*Today I Start My Second Thousand Posts*

oldzilla

oldzilla

Accu-Stats Messenger
Silver Member
After being a member for 324 days i have reach my first 1000 posts.

I hope most of them were enjoyed by somebody.

I want to start my next thousand with an idea for a format that would satisfy the arguement of winner breaks vs alternate breaks.
Winner breaks has the continuous factor of stringing racks which i think should be part of the match.
Alternate breaks is to asure that both players get a chance.

I call it Alternate Continuous Breaks (ACB).
Play innings with each player getting a chance to break and run as many as they can. Once they do not make a ball on the break the rack is played out and it is the next players turn.
With all the normal 9-ball rules applied. player 1 runs 3racks and then has to push. player 2 wins that rack, score is 3-1 after top of the first inning.


windows is going to restart so i'll bbl.
 
So now it is the bottom of the first inning and player2 breaks and runs 1rack and then scratches on the break. player1 dogs the nine and player two wins. player2 getting 2 games in the bottom of the first the score is now tied 3-3.

so i would think 5 or 6 innings would be enough and the scores would reflect on players abilities along with the playability of the equipment.
if the score ends up tied you go to extra innings.
 
Last edited:
I saw a tournament I can't remember which one, but they have the best format (might be the eurotour). The format is you break 3 times in a row than your opponent does the same. I like this because you can break and run out a few racks. I think the 3 breaks in a row allows us to see small packages and still gives the other guy a fair chance to return serve. I also believes it lends itself to comebacks.
 
noontime bump. i want peeps to see my idea even if i have to make another thread.

so it's a nooner ! :p
 
I think that is a pretty good idea. Should make both parties happy. You ever thought about running for president?
 
I think it's an interesting idea...you should make a thread about it with a proper title. That will probably attract more attention.

And congrats on the 1,000 posts!
 
Talking to George Breedlove the other day and he mentioned a format I never heard of prior. Trailing Player breaks, if you are behind in a match you break until you tie up and then the other player breaks next rack.

George thought this would make more exciting matches, being that he has a world class break he would never think he was out of it until the last game is broken.

What do you think of trailing player breaks??
 
in regards to g breedloves idea.

i have thought about that one before and accually did a weekly to that effect when i had a small room a few years back. the players did like the idea very much.

but my idea has that allmighty continuous factor which is the main reason 14.1 is so interesting. you can shoot forever ! records are set and records are broken. imortality acheived.
 
LET"S MAKE THE RULES SO I CAN WIN! I wrote an article several years ago with this title. It was when pool was very popular but the players that were used to winnig in the past were now starting to lose to people they refered to as, NOBODY'S.

The point I'm trying to make is: no matter how you play the game, the best players are going to win. The people that don't win are always going to find an excuse as to why they didn't win.

The sad part is: people that should be playing or at least particapating as spectators won't even do that much to support the game.

The game doesn't have to change. The people around it, that's a different matter.

Just my opinion. I enjoy your honesty and your enthusiasm for the game, Gary. We could use millions more just like you.

Tom McGonagle

_________________________________

http://tommcgonaglerightoncue.com
 
The first two thousand posts you make will the worst ones you ever make. It's all uphill after that :P

Let me get it straight... you break and run as many racks as you can until you miss. Then, (in the rack where you missed/dry broke)... regardless of whether you manage to win that rack or not... the next guy gets to break. Is that what we're saying?
 
CreeDo said:
The first two thousand posts you make will the worst ones you ever make. It's all uphill after that :P

Let me get it straight... you break and run as many racks as you can until you miss. Then, (in the rack where you missed/dry broke)... regardless of whether you manage to win that rack or not... the next guy gets to break. Is that what we're saying?
Click to expand...

yes i think you got it !

it is just like playing regular set of 9-ball but you have a chance to put a pack up on you score . when you can not continue, then you play the game out and its the other guys turn to break and run as many as he can.
 
Well, it sounds ok at first glance. I'm trying to see if there any problems with and I can't see any. If a player runs every other rack, he would get 100% of the breaks. Is that unfair? It sounds ok actually.

Maybe worth a shot, gives the other guy a fair shot if one guy is just dominating and not giving him any chances.
 
CreeDo said:
Well, it sounds ok at first glance. I'm trying to see if there any problems with and I can't see any. If a player runs every other rack, he would get 100% of the breaks. Is that unfair? It sounds ok actually.

Maybe worth a shot, gives the other guy a fair shot if one guy is just dominating and not giving him any chances.
Click to expand...

wait a minute, you may not get it !

each player gets the same amount of chances to break. just as innings in baseball. top of the first I break and run 2 racks then break dry. You come to the table now and run the rack out. score is 2-1 my lead.
now it is the bottom of the first inning and it is your turn to break. You break and run 6 racks. then you break make 2 balls and play safe. I foul You get ball in hand and run out. scoring 7 in the bottom of the first inning it is now 2 for me and 8 for you.
now it is top of the second inning and I am breaking. I break dry and pushout. I will not be breaking next because i pushed out and the continuous factor is stopped there. will we go to the bottom of the second inning regardless who wins this rack. hope i win this rack because you are playing good and might run another 6 pack !!!:cool:
 
Last edited:
You're going postal

oldzilla said:
After being a member for 324 days i have reach my first 1000 posts.

I hope most of them were enjoyed by somebody.

I want to start my next thousand with an idea for a format that would satisfy the arguement of winner breaks vs alternate breaks.
Winner breaks has the continuous factor of stringing racks which i think should be part of the match.
Alternate breaks is to asure that both players get a chance.

I call it Alternate Continuous Breaks (ACB).
Play innings with each player getting a chance to break and run as many as they can. Once they do not make a ball on the break the rack is played out and it is the next players turn.
With all the normal 9-ball rules applied. player 1 runs 3racks and then has to push. player 2 wins that rack, score is 3-1 after top of the first inning.


windows is going to restart so i'll bbl.
Click to expand...

Appreciate your posts.Loved the ring game one.
However,i like winner breaks.I've been leading 10-4 going to 11 and
had a guy run the set out.Also i've ran 4&out a few times.Winner breaks
makes the game exciting.
If you miss you lose....i can live with that
 
A friend of mine came up with the 'Second Tuesday of Every Month' breaking system, or the STEM as we like to call it. What happens is player 'A' goes to the poolroom, gets a table, racks the balls and then breaks. If he doesn't pocket a ball he immediately calls player 'B' who comes in the following Thursday and plays his inning. Should player 'B' miss, he must call payer 'A' and the process is repeated. I'll admit it's a little awkward but there are seldom any arguments.
Congatulations on one-thousand great posts. :grin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top