This spot shot bullshit has got to stop
- Thread starter dnschmidt
- Start date
Its awful. Was awful last year too. Same shit different day. Way to f*ck up 10 ball.
I don't think Mark has anything to do with these events.
AFAIK Ozzie is owner and CEO of CSI. Predator probably had input as well. I'm not a huge fan of the ss's but its well organized professional pool. Give them some time. The stream is free and flawless on my end.
I'm gonna paste one of my posts from last year:
"Shootouts are a fundamental proponent of the game of 9 and 10 ball. They aren't a new thing. I remember when King Tut used to have shootout's in his 10-ball tournaments.
Shootouts are pool distilled down to its purest form. They really shouldn't even have a rotational run of 9 or 10 balls, just have a shootout. And instead of a lag, just have a pre-shootout to see who goes first."
"Shootouts are a fundamental proponent of the game of 9 and 10 ball. They aren't a new thing. I remember when King Tut used to have shootout's in his 10-ball tournaments.
Shootouts are pool distilled down to its purest form. They really shouldn't even have a rotational run of 9 or 10 balls, just have a shootout. And instead of a lag, just have a pre-shootout to see who goes first."
You could just play 8-ball (or 14.1) and the problem goes away........
{ducking for cover}
{ducking for cover}
You take it out then next thing would be 'how can a tournament make sense if every match is a breaking contest?'. You can't make everyone happy, people always find something to complain about.
This series is one of the best things that have happend to pool in last decade, preadtor is committed to adding money and even running these 4-5 times a year. When was the last time some one stepped up and got a 'tour' like this one with decent money added ?
I think it’s a terrible way to decide the winner. For example if player A won the first set 4-0 then lost the second set 3-4 they would have won 7 games to their opponents 4. Pool should be decided by playing whatever the game is. If they want to see players shoot spot shots just have a spot shot tournament.
I watch parts of the stream because I like pool but I wouldn’t pay to watch this. It’s also great that it puts money in player pockets but imo there is a better format than this. My opinion doesn’t count though. Maybe they wanted to do something different from what other tournaments do, but I’ve heard very few who like it.
I watch parts of the stream because I like pool but I wouldn’t pay to watch this. It’s also great that it puts money in player pockets but imo there is a better format than this. My opinion doesn’t count though. Maybe they wanted to do something different from what other tournaments do, but I’ve heard very few who like it.
That’s an issue with sets, not shootouts. In tennis you can win a match 1-6, 7-5, 7-5, even though you’ve won fewer games. But sets also increase the tension with their stopping points and resets.
I think with these shootouts they wanted to increase tension for the spectators, and my impression is that fans like it. Spectators come and watch if there’s a shootout. It’s probably more fair to do a shootout than a hill-hill game.
One thing about CSI is that they’re willing to try different things, and they’ll change if it doesn’t work. Personally I hope that they change to the Matchroom rules and get on this “nineball” train.
I hated it at first too. Now I just don't like it.
Given more time -- I may take it or leave it. Who knows -- it may be growing on me.
What I know I don't like is if you lose the first set, it has to be tough knowing the best you can do is force a shootout. I suppose 4 sets to 3 would take too long but there's just too much riding on the first set.
Given more time -- I may take it or leave it. Who knows -- it may be growing on me.
What I know I don't like is if you lose the first set, it has to be tough knowing the best you can do is force a shootout. I suppose 4 sets to 3 would take too long but there's just too much riding on the first set.
Yep, NO time to dick around. As i said earlier i'm not a big fan of the tiebreak deal but it is pro pool and it looks to be well run and organized. When was the last time you could say that about pool in the US? Plus the stream is free and flawless on my end. Its only their second go at this so maybe some modifications will happen down the line.
Looking at the brackets/score sheet powered by FargoRate but there's no fargo numbers,
how's one to know if there's a upset, an underdog to follow?
I do notice that the finale' uses the hard fork racing setup, that's cool, makes sense.
all offence is the future, so, it'll grow on ya...
how's one to know if there's a upset, an underdog to follow?
I do notice that the finale' uses the hard fork racing setup, that's cool, makes sense.
all offence is the future, so, it'll grow on ya...
If you don't recognize the name and he's winning then its an upset.
Where is this free stream, of which you speak?
Really? You need the numbers to tell you what to do?
go to CSI's site.
Dumb as I think shooting spots is, it's the player's incompetence showing. They could use a preset version of HORSE for a tie breaker but frankly set shots should be used as qualification requirements. The way I see it, if players had to brush up on back cuts and long thin ones besides the more common full ball shots, they'd be more likely to use 'em in a game.
Hopefully "jumping on the 9 ball train" is the last thing they do.
I've always thought this was kind of a dumb argument, albeit an intuitive one. As BRussell already pointed out, this is always a possibility with sets, so if you have a big problem with this, then you have a big problem with multiple sets ever being played anywhere by anyone because this will always--always--be a possibility with multiple sets. Something tells me you aren't actually opposed to multiple sets being played by yourself or others though and that it was just a knee jerk reaction excuse you latched onto to try to justify not liking it for some other reason.
The "but you could win more total games and lose a best of X sets match" argument is in my book akin to the 4th place finisher in a tournament being salty about and complaining about how they won more total games and/or a higher percentage of their games than the winner of the tournament did, and now they are somehow feeling that the format cheated them and they should be the rightful winner of the event. It's silly thinking. Here's the bottom line. They weren't playing for the most total game wins, or the highest percentage of game wins. They were playing who would win all the sets that would ultimately take them to a first place finish, just like in your example they were essentially playing for the best two out of three sets (the third set is obviously a different type but still essentially a set), not the most individual game wins in all the sets.
It is also somewhat akin to a player in a race to 100 complaining that they were literally never behind during the entire set and yet they lost the set because their opponent tied it at the hill and then won the case game. "I was ahead for literally 99% of the match, and yet my opponent is being called the winner, that's BS, I'm clearly the better player as I was leading the entire time". Thing is though you weren't playing for who could spend the most time in the lead, you were playing for who would hit 100 first, and it wasn't you.
You have to win the game that you are playing, not some other game or stat you have made up in your mind which makes no difference whatsoever. Trying to come up with some other format or stat you would have won under is mostly just coming up with excuses to try to make yourself feel better for not having been able to come with it when it was needed so that you could have actually won under the format that you were actually playing.
That is a whole separate topic entirely that you are somehow trying to link together. There are reasonable arguments to be made for staying with the same game always, and also for altering things in an attempt to create sudden death type pressure and excitement. It's personal preference, but what I can say without doubt is that a lot of what pool players like is because that is what they are used to, and if they also got used to something else they might like it just as well or even better. There is almost no doubt that many people will come around to liking this format change once they get fully used to it (and you already see it happening), the only question is will it be enough of them to justify using this format long term? Time will tell, but keeping in mind that more people are going to come around as they get used to it (and seeing the verification of this actually happening) we should probably be willing to give it some time and see how it ultimately ends up shaking out.