Pattern Racking

[ironman]

Chris - I talked with Pat Fleming a year ago about the Nine-Ball break. He said that the break was a huge advantage on regular equipment but then the pros began playing on the pro-cut pocket Diamonds. The break advantage was virtually wiped out. You are on the money.

I respectfully disagree about the importance of pattern racking. On regular equipment (most of the equipment) where top players are concerned, every little thing matters. The slightest advantage can make a winner. Most people do not understand a good pattern racking strategy. A good strategist never pattern racks untill it matters. He may random rack an entire set and then pattern rack the hill-hill game. He won't be questioned.

You are right that for 90% of the players, it is not important because they cannot get out anyway.

If he waits until the Hill-Hill game, how do you prove it is Pattern racking. If it is such an advantage why would someone wait until "HE" is racking for the other guy and let it get Hill_Hill. Sounds like shutting the gate after the horse got loose.
I think this sounds what I call the Hillbilly syndrome,,,worrying about everything except playing pool

 

[Black-Balled]

Play 10 ball or 14:1. In 9 ball there will be pattern racking and other sharking.

When nine ball is outlawed, only outlaws will nine ball!

 

[RRfireblade]

If he waits until the Hill-Hill game, how do you prove it is Pattern racking. If it is such an advantage why would someone wait until "HE" is racking for the other guy and let it get Hill_Hill. Sounds like shutting the gate after the horse got loose.
I think this sounds what I call the Hillbilly syndrome,,,worrying about everything except playing pool

Actually I thought pattern racking was THE reason the guy was winning all the sets ?

I'm lost.

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

so 9ball rack you have 9 spots to put the balls, but the 1 and 9 have to go in a perticular spot so (stay with me folks) you now have 7 spots to fill meaning (pulls up calculator ) 7 x 6 x 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 = 5040 and there you have how many different rack patterns you could have in 9 ball.

for more info on the math check out the website here:
http://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations.html

i warn you its a bit of a read but not to bad.

now if i take this a step further and say "hey how about we put the 1 up front, the 9 in the middle and the 2 in the rear" do the math you end up with 720 posible rack patterns....

now if this "no confict racking" is doing it for you then alright... in my mind though it doesn't really do it for me, if your not a fan of the break then play a different game hit up the snooker or 14.1 or 1 pocket OR a game that has no break to speak of and play 3 cushion billiards

Vince (it ain't broke stop trying to fix it" S

it's 4 am when the hell did that happen

Although your math is 100% correct, pattern racking begins and ends with the first 3 balls. After that, most advanced players will not have a problem running out. That is to say, placement of the 2 and 3 are my biggest concerns. I'm so in-tune to it, every time I see the 2 and 3 placed in the "pattern racking slots", I'll make note of it, even if my opponent has gone the entire set racking randomly.

In my opinion, the racker should always act as a neutral party - like a referee. The racker should be mindful of creating a tight rack, properly angling the rack and keeping the apex ball completely on the footspot. Nothing else should be taken into consideration whether you are racking for yourself, your opponent or as referee. Anything done that falls outside this practice should be deemed unsportsmanlike (cheating). Again, this is just my opinion

It's obvious to me, the object in any competition is to crown someone the best. "The best" in 9ball has a broad criteria but in my opinion, that criteria has nothing to do with racking. What we find beautiful about the game is finding that order amid chaos, not crafting a way to eliminate chaos.

 

[Paul Schofield]

In my opinion, the racker should always act as a neutral party - like a referee. The racker should be mindful of creating a tight rack, properly angling the rack and keeping the apex ball completely on the footspot. Nothing else should be taken into consideration whether you are racking for yourself, your opponent or as referee. Anything done that falls outside this practice should be deemed unsportsmanlike (cheating).

You know Jude, I cannot agree with you more. In golf, integrety is part of the fabric of the game. Players call their own fouls. Unfortunately, our reality is different. I just wish this was not the case. A "pirate" mentality seems to be second nature in our game. I can only speculate as to why that might be. Contrary to much of what has been posted in this thread, pattern racking can have a huge impact in determining the outcome of a match (top players, regular equipment). It needs to be considered. I have offered a fast and simple solution. I have used it for three events with successful results.

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

Right now in 10 ball the 1,2,3 and 10 are assigned a spot, the 10 on the brteak doesn't count as a win, so the ability to manipulate the rack is limited.

Chris

Chris, under what rules are the 2 & 3 ball locations specified? According to WPA rules only the 1 and 10 balls have designated places.

Thanks.

 

[ironman]

Actually I thought pattern racking was THE reason the guy was winning all the sets ?

I'm lost.

He said the smart guy would wait until iis HIll_Hill!!??

 

[greyghost]

This video should've been in the movie airplane. I agree with the poster above. I want the minute of my life back I just spent watching this.

I fast forwarded the vid.....glad i only lost about 15sec of my life......that gives me a 45sec lead on you guys lol

 

[enzo]

i still know the HUGE underlying problem here is the wording of the rule itself. the rule says to rack the balls "randomly," yet randomness is always present to varying degrees. even if you flip a coin for example, that isn't completely random (it is random enough, but it is not 100% random). so how would we discern, or define when a rack is "random" or not? truth is, you can't.

the method proposed here may very well work, but the problem would be i would doubt very highly this spin method is going to spread like wildfire across american poolrooms.

 

[TATE]

What we find beautiful about the game is finding that order amid chaos, not crafting a way to eliminate chaos.

This is a great quote, something all pool players should take to heart.

Chris

 

[TATE]

Chris, under what rules are the 2 & 3 ball locations specified? According to WPA rules only the 1 and 10 balls have designated places.

Thanks.

Hmmmm... the Seminole Tour was requiring the 2 and 3 to be racked in the corners - I believe the Mezz was too. I thought it was part of BCA and WPA rules but I guess not.

I stand corrected. I guess the logic is the corner balls travel and carom a lot in 10 ball, so they will undoubtedly end up in random areas most of the time.

Chris

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

i still know the HUGE underlying problem here is the wording of the rule itself. the rule says to rack the balls "randomly," yet randomness is always present to varying degrees. even if you flip a coin for example, that isn't completely random (it is random enough, but it is not 100% random). so how would we discern, or define when a rack is "random" or not? truth is, you can't.

the method proposed here may very well work, but the problem would be i would doubt very highly this spin method is going to spread like wildfire across american poolrooms.

Seriously Enzo, who cares about the philosophy or even the mathematical theory of what is random or can anything be "truly" random? It is irrelevant that if my favorite color is red I'm more likely to grab the 3 or 11 balls first so these will end up at the front of the rack slightly more often than the other colors.

If you actually read the WPA rules you would know that the word "random" is not even in the rule. The actual 9 Ball rule reads:

The object balls are racked as tightly as possible in a diamond shape, with the one ball at the apex of the diamond and on the foot spot and the nine ball in the middle of the diamond. The other balls will be placed in the diamond without purposeful or intentional pattern.

The highlighted part reads exactly the same in the 10 ball rules.

And even if we use the term "random", what we are talking about is the practice of intentionally racking the balls in a purposeful or intentional pattern - in violation of the rules. There is no problem at all with the way the World Rules are written. If you read the text of the rule above, pattern racking is clearly against the rules.

Whether pattern racking has much if any advantage or not is besides the point. It is against the rules. Now, for those that think it is a bad rule, that it is a skill that every player should have the right to use - well, that's a different debate.

Also, two players matching up can agree to anything they want including pattern racking, and I've no problem with that. But that does not include pattern racking opponents you draw in a tournament. To me that is intentionally breaking the rules to gain an advantage. Hmmm, that pretty much sounds like the definition of cheating.

The only gray area in the whole pattern racking thing is if you need to manipulate the location of a couple of balls because of size irregularities. While this may be construed as against the rules because you're placing balls purposefully, it is being done in order to comply with the first part of the rule for a tight rack rather than to get an unfair edge.

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

Hmmmm... the Seminole Tour was requiring the 2 and 3 to be racked in the corners - I believe the Mezz was too. I thought it was part of BCA and WPA rules but I guess not.

I stand corrected. I guess the logic is the corner balls travel and carom a lot in 10 ball, so they will undoubtedly end up in random areas most of the time.

Chris

Thanks again. When I read your post it rang a bell but I couldn't remember where I saw that. I agree that pretty much takes care of the problem in 10 Ball because it really separates the 1-2-3 balls and sends them off in different directions.

 

[Paul Schofield]

the method proposed here may very well work, but the problem would be i would doubt very highly this spin method is going to spread like wildfire across american poolrooms.

Enzo - I encourage you to give it a try for one night and come back here and tell us what you think. What you think after you try it is important. It is just so easy and simple. It is a no brainer. It becomes habit very quickly.

Two players who want to match up can play however they like and any game that they like. If they want to pattern rack, it's OK. This is not for them unless that is what they want to do. The proposed process is for organized events. I have used it in three events so far and there were no problems with it (no unintended consequences).

I offer a solution. I have not heard of any other ideas that work. Has anyone here heard of anything?

 

[poolcuemaster]

All I can say about pattern racking is that when I payed for the TAR match between SVB and Donny Mills it was sickening to watch. It was in my eyes a con game trying to beat the best 9 baller in the states by shooting a soft break shot, making a couple of balls and having almost the exact layout every time. The great part of it was Shane outrunning the nuts with pure power and great safetys. I won't buy the next Donnie match if its rack your own as it's too boring.--Leonard

I should state that I admire Donnys game and was at the US open pulling for him to win all the way over Mika and Ralph and he shot fantastic all week long and he signed a cueball for me.

 

[klockdoc]

If you actually read the WPA rules you would know that the word "random" is not even in the rule. The actual 9 Ball rule reads:

The object balls are racked as tightly as possible in a diamond shape, with the one ball at the apex of the diamond and on the foot spot and the nine ball in the middle of the diamond. The other balls will be placed in the diamond without purposeful or intentional pattern.

ran·dom
   /ˈrændəm/ Show Spelled[ran-duhm]
–adjective
1.
proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern:


Sounds like random to me.


Anyway, why not just rack every rack in the same configuration? I do and have never been called for it. Then both have the same advantage.

With this system the OP is stating, if you are shooting on a "gully" table, you happen to grab the balls every time in a similar order because they are made in a numerical order. (with exceptions to balls made out of turn or on the break). It wouldn't be that random.

 

[enzo]

Seriously Enzo, who cares about the philosophy or even the mathematical theory of what is random or can anything be "truly" random? It is irrelevant that if my favorite color is red I'm more likely to grab the 3 or 11 balls first so these will end up at the front of the rack slightly more often than the other colors.

If you actually read the WPA rules you would know that the word "random" is not even in the rule. The actual 9 Ball rule reads:

The highlighted part reads exactly the same in the 10 ball rules.

And even if we use the term "random", what we are talking about is the practice of intentionally racking the balls in a purposeful or intentional pattern - in violation of the rules. There is no problem at all with the way the World Rules are written. If you read the text of the rule above, pattern racking is clearly against the rules.

Whether pattern racking has much if any advantage or not is besides the point. It is against the rules. Now, for those that think it is a bad rule, that it is a skill that every player should have the right to use - well, that's a different debate.

Also, two players matching up can agree to anything they want including pattern racking, and I've no problem with that. But that does not include pattern racking opponents you draw in a tournament. To me that is intentionally breaking the rules to gain an advantage. Hmmm, that pretty much sounds like the definition of cheating.

The only gray area in the whole pattern racking thing is if you need to manipulate the location of a couple of balls because of size irregularities. While this may be construed as against the rules because you're placing balls purposefully, it is being done in order to comply with the first part of the rule for a tight rack rather than to get an unfair edge.

well, what i wont do is argue and post pages and pages of text while getting nowhere. what i will tell you is that anybody that wants good rules and to be truly fair would care.... because there is no way to enforce objectively

its simple, nothing can be 100% random (or not patterned=same thing)... so we have varying degrees of randomness for each player, even each rack. who decides what was random and what wasn't? you cant do this objectively. one guy could throw the balls up "randomly" yet somehow it deosn't have to be so random. rules that dictate how we play and force us to enforce them subjectively are bad rules. further, what happens when the balls wont rack when we throw up these "random" racks? we have to get a td over to decide if we could move one ball around to get the rack tight, that's a joke, so is this discussion. take home message: YOU CAN'T ENFORCE THIS RULE FAIRLY AND OBJECTIVELY, SO IT'S A BAD RULE. over.

so go ahead and post a three page letter about how you think you are correct. it is fun when somebody does so much work for nothing. ive even stated i dont even think the idea in this thread is bad, i just know it wont catch on.

 

[Snapshot9]

Racking

I have never seen pattern racking work, and I have been playing 49 years.
It is simply 1 person's opinion from observation, with no scientific proof to back it up, and everyone is entitled to their opinion.

They can rack however they want to, they still have to make all the balls.
So you were saying this guy beat you because he had easier runouts than you did. Sorry, but I call hogwash on that.


I rack a certain way in 8 and 9 ball all the time, everytime.

 

[klockdoc]

i have never seen pattern racking work, and i have been playing 49 years.
It is simply 1 person's opinion from observation, with no scientific proof to back it up, and everyone is entitled to their opinion.

They can rack however they want to, they still have to make all the balls.
So you were saying this guy beat you because he had easier runouts than you did. Sorry, but i call hogwash on that.


I rack a certain way in 8 and 9 ball all the time, everytime.

ditto......

 

[Paul Schofield]

Seriously Enzo, who cares about the philosophy or even the mathematical theory of what is random or can anything be "truly" random? It is irrelevant that if my favorite color is red I'm more likely to grab the 3 or 11 balls first so these will end up at the front of the rack slightly more often than the other colors.

If you actually read the WPA rules you would know that the word "random" is not even in the rule. The actual 9 Ball rule reads:

The highlighted part reads exactly the same in the 10 ball rules.

And even if we use the term "random", what we are talking about is the practice of intentionally racking the balls in a purposeful or intentional pattern - in violation of the rules. There is no problem at all with the way the World Rules are written. If you read the text of the rule above, pattern racking is clearly against the rules.

Whether pattern racking has much if any advantage or not is besides the point. It is against the rules. Now, for those that think it is a bad rule, that it is a skill that every player should have the right to use - well, that's a different debate.

Also, two players matching up can agree to anything they want including pattern racking, and I've no problem with that. But that does not include pattern racking opponents you draw in a tournament. To me that is intentionally breaking the rules to gain an advantage. Hmmm, that pretty much sounds like the definition of cheating.

The only gray area in the whole pattern racking thing is if you need to manipulate the location of a couple of balls because of size irregularities. While this may be construed as against the rules because you're placing balls purposefully, it is being done in order to comply with the first part of the rule for a tight rack rather than to get an unfair edge.

A differing point of view: I think this is a good read.