Yes, makes sense...
No, WTF?...
No, WTF?...
Mandatory Push after the break?
- Thread starter Icon of Sin
- Start date
I dont really know. The only reason in my mind is so that a player with a lesser break can still have a chance with a player with a better one. I'm sure CJ will chime in telling us how it makes the game more "pure" and it's real pool or something like that.
I chose No... as did everyone who voted elsewhere. Figured I would created a new thread about it here to encourage discussion about it in this thread as opposed to one that got hijacked.
I see pros/cons of both sides. It takes the excitement out of the game, but it also takes the rack mechanics out of the game as well.
Seems like a rule designed for players who hate being run out on so much. Nothing is more exciting than a 3+ pack. I was in a tourney a couple weeks ago. I was on the hill in both matches when my opponents put a 4 pack and a 3 pack on me respectively to win each match. I went 2 and out and had no complaints. To me, it was a thrilling way to lose.
The same people that created handicapped tournaments are probably responsible. Next you'll see a handicap system where an advanced player has to push out two or 3 times against a lesser player. Where will it stop??
The same people that created handicapped tournaments are probably responsible. Next you'll see a handicap system where an advanced player has to push out two or 3 times against a lesser player. Where will it stop??
Can you elaborate on "takes the rack mechanics" out of the game? Sounds like an accusation.
If player A racks, player B as the right to check it. THAT takes the rack mechanics out of the game. If player B doesnt see a need to check it then either player B doesnt care or player B is going to try to fix the rack as well.
A neutral racker would also take the rack mechanics out of the game. I know it was said in other threads in regards to tournaments that having a neutral racker would be virtually impossible... but for setup matches like something on TAR or the upcoming JA vs. Shaw match where this rule is being used, this is highly possible.
So in this case, rack mechanics wouldnt be a valid excuse IMO. In a tourney it would be barely valid, but if both players have the right to check the rack then it shouldn't be a concern.
My vote is NO
If you want to see runouts, then you have 9-Ball, 10-Ball.
If you want strategy, nice shots and fight for the first most important shot, than you have One Pocket.
For me the things are clear.
If you want to see runouts, then you have 9-Ball, 10-Ball.
If you want strategy, nice shots and fight for the first most important shot, than you have One Pocket.
For me the things are clear.
Decent idea but what we really need is neutral rackers, at very least in the late rounds of tournaments.
Best of all, however, would be to switch to eight ball, the one game that all pool players and most non pool players know.
Without a neutral racker, rotational pool is broken beyond repair and "rack your own" could possibly spell the end of the rotational pool era.
I'd be OK was having a "manadatory pushout" event on the pool tournament calendar occasionally, but not more often than that.
Best of all, however, would be to switch to eight ball, the one game that all pool players and most non pool players know.
Without a neutral racker, rotational pool is broken beyond repair and "rack your own" could possibly spell the end of the rotational pool era.
I'd be OK was having a "manadatory pushout" event on the pool tournament calendar occasionally, but not more often than that.
Last edited:
OK you guys all think it take out the better breaker and that is an obvious way to look at. Bt but perhaps it gives favor to the better pool player. The person who can envision places they can be successful from when they push that the opponent gives back to them. The person who is going to accept the push and return a safe kick or make the ball, whatever. I am sure the game is not made for TV but if you play a 10 ahead of must push the better pool player will prevail and they better break pretty good too. And remember the first player at the table must push so a dry break would force the incoming player to push so creative pushes, good kicking will be a key part of the winning plan.
I think there are package players and there are control players this game would allow the player with the most control to prevail.
I think there are package players and there are control players this game would allow the player with the most control to prevail.
voted yes... as this is the option being discussed... it is something that puts more "play" into the game. With Texas Express rules the break becomes such a significant part of the game it encourages "rackology".
I would take "mandatory" out if the Texas Express rules were ripped up on thrown away. To something more along the lines of spot all balls, push-out at anytime, or push-out to "Make" at anytime and ball in hand in the kitchen for on the break fouls.. or some combination. AND for me this is not an SVB "rule" there have been a lot of great breakers -- some combination of the above rules for 9 ball and even 10 ball would reward the better player significantly ... (to the point were short-stops might not even get in pro tournaments
)
Texas Express was adopted on the pro tour (I believe) because 1) through the late 70's the Mike and Buddy show hand a choke hold on almost every tournament 2) it increase the pace of play because Ball in Hand at anytime and all balls stay down made the game EASIER, thus quicker.. 3) TE would make it more exciting and better for TV, well it ain't on TV and doesn't look like it will be anytime soon...
put the strategy back in... put a complete test of skills back in... play some tournaments with TE and some without and see what happens... who knows until you try it...
I would take "mandatory" out if the Texas Express rules were ripped up on thrown away. To something more along the lines of spot all balls, push-out at anytime, or push-out to "Make" at anytime and ball in hand in the kitchen for on the break fouls.. or some combination. AND for me this is not an SVB "rule" there have been a lot of great breakers -- some combination of the above rules for 9 ball and even 10 ball would reward the better player significantly ... (to the point were short-stops might not even get in pro tournaments
)Texas Express was adopted on the pro tour (I believe) because 1) through the late 70's the Mike and Buddy show hand a choke hold on almost every tournament 2) it increase the pace of play because Ball in Hand at anytime and all balls stay down made the game EASIER, thus quicker.. 3) TE would make it more exciting and better for TV, well it ain't on TV and doesn't look like it will be anytime soon...
put the strategy back in... put a complete test of skills back in... play some tournaments with TE and some without and see what happens... who knows until you try it...
In a 10 ahead set, the better player usually wins regardless.
Can we get an in-between option?
I don't want to see it become the new standard.
But I think for a spectator it might make an interesting change of pace.
Sort of like how 1p is a nice change of pace from watching 10b all the time.
We sort of glaze over the pushout in most racks because it comes up rarely.
Was it a good pushout, a dumb one? Who cares, he ran 5 racks earlier.
Losing this one to a bad pushout won't sink him.
But if your decisionmaking directly affects EVERY rack you can start to see a lot of
thought go into it, and I can imagine sweaters having endless debates on what
they'd do from a certain position.
I don't want to see it become the new standard.
But I think for a spectator it might make an interesting change of pace.
Sort of like how 1p is a nice change of pace from watching 10b all the time.
We sort of glaze over the pushout in most racks because it comes up rarely.
Was it a good pushout, a dumb one? Who cares, he ran 5 racks earlier.
Losing this one to a bad pushout won't sink him.
But if your decisionmaking directly affects EVERY rack you can start to see a lot of
thought go into it, and I can imagine sweaters having endless debates on what
they'd do from a certain position.
No. Pool needs to speed up, not slow down.
If people are worried about two many packages being ran, etc., just tighten the pockets up slightly. That keeps the game somewhat honest without making it gaffy. This rule makes it gaffy, in my opinion.
You do that weird "lets put quotation marks around random words" thing CJ does.
If people are worried about two many packages being ran, etc., just tighten the pockets up slightly. That keeps the game somewhat honest without making it gaffy. This rule makes it gaffy, in my opinion.
voted yes... as this is the option being discussed... it is something that puts more "play" into the game. With Texas Express rules the break becomes such a significant part of the game it encourages "rackology".
I would take "mandatory" out if the Texas Express rules were ripped up on thrown away. To something more along the lines of spot all balls, push-out at anytime, or push-out to "Make" at anytime and ball in hand in the kitchen for on the break fouls.. or some combination. AND for me this is not an SVB "rule" there have been a lot of great breakers -- some combination of the above rules for 9 ball and even 10 ball would reward the better player significantly ... (to the point were short-stops might not even get in pro tournaments
Texas Express was adopted on the pro tour (I believe) because 1) through the late 70's the Mike and Buddy show hand a choke hold on almost every tournament 2) it increase the pace of play because Ball in Hand at anytime and all balls stay down made the game EASIER, thus quicker.. 3) TE would make it more exciting and better for TV, well it ain't on TV and doesn't look like it will be anytime soon...
put the strategy back in... put a complete test of skills back in... play some tournaments with TE and some without and see what happens... who knows until you try it...
You do that weird "lets put quotation marks around random words" thing CJ does.
"
Um.... The current ways of dealing with the rack are gaffy. Rack your own? We've seen what that can lead to. Perfect rack? Leads to perfect breaks.
SJM is right at least for nine ball. For top-level play, the game is broken. A few steps down, it probably doesn't make much difference what the break rules are.
I think "first shooter pushes" has a chance to put more back-and-forth into the game and fix the problem with the break.
Anyone who isn't fully aware that rack mechanics can have a large effect on the outcome of a tournament hasn't been paying attention the past few years.
Last edited:
And if it's important to speed the game up, put in a 15-second shot clock. That should fix things.
