what happened to using the great and wonderful magic rack? instead of of these rack inspectors.
"magic" rack?
- Thread starter breakandrunrob
- Start date
speaking of rack inspectors did you see Rodney Morris take a picture of
the rack Mike Dechaine gave him in the middle of their match whats up with
that i have never seen that done before i would love to see a close up of that
I've seen "rack inspectors" even with the magic rack.
When was this? I'm intrigued now.
at Turning Stone yesterday during their match rodney got a camera
and took a close up picture of the rack dechaine gave him i guess
it was to study it later to see what gaps or tricks mike uses
or maybe it was a move to get in mikes head a little
i sure would like to hear what Rodney has to say about it
Last edited:
I was talking to Thorsten about the racking issues, he was a bit frustrated and stated that's why he does better in Asia because it's magic rack and he can just play pool and not worry about the inspecting. But then he said it becomes a trick shot because you can make a ball on the break every time utilizing a cut break so there is an element of chance taken out which is why turning stone doesn't use magic rack.
Before the match between Rodney and Shaw, Rodney was showing the photo to Shaw and they were clearly talking about racking issues after Shaw just defeated dechaine.
That's what's so great about turning stone, you are right in the mix to see professional pool, warts and all.
I was at Turning Stone on Saturday for a while and watched the Strickland/Daya match. I don't think either one even glanced at the rack before breaking. Meanwhile, a few tables away Yednak studied the racks with the concentration of a chess grand master.
I'll let you guess which was the more enjoyable match to watch.
I'll let you guess which was the more enjoyable match to watch.
The issue with anyone complaining about having someone check the rack, is that these guys make a living winning pool games. If you get a rack you don't like, you don't get a good layout or make a ball, you don't pay the rent.
Would we complain that a skydiver is checking his parachute to make sure it's OK before jumping? Or a race car driver checks his tires and car before a race?
There is NO way to totally have a solution for racking in pool. Rack your own, well then the guy can setup a rack to make a ball or do pattern racking for the same easy layout. Rack for your opponent, guy may not do the best job and the breaker will want to check things. Use regular rack, it's not tight enough. Use Magic Rack and it's too tight and easy to make a ball.
Here is what we can do. Hire a bunch of blind people to just throw the balls on the table instead of having a break shot to start the game. Equal for all and no rack issues.
I guess my point is that Earl did just fine without looking over the rack and the match moved along and was enjoyable to watch. From a spectator's point of view, the momentum was lost after every rack while Yednak and Archer looked things over.
Not good analogies. You don't pay to watch pre-race or pre-jump set up, just like we don't normally "pay" (I put it in quotes because TS is free to spectators) to watch athletes warm-up.
A better analogy would be having a baseball pitcher slowly examine all the threads on the baseball before throwing it.
Or... get impartial volunteers to rack. TS had about 14 tables. You could have 7 volunteers covering two tables each to rack each game. The volunteer makes the best effort and the players cannot examine or complain about the rack. Volunteers could be "paid" by getting to play in a pre-tourney scotch-doubles pro-am.
Frankly, I'm a little surprised at your response. In the "league bashing" thread, you wanted to grow professional pool but here you are defending an aspect of the game that is really really boring. If it were on TV, they would go to commercial between racks but then again, they would also have an official do the racking anyway...
Not good analogies. You don't pay to watch pre-race or pre-jump set up, just like we don't normally "pay" (I put it in quotes because TS is free to spectators) to watch athletes warm-up.
A better analogy would be having a baseball pitcher slowly examine all the threads on the baseball before throwing it.
Or... get impartial volunteers to rack. TS had about 14 tables. You could have 7 volunteers covering two tables each to rack each game. The volunteer makes the best effort and the players cannot examine or complain about the rack. Volunteers could be "paid" by getting to play in a pre-tourney scotch-doubles pro-am.
Frankly, I'm a little surprised at your response. In the "league bashing" thread, you wanted to grow professional pool but here you are defending an aspect of the game that is really really boring. If it were on TV, they would go to commercial between racks but then again, they would also have an official do the racking anyway...
The magic rack is way too predictable! That being said, they should use the magic rack and after the break, the first shot has to be a push! I personally think that would change the game completely, and also, you would have a few different "top" players in the mix
But as I say this, I still love watching 4-5-6 packs being put together
But as I say this, I still love watching 4-5-6 packs being put together
I'm not sure why they simply don't specify a pattern that has to be used. How hard would that be? Also use the magic rack. Then let each player rack their own.
I was not "bashing leagues" I was just against the idea that they help grow pool outside of beer and cheap cue sales in almost every case.
Having volunteers is just as bad as anything, you could setup any rules for racking/breaking in a tournament, but if there are not, I am not going to complain that players look or ask the rack to be redone. Many pro player agrees that the break is the most important shot they shoot, which no-one here argues against. So why is setting up the rack well bad? The only real issue with using the Magic Rack is in 9 ball, it just wires up the balls too well. At the same time, any well done rack and a breaker that has tuned the speed and angle of the break can just about wire a ball in 9 ball.
I think the real solution is to play 10 ball in these pro events, including the US Open.
I didn't say you were bashing leagues, I was just referring to the other thread whose title was something like "to all the league bashers".
And I agree to the 10-ball idea.
Agree with the 10 ball comment. NO matter what ... racking 9-ball will always be an issue.
How about this though - a bit of a take from the No Conflict rules.
First - use a delta 13 rack. Then:
Have a volunteer put the nine balls in the rack and spin three times (to get randomness), push the balls together to a none-ball formation, and then swap the one and nine balls with the appropriate ball if they are not in the correct position (the non-conflict part).
Push the rack to the foot spot and step away. Pro then "racks" his own. Nine ball spotted if made in bottom two pockets. Otherwise ... good to go.
How about this though - a bit of a take from the No Conflict rules.
First - use a delta 13 rack. Then:
Have a volunteer put the nine balls in the rack and spin three times (to get randomness), push the balls together to a none-ball formation, and then swap the one and nine balls with the appropriate ball if they are not in the correct position (the non-conflict part).
Push the rack to the foot spot and step away. Pro then "racks" his own. Nine ball spotted if made in bottom two pockets. Otherwise ... good to go.
On all the Accu-Stats videos I have of 9 ball tournaments from the 90s guys are racking for each other and it doesn't take them 10 minutes to rack the balls. What changed? In my opinion guys became way more knowledgeable about the rack and were no longer content with accepting the fact that making the ball on the break was chance. Instead the expectation became for a rack to always be perfect with a wired ball. In my opinion the only real solution would be to have independent rackers with no ability of either player to check the rack. Also, one could go to the Mosconi Cup break rules from last year to prevent wired balls. I know one thing for sure opponent racks isn't the way to go anymore. Watching guys rack the balls for 10 minutes at a time is just brutal.
The magic rack is way too predictable! That being said, they should use the magic rack and after the break, the first shot has to be a push! I personally think that would change the game completely, and also, you would have a few different "top" players in the mix
But as I say this, I still love watching 4-5-6 packs being put together
I was told pat Flemming is already doing this in his 9 ball challenge matches at accu stat arena. Players rack their own, incoming player is forced to push out make his opponent push. Sounds good to me.
I think that the American Rotation method of alternate breaks, rack your own, and giving the breaker BIH after the break whether they make a ball or not really neutralizes the rack/break issues. It takes some getting used to since we're so accustomed to tracking the cue ball on the break, but once you've watched for a while, you begin to ignore the cue ball and pay attention to the way the object balls spread.
Not true. My events are fixed for good. They draw players too. (and that includes MD)
Last edited:
Is that the "shoot even if you don't make a ball but you have to push" thing? Or just "shoot even if you don't make a ball"?
I don't like that either. For pro level pool, 10 ball is the only think I can think of that will keep the 9 ball rack from being an issue.
Shooting even if you don't make a ball creates other issues. Now you don't have to worry about shooting to make a ball and have an open shot, you can shoot to play easy shape on the 1. About the same issue that you get with a soft break. Not to mension that it defeats the whole concept of pool which is, you make a ball, you shoot again. Now you can NOT make a ball but keep shooting.
That would really only work for that game, imagine giving a pro player ball in hand in 9 ball or even 10 ball?
Even alternating breaks, which I think are fair, are at times not fun since a player may end up behind, but never get a chance to catch up even if they break and run a game since the next chance is the opponents.
I like winner break, or at least do a break rotation where if you break 3 times in a row, next break is the opponents. If they lose, you get the break again for 3 times max, if they win, they can break up to 3 times.