Pool has a "FATAL FLAW"

Yup! Pat Fleming and Company are very aware of pool's fatal flaw. And they are grabbing the bull by the horns:

http://www.azbilliards.com/2000storya.php?storynum=8724

Get both players up and out of their chair as often as possible. Maybe Pat's solution is the answer. Maybe not. The important thing is to recognize and acknowledge the problem. Solutions will follow.
 
Last edited:
I don't think its flawed. If a man jumps up and runs a set out ill shake his hand. If I were Bustamante I would say double the bet. We can talk about luck factor all day but the bottom line is 99% of the matches you lose are because you beat yourself.
 
fd_colorado said:
.The last 10 or so "pool halls/bars" that I have gone into (in CO, WI, WA & BC) I've thrown out 9 balls on the table and shot left-handed for 15 minutes without getting anyone wanting to play.

Further evidence (IMHO) that this sector is on life support is that in each of these establishments the employees behind the counter did not have any passion for the game: it was just a job.
Click to expand...

This is off topic but deserves comment. My hat is off to you. You have pointed out a significant oversight by room owners. I have 40 employees in my establishment. I advertise in the local newspaper for positions regularly in my bar/restaurant. I have never once done that for the billiard room. I look from within my customer base in my room for workers. A prospective worker must be just nuts about pool in order to work in the billiard room.
 
Last edited:
I rack balls said:
I don't think its flawed.
Click to expand...

Of course you don't think it is flawed. No one involved in this game today thinks that it is flawed. We are all attached to this game because of what it is. We like it the way it is and we have no interest in seeing change. We just don't understand why the rest of the country does not see pool the way we do.

Here is the problem. We want to see growth into new demographics. We want to see new viable sports venues. We want there to be a professional segment. We want to see pool on television. We want to make more life long enthusiasts. We want people to find pool, enjoy it, and make it a part of their lives. We want spectators for the game. We want more participants. We want growth.

I don't think I need to spell out where we are today. I am coming from a different perspective and challenging the conventional wisdom of pool's Shaman.
 
Paul Schofield said:
Yup! Pat Fleming and Company are very aware of pool's fatal flaw. And they are grabbing the bull by the horns:

http://www.azbilliards.com/2000storya.php?storynum=8724

Get both players up and out of their chair as often as possible. Maybe Pat's solution is the answer. Maybe not. The important thing is to recognize and acknowledge the problem. Solutions will follow.
Click to expand...

Paul, have you tried having a Bowlliards or Pool300 tournament? These games have both players coming to the table for the same number of innings and the high score wins. They are very similar except that Pool300 plays the first inning of each "frame" in more of a rotation style format, while Bowlliards is played pretty much like straight pool (call shot, any ball). Scoring is like bowling.

What say you?
 
There is no fix

People were trying to figure out how to "fix" pool when I started playing the game in the'60s and others have been trying to "fix"it ever since. What some find as a flaw as described in this thread, others find as one on the attractions of the game. I am one of the others. A long time ago a major mag (I believe it was SI) did a story on Lassiter. To this day, I remember one of his quotes being, "As long as you are at the table, you'r opponent can not beat you." I found that an attractive part of the game, still do.

One more note, I have been to many, many tournaments in my time. I couldn't even tell you who won most of them, but if someone put together a string of racks to win a match, it was like it happened yesterday. I'm guessing that I'm not the only one that enjoys watching someone "catch a gear".
 
DogsPlayingPool said:
Paul, have you tried having a Bowlliards or Pool300 tournament? These games have both players coming to the table for the same number of innings and the high score wins. They are very similar except that Pool300 plays the first inning of each "frame" in more of a rotation style format, while Bowlliards is played pretty much like straight pool (call shot, any ball). Scoring is like bowling.

What say you?
Click to expand...

I have tried them. I re-posted some earlier comments I made on this topic. Don't misunderstand. I do not think that scored games are a dead end.


Post #32 Good thinking. Jerry Breisath (a nationally recognized instructor) devoted an gallant effort to a similar concept he devised called Equal Offense. Here is the problem with that: pool players want to play interactive games. They have only anectotal interest in scored games like Bowliards, Stroke Play, and Equal Offense. The players won't play scored games. Players rule.

Post #131 Tara - I did scored game leagues in the early 80's. It started out so promising but after three years, the players came to me and asked that I not run the league again. They wanted to play interactive games. I thought I had discovered the wheel. I can't tell you how disappointed I was. I have often wondered if my version of scored game or my league function was missing a component, and that caused it to fail. I am looking at the website to see what pool300 has that I did not. I see a number of differences. I am very interested in hearing how it goes in the coming years. I am very interested in learning why mine failed. I am also aware of a venture called 6pocket which is also a scored game. I would really like to know how they are doing. Maybe he is following this thread and he can let us know. Thanks for the link. Paul
 
Last edited:
M HOUSE said:
People were trying to figure out how to "fix" pool when I started playing the game in the'60s and others have been trying to "fix"it ever since. What some find as a flaw as described in this thread, others find as one on the attractions of the game. I am one of the others. A long time ago a major mag (I believe it was SI) did a story on Lassiter. To this day, I remember one of his quotes being, "As long as you are at the table, you'r opponent can not beat you." I found that an attractive part of the game, still do.

One more note, I have been to many, many tournaments in my time. I couldn't even tell you who won most of them, but if someone put together a string of racks to win a match, it was like it happened yesterday. I'm guessing that I'm not the only one that enjoys watching someone "catch a gear".
Click to expand...

If only there were many more like you, we would not even be having this discussion. Straight-Pool would be king and the business of pool would be in great shape.
 
I'm only halfway through digesting 18 pages of discussion, but would like to make a shameless plug for my game that I posted rules for here. I think it'd actually go a long way towards addressing the issues raised. It's not that difficult for beginners to play, has high spectator value and has a lot of interaction between players. It retains the core of pool (runs, called shots, defensive play) and shifts the balance a bit. I hope you'll try it out, I'd be honoured if you try hosting a local tournament with it and would love to hear how it turns out.
 
Flawed or Different?

Hi, azers. I think that pool is different from any other game or sport because a player can lose without ever having the opportunity to play. It makes the stress different also. I wouldn't change a thing! I love the game.
 
lose or WIN

sammy p said:
Hi, azers. I think that pool is different from any other game or sport because a player can lose without ever having the opportunity to play. It makes the stress different also. I wouldn't change a thing! I love the game.
Click to expand...

I beleive it may also be the only game or sport that a player can WIN and never have the opportunity to play. (Eight-ball: the other player runs out, makes the eight and fouls).

And for you quick-thinkers out there, no, I don't consider Russian Roulette a game or sport.
 
I think alternating the brake gaves each player a shot at the table, but the stronger player is still going to win.
Personaly,I enjoy watching players string racks. As to how pool can become more, players have to be paid that day. As far as tv..no idea,to much money envolved..
 
Pros have said it themselves many times: the winner in a match between two evenly paired players will usually be determined by whoever is breaking best.

But does it really have to be that way?

Roger
 
Maniac said:
As has been previously mentioned, One Pocket and games with alternating breaks would change some things too!!! These ideas and thoughts are nothing NEW. It's just that PEOPLE are too stubborn or set in their ways to change.
Maniac
Click to expand...

No, people are not too stubborn to change. That is not how it works. We are talking about recreation. Forget about right, wrong, fair, and unfair. Show someone how something can be more fun and change becomes possible.

Yes, Grady's rules for Nine-Ball are fairer but they are they more fun? The fact is they are rarely used.

Alternating breaks is a shallow fix. Much more would need to be done.
 
Roger Long said:
Pros have said it themselves many times: the winner in a match between two evenly paired players will usually be determined by whoever is breaking best.

But does it really have to be that way?

Roger
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like one of these two players is playing better than the other. Why would you want it another way? What is the point?
 
As I was reading the thread and came across this,
things came to mind - the importance of excitement!
Of Action! Of Drama!

And i remember the Gillette Wide World of Sports tv program
(or was it Gillette Word of Sports) when I was still a little kid.
It featured billiards!

It got me curious - the way the game was player - how the players
get to try to pocket the balls and all.

But what was truly memorable were the players themselves.
One was like reserved, with a touch of class and a sense of refinement.
He was really, really, really very good!

But, it was the other player who was the center of it all!
He kept on talking for like the whole duration of the match!
He blabbered even when his opponent was shooting!
Heck, he was even yakking while he himself was shooting!

I cant remember what he was talking about - but it got the people
smiling! Laughing! Interested! Like there was drama and excitement
in the TV studio - and action on the pool table itself!

That player was Minnesota Fats! He brought that drama and sense
of excitement to the match. And the action part was that of the players
trying their best to pocket the balls in the middle of it all!
I cannot forget that episode - ever! And I kid you not!



AnitoKid



nancewayne said:
THAT creates action AND drama!
I.M.O.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Wags said:
Sounds to me like one of these two players is playing better than the other. Why would you want it another way? What is the point?
Click to expand...

Come-on Wags. You know what this is about. Me and everyone else are all OK with lopsided scores and one player beating an opponent into submission. This thread is about figuring out ways to engage both players in ways that all other sports do.
 
M HOUSE said:
I beleive it may also be the only game or sport that a player can WIN and never have the opportunity to play. (Eight-ball: the other player runs out, makes the eight and fouls).

And for you quick-thinkers out there, no, I don't consider Russian Roulette a game or sport.
Click to expand...

That's an easy fix. When I gamble at 8 ball (rare) I always change the rule such that if a player fouls on the 8 or pockets the 8 early, it's a foul/cue ball in hand. 8 gets respotted. The only way to win is to pocket the 8 ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top