Pattern Racking 9-Ball With Soft Breaking Video
- Thread starter Scott Brazier
- Start date
Just casually following this discussion... what pattern is so tough that pros can't string racks?
I mean, the hardest 9-ball layout I'm aware of is something like mississippi 9 ball, but no break would ever produce a layout like this.
And no matter how weird the pattern is, the player has control of the speed of the break, so they're gonna figure out a speed that makes it easier... like if they feel the route from 6 to the 7 is tough, cuz they're on opposite ends, they break softer or harder and figure out how to keep either ball (or both) near the center instead.
One thing I've seen is that unless it's VERY soft breaks with magic rack, pattern racks don't really produce the same layout every time. And if they did manage to do that, the game would be so boring it's unwatchable for spectators. The game has to be somewhat entertaining to spectators, to generate money for the players.
You used the magic word....magic rack. I've been saying all along they're killing the game. When players actually have to make shots that are risky to maintain control of the table....you'll start seeing the excitement of running a rack come back in the game, instead of watching someone simply connect the dots and run out.
I'm twice your age and can't find boredom in anything, so why do you bore so easily?
Frankly, I have no problem with the magic rack. If the players have figured out how to break that is fine, but I would insist on racking the balls in what would be considered a "neutral" pattern.
Now who determines what that pattern of the balls must be to make a runout difficult, but not "too" difficult, is not me. But to me, that is the solution for 9-ball.
Saying that the players need to use a wooden rack, just so that they get an imperfect rack is not the answer.
Now who determines what that pattern of the balls must be to make a runout difficult, but not "too" difficult, is not me. But to me, that is the solution for 9-ball.
Saying that the players need to use a wooden rack, just so that they get an imperfect rack is not the answer.
Wha? As long as there are no clusters and there's a shot at the low ball, a good player has a good chance of running out, and an elite player has an almost certain chance of running out, regardless of the layout. But the outcome of any break is made more predictable BECAUSE the person shooting the break can do so every time from the same location, and tweak the speed and hit.
Even with an imperfect rack, most good players can examine them and make a judgment as to whether they'll break it up harder or softer, hit from the left, right, etc...
Another idea that may be impractical, but really shake things up, is have a computer-generated pocketing order after the break and 1-ball, which the players must follow, and that would take out any predictability of pattern. For example, the computer may spit out 3,9,5,2,6,4,8,7, and that would be the order the balls have to be pocketed. Would make for some hilarious moments I think. Might even be a new game, and someone could probably make a 9-ball randomizer as an Android app... Or even just have 8 pills in a bottle or 8 cards and draw them out to make the pocketing sequence.
If playing pool ever...ever...gets down to the level of being some kind of game show circus act. I'll retire from anything to do with this industry.
So do you remember when the US Open was going on, and you LOATHED the break rules they were using? Let me know if you don't, because I can find some quotes if you'd like.
Anyways, guess what happened with those rules. It wasn't a connect the dots and run out fest. It was some of the best 9 ball we've seen in years.
Oh, and just in case you forgot. They were using a template.
Well you just quote them then, I've always been against racking aids, 9 on the spot, alternating breaks, double elimination, shorter races, break boxes, balls past the side pockets....and amateur players mixed with Pros.
Your whole idea stems around not giving anyone an advantage because they are breaking. That's unfortunately part of the game. You have the better lag, you break. You break and leave no clusters and pocket a ball, you have a chance to run out. You run out, you break. Pool is like life, sometimes it's not fair.
The exact reason these guys pattern-rack is because they can place the cue ball at the same location every time. Move the cue just an inch, and the spread changes. Even a rule that forces a player to not shoot from the same side twice in a row, with the opponent racking, would remove a big percentage of the break advantage.
The guys that have the knowledge, and the skill to pull it off, are the ones that will win, regardless of the rules, because they will learn how to use the rules to their advantage, regardless of what they are. Any yo-yo can be trained to pattern-rack and soft-break. You still have to play position, but many high and some mid level amateurs can force the ball close to wherever they want when they get a bit loose on position. The best get the ball exactly where they want. The difference is the best don't miss with an open shot.
I actually ca relate with most of this, but you're against "amateurs mixed with pros?" That's why it's called the US OPEN, not Invitational, or Professional Open!!!
That's been my point for years too. The Professional player shouldn't ever have to compete against amature players. They should be in a division all by themselves like ALL other professional sports figures are. And if the do in fact ever play against NON-PROS' it should be called an exhibition!
*ding* *ding* *ding* We have a winner!!!!
By using a few different patterns you can't be called for pattern racking
If you are purposely placing the balls, whether it is one pattern or 100, then you are pattern racking and cheating (if the rules call for not pattern racking).
Play semantics with the words or the rules all you want, but all of us know that "purposely placing" would mean you move a ball from one position to another or you pickup a specific ball to put it in a specific place of the rack (other than the 1 or 9) as opposed to just putting the balls in place and then moving the 1 and 9 as needed.
There's so many problems with what you're saying though. Players purposefully place balls all the time, and it has nothing to do with trying to manipulate the balls into a pattern. They're just trying to get a tight rack. Not all the balls are the same size. But this would be a pattern of some sort nonetheless, i.e. They're "cheating".
No matter what anybody says or think, enforcement of pattern racking rules isn't possible. It's not enforceable until you have mind reading or something. The solution lies elsewhere.
I still don't know why sets of rotation games are won and lost simply because a ball happens to topple in, whereas if it didn't the other guy would have won.
Look at this another way, a guy hits the best break he's ever hit in his life. He doesn't have to make a ball, he could even scratch! Let's compare that to a couple other sports real quick... guy serves the best serve of his life in tennis. Ace. Guy drives the best drive of his life in golf, he's twenty yards further than his competition and right in the middle of the fairway with a good angle to the flag.
Why not try to come up with some alternative solutions? its sort of beating a dad horse in any case, there's no incentive for anybody to come up with anything good for pool because nobody cares. Svb could win the next 80 tournaments in a row and be the most dominant athlete ever in any sport, and nobody would even know his name.
Well, actually, Paul Schofield's "No Conflict Rules" seem to take care of the random racking problem: http://www.goldcrownbilliardseriepa.com/no-conflict-rules/
There are amateurs in the US Open Golf Championship too. I doubt you would ever be able to find 128 "professionals" for a pool tournament, particularly if you required a prize money earning requirements.
All other PGA events have sponsorship exemptions too.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
My proposal has always been to give the world 10 months to take a skill level test on sanctioned tables. The skill level test ranks the players from highest to lowest by points, at the teat deadline draw a line under the top 128, 256, or 64 best scores and there's the Pros for the world championship tournament.
Or, you could just use the top 8 from each of the year's biggest tournaments (DCC, Turningstone, US Open, etc.).
Right there's the problem with pool in this country. You still believe POOL is an American game exclusively and therefore we Americans represent the world's best. Hate to burst your bubble, but we might only have 2 or 3 of the top 64 players in the world living and playing in this country.
I agree. So you could also use the top 8 from international events as well.
After all, how many times have you seen an absolute rank amateur in the quarterfinals of a major event?