SVB racking "shenanigans"

[Mark Griffin]

Unfortunately, I am getting tired

CJ,

I know you know a lot about pool.
But you keep insisting on things like 'referees will do it for free' and that money is not the issue but NOONE CARES enough.

I call BULLSHIT.

I have only had a few discussions with you but you are just going further and further out on the limb.

I am tired of hearing you and so many keyboard cowboys tell people what is wrong with pool and pool tournaments.

I run pool events. I try to do the absolute best we can. But I am just not going to listen to all this drivel about how easy it is to do.

Volunteers won't suffice.
And about half of these ideas are half-cooked.

Enough is enough. You p,ay good pool. That is wonderful. That does not qualify you to tell the world this is how it should be done.

As Nike says - JUST DO IT.

Sorry to half rant. But you are doing a disservice to AZ Billiards, the pool players
That want to learn. And in all honesty ( even though I believe you did not mean it this way) you are calling me inept.

I do these types of events. I bankroll them. Times are different from 20-30 years ago.

Please accept these comments as constructive criticism. But it is criticism!!!

Mark Griffin, CEO
CSI - BCAPL - USAPL

Yes, it's a "catch 22" isn't it?

The reality is referees would do it for free. None of them were ever paid, they do it for the service or to promote something, or just to be part of the action. Golf tournaments have hundreds of people at their events donating their time to help.

The money is not the issue, it's the fact that no one cares enough to actually do it. Promoting pool will not be about the money, if it was {only about the money} it would end up like......like......hmmm, like it is.....I guess you have a point.

 

[mikeyfrost]

MG serving it

 

[CJ Wiley]

See, Mark, there's always a solution, let's move forward together.

CJ,

I know you know a lot about pool.
But you keep insisting on things like 'referees will do it for free' and that money is not the issue but NOONE CARES enough.

I call BULLSHIT.

I have only had a few discussions with you but you are just going further and further out on the limb.

I am tired of hearing you and so many keyboard cowboys tell people what is wrong with pool and pool tournaments.

I run pool events. I try to do the absolute best we can. But I am just not going to listen to all this drivel about how easy it is to do.

Volunteers won't suffice.
And about half of these ideas are half-cooked.

Enough is enough. You p,ay good pool. That is wonderful. That does not qualify you to tell the world this is how it should be done.

As Nike says - JUST DO IT.

Sorry to half rant. But you are doing a disservice to AZ Billiards, the pool players
That want to learn. And in all honesty ( even though I believe you did not mean it this way) you are calling me inept.

I do these types of events. I bankroll them. Times are different from 20-30 years ago.

Please accept these comments as constructive criticism. But it is criticism!!!

Mark Griffin, CEO
CSI - BCAPL - USAPL

That's fair enough.......From now on I'll offer my services for FREE to all future TAR matches. I'll rack the balls and Referee the matches and handle ALL player discrepancies. You're right, action talks and BS walks.

I'll also pay 100% of my expenses as well, and if I can't personally be there I'll supply someone as qualified as myself with the same level of expertise.

If you need anything else, please feel free to ask. I work for the Game and the Game will pay me more than money as compensation, it will provide a feeling of Good Will.

See, Mark, there's always a solution, let's move forward together.

CJ Wiley

ps: I'll do the player announcements and be the "GM Referee" at the 10 Ball tournament in Vegas well.....FREE of charge of course. 'The Game is the Teacher'

 

[Mark Griffin]

Not what I was talking about

CJ,

That is a generous offer, however I was not referring to TAR, I was talking about pool tournaments.

As you know, I am involved with TAR - but I do not make decisions on issues like this. This is Justin's area of expertise. I will make certain he's aware of your offer. But I do not believe there is a TAR problem.

In both large tournaments and TAR matches, I am not interested in having 'someone' rack and officiate. We have procedures that work fairly well. I feel we run the best pro (and amateur) events in the country.

In all honesty, I am not sure we would come to the same conclusion - with any given situation. And I am not willing to relinquish authority when it is my event -and therefore my reputation on the line.

I just think we see things differently. Not getting into long discussions here in a public (written) forum. I think we have philisophical differences as to what pool needs.

I will keep going the direction I see fit.

Mark Griffin

That's fair enough.......From now on I'll offer my services for FREE to all future TAR matches. I'll rack the balls and Referee the matches and handle ALL player discrepancies. You're right, action talks and BS walks.

I'll also pay 100% of my expenses as well, and if I can't personally be there I'll supply someone as qualified as myself with the same level of expertise.

If you need anything else, please feel free to ask. I work for the Game and the Game will pay me more than money as compensation, it will provide a feeling of Good Will.

See, Mark, there's always a solution, let's move forward together.

CJ Wiley

ps: I'll do the player announcements and be the "GM Referee" at the 10 Ball tournament in Vegas well.....FREE of charge of course. 'The Game is the Teacher'

 

[CJ Wiley]

players should have referees and get their names announced at the professional events

CJ,

That is a generous offer, however I was not referring to TAR, I was talking about pool tournaments.

As you know, I am involved with TAR - but I do not make decisions on issues like this. This is Justin's area of expertise. I will make certain he's aware of your offer. But I do not believe there is a TAR problem.

In both large tournaments and TAR matches, I am not interested in having 'someone' rack and officiate. We have procedures that work fairly well. I feel we run the best pro (and amateur) events in the country.

In all honesty, I am not sure we would come to the same conclusion - with any given situation. And I am not willing to relinquish authority when it is my event -and therefore my reputation on the line.

I just think we see things differently. Not getting into long discussions here in a public (written) forum. I think we have philisophical differences as to what pool needs.

I will keep going the direction I see fit.

Mark Griffin

We run into these type managerial issues in restaurant/bar consulting frequently - sometimes it's difficult to see the forest for the trees. We have worked with many CEO's involving operational issues and it's generally an easy fix for us, we use the same basic formula to organize management.

When we spoke on the phone you shared your hospitality experience and I'm sure you understand the players are really good customers, they are the "heartbeat" of events. You know the "Golden Rule," and it certainly applies to this business, we want the fields to stay vibrant and full.

When I was away from pool I operated Carsons LIVE that was one of the highest volume private clubs in Texas with 630,000 individual private members. Organizing and solving your referee and player announcement issues would be a refreshing change of pace - we will do a job that would even make Michaela Tabb proud.

I'm committed to pool for a few years, so it really doesn't matter what I'm doing, as long as it's beneficial and appreciated by players and public alike. If we need to assist you in making this happen I would feel like we're doing a good deed for the players and creating a positive impression for the Game.

Whatever protocol we apply ourselves, be assured it will be done with class, etiquette, and diplomacy. 'The Game is our Teacher'

 

[PoolSharkAllen]

I am tired of hearing you and so many keyboard cowboys tell people what is wrong with pool and pool tournaments.

Times are different from 20-30 years ago.

Last night's 10-ball match between Corey Deuel and Warren Kiamco illustrates perfectly why we need neutral rackers. In the final set of the match, with the alternating break, on his turn at the table Corey would pattern rack the balls the exact same way in every rack. In particular, Corey pattern racked the 8, 9 and 10 balls identically in every single rack. After he would break with the soft break, the 8, 9 and 10 balls would remain clustered afterwards. Every rack that Corey broke in was scripted in that it would require using the 6 or the 7 ball to open the 8, 9 and 10 cluster.

Folks here can complain about SVB's alleged racking shenanigans but what Corey did last night was pretty blatant with entire racks being scripted in the same way every time.. (This was recorded by insidepool.tv so the video recording should be available sometime soon.)

Times may be different now than they were 20 or 30 years ago but some things still remain the same. Whenever possible, players will take advantage of the rules. Only a naive tournament director would think otherwise.

 

[nb92]

Last night's 10-ball match between Corey Deuel and Warren Kiamco illustrates perfectly why we need neutral rackers. In the final set of the match, with the alternating break, on his turn at the table Corey would pattern rack the balls the exact same way in every rack. In particular, Corey pattern racked the 8, 9 and 10 balls identically in every single rack. After he would break with the soft break, the 8, 9 and 10 balls would remain clustered afterwards. Every rack that Corey broke in was scripted in that it would require using the 6 or the 7 ball to open the 8, 9 and 10 cluster.

Folks here can complain about SVB's alleged racking shenanigans but what Corey did last night was pretty blatant with entire racks being scripted in the same way every time.. (This was recorded by insidepool.tv so the video recording should be available sometime soon.)

Times may be different now than they were 20 or 30 years ago but some things still remain the same. Whenever possible, players will take advantage of the rules. Only a naive tournament director would think otherwise.

The point above might be a thread of it's own. I don't want to "cut / paste" your content to start one...

My thought is: I don't disagree with your assessment but my question is... In alternate break does it matter?

If you have a technique that works for you (pattern, speed, etc) and you use it, so what? Everyone is going to get nearly the same number of chances to use their technique.

If it is not alternate break then you get the finals at the Swanee where the soft break and pattern racking were discourage but we got to see a six pack during which (or nearly so) each ball went in the same pocket, using the same pattern (Quite an accomplishment in itself)...

Determining random vs. non-random when racking a finite number of balls, where at least 2 of the 9 or 10 (and sometimes 4 (1,10, 2 and 3) are predetermined is an issue. How about we use some of the studies already available of racks that produce the most difficult results for a run out and just assign racking positions for all 9 or 10 balls?

Then let the scientist figure out the optimum break to MAKE a ball AND get Position for a difficult out.

Corey went deep to the next step on this with the 10-ball last night. .....soft break, playing the 1 in the side and playing position on the 2 in such away as to be safe on the 1 if it did not go... and creating and end game situation that had to be solved... If you have practiced all of the above before the match you have an advantage against someone figuring it out on the fly. Nothing wrong with a game plan.

 

[CJ Wiley]

Anyone got a rule book?

The point above might be a thread of it's own. I don't want to "cut / paste" your content to start one...

My thought is: I don't disagree with your assessment but my question is... In alternate break does it matter?

If you have a technique that works for you (pattern, speed, etc) and you use it, so what? Everyone is going to get nearly the same number of chances to use their technique.

If it is not alternate break then you get the finals at the Swanee where the soft break and pattern racking were discourage but we got to see a six pack during which (or nearly so) each ball went in the same pocket, using the same pattern (Quite an accomplishment in itself)...

Determining random vs. non-random when racking a finite number of balls, where at least 2 of the 9 or 10 (and sometimes 4 (1,10, 2 and 3) are predetermined is an issue. How about we use some of the studies already available of racks that produce the most difficult results for a run out and just assign racking positions for all 9 or 10 balls?

Then let the scientist figure out the optimum break to MAKE a ball AND get Position for a difficult out.

Corey went deep to the next step on this with the 10-ball last night. .....soft break, playing the 1 in the side and playing position on the 2 in such away as to be safe on the 1 if it did not go... and creating and end game situation that had to be solved... If you have practiced all of the above before the match you have an advantage against someone figuring it out on the fly. Nothing wrong with a game plan.

I guess it would like if golfers kicked their golf ball in the rough. Would it be fair if everyone did it, or is it relevant that it's against the rules?

As far as I know "pattern racking" and racking to favor a certain result is against the rules. I'm not sure why it's even being debated. Anyone got a rule book?

 

[nb92]

I guess it would like if golfers kicked their golf ball in the rough. Would it be fair if everyone did it, or is it relevant that it's against the rules?

As far as I know "pattern racking" and racking to favor a certain result is against the rules. I'm not sure why it's even being debated. Anyone got a rule book?

don't disagree ... more questioning the rule or why not eliminate the question completely and assign ball locations? in some 10 ball events 40% of the rack is assigned and the other 6 balls are to be "random".. I mean how random can it be?

with 40% of the rack assigned one could have a break technique for the likely similar racking patterns possible... Just another type of percentage play and I believe at your level making the correct decision based on the percentages many times is THE deciding factor.

oh, and from the gulf perspective they are not playing random golf holes.. why play random racks?

 

[CJ Wiley]

people are always resistant to change

don't disagree ... more questioning the rule or why not eliminate the question completely and assign ball locations? in some 10 ball events 40% of the rack is assigned and the other 6 balls are to be "random".. I mean how random can it be?

with 40% of the rack assigned one could have a break technique for the likely similar racking patterns possible... Just another type of percentage play and I believe at your level making the correct decision based on the percentages many times is THE deciding factor.

oh, and from the gulf perspective they are not playing random golf holes.. why play random racks?

Yes, I understand the golf analogy, and what about if your opponent hits a great drive you don't even get to play that hole? Then does it the next hole, then the next hole.....it wouldn't be much of a game would it?

I believe in making the break just another shot, and not a game winner. They serve aces in tennis, however, you still have a chance to hit the ball, in pool you don't. That's what makes one pocket such a good game is the strategy and both players usually get to play each game.

Playing Roll Out in 9 Ball would be like that too. But it's a change and people are always resistant to change, especially when things are going really well for them.

 

[nb92]

Yes, I understand the golf analogy, and what about if your opponent hits a great drive you don't even get to play that hole? Then does it the next hole, then the next hole.....it wouldn't be much of a game would it?

I believe in making the break just another shot, and not a game winner. They serve aces in tennis, however, you still have a chance to hit the ball, in pool you don't. That's what makes one pocket such a good game is the strategy and both players usually get to play each game.

Playing Roll Out in 9 Ball would be like that too. But it's a change and people are always resistant to change, especially when things are going really well for them.

100% with you on roll out ... but I have had my head taken off on that one already... so if not roll out ... how about alternate break, everyone gets to break... then if there is an issue with patterns ... fine here is THE pattern.. in a conversation with Buddy a question was asked .. would he like the idea of loser breaks in 9-ball "I like that idea a lot, I feel really good about my chances when I break and pretty good when the other guy is..." LOL

and thank you for the perspective from "inside the ropes" :thumbup:

 

[Hungarian]

He and I both have bionic ears!!!

Hidy, you got a bionicly positive attitude

 

[CJ Wiley]

there's no "head to head" competition and that's the only thing that's exciting

100% with you on roll out ... but I have had my head taken off on that one already... so if not roll out ... how about alternate break, everyone gets to break... then if there is an issue with patterns ... fine here is THE pattern.. in a conversation with Buddy a question was asked .. would he like the idea of loser breaks in 9-ball "I like that idea a lot, I feel really good about my chances when I break and pretty good when the other guy is..." LOL

and thank you for the perspective from "inside the ropes" :thumbup:

Winner breaks, alternate breaks, loser breaks, it's all basically the same game dressed differnently. The main point is playing ANY of these ways both players aren't playing in ever game. This is flawed in my opinion.

Back to the golf analogy, what if when the guy hit a 330 yard drive down the center you didn't get to play that hole, BUT, the next hole you got to drive and hit it 330 down the center and your opponent had to sit out that hole, and it went that way for 18 holes. Each hole you just get to see one player par the hole, no birdies just par after par after par.....:boring2:

Do you see where this goes? It's boring because there's no "head to head" competition and that's the only thing that's exciting about games. In football, basketball, hockey, tennis, golf and even poker ALL players get a chance to play each game. This seems obvious that if no other game or sport does what we do we should consider doing what they do. 'The Game is trying to teach us something' :welcome:

 

[nb92]

Winner breaks, alternate breaks, loser breaks, it's all basically the same game dressed differnently. The main point is playing ANY of these ways both players aren't playing in ever game. This is flawed in my opinion.

Back to the golf analogy, what if when the guy hit a 330 yard drive down the center you didn't get to play that hole, BUT, the next hole you got to drive and hit it 330 down the center and your opponent had to sit out that hole, and it went that way for 18 holes. Each hole you just get to see one player par the hole, no birdies just par after par after par.....:boring2:

Do you see where this goes? It's boring because there's no "head to head" competition and that's the only thing that's exciting about games. In football, basketball, hockey, tennis, golf and even poker ALL players get a chance to play each game. This seems obvious that if no other game or sport does what we do we should consider doing what they do. 'The Game is trying to teach us something' :welcome:

Can not and do not disagree... looking forward to watching the format in action. Needless to say JA has enough experience to demonstrate the format ... :withstupid: :smile:

 

[CJ Wiley]

there's more "movement" to this game than even one pocket

Can not and do not disagree... looking forward to watching the format in action. Needless to say JA has enough experience to demonstrate the format ... :withstupid: :smile:

View attachment 270049

Yes, Johnny Archer is a superb all around player and this is a superb all around game. You will see that there's more "movement" to this game than even one pocket, with one ball and six pockets to protect and/or attack.

I am making a prediction that Johnny will appear as a dominant force in this match, nothing against his opponent, it's just a vastly more difficult and stategic game than what he's accustomed to.

Only thing that could make this Game more entertaining is if it was "Two Shot Roll Out" all the time, then Johnny would be 3/1 favorite because there would be even less of a "luck factor"......imho

'The Game will be the Teacher'

 

[CreeDo]

In other news, on the subject of Shane's Shenanigans (is that like Hogan's Heroes?)... I tried out the trick Baxer mentions where you slightly separate the 2nd-row balls from each other, in an otherwise tight rack.

It works. The balls were moving faster and much more regularly towards those side pockets. I'm gonna be paying closer attention the next time I see Shane rubs that 1 ball with the back of his thumb.