Slasher said:
Not at 'speed'.
World Championsips Need Too Change
- Thread starter Island Drive
- Start date
Not at 'speed'.
D
Danny Harriman
Guest
Youth and Keen eye sight are not what really helps players make balls, so your saying that the more younger the player the better of a shot maker they will be? I agree the answer to making the game more interesting is not in tightening up the pockets, but note that what makes a great shotmaker is knowledge of center ball and stroke, before Eddie Taylor passed on I saw him cut balls in from everywhere and he had no vision in one eye and legally blind in the other. When watching championship pool two balls must not be allowed to pass and I prefer the Diamonds cause the slate extends back in the pocket to where it should keeping the players honest when trying to pocket a ball down the rail. I think that bank pool might be the answer, how we promote it is important also in relation to educating the public on the rules, It might help to start with some sort of theme and there does need to be some build up. You could have two great players playing eight ball but every shot must be a bank or at least a two rail kick, again there would have to be a script that lets the players be themselves and a contrast in personalities such as Fats and Masconi, the commentary would have to change also. I do not claim to have the answers but I know watching a pro 9-ball tournament is not too exciting to your every sports fan.
Sincerely, Danny Harriman
Sincerely, Danny Harriman
Tournament Snooker Table Pockets
Hi there,
The pocket sizes are indeed the same for each tournament in professional snooker events, but other conditions can seem to have an effect on them making them play tighter or easier.
World Snooker, the sport's professional governing body, has a template that it uses, although it is very difficult to get a copy of this template.
It's not so much the width of a snooker table pocket that deems how difficult it is, but the cut of the rubber leading into the pocket and to a lesser extent the drop of the slate.
On club snooker tables a part of this rubber will be shaved off making the pockets slightly easier, plus the drop of the slate may be beveled enabling the ball to drop easier into the pocket.
Regards.
Alan Morris.
Island Drive said:
Hi there,
The pocket sizes are indeed the same for each tournament in professional snooker events, but other conditions can seem to have an effect on them making them play tighter or easier.
World Snooker, the sport's professional governing body, has a template that it uses, although it is very difficult to get a copy of this template.
It's not so much the width of a snooker table pocket that deems how difficult it is, but the cut of the rubber leading into the pocket and to a lesser extent the drop of the slate.
On club snooker tables a part of this rubber will be shaved off making the pockets slightly easier, plus the drop of the slate may be beveled enabling the ball to drop easier into the pocket.
Regards.
Alan Morris.
Alan Morris said:
Alan thanks for you help. I thought that would be the case. With 9-ball it would be nice to see the same pocket size, shelf depth and facing angle "every" year and have the WPA mandate these specs. Manufacturers set specs but have some leeway, in pro play it should be exactly the same every year like snooker, not too loose and not too tight.
Snooker Cut
I play both games (grew up on Snooker) and I can tell you that slate cut is 75% of it. I've played on some real intimidating narrow snooker tables that in reality were not that tough (except down the rail...you can't fight the physics). Once you got them slightly inside the jaws at reasonable speed they would fall in real nice.
The problem with tight day to day play is:
The Equipment is not perfect
The cloth is not brand new (slide)
The balls are a bit roughed up
Tight pockets on fresh equipment (ok I'll say/write it (Mr. Wilson beat me softly)) is like sex without a condom! Tight equipment that has to many miles on it is just stupid. Good balls get rejected and simple layouts become unnecessarily daunting.
US Open equipment looks perfect. WPC look good as well.
Nick
I play both games (grew up on Snooker) and I can tell you that slate cut is 75% of it. I've played on some real intimidating narrow snooker tables that in reality were not that tough (except down the rail...you can't fight the physics). Once you got them slightly inside the jaws at reasonable speed they would fall in real nice.
The problem with tight day to day play is:
The Equipment is not perfect
The cloth is not brand new (slide)
The balls are a bit roughed up
Tight pockets on fresh equipment (ok I'll say/write it (Mr. Wilson beat me softly)) is like sex without a condom! Tight equipment that has to many miles on it is just stupid. Good balls get rejected and simple layouts become unnecessarily daunting.
US Open equipment looks perfect. WPC look good as well.
Nick
sniper said:
Discounting luck on break:
The biggest downside of winner's break is that the other player could still be "penalized" even when he is not making any mistake; it just so happened that his opponent is having a good run.
With alternate break, you can only be penalized when you make a mistake or the other player played a very good safety.
The biggest downside of winner's break is that the other player could still be "penalized" even when he is not making any mistake; it just so happened that his opponent is having a good run.
With alternate break, you can only be penalized when you make a mistake or the other player played a very good safety.
Last edited:
crosseyedjoe said:
Exactly! At least with alternate breaks, we get to see both players play their game. With winner's break, it's possible to lose the tournament without even getting to hit a ball after the lag!
There are pros and cons to both -- it's up to the promoters on what style of play they want. Good players will always play, whatever the rules, or the state of the equipment, for that matter.
Another thing that probably makes the filipinos such good players is that they play even in the worst possible conditions, on the worst equipment. Do you think they nit-pick on the cloth, the rail, the pocket size, shelf depth, facing angle, etc.? They're just happy to play! And hey, new tables -- better!
Renegade said:
Why not make the whole event race to 17 winner breaks single elimination and seed the players.
Solution to AB & WB…
Combine both of them….race to at least 13
1.First, the play must start with AB, and then WB will come only when one of the players leads by 2 racks, it means he must steal his opponent’s break. When WB starts, it will end as WB.
Advantages:
1.If both players are good, have an A-game and both holding their breaks, it will be a see-saw battle…exciting!
2.You will always to defend your break and always want to steal your opponent’s break…exciting to watch to see whom the first one to give his break.
3.In WB alone, there is a possibility that you will lose the match without any mistake, cruel. At this format, you will not say that, since your opponent will only run-away once you made a mistake in your break and give to him.
4.There is always a chance to catch-up since it will be a WB once your opponent starts to run away, given he will not finish the race.
Combine both of them….race to at least 13
1.First, the play must start with AB, and then WB will come only when one of the players leads by 2 racks, it means he must steal his opponent’s break. When WB starts, it will end as WB.
Advantages:
1.If both players are good, have an A-game and both holding their breaks, it will be a see-saw battle…exciting!
2.You will always to defend your break and always want to steal your opponent’s break…exciting to watch to see whom the first one to give his break.
3.In WB alone, there is a possibility that you will lose the match without any mistake, cruel. At this format, you will not say that, since your opponent will only run-away once you made a mistake in your break and give to him.
4.There is always a chance to catch-up since it will be a WB once your opponent starts to run away, given he will not finish the race.
Luv2RunOut1
Banned
I think the problem is island that your assumption of a fast paced action intense game is just that, your assessment of it. So when you have to slow the game down and be more precise your also having to be better. So the fact that you see it as a fast paced game in no way constitues it actually being so. The pace of the game is not inherent in it. The pace of the game changes based on certain conditions, when the conditions become more difficult it slows down. As it should. Because its harder. So instead of complaining that the best players in the world are slowing down, maybe instead consider as to why it is thats happening. Common sense tells you its because tougher conditions means slower play, but it also means that the better player wins, which is all that really matters.
cheemagun said:hello did anybody read this ??
Yes it is a good idea until the part where we switch to 10 ball. It's kinda of silly to switch to 10 ball in a 9 ball tournament.
if you want to watch an exciting fast pace game then watch the derby city classic ten ball ring game. that is a fast pace match with a lot of shotmaking. i like the small pockets and race to eleven is good. the only rule i would change is that no soft breaks allowed. winner always break.
Last edited:
The Matchroom changes to breaking and tight-pocket makes me excited. Their modifications sound good specially the break box in the middle of the headstring.
No matter what, the World 9 ball pool championships is still my favorite tournament to follow. Every year, it seems to get harder and harder to guess who's going to win. I like to make a list after they're done to the final 64 and make a list of 10 players who I think will finally win it. I do that again at the round of 32 and round of 16 and round of 8. This year, I picked wrong more than the other 4-5 years I've been doing it.
Next years tournament can't come quick enough for me.
Next years tournament can't come quick enough for me.