Proposed rule change: Is the pool world ready for rack-your-own yet?

[Cuebacca]

Please don't vote until the thread has played out a little, unless you've already spent a lot of time and effort researching and/or thinking about this topic...

I would like to petition the WPA to make a change to their rules. I would like the following two rules to added:

1. The player who will break the balls is allowed to rack his/her own balls. The opponent has the right to inspect the rack and request a re-rack if there is a reasonable objection to the rack.

2. In the game of 9-ball (10-ball) making the 9-ball (10-ball) on the break doesn't count as a win. If pocketed on the break, the 9-ball (10-ball) will be placed on the foot spot before the first shot after the break. If this bothers the shooter in any way, he/she has the option to spot the ball before the second shot after the break.

There is probably better wording but hopefully that makes sense. It's basically the way the Florida 10-Ball Tour does it, I believe.

Why?

I think this is the most fair way to go. Once a pool player gains a decent level of proficiency at the game, the break becomes a very important shot. To make a good break requires a good, tight, rack. To make a good, tight, rack requires a certain level of skill at racking and also a certain level of effort by the racker. A competitor should not suffer a disadvantage due to a lack of skill and/or effort of his opponent.

What about concerns of "rack rigging"? Rack rigging is intentionally racking the balls in way that deviates from a "perfect" rack in order to create an advantage for the racker. Ways to deviate from a "perfect" rack include leaving gaps between specific balls, tilting the rack at an angle, or placing the head ball off of the spot, etc.

In regards to rack rigging, I believe the above rule changes would actually help to prevent rack rigging, because there are a lot more ways to give the breaker an unfavorable rack than there are to give the breaker a favorable rack. A favorable rack is a tight rack. The obvious exception being a rack with a gap behind the 9-ball (10-ball) such that the chances of making this ball on the break are highly increased. The 2nd rule above takes care of this type of rack.

In my opinion, the two rule changes above would virtually eliminate the need to walk up and inspect a rack, reducing arguments and/or ill will over the rack.

In my opinion, the pros of the above rule changes would far outweigh the cons, but I would like to open the topic up for discussion if there are any reasons not to make these changes.

 

[sydbarret]

imo the whole racking issue is overblown. If I win I don't wanna rack.I'll sit in the chair or stand at the head of the table and let him deal with that. If you have to ask for a rerack oh well it's part of the game. You win you break you lose you rack, what's so hard about that?

 

[Icon of Sin]

I think it would be ideal for league play, especially since a lot of the players on leagues just throw the balls into the rack and lift it up and have no idea what a bad rack is.

 

[ShootingArts]

more changes

With rack your own we also need to bury the "random order" rule and go to only two acceptable racks, a set order and the mirror image of that order. We really need to bury the "random order" rules anyway since they make no sense.

I don't think that rack your own will reduce rack inspections significantly either. It might shorten the time required for the inspections but I would inspect many players racks very carefully if they were allowed to rack their own. Racking your own without inspections would require honor kind of like calling your own fouls and that always opens up a can of worms.

Hu

Please don't vote until the thread has played out a little, unless you've already spent a lot of time and effort researching and/or thinking about this topic...

I would like to petition the WPA to make a change to their rules. I would like the following two rules to added:

1. The player who will break the balls is allowed to rack his/her own balls. The opponent has the right to inspect the rack and request a re-rack if there is a reasonable objection to the rack.

2. In the game of 9-ball (10-ball) making the 9-ball (10-ball) on the break doesn't count as a win. If pocketed on the break, the 9-ball (10-ball) will be placed on the foot spot before the first shot after the break. If this bothers the shooter in any way, he/she has the option to spot the ball before the second shot after the break.

There is probably better wording but hopefully that makes sense. It's basically the way the Florida 10-Ball Tour does it, I believe.

Why?

I think this is the most fair way to go. Once a pool player gains a decent level of proficiency at the game, the break becomes a very important shot. To make a good break requires a good, tight, rack. To make a good, tight, rack requires a certain level of skill at racking and also a certain level of effort by the racker. A competitor should not suffer a disadvantage due to a lack of skill and/or effort of his opponent.

What about concerns of "rack rigging"? Rack rigging is intentionally racking the balls in way that deviates from a "perfect" rack in order to create an advantage for the racker. Ways to deviate from a "perfect" rack include leaving gaps between specific balls, tilting the rack at an angle, or placing the head ball off of the spot, etc.

In regards to rack rigging, I believe the above rule changes would actually help to prevent rack rigging, because there are a lot more ways to give the breaker an unfavorable rack than there are to give the breaker a favorable rack. A favorable rack is a tight rack. The obvious exception being a rack with a gap behind the 9-ball (10-ball) such that the chances of making this ball on the break are highly increased. The 2nd rule above takes care of this type of rack.

In my opinion, the two rule changes above would virtually eliminate the need to walk up and inspect a rack, reducing arguments and/or ill will over the rack.

In my opinion, the pros of the above rule changes would far outweigh the cons, but I would like to open the topic up for discussion if there are any reasons not to make these changes.

 

[Beware_of_Dawg]

I think it would be ideal for league play, especially since a lot of the players on leagues just throw the balls into the rack and lift it up and have no idea what a bad rack is.

Im quick to ask for a re-rack when that happens.

 

[BVal]

Rule #1 - I like

Rule #2 - not so much. I think the ball (9) if sunk of the break should be spotted immediately. It should only NOT count if it is made into one of the bottom corners. If it goes in another pocket it is just luck.

In my personal opinion I would rather play 10-ball rack your own because even though the break is a very important shot it is much more difficult to manipulate the rack in either players favor.

 

[Cuebacca]

Rule #1 - I like

Rule #2 - not so much. I think the ball (9) if sunk of the break should be spotted immediately. It should only NOT count if it is made into one of the bottom corners. If it goes in another pocket it is just luck.

In my personal opinion I would rather play 10-ball rack your own because even though the break is a very important shot it is much more difficult to manipulate the rack in either players favor.

Thanks for your post. I'm not completely attached to rule #2 as stated, but I think, as you do, that the 9-ball on the break should be address in some way.

All I know is that if the rack is perfectly frozen, the 9-ball doesn't move unless it gets kissed by a moving ball. So when the 9-ball flies up towards an upper corner, I think it's due to some kind of rack imperfection, which is why I thought not counting it in any pocket would be best.

Anyway, maybe if people like #1 we could figure out what the best #2 would be. If people hate #1, I guess #2 will be mute.

 

[Cuebacca]

When you guys ask for a re-rack, how is that next rack usually? I've often found that the new rack has the same problem as the first one, or is perhaps only slightly better. Rarely have I found someone that will give me as good a rack as I would give myself, even after requesting a re-rack.

 

[Icon of Sin]

Im quick to ask for a re-rack when that happens.

Same here don't get me wrong, but some people will ***** and moan about it and when I am out on league I just want to have a good time and don't feel like dealing with that shit.

Then even after a rerack the rack is still ****ed up and then you gotta ask again, it's just a pain in the ass to have to deal with that with someone who doesn't know any better. Hell some get all bent outta shape when you lean over to look at the rack and dont say anything... Hell, Im doing them a favor by showing teaching them what a good rack is...

 

[BVal]

Thanks for your post. I'm not completely attached to rule #2 as stated, but I think, as you do, that the 9-ball on the break should be address in some way.

All I know is that if the rack is perfectly frozen, the 9-ball doesn't move unless it gets kissed by a moving ball. So when the 9-ball flies up towards an upper corner, I think it's due to some kind of rack imperfection, which is why I thought not counting it in any pocket would be best.

Anyway, maybe if people like #1 we could figure out what the best #2 would be. If people hate #1, I guess #2 will be mute.

Even if the rack is perfectly frozen - another ball could kick the 9 down table which is the way it happens the majority of the time. The only two pockets that can be somewhat predicted (to make the 9) are the bottom two. The only way to get a perfect 9 ball rack everytime is a Sardo rack. Even then the 9 ball rack is easily predictable. 10-ball is the way to go It is much more difficult to make a ball on the break so the break becomes less of a factor. Pocketing balls and cue ball control is highlighted instead.

BVal

 

[Cuebacca]

thanks

With rack your own we also need to bury the "random order" rule and go to only two acceptable racks, a set order and the mirror image of that order. We really need to bury the "random order" rules anyway since they make no sense.

I don't think that rack your own will reduce rack inspections significantly either. It might shorten the time required for the inspections but I would inspect many players racks very carefully if they were allowed to rack their own. Racking your own without inspections would require honor kind of like calling your own fouls and that always opens up a can of worms.

Hu

Excellent point on the random order issue. Actually, though, this is an issue that I think needs to be addressed for both rack-your-own and for rack-for-each-other.

When you mention inspecting the rack when your opponent racked his own, is there anything that you can share about what you're looking for? I would probably only complain about his rack if he put the one-ball significantly higher than the spot, or if he tilted the rack. (Or of course if the money ball wasn't frozen in the back and there was no rule #2).

As far as other frozen (unfrozen) balls, as far as I know, having everything perfect is the best, but I wonder if I'm missing something.

 

[Cuebacca]

Same here don't get me wrong, but some people will ***** and moan about it and when I am out on league I just want to have a good time and don't feel like dealing with that shit.

Then even after a rerack the rack is still ****ed up and then you gotta ask again, it's just a pain in the ass to have to deal with that with someone who doesn't know any better. Hell some get all bent outta shape when you lean over to look at the rack and dont say anything... Hell, Im doing them a favor by showing teaching them what a good rack is...

These are good points; the purpose of the rule changes is not only to receive a good rack, but to receive it with minimal ill will and arguments.

If I am forced to break my own rack, I will quickly learn how to rack well. If I never break my own rack, I will just wonder why does my opponent break so bad and why does he seem to blame it on little old me?

 

[ShootingArts]

hard to cover in a post

Really hard to cover everything in one post, watching Joe Tucker's video's until you(anyone) understands the theory is best. What I am looking for is gaps, canted racks, racks significantly off of the spot, particularly in the same place over and over, and the toughest thing to prove if they aren't stacked the same way every time, stacked balls. There is no way in the world to keep a very practiced racker from stacking balls if they want to when just seeming to grab them and put them in the rack at random. They may not be stacking every ball every time but if most of the rack is stacked it is a real advantage.

I often can't prove someone is stacking balls but if I see every rack stacked against the breaker I'll do a little stacking of my own which can't be proven either. I have been known to stack the balls in favor of the breaker in practice too, gives them a little overconfidence when it comes time for serious play!

I firmly believe that skill with a cue stick should decide the winner but I am under no illusions that many people don't take all of the gamble out of gambling and tournament play that they can.

I haven't voted yet but I favor any rules that minimize "fixing" without slowing the game terribly. The coin boxes that don't work on time are an issue to spotting the money ball made on the break, unfortunately no really pleasing solution has been found to that in the last thirty years and more I have been around tables. It seems that since you can't spot the money ball the game is over. The only real question is should it be a win or loss? In eight ball I favor it being a loss. In nine and ten it seems more reasonable for it to be a win. Spotting the money ball made in any pocket is best I believe but only works if you can retrieve the money ball.

Hu

Excellent point on the random order issue. Actually, though, this is an issue that I think needs to be addressed for both rack-your-own and for rack-for-each-other.

When you mention inspecting the rack when your opponent racked his own, is there anything that you can share about what you're looking for? I would probably only complain about his rack if he put the one-ball significantly higher than the spot, or if he tilted the rack. (Or of course if the money ball wasn't frozen in the back and there was no rule #2).

As far as other frozen (unfrozen) balls, as far as I know, having everything perfect is the best, but I wonder if I'm missing something.

 

[Cuebacca]

Syd, thanks for your reply.

You win you break you lose you rack, what's so hard about that?

Because I want to win the next game too!

imo the whole racking issue is overblown. If I win I don't wanna rack.I'll sit in the chair or stand at the head of the table and let him deal with that. If you have to ask for a rerack oh well it's part of the game. You win you break you lose you rack, what's so hard about that?

I suppose if you view racking as a chore, then I understand how you don't want to be stuck with this chore after earning a win. So this is a downside. However, I think the effort of racking is worth it in order to secure a good rack for myself to break.

Maybe I've been playing on bad equipment too much where a good rack from my opponent is easier said than done. However, even on good equipment it's easy to receive a bad rack and not even realize it... the balls may spread but they move more slowly than if the rack was truly tight, decreasing the chances of making a ball without the breaker even realizing it (depending on the breaker of course).

 

[Cuebacca]

Really hard to cover everything in one post, watching Joe Tucker's video's until you(anyone) understands the theory is best. What I am looking for is gaps, canted racks, racks significantly off of the spot, particularly in the same place over and over, and the toughest thing to prove if they aren't stacked the same way every time, stacked balls. There is no way in the world to keep a very practiced racker from stacking balls if they want to when just seeming to grab them and put them in the rack at random. They may not be stacking every ball every time but if most of the rack is stacked it is a real advantage.

Thanks, Hu, I think we are on the same page as far as what to worry about when the opponent is racking for himself.

I've read Joe Tucker's Racking Secrets and watched the 9/10-ball portion of the video. I believe there are some gaps that can help you determine where to place the cue ball in order to make the wing ball.

However, I don't really worry about those when my opponent is racking because I know that if 100% of the balls are frozen in a 9-ball rack, the wing ball is automatic anyway. So in that sense, I think these gaps cannot really create an advantage, unless the breaker is restricted in terms of where he can place the cue ball on the break. I hope I'm not missing something.

I often can't prove someone is stacking balls but if I see every rack stacked against the breaker I'll do a little stacking of my own which can't be proven either. I have been known to stack the balls in favor of the breaker in practice too, gives them a little overconfidence when it comes time for serious play!

I firmly believe that skill with a cue stick should decide the winner but I am under no illusions that many people don't take all of the gamble out of gambling and tournament play that they can.

I like your philosophy on that.

I haven't voted yet but I favor any rules that minimize "fixing" without slowing the game terribly. The coin boxes that don't work on time are an issue to spotting the money ball made on the break, unfortunately no really pleasing solution has been found to that in the last thirty years and more I have been around tables. It seems that since you can't spot the money ball the game is over. The only real question is should it be a win or loss? In eight ball I favor it being a loss. In nine and ten it seems more reasonable for it to be a win. Spotting the money ball made in any pocket is best I believe but only works if you can retrieve the money ball.

Hu

Good point on the coin-op tables. I suppose a spare ball, like the 11-ball. could be spotted in place of the original money ball if both players are OK with that to save money. As far as how the WPA would view this, it may not be a concern for them, since as you mentioned they already have a ball-spotting rule in place for 8-ball. Good food for thought as a potential issue with this proposed rule change...

 

[Bob Jewett]

... I would like to petition the WPA to make a change to their rules. I would like the following two rules to added: ...

Actually, it would be a regulation rather than a rule. In general, the rules themselves do not attempt to cover the situation where there is no referee to rack the balls.

You forgot the choice that is presently listed in the Regulations which seems to have worked out reasonably well. If you think that way doesn't work, then the only way I can think of that's fair is to say that the first shot after a break must be a push-out. You might not consider that nine ball but I think it is far fairer than the alternatives.

 

[sydbarret]

Oh and as for the 9 or the 10 on the break they absolutely should count. Again it's part of the game it's the same for everybody.

 

[Cuebacca]

Actually, it would be a regulation rather than a rule. In general, the rules themselves do not attempt to cover the situation where there is no referee to rack the balls.

You forgot the choice that is presently listed in the Regulations which seems to have worked out reasonably well. If you think that way doesn't work, then the only way I can think of that's fair is to say that the first shot after a break must be a push-out. You might not consider that nine ball but I think it is far fairer than the alternatives.

Thanks, Bob. Is the following regulation the choice that you were referring to? ...

4. Racking / Tapping of Balls
A table is said to be "tapped" when a template is placed in the rack area, balls are placed in the holes in the template and are tapped into place. This procedure replaces the use of the traditional triangle rack, and ensures a quick, tight rack. The choice of tapping over traditional racking with a triangle is at the discretion of the event organizer. Players must never tap balls; only tournament officials should tap or re-tap (if needed) the racking area.
For further information about tapping and the templates, contact the WPA Sports Director.​

 

[Cuebacca]

part of the game... but "should" it be?

Oh and as for the 9 or the 10 on the break they absolutely should count. Again it's part of the game it's the same for everybody.

That's the rub though... it's the same for everybody in terms of it counting, but it's not the same for everybody in terms of when it's going to go in.

I actually can't remember the last time someone made one on me and the reason is because I rack the balls tight. That's the one benefit I get from people giving me bad racks; I make the 9 on them waaay more often than they make it on me.

But I'd much prefer tight racks and actually playing out the games, rather than slug racks and games that end on the break.

 

[Jimmy M.]

I don't know if I like the 9 (or 10) not counting at all, but I like the rule where it doesn't count in the bottom two pockets when playing rack-your-own. It eliminates any possibility that the racking player can fix the rack to have a better chance of making the money ball which, in my opinion, is the only reasonable argument against playing rack-your-own in the first place.