Pool has a "FATAL FLAW"

The secret to fun in most games is to have a little... just the right amount... of unfairness. This applies in everything from chess to this week's hot fighting game. Games like 9 ball continue to be popular because of the unfairness... ever beat up some scrub in 8 ball over and over, and have him say "let's switch to 9 ball, I'm better at 9 ball anyway. That's my game."? And statistically the unfairness will allow him to win a few he didn't otherwise deserve. It's not that he's better at an otherwise harder game. But in his mind he is, so he keeps coming back. If you eliminate the unfairness in the game, he'll just get tired of losing and quit.

I don't object to these unique rules if two friends want to play this way to find who's the better player or throw some variety into the mix. But they're in no danger of catching on :/
 
CreeDo said:
The secret to fun in most games is to have a little... just the right amount... of unfairness. This applies in everything from chess to this week's hot fighting game.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more. The magic "F" word is not FAIR. The magic "F" word is FUN. Equally unfair can be much more fun than equally fair. Anyway, I have often said "The harder you try to make things fair, the more unfair they can actually become."

We really have got to be careful what we do to our pool games. We can take the fun right out of them. Go get a novice interested player and show him how much fun it is playing called-shot Ten-Ball on a table with tiny pockets. I scratch my head and wonder what everyone is thinking.
 
Last edited:
It’s time to resurrect this thread. You can throw this one on the very top of the heap of “What’s wrong with pool”. I find many of the thoughts posted here to be insightful.

It’s fun to think about these things. I will try again. I will keep it simple.

POOL’S DYNAMIC IS BAD. Pool is sterile. There is little human interaction. As a matter of fact, interaction is discouraged and considered impolite and unsportsmanlike. One player doing all the shooting while his opponent poses “sphinx like” is a problem for pool. It is a problem for the participants and it is a problem for an audience.

Positive human interaction is a product of the rules of a game. Just think about golf and bowling for a minute and all the good interactive opportunities there are. We could never have that in any of our current games. The rules and structure of our games are just too contentious.

I take special interest in any new games that are put forward. I don’t look at how challenging a new game is. I look to see if there is a new human dynamic. Inside the dynamic is where the bulk of the fun and entertainment is.
 
Last edited:
Wags said:
I agree that pool is one of the few games that you can lose without ever playing or getting any kind of a shot at playing.

Perfect games are difficult. Rarely does an opponent not get a chance at the table. That said......

To take that element out of the game and make a fair playing field, I used to think about a giant pin-setter like in bowling (s'pose in pool in would be a ball-setter). I have up-graded my thought as the computer age came about.

So, One player breaks the balls and a laser scans the table (I think of it as a big bar code scanner like a medical imaging device) and precisely remembers where every ball is. The breaker then tries to run the rack. Maybe the breaker gets a point for every ball made plus a bonus for completing the run-out. The computer then shows the referee where the balls were after the break and the opponent gets the same chance. The break would be alternating.

We now have a game with equal opportunity. The players start with the same lay-out, although they may play the pattern differently. Easy enough to add "no-luck" rules for the pros. It's all offense. It's about making the shot that your opponent misses. The better shot-maker, that day, will win just like in golf.

Can you see the TV with a split screen showing how the first player played the run while the opponent is making their run? Strengths and weaknesses would show up pretty quick. Missed shapes, breakouts, different approaches and patterns could be analyzed.

I am looking for someone with the expertise to make a prototype. I would think that with today's technology that it is possible.

Note: it could be used for almost any cuesport game (with some modification of rules) on any table with the most glaring exception of one-pocket.

C'mon guys, give me some constructive feedback, good or bad.
Click to expand...

Now this is a good idea!!! It would be interesting to see how different players, e.g. efren vs. souquet, would attack a lay-out.

With today's technology (see: pool playing robot), this can easily be done.
 
Last edited:
I've Been Playing POOL 300 Lately and it Solves the Problems Mentioned

Paul Schofield said:
It’s not rocket science. All one has to do is pick out the common components of all successful sports and then identify what is missing in pool. Pool has a “FATAL FLAW”. Pool has its own glass ceiling.

Here is the “FATAL FLAW”: A player is entitled to play on offence and score without limit while an opponent sits idly without influence. The combination of these components is not a recipe for success. All sports know that this is unacceptable. No successful legitimate sport has this structure. This current structure of pool mirrors a video game, not a sport. Play Pac Man and make your opponent sit and watch you clear screens. Play pool and make your opponent sit and watch you run balls/racks.

Take note of the following: a 240,000 straight rail billiard run, a run of 622 balkline billiards, a run of 31 three cushion billiards, a run of 4137 points in English Billiards, a 526 ball run in straight pool, an 18 pack in bar-box nine-ball, an 11 pack in nine-ball on a big-table. Where are these games now? Are these examples of successful games with viable futures? All these games are evidence of failed attempts to come to terms with the “FATAL FLAW”. Players get good so let’s make the game harder. Is Ten Ball with tiny pockets the answer to improving interest in the game? I don’t think so.

Baseball, football, basketball, golf, bowling, and other successful sports have written into their rules, regular and predictable opportunities for players/teams to participate. This makes for viable competition and result in popular successful sports. Pool needs to look inward at its structure and look for ways to do the same. The fix would send pool’s evolution in an entirely different direction. Evolution takes a long time and pool is light years away from being ready for prime time. If the “FATAL FLAW” was fixed, I think it is very possible that over time, one new game would emerge that would have the broad based appeal needed so that pool could join all the other successful sports.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I've spent time with Don Owen lately and he's invented a Game that Solves ALL the problems mentioned above. I had some suggestions to "tweak" the game, but overall it's a Great game to give each player the same opportunities in a very competitive format. imho CJ WILEY 'The Game is the Teacher'
 
Paul Schofield said:
It’s time to resurrect this thread. You can throw this one on the very top of the heap of “What’s wrong with pool”. I find many of the thoughts posted here to be insightful.

It’s fun to think about these things. I will try again. I will keep it simple.

POOL’S DYNAMIC IS BAD. Pool is sterile. There is little human interaction. As a matter of fact, interaction is discouraged and considered impolite and unsportsmanlike. One player doing all the shooting while his opponent poses “sphinx like” is a problem for pool. It is a problem for the participants and it is a problem for an audience.

Positive human interaction is a product of the rules of a game. Just think about golf and bowling for a minute and all the good interactive opportunities there are. We could never have that in any of our current games. The rules and structure of our games are just too contentious.

I take special interest in any new games that are put forward. I don’t look at how challenging a new game is. I look to see if there is a new human dynamic. Inside the dynamic is where the bulk of the fun and entertainment is.
Click to expand...

There's a book called "300 ways to play billiards". There are no alternatives in there!?

As for comparisons between bowling/golf and pool, I think they're entirely invalid. Otherwise, I could say, "The problem with golf is that the other guy isn't allowed to play defense. In hockey, you have a goalie that is protecting his net; you don't have that in golf and therefore golf has a fatal flaw." Basically all you're saying is "these things over here which are popular are different than this thing over here which isn't as popular, so we need to make this thing more like that thing." Well maybe bowling is more popular, but who the hell watches bowling? Who even bowls that much anymore? Does bowling afficionados have forums where they say, "The problem with bowling is that you only get two chances to knock all the pins down."

Also, you talk about "sphinx-like" opponents in pool... well what is the opponent in golf or bowling doing while the other guy is playing? Sitting/standing quietly to one side waiting for his turn.

As has been repeated so so so often in the past, pool is a participatory sport, not much of a spectator sport. The level of play that keeps an opponent in the seat the whole time is pretty much unattainable for the Common Man and therefore irrelevant to the argument. Start people on 8-ball, then when they can play better, show them rotation games.

You're trying to introduce a MASSIVE paradigm shift which is, I think, doomed to failure because running multiple balls is PURE PLEASURE and taking that away from players is, I think, more fatal than any other suggestion I've heard.
 
Games like balkline were obviously broken which is why they kept changing the rules... being able to score thousands puts everyone to sleep.

What you described earlier as a fatal flaw is not a typical experience for either the player or the fan. You're talking about known world records. Those are a one-in-a-million experience. They're not what joe schmoe sees when he turns on ESPN2 to watch some pool. If 11 packs were an everyday thing, then I'd agree we'd need to change the game, just as they changed balkline.


A more typical (but still tremendous) display of skill might be 150 in straight pool, or 6 pack in 8/9/10 ball. And those are still pretty rare. I think they're something the average joe would be amazed to see.

When Earl was shooting his 10/11 pack for the million dollar prize (on tight pockets), the crowd was going apeshit. They were not bored, they were not sad that the opponent didn't get a chance to shoot.
It didn't hurt there was a million on the line.

---

As for the sterile interaction...

Golf is successful. This is what I see on golf on TV: Tiger sets up his drive. He whacks it. Next is a shot of him walking along beside his caddy. Later, we see him lining up his next shot or putt. He sinks it. He pumps his fist, or more often just raises one hand and nods. We cut to the next golfer.

How much interaction just happened between him and the crowd, or the other players?

Snooker does just fine, and the opponent sits absolutely still and doesn't talk during the other guy's run. The audience might cheer after a shot, or even between every shot, but they are asked to settle down and thrown out if they refuse. They keep quiet during the actual shot, just as the crowd does in golf.

I don't think the lack of interaction is at the heart of what prevents pool from getting on TV or being more popular in general. Pool can't be the nba or nfl. It can't be poker either.

It might try to be golf but part of golf's appeal is how challenging it looks.... they use a violent yet somehow controlled motion to hit a tiny ball 1000 feet, or a perfect putt to sink it from 20 feet, which is amazing to dudes like me who have never hit a ball. Just getting the ball within spitting distance is a an athletic challenge.

That's pool's inherent flaw I think. Nothing about it looks that difficult. Hitting the same tiny area with a three times in a row with a dart is tough. Hitting a ball 1000 yards is tough. Hitting a thin 7 foot cut shot? I did that last night.
 
CreeDo said:
It might try to be golf but part of golf's appeal is how challenging it looks.... they use a violent yet somehow controlled motion to hit a tiny ball 1000 feet, or a perfect putt to sink it from 20 feet, which is amazing to dudes like me who have never hit a ball. Just getting the ball within spitting distance is a an athletic challenge.

That's pool's inherent flaw I think. Nothing about it looks that difficult. Hitting the same tiny area with a three times in a row with a dart is tough. Hitting a ball 1000 yards is tough. Hitting a thin 7 foot cut shot? I did that last night.
Click to expand...

absolutely!
 
Interesting post from the person that started no conflict rules 9 ball because of the players interaction.

The fatal flaw is the lack of a long term view on growing pool for the everyday pool player. Has anyone asked what prevents that border line player from going pro?

The IPT format was good. The execution was not. This is about when I returned to pool and was excited that the IPT was happening cause this gave me something to shoot for.

This is when I got my education about the real world of pro pool. And there has not been anything close that has come along that peaked my interest in trying the pro thing like the IPT.

See, believe what you will, I'm that borderline player. The current pro levels tourneys format have not gotten my attention like the IPT format.

I like 9 ft tables, call 8 ball, 8 on the break is spotted. I do not care for 9 ball or 10 ball nor 1 pocket. And yes I can play them well, but 8 ball along with 14.1 are a very good test of a players overall skills.

But hey, just one voice in the din.
 
Ok, here's my 2 cents:

all games you're trying to compare to (golf, snooker, etc etc) they have something different:
THEY ALL HAVE ONE SET OF RULES, ONLY!!!

So, when the common man is thinking about golf, snooker, soccer, rugby, etc etc, he automatically knows what's about!!
When talking about pool , next question is: ok, wich game??

So, personally I think that's "tha problem" (admitting there is one!!)

So many specialities helps for the entertainement, but not for the mass popularity.

Ex: snooker is snooker! One game, one set of rules and ONE World championship

Same for golf and lots of other "succesful sports"

Pool? Nope!

So, you can be the "world champion" in 9 or 10 ball, but does it really means anything to a 14.1 player?
And same way around!

I think the lack of "credibility" lays in the definition of the sport!!
Each mentioned sport is ONE
Pool is multiple!

Beside that, it's perceived as easier.
As CreeDo sayed, looking Tiger launching a ball 1000 ft away, and hitting the green, or watching Ronnie making a 147 looks "impossible" for the average man, and keeps people watching, hoping to see another "special"

Looking reyes making 3 4 or 5 racks , well, I know others can make, I do not need TV !! And I can run 2 or 3 racks my own!!! (if lucky!! lol)

I think pool is great, but to get to the next level, mosltly need a new game (don't know which) which must look more challenging, and on which everybody agrees!!

There are too many games, and too many rules for each game! It's confusing!!

Just my opinion.

Have a nice weekend!! :-)
 
I like pool just as it is - at the same time I am not a young guy and I don't play video games, computer games or watch a lot of TV. It's obvious to me that there is a generational difference in interests - not unlike a lot of other well-worn activities. I'm a member of the American Legion - it's the same there. Mostly all a bunch of Viet Nam vets and older with an occasional sprinkling of Gulf War vets. The Legion Riders draw a lot more of the younger vets but they have a common biker-club theme and lots of Harleys. So, what would the "Harley Davidson" equivalent of a new pool game be like? Something much faster with offence and defense at the same time. How about this: Both players have pre-determined balls – let’s say the same goal as 8-ball. Each guy has his own cue ball and they break at the same time on the same table. Now it's a race to see who runs out first. You can only disturb the other guy's shot with one of your object balls - not a direct hit by your cue ball. As the two contestants are running around the table, body checking is permissible - somewhat like hockey. The floors would be padded of course. There would have to be a referee or two and the first guy to sink the 8-ball wins. The game could work with 9 and 10 ball as well. It would run a lot longer and there would be more full contact but you gotta admit - great action! ESPN would be all over it!
 
Last edited:
71vega said:
I like pool just as it is - at the same time I am not a young guy and I don't play video games, computer games or watch a lot of TV. It's obvious to me that there is a generational difference in interests - not unlike a lot of other well-worn activities. I'm a member of the American Legion - it's the same there. Mostly all a bunch of Viet Nam vets and older with an occasional sprinkling of Gulf War vets. The Legion Riders draw a lot more of the younger vets but they have a common biker-club theme and lots of Harleys. So, what would the "Harley Davidson" equivalent of a new pool game be like? Something much faster with offence and defense at the same time. How about this: Both players have pre-determined balls – let’s say the same goal as 8-ball. Each guy has his own cue ball and they break at the same time on the same table. Now it's a race to see who runs out first. You can only disturb the other guy's shot with one of your object balls - not a direct hit by your cue ball. As the two contestants are running around the table, body checking is permissible - somewhat like hockey. The floors would be padded of course. There would have to be a referee or two and the first guy to sink the 8-ball wins. The game could work with 9 and 10 ball as well. It would run a lot longer and there would be more full contact but you gotta admit - great action! ESPN would be all over it!
Click to expand...

Congratulations! This is the best post in this entire thread. This is for everyone who wants to see pocket billiards grow and succeed. As outrageous, over the top, and extreme your suggestion is, I think the concept behind it is dead on.

I don't think that pool needs to go to these lengths described in the above post to get the job done. I do think that something has to be done to engage the idle opponent. Just the slightest adjustment to one of our short games could change the entire dynamic of pool. Our game needs to be more fun in order to compete in 2012.

My hat is off to you, Sir!
 
it's like blaming Steak for a town never having a great Steak House

Paul Schofield said:
Congratulations! This is the best post in this entire thread. This is for everyone who wants to see pocket billiards grow and succeed. As outrageous, over the top, and extreme your suggestion is, I think the concept behind it is dead on.

I don't think that pool needs to go to these lengths described in the above post to get the job done. I do think that something has to be done to engage the idle opponent. Just the slightest adjustment to one of our short games could change the entire dynamic of pool. Our game needs to be more fun in order to compete in 2012.

My hat is off to you, Sir!
Click to expand...

It's funny to me when I hear people talk about the Game of pool "not being good enough to be successful"....Like I told my group last night....it's never been pool's fault it's not doing well....it's like blaming Steak for a town never having a great Steak House when all they ever served was hamburger. LoL 'The Game is the Teacher'
 
If pool is played correctly it looks very easy. This is the main problem with pool. IMHO.
A rack run by Earl Strickland looks really easy and this is not exciting for the average person. Last month I was watching a 9 ball match in dvd. My father joyned me for some minutes and then left. At a point Reyes got un-line on a shot and he had to let the cueball travel 3 or 4 rails to get back in- line. That was a great shot, but my father didn't react. Then Reyes makes an hanger cross side bank and my father said that was a great shot. The average non pool person doesn't know what cueball controll is. An example is the famous "He is not that good, he didn't have any hard shot"!
I explained to my mother how hitting different portion of the cueball affect the cb reation and she was surprised. She thought players were getting position only by hitting the cueball softer or harder. She also didn't know what 9 ball is.
My father, instead, watch snooker with me. He is amazed how the players can pot these long shots in such small pockets. He doesn't have any pool/snooker/billiard knowledge but he enjoy watching snooker because it looks hard. When you are watching a 147 you know you are watching something really special. It's not the case in pool where big packages are stopped because of the stupid breaking rules ( break from the box, 3 balls passing the headstring,ecc). The truth is that pool is, at this moment, a very easy game for the pros. This is why you hear of huge packages run against the ghost with bih after the break. There is a rumor where Ralf Souquet run 25 racks of 9 ball against the ghost.
Basically a 9 ball match beetween two champions is a coin toss and the winner will be who gets more rolls.
 
it's a great game for your Mind, Body and Spirit and can be played by everyone

Paul Schofield said:
I could not agree more. The magic "F" word is not FAIR. The magic "F" word is FUN. Equally unfair can be much more fun than equally fair. Anyway, I have often said "The harder you try to make things fair, the more unfair they can actually become."

We really have got to be careful what we do to our pool games. We can take the fun right out of them. Go get a novice interested player and show him how much fun it is playing called-shot Ten-Ball on a table with tiny pockets. I scratch my head and wonder what everyone is thinking.
Click to expand...

Maybe the older demographic is overlooked. I know many in their 60's, 70's, and even 80's that would love to have a better reason to play pool...it's a great game for your Mind, Body and Spirit and can be played by everyone including all ethnicities, gender's and ages.. truly a sport/game for EVERYONE to enjoy... the Master Game -'The Game is the Teacher'
 
cjssecrets4u2 said:
It's funny to me when I hear people talk about the Game of pool "not being good enough to be successful"....Like I told my group last night....it's never been pool's fault it's not doing well....it's like blaming Steak for a town never having a great Steak House when all they ever served was hamburger. LoL 'The Game is the Teacher'
Click to expand...

I appreciate your metaphor but I respectfully disagree.

You speak as though pool "always was and always will be" (your Steak reference). That is just not the case. The game is not the teacher. People devised this game and it is anything anybody wants it to be. It is the people's tool. Billiards has been in a state of evolution for 150 years. That evolution has never moved quicker than the last 20 years. Evolution is not going to stop now. It is survival of the fittest (or become extinct).

Pocket Billiards is in trouble. I, for one, think that pool has evolved itself into a corner. The world has changed. The world's favorite sports and recreation have become highly interactive. Pool needs to look in this direction. (Look at the success of the team concept.)

I read over and over "If only someone would promote this game properly, start youth programs, run events geared to the less skilled player." I have tons of experience here. The public has spoken. They say "We have tried your game and there is other more fun stuff to do. We are going to do something else."

Evolution needs to happen.

(Please note: I am speaking about Pocket Billiards and not miniature-pool played at the corner bar.)
 
CarlB said:
I think your catch 22 then would be that you can not keep the aspect of running balls AND eliminate the aspect of your opponent sitting. It wont happen.

I think my offensive/defensive game would work, you wouldn't be thinking multi-ball runs. but you emphasis the offense and defensive nature of the game. Each player would be shooting often, and would get equal opportunity to play offense and defense.

You lag and the winner picks offense or defense first.

Come on, you gotta admit its intriguing...like I said, the more I think of it, the more I like it.

Carl
Click to expand...

It sounds good to me. Write out your rules and let us try it.

Dave Nelson
 
I agree that to the average layperson, one who doesn't play pool, the pro's make it look so simple that it is boring.

The average layperson doesn't understand the skill it takes to make it look that easy. One comment I have heard is "those shots are all easy, I can make those shots", and he is right, most of us can make most of the shots you see in a rack run on tv. At least potting the ball, that is....

What the layperson doesn't understand is how difficult it is to get the position on the next shot, and the next one, as well as the pro's do it. That part of the game is lost on the casual viewer.

I don't have an answer. I'm just commenting on why pool is such a difficult "watch" for those who don't play the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top