Which one? Neutral racker, breaker racks, or loser racks?

Which one?

  • Neutral racker

    Votes: 79 66.4%

  • Breaker (winner) racks

    Votes: 31 26.1%

  • Loser (opponent) racks

    Votes: 9 7.6%
  • Total voters
    119
  • Poll closed .
JAM

JAM

I am the storm
Silver Member
The amount of time taken during a match for racking the balls continues to be a problem. No matter what racking device is used, it seems as though there is still a long amount of time spent examining racks before the break.

This is a blind poll, so lurkers can remain anonymous. ;)

Please cast your vote.
 
Last edited:
Been saying it for years....the game will not grow up until we have a third party racking.
 
None of the above. Get rid of 9 ball. They all have the template racks figured out. Rack your own, the opponent will say the rack was rigged. Opponent racks, the rack was rigged. Neutral racker they'll be b**ching they got a bad rack. I quit watching the TS finals with all the time taken for re-racking. Switch to 10 ball.
 
I remember having this discussion with Buddy Hall years ago, the problems of rack-rigging. His solution is to have alternate breaks. The logic is that if someone is rack-rigging, this presents a speed bump to running racks due to rack-rigging. It's not a solution to the problem, but it is a speed bump that will slow down the rack-rigger.
 
I like the template....and a small break box...
...one diamond wide, center of end rail...and one diamond from the rail.
...like moving the pitcher's mound back....
...breakers have gotten too good and crafty
 
pt109 said:
I like the template....and a small break box...
...one diamond wide, center of end rail...and one diamond from the rail.
...like moving the pitcher's mound back....
...breakers have gotten too good and crafty
Click to expand...

Breaking balls well is definitely a strength when shooting pool competitively, but it shouldn't be about breaking balls based on cracks in the rack, especially when cracks in the rack are placed there by the competitors themselves.

At the players meeting of the Skins Billiard Championship, all competitors were told that there would be a neutral racker, and nobody was allowed to question the rack or ask for a re-rack -- no ifs, ands, or buts. The competitors were allowed to look at the rack, but they couldn't question it or ask for a re-rack. This is the way it should be for all professional competitions, in my opinion. This event, of course, was on TV on ESPN. How would it look to have a never-ending examination of the rack on TV like happens at most pro events today?

If a pro player is benefiting with wins due to rack rigging, there is something wrong with this. It needs to be addressed.

At the pro event at the Super Billiards Expo in Valley Forge one year, I was standing outside in the "smoking lounge." One of the players came outside for a smoke break in the middle of his match. He said: I know So-and-So is rigging the rack on me, and when it's my turn to rack for him, I'm doing the same thing to him. :o

Racking-rigging is rampant, more so today than 10 years ago. It's like a nighmare, and it's getting worse and worse, isn't it?
 
I think playing 10 ball solves a little bit of the problem, but really neutral racker with no ability to ask for a re-rack is probably the best for all formats. The catch I've always heard was the cost of getting people to rack the balls, and I've always thought there would be people who would volunteer for this duty like rangers volunteer at golf tournaments. I know I would.
 
StraightPoolIU said:
I think playing 10 ball solves a little bit of the problem, but really neutral racker with no ability to ask for a re-rack is probably the best for all formats. The catch I've always heard was the cost of getting people to rack the balls, and I've always thought there would be people who would volunteer for this duty like rangers volunteer at golf tournaments. I know I would.
Click to expand...

I kind of think, though not sure, that a referee -- one who looks at hits, et cetera -- would be ideal to be a neutral racker. Most pro events have a referee or two.

We had a bad experience, though, with a referee at the Super Billiards Expo one year calling a hit on Keith and Shanoon at the Pro/Am event. It was a neck-and-neck battle to the finish. Both Keith and Shannon played well. There was a questionable hit, and the referee was called to the table. He said "good hit," and everybody on the rail knew it was a bad hit. But, of course, the referee is always right, so you can't question the ruling.

In this regard, the referee, love them or hate them, should be racking the balls in pro events, I think. I think there used to be a BCA referee accreditation program or something like that. Maybe racking is something they could include in the training. :)
 
strokeofluck said:
none of the above. Get rid of 9 ball. They all have the template racks figured out. Rack your own, the opponent will say the rack was rigged. Opponent racks, the rack was rigged. Neutral racker they'll be b**ching they got a bad rack. I quit watching the ts finals with all the time taken for re-racking. Switch to 10 ball.
Click to expand...

^^^^^ this!!!! ^^^^^
 
Triangle rack, rack your own, 30 second rack clock, no touching of balls after rack is lifted. Three tries max. You either accept the third rack or forfeit the break.
 
I like what I believe was Mike Howertons' statement: If you don't like the rack, have your opponent break them and see how you like it then!
 
Sloppy Pockets said:
Triangle rack, rack your own, 30 second rack clock, no touching of balls after rack is lifted. Three tries max. You either accept the third rack or forfeit the break.
Click to expand...

I actually really like this idea! This solves a lot of the issues I think.

Still lets people pattern rack unfortunatel and I think there should be some mechanism in place for the opponent to challenge a rack which would lead to a ref review or something (so the racker can't start moving the rack up/down a little or tilting it slightly to gain advantage). But overall, I like it and I definitely prefer rack your own as I think it just gets rid of a point of contention/confrontation between opponents that is unnecessary.

Or just get rid of 9 ball, I definitely think 10 ball should take the place of 9 ball for all major competitions, just a better game.
 
Obviously neutral racker is best, but not always feasible, especially in early rounds of large tourneys. I don't understand non-breaker racks. That just invites problems and disputes. I think way too much is made of "rack-rigging," usually by the people who are poor breakers. Frozen rack (not "rigged") + break from the side = wing ball.

I know people don't like it, but I like the 'three balls past the headstring' rule. It requires a strong break, and reduces predictability. It's not a foul to fail, it's just your opponent's turn. Alternate break. Breaker racks, template rack.
 
Sloppy Pockets said:
I'm sure the man in the hat in this video would agree with me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHQw9T5uvyk
Click to expand...

I'm sure he would. :grin-square: He's never been one to examine racks, which drives me nuts when I'm sweating a tournament match. Everybody else examines the racks, and he doesn't seem to give it much thought.

Pool shouldn't be about examining racks. It should be about game strategy (defense and offense) and executing shots.
 
I see neutral racker is leading by a wide margin. Wouldn't that require the director to hire additional people which would reduce payouts to the players?

One option not listed would be the magic rack which is a form of neutral racker.

I voted for rack your own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top