For all those who want to get rid of slop, luck and call the nine, call the safety. Why not go all the way and just say call your shot and if you miss the guy coming to the table gets ball in hand. I don't care either way, was never a fan of 9-ball with all the safety play.
To call or not to call the 9
- Thread starter PGHteacher
- Start date
I voted "I don't care either way" because I will play however the rules state it should be done.
Most of the people I play 9 ball against are not slopping it in anyway so it seldom becomes an issue. But I do like the aspect that it could happen, it's what made people think that no matter what their skill, they have a chance at winning. THAT is the reason 9 ball got so popular.
I have been one the bad side of this "luck" several times before and it sucks, but I still think it has a positive impact on the game. If you want to get more people to play, give them a game that they feel like they have a chance to win.
Most of the people I play 9 ball against are not slopping it in anyway so it seldom becomes an issue. But I do like the aspect that it could happen, it's what made people think that no matter what their skill, they have a chance at winning. THAT is the reason 9 ball got so popular.
I have been one the bad side of this "luck" several times before and it sucks, but I still think it has a positive impact on the game. If you want to get more people to play, give them a game that they feel like they have a chance to win.
Good question. Why were the rules for 9 ball changed in the '70s? You didn't think the current rules were the way it was always played did you?
Why was the three foul rule in Straight Pool changed from a loss of 15 points to 18? Why was it changed back again? Why are any rules changed?
Think of it this way:
Does it really matter if my win happens because I shat in the 7, then carried on with a routine 8 and 9? Vs. I made the 7 legit, but shat in the 9?
The outcome is still the same. You won because of a slop shot. Your turn should have been over, but it wasn't.
At a banger level, maybe there's a difference between shitting in the 6 vs. the 9. But at the pro level, a single lucky miss is going to be enough to win that game, whether it happens early in the rack or later.
It also doesn't seem very consistent to have 9 on the break as a win, yet it has to be called.
So either make all shots called, or write off 9-ball as a game that isn't for serious players and let the bangers have fun riding the 9.
I personally like the nearly-guaranteed ball on the break in 9 ball and wouldn't mind seeing pros play it in a serious way, with all balls called (you could even include the break as one of the called shots).
Does it really matter if my win happens because I shat in the 7, then carried on with a routine 8 and 9? Vs. I made the 7 legit, but shat in the 9?
The outcome is still the same. You won because of a slop shot. Your turn should have been over, but it wasn't.
At a banger level, maybe there's a difference between shitting in the 6 vs. the 9. But at the pro level, a single lucky miss is going to be enough to win that game, whether it happens early in the rack or later.
It also doesn't seem very consistent to have 9 on the break as a win, yet it has to be called.
So either make all shots called, or write off 9-ball as a game that isn't for serious players and let the bangers have fun riding the 9.
I personally like the nearly-guaranteed ball on the break in 9 ball and wouldn't mind seeing pros play it in a serious way, with all balls called (you could even include the break as one of the called shots).
A lot of rules are changed to make games faster and more spectator (or tv) friendly.
So, pushout becomes texas express.
That's along with changes like shot clocks, speed pool, 7 ball, etc.
I suggest you watch the entire video of the Bustamante vs. Immonen match; it may change your mind If you have this view of infallibility/near-infallibility:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSFlXCCQYug
1. 0:43
2. 0:53
3. 1:18
4. 1:58
5. 4:22
Will change your mind.
It doesn't to me either but I think that is another issue; 1 step at a time, slow and steady wins the race etc.. etc..
See post #41 by me; it is lengthy so you can't "skim it" and get it.
Not sure what you mean here; can you go into more detail?
Every game has a beauty all its own IMHO if you make 9ball a call shot game you take away some of its flavor/soul if you will by killing the 2 way shot (see post #9 by me)
No access to youtube at the moment. what I do have access to... is plenty of accustats catalogs on this site that show that pros, playing in major tournaments against other pros... miss 3-7% of their shots. You can glance at several catalogs and the stats are pretty consistent, so I trust those stats more than any single match.
For someone who misses so rarely, it is absolutely deadly to allow them another chance at the table when they should be sitting down. That's what slop lets them do, occasionally.
Yes, it's rare with a good player, but the catch is that it actually MATTERS with the good players. The outcome between two bangers is random anyway, and there's no trophy on the line (nevermind the cash).
Tradition, and what works for fans and TV, isn't factored in when I answered this question... I'm strictly looking at it from an analytical sense, what makes the game the best test of skill, and the most enjoyable, while still maintaining the core concept (run 9 balls in numerical order)? Sometimes "best test of skill" comes into direct conflict with most enjoyable, and it can also conflict with "most entertaining for fans".
For example, it's more enjoyable for a banger to allow slop, but less enjoyable for a pro.
So that's why I have two answers. 9 ball has to decide to either be a banger game or a professional's game. If it's a banger game, banging fun is the priority, so let them send the 1 flying at the 9 since they have little hope of running out. If it's a professional game, make every shot called.
With the advent of magic racks, it's easy to get a dead frozen rack of 9 ball, which means the same wing ball goes in on the break every time. So theoretically, if you wanted to make a call ball game, you could even make the break a called shot without changing anything dramatically.
Honestly if I had to make it one way or the other, I'd just leave it as all-slop all the time, because that is the "spirit" of 9 ball, and for those who demand better... there's 10 ball.
I'm only arguing against a halfassed measure of calling the 9 ONLY. Either commit all the way to making it a call shot game, or leave it as a fun and fast game. At the pro level, I feel that a slopped 6 ball can lead to a win just as surely as a slopped 9.
As for 2 way shots... even with called pockets you can do 2-way shots in 9 ball. You can play shape for ball "B" while leaving nothing on the pocket ball "A" goes into, assuming your miss doesn't send the object ball flying completely away from that pocket.
I heard that one about tv long ago but since I came to AZ I've been told different, can't remember what it was now but was told it was not because of tv.
That's a shame; as I said "if you watch this it might change your mind"
I agree
I agree except for the underlined part.
I agree
I agree
I agree
No game has to decide that IMHO all games should be for everyone to play from novice to pro.
You lose the purpose in playing 9ball if you do that IMHO, you might as well play 10ball
The bold "every time" is where this gets into the fundamental difference in perception.
Not to about 1/3 of the people that have answered this poll and the numerous TD's that have determined that call the 9 is a superior rule and therefore have implemented it in world class tournaments.
Wow the aforementioned posters and TD's idea about calling the 9ball is a "halfassed" one? I allow you to have your opinion without any kind of malice; why not show others the same courtesy?
As I said that would defeat the purpose of playing 9ball
Here is our fundamental difference in perception; I think of it this way, a slopped in 9ball is a win (assuming it is a legal shot, no scratch/legal contact) 100% of the time with "no call" 9ball.
IF (and I am sure this is true)
That would mean that it is not 100% win but somewhere between 93%-97%; 93%-97% is not "just as surely" as 100%, it is "just about", "close to", "almost as" etc.. etc.. but it is not "just as". As I said this is a fundamental difference in perception and is probably why we disagree.
I know what a 2 way shot is they come up in all games 7,8,9,10,14.1,1P and most other games you can think of; cowboy, bottle-pool & bank-pool not so much. What makes 2 way shots in 9ball unique is that you can be trying for any # of balls and don't have to call it. I have been in situations in 9ball where I have 3-4 possibilities of a ball dropping, granted doesn't happen often but that is one of the "beauties" of the game that I am talking about that is unique to the game.
I respect your way of thinking I just don't happen to agree with it; I think you could have more constructive things to say than to call the majority of the opinion here and a whole lot of TD's idea of how to deal with what some people consider a flaw in the current rules "halfassed" from the posts I have seen of yours you seem to be more level headed and knowledgeable than that.
I think you are confused as to the difference between:
1. Call shot
2. Call the 9
3. Don't have to call anything
In 9ball in the scenario you described if you were playing 1. Call shot and called the 3 and the 9ball dropped you would either lose or spot the 9; if you called the 9 you would win. If you were playing 2. Call the 9 and you called the 9 you would win; if you didn't call anything you would spot the 9 and continue your inning (assuming you made the 3 in the side). If you were playing 3. Don't have to call anything you would win.
Oh my lord, so much line by line quoting 
Well, in my opinion, 9 ball with all called shots works fine for both novice and pro. The novice can still take try to beat a superior one by taking flyers at the 9, he just has to predict the hole the 9 falls into when he tries his 1-9 flyer. You get the fast and loose "anyone can win, it's like the lotto!" feeling, without quite as much luck.
re: You lose the purpose in playing 9ball if you do that... might as well play 10ball
...well, we agree there. It's a flat out better, more fair game. Mostly because of calling all shots, though many players also like the more challenging break.
This is nitpicking. Donny mills broke 83 times in his TAR match vs. Shane and made the wing ball 82 of them. Close enough? With a magic rack and good equipment, it's virtually guaranteed.
One of the posters has a line in his signature, something like "consider anything I say to mean 'most of the time, in my experience, in the majority of situations, nothing is 100% guaranteed" and so on. Pretend I have that same signature.
Geez... does the word "ass" give you a case of the vapors?
I'm not saying anyone is stupid or bad for using called 9 ball.
What I am trying to convey is it's a half-measure. It's a rule that is made without a clear direction. It's a rule that is made to eliminate one lucky shot in 9 ball, but the players would be better served if you simply eliminated ALL lucky uncalled shots in 9 ball.
In 10 ball, I feel the same way about 10-on-the-break, either make it a win or spot it, but the rule where 'it doesn't count in the lower corner pockets' is another one I'd call halfassed, though I can use a more dignified term if that one really bothers you.
It's not meant as a personal insult to whoever first thought it up (I'm sure it's occurred to hundreds of people in the past) or anyone who supports it.
I mean, if my choices are "call nothing" or "call the 9" with no third option ("call everything")... then I support call the 9 too. Even though I consider it halfassed. It beats calling nothing at all.
I'm not clear on where you're going here. It sounds like you feel it's an important difference in viewpoints, but I'm not seeing why. If slopping in the 6 ball only gives a player an undeserved win 19/20 times, why is that drastically different to you than 20/20?
I think winning the game from a missed shot should not happen even 1 out of 20 times.
Can you diagram an example? Because in my mind, if you're blasting a ball and hoping for one of several possible outcomes, that implies you don't know where the lowest numbered object ball will be. So how can you be sure you're gonna hook the other guy on it? Or not accidentally hook yourself? And how is a 'blaster' 2-way a more pretty part of the game than a traditional one with a planned outcome?
Well, in my opinion, 9 ball with all called shots works fine for both novice and pro. The novice can still take try to beat a superior one by taking flyers at the 9, he just has to predict the hole the 9 falls into when he tries his 1-9 flyer. You get the fast and loose "anyone can win, it's like the lotto!" feeling, without quite as much luck.
re: You lose the purpose in playing 9ball if you do that... might as well play 10ball
...well, we agree there. It's a flat out better, more fair game. Mostly because of calling all shots, though many players also like the more challenging break.
This is nitpicking. Donny mills broke 83 times in his TAR match vs. Shane and made the wing ball 82 of them. Close enough? With a magic rack and good equipment, it's virtually guaranteed.
One of the posters has a line in his signature, something like "consider anything I say to mean 'most of the time, in my experience, in the majority of situations, nothing is 100% guaranteed" and so on. Pretend I have that same signature.
Geez... does the word "ass" give you a case of the vapors?
I'm not saying anyone is stupid or bad for using called 9 ball.
What I am trying to convey is it's a half-measure. It's a rule that is made without a clear direction. It's a rule that is made to eliminate one lucky shot in 9 ball, but the players would be better served if you simply eliminated ALL lucky uncalled shots in 9 ball.
In 10 ball, I feel the same way about 10-on-the-break, either make it a win or spot it, but the rule where 'it doesn't count in the lower corner pockets' is another one I'd call halfassed, though I can use a more dignified term if that one really bothers you.
It's not meant as a personal insult to whoever first thought it up (I'm sure it's occurred to hundreds of people in the past) or anyone who supports it.
I mean, if my choices are "call nothing" or "call the 9" with no third option ("call everything")... then I support call the 9 too. Even though I consider it halfassed. It beats calling nothing at all.
I'm not clear on where you're going here. It sounds like you feel it's an important difference in viewpoints, but I'm not seeing why. If slopping in the 6 ball only gives a player an undeserved win 19/20 times, why is that drastically different to you than 20/20?
I think winning the game from a missed shot should not happen even 1 out of 20 times.
Can you diagram an example? Because in my mind, if you're blasting a ball and hoping for one of several possible outcomes, that implies you don't know where the lowest numbered object ball will be. So how can you be sure you're gonna hook the other guy on it? Or not accidentally hook yourself? And how is a 'blaster' 2-way a more pretty part of the game than a traditional one with a planned outcome?
I think the thing about straight pool was more a matter of semantics. The 3 fouls plus the 15 ball penalty equals the 18 points. It was just clarifying how it is stated.
Changing rules...
Changes in rules are part of the natural evolution of any game. Are baseball, football and basketball played the same way as when they first appeared?
Rules are changed for various reasons:
To take some of the luck out of the game.
To speed up the game.
To make the game more attractive for spectators.
Unless you were there when the first game of 9-ball was played, how can you say it was "meant to have a little more luck involved"?
Any game can be played slop or call. Generally speaking, beginners like slop, better players not so much. Back in the 1950s, most players played slop 9-ball and many played slop 8-ball. But the money matches I saw were usually call...
Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
Changes in rules are part of the natural evolution of any game. Are baseball, football and basketball played the same way as when they first appeared?
Rules are changed for various reasons:
To take some of the luck out of the game.
To speed up the game.
To make the game more attractive for spectators.
Unless you were there when the first game of 9-ball was played, how can you say it was "meant to have a little more luck involved"?
Any game can be played slop or call. Generally speaking, beginners like slop, better players not so much. Back in the 1950s, most players played slop 9-ball and many played slop 8-ball. But the money matches I saw were usually call...
Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
Honestly, I've grown tired of people trying to change the rules of 9ball. By making it call-shot at all is a big change. Today, it's the 9ball. Tomorrow, it's the entire rack. There's a whole continent of Asian players that have built amazingly sophisticated rotation games around the current rule-set. By introducing call-shot, you aren't making 9ball better. You're dumbing it down.
Look no further than APA 9ball which is all about counting balls. Yeah, it makes sense. Bob pockets more balls than John. Bob wins. The problem is, Bob can win without ever pocketing a single 9ball and every 9ball player knows, pocketing the 9 is always the hard part.
There are shots in 9ball that have multi-way value. This isn't just "the luck factor". There are many players that have built their games around the possibility of something else happening other than the main intent. By utilizing call-shot, even on a single ball, you are opening Pandora's box and allowing for the possibility of a complete overhaul. If you want to have that, fine. But don't think for one second that suddenly the game is going to look better because of it.
Look no further than APA 9ball which is all about counting balls. Yeah, it makes sense. Bob pockets more balls than John. Bob wins. The problem is, Bob can win without ever pocketing a single 9ball and every 9ball player knows, pocketing the 9 is always the hard part.
There are shots in 9ball that have multi-way value. This isn't just "the luck factor". There are many players that have built their games around the possibility of something else happening other than the main intent. By utilizing call-shot, even on a single ball, you are opening Pandora's box and allowing for the possibility of a complete overhaul. If you want to have that, fine. But don't think for one second that suddenly the game is going to look better because of it.
The "change" has already happened; it is no longer about "people trying" see post #41,the question is what do we do now that the change is here?
Complete overhaul?
It was the APA that did a "complete overhaul" of playing rules and scoring to establish their system. Nine-ball is called 9-ball for a reason. If you make the 9-ball you win. APA 9-ball should be called "Slop rotation, 1 point per ball". I once lost a 9-ball match in APA in which my opponent never even took a shot at a 9-ball. On instructions from her coach, she hit every shot as hard as she could and pocketed 13 balls. Every point scored was slop! Before APA, I couldn't have imagined how you could literally become a national champion without ever having won a game. Think about it...
Please take time to read my previous post.
Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
It was the APA that did a "complete overhaul" of playing rules and scoring to establish their system. Nine-ball is called 9-ball for a reason. If you make the 9-ball you win. APA 9-ball should be called "Slop rotation, 1 point per ball". I once lost a 9-ball match in APA in which my opponent never even took a shot at a 9-ball. On instructions from her coach, she hit every shot as hard as she could and pocketed 13 balls. Every point scored was slop! Before APA, I couldn't have imagined how you could literally become a national champion without ever having won a game. Think about it...
Please take time to read my previous post.
Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
Speaking of post #s....
..I'd like to see CJ's response to post#36, which is a response to #34.
pt..<..likes this tread, Teach