| Author |
Mark Gray |
|
Shooter
Home away from home
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 517
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 08:29
First of all, well done mark and D4ryl.
All these opinions!
Mine is that 9ball should be nomination the same as 8ball.
This would eliminate all flukes and who is brave enough to call the 9 on the break.
I'M WATCHING!!!!!!!!!!
"BIG JON"
|
|
Riggers
Home away from home
Joined: 30-Mar-2006
Posts: 4454
From: Barnsley (centre of the universe)
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 08:43
I think Blue_Suede summed it up really well. We certainly don't want to get into a situation where, like English 8 ball, there are several sets of rules all over the place so the only real way forward is either: a) have the world standardised rules changed (and I like the idea of respotting the 9 too) or b) Continue as we are leaving the players to come to a mutual agreement at the start of the game or just let good sportsmanship come through during the match. Whilst the sportsmanship shown by both players is admirable we shouldn't be in a position where we congratulate players for showing good sportsmanship. That suggests it is the exception rather than the norm and it should never be like that. It should be second nature to all of us to act like that. I had a few incidents in English Pool in big games where I've called a foul that no one could possibly see. One was in a semi final when I could 'feel' myself hit the cue ball twice though you couldn't know this unless you actually played the shot. I owned up and my oponent dished to win the match. All the praise I received afterwards actually annoyed me! Why should you be praised for that? How could I not call a foul? What annoyed me was that people were suggesting the reason I lost the match was because I was honest. Wrong! I lost because I fouled - pure and simple. There are plenty of players out there who call fouls on themselves or show great sportsmanship in other ways but the key to this for me is inside the players mind. Would they really do it at a critical point in a massive match? That's where different players have different mind sets. It's interesting that BigDave said in his report he'd seen this happen before but never in a final. I can unmderstand that, and I can also understand why it did happen in this final. Congratulations Daryl on another great victory and well done to Mark for playing a great final. [ This message was edited by: Riggers on 2006-06-27 08:45 ]
|
|
malaguista
Home away from home
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 1176
From: Spain
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 09:48
This is a discussion that could go on and on and on....
What happened in the match between Mark and Daryl was wrong according to the rules by which we all play. Mark should not have offered a re- rack, he had done nothing wrong and in any case, the rules do not allow for a re-rack in these circumstances.
In a refereed match, this situation could not have happened.
We are playing a game which has international rules that are applied all over the world and it is wrong that we should think of changing the rules for individual tournaments.
There are rules in all sports with which we may not agree but they should only be changed by governing bodies.
No-one has answered my previous question yet: If you were playing 8 Ball in an IPT match and the 8 went in off of the break, would you offer a re-rack because you did not expect the 8 to be potted?
The circumstances are exactly the same.
|
|
thecardman
Home away from home
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Posts: 359
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 09:53
On 2006-06-26 16:54 , TheSurgeon Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! Cardman, same happens in 10-ball mate, the principle of making the centre ball remains the same. I agree, Simon, but you have to admit that it does happen A LOT LESS in 10 Ball than in 9 Ball. I've only ever seen 3 10 Ball matches (2 of those were the 2004 Ring Games from Derby City) and I think (I think!) there was only 1 10-Ball on the break out of all those racks! Best wishes thecardman  P.S. PLAY MORE STRAIGHT POOL!!! www.scottish9ball.com
The Cardman's Blog
|
|
read_this
Just can't stay away
Joined: 16-May-2006
Posts: 109
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 10:15
On 2006-06-27 09:48 , malaguista Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! This is a discussion that could go on and on and on....
What happened in the match between Mark and Daryl was wrong according to the rules by which we all play. Mark should not have offered a re- rack, he had done nothing wrong and in any case, the rules do not allow for a re-rack in these circumstances.
In a refereed match, this situation could not have happened.
We are playing a game which has international rules that are applied all over the world and it is wrong that we should think of changing the rules for individual tournaments.
There are rules in all sports with which we may not agree but they should only be changed by governing bodies.
No-one has answered my previous question yet: If you were playing 8 Ball in an IPT match and the 8 went in off of the break, would you offer a re-rack because you did not expect the 8 to be potted?
The circumstances are exactly the same. Good golly miss molly - how on earth can you compare an 8 off the break in 8 ball where even the most skilled or the worst racker in the world would have trouble in consistently increasing the chances of making the 8 without it getting kicked, with 9 ball where the majority of us posting here can set up a rack where the 9 will track towards (I'm not saying go in) a corner pocket? The problem here is the rack your own rules as that automatically brings your opponent into the firing line whenever this happens. The constant checking of racks also tends to cause aggro as players perceive it to be a questioning of their integrity. I like the idea of the 'no farming rule' and call pocket but in the absence of a fundamental shift in the rules related to this, which isn't going to happen as part of the appeal of 9 ball for lesser skilled players is 9s off the break and combos (so no governing body is going to sanction this and endanger the popularity of the game), what is wrong with a mutual agreement that takes this problem out of matches? If there is no such thing as a perfect rack have they glued the nine to the table on breaks with tapped balls in decent conditions (cf world champs, WPM etc.)? Blimey oh riley. B.
|
|
read_this
Just can't stay away
Joined: 16-May-2006
Posts: 109
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 10:17
Has el presidente got a view on this being the rules guru for the UK?
|
|
Riggers
Home away from home
Joined: 30-Mar-2006
Posts: 4454
From: Barnsley (centre of the universe)
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 11:20
On 2006-06-27 09:53 , thecardman Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! On 2006-06-26 16:54 , TheSurgeon Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! Cardman, same happens in 10-ball mate, the principle of making the centre ball remains the same.
I agree, Simon, but you have to admit that it does happen A LOT LESS in 10 Ball than in 9 Ball.
I've only ever seen 3 10 Ball matches (2 of those were the 2004 Ring Games from Derby City) and I think (I think!) there was only 1 10-Ball on the break out of all those racks!
Best wishes
thecardman
P.S. PLAY MORE STRAIGHT POOL!!!
www.scottish9ball.com
The Cardman's Blog I got 2 10 balls off the break and 2 more hanging over the pocket playing in a ring game with thediamond and thesurgeon last week. [ This message was edited by: Riggers on 2006-06-27 14:21 ]
|
|
PC
Official Pro9 Tipster!
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 780
From: Leeds
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 11:44
I was not at the event but if i read the report right was Chris racking the balls? If so then i would say that Mark should have accepted the 9 on the break as he had had no chance to rig the rack and no one could acuse him of foul play. The rules state 9 on the snap wins and so surely in a pro tournament the pro rules should be applied? I know people say its impossible for it to go straight in but surely due to balls all being different sizes within a set and different degrees of roundness then 9 balls on the break must be possible as you will never have a set of balls racked exactly the same, there was a topic on az billiards and the difference in size and roundness of ball was quite surprising even in the aramith tv pro cup sets!!!! ----------------- 
|
|
malaguista
Home away from home
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 1176
From: Spain
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 12:06
!!! QUOTE !!! where the majority of us posting here can set up a rack where the 9 will track towards (I'm not saying go in) a corner pocket?
This implies that rackers are cheating, I hope that this is not the case but if we were to use a Sardo type rack or even tap the balls as they do in the Eurotours, this would eliminate any possible problems and anyone potting the 9 off the break would claim the game as he rightly should.
|
|
read_this
Just can't stay away
Joined: 16-May-2006
Posts: 109
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 12:39
On 2006-06-27 12:06 , malaguista Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! !!! QUOTE !!! where the majority of us posting here can set up a rack where the 9 will track towards (I'm not saying go in) a corner pocket?
This implies that rackers are cheating, I hope that this is not the case but if we were to use a Sardo type rack or even tap the balls as they do in the Eurotours, this would eliminate any possible problems and anyone potting the 9 off the break would claim the game as he rightly should.
No - this implies that most of us know what has happened in the rack when a 9 goes towards a corner pocket, not that we actually seek to do this. I think most golden breaks are 'achieved' by less knowledgeable and skilled rackers than by those in the know.
|
|
crashnburn
Home away from home
Joined: 23-May-2006
Posts: 518
From: Somewhere between Rugby and Northampton
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 13:01
Thats quite true i just stick the cue ball down in roughly the same spot and attempt to smash the balls wide open not always caring for position of the cue ball.
Went to Brislington for World Champs qualifiers at stars and stripes and was losing 5-2 to guy from slovenia and pulled off 3 golden breaks out of 4 racks to lead 6-5 to eventually lose 7-6 but i just thought it was just luck at the time. But a nice feeling to have done it almost one after another.
|
|
crashnburn
Home away from home
Joined: 23-May-2006
Posts: 518
From: Somewhere between Rugby and Northampton
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 13:03
Forgot to add Mark Gray what a guy!!! Superb and great sportmanship to offer to have the balls re-racked. Nice one Mark!!!!
|
|
thediamond
Home away from home
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Posts: 1520
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 15:41
I got 2 10 balls off the break and 2 more hanging over the pocket playing in a ring game with thediamond and thesurgeon last week.
Yeah, couldn't wait.
|
|
TheSurgeon
Home away from home
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Posts: 529
From: Leeds
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 16:38
he, he! :o)-
|
|
TheSurgeon
Home away from home
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Posts: 529
From: Leeds
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 16:42
On 2006-06-27 09:48 , malaguista Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!!
No-one has answered my previous question yet: If you were playing 8 Ball in an IPT match and the 8 went in off of the break, would you offer a re-rack because you did not expect the 8 to be potted?
The circumstances are exactly the same.
A 15 ball break has different physics to 9 or 10 ball pete, so the 8 can't go straight into the bottom bags, not to my knowledge anyway... Anyone else have any thoughts???
|
|
malaguista
Home away from home
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 1176
From: Spain
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 17:47
You are missing the point or I am.
The 9 goes in off of the break you win,
The 8 goes in off of the break in IPT you win.
The black goes in a pocket other than the one you intended in snooker, you get 7 points.
It doesn't matter if the ball in question goes in by touching another ball or not.
These are the rules.
|
|
read_this
Just can't stay away
Joined: 16-May-2006
Posts: 109
|
Posted: 2006-06-27 22:27
On 2006-06-27 17:47 , malaguista Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!! You are missing the point or I am.
The 9 goes in off of the break you win,
The 8 goes in off of the break in IPT you win.
The black goes in a pocket other than the one you intended in snooker, you get 7 points.
It doesn't matter if the ball in question goes in by touching another ball or not.
These are the rules. The latter - you are missing the point. This is becoming a circular argument. As The Surgeon has pointed out, as I tried to earlier in this thread, the 8 and 9 ball racks are worlds apart in terms of the viability of potting the money ball straight from the break, (and here comes the crucial bit) as a result of the racking. And again as I stated earlier in the thread there is a rule about racking the balls as tightly as possible. If you don't understand the 9 ball rack (and I apologise if you don't) then like crashnburn did you might consider this to be lucky. Those who do, will not, and hence this discussion in the first place about Mark Gray's sporting gesture, and other players decisions to re-rack straight in golden breaks. I'd love to have seen the look on that Slovenian's face Crashnburn. I know what mine would have been like! Regards, B
|
|
Blue_Suede
Just can't stay away
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 121
|
Posted: 2006-06-28 05:13
Peter (malaguista) certainly knows the ins & outs of a 9-ball rack. No question. And an 8-ball rack.
But that's not really the point, is it?
We all do. The issue that (I think) we're discussing is what to do when a 9-ball 'flies in' on a break shot. No?
Can I quote the WPA 9-Ball (World Standardized) rules?
5.2 RACKING THE BALLS
The object balls are racked in a diamond shape, with the 1-ball at the top of the diamond and on the foot spot, the 9-ball in the center of the diamond, and the other balls in random order, racked as tightly as possible. The game begins with cue ball in hand behind the head string.
and...
5.15 END OF GAME
On the opening break, the game is considered to have commenced once the cue ball has been struck by the cue tip. The 1-ball must be legally contacted on the break shot. The game ends at the end of a legal shot which pockets the 9-ball, or when a player forfeits the game as the result of a foul.
Seems pretty clear to me. What rules do you play?
I'm not trying to be difficult about this, but I think that all organizations need to make a decision which is clear to the players. TD's take note.
I would advocate that the players cannot make a deal before matches about Golden Breaks. The TD should make this clear at the start. They never do unfortunately. Maybe this will change. TD's should announce at the start of an event, the tournament rules in the event of a so-called 'clean 9-ball' from the break.
Then there would be no issue. Rules are rules after all.
I would also suggest that players should rack for each other. This would also eliminate any altercation over a 'sloppy' rack. Would you give you opponent this advantage? Didn't think so...
BS
|
|
malaguista
Home away from home
Joined: 14-Mar-2006
Posts: 1176
From: Spain
|
Posted: 2006-06-28 06:49
Yes I do know a little about racking and I also have a copy of the famous DVD "Racking Secrets with Joe Tucker" My point all along has been about rules as Blue Suede points out, One of my many roles in the Spanish Federation is as Principal Trainer of Referees therefore I know a little about rules as well. I do not agree with changing rules willy nilly and on a whim, this is for others to do like the WPA etc. In most competitions that I have witnessed around the world, either the referee or the opponent racks the balls, and while the shooter has the right to inspect the rack, he doesn't automatically have the right to have it changed or re-racked if he doesn't like it. [ This message was edited by: malaguista on 2006-06-28 06:53 ]
|
|
read_this
Just can't stay away
Joined: 16-May-2006
Posts: 109
|
Posted: 2006-06-28 13:17
On 2006-06-28 05:13 , Blue_Suede Wrote:!!! QUOTE !!!
I would also suggest that players should rack for each other. This would also eliminate any altercation over a 'sloppy' rack. Would you give you opponent this advantage? Didn't think so...
BS
Racking for your opponenet will eliminate any altercations about a 'sloppy' rack - maybe on mars but not on this planet.
|
