Proposed rules for tournament slow play in One Pocket and Banks

336Robin said:
This is why I'm in favor of time limit on the match. At the end of the time, you count the balls made in the last rack to
determine the winner of that rack. One Pocket races are usually shot like race to 3. So, if one player gets a head and then starts slow playing
the underdog of the match doesn't have to play slow also. He speeds up or does something aggressive forcing the other guy to take
a swing at something. If the underdog is already losing, its his responsibility to turn things around. No chess clock needed for that. Just a start
time and an end time.
Click to expand...
That's actually not bad after I read it a few times. Simply whoever is ahead at the time limit wins. Yes, it greatly favors the player ahead, and they can knock all the balls out of play. But they would do that anyway if there was no time limit, if they are managing the game. And if they did get ahead, well that simply means they played better up until that point, so maybe simply reward them with the win when time expires.
 
iusedtoberich said:
That's actually not bad after I read it a few times. Simply whoever is ahead at the time limit wins. Yes, it greatly favors the player ahead, and they can knock all the balls out of play. But they would do that anyway if there was no time limit, if they are managing the game. And if they did get ahead, well that simply means they played better up until that point, so maybe simply reward them with the win when time expires.
Click to expand...

In yrs. past a friend of mine had a little tour and he ran into one guy that played slow like that and I'd already warned
him about the guy. One of his biggest tools was bunt the ball and let you do all the work in hopes he would get a shot.
I don't see that as playing One Pocket. That is (Stall Ball) and it shouldn't be rewarded if you can't shoot at your hole because
the other man is leaving you locked up tight or partially behind a ball (which is the point of the game). I've seen too many people
that don't understand the table math of (what they could lose or might not lose if they miss) too scared to play the game and shoot makeable
shots.

You can't play a guy like that for $10, you would need to play him for $100 a rack if he's going to do that and to reward him at the
expense of everyone in the tournament isn't right. Times up! The one ahead is the winner!
 
The whole point of classic one pocket strategy was to protect balls near your hole, and once you have an advantage in ball count, play the score and knock balls OUT OF PLAY.
Up to your opponent to create advantages while you take your time, and squeeze as hard as you want.
Why punish the player protecting their lead because the other player isn’t skilled enough or knowledgeable enough to create advantages? Let them take all the risks.

So nowadays, people want the entire game to be downtable, playing around the stack, so that any error might result in a run out (good for tv and speed play) and forget sending anything uptable at all.

Got it.
 
SUPERSTAR said:
The whole point of classic one pocket strategy was to protect balls near your hole, and once you have an advantage in ball count, play the score and knock balls OUT OF PLAY.
Up to your opponent to create advantages while you take your time, and squeeze as hard as you want.
Why punish the player protecting their lead because the other player isn’t skilled enough or knowledgeable enough to create advantages? Let them take all the risks.

So nowadays, people want the entire game to be downtable, playing around the stack, so that any error might result in a run out (good for tv and speed play) and forget sending anything uptable at all.

Got it.
Click to expand...

I think you’re on the money.

As you say, nowadays, because the style of play has become far more aggressive, there is more down table play. You can thank Scott Frost, Tony Chohan, and just about any Filipino you’d care to name.

In the old days commentators would laugh at kick shots saying you only shoot those if you’re mad at your money (or backer). Now, you must be conversant on kicks, banks, and combos that would have made the old timers faint dead away.

Lou Figueroa
 
You boys are completely missing the point. Wouldn't it be cool to have a small weekly one pocket or banks tournament? Something like $20-40 entry, 16 players max field? It's not possible to do that unless there is SOME form of time control on the matches. Whatever that time control is, it must be tournament director friendly.

After the players get knocked out, let them play wedge one pocket until the room closes. Better yet, pay the houseman to stay open until the morning shift comes in.

What I'm proposing will ONLY affect the matches that end up taking a long time, AND HOLD UP THE ENTIRE TOURNAMENT, thus affecting EVERYONE.

Most one pocket sessions have a mix of down table games, and up table games. As long as a reasonable time limit is picked "for the specific tournament parameters", then it's only going to come into play occasionally.
 
bad players are the ones that send the balls up table. good players dont unless way ahead. they dont want to have hour plus long games.

with slow players it is impossible to have a one day one pocket tournament even with races to two or three.
 
iusedtoberich said:
You boys are completely missing the point. Wouldn't it be cool to have a small weekly one pocket or banks tournament? Something like $20-40 entry, 16 players max field? It's not possible to do that unless there is SOME form of time control on the matches. Whatever that time control is, it must be tournament director friendly.

After the players get knocked out, let them play wedge one pocket until the room closes. Better yet, pay the houseman to stay open until the morning shift comes in.

What I'm proposing will ONLY affect the matches that end up taking a long time, AND HOLD UP THE ENTIRE TOURNAMENT, thus affecting EVERYONE.

Most one pocket sessions have a mix of down table games, and up table games. As long as a reasonable time limit is picked "for the specific tournament parameters", then it's only going to come into play occasionally.
Click to expand...

Who ever puts together a good tournament like that would consistently get 16 player in most cities

More players, equal more rail birds = more food and drinks sold.

Your idea is solid in my opinion.
 
iusedtoberich said:
You boys are completely missing the point. Wouldn't it be cool to have a small weekly one pocket or banks tournament? Something like $20-40 entry, 16 players max field? It's not possible to do that unless there is SOME form of time control on the matches. Whatever that time control is, it must be tournament director friendly.

After the players get knocked out, let them play wedge one pocket until the room closes. Better yet, pay the houseman to stay open until the morning shift comes in.

What I'm proposing will ONLY affect the matches that end up taking a long time, AND HOLD UP THE ENTIRE TOURNAMENT, thus affecting EVERYONE.

Most one pocket sessions have a mix of down table games, and up table games. As long as a reasonable time limit is picked "for the specific tournament parameters", then it's only going to come into play occasionally.
Click to expand...

If I am ever faced with a wedge... at the first opportunity I am *blasting* into the wedge with an OB and putting the CB as close to my opponent's pocket as possible and will take my chances from there, lol.

Lou Figueroa
 
maha said:
bad players are the ones that send the balls up table. good players dont unless way ahead. they dont want to have hour plus long games.

with slow players it is impossible to have a one day one pocket tournament even with races to two or three.
Click to expand...

There are many bad players that think 1pocket is all about bunting balls up table so that they can take hours playing a single frippin' game.

You get two of these guys playing each other and they stink up the whole tournament.

Lou Figueroa
DQ them
 
iusedtoberich said:
You boys are completely missing the point. Wouldn't it be cool to have a small weekly one pocket or banks tournament? Something like $20-40 entry, 16 players max field? It's not possible to do that unless there is SOME form of time control on the matches. Whatever that time control is, it must be tournament director friendly.

After the players get knocked out, let them play wedge one pocket until the room closes. Better yet, pay the houseman to stay open until the morning shift comes in.

What I'm proposing will ONLY affect the matches that end up taking a long time, AND HOLD UP THE ENTIRE TOURNAMENT, thus affecting EVERYONE.

Most one pocket sessions have a mix of down table games, and up table games. As long as a reasonable time limit is picked "for the specific tournament parameters", then it's only going to come into play occasionally.
Click to expand...

Why is banks even in the conversation?

It would be cool to have a weekly, but banks would be quicker unless you get 2 people that can’t make a straight in shot, let alone, a bank, playing each other.

One pocket, 16 player single elimination is about a days worth of time if you start at noon/1pm.
Anything more than that, should be two days and double elimination with that number should definitely be two days.
Sad when tournaments end up being endurance contests when they don’t have to be. Lots of players won’t even bother if that’s the case and they know it before hand.

Plus, plenty of establishments don’t want time constraints because if a tournament goes on till 3 or 4 in the morning, they don’t care. To them, that’s more people in the joint buying food and drink and renting tables just to hang out when the place would otherwise have closed. Just like the old, “hot and humid in the summer time, let’s just open some windows and forget about the AC, call it a day, and squeeze out that extra few cold beverage sales, move.
 
@SUPERSTAR

Banks is my favorite game that's why I included it. I find that some banks games can take as long as one pocket games, when the balls get out of play. The strategy is similar in the two games, a beginning portion that is mostly offense, a middle portion that is knocking balls out of play, then an end portion getting those balls slowly back in play.
 
Here's one that is guaranteed to speed up play.

You are allowed to chalk the cue one time only between shots.

I have seen Dennis O pick up, chalk and put it down again 20 times between shots. :)
He'll pickup and chalk, put it down and you think he's going to shoot. Nope then he'll pick it up again.
 
he needs to be told to play faster or stay home. surprise!! he will play faster.
 
how about if your match is the last one going from round 2 etc it;s over on the spot. Current leader at that time wins OR the next person to make 2 balls wins. If this conversation is solely about the one match that holds up the event, that should work.
 
iusedtoberich said:
You boys are completely missing the point. Wouldn't it be cool to have a small weekly one pocket or banks tournament? Something like $20-40 entry, 16 players max field? It's not possible to do that unless there is SOME form of time control on the matches. Whatever that time control is, it must be tournament director friendly.

After the players get knocked out, let them play wedge one pocket until the room closes. Better yet, pay the houseman to stay open until the morning shift comes in.

What I'm proposing will ONLY affect the matches that end up taking a long time, AND HOLD UP THE ENTIRE TOURNAMENT, thus affecting EVERYONE.

Most one pocket sessions have a mix of down table games, and up table games. As long as a reasonable time limit is picked "for the specific tournament parameters", then it's only going to come into play occasionally.
Click to expand...

I'm glad this thread came up. I have a new room going in close by with lots of tables.
A weekly One Pocket tournament would be a nice distraction. Getting it finished and over in a predictable manner
would be nice also. In fact, unless it does, it won't work at all.
 
Grady's "four ball" rule ends all the problems of long One Pocket matches, and it does not materially affect the outcome. The better player will still win, it just won't take as long. I've used this rule several times and it absolutely works! All the other solutions mentioned here are not that easy to implement and not as effective as the Four Ball rule.
 
jay helfert said:
Grady's "four ball" rule ends all the problems of long One Pocket matches, and it does not materially affect the outcome. The better player will still win, it just won't take as long. I've used this rule several times and it absolutely works! All the other solutions mentioned here are not that easy to implement and not as effective as the Four Ball rule.
Click to expand...

From AI:

Grady Mathews, a renowned pool player, introduced a rule in One Pocket to address situations where multiple balls are clustered behind the head string (in the “kitchen”). According to Grady’s 4-ball rule, if all the remaining balls are in the kitchen at the end of a player’s inning, the ball closest to the head rail will be spotted12. This helps to keep the game flowing and prevents stalling.

Me:
This is a good rule that would apply to many situations, but I don't believe this rule is going to guarantee that a weekly one pocket tournament finish in a timely manner (race to 3)--16 players--8 tables.

At 1.5 hr. matches---with a 1pm start time----solid playing nothing else will take 10.5 hrs. and you know that other stuff will happen in between times or delay people getting to their tables quickly like meals, bathroom breaks etc. That means the weekly one pocket event will be 12pm to 1pm getting done. If a few tables go over 1.5 hrs. you're there even later.

With a 1 hr. and done match time----7 rounds is hypothetically done by 8pm with a 1 pm start time meaning 9 to 930pm at night most likely.

If people don't like the time limit, then don't get in. For a weekly cheap to enter tournament something has to be done
to make it worth folks time. Holding them to all hours of the night won't work when you need a guaranteed ending time for the whole thing.

That is my 2 cents worth. Would I pony up $40 to participate in double elimination like this? Yes, I would.
Luck of the draw, no spots just play your best. I don't like being out all night anymore and won't if I can get around it.
 
336Robin said:
From AI:

Grady Mathews, a renowned pool player, introduced a rule in One Pocket to address situations where multiple balls are clustered behind the head string (in the “kitchen”). According to Grady’s 4-ball rule, if all the remaining balls are in the kitchen at the end of a player’s inning, the ball closest to the head rail will be spotted12. This helps to keep the game flowing and prevents stalling.
Click to expand...
lately in the tourney i have seen that have used the "grady rule"
it didnt matter if there were balls out of the kitchen or not
anytime the were 5 or more balls in the kitchen balls were removed as necessary to leave 4 balls in the kitchen.
i think the above makes more sense since if there are balls out of the kitchen they are "in play"
jmho
icbw
 
Apologies if this has already been discussed in this thread. I started reading it shortly after it was created but haven't went back through all the replies. Regardless, I've been thinking about it off and on since then and the best thing I can come up with to speed up play is to simply play with fewer balls. Why not try 11 balls instead of 15 and see how it goes?

1727785704630.png


I realize the rack looks goofy. But playing this way should speed up play noticeably without anyone having to keep track of time or how many balls are up table. So the game could be played as normal, just shorter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top