PDA

View Full Version : Post a picture of how you rack 9 ball



BigRigTom
01-15-2008, 11:57 AM
Here is how I rack 9 ball. If I break I have a good chance to run out. If my opponent breaks and doesn't run out I have a good chance of running out from where he misses.
http://hardingersystems.com/BAT-forum/images/9-Ball-Rack-400x300.jpg

Jude_Rosenstock
01-15-2008, 12:12 PM
I am flabbergasted. You put the 9-ball in the middle? Who does that?

Bob_Jewett
01-15-2008, 02:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BigRigTom:</font><hr> Here is how I rack 9 ball. If I break I have a good chance to run out. If my opponent breaks and doesn't run out I have a good chance of running out from where he misses.<hr /></blockquote>
If you are choosing the order of the balls, you may want to know that is it not allowed under the written rules of nine ball. If you happen to find a picky opponent or a picky tournament director, they may call a foul on you.

Jude_Rosenstock
01-15-2008, 02:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote BigRigTom:</font><hr> Here is how I rack 9 ball. If I break I have a good chance to run out. If my opponent breaks and doesn't run out I have a good chance of running out from where he misses.<hr /></blockquote>
If you are choosing the order of the balls, you may want to know that is it not allowed under the written rules of nine ball. If you happen to find a picky opponent or a picky tournament director, they may call a foul on you. <hr /></blockquote>

Wait, which rule is this? Is this new? I mean, I'd love it but I've never heard of such.

Deeman3
01-15-2008, 02:34 PM
Jude,

I beleive the balls other than the one and nine must be random.

DeadCrab
01-15-2008, 02:40 PM
How random can they be when someone is choosing them?

Seems to me, the ball position should be specified by rule, and the same for every rack.

Jude_Rosenstock
01-15-2008, 02:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Jude,

I beleive the balls other than the one and nine must be random. <hr /></blockquote>

Okay, can you show me a rule that says this is a foul?

BigRigTom
01-15-2008, 03:02 PM
The APA does allow you to place the balls in any order as long as the 1 is in front and the 9 is in the center.

Are the new rules different or has there always been a rule about the specific ordering of the rack?
I noticed that in a recently televised US Open match between Cory Deuel and Johnny Archer where they were racking their own breaks they would rack the balls in the same order each time.
Of course Cory had one order and Johnny had a different one but they each rack the same every time.

Jude_Rosenstock
01-15-2008, 03:21 PM
I see the rules state that the balls must be racked in random order which is terribly subjective with two exceptions being the 1-ball and 9-ball which have specific places. This could easily be interpreted to mean that there is no specific order for the remaining 7 balls.

Also, in the general rules, the game has not commenced until the moment one's cue strikes the cue-ball hence, if the game has not yet begun, how can one commit a foul?

Artemus
01-15-2008, 03:41 PM
Jude, don't get carried away now and start posting too often. I'd hate to see you wake up tomorrow morning with guilt feelings and thinking less of yourself from having to jump in bed with riff-raff just because you needed a quick orgasm. Control yourself man, control yourself.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=85724
/ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Bob_Jewett
01-15-2008, 05:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jude_Rosenstock:</font><hr> I see the rules state that the balls must be racked in random order which is terribly subjective with two exceptions being the 1-ball and 9-ball which have specific places. This could easily be interpreted to mean that there is no specific order for the remaining 7 balls.

Also, in the general rules, the game has not commenced until the moment one's cue strikes the cue-ball hence, if the game has not yet begun, how can one commit a foul? <hr /></blockquote>

Here is the present rule. See the WPA website for the full set of rules and regulations.

<font color="blue">The object balls are racked as tightly as possible in a diamond shape, with the one ball at the apex of the diamond and on the foot spot and the nine ball in the middle of the diamond. The other balls will be placed in the diamond without purposeful or intentional pattern.</font color>

Personally, I have no difficulty ignoring the numbers on the balls when racking -- they just go into the rack in the order I happen to grab them. Maybe the balls pocketed in the foot pockets tend to be in the front of the next rack more often than you might expect simply because they are the first balls into the triangle. I've tried seeing how the order of balls in the rack determines the order in the broken layout, but I've never noticed a pattern. Of course, that was before tight racks (think Sardo).

As for when to call the foul, that would be when it is noticed. Many fouls, mostly unsportsmanlike conduct, can occur outside of a rack. If I were the TD/ref, I would warn the racker on first notice, give his opponent a game the second time, and say goodbye the third. Manipulating the rack is unsportsmanlike conduct.

BigRigTom
01-15-2008, 08:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Bob Jewett
<font color="red">If I were the TD/ref, I would warn the racker on first notice, give his opponent a game the second time, and say goodbye the third. Manipulating the rack is unsportsmanlike conduct. </font color><hr /></blockquote>

What about in the case I described where Cory Deuel and Johnny Archer were breaking their own rack in the US Open and they each rack the same way on every break?

How can that not be fair, when the player is breaking his own rack and each player has the freedom to rack the way he see's to his best benefit.
I'm not making this up...it was a televised match and I think I still have it on my Tivo.
It was the match that Cory came back from a 0 to 6 deficit to beat Archer. He also made an amazing masse on the 3 ball and a super lucky kick on a 1 ball to combo in the 9 ball....this was all in the same match and maybe that is way I watched it so many times I noticed the way they were each racking the balls. You will also notice that Archer went over an examined the rack one time after Deuel walked away and was heading back to the head of the table to break.

Cydpkt
01-16-2008, 09:37 AM
Weren't they required to place the 2 ball at the bottom of the rack. The tourney is keeping the rack from being in random order. Give these guys some credit they break making a ball and playing shape for the next shot. This is another evolution of the game. I not all that fond of the top players being spread out in the bracket. "Hey they spend a lot of money to get here, they have earned it." Last time I looked it cost most people the same amount for the hotel rooms, meal, and travel. But hey that is a different thread.

Deeman3
01-16-2008, 09:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jude_Rosenstock:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote>

Okay, can you show me a rule that says this is a foul? <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">No. I never said I could. "Not in a purposeful manner" would seem to indicate the intent is not to put them in a pre-determined order beyond the one and nine. I agree it might not be a foul as the game begins after the cue has been struck except if you place the cue ball in front of the line, you have also not technically fouled until you have actually shot in that case as well.

It may not be technically a foul when you rack and some of the balls are not touching as well, but it is still counter to the spirit/intent of the rules and game. </font color>

Tom_In_Cincy
01-16-2008, 10:31 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>
<font color="blue">It may not be technically a foul when you rack and some of the balls are not touching as well, but it is still counter to the spirit/intent of the rules and game. </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

Dee,

For the life of me, I have always wondered exactly who's 'spirit/intent of the game' they are referring to.

Is it the people that wrote the rules? or the players? or the TD's (to settle arguments).. doesn't it have to include all 3 to be FAIR?

BTW, I've often (usually in a large tournament) where seasoned players show up from out of town that are not familiar with the World Standard Rules or even the old BCA rules, had to refer to the 'book' to explain about RANDOM racking.

Even in our little town of Sacramento, there are many pool halls with different rule sets. The WSR are used at Hard Times and apparently nowhere else.

Such is life.

tjlmbklr
01-16-2008, 11:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BigRigTom:</font><hr> Here is how I rack 9 ball. If I break I have a good chance to run out. If my opponent breaks and doesn't run out I have a good chance of running out from where he misses.
http://hardingersystems.com/BAT-forum/images/9-Ball-Rack-400x300.jpg <hr /></blockquote>

Off the subject (well sort of); is it and optical illusion or is that CB bigger then the rest of the balls?

BigRigTom
01-16-2008, 12:30 PM
It is an optical allusion. The Pro Cup is exactly the same size as the object balls.

I can't help but wonder why no one is commenting about that US Open match I described above. If the rack MUST be random, why was that allowed?

Cydpkt
01-16-2008, 12:50 PM
They just randomly end up in the same order every time. With the soft break you can control the area in which each ball will end up. What a bummer to play for a shot on the 1 and end up making it on the break. I guess you better have the two in a position just in case. That may be one of the rules that doesn't get enforced as much. Kind of like with ball in hand many players are using the cue tip to position the cue ball before shooting. I always thought the cue ball was "live" at all time and if the cue tip comes in contact with cue ball that represents a hit. Maybe it has to now be stroked?

Bob_Jewett
01-16-2008, 01:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BigRigTom:</font><hr> ... If the rack MUST be random, why was that allowed? <hr /></blockquote>
Many tournament directors make up their own rules. The Derby City Classic, for example, uses some rules that are not in any other written rule set.

I suspect that it was a matter of convenience. Enforcing the rule is more complicated than allowing the players to order the rack as they please to gain some advantage.

BigRigTom
01-16-2008, 02:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote BigRigTom:</font><hr> ... If the rack MUST be random, why was that allowed? <hr /></blockquote>
Many tournament directors make up their own rules. The Derby City Classic, for example, uses some rules that are not in any other written rule set.

I suspect that it was a matter of convenience. <font color="red"> Enforcing the rule is more complicated than allowing the players to order the rack as they please </font color>to gain some advantage. <hr /></blockquote>

I agree so maybe the rule that is next to ridiculous to enforce should be changed. If a player is allowed to rack for himself the break is more in his hands but the result is still pretty unpredictable in the long run.

I am nowhere near a pro but in one of my APA matches last season my opponent (also a skill level 7) was having trouble making a tight rack even after I showed him how I was doing it. He got so frustrated that he ask me to rack for myself. I then proceeded to rack for both him and me with the same rack order I showed in the picture. I explained to him that I was giving him the same rack that I did for myself and he agreed that was more than fair.

He won that match by 2 points with a score of 55 to 53 too...damn it!

The point is that I can't see how that is anything but fair and maybe the order of the rack should be specified in the rules and save a lot of raised eye brows all around.

bsmutz
01-16-2008, 05:11 PM
I have seen a couple of times a specific rack arrangement for 9-ball that Allen Hopkins advocates. It's out here on the net somewhere. He had specific reasons for racking that way that made sense to me at the time. You might want to spend the time looking for it if you are so inclined.

Shaft
01-20-2008, 08:29 AM
A random rule would be hard to enforce.

In law, the ambiguity of the law is held against the law maker and in favor of the citizen.

"Random" could be interpreted as "non-specified," or "player's choice."

How many time have we seen players shuffling an 8-ball rack so stripes and solids are most alternated on each row, even though the rules only specify that the 8 be in the center and a solid and a stripe in each corner? Not exactly random. Nobody complains (except about the time wasted), but no one has shown whether it gives the breaker a statistical advantage, either.

Tom's order, though he believes it helps him runs the table, is reminiscent of shuffling an 8-ball rack. It could easily have been the order specified in the rules, if the rules had ever specified an order.

BTW, Tom, are you Catholic? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Since other players have other racks, there may be no definitive rack.

BigRigTom
01-20-2008, 09:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Shaft:</font><hr> A random rule would be hard to enforce.

In law, the ambiguity of the law is held against the law maker and in favor of the citizen.

"Random" could be interpreted as "non-specified," or "player's choice."

How many time have we seen players shuffling an 8-ball rack so stripes and solids are most alternated on each row, even though the rules only specify that the 8 be in the center and a solid and a stripe in each corner? Not exactly random. Nobody complains (except about the time wasted), but no one has shown whether it gives the breaker a statistical advantage, either.

Tom's order, though he believes it helps him runs the table, is reminiscent of shuffling an 8-ball rack. It could easily have been the order specified in the rules, if the rules had ever specified an order.

BTW, Tom, are you Catholic? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Since other players have other racks, there may be no definitive rack.<hr /></blockquote>

Good points Shaft and no I am not Catholic. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Not sure why that question though....I believe in God and lots of other things but am not a true Christian according to most faiths.

I have some instructional VHS tapes by Jerry Reid and he suggest a specific order for a rack of 9 ball and then goes a bit further to explain why you might want to rack that way.
As I explained several times now if anyone would take the time to go back and watch the US Open match between Cory Deuel and Johnny Archer where they were racking for themselves, you will notice that each player has a specific order of balls in the rack and it is repeated EVERY time he racks for himself.
You should also notice that they do not break from the same point and that they are using different speeds on the break.
These 2 guys are 2 of the most respected pros of the day and they see an advantage in ordering the rack for their own break so I bow to their expertise.
I too have found the order I use to be rewarding and until I see some evidence to the contrary and until someone shows me that I am not allowed to rack that way in the APA I will continue to rack the way that I see most advantagious to my game.
Everyone else can do as they see fit and I say more power to them if they think their version of "RANDOM" is better. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

This also works for me.....
"Think before you shoot and then shoot without thinking!" /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Artemus
01-20-2008, 09:29 AM
So does Mike Sigel have a way of racking balls for 9-ball in his video, not to mention Joe Tucker's rackmeister tricks of the trade. Or inject Johnny Archer with truth serum and have him tell all the secrets for manipulating the rack. He's GOOD!

If you have the ball arrangements and system memorized as well as getting adept at throwing them in the rack quickly so that it looks casual, NOBODY knows what you're doing.
It's like a card shark doing sleight of hand or manipulating the deck to know exactly where certain cards are at all times.

BigRigTom
01-20-2008, 09:40 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> So does Mike Sigel have a way of racking balls for 9-ball in his video, not to mention Joe Tucker's rackmeister tricks of the trade. Or inject Johnny Archer with truth serum and have him tell all the secrets for manipulating the rack. He's GOOD!

If you have the ball arrangements and system memorized as well as getting adept at throwing them in the rack quickly so that it looks casual, NOBODY knows what you're doing.
It's like a card shark doing sleight of hand or manipulating the deck to know exactly where certain cards are at all times. <hr /></blockquote>

Yep!
One exception though...it is not cheating in the APA!
The rules allow it.

Artemus
01-20-2008, 10:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BigRigTom:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> So does Mike Sigel have a way of racking balls for 9-ball in his video, not to mention Joe Tucker's rackmeister tricks of the trade. Or inject Johnny Archer with truth serum and have him tell all the secrets for manipulating the rack. He's GOOD!

If you have the ball arrangements and system memorized as well as getting adept at throwing them in the rack quickly so that it looks casual, NOBODY knows what you're doing.
It's like a card shark doing sleight of hand or manipulating the deck to know exactly where certain cards are at all times. <hr /></blockquote>

Yep!
One exception though...it is not cheating in the APA!
The rules allow it. <hr /></blockquote>

It's also not cheating if you don't get caught, anywhere!
There's still always enough randomness in any break to eliminate guaranteed results or cheating. It's more like "stacking the deck" or "putting the odds in your favor" just a wee bit. Isn't that what the "house" does in all the games played in casinos? Yet, "cheaters" are the ones that come in and try to gain the odds on the "house". (card counting) Go figure.

BigRigTom
01-20-2008, 11:49 AM
Artemus,
I still get the impression that you think it is cheating to rack a particular order even tho the rules allow it.
I know of NO card games that allow "stacking the deck", do you?
If the rules allow you to order the rack then ordering the rack is NOT cheating anymore than pushing out when the rules allow you to push out, or jumping a ball when the rules allow you to jump a ball.

I know bar players that think playing safe is cheating too but that don't make it so when the rules allow you to play a safe. It is just dumb to ignore the advantage of playing safties in a game where the rules allow you to play safties.

....or....Maybe I'm missing your point?

Artemus
01-20-2008, 11:57 AM
We're not even close to being on the same page. I'm 100% in favor of rack rigging, rack manipulation, or whatever you want to call it, AS LONG AS I'M THE ONE DOING IT FOR MYSELF OR SOMEONE ELSE, regardless of the rules! I prefer self racking too, not only for ball placement but ball/rack tightness. If somebody has a better way of setting up the balls for himself than I do for myself, more power to him. And if it gives either one of us an advantage over the other, so be it. It's ALL a part of the game just like woofing, matching up, or rigging the bet in your favor by being the better talker/locksmith.

BigRigTom
01-20-2008, 01:21 PM
WELL!
OOOOOOOOOOOKKKKKKKK Then!
To each his own. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Shaft
01-21-2008, 06:18 AM
"Connecting the dots" of the numbers in your rack, your rack reminds me of the Catholic "Sign of the Cross," especially the way Eli Wallach playing "Tuco" in "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" used to do it: up, down, right, left, (and right, left, right, left, again, just for good measure.)

Seeing a pattern helps me remember how to do your rack if I want to try it.

No knock against Catholics... I respect everyone's right to worship (or not) anyway they want to (or not).

New2Pool
01-21-2008, 02:28 PM
Slightly off topic but how did the practice of racking for the other person get started? It seems like that since the way the balls are racked has an influence on how good the break is it seems that players who do not rack well are rewarded by having their opponent make a less effective break.

wolfdancer
01-21-2008, 02:38 PM
I think the spirit/intent of any game, or sport....is to have a level playing field, so that the contest is decided solely on one's playing ability
'course having a little luck also helps....

Cydpkt
01-21-2008, 03:10 PM
Slightly off topic but how did the practice of racking for the other person get started? It seems like that since the way the balls are racked has an influence on how good the break is it seems that players who do not rack well are rewarded by having their opponent make a less effective break.

<font color="blue"> </font color>
This is why as the person breaking you have the ability to check the rack and ask for a rerack if you don't like how the balls are not frozen. In my opinion it is the breakers fault if they don't check before breaking and should not complain for a bad break or spread. Of course that always leads to the thought of if your opponent has to get 3 balls past the head string or give up a ball in hand, there might be some shifty racking happening to get the ball in hand advantage.

canadan
01-21-2008, 09:35 PM
well soon as they come out with a pool hall with rack girls. Thats the place I'll be!!!

BigRigTom
01-23-2008, 10:05 AM
The Hooters Girls are in Playboy's Feb Issue, maybe someday there will be a pool hall name "Racks" and we'll see those girls in Playboy... /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif
That would certainly boost the popularity of the sport!