U.S. Open rules discussion

[tduncan]

Earl was running five and six racks in every match when he dominated the U.S. Open, and all the other 9-Ball tournaments he played in. I saw good players get Earl down something like 7-2 and the next time they came to the table they were behind 9-7! At one time he was a speed above the world!

Shows just how good Earl was. He wasn't racking his own & pattern racking the balls. Just bustin' them & getting out from EVERYWHERE!

And everyone wonders why Earl complains about the game being too easy. We have made it that way by allowing players to rack the balls so they spread just right or wire a ball to go in every time.

 

[itsfroze]

==============

 

[sjm]

Well, whatever the rules, I can't wait for this to start, and it sure is great to have Jay involved again.

I'm buying the stream whatever the rules guys decide. Let's do this!

 

[itsfroze]

==========

 

[tduncan]

Originally posted by Jay Helfert:
Earl was running five and six racks in every match when he dominated the U.S. Open, and all the other 9-Ball tournaments he played in. I saw good players get Earl down something like 7-2 and the next time they came to the table they were behind 9-7! At one time he was a speed above the world!

*************

Which matches because I would like to get those DVD's from Accu-stats ???
They don't have many matches with 6 packs, as this has come up in a thread before. I'd like to know the matches.
Can anyone post the many matches with 6 packs from former Opens, I doubt anyone can.
I'll let you figure out why !

There are a few, and that's it.[/QUOTE]

Check out the Hong Kong match between Earl & Efren, I'm confident there were some large packages there.

 

[tduncan]

Good post wedge.

But doesn't the 1-ball in the side become almost as dead when you put the 9-ball on the spot?

We'll find out.

 

[AtLarge]

I think the Break & Run statistics were 12% for 2012 and something like 14% for 2013.
Is that about right, AtLarge, I think that's what you said.
So if that's the case, where are all these 6 packs people are imagining. I have hundreds
of Accu-stats DVD's there just aren't that many with 6 packs.

People always talk about how players are B & R out like water when ever it suits their side of a discussion.

For the streamed matches I watched, the B&R percentages were 21% in 2011, 23% in 2012, and 21% in 2013. But it can, of course, get considerably higher than that for the top players near the end of the event.

 

[Schwinn]

Jay, I vote for one ball on the spot for reasons already mentioned.

I am also a very big proponent of a neutral racker. This solves all the racking problems. I hate pattern racking. I know it is not feasible, but in an ideal world...

 

[itsfroze]

*************

Which matches because I would like to get those DVD's from Accu-stats ???
They don't have many matches with 6 packs, as this has come up in a thread before. I'd like to know the matches.
Can anyone post the many matches with 6 packs from former Opens, I doubt anyone can.
I'll let you figure out why !

There are a few, and that's it.

Check out the Hong Kong match between Earl & Efren, I'm confident there were some large packages there.[/QUOTE]

We are talking about the U.S. Open here and people were saying lots of big packages like 6 packs have been run. I said there aren't that many.
The fact is that there aren't that many in the whole Accu-stats library, in any and all the different tournaments they have covered. That's a fact !

Thanks for the suggestion about the Hong Kong Match though.

 

[pooler]

What do I mean, it's simple. Point out the rule from the WPA that states when an event
is sanctioned by the WPA the event must use their rules, please I'd like to see the rule.
There is none as far as I know, enlighten me.

Well, this is something you may as well question as much as you want but looking at:

section - Notification:
Link:
http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/tournament_sanctioning_catalogue

and

WPA Regulations, point 2 (Exceptions to the Rules)
http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/the_regulations#2

it would come clear that, to have the event sanctioned, it is not just to pay the sanction fee but also to observe certain guidelines that serve the bigger picture, thus: general progress of pool as a sport recognized worldwide, the same around the World

Certainly, not to rely on the "phone call to someone" a week before the start of the event

Well, I clearly answered your question, quoting the precise stuff to "... enlighten you..." :wink:

Now you hit me with:

WPA regulations : 17. Open Break Requirements
The tournament management may set additional requirements on the break shot on games that require an “open” break such as nine ball. For example, it may be required to drive three balls above the head string or pocket them.

What is your point with the above quote ???

Mind you, I know this in and out, both in theory and long term practice/first hand experience

 

[AtLarge]

I think the Break & Run statistics were 12% for 2012 and something like 14% for 2013.
Is that about right, AtLarge, I think that's what you said.
So if that's the case, where are all these 6 packs people are imagining. I have hundreds
of Accu-stats DVD's there just aren't that many with 6 packs.

People always talk about how players are B & R out like water when ever it suits their side of a discussion.

Biggest B&R packages in recent U.S. Open 9-Ball streamed matches:

2010 -- 6, by Immonen defeating Klatt

2011 -- 6, by Klatt losing to Appleton

2012 -- 5, by Eckert defeating Daulton

2013 -- 3, by Van Boening (2x), Vann Corteza (2x), and Shaw

 

[itsfroze]

For the streamed matches I watched, the B&R percentages were 21% in 2011, 23% in 2012, and 21% in 2013. But it can, of course, get considerably higher than that for the top players near the end of the event.

Thanks, as I wasn't sure that's why I asked.
Those percentages are for the Open, correct.
Sent you some green, always like the stats. :thumbup:

 

[itsfroze]

Biggest B&R packages in recent U.S. Open 9-Ball streamed matches:

2010 -- 6, by Immonen defeating Klatt

2011 -- 6, by Klatt losing to Appleton

2012 -- 5, by Eckert defeating Daulton

2013 -- 3, by Van Boening (2x), Vann Corteza (2x), and Shaw

As I thought not that many. Thanks

 

[itsfroze]

Well, I clearly answered your question, quoting the precise stuff to "... enlighten you..." :wink:

Now you hit me with:


What is your point with the above quote ???

Mind you, I know this in and out, both in theory and long term practice/first hand experience

I posted my point;
2. Exceptions to the Rules
The actual Rules of Play may not be altered unless a specific waiver is issued by the WPA Sports Director or other WPA official for the individual event. A written explanation of any rules change should be made available at the players’ meeting.

They must have a waiver, and if so then they can make what rules they want.
That's my point.
Anyway I'm going to enjoy the Open and I hope you do too. :smile:

 

[AtLarge]

Thanks, as I wasn't sure that's why I asked.
Those percentages are for the Open, correct.
Sent you some green, always like the stats. :thumbup:

Yes, U.S. Open 9-Ball, streamed matches only.

 

[buckshotshoey]

I posted my point;
2. Exceptions to the Rules
The actual Rules of Play may not be altered unless a specific waiver is issued by the WPA Sports Director or other WPA official for the individual event. A written explanation of any rules change should be made available at the players’ meeting.

They must have a waiver, and if so then they can make what rules they want.
That's my point.
Anyway I'm going to enjoy the Open and I hope you do too. :smile:

This makes sense. That way with any sanctioned event. When I posted my response a while ago, I had a brain fart and didn't realize the open was as close as it is. Rule changes within a month of an event shouldn't be allowed....unless the current rules do not conform to the sanctioning body.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Very interesting. I like it but not sure how it would affect the pace of play. We will also discuss this more. I'm more inclined to specify the one in front and two in back.

Jay, an easier way to randomize the rack would be for the racker (winner in this case) to just toss all the balls into the rack, spin it three times, and then form a diamond shape inside the rack. The racker then switches the position of the 1 and whatever ball is lying at the front of the rack and switches the 9 with the ball lying in the middle. Unless, of course, either ball is already in its proper position.

No need to bring the opponent to the table, no fights about which two balls that get switched by the opponent, etc. Play would likely speed up as opposed to "loser racks", and pattern racking would be essentially eliminated.

 

[Island Drive]

I actually like this idea a lot more. Putting the spot up to where the 1 should sit.

:scratchhead:....I hope your kidding.

 

[Island Drive]

As I thought not that many. Thanks

Those are just streamed matches which is a VERY small number of matches. In the winner breaks world of match play in the past, great players were always putting two's and threes together, and once in awhile a fiver, and five was not out of the ordinary among great players with good breaks.

 

[watchez]

The biggest rule that the US Open should put forth is that all players are paid on the spot. Everything else is secondary.