Perfect rack is bad for straight pool

[kanzzo]

The European Championships in Straight pool used tapped table for straight pool and left is, because it became apparent, that it's not good for the sport. It became an advantage to break the ball because you could call front ball into the side pocket and you didn't need a break ball. You could always call the corner ball from undisturbed rack.

In 9 Ball we had this transformation to a perfect rack and it wasn't perfect also. It was boring to watch the pros needing 5 min to rack the ball with a triangle but with a perfect rack Corey Deuel was the first to take advantage of this and was running out tournaments using a soft break. Then the breaking requirements got changed more and more and now it's kitchen rule and 9 on the spot - but for me it just killed 9 Ball the way it was. Everyone is a great breaker with a perfect rack of 9 frozen balls.

Back to straight pool. According to the rules all these shots are allowed (and there are much easier on a perfect rack):

and this ball is especially tough on triangle rack and too easy on a perfect rack of frozen balls

So if we wanna stick with perfect rack for straight pool, I think we need to modify breaking rules, as we did in 9 ball.
For example: calling dead balls from undisturbed rack is not allowed.

Else: just stick to racking balls with a triangle. Because it is a science to actually be able to read a rack and take any gap into account.

(I ordered the Perma-Rack and will try to post a 100 ball run video calling the corner ball from undisturbed rack every time while I am not able to run even 70 balls on my table with the classic straight pool approach.)

 

[Bob Jewett]

A simple solution is to forbid calls out of an untouched rack. There are similar solutions at nine ball that fix the tight rack "problem".

 

[kanzzo]

For example: calling dead balls from undisturbed rack is not allowed.

^^ was my suggestion also

 

[kanzzo]

Here is Jayson playing this ball at the Legend's Straight Pool Challenge, so at the moment this ball is a legitimate way to set a world record in straight pool high run.

 

[kanzzo]

or this is the future of straight pool:

 

[The_JV]

Rule modification is the easiest solution.

If you removed the suggestion of a template's use from the equation, and surveyed 14.1 players I'm confident they all replace the option to call out of an touched rack with being any to count on the spread of the 'perfect rack'.

Some just hate templates. Can't get around bias...

 

[DynoDan]

Rule modification is the easiest solution.

If you removed the suggestion of a template's use from the equation, and surveyed 14.1 players I'm confident they all replace the option to call out of an touched rack with being any to count on the spread of the 'perfect rack'.

Some just hate templates. Can't get around bias...

I think it’s all about ‘tradition’. When a sport’s rules and equipment are changed, any new record that’s set requires an asterisk.
I‘m sure modern technology could come up with a more efficient material than ash to hit baseballs with, and surely the balls could also be made livelier, so every solid hit could be a ‘home run’ (?). If player’s shoes had longer/sharper spikes, likely they could steal more bases also (?).
And, on & on……. No limit to the ways we could ‘improve’ most any sport.

 

[The_JV]

I think it’s all about ‘tradition’. When a sport’s rules and equipment are changed, any new record that’s set requires an asterisk.
I‘m sure modern technology could come up with a more efficient material than ash to hit baseballs with, and surely the balls could also be made livelier, so every solid hit could be a ‘home run’ (?). If player’s shoes had longer/sharper spikes, likely they could steal more bases also (?).
And, on & on……. No limit to the ways we could ‘improve’ most any sport.

Fair enough, but why not put the * on the records with outdated rules/equipment.

Matter of perspective I guess

 

[SlateMan]

I'll play devils advocate here. I don't really have a dog in the race but ponder this:
So at what point in time do we determine that a new technology should or should not be implemented?
Remember:
Long before the current cues were introduced to the game, players hit the ball with a mace.

At one point in time the triangle was introduced to the game to get the balls to rack more consistently. Did people sit around the pub and ponder if the wooden rack was bad for the game? After all, the wooden rack helped players to rack more consistently and quickly. Did the invention impact play? Probably. So, the magic racks and perma racks IMPROVE the current technology and change the game.

So the question becomes when do we freeze our adoption of new technology and determine that the technology we have is perfect and should not be changed? At what point does the world around us get tired of this belief?

 

[kanzzo]

I'll play devils advocate here. I don't really have a dog in the race but ponder this:
So at what point in time do we determine that a new technology should or should not be implemented?

ok.

for the sake of argument:

because its a game and not a real life.

Shooting with a rifle is more effective than with bow and arrow. Doesn't mean archery as a sport has to die and they have to change to shooting guns. This is what your picture reminded me of.

It probably is about tradition. Spirit of the game.

Game is about solving the problems, bumping the key ball closer to the middle pocket, bumping the break ball a little for having a perfect break ball at the end. Having great end pattern.

Changing the equipment in a way that none of this is needed any longer, just memorize 4 shots on the perfect undisturbed rack and execute them every time and you can have a run of 1000 balls.

It needs someone like Deuel to implement it for a while and win every tournament before the other players come whining and rules get changed.

But history is repeating itself here...

Break by Bustamante (isn't the best example, I could find some breaks from 90s Sands Regency by Martinez and Bustamante and Archer):

Break after change of equipment with perfect rack (Corey):

 

[SlateMan]

ok.

for the sake of argument:

because its a game and not a real life.

Shooting with a rifle is more effective than with bow and arrow. Doesn't mean archery as a sport has to die and they have to change to shooting guns. This is what your picture reminded me of.

It probably is about tradition. Spirit of the game.

Game is about solving the problems, bumping the key ball closer to the middle pocket, bumping the break ball a little for having a perfect break ball at the end. Having great end pattern.

Changing the equipment in a way that none of this is needed any longer, just memorize 4 shots on the perfect undisturbed rack and execute them every time and you can have a run of 1000 balls.

It needs someone like Deuel to implement it for a while and win every tournament before the other players come whining and rules get changed.

But history is repeating itself here...

Fair enough. I guess my post was meant to just have folks think about this concept. I imagine the standard wooden rack may have caused some of this concern way back when.

But I do understand your point.
Perhaps the counter to my initial argument would be as follows:
The goal of the racking and breaking is to cause a certain amount of random variation in the game.
The wooden rack technology was welcomed, as it did not appear to remove too much of the random variation.
The patterned racks violate the overall goal (as they remove too much of the random variation) and therefore should not be allowed. (Or the no call rule).

I'm cool with it. Every sport has these issues. (MLB and aluminum bats...)

Peace.

 

[kanzzo]

The goal of the racking and breaking is to cause a certain amount of random variation in the game.
The wooden rack technology was welcomed, as it did not appear to remove too much of the random variation.

exactly my point ^___^

 

[jeagle64]

Titleist pro V1 sees nothing wrong here and slowly backs out of the room. Lol


Sent from my iPad using AzBilliards Forums

 

[DDiabolico]

Despite different rules being implemented in all kinds of tournaments about racking with triangle, no checking the rack, etc. the rules established by the WPA state the the balls should be as tightly racked as possible. That's why Permarack and Magic Rack even came into existence. They provide a perfect rack which just follows the official rules.

In our league, it's mandatory to use some kind of Magic rack for 8, 9 and 10 ball but it's forbidden to use the 8-ball template for straight pool. Mainly because it's difficult to remove after the break shot and it may cause problems on slower shots. That's cool for me. Permarack is different as it doesn't interfere with rolling balls like those templates could. So, if you are obliged by an official rule to rack the balls as tightly as possible why not use Permarack? Sure, implement a new rule against calling shots out of an intact rack, but let the balls be perfectly racked.

 

[wrldpro]

Here is Jayson playing this ball at the Legend's Straight Pool Challenge, so at the moment this ball is a legitimate way to set a world record in straight pool high run.

For the record. Jayson tried this type of shot 6-7 times in 5 days this week when he set the World record High Run and only made it 1 time and that was on the 1st day. Thats a very low percentage shot.

 

[JusticeNJ]

I actually got rid of the rack template and went back to the triangle out of preference, fwiw.

Edit: for straight pool.

 

[kanzzo]

For the record. Jayson tried this type of shot 6-7 times in 5 days this week when he set the World record High Run and only made it 1 time and that was on the 1st day. Thats a very low percentage shot.

I already answered it in another forum: the fact that Jayson didn't know how to make this ball doesn't make it low percentage. If I can make the ball 8-9 out of 10 I don't consider it low percentage.

I couldn't test the Perma-Rack since it didn't arrive yet and as far as I understand it, you used a similar but slightly different model. It all comes down to how perfect the balls can be racked. From the review by Shuddy it's still difficult to place all 14 (or 15) donuts perfectly to get a perfect rack using the template that is sold on perma-rack.com

But with a perfect rack (all balls frozen to each other with no gaps) the combinations from undisturbed rack go every time. I tested it and I already made videos showing it... (and this is the title of this thread. Not perma-rack is bad but perfect rack is bad for the game. If someone can develop a template to get the 14 balls perfectly frozen every time I can make the corner ball from this undisturbed rack every time. And if I can do it then Filler or Deuel can easily do it too.)

 

[wrldpro]

I already answered it in another forum: the fact that Jayson didn't know how to make this ball doesn't make it low percentage. If I can make the ball 8-9 out of 10 I don't consider it low percentage.

I couldn't test the Perma-Rack since it didn't arrive yet and as far as I understand it, you used a similar but slightly different model. It all comes down to how perfect the balls can be racked. From the review by Shuddy it's still difficult to place all 14 (or 15) donuts perfectly to get a perfect rack using the template that is sold on perma-rack.com

But with a perfect rack (all balls frozen to each other with no gaps) the combinations from undisturbed rack go every time. I tested it and I already made videos showing it... (and this is the title of this thread. Not perma-rack is bad but perfect rack is bad for the game. If someone can develop a template to get the 14 balls perfectly frozen every time I can make the corner ball from this undisturbed rack every time. And if I can do it then Filler or Deuel can easily do it too.)

Thats all good for you but Like I said Jayson only made the corner ball 1 out of 6-7 times he tried so it wasnt a automatic shot for him to make just to be clear.

 

[The_JV]

I already answered it in another forum: the fact that Jayson didn't know how to make this ball doesn't make it low percentage. If I can make the ball 8-9 out of 10 I don't consider it low percentage.

I couldn't test the Perma-Rack since it didn't arrive yet and as far as I understand it, you used a similar but slightly different model. It all comes down to how perfect the balls can be racked. From the review by Shuddy it's still difficult to place all 14 (or 15) donuts perfectly to get a perfect rack using the template that is sold on perma-rack.com

But with a perfect rack (all balls frozen to each other with no gaps) the combinations from undisturbed rack go every time. I tested it and I already made videos showing it... (and this is the title of this thread. Not perma-rack is bad but perfect rack is bad for the game. If someone can develop a template to get the 14 balls perfectly frozen every time I can make the corner ball from this undisturbed rack every time. And if I can do it then Filler or Deuel can easily do it too.)

Quite frankly... A perfect rack isn't bad. It should be expected. In the passed there were small odds of someone developing a perfect rack with a wooden triangle. However if it was accomplished does anyone have any knowledge of this perfect rack being rejected because of an unfair advantage...? I'm guessing not. By extension, does anyone have any knowledge of a rack being rejected because it was poorly done...? I'm guessing yes.

Tech has advanced and the odds of having a 'perfect' rack to hit have gone through the roof. The remedy is extremely simple. A rule that says an unmolested rack can not have a ball called out from it. Done..., problem solved and players can still benefit from what should be expected. ...The best possible rack achievable.

 

[kanzzo]

Thats all good for you but Like I said Jayson only made the corner ball 1 out of 6-7 times he tried so it wasnt a automatic shot for him to make just to be clear.

here is how it works

this are the relevant 9 balls. If they are frozen and you aim full at the line of the 3 green balls, 5 goes in the line of green (going to the short rail)

if you aim to the orange line the the force gets transferred to orange and 5 goes in the direction of orange.

in between and it's basic physics, how the force gets divided in green and orange. So if you aim the first ball full to the 5 when it goes straight (about half diamond above the pocket)

So you just aim the angle alpha to the right of the blue line if you need the corner ball to go the angle alpha to the left and into the corner pocket. (the angle is about 10° to pocket the corner ball)

this is what I did in the video above and it goes every time. You can try it yourself and see, that after about 12 minutes of practicing you make the ball 6 out of 7.

here ^^ the video once again.

if you have to cut the first ball with the alpha angle, then the throw effect is quite big and the 5 goes a little above the corner ball. But it's the same effect (cut induced throw) that you should know from banks and effect is the same every time for the same angle. So easy to adjust you aiming accordingly (aiming thinner and / or using english).