Tuning Stones XXVl - A Player's Experience

u12armresl said:
I can tell you what we do in arm wrestling, and it works out just fine.

You have a certain amount of tries or seconds to get the right grip (on both sides). If you can't agree on a grip (same as agreeing on a rack IMHO) then the 2 referees put you in a ref grip and if EITHER wrestler moves, the one who didn't move gets a foul or a loss.

If I was a casual fan new to the sport and sat to watch a Mike D or Donnie match, I'd leave and probably not come back.

We can all agree we can't afford to lose more spectators to our sport.
Click to expand...

If we all agree on this, then why can't we all agree to spend the time learning how to rack properly? This is a *skill* that requires practice. It is a very important skill because one's ability to deliver proper sportsmanship depends on it. Learn what gaps matter and don't matter. It isn't rocket science. I have yet to meet a person that is not ignorant about the rack who also thinks that racking properly doesn't matter. To say it another way, I've yet to meet someone who both thinks it doesn't matter *and* understands what is going on in the rack.

I'm disappointed to hear about Zuglan's attitude towards the original poster.

Also, to the original poster: I agree with your view and am sorry to hear about this. However, I specifically disagree with your paragraph about "you should either accept no gaps or all gaps". With all due respect, it is hard to imagine you would make this statement if you knew much about how the rack works. You have firsthand experience that in some circumstances a perfectly frozen rack is damn near impossible. On the other hand, freezing the *relevant* gaps is almost always possible. Sometimes good enough is all you can do, and that should be "good enough". I recommend learning a little more about the rack. This way you will at least know what "good enough" is, and it should make it easier to get there. Check out Racking Secrets by Joe Tucker.

I hope you have better luck with this type of situation in the future. The problem with rack for each other is that one player may be genuinely and honestly racking "as good as I can." Thing is, if you are racking for me, you need to rack as good as *I* can, otherwise I am spotting you a tight rack. What genuine sportsman wants that situation? We should both be breaking racks of equal quality. In this case "its the thought that counts" really isn't sufficient. There really is no problem with rack your own...except in the minds of those who have simply not taken the time to learn how to rack the balls tightly. Sadly, there are MANY people who think they rack great, but they actually don't, and become defensive about this instead of trying to learn something. Oh well, that's humanity for you...

KMRUNOUT
 
justaplayer said:
Are you a politician??? Cause all I hear is BS.

Pool tournaments are not democracies. It's take it or leave it. Guess you wont be back for TS 27...too bad cause I'd give you the 7 out if you want some...but I'm sure you hate money too.
Click to expand...

Trying to figure out how this highly insightful post helps the conversation...

KMRUNOUT
 
rickwen186 said:
Which is EXACTLY the problem If gaps occur at random they should be accepted. We can not gauge intend on these racks. unless you can read minds. My opponent specificlly said I could leave the 1 ball only frozen to 1 ball...thus creating the potential for the 4 ball track and the wing ball flying in. I dont want to leave the back two not touching the row of three because then the 9 can fly in the corners and my opponent wanted the back two frozen together between each other. So all these requirements essentially required a perfectly tight rack and it was a nightmare.
Click to expand...

You definitely should learn some more about the rack. The easiest rack in 9 ball to make the corner ball *consistently* is a perfectly frozen rack. Likewise for playing shape on the 1. Many people have a very underinformed belief that the goal of the "rack rigger" is to get some special layout other than frozen. The "4 ball track" is present in a frozen rack...that is why the corner ball goes so easily. For the vast majority of the people using the term, a "rack rigger" is a person who is able to achieve an *acceptably* frozen rack, and knows what that is. The same vast majority thinks it means something else.

All that being said, how and when objections about the rack are raised is a whole different can of assholes. Using the situation as a move is the specialty of certain individuals. This disgusts me. It takes some careful assessment to understand the difference between these two aspects of this problem. Many people mistake a legitimate concern for a tight rack with an intentional move.

Finally, from your description it seems that of the 16 points of contact in the rack, you were needing to concern yourself with 5. (the 3 in the 4 ball track and the 2 behind the 9.) That is very far from a perfectly tight rack. It kinda sounds like your opponent was trying to make it easier for you, and willing to accept a well less than perfect rack.

Food for thought...

KMRUNOUT
 
Excellent responses KM!

I appreciate your insight. I did,in fact, question the intent of my opponent as being nefarious or not. I did not trust my own judgement on that which is why I didn't want to call that person out. More, I wanted to put the racking issue on the stage and voice my feelings about how I felt I was treated by the Director.

I have watched racking secrets and what complicated this was that in this situation, my opponent wanted certain balls tight as well as I wanted certain balls tight as the racker. I do my best to get all the balls tight but am willing to accept freezing the top 3 and the back two against the 9 and two balls beside the 9. I feel this gives a good spread and reduces the opportunity for the 9 to drop. Now that I'm writing this I think I may have had more strict standards as rhe racker than my opponent as the breaker. What rubbed me wrong was that my opponent said the 1 didn't have to touch both balls behind it. It only had to touch 1. It was a bit insulting as obviously that creates the 4 ball track with opposite side gaps. Break on the gap side and the wing goes in. The gap that my opponent would not accept was the one between the 2 back balls, and honestly I don't think there is a significance for that gap.

The moral of that really is that if both players have gap requirements it's going to be impossible to rack. I guess I'm swayed to your side though in that, I don't believe I should provide a rack with my own acceptable gaps do I believe the breaker should continue to demand a re rack until there gaps are present.

Magic rack , 9 on the spot. Let's just go with that. Lol
 
It seems to me the easiest solution is do not let the breaker inspect the rack, if the breaker think he is getting "slug" racks call a ref over, if the ref sees an intentional bad rack the breaker gets a game on the wire, this should keep the racker honest.
I like the big talker here, when he is offered a game he quits barking, whats up with that?????
 
rickwen186 said:
Excellent responses KM!



I appreciate your insight. I did,in fact, question the intent of my opponent as being nefarious or not. I did not trust my own judgement on that which is why I didn't want to call that person out. More, I wanted to put the racking issue on the stage and voice my feelings about how I felt I was treated by the Director.



I have watched racking secrets and what complicated this was that in this situation, my opponent wanted certain balls tight as well as I wanted certain balls tight as the racker. I do my best to get all the balls tight but am willing to accept freezing the top 3 and the back two against the 9 and two balls beside the 9. I feel this gives a good spread and reduces the opportunity for the 9 to drop. Now that I'm writing this I think I may have had more strict standards as rhe racker than my opponent as the breaker. What rubbed me wrong was that my opponent said the 1 didn't have to touch both balls behind it. It only had to touch 1. It was a bit insulting as obviously that creates the 4 ball track with opposite side gaps. Break on the gap side and the wing goes in. The gap that my opponent would not accept was the one between the 2 back balls, and honestly I don't think there is a significance for that gap.



The moral of that really is that if both players have gap requirements it's going to be impossible to rack. I guess I'm swayed to your side though in that, I don't believe I should provide a rack with my own acceptable gaps do I believe the breaker should continue to demand a re rack until there gaps are present.



Magic rack , 9 on the spot. Let's just go with that. Lol
Click to expand...

Yeah magic rack 9 on the spot would probably be ok.

I appreciate your receptiveness to criticism without becoming defensive. That is an all too rare quality. I really do think that if Zuglan behaved as you described, that that is pretty crappy and disrespectful. Sounds like some sort of unconscious mental block over racking issues lol.

Still, I respectfully disagree with you over the specifics you mention about the rack. Simply leaving a gap on one side of the 1 ball does not by any means wire the corner ball. It *can*, but that depends on the rest of the rack. Having experimented *considerably* with this stuff, I am quite certain that if my goal is to reliably make a ball on the break, I would prefer the one ball is frozen to both balls behind it, the 4 ball track is frozen, and the back ball is frozen to the end of the 4 ball track. I also prefer both balls behind the 9 be frozen to the 9, so in case I break dry, I don't want the 9 leaking out and hanging in front of a corner pocket. I don't care about the other gaps in the rack, and don't really waste any mental energy trying to freeze them. So for me, that's 6 out of 16 gaps that I require to be frozen. That's not even 1/2 way perfect lol!

KMRUNOUT



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think the one observation in this thread that sticks out to me is when's pros rack for themselves it takes 10 seconds. When they rack for each it because a rediculous mess. That tells me everything you need to know about what the rack mechanics are up to.
 
Last edited:
trob said:
I think the one observation in this thread that sticks out to me is when's pros rack for themselves it takes 10 seconds. When they reach for each it because a rediculous mess. That tells me everything you need to know about what the rack mechanics are up to.
Click to expand...

That is an excellent observation, and I agree!
 
rickwen186 said:
I'm not a politician player, I just don't believe that two parties must be uncivil too each other during a disagreement. If I'm wrong, I say I'm wrong and I don't need to bully in order to win arguements.

7 and out huh? Get with me the next time you hear my name in the Calcutta. I'm all over the place. VA all the way up to Steinway. Better yet, put your name on here so I can hear you in the Calcutta and come hit you up for a game.
Click to expand...
He just needs a hug

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
 
trob said:
I think the one observation in this thread that sticks out to me is when's pros rack for themselves it takes 10 seconds. When they reach for each it because a rediculous mess. That tells me everything you need to know about what the rack mechanics are up to.
Click to expand...


What does it tell you? It tells me that it is fairly easy to get the important balls touching, which is good enough for those that know what they are doing. It may not be acceptable however to someone that doesn't know. It could possibly tell me that it is easy to freeze the rack up adequately to break from, say, the right side. So maybe one guy likes to break from the left side. The same rack that satisfies one player and is easy to achieve will not satisfy the other player.

But I am curious what conclusions you drew from your statement. Care to share?

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
KMRUNOUT said:
What does it tell you? It tells me that it is fairly easy to get the important balls touching, which is good enough for those that know what they are doing. It may not be acceptable however to someone that doesn't know. It could possibly tell me that it is easy to freeze the rack up adequately to break from, say, the right side. So maybe one guy likes to break from the left side. The same rack that satisfies one player and is easy to achieve will not satisfy the other player.

But I am curious what conclusions you drew from your statement. Care to share?

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yea. They're cheating. They want more then a tight rack they want it loaded. if all there doing is making sure the rack is tight it should be just as quick when they're racking for themselves as each other.
 
Are any of you who are saying the poster is butt hurt the same people crying about slow play in another thread? I believe he said it took 2 hours to play 11 racks? That's insane for a tournament of this quality.
 
trob said:
Are any of you who are saying the poster is butt hurt the same people crying about slow play in another thread? I believe he said it took 2 hours to play 11 racks? That's insane for a tournament of this quality.
Click to expand...

He was beaten by Jen Beretta ...look, aim, look, ponder, get down, recheck, practice stroke 4 to 9 times and shoot. Plus Rick Miller missed a few shots cause JB isn't running out sets.

He lost because of the racking shenanigans and the profound effect it had on his mental game. Leading to a complete breakdown of his ability to hit a ball with a stick as he's done for years.
 
justaplayer said:
I could give a rats ass what you think.
Click to expand...
To lash out like you have been on this thread someone must have wounded you deeply. I'm sorry you had to go through something so trematic and hope you find the closure you need

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
 
justaplayer said:
He was beaten by Jen Beretta ...look, aim, look, ponder, get down, recheck, practice stroke 4 to 9 times and shoot. Plus Rick Miller missed a few shots cause JB isn't running out sets.

He lost because of the racking shenanigans and the profound effect it had on his mental game. Leading to a complete breakdown of his ability to hit a ball with a stick as he's done for years.
Click to expand...

It really is disturbing to, I'm sure, not just me how degrading you are to women. You have made comment after comment ill using to the Shane I must feel for losing to Jen. Let me be clear. I lost because my opponent WAS running racks and playing flawless. Don't act like you know me. I would not associate with a person of your character. You won't even put your name on here! I've never been exposed to this level of racking scrutiny before so as a result, I could not "always" react this way to that. I can promise you this, I will react differently in the future.
 
Back in the day before everyone knew the secret to making the wing ball, racking for each other worked fine. You simply racked them as tight as you can and the guy broke.

Now that everyone knows the secret to making the wing ball, racking for each other makes no sense.

In this case, Jen B is in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. If she takes the honest route, she is going to give you a perfect rack and expect a perfect rack in return. If she is giving you perfect racks and you are not returning the favor then she is going to request a million reracks, as she did.

Her other option is to accept your bad racks and then purposely give you less than perfect racks which is pretty shady b/c she is not racking the best that she could.

What do you expect her to do? Should she give you perfect racks while you give her bad racks?

I've been in this situation a million times. I know how to rack too well. Should I be at a disadvantage because my opponent isn't as good at racking as me? Should I intentionally not give my best rack? I usually end up just carelessly racking for my opponent and then accepting all of their racks just to avoid an argument. I'm not racking them loose by any means but I'm definitely not spending the time needed to give a perfect rack.
 
trob said:
Yea. They're cheating. They want more then a tight rack they want it loaded. if all there doing is making sure the rack is tight it should be just as quick when they're racking for themselves as each other.
Click to expand...


Ah ok you totally missed my point. If you care to reread what I said and see if you can make more sense of it, cool. Otherwise take care.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top