Rack your own

Rack you own is the only way to go, maybe it might not look the most "professional" but
it sure does eliminate lots of racking issues.

Just watched a "Make it Happen" 8 ball match between Orcollo and Appleton with
a racker, lots of issues, Danny D showed his frustration with the whole affair.
 
I think this idear could be the end all / be all - have the " racker " wear a blindfold and just like when ya practice reach down into the ball return and just throw the balls out on the table ( 9 ball made doesn't count ). This gets rid of pattern racking AND cut breaks, also would fulfill every x # of balls must touch a rail! Think about it!
 
Last edited:
BmoreMoney said:
I think this idear could be the end all / be all - have the " racker " wear a blindfold and just like when ya practice reach down into the ball return and just throw the balls out on the table ( 9 ball made doesn't count ). This gets rid of pattern racking AND cut breaks, also would fulfill every x # of balls must touch a rail! Think about it!
Click to expand...
I think you're trying to say what Paul Schofield has said for a long time and more eloquently. You may find his threads interesting. He has a recent one under the title of "another no-conflict tournament" or similar.

It has been clear for over 10 years that nine ball is broken -- see for example http://sfbilliards.com/articles/2008.pdf . The latest wrinkle I've seen was a rack-your-own situation where a player figured out how to wire the corner ball dead for himself with a non-cut-break. It was very, very effective.
 
Bob Jewett said:
I think you're trying to say what Paul Schofield has said for a long time and more eloquently. You may find his threads interesting. He has a recent one under the title of "another no-conflict tournament" or similar.

It has been clear for over 10 years that nine ball is broken -- see for example http://sfbilliards.com/articles/2008.pdf . The latest wrinkle I've seen was a rack-your-own situation where a player figured out how to wire the corner ball dead for himself with a non-cut-break. It was very, very effective.
Click to expand...

Bob, thanks for the suggestion. I did just read the no conflict thread and I must say I'd want no parts of that. Whether tourny or gambling would I ever participate in those rules. Not what im used to and not something that I believe I'd like either - but thanks anyhow ss im always open to entertaining new things. My earlier suggestion was partially a half-hearted attempt at a funny ( although while very corny it actually would eliminate most of the problems people are always b____Ing about. Honestly, for me I dont really have a problem with the " pattern racking " as I see that as a skill, or at least strategy which is an ok part of the game. I see it as if ya dont know how to do it u should - kinda like being able to masse - along those lines. And in my opinion, if both parties do it it still comes down to who misses / messes up first no different in my opinion than if neither party were doing it. And that statement is true in my opinion because ya really dont see anyone winning the lag and breaking and running out the set now do you? I certainly do not play on the pro level soaybe if I did I would feel differently , however I dont think I would because of my earlier stayed examples.
 
Played a buy in tourney at a local bar. Bca rules and rack your own. It was worth the $5 buy in to make sure I had a tight rack and an even chance to run out. We switched the break each time too. Was a good time.
 
I like to rack my own in top level tournaments. I would never employ a racker.

In certain tournaments a ref is provided of course and that is fair enough because a ref is impartial and can be considered by all to be so.

Is a racker impartial? Can he take a side or be paid off? Should the players have a racker each?

Honestly, it has never occured to me, ever, to consider employing one.

It is not just about racking the balls either. It is not just about being secure in the rack being correct. It is a useful pause in the match where you can think about what is going on and slow down or speed up the match according to your wants and needs. Physically getting the balls out of the return and then placing them in the rack automatically tunes you in to concentrating on the table.

for me anyway..
 
BobTfromIL said:
Rack you own is the only way to go, maybe it might not look the most "professional" but
it sure does eliminate lots of racking issues.

Just watched a "Make it Happen" 8 ball match between Orcollo and Appleton with
a racker, lots of issues, Danny D showed his frustration with the whole affair.
Click to expand...

Your probably right, but if I'm racking my own in the old days, I would do everything I could/legally during racking to make sure a ball went down. As in the old days when you lost & you racked you did everything you could/legally and morally to make sure your opponent did NOT make a ball on the break. Certain groups of balls rack tighter than others, and certain ball patterns because of the differences in ball diameter's make a dramatic difference in balls made on the break or not.
 
RE: Pattern racking

As I've mentioned before, the easiest way to allow the breaker to "rack his own" without allowing pattern racking is a simple rule that his opponent gets to switch the position of any two balls (except the one and nine, of course). You can destroy any pattern by switching the position of two balls.

The breaker gets to make sure his rack is tight; his opponent gets to make sure the breaker doesn't get an easy layout.

It doesn't require any software or additional equipment.

Simple, really. Try it.
 
Local tournaments allow rack your own, with the proviso 9 on the break doesn't count if you rack your own. Less drama, and works pretty well.
 
FWIW, I'm an advocate for putting marks on the table to ensure that things are done "consistently" and fairly for everybody in the game.

I like a line to be drawn from the break spot to the center spot on the short rail behind the rack. This allows the rack to be lined up straight and it gives a reference when lining up balls to be spotted behind the ball on the spot.

Even though I don't play 14.1 often, I like a triangle to be drawn around the rack on the spot so that you can determine if balls are/or will be in the rack.

I also like a line drawn across the breaking end at the second diamonds so that people don't put the cue ball in the middle of the table when they break.

If you want things to be consistent, you have to have rules and boundaries. You can't have people just "eyeballing" things and doing them half-ass.

Aloha.
 
King T said:
They do it in international tournaments, it could be done here.
Click to expand...

International tournaments have a ton of sponsor options US ones don't. How big do you think the Mosconi Cup or other major events would be without the online poker or gambling ads they have?
 
Bob Jewett said:
I think you're trying to say what Paul Schofield has said for a long time and more eloquently. You may find his threads interesting. He has a recent one under the title of "another no-conflict tournament" or similar.

It has been clear for over 10 years that nine ball is broken -- see for example http://sfbilliards.com/articles/2008.pdf . The latest wrinkle I've seen was a rack-your-own situation where a player figured out how to wire the corner ball dead for himself with a non-cut-break. It was very, very effective.
Click to expand...

The two shots in diagrams 1 and 2 are illegal by the rules I know of. 1, the base of the ball has to be on or over the line for it to count as a legal ball to hit. Same thing in diagram 2, but I think the ruls is, if the only ball you can hit is behind the line, it gets spotted. Otherwise you are are actually worse off if your opponent fouls and you get ball in hand behind the line.
 
The following is talking about the first article in the PDF of articles referenced above....

hang-the-9 said:
The two shots in diagrams 1 and 2 are illegal by the rules I know of. 1, the base of the ball has to be on or over the line for it to count as a legal ball to hit. ...
Click to expand...
Which rule set are you using? (WSR? TAP? BCAPL? APA? ...)
 
hang-the-9 said:
The two shots in diagrams 1 and 2 are illegal by the rules I know of. 1, the base of the ball has to be on or over the line for it to count as a legal ball to hit. Same thing in diagram 2, but I think the ruls is, if the only ball you can hit is behind the line, it gets spotted. Otherwise you are are actually worse off if your opponent fouls and you get ball in hand behind the line.
Click to expand...

Bob used those two shots in Diagrams 1 and 2 to show a change in the WPA rules effective in 2008. Prior to then, those shots were not allowed, but now they are. Here's the current rule:

6.11 Bad Play from Behind the Head String
When the cue ball is in hand behind the head string, and the first ball the cue ball contacts is also behind the head string, the shot is a foul unless the cue ball crosses the head string before that contact. If such a shot is intentional, it is unsportsmanlike conduct.
The cue ball must either cross the head string or contact a ball in front of or on the head string or the shot is a foul, and the cue ball is in hand for the following player according to the rules of the specific game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top