In the other sports that have been mentioned (tennis, golf, baseball) your opponent does participate, pool is afaik the only sport that you could never have a chance to win the game, i.e. a break and run.
If you have alternating breaks and a race to more than 1, the problem you refer to is eliminated.
Well, for one thing, the pool world is made of different games. To apply this concept to all the pool games does not make sense.
I have a feeling this is more related to 9 ball than any other pool game.
So, maybe the real problem is the pool game being played and not the whole world of pool games.
Short races and lack of multiple sets is another problem.
An old man once told me that pool is the most cruel game ever invented. In all other sports an opponent is guaranteed an opportunity to get their shot.
Examples. Golf. You take your swing and then your other opponent(s) get theirs. Baseball. one team gets a time at bat. 3 outs later the other team gets their turn. Football. One team scores and then has to kickoff to the other team.
Not so in pool. Guy might break and run out a set and you never reach the table.
Pool also punishes you harshly for making mistakes. You might dog a shot and your opponent takes over the table and you may never see the table again. And if you do you might be kicking 3 rails to hit a ball because your opponent shot a dead lock safety on you. That is what the old man I knew meant when he said pool is the most cruel game!!
This old man also played golf and said that pool was a much harsher game than golf. He said in golf you can make a bad shot and it may cost you several strokes but at least you get another opportunity at redemption because you always get another shot and can make up for a bad shot. Pool guarantees no such opportunities. One stupid mistake and you may cede control of the table to your opponent and may never have another chance to redeem yourself.
The old man said that playing pool required a certain mental toughness because of this aspect of it. He was truly a wise old man.
I tried to cover this in my original post: Even though I'm pointing out what could be considered a flaw, I am not advocating alternate breaks because there is a beauty and a higher goal to stringing racks.
Perhaps, as one person pointed out in regards to the DCC, if one player runs, say, 13 racks, the other player should get to at least try to run the same number of balls, plus one, afterwards.
> a pistol duel.
> I was dealt "Gin" once.
In Pool, someone can run out the set (winner breaks) with ZERO input from you. You don't even get 1 remote chance at it. You get nothing. You lose. Good day, sir.
Eric
You can't have it both ways. Either you have alternating breaks, or you give a really good player an opportunity to break and run the set. I would be in favor of giving an incoming player an inning at the table if his opponent broke and ran the set.
> a pistol duel.
> I was dealt "Gin" once.
How about being dealt a Blackjack? (plus you get odds on your money)
J
Somebody mentioned "pistol duel"...good job. I think that one works
Sent from my BlackBerry 9780 using Tapatalk
Archer ran out the set (like 11 racks) on Bustamante, Then Bustamante asked Archer if he would like to bump the bet....Just saying
After a pitcher releases the ball, he relinquishes control to the hitter. No matter how difficult of a pitch it is to hit, it is the hitter who has control. He can choose to swing or not. In order for the pitcher to strike him out, he must eventually place the ball in the strike zone.
Pool is not this way in the context of this thread.
Id say golf, because if you play perfect, your opponents are screwed.
Joe