L.S. Dennis
Well-known member
Trying to watch the European Open, but find the slow pace of play in incredibly boring. Why isn’t there a shot clock of 25 seconds max with very limited extensions allowed?
Shot clock?
- Thread starter L.S. Dennis
- Start date
Solution
Where do you come up with 25 seconds?
L.S. Dennis
Well-known member
I got out my stop watch and timed out what I thought was reasonable amount of time for most shots and 25 seconds seemed about right before it becomes too boring. Earl would think 25 seconds is a lifetime between shots but I realize that not everyone shoot at Earl’s pace.
It's not too boring for the player trying to win while thinking about the shot.
One second more than the NBA…….4 secs. more than MLB’s proposed pitch clock…….just make it 30 secs.
A player has to complete his shot within 30 secs of arriving at the table. The player that missed has to leave the table within 5 secs. after missing. 30 seconds is more than ample time to evaluate & complete your next shot.
A player has to complete his shot within 30 secs of arriving at the table. The player that missed has to leave the table within 5 secs. after missing. 30 seconds is more than ample time to evaluate & complete your next shot.
I'm not sure whether there is a scorer at each table, but if there is, they could do the shot clock. I think that was tried at the 2019 US Open (9-ball) at Mandalay Bay.
It's important to remember that if the show is unwatchable, there will be no spectators. If there are no spectators, there is no income. If there is no income, there is no show. This event is not a charity for the players.
The tournament matches seem to be running smoothly time-wise, so the average player is playing quickly enough. Maybe they just got a few snails on the TV table by chance.
It's important to remember that if the show is unwatchable, there will be no spectators. If there are no spectators, there is no income. If there is no income, there is no show. This event is not a charity for the players.
The tournament matches seem to be running smoothly time-wise, so the average player is playing quickly enough. Maybe they just got a few snails on the TV table by chance.
I wonder if a differential shot clock would be a fair compromise between allowing a player enough time and keeping the pace fast enough to hold spectator interest. For example, a 60 second clock to start an inning, then 30 seconds for subsequent shots within that inning. That gives the incoming player more time to deal with whatever the opponent left them, then makes them speed up for the rest of their shots which presumably will be from more or less planned positions. I'm not necessarily advocating 60 and 30 seconds, just exploring the concept of a two-tier system.
How about a electronic shot clock on the wall and each player has X secs to complete their shot?
A referee can start, pause and reset the clock, even adding back time if circumstances justified it.
