U.S. Open rules discussion

[iusedtoberich]

Here's another option:

1 on the spot. No break box. 3 balls must cross headstring or be pocketed.

Yes, this results in the wired corner ball. However, you still must smash the rack to meet the headstring requirement. So, the person who can smash the rack AND control the CB, will have better success. This will make the break look like all the breaks from the 80's and 90's, before the soft break was commonly used.

On a 1 on spot, no break box, and soft break allowed, a weaker player with less CB control can be just as effective as a stronger player with better CB control.

 

[itsfroze]

I'm seriously wondering if you just come on here to bash Mike Dechaine every chance you get. Can you please do us all a favor and stop posting if you're not going to contribute anything to discussions? It's extremely annoying to see you all over every thread bashing someone for being smart enough to exploit a flaw in the system to gain an edge. It happens in every game/sport.

OT: Rack the 9 on the spot. Last year it was a little easy to play in it, because of the wing ball being wired. MD beat me 11-2 in the 3rd round with like 8 break and runs. Can't complain, but I will say that the Mosconi Cup this year was much more exciting when it was a tactical battle instead of running out all the time. Test it out for once! We'll never know if we don't try it.

Yea, let's test something new out, the year Shane is trying to become the first player to ever win 3 U.S. Opens in a row.

PS. Also if there is no penalty for a soft break then then how can you enforce the rule. This leaves yo wide open, for a problem to occur.

 

[Icon of Sin]

1 on the spot... let the wing ball snap and let the packages fly...

 

[Paul Schofield]

On and on....

Jay, honestly, I don't know what you are thinking. This is like the doctor turning to the patient and asking him for advice on a cure.

 

[CSykes24]

Yea, let's test something new out, the year Shane is trying to become the first player to ever win 3 U.S. Opens in a row.

PS. Also if there is no penalty for a soft break then then how can you enforce the rule. This leaves yo wide open, for a problem to occur.

What does him winning 3 years in a row have to do with anything? That's a variable that shouldn't even be included in the decision at all.

 

[itsfroze]

What does him winning 3 years in a row have to do with anything? That's a variable that shouldn't even be included in the decision at all.

So you think.

 

[nobcitypool]

9 on the spot is good, it will give the Mosconi Cup guys some real life practice. If a soft break is not allowed, you must have an objective way to measure it. Since that is unlikely, allow a soft break. Imho, any rule that cannot be objectively measured is a recipe for problems. If you're going to have all ball fouls, then touching should be a foul. Again, back to the objectivity thing. Alternating breaks is good. Break anywhere behind the string.

Why use anything other than a magic rack type device? Use a magic rack device and let people rack their own. Make things consistent and you have less variables that can cause controversy. I also think having a set pattern for all 9 balls would be a good thing.

 

[purpdrag]

As TD this year it is my goal to make the rules as fair as possible for everyone. It will be a stellar field, full of great players, and for that I'm excited. Since this is a WPA sanctioned event we will follow their rules as closely as possible.

9-Ball, Texas Express, Winner Breaks and Rack Your Own for starters. We will be playing Foul on All Balls, which is the way most major events are played today all over the world. An incidental touch of a shirt sleeve will not constitute a foul unless the ball moves. It's actually much easier to officiate playing all ball fouls than playing cue ball fouls only. If a ball moves you fouled and there is no question about it.

The big question is how to rack the balls, and there is no clear WPA rule to cover that. We will definitely be using the break box and can either rack the one on the spot or the nine on the spot. The problem with racking the one on the spot is the wing ball is wired for one of the corner pockets, thus making a run-out that much easier. With the nine on the spot this is not the case. Most of the top players I've talked to support the idea of racking the nine on the spot. It makes for a better game requiring more skill. That's the way they do it on all Matchroom events and it seems to work pretty well for them.

Barry's goal as the promoter of this event is to make it the best test of pool in the USA, similar to the U.S. Open in golf. I'm still open to suggestions about this and anything else rule related. I seriously doubt we will require three or more balls to be pocketed or sent past the head string. But we will not allow soft breaking. A cut break is okay as long as a firm stroke is used.

Thanks for your input. Barry has a lot of faith in the members of this forum and he asked me to please put this out there for all to see. It also serves to inform the players in advance what rules we will be using.

Thanks Jay. Glad you're coming back as TD. I think you're totally on the right track.

First, I definitely like foul on all balls, but I love the idea of incidental touch of the short NOT being a foul unless a ball actually moves. I think it's fairer and easier to call.

I totally get why 9 on the spot could make a fairer game, but on this one I am more of a traditionalist and prefer 1 on the spot. More balls will be made on the break. So what. Breaking from the box helps that a little bit. I'm pretty neutral on this though so no big deal if 9 on the spot is how it goes.

However, I definitely don't like requiring three or more balls to be pocketed or sent past the head string, so I'm with you there. I don't mind requiring 3 or 4 balls be pocketed or hit a rail. For me it's either that or just saying you need to hit them hard.

 

[CSykes24]

So you think.

That's not really how science works. Nice basis for the argument, though.

 

[Icon of Sin]

What does him winning 3 years in a row have to do with anything? That's a variable that shouldn't even be included in the decision at all.

Because it's a chance to create a new record of 3 wins in a row and they are talking about a rule change from the last 2. Not exactly fair.

On top of that, players have been practicing and now a week before the Open there is a possibility of changing the rules... the players could have been practicing and working on the break according to how the balls were racked last year, then last minute there is going to be a rule change.

How many rule changes have occurred in the history of the USOpen?

 

[CSykes24]

Because it's a chance to create a new record of 3 wins in a row and they are talking about a rule change from the last 2. Not exactly fair.

On top of that, players have been practicing and now a week before the Open there is a possibility of changing the rules... the players could have been practicing and working on the break according to how the balls were racked last year, then last minute there is going to be a rule change.

How many rule changes have occurred in the history of the USOpen?

The U.S. Open for Golf changes courses essentially every year. Same with many other sports. I know that it hasn't always implemented the cut break. When was that? And was that fair to the previous U.S. Open champion when it was implemented? Probably not. I don't see why people are upset about making an already flawed game tougher. I guess I'm really indifferent on it, because I don't care either way. Just stating that it'd be nice to see a change.

I'm not old enough to know how many changes have occurred in the U.S. Open, but I'm going to go by the audacity in your statement and guess zero?

 

[Icon of Sin]

The U.S. Open for Golf changes courses essentially every year. Same with many other sports. I know that it hasn't always implemented the cut break. When was that? And was that fair to the previous U.S. Open champion when it was implemented? Probably not. I don't see why people are upset about making an already flawed game tougher. I guess I'm really indifferent on it, because I don't care either way. Just stating that it'd be nice to see a change.

I'm not old enough to know how many changes have occurred in the U.S. Open, but I'm going to go by the audacity in your statement and guess zero?

lol... hardly 0. Not sure if that was sarcasm or not. The rules on the break/racking has changed numerous times during the US Open's history.

 

[IamCalvin06]

With all due respect to Jay and Barry. I have said this many times.

Our idea of what 9ball was flawed bc of inconsistent racks. Had that been the case in the beginning of the game it wouldn't be a big deal.

The 9ball rack is wired for the wing and 1ball to go. I see no problem with it. You must execute a great break and continue ur run. Much like straight pool.

In 14.1, 1pkt, and 8ball the corner ball is also wired. It requires the thinnest of hits but is reliable.

Anyways what I'm getting at is. 9ball is just a continuous run type game but we refuse to accept it.

If ur still intent on keeping it the way it was then no rack inspecting, opponent racks, and this forces the breaker to hit it with all his might.

See the folly in this? Even the three ball headstring rule isn't fair. I've seen hard breaks where the balls just clack into each other and remain down table.

Fair is consistent but then when it's too consistent we complain.

We then want some randomness but then too much and we complain.

Simple rule. 9 ball on the spot and breaker breaks from the spot.

Exhausted now going to grab a beer lol

Anyways it's an uphill battle but I commend jay and Barry for their efforts in all they do for our messed up world.

 

[naji]

As TD this year it is my goal to make the rules as fair as possible for everyone. It will be a stellar field, full of great players, and for that I'm excited. Since this is a WPA sanctioned event we will follow their rules as closely as possible.

9-Ball, Texas Express, Winner Breaks and Rack Your Own for starters. We will be playing Foul on All Balls, which is the way most major events are played today all over the world. An incidental touch of a shirt sleeve will not constitute a foul unless the ball moves. It's actually much easier to officiate playing all ball fouls than playing cue ball fouls only. If a ball moves you fouled and there is no question about it.

The big question is how to rack the balls, and there is no clear WPA rule to cover that. We will definitely be using the break box and can either rack the one on the spot or the nine on the spot. The problem with racking the one on the spot is the wing ball is wired for one of the corner pockets, thus making a run-out that much easier. With the nine on the spot this is not the case. Most of the top players I've talked to support the idea of racking the nine on the spot. It makes for a better game requiring more skill. That's the way they do it on all Matchroom events and it seems to work pretty well for them.

Barry's goal as the promoter of this event is to make it the best test of pool in the USA, similar to the U.S. Open in golf. I'm still open to suggestions about this and anything else rule related. I seriously doubt we will require three or more balls to be pocketed or sent past the head string. But we will not allow soft breaking. A cut break is okay as long as a firm stroke is used.

Thanks for your input. Barry has a lot of faith in the members of this forum and he asked me to please put this out there for all to see. It also serves to inform the players in advance what rules we will be using.

Thanks for giving us the opportunity to share our input. I think stream viewers and game watchers like to see high number of packs (brakes and runs), so alternating might put a stop to that excitement, but players likes it because they have a chance; i think one way , let the player who wins the lag breaks 5 in a row (for race to 9 match, or 6 in a row for race to 11), and his opponent breaks last 4 games.this give a chance to players, and viewers likes it IMO.
I certainly like 9 on the spot.
foul on all balls is good
three balls cross is good
i added shot clock

 

[Petros Andrikop]

Ok, since triangle will be used and no referees, along with the wish of most players, here it is:

-9 on the spot
-rack your own, no checking from opponent
-dry break with 3 balls having to pass one diamond behind the middle of table (not two). Hard to judge the power of a break without a distinct rule, otherwise there will be confusion and arguments.
-"big" box
-continuous break
-min race to 11, could be raised for final 16

Petros

 

[jay helfert]

On and on....

Jay, honestly, I don't know what you are thinking. This is like the doctor turning to the patient and asking him for advice on a cure.

I believe wholeheartedly in making the rules and telling the players how they will play. In this instance I'm not the only one making these decisions. :thumbup2:

 

[Island Drive]

Rack your own

To help move along the event, and utilize players time effectively I would have Loser Racks, winner breaks.

Like you mentioned, the 9 on the spot, has gotten rid of massive break and run packages. and made play much more fair.

If loser racks, the class and etiquette of each player can be shown in a much better light either way....and SPEED UP PLAY.

Also, I would highly consider the of use wooden racks as they create a wonderful sound of play, and like the Willards event at Pheasant Run IL they were embossed and players could sign em for the buyers and sellers.
These wooden racks, were made by a good friend of Vivian V. in TX and, were top notch. That additional' 'sound'' of play, is almost as nice as hearing the ball slapping against the back of a Gold Crown Pocket.

Here's why loser should rack, ''especially if they are Drop pockets''. Both players are seen (in the public eye), working together during play to assist and roll balls down table and interact. When your racking, your basically remembering what you did wrong/or not/making sure they are tight, and when your breaking, your doing the same but from the winners perspective and your prepping for breaking while your opponent is doing his job. I wouldn't be surprised if all matches ran at least 20-30 minutes quicker that the rack your own. Only next best thing is having refs/rack at each table, and we know that's not possible now.
With the increase in entry fees and overall costs, the caliber of players at this event is world class, therefore in the players meeting DEMAND that they act like true pros and give your opponent a rack as good as you would for yourself. It's time to stop babysitting adults until there is a ref at each table.

 

[jay helfert]

This is a great post. In order to come up with a qualification of what is hard and what is soft, you as the tournament director need to do a series of experiments to say when you break them like X, the result is Y. And when you break them like A, the result is B. And when you break them like M, the result is N. Then you can use that information to come up with your "objective" measure of break speed.

Been there, done that, maybe a hundred times. The results are somewhat skewed depending on who is breaking, but I guess that isn't news. I like three balls past the side pocket, but we are still discussing how best to implement the hard break rule.

 

[jay helfert]

Along my theme of Keep It Simple (three balls either pocketed or beyond the centerline), there's a simple solution to pattern racking:

Breaker racks the balls any way he wants, but before "tightening" the rack his opponent gets to switch the position of any two balls (except the one and nine, of course). After the switch the breaker tightens the rack and lifts the triangle.

This way the breaker gets to make sure the rack is tight and his opponent gets to make sure that it doesn't result in an easy pattern.

Try it. You'll find that you can destroy any pattern but simply switching the position of two balls.

Keep It Simple. Disaster awaits all who rely on technology like iPhones, radar guns, software, etc.

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.

 

[JoeyA]

The only thing about the 9 ball on the spot that I don't like, is that the matches will take longer to play.

Yes, 9 ball on the spot takes more skill.

I don't like the idea of 3 balls having to pass the head string. You could make a ball on the break, have one object ball pass the head string and smack another ball that is headed to pass the head string (and that one doesn't) and that would be considered an invalid break. That imo, "sucks deep pond scum" (thanks George Fels) and IS bad luck.

JoeyA