The Chicago squeeze is becoming a thing of the past for the most part in 1P, you are right about that.
One Pocket Timing
- Thread starter Tennesseejoe
- Start date
Basically, if there are more than 4 object balls in kitchen, the ones closest to the head rail are spotted. The objective is to only have 4 balls in the kitchen.
Last edited:
mayb just dont play or watch if it bugs you
or start your own rock em sock em 1pkt tournament where you must blast to stack open on the break and turn 1pkt into 9b which is what it seems most want
senior 1pkt, its not new news that its slow
9years running already
or start your own rock em sock em 1pkt tournament where you must blast to stack open on the break and turn 1pkt into 9b which is what it seems most want
senior 1pkt, its not new news that its slow
9years running already
Don’t play 1pkt but I do enjoy watching it no matter the length it takes to play just as long as it is two players that really know how to play. And when it is two players that know how to play it usually takes longer. If one player is better than the other it’s always going to be a much quicker game if the better player wants it to be. That’s the other thing about one pocket… it’s very easy to mask your skill level. Watching 1pkt for me it’s not necessarily the end result... there’s much to learn and pick up from the strategy. Hell if I had no patience and wanted to watch some quick gambling I’d watch people flip coins. The problem with the game is that it’s not conducive for tournament play unless you adjust the rules but even then it’s a slow game and even slower to watch if you don’t appreciate the strategy. Yeah some players play more aggressive but what’s on the line? Put some real cash on the line and you’ll see shot selection change quickly. Hell even watching world class 9 ball players play… shot selection changes and more safes are played when something is on the line. Also just because someone is a high level 9 or 10 ball player doesn’t at all mean that translates into a high level 1pkt player so that’s also why you see more aggressive play by someone you might consider a good player but it doesn’t translate into their 1pkt game. It’s sort of like can you enjoy a low scoring defensive dominated NFL football game? Can that be exiting? Or does it have to be high scoring? The NFL to me has ruined the game with all the rule changes that favor scoring.
Last edited:
In my experience, the better the players, the faster the games.
I will qualify that by saying that that is IMO a recent development that started with Efren running eight and outs like it was nothin'; Scott and his power 1pocket; and now Tony with whatever you choose to call his gonzo shot selection. Players have become hyper-aggressive and are shooting at shots players wouldn't have dreamed of shooting two and certainly not three decades ago. Doing all that, games don't take so long.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
I don’t know about that... that game is so multifaceted. Yeah a game can go fast with a single mistake and you sell out but if two players that truly know the game on average it’s a long game. 1pkt is probably the easiest game to get hustled. Professional pool players get hustled playing 1pkt. And for people that don’t truly know the game it’s difficult to differentiate or distinguish who’s better, or who’s on what level... is it even really an even matchup? I will say i agree with you about Efren. He played the game different. But he didn’t go eight and out because he was aggressive. He went eight and out because he creates the opportunities to do it. Freewheeling/aggressive play is there if nobody’s punching back. If you get punched in the face the freewheeling stops just as in all games. Ipkt is sort of like poker… it’s easy to hide your skill and if you don’t see the sucker it’s probably you. There’s a whole lot of people that enjoy playing poker that are not great players.
Two good players will have long games but they will have a higher percentage of faster games — but you get two guys at the local pool room that haven’t kept up and just like to bunt ball upstairs and you’ll get long games and sessions.
You are correct, it takes a fine palate to distinguish and appreciate what’s going on in a 1pocket match. And that’s the reason it's the perfect hustler's game: your opponent never ever thinks you've beaten them -- they always leave the table thinking that they beat themselves. They missed the shot (and sold out), misplayed a safety (and sold out), hit a bank too hard (and sold out), let the cue ball creep out a bit too far (and sold out), well you get my point.
What they don't get is how difficult some of those simple looking safeties are to execute; the quality of the trap they were put in that forced the error; how repeatedly they were trapped (frozen to the back of a ball or the stack, with a ball in the jaws of their opponent's pocket); and how, without fail, their opponent punishes them for their mistakes. What it boils down to is that any opponent that doesn't come to the table with the full compliment of shots in their bag of tricks, is pretty much doomed from the start against an experienced player. You can't just know some of the shots -- you have to know them all.
The player that knows and can execute the most shots best wins. A good 9ball player without that knowledge is a dead duck against an experienced 1pocket player who might not even have the same fire power.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
yes what is wrong with telling certain players they cant play in the tournament.
lou is right. tell them to stay home.
what if it is a player that starts fights or arguments all the time. cant you tell him not to play. of course you can. or any player that disrupts the flow or fun of the tournament. and a slow player is just that.
to fix it all you have to do if the t.d. or organizer wont, is just get two players that just sit and dont shoot for 5 minutes every time its their turn. when questioned just say others can slow the game to a crawl for their benefit so can i.
you will see them fix it quickly.
stand in line at any checkout counter for ten minutes and see what happens. stay put at a stop sign for ten minutes and see if you dont get penalized. you see some people have a pair of balls and will stop it from happening. not so with pool t.d.s and organizers.
lou is right. tell them to stay home.
what if it is a player that starts fights or arguments all the time. cant you tell him not to play. of course you can. or any player that disrupts the flow or fun of the tournament. and a slow player is just that.
to fix it all you have to do if the t.d. or organizer wont, is just get two players that just sit and dont shoot for 5 minutes every time its their turn. when questioned just say others can slow the game to a crawl for their benefit so can i.
you will see them fix it quickly.
stand in line at any checkout counter for ten minutes and see what happens. stay put at a stop sign for ten minutes and see if you dont get penalized. you see some people have a pair of balls and will stop it from happening. not so with pool t.d.s and organizers.
Those contributors who have ideas about how to change the game of One Pocket should post their remedies. Banning players for their methodical play is disrespectful of their skill set. None of the posters in this thread has the slightest chance of beating Nicky Varner. But they don't like his Wedge so ban him from playing. I think thoughtful changes to the rules of one pocket is in order. Events like the recent Seniors One Pocket in Houston is a good place try them out. That's exactly what happened. The tournament started thursday and finished sunday night as scheduled.
The only thing that I saw that was disrespectful was guys endlessly staring at the table, getting down to shoot, getting back up again, endlessly staring at the table, and then, finally shooting.
Then doing it all again their next shot.
And just my opinion: you don’t need four days to run a 40 man tournament, unless…
Lou Figueroa
play grady rules thru out
and after a predetermined time
make the game the first to make 4 or maybe 5 balls wins each game (instead of going to 8)
may not solve the problem because then no "iffy " shot gets taken i guess
Make it where whoever has more balls after 20 minutes wins that game.
How many tables were available? How often were the available tables idle?
Here's a different format that might fix part of the problem:
The first phase of the tournament is the qualification phase. You run a bunch of 4-player single-elimination groups, race to 2. The winner of the group gets 2 points, the second place finisher gets 1 point. As soon as you are eliminated from a qualifier, you get back in line for another qualifier if you want to play some more. You stop the qualifiers at the end of the second day. All the tables are kept busy all the time.
The top 8 or 16 points earners come back on the third day to play a single-elimination tournament. That's three or four rounds in about 12 hours, so four or three hours per round, less meal time. You only need time control measures for that final day. You could play races to five, maybe.
In the qualification phase, the slow players are penalized by not being able to play as many qualifiers, so they won't have a shot at as many points. A slow player can only screw up two people in his group, and doesn't make a whole round wait on him.
There are a few details to worry about such as how to mix up the groups so you don't have to play the same person multiple times, but that's not a large problem.
speaking from someone who is a good player but plays at crawl speed so would of course think its okay to play slow..
Bob -- all those are issues to be discussed with the venue and the TD.
Lou Figueroa
yeah, maybe add some players buying back in to add to this clusterf*ck also,,,,,,,,,
Just apply the Grady rule, hell even change it to 3 balls up table max, done!
I agree with a lot of what you're saying, however the fact remains that an average Nick Varner race to 3 match lasts 6+ hours. A few other points, the tournament was originally limited to 32 players and a Friday start. On a whim it was changed to add more players and an extra day. Didn't the tournament end Monday morning
With the Grady rule being used in the seniors 1p tournament. And the level of players that were playing.
It's clear that guy's aren't shooting at there hole when they should be or the opponents aren't putting them in a trap soon enough. Which seems really hard to believe.
I like the idea of the aggressive 1p but I bet 50% of those seniors wouldn't play if they couldn't take more time.
It's clear that guy's aren't shooting at there hole when they should be or the opponents aren't putting them in a trap soon enough. Which seems really hard to believe.
I like the idea of the aggressive 1p but I bet 50% of those seniors wouldn't play if they couldn't take more time.
A couple of points:
- the field was increased to about 43 players. the actual number participating was about 36-7 players. several of the early signups had to cancel out for various reasons. if the field had been left at 32 players we might have had only 27 or so players. extra players not a factor. as a side note; the Sands Regency Tournaments regularly had 300+ players. So, the pro's didn't like having the shortstops knock a few of them out and forced a reduced field. that event went the way of the DoDo Bird. The hotel added good money to the Regency events for years.......goodby
- there were 10 tables available. the minimum age was 65 years AND we had players in their 80's playing so some of us have complained about slow play-----give me a break.
- re: the Varner Wedge, it takes two willing participants to play that game.
- thx for Bogies hosting the event and adding nice money and zero green fee's regardless of the complaints. thx for Ray Hanson streaming and his handling of the Calcutta (almost 20K.) in total 12K prize money and 20K calcutta was not too shabby for old geezers to play for.
- the field was increased to about 43 players. the actual number participating was about 36-7 players. several of the early signups had to cancel out for various reasons. if the field had been left at 32 players we might have had only 27 or so players. extra players not a factor. as a side note; the Sands Regency Tournaments regularly had 300+ players. So, the pro's didn't like having the shortstops knock a few of them out and forced a reduced field. that event went the way of the DoDo Bird. The hotel added good money to the Regency events for years.......goodby
- there were 10 tables available. the minimum age was 65 years AND we had players in their 80's playing so some of us have complained about slow play-----give me a break.
- re: the Varner Wedge, it takes two willing participants to play that game.
- thx for Bogies hosting the event and adding nice money and zero green fee's regardless of the complaints. thx for Ray Hanson streaming and his handling of the Calcutta (almost 20K.) in total 12K prize money and 20K calcutta was not too shabby for old geezers to play for.