PDA

View Full Version : Need feedback for One Pocket Tournaments



Greg/Diamond
10-31-2002, 11:33 PM
This is my first official post......... Besides hoasting the One Pocket division at the Derby City Tournament I've been given permission to try and bring back the US Open One Pocket Championship. I've run into problems at One Pocket events due to matches running too long, not fitting into a time frame which is manageable. Matches have ran as long a 6 hours while only racing to 3 games................ Many options have been talked about to correct this situation. While at the US Open in Va. Marty Herman suggested a time clock like one used in Chess might help. After talking with other players I'd also like the CCB players input........... We've allocated 2 1/2 hours for play at the Derby the last few years and haven't had many matches go over, but occasionally one match sets the hole tournament back. Its not that the players are playing slow. I'ts just that the rules as they stand don't require a player to shoot at his hole and infact a match could be neverending................. This doesn't work for tournament play! We've came to the conclusion that by using a shot clock where each player would be allowed 1 1/2 hours at the table including breaks and racking one's own balls would be enough time for normal play............ It would work by pushing a button on the clock after your turn at the table resulting in time now being used going against the incoming player. The clock would display the amount of time used by each player separately, allowing each player to know how much time they have left......................
If you play a great safe and it takes a long time for the other player to figure a way out, it works in you're favor, because the catch is if you run out ot time the match is over!!!!!!! I know this may sound drastic, but before you reply please play a race to 3 with someone.................... I'ts not my intension to change the way you gamble at the game or put anyone in a situation which drastically changes the way one pocket is played. Only give it a chance to fit in a tournament format. Please feel free to be the devil's advocate and give input.....Other ideas will be considered....... Greg/Diamond

Troy
10-31-2002, 11:51 PM
Just a thought, but what about declaring a winner after 1 1/2 hours as the player with the highest TOTAL ball count regardless of the number of games.

Troy...~~~ Has run "handicap" 1-Pocket tourneys this way
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Greg/Diamond:</font><hr> This is my first official post......... Besides hoasting the One Pocket division at the Derby City Tournament I've been given permission to try and bring back the US Open One Pocket Championship. I've run into problems at One Pocket events due to matches running too long, not fitting into a time frame which is manageable. Matches have ran as long a 6 hours while only racing to 3 games................ Many options have been talked about to correct this situation. While at the US Open in Va. Marty Herman suggested a time clock like one used in Chess might help. After talking with other players I'd also like the CCB players input........... We've allocated 2 1/2 hours for play at the Derby the last few years and haven't had many matches go over, but occasionally one match sets the hole tournament back. Its not that the players are playing slow. I'ts just that the rules as they stand don't require a player to shoot at his hole and infact a match could be neverending................. This doesn't work for tournament play! We've came to the conclusion that by using a shot clock where each player would be allowed 1 1/2 hours at the table including breaks and racking one's own balls would be enough time for normal play............ It would work by pushing a button on the clock after your turn at the table resulting in time now being used going against the incoming player. The clock would display the amount of time used by each player separately, allowing each player to know how much time they have left......................
If you play a great safe and it takes a long time for the other player to figure a way out, it works in you're favor, because the catch is if you run out ot time the match is over!!!!!!! I know this may sound drastic, but before you reply please play a race to 3 with someone.................... I'ts not my intension to change the way you gamble at the game or put anyone in a situation which drastically changes the way one pocket is played. Only give it a chance to fit in a tournament format. Please feel free to be the devil's advocate and give input.....Other ideas will be considered....... Greg/Diamond




















<hr></blockquote>

11-01-2002, 12:01 AM
Are you saying if a player runs out on time, even if they are ahead in the set, they lose? Couldn't the other player once they know a player is running short on time just put balls up table to delay the game and cause the other player run out on time? I have no answers right off the top of my head and I understand your problems, but I don't like seeing you trying to solve it by tampering with the play of the game itself. (I will be playing by the way)

Voodoo Daddy
11-01-2002, 12:07 AM
Greg, thanks for including us, I for one am impressed that a promoter would ask the mass's. As the "only" guy to try a OnePocket tour on the planet and a former participant in the US Open One Pocket Tournament(1999), I can give you some of my veiws. Races to three can be twenty minutes or three hours...depends on who is playing, I watched the finals of the '99 open between Nevel and Joyner...race to 5 in 45 minutes...then years later watched Varner and Martin in a 6 1/2 marathon!! The question is what to do with a up-table game and the score 1-0 after 45 minutes. Ray Martin and myself talked about the "Shot Clock" ala chess clock like Marty Herman suggested after my tour ended...a great idea as long as you make it crystal clear that this is the rule, period. A 2 hour window is what I would shoot for because you gave up 2 1/2 hours before and in my opinion 1 1/2 hours might be too tight. Send me a PM if you need more info.

Steve Ferraro
{aka}
Voodoo Daddy

Chris Cass
11-01-2002, 12:12 AM
Hi Greg,

I recently attended a tourney in Olathe, Ks. It was ran by Evelyn and Danny. I don't know their last names but it was a Midwest 9ball Tour stop. It was a one pocket event also. They had a 45 second shot clock that would result in losing your turn at the table.

It mainly wasn't put into use but warned players that it will be enforced if requested by an opponent or if they noticed a match taking too long.

The tourney ran smooth and I don't know for sure what the longest race to 3 took. I'm sure they're easy to get a hold of if you'd like there take on it. I happened not to have a problem.

Regards,

C.C.~~best regards to Mark too.

11-01-2002, 12:15 AM
greg/diamond,

well, son, you might just be onto something.

my first impression was that 1=p takes as long as it takes and that's part of he beauty of the game. forget live, plan to delay and edit since no one in their right mind wants to sit and watch the endless precious little shots that some of us are addicted to.

but............

that must have been the problem for pro chess when they brought in the clock. s'pose they could wait and study and think and study and... till one falls over, if you let 'em do it.

i like it. since 1-p brings out more extravagant shots than any other game, 2 and 3 railers are not that unusual and 1-c banks are cheap. with a shot clock, it could get interesting.

i still think you would have to edit the t.v. product.

dan...w/early van morrison in the backround.(these dreams of you.)

Greg/Diamond
11-01-2002, 12:23 AM
Troy, This is a good start. I really appreciate you're reply. I hope my post didn't make you think I was trying to make the match last 1 1/2 hours. I meant for the match to last no more than 3 hours total. Allowing each player 1 1/2 hours at the table. The amount of time needed is still up for debate. But it seems logical to me that some amount of time can be found for a race to 3 that would be fair to all envolved including spectators..............The change you suggested is definitely worth considering. My main concern is I want to change the game as little as possible. And totalling balls changes strategies as the end game. What I mean is a person can win a match making 24 balls total, while the looser made more balls as many as 37 in a loosing effort. One pocket as it stands now only requires you get 8 balls first! You're style of play and shot selection is greatly influenced by the score and number of balls you may give up if you don't execute properly. Just keep the other player below 8 and you're OK. I don't want to give up these strategies if I don't have to.....Thanks,,,,, Greg/Diamond

Greg/Diamond
11-01-2002, 12:42 AM
Steve, I seem to have miss led my first post. I was thinking about a 3 hour match with each player having 1 1/2 hours each at the table. The amount of time ,as everything ,is negotiable. With everyone's help I'm confident some fair format can be derived. Botom line One Pocket is too great a game to not find a format for tournament play! I know I'll not be able to please everyone, but we've got to find a way for tournaments with as few changes as possible. Kinda like not playing an ahead set in 9 ball rather in tournaments we play a race.......Greg/Diamond

Alfie
11-01-2002, 02:22 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Greg/Diamond:</font><hr> I've run into problems at One Pocket events due to matches running too long, not fitting into a time frame which is manageable.

While at the US Open in Va. Marty Herman suggested a time clock like one used in Chess might help. After talking with other players I'd also like the CCB players input [...] <hr></blockquote>

Greg, there was a recent thread about Grady M's upcoming one pocket tournament in another forum. The use of a chess clock and other strategies were discussed briefly. You might find it worth a look. The thread URL is
http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=7f856778.0210101140.2a95ac6e%40post ing.google.com

Voodoo Daddy
11-01-2002, 02:26 AM
Well, lets clang some heads together Greg, I'll be with the Seniors next week at the Mizerak Senior Tour stop in Fl. I'll ask Danny D., Nick and several others for imput and I'll send them to you via e-mail...is that good for you?

Ken
11-01-2002, 08:37 AM
Greg,
I'm afraid that using just a chess clock and giving the game to the person with time left will drastically change the game. An inferior player may never attempt to put a ball near his pocket as that might give his opponent an opportunity to score. He knows that he can win by shooting fast but putting all balls up table never attempting to make a ball. That would be a real boring game with the possibility of someone winning when he is behind 0-7. Imagine what would happen if they both adopted that strategy. A 0-0 game with both of them shooting like Luc Salvas. It would certainly turn pool into a sport with both players running around the table and back to the clock.

You might consider giving them one hour apiece and then putting the one running out of time on a shot clock as someone may have already suggested.
KenCT

11-01-2002, 09:02 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Greg/Diamond:</font><hr> This is my first official post......... Besides hoasting the One Pocket division at the Derby City Tournament I've been given permission to try and bring back the US Open One Pocket Championship. I've run into problems at One Pocket events due to matches running too long, not fitting into a time frame which is manageable. Matches have ran as long a 6 hours while only racing to 3 games................ Many options have been talked about to correct this situation. While at the US Open in Va. Marty Herman suggested a time clock like one used in Chess might help. After talking with other players I'd also like the CCB players input........... We've allocated 2 1/2 hours for play at the Derby the last few years and haven't had many matches go over, but occasionally one match sets the hole tournament back. Its not that the players are playing slow. I'ts just that the rules as they stand don't require a player to shoot at his hole and infact a match could be neverending................. This doesn't work for tournament play! We've came to the conclusion that by using a shot clock where each player would be allowed 1 1/2 hours at the table including breaks and racking one's own balls would be enough time for normal play............ It would work by pushing a button on the clock after your turn at the table resulting in time now being used going against the incoming player. The clock would display the amount of time used by each player separately, allowing each player to know how much time they have left......................
If you play a great safe and it takes a long time for the other player to figure a way out, it works in you're favor, because the catch is if you run out ot time the match is over!!!!!!! I know this may sound drastic, but before you reply please play a race to 3 with someone.................... I'ts not my intension to change the way you gamble at the game or put anyone in a situation which drastically changes the way one pocket is played. Only give it a chance to fit in a tournament format. Please feel free to be the devil's advocate and give input.....Other ideas will be considered....... Greg/Diamond




















<hr></blockquote>


Maybe have a 1 1/2 hour time limit for the matches (the whole race to 3) for both players, and have a 1 minute shot clock or whatever you think is fair.

The player with the most balls/games wins.

The 1 minute time clock would prevent anyone who is up a game or a few balls from "stalling" for an hour or so just because he/she is ahead. The resulting foul would be a loss of a ball (spotted of course), and the other persons shot.

The 1 1/2 hour time limit would be the amount of time that was allowed for the WHOLE SET, and would be for BOTH players, not just one at a time. (I can't imagine how frustrating it would be to have to "clock out" on each shot). You could allow a 2 hour time limit for the set, but with the 1-minute shot clock (which should be sufficient in most cases) the games may last only 20-30 minutes.

Tom_In_Cincy
11-01-2002, 09:16 AM
Greg/Diamnod

IMO the the matches that take longer than the 3 hours alloted, are not typical, they happen and there must be something done to speed them up. Tournaments are run on a schedule, all players know this. When extremely slow play takes place, it is out of the ordinary, it should be delt with by the TD in an appropriate way. This has usually been a shot clock.

IMO, I would rather see the players of the "slow" match, be put on a shot clock, than changing the rules for all the other players that will be completing their matches within the 3 hours.

One senerio might be that if the score is 1-1 with 60 minutes left (of a 3 hr. match), each player will only get 30 minutes on the chess clock method. This way the players know that they get 2 hours of play that won't be infulenced by the clock. IMO this would cover over 80% of the matches.

In those 'slow play' matches, the players will know that they are about to be put on shot clocks. In other words, the players will know that they will have to play under a shot clock if they play slow. The rule will only apply to the match that needs it.

11-01-2002, 09:34 AM
A long match does not necessarily mean slow play. Also a long match does not mean a bad match. I have seen two champions play with the last three balls for an hour and the play was masterful. I would hate to see this part of the game taken away. It destroys the meaning of the game. I would rather see a shorter set, then see the game ruined. There needs to be another way or why have the tournament at all. I hate to be blunt, but that is how I feel. I will still play but I won't like it.

Ross
11-01-2002, 10:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Chris Cass:</font><hr> Hi Greg,

I recently attended a tourney in Olathe, Ks. It was ran by Evelyn and Danny. I don't know their last names but it was a Midwest 9ball Tour stop. It was a one pocket event also. They had a 45 second shot clock that would result in losing your turn at the table.

It mainly wasn't put into use but warned players that it will be enforced if requested by an opponent or if they noticed a match taking too long.

The tourney ran smooth and I don't know for sure what the longest race to 3 took. I'm sure they're easy to get a hold of if you'd like there take on it. I happened not to have a problem.

Regards,

C.C.~~best regards to Mark too.
<hr></blockquote>

This sounds like the best solution to me. For normal speed players/games, nothing is changed. For particularly slow players/games (which is the source of the problems for a tournament) the minimal amount of intervention is done.

Cumulative shot clocks (like in chess) sound good in theory. But all kinds of strategies that have little to do with 1-pocket could be adopted by the guy who is behind to put the other guy into time trouble. Better to use shot clocks on individual shots, I would think.

Chris Cass
11-01-2002, 11:25 AM
Hi Ross,

I agree, this is the easiest way to get things going. One thing I will say about these two. Evelyn and Danny know how to run a tourney. They don't screw around and mean business when they speak. They are honest and are they're for the players and spectator as well.

Players won't play another tourney, if they pull a no show when someone has them in the calcutta. They'll make them pay that money back to the person buying them in the cal before thier, name goes on the sign up sheet.

Although, I haven't done anything in any of their, rack your own tourneys. They seem to be one of the most professionally run tourneys, I've ever been to. Another is a guy from MI. I believe. He ran the one in Peoria. Good tourney and well ran, with what he had to work with. His name was Dean.

Regards,

C.C.~~can't say enough about Evelyn and Danny and Dean....

Scott Lee
11-01-2002, 11:40 AM
Chris....Danny &amp; Evelyn Dysart are the two you are talking about. They have been running tournaments for at least the past 15 yrs, that I know of...maybe longer! Great reps in the biz, and very nice people too!

Scott

11-01-2002, 05:51 PM
Greg, I'll give you my thoughts on this. First of all, I am a fan of Houston Dan, but I really can't imagine a one-pocket match on television. Never, edited or not. Only the pool players would watch for more than five minutes.

I believe a shot clock would be the only usable solution to the time problem. Allow a reasonable time and use it on every shot. When the balls stop rolling, the player coming off the table can hit the button and the clock would start for the incoming player. If the clock runs out before he shoots, charge him with a foul and give him a new clock. If it runs out again, another foul. Three fouls and you forfeit the game.

You can't make him give up his turn. That might be the best thing he could hope for in some situations.

I really hope you can find a workable format and promote a good one-pocket tournament. It's the second-best thing one can do on a pool table. Good luck.

OnePocketChamp
11-01-2002, 06:28 PM
I would love to see some serious consideration given to establishing a sensible method to regulate the time factor at one pocket tournaments but also realize that any changes will effect the game. As time runs down, both players will be less apt to play a up table game and this is a solid stragety when one player is up on balls pocketed. If a shot clock is used and both players are alloted a pre-determined amount of time then the advantage to play a up table game swings toward the player with more alloted time left. Pandora's box is opened and the game is changed forever.
Maybe, as a way to speed up play the slower player looses his right to the break
Thanks for giving the masses an opportunity to try to contribute.

Greg/Diamond
11-01-2002, 08:54 PM
I agree with what you are saying. I'm on the net hoping someone can come up with rules that will change as little as possible and put it in a time frame where a tournament can exsist. Even if we shortened the match to a race to 1, there's no limit on how long a game can last. No matter how exciting that game might be. We can't run a tournament without being able to schedule matches. Like I said earlier, the Derby only had a couple problem matches. I'm just looking for better options. With everyone's mind working something will pop up.......Greg/Diamond

Greg/Diamond
11-01-2002, 09:02 PM
Thanks for the info.. I wasn't aware of the previous discussion. I did talk with Grady a couple days ago and Allen Hopkins today. Somehow, someway, someone will find a way to solve this problem.......Greg/Diamond

Greg/Diamond
11-01-2002, 09:22 PM
Ken,
I understand what you are saying. Would you help me moniter all the sugestions coming in. I feel strongly there's a reasonable answer somewhere. If we get a couple good sugestions, maybe we can take some kind of vote and try them out. I'm not making any changes a my tournaments as of yet, only seeking improvements.......Greg/Diamond

Chris Cass
11-01-2002, 09:51 PM
And just where have you been mister? I've been looking for your posts for like what seems 6 mths. LOL

Good to hear from ya Scott. Thanks for clearing that up for me. They are very nice people. They trust me totally and although were friends they make me hold up to their standards. /ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif That's a good thing.

Regards,

C.C.~~thinking of buying a, Scott Lee lookalike hair piece./ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif

cueball1950
11-01-2002, 10:38 PM
greg.... why not just have a 3 hour time limit. If they are still playing after 2 hours then warn the players that they have 1 hour left and if they are not finished by the announced time then the player who has won the most games wins the match. in case of a tie. ie 2/2 then go to who has the most balls on their side. But you would have to strickly enforce these rules.. just my opinion...mike

EZMark
11-02-2002, 03:42 PM
Greg my buddy and I will be at the Derby City Classic. I overheard Bill Staton Weenie Beanie talking about one pocket would be a better game if half the balls or more were in the kitchen rerack flip a coin winner breaks and start again. Just a thought, Thnx EZmark