LOL, I don't ever remember noticing that, but then I'm not too worried about the clock when I play so I guess I don't pay too much attention to it when watching.
And now I have to go watch more pool videos
Shot clock in pool
- Thread starter dumisin
- Start date
LOL, I don't ever remember noticing that, but then I'm not too worried about the clock when I play so I guess I don't pay too much attention to it when watching.
And now I have to go watch more pool videos
The tournament I have seen was just a time limit for the match. Also in chess the clock is right there and you don't move from the seat. Where are they going to put a clock on the pool table? It's a bit hard to have a shot clock to keep track of, run around the table for the shot, aim, shoot, and keep a half eye on the clock even if someone else automatically stopped and started it for you. When does the shot start? When the ball stops or when you get to the table for your turn? So the opponent shoots, the balls stop in motion, does the other player then need to run to the table? Or are they standing behind the opponent to jump right into their time? Or does the time only start when the opponent gets to the table?
Don't think a time match would work well for a game that involves a lot of moving and walking on the field/table as well as a "corner" you need to sit in to keep from distracting the shooter.
well, once you have a couple racks lead you can play slow as a turtle. they have it in some chinese 8-ball tournaments and certain players use this strategy.
If anyone wants too know How to beat and ''up down look around'' player, I figured it out. In the late seventies, and then ran into a similar play style with another player and it worked, it beats at their own game.
I like the soft shot clock rules. No foul if the player is in the final execution but if they get up its a foul. I also like the automatic extension instead of the foul.
For the matchroom events, the hard shot clock with the beeps is meant to add a bit of excitement to a game that is less than exciting to most of the general public. The psychological aspect resonates with most people subconsciously.
The only issue I have is that it's pretty much a loss of game to have a shot clock foul. In any other sport the penalty is mostly minimal, although sometimes they can be huge swings. Football teams very often take delay of game penalties for strategic purposes.
As to fast players, I've watched quite a few of Tony Drago's matches and some of the routine misses he makes has to be attributed to his pace of play. It's a beautiful frenzy when he's on, but not so much when he's off. That's not to slight him, he's pretty damn good. That being said there is no reason for agonizingly slow play either, 30 or 40 seconds is enough time for any shot in rotation. I think 20 is just too short for some shots.
I've watched some matches with shorter shot clocks, 20 or 15 seconds I don't remember which. The play was less than stellar, although it was a small sample size, not entertaining at all in my eyes.
Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk
For the matchroom events, the hard shot clock with the beeps is meant to add a bit of excitement to a game that is less than exciting to most of the general public. The psychological aspect resonates with most people subconsciously.
The only issue I have is that it's pretty much a loss of game to have a shot clock foul. In any other sport the penalty is mostly minimal, although sometimes they can be huge swings. Football teams very often take delay of game penalties for strategic purposes.
As to fast players, I've watched quite a few of Tony Drago's matches and some of the routine misses he makes has to be attributed to his pace of play. It's a beautiful frenzy when he's on, but not so much when he's off. That's not to slight him, he's pretty damn good. That being said there is no reason for agonizingly slow play either, 30 or 40 seconds is enough time for any shot in rotation. I think 20 is just too short for some shots.
I've watched some matches with shorter shot clocks, 20 or 15 seconds I don't remember which. The play was less than stellar, although it was a small sample size, not entertaining at all in my eyes.
Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk
I suppose that's possible in a very, very small number of cases but I don't think it is worth worrying about. If you use a reasonable increment per inning, like 20 seconds, walking to the shot is not a factor unless the player is in a wheelchair. Perhaps a devious opponent could try it once in a rack but that's about it. It's not possible to force your opponent to use up all his time -- he has to do that on his own.
In chess the strategy seems to be to prepare a complicated, new line of play. Learn all the ins and outs of the positions it leads to. Then spring the variation on your opponent. He has to think things through while you know most of the responses.
That has nothing to do with the chess clock method. You play on your time and the opponent plays on his time. The times are separate, not shared.
In Mexico there were some carom matches for TV with a fixed total time, so your strategy was possible even though there was also an individual shot clock. One tactic was to shoot straight at the nearest ball with extreme side and a stun shot. That left the cue ball spinning in place after striking the ball. A good stroke could leave the cue ball spinning for 30 seconds.
That makes sense given that time is added per shot/ball/move.
RE: chess - I can see that. I've played a little chess but never with a clock, only checkers with a clock and that's totally different because I like speed checkers.
Play to a ruleset I call "declare".
Break, study, declare.
Player looks at layout, declares intent - run or not run.
If player declares <run out> and fails, the remaining balls are played out to determine the breaker. No point is scored.
The game is essentially no count to a time limit.
Valid runs are scored normally.
Set is limited to a reasonable time.
There might be some tricky logic to limiting the number of unsuccessful runs. It's possible to have a set with only one point scored - but the only idea is the best pool with the least stalling. Toward this end, total points will be scored toward the cash. IOW high points wins.
Break, study, declare.
Player looks at layout, declares intent - run or not run.
If player declares <run out> and fails, the remaining balls are played out to determine the breaker. No point is scored.
The game is essentially no count to a time limit.
Valid runs are scored normally.
Set is limited to a reasonable time.
There might be some tricky logic to limiting the number of unsuccessful runs. It's possible to have a set with only one point scored - but the only idea is the best pool with the least stalling. Toward this end, total points will be scored toward the cash. IOW high points wins.
The technique -- spin the cue ball in place to eat up time -- has already been used in a pro carom tournament that had matches with a fixed total time for TV.
Manual braking could be allowed for that.
Last edited:
for faster games like 9 ball just have the ref. give a warning or two and then the slow guy loses the match and isn't invited back again. that will speed up players. its like using the un- sportsmanlike conduct penalty.
t.d.'s in all tournaments gets to not invite certain players, so make the overly slow ones get notice before they even show up.
in one pocket i like the time bank, and that game wont punish the guy that walks back to the clock. and all games end at the specified time or before. so no hitches in tournamets
t.d.'s in all tournaments gets to not invite certain players, so make the overly slow ones get notice before they even show up.
in one pocket i like the time bank, and that game wont punish the guy that walks back to the clock. and all games end at the specified time or before. so no hitches in tournamets
InsertCleverNameHere
Well-known member
Shot clocks are fine as long as every table going is using it.
The fact that at some events one or more tables are playing by different rules from the other tables is beyond ludicrous. It’s commonplace and nobody questions it but it’s not right.
Imagine other timed competitions having different parameters during the “same portion” of an event… a poker tournament where 1 table the blinds are 10 minutes and the rest of the tables an hour(or no clock at all as is the case in pool). A chess tournament where one match has 10 minute clock and the rest have an hour(or no clock at all).
Every competitor would protest something like these hypotheticals but in pool nobody says a word, we all know why. But that doesn’t make it right.
All tables should play by the same rules, arguing anything else is preposterous.
The fact that at some events one or more tables are playing by different rules from the other tables is beyond ludicrous. It’s commonplace and nobody questions it but it’s not right.
Imagine other timed competitions having different parameters during the “same portion” of an event… a poker tournament where 1 table the blinds are 10 minutes and the rest of the tables an hour(or no clock at all as is the case in pool). A chess tournament where one match has 10 minute clock and the rest have an hour(or no clock at all).
Every competitor would protest something like these hypotheticals but in pool nobody says a word, we all know why. But that doesn’t make it right.
All tables should play by the same rules, arguing anything else is preposterous.
I can definitely see a need for shot clocks , especially if pool wants to be anything more than a niche sport but if there are going to be shot clocks on every table there needs to be a time shot clock keeper on every table. The salaries for the shot clock people would have to come out of increased greens fees, how many players want to pay those shot clock time keepers?? There are not even refs on every table, where is the outrage on that??
I can definitely see a need for shot clocks , especially if pool wants to be anything more than a niche sport but if there are going to be shot clocks on every table there needs to be a time shot clock keeper on every table. The salaries for the shot clock people would have to come out of increased greens fees, how many players want to pay those shot clock time keepers?? There are not even refs on every table, where is the outrage on that??
Oikawa
Well-known member
While I agree with shot clocks being good for the game, I find this quote to be misleading. A pro thinking over 30 seconds is almost never them not having any ideas of what they could do, but rather them spending extra time trying to pick the best option out of everything available. Perhaps they are increasing their odds of winning the safety exchange from 60% to 65%, or running out from 98% to 99% on average by spending extra time weighting out different intricacies of the possible cue ball paths/error margins and whatnot. All the pros will see the different ideas very fast, some just make their final decision faster, whereas some prefer to gain those tiny advantages from more optimal shot selection.
Then there's those who spend longer due to nerves/composure issues, which I definitely think everyone should try their best to not let affect their speed of play.
Some pros might even be deliberately slowing their pace down at critical moments, or in general, to mess with their opponents rhythm.
None of these reasons are about being incapable of coming up with ideas of something to do.
At amateur level, it happens though. A lack of experience leads to slow shot selection and shot routines, but those aren't relevant for high level tournament shot clock regulations.
Last edited:
Already solved: chess clocks. No official required.
Hey, that's great
Oikawa
Well-known member
I have thought of it too. A button on a table next to the players seats (or one button for each player), that is pressed to restart the countdown from 30 seconds. It would be exhausting for the shooting player to have to walk back to wherever the shot clock is inbetween every shot, so the opponent definitely should be the one to do that. Technology for automatically detecting when a shot ends/starts is too far-fetched, at least for widespread usage.
One could then argue that could it also be too exhausting for the opponent to be constantly watching the game and paying attention to when the shots end? Being off by multiple seconds could put the shooting player at a great advantage/disadvantage, and lead to conflicts.
Last edited: