Rodney Morris Challenges the Top 25 European Players

elvicash said:
Slow cloth would require the bigger stroke and would reward the players with the power. It would do more to separate the quality of players. The thick cloth was one thing the IPT probably had right. We all love to play on slick cloth, you can get most anywhere most of the time, thick cloth not so easy unless you got the power.

Some rules which would make an interesting high level format
Slow Cloth, 4.5" pockets, 10 ft table, 2 shot foul count on the cue ball not the player , 9 ball, rack it on the spot, small break box, winner breaks, jump ok with full length play or break cue.
Click to expand...

that would definitely be interesting and quite a challenge to even the best players
 
pt109 said:
I never minded 'roll out' rules.....
...but Stevens cloth?:eek:

That would be like golf going back to hickory shafts....
....and un-mowed greens
Click to expand...

You couldn't pit-pat balls for shape. You had to have a STROKE to move that cue ball around the table. Believe it or not, heavy Stevens type cloth was still being widely used up until about 20 years ago. You only saw Simoniz or Granito on billiard tables.
 
elvicash said:
Slow cloth would require the bigger stroke and would reward the players with the power. It would do more to separate the quality of players. The thick cloth was one thing the IPT probably had right. We all love to play on slick cloth, you can get most anywhere most of the time, thick cloth not so easy unless you got the power.

Some rules which would make an interesting high level format
Slow Cloth, 4.5" pockets, 10 ft table, 2 shot foul count on the cue ball not the player , 9 ball, rack it on the spot, small break box, winner breaks, jump ok with full length play or break cue.
Click to expand...

Slow cloth limits your options.....how can that be good for the game?
...best player wins under any condition.....why make the game ugly?

I've got more experience than most on here with thick cloth.....
....40 cloth in a British club is brutal.....there are many things a mediocre player can't do
on that stuff....but neither can the champions.

Everybody should play some carombole to appreciate fine cloth.

But if y'all want to make the game MORE pedestrian, carry on.
 
jay helfert said:
You couldn't pit-pat balls for shape. You had to have a STROKE to move that cue ball around the table. Believe it or not, heavy Stevens type cloth was still being widely used up until about 20 years ago. You only saw Simoniz or Granito on billiard tables.
Click to expand...

Those were the days. Yeah, if you wanted to stun a fairly straight shot to the rail and back out, you needed to cream it. Personally, I'd hate to see those days come back.
 
pro9dg said:
I already wrote it and it consisted of over 800 chapters.. I had it on it's own hard drive. But about two months ago my PC was struck with a virus.
Even though the files were on a separate USB drive they were still accessed and encrypted.
I still have some chapters as hard copy but I just don't relish the thought of inputting it again.
Shame really because it was unusual. Some chapters were only 4-5 lines and the longer ones 2 to 3 pages. Facts were printed in black, hearsay chapters in red and some humorous stories adapted to a pool environment were in blue ink.
I intended to publish it when I reached 1000 chapters but at the moment I am about 700 short.
Click to expand...

I want a mention in the JK chapter!!:wink:
 
jay helfert said:
You couldn't pit-pat balls for shape. You had to have a STROKE to move that cue ball around the table. Believe it or not, heavy Stevens type cloth was still being widely used up until about 20 years ago. You only saw Simoniz or Granito on billiard tables.
Click to expand...

The slow thick cloth makes the pockets play bigger
No one has talked about that
 
real bartram said:
The slow thick cloth makes the pockets play bigger
No one has talked about that
Click to expand...

Does new cloth do that as well? I think it does, at least in my observations. I recently played on Diamonds (not Pro-Ams) that had brand new Simonis 860, and found that as long as I hit pocket speed, I could easily hit the first diamond and still make the ball.

Before the new cloth, it was old non-Simonis, and I couldn't do that.
 
jay helfert said:
You couldn't pit-pat balls for shape. You had to have a STROKE to move that cue ball around the table. Believe it or not, heavy Stevens type cloth was still being widely used up until about 20 years ago. You only saw Simoniz or Granito on billiard tables.
Click to expand...

Jay, what do you think was the cloth used at the famous Rack in Detroit?
Gil Elias was a former tournament 3-cushion player.
The cloth was faster than 860 Simonis ( and maybe even 760).....
...and it was cleaned several times a day.

Some 1-pocket thin-cut banks could be done there that were impossible
on thick cloth.
Some players didn't realize the difference....so I caught a player at another
room that had Mali 821 directional nap....he lost his money trying to do
a shot that was very possible at the Rack.
 
Celtic said:
That is exactly what I meant to say, must have made it a little confusing with my wording.

What I meant by "Unlike current TAR there is no decent 2nd place money" is that "This system, unlike current TAR, would not have guaranteed decent second place money".

I think the players would buy into it. You are basically giving the players a huge freeroll to win as many games as possible with every game they win being money in their pocket. Heck you could have a stack of money right there in the studio and be paying these guys cash every game they win on the spot, that could be pretty interesting when SVB runs a 10 pack off the lag, has $500 in his pockets, and his opponent is sitting there glowering wondering if he is going to get white washed.

Keeping the money tally on screen as the "score" would also be interesting.
Click to expand...

I must have misunderstood your original post. We are saying the same thing it looks like. I will think about your idea and talk with some players. It could add a cool dynamic. It does seem to emphasize yardage more than a victory though so that is something to think about.
 
JCIN said:
I must have misunderstood your original post. We are saying the same thing it looks like. I will think about your idea and talk with some players. It could add a cool dynamic. It does seem to emphasize yardage more than a victory though so that is something to think about.
Click to expand...

What about combining both methods? Just for example: $5,000 purse. $1700 to winner, $800 to loser, and the rest by games won?

eidt: If you made it $25 a game, then you are good for 100 games of play. What the final score is, would be unknown at the beginning of the match. And, even if a blowout, the loser still would be fighting for every game.
 
Last edited:
That could be an interesting format


Neil said:
What about combining both methods? Just for example: $5,000 purse. $1700 to winner, $800 to loser, and the rest by games won?

eidt: If you made it $25 a game, then you are good for 100 games of play. What the final score is, would be unknown at the beginning of the match. And, even if a blowout, the loser still would be fighting for every game.
Click to expand...
 
JCIN said:
I must have misunderstood your original post. We are saying the same thing it looks like. I will think about your idea and talk with some players. It could add a cool dynamic. It does seem to emphasize yardage more than a victory though so that is something to think about.
Click to expand...

I like the idea, but it would be good if you also had a winners and losers prize for the set as a whole - so $1000 (or whatever amount you decide) to the winner of the set and then x amount per game won. That way every game is worth something, but you still have the added pressure when it gets close to the end.

Playing per game only, if you're racing to 21 and it's 19-19, there's such a small difference between winners and losers prizes that there's not much pressure over the last few games. If you have an amount won per game and a winner's prize for the set, you have meaning for each game and pressure on the set as a whole.
 
pt109 said:
Yep, thick cloth makes the rail deader, therefore a ball will slide in.
Click to expand...

So wouldn't that mean that balls are more easily pocketed on thick clothed tables?

These days, Johnny Archer would never finish a game of pool if he had to pick lint off of one of those shag carpets of yesteryear.

JoeyA
 
BeiberLvr said:
Does new cloth do that as well? I think it does, at least in my observations. I recently played on Diamonds (not Pro-Ams) that had brand new Simonis 860, and found that as long as I hit pocket speed, I could easily hit the first diamond and still make the ball.

Before the new cloth, it was old non-Simonis, and I couldn't do that.
Click to expand...

Yes, pockets tighten up as the cloth wears. Balls will slide in when the cloth is new.

A newer/faster cloth means you have to hit the balls less hard, which also means you have to be less precise.
 
sjm said:
Solid post, and the luck argument would seem to hold water, but in fact only a select few ever win the premier events. All the greats have played tens of thousands of races to nine or eleven in competition, and the cream has always risen to the top, and the top dogs seemingly win every major title in sight. In fact, when the Derby City Classic nine ball was a race to seven event, about ten in a row of them were won by Hall of Famers and future Hall of Famers.

Short race events are the only way to determine champions and, as you say, the pressure is immense. Only a few are consistently good enough to deal with that pressure, but cinderellas win the big titles incredibly rarely, and that, to me, refutes the hypothesis that the races are too short.
Click to expand...

But big events with short sets like to 5 always see an unexpected name or 2 got far deeper than their records would suggest.

Surely that is indicative of the fact that shorter races minimize skill differences, no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top