Pool has a "FATAL FLAW"

[Wags]

Thanks for the getting the credit post!

I really like my idea...if anyone steals it...ya better give me credit. lmao.

In fact...I think I am going to work up a full game list of rules.

Carl

Thanks for reminding me.

I really like my idea...if anyone steals it...ya better give me credit. lmao

 

[CarlB]

Thanks for reminding me.

I really like my idea...if anyone steals it...ya better give me credit. lmao

Classic!!! Love it. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Carl

 

[Hustlehard]

No sport is perfect anyway i can find something wrong with every game, doesnt mean i still wont participate or watch.

 

[Wags]

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.

Paul, I respectully disagree. If there was enough money in it and tournaments, the pros would be ther with bells on. Those games still don't give an equal field because the object balll positions are different every time.

 

[jwpretd]

Personally, for the rotation games and eight ball, I think alternate breaks would be a good idea. However, with that there would need to be a "win by 2 games" rule, the intent being to force the winner to have won at least one game on the loser's break. Or perhaps something like the "equal number of innings" rule in billiards, though it's unclear exactly how you would work that.

Or just go to call pocket 15-ball rotation, using either ball-value scoring or doing it like ten ball. That'd pretty much guarantee both players chances to shoot. Unless maybe one of them is Reyes.

 

[Wags]

Personally, for the rotation games and eight ball, I think alternate breaks would be a good idea. However, with that there would need to be a "win by 2 games" rule, the intent being to force the winner to have won at least one game on the loser's break. Or perhaps something like the "equal number of innings" rule in billiards, though it's unclear exactly how you would work that.

Or just go to call pocket 15-ball rotation, using either ball-value scoring or doing it like ten ball. That'd pretty much guarantee both players chances to shoot. Unless maybe one of them is Reyes.

I've seen Alex run out a couple times in a row. He was playing and betting on the 15 ball ghost. How strong is that?

I always did like the "win-by-two" tournaments. I ran a lot of those back in the '80's. The Mosconi Cup this year showed how the alternating break format can make matches close.

 

[BasementDweller]

I don't quite agree with this "FATAL FLAW" notion. I still believe that there are a lot of people that are attracted to greatness. This is why I will watch a major golf tournament on Sunday's but I don't even play golf. So, I really don't think you can take the high runs out of pool without hurting the game. By hurting the game, I'm not necessarily referring to making it less marketable, but hurting it for the PLAYERS. After all, if you make the game less enjoyable for the people that love it in an effort to make it more marketable to those that don't even care about it, what do you really gain in the long run?

A middle ground would be something along the lines of each player gets to break for a certain number of racks in a row (playing 9 or 10 ball). I was thinking 3 racks. This would give a player enough racks to showcase their talent for running balls. A 3 pack would mean something and if the game was coming down to the wire and a player was down 2 racks but just began breaking he would have the opportunity to run out the match. This would make for an exciting match for me.

The idea that each player has to have a turn at the table every rack is something I don't agree with, nor do I understand it.

 

[watchez]

It is not that pool doesn't have a defense as part of the game - it does.

But pool is the only game I can think of that you can win without your opponent getting an opportunity to play. In golf, both players get a chance to hit the ball.

(although I do not find this pool's fatal flaw)

 

[Roger Long]

Uh, golf has pretty broad based appeal, has major sponsorship, hugely successful tours, network TV plus it's own dedicated cable channel, and even the second tier & journeyman pros are millionaires.

In golf your competitor also doesn't play defense against you.

With all due respect, I don't think that's it.

But the difference is that all players get their chance to shoot. I think that's the most important point Paul is trying to make.

Roger

 

[Paul Schofield]

Let me try this from a different angle.

Where would basketball be today if a team kept the ball after they scored? Every legitimate sport has its own way of creating "back and forth" and promoting viable competition. I shoot till I miss while you sit and do nothing about it does not cut it.

Do we want to make pool players or do we want to make them quit?

 

[MOJOE]

I like where this is going and feel that Paul is on to something.. Paul, are you the one that runs the tournaments that the player gets to shoot after he/she breaks whether a ball is pocketed on the break or not? Alternate break of course..

I really like that concept!

 

[Maniac]

Are you folks that gullible? I have a nice lime-green JitterBug lure that I'm casting out to you... oooo, doesn't it look delicious? Wanna bite?

-Sean

Does it have a white belly, with black spots on its back outlined in white? That would be your basic frog pattern. Got one. Got a Hula Popper in the same pattern :thumbup:!!!

Maniac

 

[DaveK]

I might be wrong about this, but I think until recently snooker has been mostly an elitist sport in England-played largely by the pros and higher income folks and no so much by the 'general public'.

Tell that to Andy Capp

Dave

 

[Paul Schofield]

I like where this is going and feel that Paul is on to something.. Paul, are you the one that runs the tournaments that the player gets to shoot after he/she breaks whether a ball is pocketed on the break or not? Alternate break of course..

I really like that concept!

Yes I am, but that is not what this thread is about.

 

[supergreenman]

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 three together is a recipe for absolute failure. 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.

Promoting pool in its current form is suicide.

If you think it's so flawed, the answer is simple. Don't play. I on the other hand, love it because of it's "flaws" I love that you can close out a game or a match with out your opponent ever shooting.

 

[BasementDweller]

Let me try this from a different angle.

Where would basketball be today if a team kept the ball after they scored? Every legitimate sport has its own way of creating "back and forth" and promoting viable competition. I shoot till I miss while you sit and do nothing about it does not cut it.

Do we want to make pool players or do we want to make them quit?

Well, how about tennis???

Should they alternate the serve after every point? I don't think so. At the same time, I wouldn't like it if you had the same player serving the whole match. This is why I like my previous idea of a set number of breaks before the break switches to the other player.

I know from reading your previous posts that you really don't care for the break shot but I still don't know what your alternative is.

 

[Maniac]

Or just go to call pocket 15-ball rotation, using either ball-value scoring or doing it like ten ball. That'd pretty much guarantee both players chances to shoot.

I've suggested this game a few times in past threads and I get a lot of "People want to see the packages put up" comments. Then this OP starts a thread complaining of the "packages" so-to-speak and where are all the comments about "people wanting to see packages put up"??? Go figure.

15-ball rotation would be THE game to play professionally imo. Sure you'd get a B&R occasionally, but not often enough to ruin the ability of BOTH players getting PLENTY of trips to the table. Even a winner breaks format (which many folks favor) would probably see both players shooting in most single games.

Maniac

 

[Nostroke]

All those things were true during its heyday when there were 2-3000 poolhalls in Chicago alone.

 

[MikeM]

No sport is perfect anyway i can find something wrong with every game, doesnt mean i still wont participate or watch.

HH, we know YOU - and we - will participate and watch. It's everybody else we're trying to capture as an audience.

What Paul and "us all" mean when we say pool is dying or flawed is that there is no "real" professional pool anymore.

What little pro pool is played, gets NO TV air time and little to no commercial sponsorship. There is no appeal to the masses and therefore no $$$ in the game.

I understand Paul's point and I like that he puts so much thought into improving on the game. I disagree that the flaws he describes are fatal however. Pool has plenty of deadly flaws before you even get to the table.

Everyone has their own ideas on how to save pool. I've got mine as well and if they're ever able to be put to the test, I hope Paul is around to help out.

MM

 

[Paul Schofield]

Well, how about tennis???

Tennis has their way of creating viable competition. Serving in alternating games works fine.