PDA

View Full Version : Predator tour bans jump cues



Bambu
01-27-2008, 01:39 AM
http://www.predator9balltour.com/rules.htm

I'm not complaining, but I felt this was too ironic not to mention. Shortly after predator unveils its new "air jump" cue, they follow that up by banning jump cues on their latest 9-Ball tour.
Assuming Predator was not responsible for banning their own new product from their latest tour, what was the reasoning behind this decision? Nothing against Tony Robles(an all around class act) but was he responsible for banning the jumpers? Or is it the players who dont like them? The room owners maybe? Certainly not predator.
Personally, I have been opposed to jumpers for years now, but finally broke down just to "keep up with the jones'." I also just happen to have bought the predator air jumper, about a week ago. In my book, it does everything it claims to do. I have no experience jumping with any other jump cue(only my own cue, or a house cue). Actually, I did try an old jump cue from years ago called "the frog." That was even cheesier than the predator air jump, and as many people remember, was banned shortly after its release. It was just silly, looked like a giant pencil with a huge tip.
Frankly, I feel this jump cue stuff is cheating. Far easier than jumping with a standard size cue. You dont even need to drive the ball hard into the slate hard to get it to jump. Drte I say, it is almost a purchased skill. But I also think there is a fairly big market for these cues, and the crowd seems to thrive on jump shots.
So a couple of buddies of mine have been razzing me about my new jump cue, real purists they are. Because the predator tour is the first tour we noticed banning jumpers, one friend is going as far as to say that banning jumpers is "just the beginning." And that soon enough, all jump cues will be banned. Me, I cant see pool giving up any tidbit of excitement it currently has. I dont like the jump cue myself, but I think the fans like the jump shot too much to let it go.

Rich R.
01-27-2008, 07:37 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> I dont like the jump cue myself, but I think the fans like the jump shot too much to let it go. <hr /></blockquote>
This statement says it all. The industry isn't going to give up a product that they can sell. Many of the fans like to see the jump shots and enough players like using the jump cues. They ain't going anywhere any time soon.

After reading the tour rules, I am more concerned with other rules.
In rule #1, it says that players rack their own balls. There are some restrictions on where the 9 ball goes on the break, but the players are still racking their own.
In rule #9, it says there is absolutely no checking opponents racks.
I think Tony is going to have problems with these rules. The restrictions on where the 9-ball can be pocketed on the break mean nothing, to the better players. Run out players don't have to make the 9-ball on the break, they only need to make a ball. There are enough rack mechanics out there and they can insure that they make a ball on the break. After that, they have a good chance of running out.
I predict there will be arguments on these rules. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Bambu
01-27-2008, 09:28 AM
I agree. I play rack my own with my friends, but wouldnt want to see that in any tournament either. Why do you think the jump cue has been banned in a predator tour though?

Artemus
01-27-2008, 09:57 AM
I think its to take the focus off the jump cue and redirect everyone's attention to the NEW line of cues coming out, the "Safety and Kick Cue Line".

Bob_Jewett
01-27-2008, 02:02 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> ... After reading the tour rules, I am more concerned with other rules. ... <hr /></blockquote>
Me too. It looks like most of their rules are broken. I wonder who made them up. I hope it wasn't Tony. A very bad job.

Bambu
01-27-2008, 08:56 PM
While that may seem impossible, what if other things were invented somehow? It may sound crazy, but what if someone came up with say, a draw cue. A somewhat lighter than normal cue, but made of some new space age plastic polymer. But what if it actually worked, and any joe schmo could now execute an 8 foot draw shot with ease? Cue extensions, jump cues, break cues...when does it end? For extra reach, can I strap on a couple of plastic buckets to my shoes, too?

Rich R.
01-27-2008, 11:13 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> I agree. I play rack my own with my friends, but wouldnt want to see that in any tournament either. Why do you think the jump cue has been banned in a predator tour though? <hr /></blockquote>You misunderstood my response.
I have no problem with racking your own balls. That rule is used in some of the regional tours and some big tournaments. The problem lies in the fact that they are prohibiting your opponent from checking the rack. IMHO, whether it is rack your own or not, your opponent should get to check the rack.

av84fun
01-28-2008, 01:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> ... After reading the tour rules, I am more concerned with other rules. ... <hr /></blockquote>
Me too. It looks like most of their rules are broken. I wonder who made them up. I hope it wasn't Tony. A very bad job. <hr /></blockquote>

I disagree that "most" of the rules are broken or that they did "a bad job."

Banning jump cues is something I don't personally favor but there is no fundamental "right or wrong" on that matter.

Spotting the 9 made on the break is a LONG overdue return to some rules sets back in the day. People complain that there is too much luck in 9 Ball and then complain when one element of luck is ruled out.

I am HUGELY in favor of banning the soft break which, if not banned, will ruin an already wounded sport.

I am HUGELY in favor of eliminating the utterly SILLY winner breaks rule.

Shooting away from a frozen CB/OB is at least an objective standard and solves the real problem with other rule sets that requires judgment calls to be made by refs who are too often lacking in the skills to make such calls correctly.

The Derby City rule was that if the player jacks up 45 degrees then the shot is legal regardless of any double tap which also eliminates often flawed judgment calls.

Including the new WSRs, I would place the Predator rule as best, the DCC rule in second place and the WSR rule a distant 3rd.

The only rules that isn't "as good or better" than other rules sets is disallowing the opponents to check each other's racks. Clearly, what they are trying to do is stop endless bickering about racks in an environment where there is no tournament "rack person."

But I agree that such a rule will cause more problems than it solves.

Other than that one rule, in my views the Predator rules are AT LEAST as defensible as any other rule set and superior in the above-stated ways to others.

Pretty good job Predator...and Tony...and certainly not "broken" or a "bad job"...but you might want to re-think the rack checking rule.

Regards,
Jim

Bambu
01-28-2008, 07:26 AM
I did understand you rich, sorry I was not clear enough on that last answer. I agree, its not the racking your own thats bad, its not being allowed to check someones rack.

Bambu
01-28-2008, 07:36 AM
I like almost everything you said, except for the jump cues. Alternate breaks, rack your own, spot the 9 on break, and no soft breaks. The only thing I dont like is "shooting away" from a glued ball on your cueball. I say that because if a shot is dead into a pocket but kissing the cueball, shooting "away" might throw your shot out of the pocket.

Artemus
01-28-2008, 07:58 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> I did understand you rich, sorry I was not clear enough on that last answer. I agree, its not the racking your own thats bad, its not being allowed to check someones rack. <hr /></blockquote>

Aside from the 9 ball in the middle, the one ball ON the spot, or the rack being angled, what else would you be looking for that would make a difference and give the opposing player a definite advantage. (other than ball placement which is up for speculation on how they got that way - planned or random)

Artemus
01-28-2008, 08:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> While that may seem impossible, what if other things were invented somehow? It may sound crazy, but what if someone came up with say, a draw cue. A somewhat lighter than normal cue, but made of some new space age plastic polymer. But what if it actually worked, and any joe schmo could now execute an 8 foot draw shot with ease?

<font color="red"> The only way it could work is if Joe Schmo had a large enough arm mass. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif </font color>

Cue extensions, jump cues, break cues...when does it end?

<font color="red"> It ends when as much money as possible can be extracted from your piggy banks and everybody quits falling for the hype. </font color>

For extra reach, can I strap on a couple of plastic buckets to my shoes, too? <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> Only if you can do it within the time limit of a 30 second clock, why not. </font color>

Rich R.
01-28-2008, 08:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> I did understand you rich, sorry I was not clear enough on that last answer. I agree, its not the racking your own thats bad, its not being allowed to check someones rack. <hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>Aside from the 9 ball in the middle, the one ball ON the spot, or the rack being angled, what else would you be looking for that would make a difference and give the opposing player a definite advantage. (other than ball placement which is up for speculation on how they got that way - planned or random) <hr /></blockquote>
You should look for gaps between the balls, especially at certain places.

Artemus
01-28-2008, 08:52 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> I did understand you rich, sorry I was not clear enough on that last answer. I agree, its not the racking your own thats bad, its not being allowed to check someones rack. <hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>Aside from the 9 ball in the middle, the one ball ON the spot, or the rack being angled, what else would you be looking for that would make a difference and give the opposing player a definite advantage. (other than ball placement which is up for speculation on how they got that way - planned or random) <hr /></blockquote>

You should look for gaps between the balls, especially at certain places. <hr /></blockquote>

True, but who can manipulate THAT with perfection while just rolling the rack up to the spot? Might it not also be as much of a detriment to the breaker?

Bambu
01-28-2008, 08:56 AM
Not much else to question, but ball placement or tilting the rack can be done to someones advantage. Racking in front or behind the spot can also be set up favorably to the racker. Though it doesnt count in this tourney, I have also heard of tricks where people leave space somewhere before or after the 9 ball to help sink it. There also might be some other tricks to sink balls I havent seen or heard of. They dont come around too often, but a good cheater can be very sneaky about what they do.

Artemus
01-28-2008, 09:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> Not much else to question, but ball placement or tilting the rack can be done to someones advantage.

<font color="red"> If ball placement can be an advantage, (and I agree) what's the other player going to do, go up to the rack and say, "Hey dude, I don't like the order in which you placed these balls. Move the 2 over here and the 3 over there, the 5 and 8 over in those positions" And if the other player KNOWS that ball placement is being done favorably by his opponent for himself, doesn't THAT player also have the opportunity to then do it for himself? The best thing he can do is start winning some games so that he has more opportunities to rack for himself and keep the other guy in the chair.</font color>

Racking in front or behind the spot can also be set up favorably to the racker. Though it doesnt count in this tourney, I have also heard of tricks where people leave space somewhere before or after the 9 ball to help sink it. There also might be some other tricks to sink balls I havent seen or heard of. They dont come around too often, but a good cheater can be very sneaky about what they do. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> They can be sneaky, but they also have to be lightning fast like a magician. Two tough combinations without drawing attention eventually. You STILL gotta shoot the balls into the pockets and get position. </font color>

Bambu
01-28-2008, 09:18 AM
It ends when as much money as possible can be extracted from your piggy banks and everybody quits falling for the hype.

That about sums it up. The problem is, people seem to like all the gadgets. So is it really a problem? I may not like it, but I am in favor of whatever it takes to get more people playing pool.

Artemus
01-28-2008, 09:24 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> It ends when as much money as possible can be extracted from your piggy banks and everybody quits falling for the hype.

That about sums it up. The problem is, people seem to like all the gadgets. So is it really a problem?

<font color="red"> Not if there's a lot of money in the piggy banks and you have no problem spending it. </font color>

I may not like it, but I am in favor of whatever it takes to get more people playing pool.
<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> I think a good case of "global freezing" would take care of that, but I think Hell would also have to be affected. </font color>

Bambu
01-28-2008, 09:32 AM
Yes, it would be pretty tough to question ball placement, but I just dont like the idea of being able to rack to your own advantage. Of course, I dont practice that, so its not any big advantage to me. For those who do rack to their advantage, its cheating in my opinion. But I do realize that depends on the rules. Other than the ability to properly freeze the balls and set them straight, I dont think racking should be a skill. Rules on this vary, as do opinions on this matter.

Bambu
01-28-2008, 09:40 AM
I think a good case of "global freezing" would take care of that, but I think Hell would also have to be affected.

Either that, or Quentin Tarantino re-writing Jennifer Barettas new pool movie to include several nude scenes.

Artemus
01-28-2008, 09:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> I think a good case of "global freezing" would take care of that, but I think Hell would also have to be affected.

Either that, or Quentin Tarantino re-writing Jennifer Barettas new pool movie to include several nude scenes. <hr /></blockquote>

Bad Boy!! Now you're going to go to Hell!

Bambu
01-28-2008, 09:50 AM
I guess I will have to switch to a flaming red simonis cloth!

Artemus
01-28-2008, 09:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> Yes, it would be pretty tough to question ball placement, but I just dont like the idea of being able to rack to your own advantage. Of course, I dont practice that, so its not any big advantage to me. For those who do rack to their advantage, its cheating in my opinion. But I do realize that depends on the rules. Other than the ability to properly freeze the balls and set them straight, I dont think racking should be a skill. Rules on this vary, as do opinions on this matter. <hr /></blockquote>

Well, racking IS a skill. And whatever someone skilled in racking can do favorably for himself, he can definitely do unfavorably for his opponent when "loser racks".

Probably the most honest device that ever came out for a consistent rack was the Sardo. It didn't take very long for players to figure it out and come up with the soft break. Then all the biyatching, crying, and whining hit the fan along with other problems such as marks in the cloth that NOTHING is supposedly fair when it comes to racking balls. Nobody is EVER happy.

Bambu
01-28-2008, 10:16 AM
True, racking your own is the lesser of the 2 evils. What can be done then, to manipulate the rack in your own favor?

CarolNYC
01-28-2008, 11:08 AM
Hi,
I'll be there Saturday-I dont know the answer,but left word-
As far as "checking the rack" maybe, "I" may not be able to check, but if I question what your doing, someone else,ref,whatever ,is able to check-I dont know!
As far as racking,according to Joe Tucker:
1,3,6,8,9,5,2,4,7
Always break from the same side as the space-if the 2 or 4 are off the nine,break from that side and the nine should go!-the bigger the space,the softer you break!
Take care!
Carol

MosconiJr
01-28-2008, 11:38 AM
These seem like good arguments for a 10-ball tour.

MJr

Bob_Jewett
01-28-2008, 11:41 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote MosconiJr:</font><hr> These seem like good arguments for a 10-ball tour.

MJr <hr /></blockquote>
Exactly. People clinging to nine ball as a game of skill should give it up.

Artemus
01-28-2008, 11:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote MosconiJr:</font><hr> These seem like good arguments for a 10-ball tour.

MJr <hr /></blockquote>
Exactly. People clinging to nine ball as a game of skill should give it up. <hr /></blockquote>

Way to go BOB!! I agree 100%. I know you're doing a lot of work regarding 14.1, I'd like to see an even greater push by you and everyone to have it recognized as the top skill game like it once was.

av84fun
01-28-2008, 12:22 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote MosconiJr:</font><hr> These seem like good arguments for a 10-ball tour.

MJr <hr /></blockquote>
Exactly. People clinging to nine ball as a game of skill should give it up. <hr /></blockquote>

Condemning 9 Ball as a game of chance instead of a game of skill is, as you recently stated on another matter..."A discussion not suitable for polite company."

If 9 Ball were a game of chance, then any league banger can beat a world champion roughly half the time.

9 Ball requires an extreme amount of skill and could be made even more skill-based if the winner breaks rule was abolished...and if the 9 Ball was spotted on the break just like the Predator Tour rules provide.

But you complain about the Predator rules.

Simply complaining about the luck factor in 9 Ball (keeping in mind that luck exists in EVERY sport) while complaining about rule changes that would reduce that luck factor doesn't make a whole lot on sense.

Regards,
Jim

CarolNYC
01-28-2008, 01:33 PM
Hi,
as per a phone conversation with my "brother" /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Assuming Predator was not responsible for banning their own new product from their latest tour, what was the reasoning behind this decision <hr /></blockquote>


This rule will be changed! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Theres other things mentioned about the "racking your own",I'll get more detail after Saturday!

Carol

Artemus
01-28-2008, 01:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>

If 9 Ball were a game of chance, then any league banger can beat a world champion roughly half the time.

<font color="red"> I agree with you if 9 ball was nothing BUT chance, however (your next statement) </font color>

9 Ball requires an extreme amount of skill

<font color="red"> You're exactly right, and yes it does. That's why a league banger would NEVER have a chance. But when you have ultra high skill levels against ultra high skill levels, anything can happen and it does. Many times after the break the game is really 6 ball or 7 ball. What high caliber player can't run that many balls? It's too easy. Whether it's winner breaks (which does give an advantage) or alternate break, if one person is just off on their break and NOTHING is dropping for whatever reason, more than likely they'll lose because their opponents are all skilled enough to run 9 balls. Every top ranked player in the world has lost at least once or more in the very first round of a nine ball tournament by a "no-name" or player of less skill to be sent scrambling and scratching in the losers bracket. How is that explained? </font color>

Jim (in black) &amp; Artemus (in red) <hr /></blockquote>

Bambu
01-28-2008, 03:22 PM
Oh, cool. I look forward to hearing about it, thanks.

Deeman3
01-28-2008, 03:27 PM
No jump cue! This is crap as I just bought one more new jump cue at Derby City. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif Someone needs to make up their mind, or mine...

Bambu
01-28-2008, 03:43 PM
Haha Dee. I am pretty much with you. I dont like it, but I have to admit I have been enjoying the easy, full ball jumps.

Deeman3
01-28-2008, 03:55 PM
Bambu,

It does make it easy and for years I was in the Earl camp but got beat by too many good jumpers and "sold out". Now I can jump over my wallet! (not a great task!)...

Bambu
01-29-2008, 01:18 PM
I know, easy is a loose term. I really meant a good jumper is much easier than jumping with a regular cue, unless you only need to jump over a small portion of another ball.

blueridge
01-30-2008, 08:51 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> http://www.predator9balltour.com/rules.htm

Frankly, I feel this jump cue stuff is cheating. Far easier than jumping with a standard size cue. You dont even need to drive the ball hard into the slate hard to get it to jump. Drte I say, it is almost a purchased skill. <hr /></blockquote>

This whole arguement against jump cues makes no sense. Nobody criticizes golfers for using a sand wedge to get out of a sand trap. Sure it takes a lot more skill to get out of a sand trap with a driver than with a sand wedge, but that's just plain stupid. You use the club that's specially made for that specific shot. The exact thing is true regarding jump cues in pool. Of course it's harder to jump with a long cue. They're not made for jumping. And furthermore, what's the difference between jumping with a jump cue and breaking with a break cue? I understand that a break cue saves your shooting cue from a lot of extra wear and tear. But break cues are made specifically for breaking. Do they give a player an unfair advantage or take the skill away from the game? I think not. While we're at it, why don't we abolish the mechanical bridge. It makes long shots way too easy. A real pool player would be skilled enough reach the length of the table and make the shot or shoot one handed. To me, the arguements against using jump cues seems hypocritical and irrational

Deeman3
01-30-2008, 09:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote blueridge:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> http://www.predator9balltour.com/rules.htm

Frankly, I feel this jump cue stuff is cheating. Far easier than jumping with a standard size cue. You dont even need to drive the ball hard into the slate hard to get it to jump. Drte I say, it is almost a purchased skill. <hr /></blockquote>

This whole arguement against jump cues makes no sense. Nobody criticizes golfers for using a sand wedge to get out of a sand trap. Sure it takes a lot more skill to get out of a sand trap with a driver than with a sand wedge, but that's just plain stupid. You use the club that's specially made for that specific shot. The exact thing is true regarding jump cues in pool. Of course it's harder to jump with a long cue. They're not made for jumping. And furthermore, what's the difference between jumping with a jump cue and breaking with a break cue? I understand that a break cue saves your shooting cue from a lot of extra wear and tear. But break cues are made specifically for breaking. Do they give a player an unfair advantage or take the skill away from the game? I think not. While we're at it, why don't we abolish the mechanical bridge. It makes long shots way too easy. A real pool player would be skilled enough reach the length of the table and make the shot or shoot one handed. To me, the arguements against using jump cues seems hypocritical and irrational <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Blueridge,

I don't think many of us are suffering over the transition to jump cues as it has made it easier for everyone. However, it did change both the quality of skills needed to jump well and actually changed the game of nine ball to an easier effort, especially in escaping lock-up safties.

Most of us old codgers have long since learned to use the jump cue but anyone who is now complaining about how easy nine ball is certainly missed or is not aware of the game before jump cues.

For better or worse, ninie ball does not resemble the game mnany of us grew up with. That may not be a bad thing but with not spotting up balls, roll outs only after the break, Sardo type racks and such, many skills have been lost and it has become a much less strategic game, which may sevre TV and short attention spans well. Lost are the abilities to hit multi-rail kicks (in many cases) the basic skill of the spot shot and the strategy of the ever present shoot or pass strategy.

Of course, those who still like a more sophisticated challenge can play one pocket but something may have been lost from nine ball that younger players may not appreciate. We seee many people asking to change the game now and some of this would be answered if the game had never changed at all.

Most of us don't "worry" about jump cues or other newer tools and have long since adapted. However, as a point of discussion, it is a much different game. Not particularily good nor bad... </font color>

Bambu
01-30-2008, 05:17 PM
Regardless of how silly you may think it is, nobody is stupid for having an opinion. Now comparing pool to golf is like comparing apples to oranges. Golf always had a number of clubs, it didnt evolve into what it is today. Pool on the other hand, just gets easier as time goes on. Better cloth, tables, cues, tips and all the gadgets. The bridge was always part of the game, so that is not a good comparison either. As for the jumper, its not a cue stick....its a toy. Break cues do not accomplish anything for you, at least not the way a jump cue does. No average player is going to suddenly have an awesome break with a break cue. But in about 5 minutes I can have any half decent player jumping balls jumps with a toy stick.

Sid_Vicious
01-30-2008, 05:39 PM
"But in about 5 minutes I can have any half decent player jumping balls jumps with a toy stick."

At best, you get a half decent player learning how to sell out with these so-called toys. Jumping, making a ball and getting general position is still an art for even the jumper. Very many of the people I see who infrequently pull out a jump cue, either foul during the stroke, or scratch on the shot, and even the pros on TV even miss 1.5-2-ball-width jumps, topping obstructing balls, and they ain't just half decent players. Jumping does not get it's fair respect, and it does take practice to find finesse with the art of jumping. JMPO...sid

av84fun
01-30-2008, 06:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> Regardless of how silly you may think it is, nobody is stupid for having an opinion. Now comparing pool to golf is like comparing apples to oranges. Golf always had a number of clubs, it didnt evolve into what it is today. Pool on the other hand, just gets easier as time goes on. Better cloth, tables, cues, tips and all the gadgets. The bridge was always part of the game, so that is not a good comparison either. As for the jumper, its not a cue stick....its a toy. Break cues do not accomplish anything for you, at least not the way a jump cue does. No average player is going to suddenly have an awesome break with a break cue. But in about 5 minutes I can have any half decent player jumping balls jumps with a toy stick. <hr /></blockquote>

First...respectfully, you are entirely wrong about golf equipment not having evloved RADICALLY from its early days.

The first known "sets" of clubs included about 6...not the 14 allowed today. And the shafts were all wood NOT steel or synthetic materials...and the golf ball was stuffed with FEATHERS.

You may recall the widespread "bitching" about the introduction of "metal woods" from the purists. So, the analogy about the evolution in pool equipment by the introduction of the break cue is entirely appropriate.

And if, by "better cloth" you are referring to Simonis 860 which is MUCH faster than the cloth of old, you are mistaken if you think that makes the game easier. Since it is substantially faster, any given error in the power put behind a shot will have a LEVERAGED impact on the miss.

It is also incorrect that break cues don't do anything for you vs. your normal playing cue. Radar gun and other speed measurement technology employed by the makers of the top quality break cues show conclusively that miles per hour ARE contributed and even 2-3 MPH has a SIGNIFICANT bearing on the power of the break shot.

Finally, the bride has NOT "always been a part of the game" and even if it was, it is still a "toy" by your definition. Why not just make the player stretch...or shoot off handed...or behind his/her back...or just play a shot that CAN be reached....instead of using that silly toy bridge?

Regards,
Jim

av84fun
01-30-2008, 06:44 PM
Deeman3
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think many of us are suffering over the transition to jump cues as it has made it easier for everyone. However, it did change both the quality of skills needed to jump well and actually changed the game of nine ball to an easier effort, especially in escaping lock-up safties.<hr /></blockquote>

I didn't write the book on pool term definitions but in my mind "lock up safety" is one there the CB and OB are VERY close together...if not frozen...in which case there IS not jump shot possible and the ONLY way to escape is with a multi-rail kick.

I agree that certain rules changes have made the game easier but NOT NEARLY as easy as some people think.

Most matches are STILL won based more on who makes the most unforced errors than on offensive perfection.

I just watched the 2005 U.S. Open match between strickland and reyes and there were FIVE unforced errors in a race to 11...4 of which were commited by Reyes...which is why he lost to Earl.

But as I noted in my thread "Fixing 9 Ball" I AGREE with you that the game should revert to several of the "old rules" which wouldn't make the game any "easier" so much as reduce the luck factor...there is a difference between those two things.

Regards,
Jim

av84fun
01-30-2008, 06:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> "But in about 5 minutes I can have any half decent player jumping balls jumps with a toy stick."

At best, you get a half decent player learning how to sell out with these so-called toys. Jumping, making a ball and getting general position is still an art for even the jumper. Very many of the people I see who infrequently pull out a jump cue, either foul during the stroke, or scratch on the shot, and even the pros on TV even miss 1.5-2-ball-width jumps, topping obstructing balls, and they ain't just half decent players. Jumping does not get it's fair respect, and it does take practice to find finesse with the art of jumping. JMPO...sid <hr /></blockquote>

TAP TAP...Jumping is WAY over-used for the reasons you cited. Most of the phillipenos can ROUTINELY kick to the preferred SIDE of the OB on 1 rail kicks and OFTEN on 2 and sometimes on 3 rail kicks.

Regards,
Jim

JimS
01-31-2008, 06:24 AM
I would be in favor of dumping the jump cue and changing the game to 10 ball.. which gets rid of the.. rack-your-own-no-inspections.. problem. Seems like that makes for a good game of pool.

Bambu
01-31-2008, 01:38 PM
I knew the jump cue lovers would not go down without a good fight. And I must admit, you came through with flying colors, Jim.
On the golf, I dont know much about it....certainly not its complete history. Perhaps I jumped the gun in trying to use golf to make my point. Or, maybe golf is just as guilty of taking advantage of technology as pool is.
On the cloth, I disagree. Its far easier to run a cueball around the table with good simonis cloth, not to mention the superior bumpers of today. For 9-ball in particular, playing on slow cloth with crappy bumpers is a bad proposition.
I cant argue with you about the date of the bridge invention, but its been around long enough, no? Possibly the first accessory made I would think, or at least one of the earlier inventions. If they(whoever "they" are)took that out too, I could live with it. But I wouldnt vote to have it removed. It serves its purpose in my opinion.
Now as for this claim of 2-3 mph more with a break cue, how is that possible? I am not arguing here, but I cant understand how that could happen. All the cue itself should be able to do to increase cue speed, is lighten itself a little bit. Lighten it too much and you have a lack of power. Can balance of the cue, somehow effect cue speed? I suppose the hard or phenolyc(?) tip should help the break to a degree, but that shouldnt effect cue speed either.
When I hear the term "the art of jumping" I do have respect for that. I am not saying its easy to make balls with a jump cue, or any cue. And sure, I have been impressed by plenty of jump shots I have seen, even with a jumper.
Just making the hit on the other hand, is a different story. And that is fairly easy with a good jump cue. Sometimes, even full ball jumps are made by average players. That just shouldnt be happening. It is a purchased skill.
So to me, what the jump cue does is degrade "the art of" kicking AND safety play. It basically comes down to this: Whats more important, kicks and safety play, or easy jump shots with a jump cue? Both cannot exist together in harmony. It should be one, or the other. The jump cue is bound to create a new breed of players, who dont care about kicking and safety play as much as they should. If all things remain the same, kicks and safeties will become a somewhat lost skill.

Cydpkt
01-31-2008, 01:54 PM
Won't we just see tougher (can't be jumped) safeties coming out? I've played safeties deliberately to have my opponent get out his jump cue. Most players around here might be able to hit the ball or maybe even make it but they can't get position on the next shot. Of course around here we don't have that many pro quality players around here. (me included) I don't mind seeing someone with a jump cue because it makes me think that they can't kick that well and I will try and adjust my safety game accordingly.

av84fun
01-31-2008, 05:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> I knew the jump cue lovers would not go down without a good fight. And I must admit, you came through with flying colors, Jim. <hr /></blockquote>

THANKS!!!

[ QUOTE ]
Or, maybe golf is just as guilty of taking advantage of technology as pool is.<hr /></blockquote>

That point is certainly a matter of taste and opinion so all views have equal validity. But for my part, I am not offended by technological advancements and don't think there is any "guilt" to be laid.

At the end of the day, sports/games are all about ENJOYMENT and in the case of pro sports...which exist only because of the spectators, then the enjoyment factor MUST be addressed both from the point of view of the competitors and the spectators.

Baseball fans want to see HOME RUNS...not strike outs or base hits...so create a livlier ball...and allow the coring out of the end of the bat so that more mass can be at the "sweet spot" while maintaining overall weight.

Same with golf equipment...same with tennis equipment. About the only unchanged major sport from a technological point of view is basketball.

[ QUOTE ]
On the cloth, I disagree. Its far easier to run a cueball around the table with good simonis cloth, not to mention the superior bumpers of today.<hr /></blockquote>

Respectfully, we'll just have to agree to disagree on the cloth but I FULLY agree with you on the cushions...which only tends to prove my point that technological improvements are just that...improvements.

As for the cloth, the Mosconis and Deacon Cranes and Babe Cranfields of the sport were able to run multiple HUNDREDS of balls on the old, nappy cloth which proves that, once becoming used to it, navigating the cue ball around the table was accomplished with extreme precision.

Now, the question becomes...is it easier to navigate the cue ball on simois 860 than on the old cloth?

We can't use straight pool runs to make the case one way or the other. We can't say that because Mosconi's run of 526 still stands, that the new cloth is more difficult because that ignores the reality that there are vastly fewer players shooting 14.1 these days.

What we do know for sure is that today, the cue ball will roll farther with a given input of force than was the case on the old cloth.

Therefore, it is true that any application of greater than "perfect force" will cause a far more significant error (too much roll) than would be the case on older cloth.

The same holds in uphill putts in golf. All pros would MUCH rather putt uphill than down for EXACTLY the same reason.

Granted the application of LESS than perfect force would create a worse outcome on old cloth vs. new. In other words, the shot would fall much further short on the old vs. the new cloth.

So, if anything, the difficulty factor between the two may be a tie...but certainly, IMHO the new cloth is not easier than the old.

[ QUOTE ]
But I wouldnt vote to have it removed. It serves its purpose in my opinion. [/qhote]

The above refers to the bridge but the jump cue "serves its purpose" too and is intended to serve exactly the same general purpose...i.e. to make a difficult shot easier. But IMHO the bridge is a WORSE implement than the jump cue from the point of view of making the shot easier. By use of the bridge the player can accomplish anything in terms of a "standard shot" that could be accomplished with the hands.

But the jump cue is FAR, FAR less accurate than a standard shot...even when used by the best jumpers in the world.

But the MAIN issue is that SPECTATORS LOVE THE SHOT! A great jump shot will generate FAR more cheers and applause than the greatest kick or safety ever shot. So, banning the jump cue would make as much sense...in terms of the popularity of the sport...as going back to less lively baseballs or small face, wooden frame tennis rackets.


[ QUOTE ]
Now as for this claim of 2-3 mph more with a break cue, how is that possible? <hr /></blockquote>

I am not competent to relate the technical details but I suggest you go to the predator site below and read up on why they think their break cue delivers more speed, power and accuracy than competing cues.

http://www.predatorcues.com/predator_cues_bk2_demo.html

In addition, at the recent Derby City event, the Cannon break cue people had a demo room with a radar gun and the vast majority of those who tried their new break cue..WHICH IS HEAVIER than normal, were getting a couple mph faster speeds than with their own cues.

Referring again to the jump cue you wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
It is a purchased skill.
So to me, what the jump cue does is degrade "the art of" kicking AND safety play. It basically comes down to this: Whats more important, kicks and safety play, or easy jump shots with a jump cue? Both cannot exist together in harmony. It should be one, or the other. The jump cue is bound to create a new breed of players, who dont care about kicking and safety play as much as they should. If all things remain the same, kicks and safeties will become a somewhat lost skill. <hr /></blockquote>

But all technological advances provide a "purchased skill" so the jump cue can't be singled out for that criticism.

And you spoke of kicking and safety play as arts and they certainly are...but so too is jumping SUCCESSFULLY. As another poster pointed out, jumping and making contact with the OB is one thing and a successful OUTCOME is an entirely different matter.

I vote for MORE art in the game...not less. Some players are fantastic bankers and will play shape for a bank rather than a long difficult cut shot. Others avoid banks like the plague. That truth only adds variety and interest to the game IMHO.

Finally...THANKS for your comments. I enjoy exchanges with thoughtful people like you!

Regards,
Jim

Bambu
01-31-2008, 10:58 PM
Thanks Jim. I am also glad to have civil exchanges with people like you. I am sure we share the same goals, preserving the game.
I like the baseball comparision, but they drew the line somewhere too. Corked bats, steroids, spitting on the ball, sandpaper, etc. I would like to see the pitching mound restored to its original height, but we both know why that wont be happening any time soon. Like baseball, pool has evolved in an offensive direction. The question is, where do we draw the line? Aluminum bats, jump shots? I am all for jump shots, but with a cue stick.
As for the bridge, it only encroaches on ones ability to play lefty, or grow. Jump cues offer choice, and degrade the option of safety, as well as the kick. Can you argue that?
What you say about the faster cloth is true. In terms of more force being created, there is a larger margin of error. But coupled with that is the fact that the total force required to run an average rack will also go up. Shooting harder takes more accuracy. Lets also not forget that when guys ran hundreds of balls on slow cloth, it was mostly all straight pool. So sure they were accurate, but an average shot distance for 14.1 is what, 2-3 feet? 4? As we all know, its not uncommon to need 15 or more feet to get shape in 9ball. Shot for shot, the average distance is far greater in the 9ball games of today.
I cant see the jump cue as an advantage in variety because it takes away from other facets of the game. Nothing else does that except the jumper. Not the bridge, not the glove, not the cue extension, no other types of shots, not the leather tip, nothing I can think of. While jumping "successfully" may be an art, succeeding is often the result of a lucky safety (after a hit). More often than not, a good kick is a better shot anyway(IMO).
Despite all that I have said, I am still in favor of whatever is good for the game of pool. And I admit, a good jump shot is more exciting to see than a good safety or kick(just as a home run beats a sacrifice fly). As you have said, the fans matter a great deal, and I respect that. I am not the unibomber some might think I am, I have nothing against technology. I just wonder where we draw that line in the sand, if ever.
Dammit, Jim! If this stuff about 2-3 MPH is true, I hold you directly responsible for my next sell out purchase. I will never live this one down. 3 cues now? I will need a new case; I am so done. Are you sure its 2-3 MPH? I ask because the website says 3.2 percent more speed, but nothing about MPH that I can find. Either way, thanks for making some great points, Jim.

Bambu
01-31-2008, 11:19 PM
Thats a good point, you should see some tighter safety attempts, but maybe less of them. On a local level, many defensive players are bound to fear the jumper. Actually, that can be a blessing in disguise for some, since safety play alone wont seal a whole lot of victories. I suppose the best defense is a good offense, but I dont mind seeing the jumper banned at local tours, such as predators latest. I can live with it, and I can live without it. Considering that some tours are banning jump cues, it might be a good idea to practice jumping with a house cue, as well as a jumper.

av84fun
02-01-2008, 01:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr>
I like the baseball comparision, but they drew the line somewhere too. Corked bats, steroids, spitting on the ball, sandpaper, etc.<hr /></blockquote>

I know where you are coming from but those things are CHEATING not technology! (-:

Does the line have to be drawn somewhere? Yes and no. Yes on a shorter term basis AND where the intended improvement is EVOLUTIONARY not REVOLUTIONARY.

Using the golf analogy again...yes to changing the dimple patterns to achieve different aerodynamics and NO to tricked up golf balls that bangers can hit 325.

Yes to large face, big sweet spot drivers but NO to drivers that have an excessive "springboard" effect.

As to time...things change. Golfers are driving longer (NOT entirely related to technology by the way...more on that later) so even such venerable clubs like Augusta National are "chaning the game by lenthening the course.

But let my rock your world about technology and average driving distance. According to an article in Golf Digest, the current PGA average driving distance is ONLY 286 yards (I would KILL for that distance) but the average drive distance has increase only 30 yards IN THE PAST 30 YEARS!!!

Because human athletic prowess tends to rise over time it is impossible to tell how much that 30 yard has been influenced by technology and how much by superior human beings. I would guess only 50% or 15 yards is pure technology.

Give Tiger a few weeks to get used to Jack's persimmon driver and he would STIL crush it 300+.

But I think we agree that giving the FANS what they want to see is a reasonable goal and we MIGHT agree that so long as technology advances are as EVOLUTIONARY as those concerning the driver in golf...then fine.


[ QUOTE ]
I am all for jump shots, but with a cue stick.<hr /></blockquote>

I respect your point of view...I really do...but I don't agree with it. Stickland, who is the world's leading jump cue hater faced a jump situation against Reyes in the 2005 U.S.l open...and what did he do? He went and got his BREAK CUE...which a phenolic tip and hit the jump shot, pocketing the OB. He did NOT use his playing cue...so if jump cues should be banned then using a break cue with a rock hard tip should be banned too since they are BOTH "technology" differenct than the playing cue.

[ QUOTE ]
Jump cues offer choice, and degrade the option of safety, as well as the kick. Can you argue that?<hr /></blockquote>

First, choice and therefore fan interest is one of the things that most favors the use of jump cues. As far as jump cues degrading safety play, I don't think the two are related at all. By definition, a jump cue is used to hit an OB that cannot be hit directly so there is no safety option...only a kicking option.

As for kicking, intentional kick safeties are the domain of champions and most of them can't hit the preferred side of the ball so as to execute an intentional safety with any regularity.

So, in my mind you jump MOSTLY because you think you can pocket the OB and you kick when you are unlikely to pocket the ball.

You also kick at a hanger...not jump because the CB might leave the table. You also kick when you are a heavy favorite to send the OB in ROUGHLY the right direction...like up table, leaving the CB down table.

You kick at almost all OBs that lie near a rail for fear of jumping the CB off the table (especially cross table shots).

So I submit that any player who practices only jump shots and foresakes kicking is not a champion and that in the league player world the jump only player will lose a lot of racks to players of the same skill rating that practice both types of shots.

[ QUOTE ]
What you say about the faster cloth is true. In terms of more force being created, there is a larger margin of error. But coupled with that is the fact that the total force required to run an average rack will also go up. Shooting harder takes more accuracy. Lets also not forget that when guys ran hundreds of balls on slow cloth, it was mostly all straight pool. So sure they were accurate, but an average shot distance for 14.1 is what, 2-3 feet? 4? As we all know, its not uncommon to need 15 or more feet to get shape in 9ball. Shot for shot, the average distance is far greater in the 9ball games of today.<hr /></blockquote>

I agree with everything you say above and in fact, that is one of the reasons I think that straight pool is overrated by some in terms of its supposed requirement for greater skill.

Spot the 9 on the break and play no slop (like many play 8 Ball) i.e. all shots must be called and the luck vs skill gap between those two games narrows dramatically!

[ QUOTE ]
While jumping "successfully" may be an art, succeeding is often the result of a lucky safety (after a hit). More often than not, a good kick is a better shot anyway(IMO).<hr /></blockquote>

As I suggested above, ending up safe after a kick...other than VERY close quarter kick shots, involves a LARGE degree of luck too and that luck factor increases dramatically as fewer balls are left on the table.

But I FULLY agree that kicking is often the better play and that jump cues are WAY over-used by amateurs...less so by pros...most of whom are VERY good kickers and some of whom are GREAT kickers.


[ QUOTE ]
Despite all that I have said, I am still in favor of whatever is good for the game of pool. And I admit, a good jump shot is more exciting to see than a good safety or kick(just as a home run beats a sacrifice fly). As you have said, the fans matter a great deal, and I respect that. I am not the unibomber some might think I am, I have nothing against technology. I just wonder where we draw that line in the sand, if ever. <hr /></blockquote>

I agree that your question is extremely appropriate but like "What is the meaning of life", has no provable answer.

We all just have to express our views on one issue at a time but I think we agree that it is a FUNDAMENTAL mistake to ignore spectator wishes.

As I noted in another post...don't believe me...just watch any televised match and when a player drills in a long jumper, that shot will get THE most fan cheering of any other shot in the entire match!

Pool, in particular, is a wounded puppy in terms of the economics and IMHO we should hasten to err on the side of new, popular innovations if we don't want to watch all professional pool to suffer the fate of straight pool by becoming nearly extinct...and there is a REASON for that extinction.

Like it or not, 14.1 just bores the average pool fan to tears. I started out playing 14.1 and personally LOVE the game but the FACT of the matter is that VERY few people in the mass audience agree with me.

Everyone who cares about the longevity of our sport needs to understand that we don't make the "laws of the jungle"...we only abide by them or perish...and the law of the jungle is SHORT racks...relatively short races...AND JUMP CUES!!!!!!!!!!! (-:

[ QUOTE ]
Dammit, Jim! If this stuff about 2-3 MPH is true, I hold you directly responsible for my next sell out purchase. I will never live this one down. 3 cues now? I will need a new case; I am so done. Are you sure its 2-3 MPH? I ask because the website says 3.2 percent more speed, but nothing about MPH that I can find. Either way, thanks for making some great points, Jim. <hr /></blockquote>

WOAH there big fella! (-:

That 2-3 mph figure was just a SMALL sample of people I saw having their break speeds gunned. At typical break speeds of 15-20 mph I think many people would get that result but the BIG breaks who are smacking it at in the mid 20s mph range would get a MUCH smaller increase.

The Predator stats are vs. other break cues...not vs. regular cues so at 20 mph, a 3% increase is "only .6 mph.

But Jack Koehler in Science of Pocket Billiards suggests that overall IMPACT is a factor of nearly twice the increase in speed so even picking up 1 mph is a big deal.

I better shut up now since I may already have set a forum record for length of post!

Regards,
Jim

Cydpkt
02-01-2008, 08:34 AM
I said in another thread about jump cues is that they are only shorter. If someone builds something that is regulation in length then it can't be banned. If a person can jump with a regulation cue then they have to start banning certain tips and ferrules as well. I can imagine some company coming out with an extension that attaches to a jump cue that makes it regulation in length. What would they do then ban all jump shots?

av84fun
02-01-2008, 01:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cydpkt:</font><hr> I said in another thread about jump cues is that they are only shorter. If someone builds something that is regulation in length then it can't be banned. If a person can jump with a regulation cue then they have to start banning certain tips and ferrules as well. I can imagine some company coming out with an extension that attaches to a jump cue that makes it regulation in length. What would they do then ban all jump shots? <hr /></blockquote>

You raise an excellent point. The keys to the jump cue are:

1. Being so short, the player (especially shorter players)can jack up more with less of a "side arm" stroke.

2. Harder tips.

3. Probably most importantly MUCH less weight.

So, if someone could invent a standard length cue made of some "space age" material that it would be as light as a jump cue without any more "flex" upon CB impact, then jumping with such a cue would be significantly easier than with a standard cue.

Having said that, I will reiterate that technolgical changes in almost all sports have been allowed over the decades and usually for ONE SINGLE PURPOSE....FAN ENJOYMENT!!

Most other sports have been "smarter" than pro pool...especially on the male side which remains in a state of disarray.

Since the jump shot is without doubt, the most "popular" kind of shot in pool from the FAN'S point of view, banning jump cues is just not very smart in the context of the overall health of the sport...(or lack of health).

Analogies abound but there is NO difference between the adoption of the "lively baseball" and the use of the jump cue. The lively baseball was introduced for ONE reason and ONE reason only...MORE "TOTAL OFFENSE AND ESPECIALLY HOMERUNS...BECAUSE FANS LIKE OFFENSE AND ESPECIALLY HOME RUNS. End of story.

Anyone who wants to ban jump cues is saying that they simply don't care what the average fan wants and refuses to break with tradition when every other major sport has done exactly that...repeatedly...over their history.

Regards,
Jim

Bambu
02-01-2008, 04:02 PM
A hollowed out extension wouldnt do it for me. I dont know about the rest of them, but the predator air jump has a layer of something in it, which isnt wood. Like the frog jumper which was banned, it seems far removed from a regular cue. Why cant they make a good one out of light wood, but at least close to regular size? Who knows, maybe somebody will.

Bambu
02-01-2008, 04:18 PM
I am going to have to raise the white flag about here, Jim. You couldnt really lose this one, with things being the way they are. But, nice job either way. As we both know, I cannot single handedly fight technology, or even jump cues. Thats why I finally broke down and bought one. And if thats what everyone wants, so be it.
I was only making a last stand for the purists, but I have known this was a losing proposition. It has been interesting to hear the different viewpoints, and they are not without merit.
This discussion reminds me of the house pro where I grew up, at the golden q in queens. Back then it was 9-ball entering the pool scene, and Danny was a straight pool purist. He fought the game of 9ball for years, all by himself. He tried anyway, and eventually had to give in for obvious reasons.

Deeman3
02-01-2008, 04:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>

Having said that, I will reiterate that technolgical changes in almost all sports have been allowed over the decades and usually for ONE SINGLE PURPOSE....FAN ENJOYMENT!!

<font color="blue"> While I agree with a lot of your post, this simply is not true. There are many reaons for technological development in sport among them, to sell improved products to amateur players. If satisfying the fan base was the driving force, purchase by professionals would never support the costs of product development. </font color>

Most other sports have been "smarter" than pro pool...especially on the male side which remains in a state of disarray. <font color="blue">

True </font color>

Since the jump shot is without doubt, the most "popular" kind of shot in pool from the FAN'S point of view, banning jump cues is just not very smart in the context of the overall health of the sport...(or lack of health).

<font color="blue"> I hope that's not the case although you could be right. Of the few tickets that are sold to professional events, I would not think the allowing of jump shots would even be considered by the public. Who is playing, the size of the tournament, the location, etc. would be much higher considerations for fans, IMO </font color>

Analogies abound but there is NO difference between the adoption of the "lively baseball" and the use of the jump cue. The lively baseball was introduced for ONE reason and ONE reason only...MORE "TOTAL OFFENSE AND ESPECIALLY HOMERUNS...BECAUSE FANS LIKE OFFENSE AND ESPECIALLY HOME RUNS. End of story.

Anyone who wants to ban jump cues is saying that they simply don't care what the average fan wants and refuses to break with tradition when every other major sport has done exactly that...repeatedly...over their history.

<font color="blue">Jim,
You almost make it sound that the development of the jump shot and the maintaining of jump cues, which is fine by most of us, is some sort of salvation for pool in the eyes of the pool fans. I just think it is not that big a deal to fans. If that had much truth, I would think a new game, "Jump Pool" would hit the airwaves and really take off. I think most fans, even the less sophisticated look for good play and excitement be it generated by a table run, a nice shot or, on occasion, a jump shot. Wheather that is donw by a normal cue or a jump cue may not make that much difference to a pool fan. I really wish it were that simple.... </font color>

<hr /></blockquote>

av84fun
02-01-2008, 11:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>

Having said that, I will reiterate that technolgical changes in almost all sports have been allowed over the decades and usually for ONE SINGLE PURPOSE....FAN ENJOYMENT!!

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue"> While I agree with a lot of your post, this simply is not true. There are many reaons for technological development in sport among them, to sell improved products to amateur players. If satisfying the fan base was the driving force, purchase by professionals would never support the costs of product development. </font color><hr /></blockquote>

Actually, I think you confirm my premise. To sell "improved products" to amateurs...they must LIKE the products! Amateurs liked the lively baseball because they could hit it farther...just like the pros (relatively)


[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue"> I hope that's not the case although you could be right. Of the few tickets that are sold to professional events, I would not think the allowing of jump shots would even be considered by the public. Who is playing, the size of the tournament, the location, etc. would be much higher considerations for fans, IMO </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

Sure. The popularity of a sport is based on incremental characteristics that are pleasing to fans...not just one and I didn't mean to imply anything other than that. But still, ADDING incrementally to fan enjoyment is a proven, time-tested strategy. But as I noted before, such "improvements", to be accepted by the masses, must always be GRADUAL and EVOLUTIONARY.

If the baseball was made SO lively that the bottom of the batting order started to jack home runs all the time and baseball scores began to resemble basketball scores, then such change would have never come into being.

Clearly, using a jump cue...and in fact, jumping AT ALL is evolutionary.

As for fan enthusiasm, I just suggest watching matches in which great jump shots are used...listening to the fan reaction, and then seeing if there was any other fan reaction that was nearly as enthusiastic in the rest of the match. In the HUGE percentage of cases, the great jump shot will win hands down.



[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">Jim,
You almost make it sound that the development of the jump shot and the maintaining of jump cues, which is fine by most of us, is some sort of salvation for pool in the eyes of the pool fans. I just think it is not that big a deal to fans. <hr /></blockquote>

</font color>

I'm glad you said "alomost" because that was not my point at all. (see above)

There is only one true "salvation" of pro pool and that is MONEY and even that might not work. What I mean is...raise enough money...and I would suggest that $50 million would be the MINIMUM figure, so that a single "League" and Governing body could be formed that would provided MUCH higher payouts....could access LIVE TV coverage and that would require pros to sign onto EXCLUSIVELY...then maybe this sport would have a shot at getting out of the doldrums in is now in.

And by doldrums...I refer to the new IPT tactic of getting world champion players to participate in $5,000.00 winner take all events. Their agreeing to do such a thing is a clear act of desperation.

Regards,
Jim

poolmouse
02-10-2008, 11:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>If 9 Ball were a game of chance, then any league banger can beat a world champion roughly half the time.<hr /></blockquote>

Nine ball isn't entirely a game of chance, but there's a good amount of luck involved a lot of times. I've seen B players slop in a few time and win against a much better player. That simply won't happen in straight pool.

Poolmouse

Bambu
02-11-2008, 09:39 AM
Looks like carol has some serious "juice" down at amsterdam billiards. According to the site, the rule has been changed....jump cues allowed. Did you ask tony why they were banned to begin with? Just curious.

av84fun
02-11-2008, 10:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote poolmouse:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>If 9 Ball were a game of chance, then any league banger can beat a world champion roughly half the time.<hr /></blockquote>

Nine ball isn't entirely a game of chance, but there's a good amount of luck involved a lot of times. I've seen B players slop in a few time and win against a much better player. That simply won't happen in straight pool.

Poolmouse <hr /></blockquote>

As they say about football..."On any given day, any team can beat any other." That is true as was proven by the Giants who defeated the obviously better team...if not the best team in NFL history, with ONE SINGLE CIRCUS CATCH.

True, the Giant's offensive line played inspired football, but erase that ONE catch and the Giants would have lost.

Over time, the best team/player wins which is why Allison has won more wpba events than all other players COMBINED...playing 9 Ball, not straight pool.

Comparing 9 Ball to straight pool doesn't address the issue that 9 Ball has a luck factor that can be reduced. Better to compare 9 Ball today vs. 9 Ball that was played in days gone by when the 9 was spotted if made on the break, you had to break from the box and slop was spotted.

And the touted absence of luck in straight pool...a game I love...is a myth.

The vast majority of 14.1 matches featured 20-30 innings. 125-50 runs were a SMALL minority occurrance. So think it through. There is only ONE safety break in the match.

So after that first rack is loosened up then there is no other safety play required EXCEPT when position is missed or when the balls roll unlucky when a player goes into the rack.

In a race to 125, there are 9 full rack break attempts and dozens more cluster break outs required. While the CB path and cluster ball paths can be GUESSED at, they cannot be predicted with utter precision so there are LOTS of good rolls/bad rolls in straight pool.

I am NOT disrespecting a game that I love. It's just not the PURE SKILL game that urban legend suggests it is.

Regards,
Jim

Deeman3
02-11-2008, 10:28 AM
[quote=av84fun but erase that ONE catch and the Giants would have lost.

Regards,
Jim <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Of course, that statement can be made about almost any football game where the end score is less than 6 points. If you could take away one play from New England, say a caught pass, the results would be the same. I think that's the reason they bother to show up and play the game. So, in my mind, the best team, on that day, wins.</font color>

CarolNYC
02-11-2008, 10:41 AM
Hi Bambu,
No,no juice!
Actually,I didnt-when we talked I just asked "why" and he said "dont worry ,we're changing that and some other things"
Wish I could be more help-I think maybe because the caliber of players,ya know-most of them can jump with their own cues-this tour is really geared toward professionalism and I like the rules,some save time,some incorporate respect for the game and eachother! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Carol

Bambu
02-11-2008, 09:22 PM
I see. Well, thanks anyway carol. Either way, I'm glad the tournament was a success.

Sid_Vicious
02-11-2008, 10:16 PM
Let me make a reference to football with this topic. I grew up with elders simply eating up football ground running, and admiring the 3-0 wins. THEN throwing the skin started, and that sport has done nothing but accelerate. Jumping with a JC, imo is an evolution, just as the passing game was in football. It is time that the intense, fundamental thinking players let the JCs alone, and learn to PIN the safeties rather than the zone safeties. The crowd loves it, and right there is the key to why all JCs of regulation length should be allowed. "You(us) old timers chill out and play better lock-up safeties. It's the future, especially for the spectators, those who are the ones which pay the bills in the end run...sid

av84fun
02-12-2008, 12:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> Let me make a reference to football with this topic. I grew up with elders simply eating up football ground running, and admiring the 3-0 wins. THEN throwing the skin started, and that sport has done nothing but accelerate. Jumping with a JC, imo is an evolution, just as the passing game was in football. It is time that the intense, fundamental thinking players let the JCs alone, and learn to PIN the safeties rather than the zone safeties. The crowd loves it, and right there is the key to why all JCs of regulation length should be allowed. "You(us) old timers chill out and play better lock-up safeties. It's the future, especially for the spectators, those who are the ones which pay the bills in the end run...sid <hr /></blockquote>

RIGHT!!! If anything, there should be a rule REQUIRING at least one jump shot per rack!!! Kidding, of course but if we don't want pool to be just an excuse to drink beer and gamble then we have to wise up to what the FANS want.

And somebody has GOT to tell that lovely Irish ref. Mekela or whatever her name is to STOP shushing the audience like they are third graders. She is UNBELIEVABLE...telling the spectators to SETTLE DOWN...or SETTLE DOON as she pronounces it every time they get excited about something...even IN BETWEEN SHOTS!

Like Fats used to say..."To shark ME...you gotta throw me off the boat into da OOOOOOSHUN first!"

(-:

Bambu
02-12-2008, 10:19 AM
Its all good conversation, sid. But, I dont see football passing as a relevant analogy to full ball jumps with a non-regulation cue. Nothing new was invented to create passing, and whether they did or not, quarterbacks always knew how to throw the ball. Or was football originally a game with no passing allowed? If it was, I am too young to remember that. But, its not as if a quarterback needs some new piece of equipment to throw a good pass.....just a strong front line and an arm.
Jumping balls began with 9ball, as I remember it. I wont forget the first jump shot I ever saw, it was done with only a shaft....where the shaft was practically thrown, dart style at the cueball. To me, thats impressive. And I dont know why that was banned in favor of something easier.
The jump cue is revolutionary because it features a brand new piece of equipment never seen or heard of by previous generations of players. I cant think of any other sport that did anything even close to that. Gadgets are one thing, but this is clearly a new tool which pool has never seen before. Further, the jump cue encroaches upon other facets of pool which in my opinion, require more skill(kicking and safety play). Pool can still evolve into jump shots without the use of cheesey equipment.
This reminds me of the olympics and their new policy of allowing runners with bionic legs and feet to enter races. If you can beat me in a race, but with machines for legs.....did you really win? Now, I know the natural runner does not have the option of stepping out to purchase himself a new set of bionic legs of his own to start the match.
But I can buy a jump cue of my own, and I have. And I even kinda like it, its fun. I just think its cheap cheating, and that we should have drawn the line at the jump cue. We dont need jump cues, all we need is another pool movie. Somebody call hollywood, and straighten them out, dammit! Tell em who you are, and make your demands. Tell em you know Dr. Dave, that should ice it!

av84fun
02-12-2008, 11:54 AM
Bambu [quoteThe jump cue is revolutionary because it features a brand new piece of equipment never seen or heard of by previous generations of players. I cant think of any other sport that did anything even close to that. <hr /></blockquote>

I am enjoying this discussion and don't mean to be argumentative. But I don't agree with your premise.

The jump cue is a pool cue with a tip on one end and a butt on the other. So, it is merely a shorter version of exactly the same piece of equipment that has been used in the modern era of pool. It is therefore, an evolutionary change in equipment not a revolutionary one.

Analogies in other sports abound. The "lively baseball", synthetic material tennis racquet frames and the over-sized face. Fiberglass polls in poll vaulting had a HUGE impact on that sport and virtually obsoleted all prior records.

Golf has witnessed a continuous series of product introductions and redesigns. In its earliest days, a "set" of golf clubs numbered about 6. Golf ball dimple patterns have continuously evolved so now you can choose a low trajectory pattern for windy days...etc. Of course the metal wood was a SIGNIFICANT change...but they are STILL golf clubs just as a jump cue is still a pool cue.

For the pro segment of the sport to survive in America, it must do exactly what so many other sports have done...which is to permit changes in the rules and equipment to ADD spectator enjoyment and excitement.

That goal is what drove all the above-referenced equipment changes. Jumping is OBVIOUSLY popular with spectators and virtually without fail, great jump shots elicit the most applause/cheering than any other shot in a given match. So there is no informed debate about spectator popularity.

Given the current rut that pro pool in America finds itself, any enhancement of spectator excitement that is even HALF WAY reasonable should be adopted.

The opposite of "If it ain't broke don't fix it" is eqaully wise. "If it ain't workin', do something different."

Regards,
Jim

Bambu
02-12-2008, 04:25 PM
I dont mind you adding in any comments, jim. Though I dont agree, I welcome any thoughts you may have. I would comment on the golf, but I am not familiar with it. If I was a wood pole vaulter though, maybe I'd be pissed!



"The jump cue is a pool cue with a tip on one end and a butt on the other. So, it is merely a shorter version of exactly the same piece of equipment that has been used in the modern era of pool. It is therefore, an evolutionary change in equipment not a revolutionary one."

I find it hard to relate to this, because a jumper is far removed from a cue. If it was not, you or I or anyone would have no problem using it to shoot regularly with. Even though its almost the same, for some reason I have more respect for a 3 piece jump/break cue. At least that resembles a regular cue, and can also be used as one. A jumper on the other hand, is clearly not a regular cue. Just having a butt and a tip isnt enough. Its not as if "shorter versions" of other equipment is widely accepted.
On baseball, we have already improved our ball sets and cues as much as baseball has, its own bats and balls. But lets say someone comes up with a "singles" bat. A bat designed to hit cheap flare, line drive base hits. A stubby, light but perhaps corked bat, not unlike like the predator air jump. For the sake of argument, lets assume it works, just like the jumper does. I dont think MLB would approve of that, any more than they would, a super fat barrel bat(designed to hit sacrifice flies). A bat and a cue should be within certain specs.
And I dont think the jump shot alone is in any position to save, or fix pool. Other than some strides in womans pool, the sport itself has made little progress in recent years. The jumper has been around long enough to have made a difference, if it was going to.

Deeman3
02-12-2008, 04:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr> Its all good conversation, sid. But, I dont see football passing as a relevant analogy to full ball jumps with a non-regulation cue. Nothing new was invented to create passing, and whether they did or not, quarterbacks always knew how to throw the ball. Or was football originally a game with no passing allowed? If it was, I am too young to remember that. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Yes, at 55 I'm also much too young to remember when football had no passing. However, it is true that about 100 years ago the forward pass did not exist. I agree the analogy has about as much to do with jump cues as fish have to do with bicycles. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

All we have to do is wait for a power driven hydraulic jump cue and absolutely no skill will be required and the fan base will go through the roof! Right! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

Sid_Vicious
02-12-2008, 05:59 PM
"But, I dont see football passing as a relevant analogy to full ball jumps with a non-regulation cue"

The general basic head strong resistence from the fundamentalists in billiards toward the emergence of the jump shot, mostly due to the JC intro, IMO is relevant when looking at the growrh with the pass in football. The two evolutions certainly have a lot of time shift difference, but those avid "I love a good ground game and low scoring game"(my dad was one) from the time period when, yes, the pass was allowed, but had not been well accepted nor perfected, probably bumped their gums at each other running passing down the road" The stage now in pool may be about the same now with the popularity rise in jumping CBs. Maybe I a big little imagination, just thought it was sensible. The mere invention of a shrunken down cue for jumping shouldn't get so many peeps panties in a wad anyway. I always say, learn to play better safeties so a jump won't work, it's that simple, and it makes for entertainment for all...sid

Bambu
02-12-2008, 07:43 PM
Pretty interesting about football, it does seem to have a rugby laden history. http://www.essortment.com/americanfootbal_rwff.htm


But I am with you, Dee. I dont like plastic tips, lazer beams, jump cues, or any other strange devices which make things easier. I still admit to using anything I feel might help, but only because everyone else does.

Bambu
02-12-2008, 08:00 PM
I dunno, sid. I respect your opinion, but I think its a stretch in comparing jumpers to football passing. Before passing, football just wasnt football. It was more like a "no holds barred" type of rugby. You call the jumper a "mere" invention, as if its no big deal to use a modified piece of equipment. Just ask any woman and she will tell you, size does matter!

Sid_Vicious
02-12-2008, 08:19 PM
And I thought the object was to try and get the balls in the hole all this time. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif sid

Bambu
02-14-2008, 05:34 PM
So Sid, tell me about this jump cue. How close to an object ball am I supposed to be able to get? I just got the thing, but the best I seem to be able to do is about 2 balls lengths in between. Also, how far are you supposed to be able to get "on the fly?" Sometimes for the far jumps that dont require a full ball jump, it seems like a house cue does a better job. Or is the jumper supposed to jump more than say, 5 feet? If you or anyone else has any tips on using the jumper, I am listening.

Sid_Vicious
02-14-2008, 09:23 PM
First off, not all jumpers are created the same, hence particular ones really work well and many don't. Mine is the low end Lucasi I have to say that for $60, it don't get much better. The general distance I trust I can get over most all of the time is 1.5-2 balls width, but better jumping players get a lot closer that that distance. My method is the dart style, and the main thing here is to plant your feet absolutely level, feet perpendicular as possible, relax the knees a little, AND REMAIN VERY STILL during the pop. Another key is to not try too hard, concentrate your third eye at the point under the CB where the CB contact line intersects into the slate. What I found that I have to do with various jump cues is that I spend time just using all of the balls for jump opportunities(practice) and take my mind off of the "need" to make the jump. I bought a Stealth a while back and I just could not get success until I strolled the table and used this practice routine, basically just allowing myself to "find" the stance and "easy" stroke. It maybe sounds more difficult than it should, but you will find that you will get good simply by relaxing and popping the shot, over and over again. it ain't hard. I never did get any worth out of using the underhand, natural cue stroke, except with the long cues. sid

Bambu
02-15-2008, 09:06 AM
You mean you always use a dart stroke, even when you dont need to jack up that much? The dart seems a bit harder for me. I find myself only needing to do that if I am 2 balls or less away from my blocker.
Interesting about the bottom part of the cueball. I will try that, thanks alot sid.

Sid_Vicious
02-15-2008, 11:40 AM
"Interesting about the bottom part of the cueball. I will try that, thanks alot.

Your stroke is at that line at pop, key is to slow down, relax. As far as the longer jumping distance, yes, and you have lots of tools, top-english-follow-draw &amp; stop, avaliable. Trust me, it becomes a lot of fun to play shape after making a pocketed ball with the jump. You will find that aiming at a specific aim point on the OB as well during setup, same perpendicular line to the slate as you do the CB, will hone your hit and expected shape skills. Too many people try to stroke through too much on the jump, or try and pound the ball...not needed....sid

dr_dave
02-15-2008, 11:50 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr>If you or anyone else has any tips on using the jumper, I am listening.<hr /></blockquote>FYI, there some pretty good advice under "jump shot" here (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html).

Regards,
Dave

Sid_Vicious
02-15-2008, 12:01 PM
dave...Do you jump with a JC???sid

dr_dave
02-15-2008, 12:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> dave...Do you jump with a JC???sid<hr /></blockquote>In my early videos, I used a regular cue. Now, I use a Stinger jump/break cue.

Regards,
Dave

Bambu
02-17-2008, 08:04 AM
Ah, yes. Many thanks, Dr. Dave!

Bambu
02-17-2008, 08:11 AM
Yeah, you dont need to force the ball too hard into the table. That was the first thing I noticed. I have made a few balls, but cannot control the cueball much, after the hit. And it is fun, I agree. And I know there is much room for improvement. I will be working on it, thanks sid.

av84fun
02-18-2008, 01:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bambu:</font><hr>





But you originally wrote..."quoteThe jump cue is revolutionary because it features a brand new piece of equipment never seen or heard of by previous generations of players. I can't think of any other sport that did anything even close to that. "

But as I stated, a jump cue is not "revolutionary...never seen or heard of..." Rather, it is EXACTLY like a regular cue..only shorter and is therefore, evolutionary not revolutionary.

Then you wrote..."On baseball, we have already improved our ball sets..."

RIGHT...and the changes were evolutionary having mostly to do with the core material. Why do you accept evolutionary change in baseball but not in pool?

How about hockey sticks? Back in the day, the blade had to be FLAT...now it is curved which makes it far easier to lift the puck on slap shots and fans LOVE slap shots that don't hug the ice.

That was a BIG change...almost revolutionary.


And you know what, JUST as much controversy surrounded the curved blade as the jump cue in pool.

And so it goes.

Regards,
Jim

Bambu
02-19-2008, 08:51 AM
Hey, Jim. I can accept evolutionary changes, but it doesnt mean I have to like them.
On the baseball changes, I have said why. The size of a bat didnt change, only the craftsmanship. Unlike pool, there are no special bats for hitting in special situations.
Interesting about the hockey. Its always good to learn new things, thanks. But again, there was never an invention of a completely different hockey stick. It may have been modified, but that was across the board. There are no specialty hockey sticks that exist only for certain shots.
Btw Jim, I bought that predator bk2, and I am very happy with it. However, my ego holds you directly responsible(j/k) for going from 1 cue, to having resorted to 3 cues and a new case. My schon, now has an inferiority complex. It feels violated, having to stand beside the jumper, and the break cue. As much as I like the new equipment, things will just never be the same. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

av84fun
02-19-2008, 11:46 AM
Bambu..."Hey, Jim. I can accept evolutionary changes, but it doesnt mean I have to like them."

LOL...AGREED!

I suppose the debate about whether a jump cue is evolutionary or revolutionary is a "glass half full or half empty" argument.

If a curved blade hockey stick is a modification, then is a short pool cue also a modification or is it an entirely new implement?

But if you held up a jump cue and asked 100 pool players the following multiple choice question, I think all 100 would answer "A".

Is what I am holding:
A. A pool cue.
B. A SWAT Team weapon.
C. A tulip bulb planting tool.

(-:

A jump cue is just a short pool cue! (-:
And like golf, there has been significant evolution in baseball bats during the 150 history of the game.

Baseball bats used to be FLAT (like cricket bats)!

And while I take FULL responsibility for your 3 cue rig...just don't send me a bill!!
(-:

Bambu
02-19-2008, 05:11 PM
Lol no, I wont be sending you the bill. It does seem to pack an extra punch to it, so I cant complain.
But that pool example isnt fair. You could hold up a mini baseball bat too. It would be identified as "a bat" but would be a toy. Even non baseball players would know that.
But to a non pool player, a jumper might look like a magic wand, a back scratcher, plumbers magnet, or something used to grab toilet paper off the top shelf.