So today, I actually played in a pool-tournament. It was probably the first I've participated in in several months which is really unusual for me. Normally, I play in at least two a month. Anyway, after the event was over for me, I was sitting around, talking to the guys, listening to the same complaints that I've always heard. "This guy is holding up the field. I can't stand playing him. I don't understand why they don't have a shot-clock on him ALL THE TIME!"
Well, it got me thinking. See, you can't have a shot-clock on him all the time because it would exhaust resources. I mean, only an IPT event can afford to have a referee for each match! On top of that, does the shot-clock really prevent slow-play? Personally, I don't care if anyone takes an extended time to look-over a complicated situation. That's perfectly acceptable in my book. What bothers me is when they take their sweet time when the shot is simple. Shots that can take 10 seconds or less to execute can take some players a full 30 seconds (some cases, a minute). Those are the delays I want eliminated as a spectator AND as a competitor.
That's when I came up with a slightly different approach. Instead of micro-managing a match, simply put a cap on its length. For a race to 9, you can allot 90 minutes for the match. If the players report the final score later than 90 minutes after it was scheduled to begin, both players are given a demerit for delaying the event. Three demerits during a single event will put a player on immediate probation which can result in disqualification if it is assessed that he/she is deliberately playing slow. Seven demerits over a span of 15 matches would put a player on probation and can result in banishment from the tour.
I thought of this because I think it's important to eliminate slow-play altogether. It's not just a strain on the players and the room, it's boring even for pool's biggest enthusists and we're at a time when we're trying to draw as many spectators as possible. The shot-clock isn't going to do it. Having a match go to sudden-death is a poor solution and slow-play can be used to create sudden-death. I use the word "probation" because I think prior to taking action, a player would need to be evaluated first. At the same time, this player should be warned that they have been involved in matches that have held up events and by holding up an event, they're not just affecting their opponent, they're affecting EVERYONE.
It's not a perfect idea and perhaps not the best solution but I was wondering what all of you thought.
Well, it got me thinking. See, you can't have a shot-clock on him all the time because it would exhaust resources. I mean, only an IPT event can afford to have a referee for each match! On top of that, does the shot-clock really prevent slow-play? Personally, I don't care if anyone takes an extended time to look-over a complicated situation. That's perfectly acceptable in my book. What bothers me is when they take their sweet time when the shot is simple. Shots that can take 10 seconds or less to execute can take some players a full 30 seconds (some cases, a minute). Those are the delays I want eliminated as a spectator AND as a competitor.
That's when I came up with a slightly different approach. Instead of micro-managing a match, simply put a cap on its length. For a race to 9, you can allot 90 minutes for the match. If the players report the final score later than 90 minutes after it was scheduled to begin, both players are given a demerit for delaying the event. Three demerits during a single event will put a player on immediate probation which can result in disqualification if it is assessed that he/she is deliberately playing slow. Seven demerits over a span of 15 matches would put a player on probation and can result in banishment from the tour.
I thought of this because I think it's important to eliminate slow-play altogether. It's not just a strain on the players and the room, it's boring even for pool's biggest enthusists and we're at a time when we're trying to draw as many spectators as possible. The shot-clock isn't going to do it. Having a match go to sudden-death is a poor solution and slow-play can be used to create sudden-death. I use the word "probation" because I think prior to taking action, a player would need to be evaluated first. At the same time, this player should be warned that they have been involved in matches that have held up events and by holding up an event, they're not just affecting their opponent, they're affecting EVERYONE.
It's not a perfect idea and perhaps not the best solution but I was wondering what all of you thought.
