditional racks IMO.

 

[Mike in MN]

I agree with the above and will add that the few times a ball rolls off on the the on the break...the rolls will even out in the long run. Maybe one time it rolls into a shot that wasn't there if it didn't hit the rack and the next time it takes a shot away from you. Johnnyt

Agreed. I think the benefit far outweighs the cost.

 

[SCCues]

I would not use the MBR in a tournament or money game, but only for practice and friendly matches. Many times, I have seen a ball stop too soon or change course when it rolls slowly into the rack, especially if it has some spin on it. Occasionally, a ball will come to rest several inches from where it would have been without the MBR on the table. I have noticed occasions when a ball is tied up when it shouldn't have been, or not tied up when it should have been. True, the serious interference doesn't happen often, but it does happen. And one time can change the outcome of a game or match.

Some have compared the MBR interference to that of the foot spot. It would be more accurate to compare it to the interference of a giant foot spot the size of the rack.

Your description is what I was thinking when I started this thread. I don't see how you could use it to rack the balls and it not effect a slow rolling ball after the break.

James

 

[Maniac]

Like I said previously, only to the extent that a foot spot would affect it.

But....on the 9-ball Magic Rack, it would be equivalent to having NINE foot spots instead of the usual ONE foot spot. This could significantly alter the outcome of one's break. Can't you imagine this scenario: A great 9-ball match goes hill-hill. Player A breaks and the 1-ball drops into the side pocket. The 2-ball is going to be fine as long as it rolls past the small cluster around the racking area. Oops, the slow-rolling 2-ball settles into one of the holes (geez, it only had to roll over two or three of them ) in the Magic Rack and is now unhittable. Push-out or kick, either way Player A can't be too happy.

Now granted, this scenario (nor anything similar) wouldn't happen very often, but even once in a great while, imo renders the Magic Rack not much better than the old-fashioned way of just racking a decent, tight rack. I think that sometimes, in the quest for perfection, we come up with ideas that are only marginally better. The Magic Rack, IMO, is one such product. With all due respect to the inventor, and to all who use it and love it, I'd just as soon not own one.

Maniac

 

[Mike in MN]

But....on the 9-ball Magic Rack, it would be equivalent to having NINE foot spots instead of the usual ONE foot spot. This could significantly alter the outcome of one's break. Can't you imagine this scenario: A great 9-ball match goes hill-hill. Player A breaks and the 1-ball drops into the side pocket. The 2-ball is going to be fine as long as it rolls past the small cluster around the racking area. Oops, the slow-rolling 2-ball settles into one of the holes (geez, it only had to roll over two or three of them ) in the Magic Rack and is now unhittable. Push-out or kick, either way Player A can't be too happy.

Now granted, this scenario (nor anything similar) wouldn't happen very often, but even once in a great while, imo renders the Magic Rack not much better than the old-fashioned way of just racking a decent, tight rack. I think that sometimes, in the quest for perfection, we come up with ideas that are only marginally better. The Magic Rack, IMO, is one such product. With all due respect to the inventor, and to all who use it and love it, I'd just as soon not own one.

Maniac

I see your point, I truly do. Like you said, the odds of that happening are fairly low though. And to be totally fair, the exact same thing could happen on a table with an actual footspot when the Magic Rack isn't used.

I don't know if I am ready to endorse the Magic Rack for professional/tournament use for that reason. For casual use however, I'm a big fan. And for what it's worth, it would be like 8 foot spots, since the 9 ball does not have its own slot, but rather it is secured by the surrounding balls. :grin: