View Full Version : Put the male pros on the clock?

Cueless Joey
01-12-2004, 10:58 AM
UPA does not have shot clock.
How would you feel if you sat through the Chamat-Souquet match which went from 9 PM to 12:15 AM on a race to 11 match with Sour Dough rack? Don't say, I'd have left.
Guess what? The next session included Efren against Pagulayan and the winner of the marathon match gets to play Charlie Williams.
The marathon pizzed-off the people waiting, err watching.
It was excruciating to watch the two marathoners circle the table on every shot. They kept pointing their sticks to the rail like they were watering their garden.
One pro veteran was obviously pulling the Make You Wait Until You Get Out Of Stroke tactic all tournament long. He delayed a session after another. The man is great person but watching him play was like watching a Kevin Costner epic-wannabe movie. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

01-12-2004, 11:13 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cueless Joey:</font><hr>
...One pro veteran was obviously pulling the Make You Wait Until You Get Out Of Stroke tactic all tournament long....<hr /></blockquote>


01-12-2004, 11:42 AM
Absolutely. I think a shot clock is an excellent idea. I think it'd be a fun idea to have an incredibly short shot clock, like 8 seconds (not all the time, just for a fun tourney). But I do agree, watching those excruciatingly long matches can wear on the patience. Pool will never get more TV time if it becomes long and boring to watch.

01-12-2004, 12:31 PM
Personally, I disagree with the idea of a shot clock completely. Maybe it is from years of watching slow snooker players in the '80s, maybe from the fact that I am not the quickest player in the world myself (I like to think things through, but if I know what I'm doing, I can run balls). I don't know.

I personally think that the MTV Generation view of pool is bull****. (I'll point out here that I am 30 and consider myself to be part of that same MTV Generation) Make things faster? NO!!! Allow people to STUDY the layout of a table, if it is necessary. How is anyone supposed to work their way through a tough lay-out or a tough safety or tough safety exchange if you have a shot clock and only one extension?

I think that the Matchroom events have it just about right. Allow a player the time to think the shot over, and allow the referee to use their own judgement about whether a player is taking too long or not. So the likes of Charlie Williams or Ralf Souquet or Johnny Archer or whomever may take their times, but they find the right shot and I'm sure they would beat virtually everyone of us on these boards - shot clock or not! Players have been told to hurry up in the past - Reid Pearce (sp?) was told to hurry up in a Mosconi Cup by highly respected snooker referee Alan Chaimberlain a few years ago, so it does happen.

Keeps smiling and TAKE YOUR DAMN TIME! That is how mistakes happen and mistakes cost matches.

Best wishes


P.S. In reply to the post directly above mine (I think - I am adding this after typing the main part) - pool does not need to change. It is the attitudes of those that run TV. Sadly, a much more difficult thing to do. Maybe the work that is being done by Matchroom may help, who knows? I hope it does.

01-12-2004, 12:56 PM
In defense of my previous post, it wasn't my intention to suggest this be the rules all the time. Only for a fun-to-watch fast paced televised tournament. I, like everybody else in this forum, would like to see pool succeed on TV, and to gain more popularity amongst the non-pool world. Maybe what it needs is an event that's a little different.

Let me make an example quick, I play in a band and when we're in unfamiliar territory playing to an unfamiliar crowd we can't just come out and play all of our own music and expect this strange crowd to warm to us automatically. We need to play some covers they have probably heard on the radio (covers=other band's songs) so as to keep them from fleeing to another bar. Just like if a viewer flips to ESPN2 and there's a televised pool event on, given he's a non-pool player, would he keep it on that channel if for the first 3 minutes all he was doing was watching some guy he didn't know walk around a table examining a shot? Probably not. Perhaps they could use a shot clock for a few televised events in order to ween the public into watching more pool before slowly going back into the no shot clock format.

I don't want to change pool from what it is now, I would just like to see it succeed on TV.

#### leonard
01-12-2004, 01:18 PM
I watched Charlie Williams chalk his cue 27 times and never hit a ball. Grass grows faster than nineball players shoot.

I went to one nineball tourney at Turning Stone Casino, there is no reason to ever go to another nineball tourney again. I am sorry to say I ever played pool.####

01-12-2004, 02:13 PM
I was at that rournament and left in disgust after watching CW play Ginky. That was early afternoon. I pity anyone who stayed to watch him go through the losers' bracket to win the event.

He would make a big show of applying powder and wiping his cue before each inning. Then it was a grand approach to the shot only to get back up. He would do that 6 to 10 times each shot. Just a little jack-in-the-box. Now he does it 4 to 6 times every other shot. Great improvement.

The most disgusting fact is that he can play as fast as anyone when he feels like it. He just loves to be the center of attention.

01-12-2004, 03:16 PM
You sir, are absolutely correct which is why I will never watch a match involving Charlie Williams if I'm a captive audience. If it's on T.V. I can do something else. At a tournament, if it's the finals, I'm leaving.


01-12-2004, 03:44 PM
I played in a tournament where all the matches were scheduled to begin at specific times. If your match went over the scheduled time and your match wasn't in the last game of the match the TD moved your match to a practice table in the lobby; no exceptions. When the event was down to the last eight matches a shot clock was invoked. Everything went just fine.......I can't handle slow players. I don't care if they are world champions.

01-12-2004, 04:01 PM
There should not be a need for a shot clock. Players should be capable of playing with a certain amount of professionalism. I would never profess to tell someone how to play, but to stand and stare at a shot for two or three minutes because they can't seem to get down and pull the trigger or look at an easy open table like it is an un-solvable puzzle, has nothing to do with the persons style of play. If they can't get down and shoot in what any player would consider reasonable period of time, maybe they should not be there playing.

01-12-2004, 04:23 PM
Here's a possible solution that I believe was used last year at the Western Canadian Open last year in Calgary. The players were given a set amount of time to play each match, not a shot clock but a "match clock". The players had a very reasonable amount of time to complete their match but not so much that it slowed the play down to an unreasonable amount of time in between shots.

If the match went past it's set amount of time both players were then set on a regular shot clock to speed the match up in time for the next scheduled match to be played. The idea worked well for everyone, maybe just do this for Souqet matches /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

01-12-2004, 04:49 PM
If the match went past it's set amount of time both players were then set on a regular shot clock to speed the match up in time for the next scheduled match to be played. The idea worked well for everyone, maybe just do this for Souqet matches /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote>

best i can tell, that's the way they're supposed to be doing it already. there's not enough refs to put a clock on everybody all the time but they can manage the matches so that if one is going long they can send in the clock.

too simple??


01-12-2004, 05:06 PM
Sniper that sounds like a good way to do it. I dont see much trouble with using a shot clock anyway. The womens tour does it and it doesnt seem to bother them.

01-12-2004, 05:16 PM
I watched Souquet/Ernesto and the match went pretty fast - it was all Souquet. His mannerisms, walking the table, etc. seemed to take a lot of time but I think he would have been OK on a shot clock. It's just that Souquet takes a lot of time looking at each single shot, no matter how straight forward, but he sets up and shoots pretty fast once he's made up his mind. His match was the first one to finish. He was fascinating to watch. Although I wouldn't want to play against such an opponent, I think I learned a lot by watching him. His concentration is enormous and it's obvious he's a perfectionist. I don't think it's a ploy - he's been that way since I can remember.

I also watched the Archer/Chamat match and it took a reasonable amount of time. I didn't think Marcus was especially slow.

Maybe Chamat and Souquet had a spat going between them - who knows?


Voodoo Daddy
01-12-2004, 05:29 PM
TAP, TAP, TAP!!! The only time I ever take more than 20-30 seconds to shoot is when I play one pocket. I'm sure this reads a lil hypocritical but those who play that game more than once a week understands completly!! ####, I sure wished we lived closer....

Voodoo~~~my move to the New England area just to be in ####'s jurous diction!!!

Rich R.
01-13-2004, 05:31 AM
You ain't seen nothin', until you see CW play Archer.

What bothers me most, is that I have seen them both play in matches with shot clocks and they can both play quickly. CW actually plays quite fast, when he wants to. But when they don't have to play fast, it is painful to watch.

#### leonard
01-13-2004, 09:08 AM
Ken, we have posted about the same tournament before if a poolplayer wouldn't go to see another nineball tourney, how can one expect lesser mortals to support the sport.####

#### leonard
01-13-2004, 09:21 AM
Voodoo Daddy, In 1964 the Albany Golden Cue had a 13 week TV show, it was 50 points of straight pool. The first two shows the Cue picked the players, then they had an elimination tourney to get the challenger. The first two shows took nearly 2 hours to film.

I won the first tourney and met the winner on the third week, who was a very slow deliberate player. I ran 40 and out on him and I can never forget the Director words, that took 12 minutes, now what the hell are we going to do. The next weeks show took 10 minutes. I was getting to do my own trick shot show.####

01-13-2004, 10:12 AM

I was at Chelmsford when CW played Archer. I couldn't bear to watch. I was standing behind the spectators when the TD, Joe Tucker, came by. He asked me if they were "playing in slow motion". I just replied that it was CW. Archer was also in his very slow mode where he placed the tip of the cue at each object ball like a beginning player.

I think Archer won that match since he went on to play Strickland and win the tournament IIRC. It was painful to watch, too. The action in the other room with McCready and Stalev was much better.

I watched Corr beat Rempe twice to win the Joss at Ultimate. That was very slow but at least they started fairly early. It was still an interesting match, though. It wasn't as frustrating as watching CW get up every time you think he's going to shoot.

01-13-2004, 10:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ken:</font><hr> Rich,

The action in the other room with McCready and Stalev was much better.


They went at it again a few weeks later in Rochester. KM is very exicting and funny to boot. IMO he's good for the game.


01-13-2004, 11:18 AM

01-13-2004, 11:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote whitewolf:</font><hr>
...If he doesn't feel exactly right, he stands back up and takes a different look at the ball each time. His final look, for example, zeros in on a spot on the object ball. His first look is the overall look. etc....<hr /></blockquote>

geez, I'm surprised he shoots as well as he does.

01-13-2004, 01:16 PM
think that if a shot clock was instituted, it should be like chess. A player should have a certain number of minutes to play X amount of games. They should display the time remaining for each player. This way a player could take more time on shots when needed. Might be fun at the end when time is running out
<hr /></blockquote>

This is exactly what I was thinking. Shotclock just like in Chess. I hate the 30 sec shotclock the ladies are using. Sometimes a shot requires more than 30 sec to be executed and well played. But, they have one extension per rack, but in a defensive game you might need more than 30 sec twice in the rack and that forces them to play a quick and badly executed shot.

With a specific time to play a match spread between 2 players, the slow players would have to pick up his game if he starts running out of time. And the other wouldn't be penalize by his slow play.

All in favor say ye ! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Cueless Joey
01-13-2004, 01:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote whitewolf:</font><hr>
...If he doesn't feel exactly right, he stands back up and takes a different look at the ball each time. His final look, for example, zeros in on a spot on the object ball. His first look is the overall look. etc....<hr /></blockquote>

geez, I'm surprised he shoots as well as he does. <hr /></blockquote>
Kinda funny, Charlie ran over Efren this Sunday.
He was shooting fast and loose. One time he had to pause as he had a head rush from shooting fast.
Neil Fujiwara and Charlie look the same when Charlie shoots fast. I believe Charlie gets rid of the jitters shooting fast too.
Johnny Archer has picked up his pace and is playing great again.
Efren and Alex took a little under an hour and a half to finish their match (11-5 Efren).

01-13-2004, 01:30 PM

Was that at the tournement in LA ? Are the results online somewhere ? I wonder how Danny Hewitt did....

01-13-2004, 01:39 PM

Hey, I'm in......how much do those chess clocks cost anyway???

01-13-2004, 01:53 PM
You can get one for forthy bux...

Check this like out

Chess Clocks... (http://www.chessexpressstore.com/chessclocks.html)

And I didn't shop around that was first hit on google...

Cueless Joey
01-13-2004, 02:06 PM
Check the brackets on AZBilliards.
Danny made it to the money rounds.
He got beat by Ernesto early and he fought his way to the money round.
Danny had some realy bad rolls against Ernesto and Ernesto was playing really well.

01-13-2004, 02:18 PM
Thanks for the info...

I'll look it up !

01-13-2004, 03:05 PM
As a Fan and long time Pro tournament attendee (and sometime player) I can appreciate the viewpoint about matches extending over the allotted time.

As a tournament director, this is the nightmare for scheduling. The one or two matches that exceed the allotted time can impact the entire remaining tournament schedule. Or, at the least ONE side of the brackets.

What to do? I disagree about the shot clock, but a MATCH clock (IMO) is not out of the question. If the match is scheduled for two hours ( or an appropriate time for the the race) and after 90 minutes, the tournament director should put the players on a match clock (30 minutes). When this match clock has expired, who ever is in the lead wins.

If the games are tied, the person that won the most of the last 5 games, wins. For instance is the race is to 11 and the last 5 games (prior to the match clock expiring), player A won 3 of them, that player would advance.

A referee should be assigned to the table to judge if the player in the lead is stalling to win. Automatic warning, then loss of game, then loss of match.

No breaks will be allowed in the last 30 minutes.

01-25-2004, 09:55 PM
"BTW, hell would have to freeze over before I would do all of this stuff. But you know what, if it works for Charlie then more power to him."

If the man plays that pitifully(and obviously by what I've read here) slow, then dammit, install a shot clock...sid