U.S. Open rules discussion

[Mr. J]

Another Option...

Okay guys, I just had a phone discussion with Barry and his feeling is we need to implement the rules now so players have time to get ready. The Open is one week away so that is ample time to prepare imo.

Based on the responses we've gotten the nine ball will be on the spot, the smaller break box (9") will be used and the balls will be racked with the one in front and the two in back. It's still Rack Your Own, Winner Breaks and your opponent can inspect the rack one time. We will monitor the matches from a podium in the middle of the arena (only nine tables) and watch for any soft breaking. Of course if a player feels his opponent is soft breaking he should inform us so we can observe the break.

Yes, fouls on all balls, with the same qualifier for incidental touching of a ball by a piece of clothing or hair. Once again if the ball moves it is a foul, no matter what.

By the way, Barry has made changes to the rules of play multiple times down through the years, all in the interest of keeping the U.S. Open as competitive as possible. Most of these players have played internationally, so they are familiar with the rules as stated above.

How about 1 in the front...

2 in the back

3 and 4 on the corners

5 cannot touch the 6

7 cannot touch the 8

9 ball on the break does not count in the bottom two corners...

simple and easy.....

maybe a new standard???

Thanks...

Mr. J

 

[GideonF]

I would also send an email to the players themselves and NOT discuss who responds or what is said but get a consensus of opinion.

If you want to make 9 ball even more skillful, add the rule; if you miss, opponent gets cue ball in hand.

I'm not sure making the game more difficult is the way to go.

There is and will always be a certain amount of luck in 9 ball. Apple called 9 ball, "one of the most exciting games in the world" and it is, BECAUSE of the luck factor.

If you want to make the break fair, use one of those rack templates and to allow skill back into play, AND allow all of the players to pattern rack and alternate break. The three F's will come into being: FAST, FIERY, AND FAIR. This will allow the matches to be completed in a timely manner and each player will have a chance to demonstrate their prowess at the break and run.

JoeyA

The problem with this is that with top players it becomes a break and run contest on alternating serves. The game can just come down to who won the lag - or a single mistake can take all the drama out of the match, because if you get down two breaks you will never catch up. I prefer the drama of winner breaks - it allows packages and allows people to catch a gear and catch up.

If I were designing a tournament based on what I want to watch, I would say templates, 9 on spot, break box and a specified racking order. I like the idea of a hard break rule, but would be worried about unfairness of hard breaks that don't move the balls enough. Also, anyone have insight on whether the Corey/Shane/Mika/Mike D's of /the world can make a ball and get shape with the 9 on the spot and breaking from the box?

Gideon

 

[Island Drive]

A lot of people have misgivings about how Shane was racking the balls last year to make the wing ball almost every time. Alex questioned it during their match and there was a lot of discussion about it afterwards.

To I , this is the Main core problem with racking your own. It's the rackers job (within the rules) to make sure your opponent has difficultly making a ball, and it's the breakers job to make sure he does make a ball (fox in the henhouse come to mind?). Two entirely separate activities during match play ....in the past at the Open it was always loser racks/winner breaks....whining tho changed the game to where we are now, not common sense. Only game I prefer rack your own in one pocket, here too the racker is doing his best to gain an advantage, that's really what this whole debacle is about, having an advantage over your opponent that is got nothing to do with your skill level at the table. Racking your own is not good for the sport, it of course should be done by referees a each table but, the game $$$$$ can't handle that presently. I'd like to see each pro in or out of the event, dress up and rack one match per day to help the venue and give the crowd more to enjoy and speed up play, ESPECIALLY FOR THE FINAL 16. Be cool to see Archer, or Appleton or Shane or??????? rack and ref ONE game of match play.

 

[CSykes24]

To I , this is the Main core problem with racking your own. It's the rackers job (within the rules) to make sure your opponent has difficultly making a ball, and it's the breakers job to make sure he does make a ball (fox in the henhouse come to mind?). Two entirely separate activities during match play ....in the past at the Open it was always loser racks/winner breaks....whining tho changed the game to where we are now, not common sense. Only game I prefer rack your own in one pocket, here too the racker is doing his best to gain an advantage, that's really what this whole debacle is about, having an advantage over your opponent that is got nothing to do with your skill level at the table. Racking your own is not good for the sport, it of course should be done by referees a each table but, the game $$$$$ can't handle that presently. I'd like to see each pro in or out of the event, dress up and rack one match per day to help the venue and give the crowd more to enjoy and speed up play, ESPECIALLY FOR THE FINAL 16. Be cool to see Archer, or Appleton or Shane or??????? rack and ref ONE game of match play.

Conflicts of interest if players are still in the tournament.

 

[itsfroze]

To I , this is the Main core problem with racking your own. It's the rackers job (within the rules) to make sure your opponent has difficultly making a ball, and it's the breakers job to make sure he does make a ball (fox in the henhouse come to mind?). Two entirely separate activities during match play ....in the past at the Open it was always loser racks/winner breaks....whining tho changed the game to where we are now, not common sense. Only game I prefer rack your own in one pocket, here too the racker is doing his best to gain an advantage, that's really what this whole debacle is about, having an advantage over your opponent that is got nothing to do with your skill level at the table. Racking your own is not good for the sport, it of course should be done by referees a each table but, the game $$$$$ can't handle that presently. I'd like to see each pro in or out of the event, dress up and rack one match per day to help the venue and give the crowd more to enjoy and speed up play, ESPECIALLY FOR THE FINAL 16. Be cool to see Archer, or Appleton or Shane or??????? rack and ref ONE game of match play.

Sounds nice but won't work. A player reffing a match could have a side bet.
Sorry bad idea.

 

[nancewayne]

U.S.Open rule

Agreed that the 1- ball on the spot allows the wing ball to be made easily in a corner pocket, therefore the 9- ball should be on the spot to prevent that, however, what if the Magic Ball Rack would be used with the 9 ball on the spot...no fussing and fighting over the re-rack and less balls made on the break ! Your thoughts ?

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.

 

[PETROBOY]

How about loser breaks? It keeps all the guys with special racking from using thier skills without the other player winning games. It should keep scores closer.

 

[Island Drive]

Sounds nice but won't work. A player reffing a match could have a side bet.
Sorry bad idea.

I'm well aware of that, but the breaker can still ck the rack. It's an idea I never heard of, but it could be fun for the crowd. Or have past winners that are no longer in, rack the final matches. I'm sure the players wouldn't mind being in the pit during the match, gives em a Whole nother perspective of match play. I'd love to see Efren racking for Shane and Souquet in the finals, I'm sure the audience would love it too.

 

[Celophanewrap]

A lot of people have misgivings about how Shane was racking the balls last year to make the wing ball almost every time. Alex questioned it during their match and there was a lot of discussion about it afterwards.

Please excuse my lack of knowledge here (I didn't watch this tournament), what specifically were all the 'misgivings'?
If one player doesn't like the way the other is racking and there is a discussion that ensues, isn't that what a TD and the Referee are for?
If you involve the referee and a decision is made, either good rack or bad rack, couldn't further comments and discussion by the dissenting party just be attributed to general whining and poor sportsmanship?
Apparently at some point a decision was made and play continued, was this done under protest?

 

[JoeyA]

The problem with this is that with top players it becomes a break and run contest on alternating serves. The game can just come down to who won the lag - or a single mistake can take all the drama out of the match, because if you get down two breaks you will never catch up. I prefer the drama of winner breaks - it allows packages and allows people to catch a gear and catch up.

If I were designing a tournament based on what I want to watch, I would say templates, 9 on spot, break box and a specified racking order. I like the idea of a hard break rule, but would be worried about unfairness of hard breaks that don't move the balls enough. Also, anyone have insight on whether the Corey/Shane/Mika/Mike D's of /the world can make a ball and get shape with the 9 on the spot and breaking from the box?

Gideon

I see some of your points. Personally, I don't like seeing a player have no chance to defend himself.

I do like the idea of a specified racking order. That way the pattern is the same and fair to all players. (The best will find a way to break and run the specified racking order more often than others.) That being said, if that were part of the rules, it should be stated in advance and for those players who choose to, may practice breaking balls in that particular configuration.

The ultimate drama is created by the smallest mistakes costing the player dearly (World Cup of Pool comes to mind), not by a player getting into dead stroke, running out the set and not letting the other player to the table, although I have a deep appreciation for players who string racks together. I also think it is far more difficult to run racks each time you come to the table when you alternate breaks. It is hard to maintain that rhythm of breaking and running when you watch your opponent come to the table every other game, regardless of how well you play.

JoeyA

 

[BasementDweller]

I'm well aware of that, but the breaker can still ck the rack. It's an idea I never heard of, but it could be fun for the crowd. Or have past winners that are no longer in, rack the final matches. I'm sure the players wouldn't mind being in the pit during the match, gives em a Whole nother perspective of match play. I'd love to see Efren racking for Shane and Souquet in the finals, I'm sure the audience would love it too.

You've certainly had some good ideas on here over the years but I don't think this is one of them.

"Ladies and gentlemen, I now want to introduce the legendary Hall of Fame pool playing Magician -- Efren Reyes."

after the applause dies down you turn to Efren and say "Now get over there and rack the balls for the next couple of hours."

 

[justadub]

To I , this is the Main core problem with racking your own. It's the rackers job (within the rules) to make sure your opponent has difficultly making a ball, and it's the breakers job to make sure he does make a ball (fox in the henhouse come to mind?). Two entirely separate activities during match play ....in the past at the Open it was always loser racks/winner breaks....whining tho changed the game to where we are now, not common sense. Only game I prefer rack your own in one pocket, here too the racker is doing his best to gain an advantage, that's really what this whole debacle is about, having an advantage over your opponent that is got nothing to do with your skill level at the table. Racking your own is not good for the sport, it of course should be done by referees a each table but, the game $$$$$ can't handle that presently. I'd like to see each pro in or out of the event, dress up and rack one match per day to help the venue and give the crowd more to enjoy and speed up play, ESPECIALLY FOR THE FINAL 16. Be cool to see Archer, or Appleton or Shane or??????? rack and ref ONE game of match play.

Waaaay too much potential for shenanigans. Friends, enemies, partnerships (Dragon Promotions, sponsor teammates, etc) it just presents far too many additional issues.

Neutral racker, for at least the final 16. Hopefully for the whole tourney, that is the answer. No checking the rack. Get up and hit it.

 

[purpdrag]

Jay already came on and announced his decisions so there is no guarantee he'll be back with further replies or even have time to continue reading this so ...

To the person who asked Jay why he was coming back when he said he never would, he did answer that already in another thread. Something to the effect of he talked to Barry and they agreed on a few things and he decided to come back. It was in a U.S Open thread within the last month so if you search you should be able to find it.

Even if Jay doesn't come back I still think this is a good discussion so back to the topic at hand.

I also see some healthy debate on the winner break or alternating break format and even the idea of loser breaks. Running up packages is great and all that but I think 9 ball at the pro level is a better game with alternating break and that loser breaks (at pro level) is a cool idea.

I think 2 ball at the back is another good rule to add. Would also like to see magic racks in use especially if 9 on the spot is the rule but understand they must already have a sponsorship deal in place with Diamond for the racks so oh well to that. In addition, although I like a clean table without extra markings, a vertical line to help see (and thus help eliminate) any rack tilting would probably be a good idea. I myself sometimes tilt the rack a bit without even trying and can't even tell unless I step far back from the table and analyze it. That's me though, I think the top pros know exactly how the rack is tilted. A small tilt can make a big difference and is pretty much impossible to see from the opponents chair. You need to be looking right down the centerline of the table to see it.

Also any refs and the TD should make it a point to pay attention to the racking during the tournament as time allows and not wait to be called by the players.

Lastly, to the guy that said it was a terrible idea and bad for the sport to be opening a debate on a social forum to discuss tournament rules a week before tournament I must say I completely disagree. This is not just any social forum. More than any other place I know, this is the place where people that care about and know about the sport gather to talk about the sport. Probably no better place to open the debate to get ideas and an informal vote of sorts. A good portion of the U.S. Open fanbase reads and contributes to this forum.

And just in case you do come back to this thread Jay, I'll say again great to have you back and I'll see you at the Open.

Here's hoping that everything runs smooth this year, that it's another great competition, and most of all that everyone (players and staff) gets paid on time.

-- Paul

 

[Island Drive]

Waaaay too much potential for shenanigans. Friends, enemies, partnerships (Dragon Promotions, sponsor teammates, etc) it just presents far too many additional issues.

Neutral racker, for at least the final 16. Hopefully for the whole tourney, that is the answer. No checking the rack. Get up and hit it.

Just thinking of the spectators, the general public and the game itself, which is bigger that us all. They are the ones, the ONLY ones that will get this game where it should be (not pool players). Make it audience/fun and exciting, and in the long run it can only help. Maybe someday the rotation game will garner the same respect as the snooker players, and we all know, that's what the players want/need, . The needs of the public are different than players. The public eyes wants the venue, exciting, engaging, with well groomed players, like the snooker dress code. Like Thorston or Souquet, and please don't toss in the latest Souquet miscue, we all make mistakes. Once the product does not appear to the public like it Totally fun, this game will evolve into a sport.

 

[cleary]

One of the reasons I love the US Open is the format has always stayed true to the way 9 ball has always been played. Winner breaks, Texas Express. I'd like like to see the 1 ball stay on the spot like its always been. Yes the wing ball is wired, it always has been. Break & runs is exciting pool. The Open has been one of the premier events in pool for almost 40 years, why change anything? IMO it's the constant change of rules regarding the break in different events that lends to the carnival atmosphere surrounding this game & the Open should stay as its always been.

I don't know what you're talking about, the open changes things every year. Different racks, different requirements for racking the balls, rack your own vs. loser racks, break from box and sometimes the rail... seems the format changes every year.

 

[lfigueroa]

I got it! I got it!

Have Diamond, or Delta, or Magic Rack build a big pachinko machine that would hold all the balls, including the CB. Whoever's turn it is to break goes up to the machine at the head of the table, hits a lever, and all the balls go spilling down the machine, bouncing off dowels, each other, and finally down a ramp onto the table.

Total random spread. No, no. Don't thank me.

Lou Figueroa
it could work :-o

 

[cleary]

I got it! I got it!

Have Diamond, or Delta, or Magic Rack build a big pachinko machine that would hold all the balls, including the CB. Whoever's turn it is to break goes up to the machine at the head of the table, hits a lever, and all the balls go spilling down the machine, bouncing off dowels, each other, and finally down a ramp onto the table.

Total random spread. No, no. Don't thank me.

Lou Figueroa
it could work :-o

That's called the "break bucket" and Disco invented that years ago. Donny Mills has already found a way to rig the bucket.

 

[sjm]

If that's the case, then American tournaments sanctioned by WPA should charge the European players a higher entry fee. Why should American tournament promoters have to pay WPA money to give *their* precious ranking points to European players on American soil? Americans do not benefit from WPA ranking points and, therefore, should pay a lower entry fee than their counterparts in WPA-sanctioned events.

Yes, point well taken, JAM, and that's our Catch-22. To get a full contingent of foreign players in a US based event, WPA sanctioning is, more often than not, needed.

American pool is a beneficiary of WPA sanctioning because a) it gives our emerging stars a chance to compete with pool's crème-de-la-crème in these days of non-participation by American players in WPA events overseas, and b) it gives far greater international visibility to the US Open, which in turn, makes American players who succeed more marketable in both domestic and foreign markets, and c) WPA ranking points are used for more than a few invitational events, so they have some value to American pros.

There's no simple answer here, JAM, but say the WPA offers nothing to American pool is not accurate. Perhaps, though, we're not getting as much as we pay for.

 

[leto1776]

If that's the case, then American tournaments sanctioned by WPA should charge the European players a higher entry fee. Why should American tournament promoters have to pay WPA money to give *their* precious ranking points to European players on American soil? Americans do not benefit from WPA ranking points and, therefore, should pay a lower entry fee than their European counterparts in WPA-sanctioned events.

Jam, you made some really good points in this thread. Then you go and post this bit of dumbness. Do you vote (D)?

 

[Petros Andrikop]

There are WPA points given in Europe, and no tournament has such an expensive entry fee like the US open, the only one higher I think is the World championship.
For most of the European players it's even harder than the US ones to travel abroad, in US some of them can make more money even without having to travel at all outside their country, they do travel enough though inside it.