mike sigel told me that starting in chicago,the new rule is if you make a solid on the break, therefore, you are solids! he said, too many players were' running out far to often and this should slow e'm down,also it will be 10 players in a group and the top 6 go thru.
Rule Change!!!!!!!
- Thread starter 8-ball bernie
- Start date
more changes....more to come...
How amusing to be able to watch and hear the IPT go thru the evolution of its existence...I am sure there will be plenty adjustments and changes to come....ONE FOOT ON THE FLOOR... will surely be inplemented into the rules from here on out I bet... No more Monkeying around...ha ha...(couldn't resist) sorry... ha ha
Mr. J.
How amusing to be able to watch and hear the IPT go thru the evolution of its existence...I am sure there will be plenty adjustments and changes to come....ONE FOOT ON THE FLOOR... will surely be inplemented into the rules from here on out I bet... No more Monkeying around...ha ha...(couldn't resist) sorry... ha ha
Mr. J.
8-ball bernie said:
Is that the same Mike Sigel who said that all of the tournaments in 2007 would be over by June? Considering the source I'm going to wait until there is some official word before I'm going to worry about it. FWIW I think it is a stupid idea and just increases the luck factor involved in the break.
OFF TOPIC, but why are there pancakes on the rabbits head?Keith Buck said:
supergreenman said:
I just saw it on a forum once (maybe this one?) with the words "I don't know what you are talking about so here is a picture of a bunny with a pancake on it's head" and it made me laugh. If you google "bunny" and "pancake" for images it comes up with the images and I think there is a backstory to it but I wasn't motivated enough to read it.
I agree with Keith that this rule change would just add more luck into the break. If the tables break hard, then the breaker could actually be at a disadvantage.8-ball bernie said:
If they want this rule change to fly, I think they should add another rule in conjuction with this rule. If the breaker pockets a ball on the break, the breaker should have the option of accepting the ball made and the table layout, or giving it to his opponent. I call this the "switch" rule.
For example, if I make a solid on the break and the layout of the table is such that it's almost impossible (for me) to runout solids (or if I don't have a clear opening shot on a solid ball), I can call "switch" and force my opponent to shoot solids with the current table layout. Unlike the "push out" rule in 9ball, my opponent does not have the option of giving it back but is forced to play solids. Of course, I would relinquish my turn at the table.
This way, the breaker is not at a total disadvantage if the table layout isn't very friendly after pocketing a ball on the break. This would also create another layer of strategy to the game...deciding whether you should "switch" or not. This decision would not only depend on the table layout, but also your skill level as well as your opponent's skill level. If playing Efren, you probably don't want to ever call switch, no matter how impossible the table layout, since you just don't want Efren back at the table.
...just another crazy idea. I'm filled with them.
Last edited:
IMO, this rule change is ridiculous. It comes off like Sigel wasn't happy, so he's changing the rules mid-tour. Sour grapes Sigel? When is this crap going to stop?
It's one thing to be in the process of ironing out the wrinkles related to the tour. This is completely changing the game and a big mistake. How can anyone practice in between competitions if they don't have any idea what they're going to be playing in the next tournament? Also, what's the point in keeping stats if your changing the game? It makes the stats that have already been compiled absolutely useless. This is a terrible move.
It's one thing to be in the process of ironing out the wrinkles related to the tour. This is completely changing the game and a big mistake. How can anyone practice in between competitions if they don't have any idea what they're going to be playing in the next tournament? Also, what's the point in keeping stats if your changing the game? It makes the stats that have already been compiled absolutely useless. This is a terrible move.
TX Poolnut said:
I agree that the rules should not be changed mid-year. Wait until 2007 if they are going to change things.
I don't think its a bad idea. it will let us see some more defense. That can't be bad for us with billiards addictions. The Dueul vs Boyes safety battle was pretty exciting. More exciting than a break and run. I hope to see more of that.
I think its good they are trying to establish the perfect game. if this does not work out they may change it. I doubt anybody is married to it. You have to change something if you want to see more defense. you must admit, this will add more defense to the game AND will make for some very nice runouts full of heroic shots.
I say lets see what happens and decide if it makes a better game. You got to remember these players can REALLY play some pool. This will be a small change and with 7 balls, I think they will still find a way to get out. Its not like they are league players
I think its good they are trying to establish the perfect game. if this does not work out they may change it. I doubt anybody is married to it. You have to change something if you want to see more defense. you must admit, this will add more defense to the game AND will make for some very nice runouts full of heroic shots.
I say lets see what happens and decide if it makes a better game. You got to remember these players can REALLY play some pool. This will be a small change and with 7 balls, I think they will still find a way to get out. Its not like they are league players
This reallty is pretty ridicuous. Talk about a tour where the cream has quickly risen to the top. It's obvious that the rules and format are appropriate.
This change, in my opinion, will make no difference at all. The same guys can be expected to do well. The only impact this will have will be to slightly increase the luck factor.
Real rules? No, real inconsitent rules, which is real stupid.
This change, in my opinion, will make no difference at all. The same guys can be expected to do well. The only impact this will have will be to slightly increase the luck factor.
Real rules? No, real inconsitent rules, which is real stupid.
Last edited:
CaptiveBred said:This will be a small change and with 7 balls, I think they will still find a way to get out. Its not like they are league players
Dang, I've been trying to get out with 8 balls, lol!
10 players in each group will make it impossible to end the tournament on Sunday...
This means 15 groups, each group has 10 players, which means 45 matches in each group, if my math is correct. Then it will be 675 matches only in round 1.
Each match lasts for 2,5 hour, and the IPT are using 60 tables. Starts 10am and end each day at 11pm it should be 5 matches a day, in total 300 the first and the second day, and then the next round can first start around 3pm on the third day.
Next round would have to be another 15 groups, with 6 players in each. Then it would be 30 matches in each group, 450 matches in total.
Still 60 tables and 2,5 hours, they will use the rest of day 3 and all of day 4.
Since this tournament is scheduled to start on Monday, this means that round 3 would start on Friday 10am, with 45 players left in 9 groups.
This round would end on Friday, and then I suppose 18 would proceed to play in 3 groups finishing on Saturday.
Last group on Sunday, with the finals late Sunday or Monday?
Maybe IPT has another way of solving it (more tables, different groups) but I personally believe that there will not be any changes and that the IPT will do business as usual...
This means 15 groups, each group has 10 players, which means 45 matches in each group, if my math is correct. Then it will be 675 matches only in round 1.
Each match lasts for 2,5 hour, and the IPT are using 60 tables. Starts 10am and end each day at 11pm it should be 5 matches a day, in total 300 the first and the second day, and then the next round can first start around 3pm on the third day.
Next round would have to be another 15 groups, with 6 players in each. Then it would be 30 matches in each group, 450 matches in total.
Still 60 tables and 2,5 hours, they will use the rest of day 3 and all of day 4.
Since this tournament is scheduled to start on Monday, this means that round 3 would start on Friday 10am, with 45 players left in 9 groups.
This round would end on Friday, and then I suppose 18 would proceed to play in 3 groups finishing on Saturday.
Last group on Sunday, with the finals late Sunday or Monday?
Maybe IPT has another way of solving it (more tables, different groups) but I personally believe that there will not be any changes and that the IPT will do business as usual...
jsp said:
This is a good point, but why reinvent the wheel at this point. The make a stripe shoot a stripe was how it all started.
Aren't all of you way ahead of yourself?
First of all, Deno just made a major announcement about the upcoming qualifiers to all subscribers, do you not think if there was a rule change this would be the time to advise everyone? He would have at least changed the rule on the IPT website before coming on line and not saying anything. Start your whining when it is official. Rumor and speculation is for the news channels.
First of all, Deno just made a major announcement about the upcoming qualifiers to all subscribers, do you not think if there was a rule change this would be the time to advise everyone? He would have at least changed the rule on the IPT website before coming on line and not saying anything. Start your whining when it is official. Rumor and speculation is for the news channels.
nfty9er said:
An IPT member cites Mike Sigel as his first-hand source. Most of us would consider that reliable information, not a rumor.
Similarly, it was common knowledge here on the forum that the IPT event in England was not going to happen long before the IPT announced it. The argument that IPT changes that haven't been announced aren't so doesn't hold water.
I really hope this isn't true. The great thing about eight ball is that the luck factor is reduced greatly. I don't understand why we would have to change the rules to make the game harder and harder until the pro's look like bangers on television. That won't get viewership.
Hey I have an idea, howabout for PGA golf tournaments, every where but the fairway should be out of bounds. That would make golf tougher.
Hey I have an idea, howabout for PGA golf tournaments, every where but the fairway should be out of bounds. That would make golf tougher.
Mike Siegel has said a lot of things
That is called heresay and would be disallowed in a court of law.
Getting all in a tither over a minor rule change rumor is pathetic. Patience is a virtue. Personally I do not think they would make that change until next year.
sjm said:
That is called heresay and would be disallowed in a court of law.
Getting all in a tither over a minor rule change rumor is pathetic. Patience is a virtue. Personally I do not think they would make that change until next year.
Did Deno make a special email announcement prior to the Las Vegas event about the change in payments? It is my understanding that prior to the end of the first round, everyone that was knocked out thought that they would be paid after the round they were knocked out of was concluded. From what I've been able to gather, the IPT makes choices and changes at will without prior warning.nfty9er said:
In reference to Mike Sigel and the rules change, the following was said in another thread;
Maybe I give more thought to some things than others do but has it crossed anyone's mind that maybe they're trying to change things up in order to give Mike Sigel a better chance at retaining his tour card for the 2007 season? Mike is the "brains" behind the scenes and KT is the money man. They can't simply hand Mike a tour card next year and retain any credibility so maybe they're changing what they can now to give him half a chance at keeping his tour card "legitimately".Nostroke said:
That is no comparison
You are talking apples and oranges. Changing payments is nowhere near changing rules. Tell me about a rule change without prior notice.
Also what are you trying to say? That K.T. and Mike are colluding? So K.T. says no one better cheat or they are out but he and Mike can. You got to be kidding me if you think that, or that crakin in your avatar is the real stuff.
UrackmIcrackm said:
You are talking apples and oranges. Changing payments is nowhere near changing rules. Tell me about a rule change without prior notice.
Also what are you trying to say? That K.T. and Mike are colluding? So K.T. says no one better cheat or they are out but he and Mike can. You got to be kidding me if you think that, or that crakin in your avatar is the real stuff.