One Pocket Format Change?

T

The Hippie

Registered
IMO this would be a way better format for 1-pocket.
Instead of a race to 8-balls for the win...make it a race to 25, or 50 (or whatever you like) That would mean that every rack you need all the balls (like in straight pool) so there would be and end game in every rack. It would make it a more aggressive game, easy to handicap, high runs and excitement!
Whoever makes the last ball each rack would win the break.
This also works for bank pool! :wink:
 
Last edited:
Only issue with that is that in one pocket, the break is a safe break not a continuation of your run as in straight pool. And there is also a lot more value in having the break in one pocket, enough so that everyone plays alternating break unless you handicap to have all the breaks. That makes just continuing to break as you sink the last ball way too much of an advantage. It's almost like having the ability to take two shots in 8 or 9 ball, you shoot, maybe miss but get a ball close to a pocket, then use your second free shot to make that ball.

Interesting idea, but overall I don't see it working too well due to how the game is played.
 
My rule change for tournaments would be only 5 balls are allowed in the kitchen. Once a player shoots a 6th ball into the kitchen it gets spotted. I think this would speed up the uptable games that tend to slow down tournament one-pocket.
 
I didn't mean to break, and then continue shooting...just that by making the last ball you win the break. I believe I worded it in a confusing manner.
 
The Hippie said:
IMO this would be a way better format for 1-pocket.
Instead of a race to 8-balls for the win...make it a race to 25, or 50 (or whatever you like) That would mean that every rack you need all the balls (like in straight pool) so there would be and end game in every rack. It would make it a more aggressive game, easy to handicap, high runs and excitement!
Whoever makes the last ball each rack would win the break and continue shooting.
This also works for bank pool! :wink:
Click to expand...

I've played in a tournament with this format once, but I think it was alternate break rather than whoever made the last ball.

I think it's a fine way to play, but I'm not sure "every rack has an end game" is an improvement on the conventional format. The end game can be pretty dull sometimes, and is especially painful among lower-skilled players. I think one pocket is more fun when there are run-outs from time to time.

-Andrew
 
The Hippie said:
I didn't mean to break, and then continue shooting...just that by making the last ball you win the break. I believe I worded it in a confusing manner.
Click to expand...

You worded it just fine. It's just that breaking is such an advantage that it would tilt the game in the favor of the player making the last ball.

I could see where the battle to make the last ball would last hours. In 1P it's pretty easy to play safe with only one ball on the table.
 
IMO the only rule that needs to change in one pocket are the fouls. I think after one player has used up 5 fouls then every foul after that the opponent gets ball in hand.
 
The Hippie said:
IMO this would be a way better format for 1-pocket.
Instead of a race to 8-balls for the win...make it a race to 25, or 50 (or whatever you like) That would mean that every rack you need all the balls (like in straight pool) so there would be and end game in every rack. It would make it a more aggressive game, easy to handicap, high runs and excitement!
Whoever makes the last ball each rack would win the break.
This also works for bank pool! :wink:
Click to expand...

You should live so long. May we all live so long.

Jeff Livingston
 
I like it... even if you lose a rack, balls you made carry over and work towards winning the "race".

I'm wondering how it will affect 1p strategy. A lot of the game is "playing the score" so you can
dial up your offensive vs. defensive shots. I think overall it will lean the game towards offense.

Selling out 4 balls is a huge deal when that's 50% of the points you need to win.
But if you play race to 40 balls, it's only 10% of the points needed. So you might take a flyer
even if risks giving away a few balls.

If wrestling over the last ball can lead to long boring games, because players are desperate for the break,
then maybe change the rule so that whoever has more balls that rack, wins the break.
Then it shouldn't come up very often, 7-7 scores aren't that common.
 
Thats not a bad idea CreeDo! It might effect the uptown downtown options also...since you will usually want or need all the balls! I have played this way with a few players and it worked out pretty good!
 
Andrew Manning said:
I've played in a tournament with this format once, but I think it was alternate break rather than whoever made the last ball.

I think it's a fine way to play, but I'm not sure "every rack has an end game" is an improvement on the conventional format. The end game can be pretty dull sometimes, and is especially painful among lower-skilled players. I think one pocket is more fun when there are run-outs from time to time.

-Andrew
Click to expand...

I also think playing the rack out is a good way to play. It guarantees exposure to all phases of the game, the end hugely important.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top