PDA

View Full Version : Mid Atlantic 9-Ball Question



Steve Lipsky
01-27-2003, 12:49 PM
I was wondering if anyone who went to watch/play this tournament could tell me how the tables were breaking? Was the Sardo being used?

I ask because there were a ton of blowouts. I've never seen so many scores of 11-0 through 11-4 in matches with two strong players.

Were players keeping control of the table for 6,7,8 racks at a time? Or was this just a fluky tournament where both players had chances, but only one was getting out?

My instinct is telling me the former, and if the Sardo was being used, well, God help us all.

- Steve Lipsky

Pizza Bob
01-27-2003, 01:42 PM
Interesting concept, and I'll bet, right on the money. It seems the Sardo takes the one variable out of the game that allowed the matches to stay close in a "winner breaks" format. Someone should do a survey on this and see if it holds up. If true, then an alternate break format should be used in tournaments where the Sardo is used.

I know that generally the Sardo is looked upon with disfavor in this group, but as a promoter, it would be awful hard to turn down the money they (the Sardo's) add to any tourney. And love or hate their gizmo, there is no faulting their support of the sport. The Sardo's have demonstrated nothing but a true zeal for our sport, and we need more sponsors like them.

Just my $.02 worth.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

Steve Lipsky
01-27-2003, 05:44 PM
Hi Bob!

I do agree with you in principle; the Sardo brothers have been amazing supporters of the game. And we do need more like them.

However, here is what I have a problem with. They are making a fundamental change to the game that is not being adopted on the amateur side. If their invention were truly phenomenal, poolrooms everywhere would have bought the things. Prices are coming down, and it would only be necessary to have one or two of them per room.

But this isn't happening, and it's because players have decided they don't like this rack.

Look at what happened when Coke introduced New Coke a while back. The public didn't respond, and since Coke had shareholders to answer to, they had to pull it. If the Sardos had shareholders, there is no way they could justify continuing to produce this rack. Nobody's buying it.

As others before me have said, it is a shame that the device doesn't work. It sounded like a great idea - until they inadvertently proved that a perfectly tight rack leads to little randomness, and randomness was what kept the game dynamic.

If they really and truly want to be a part of the game, which I believe they do, they should put their energies (and, of course, their money) into promoting events. They would still get name recognition, and the players would be quite grateful for more big-money tournaments.

Just the way I see it,
Steve

Rod
01-27-2003, 06:09 PM
[ QUOTE ]
However, here is what I have a problem with. They are making a fundamental change to the game that is not being adopted on the amateur side. If their invention were truly phenomenal, poolrooms everywhere would have bought the things. Prices are coming down, and it would only be necessary to have one or two of them per room.
<hr /></blockquote>

Hi Steve,
I have the same problem. For one I just can't accept the 9 on the foot spot. The one is a sitting duck for the side pocket. All of this to prevent a wing ball from going and of course a tight rack.

I guess one or two per room, but for a tournament more would be needed. Unless it is only used near the finals. Most rooms will not spend that kind of money just to insure a tight rack. Another thought is the balls may not rack that well if the rack isn't being used on the tables all of the time. Granted their money is great to have, well this subject has been beat to death.

Rod

Ken
01-27-2003, 06:18 PM
Rod, You are correct about the rack not working so well if not used all the time. Tommy Kennedy uses the Sardo in his tour. He apparently has only one and uses it only for the finals. Even after banging the balls in pretty well the breaks are not that consistent.

We see the rack used on brand new cloth in the TV matches. Steve Tipton claims that he does not train the table except for lightly hitting the one ball. Nevertheless the breaks are predictable as long as not hit too hard.

Anything that rewards a slow break is a step in the wrong direction.
KenCT

Rod
01-27-2003, 06:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
We see the rack used on brand new cloth in the TV matches. Steve Tipton claims that he does not train the table except for lightly hitting the one ball. Nevertheless the breaks are predictable as long as not hit too hard.
<hr /></blockquote>

Hi Ken, Yes that was my thinking. Everything is near perfect conditions on tv. Normal play and wear at the pool room has racks above and below the spot. Not to mention tilted, loose balls ect. It is rare we ever see those conditions in a room unless the tables have just been recovered.

Rod

cueball1950
01-27-2003, 09:11 PM
Hi Steve. Nice to see you posting. I went to the tournament and yes they were using the Sardo rack. The players voted,from what i was told by Brady, on what ball to put on the spot. The players voted on putting the 1 ball on the spot. In my opinion the players were keeping control of the tables. Which by the way were the same 9' coin ops that they used at the DCC a couple of weeks ago. A case in point was teh Bustamante/Morris match. They lagged for the break and the 1st time Rodney had a shot was in the 7th game. Also alot of 9's were being made on the break. Another case in point was the Strickland/Salvas match.Earl was leading 6/1 and Luc made 3 or 4 -9 balls on the break and wound up beating earl 11/7. but over all it was a good tournament. I did not hear much complaining from any of the players on the playing conditions in the tournament room.....MIKE

Vicki
01-28-2003, 12:35 PM
I went and it seemed that the only person not making 3-4 balls on the break was Corey Deuel. He was giving the snap his usual "dink" (as Earl puts it) break. He had a terrible tournament, got beat 10-2 by Mika then I think Archer ran him over right after that. He was the only person I saw consistently trying to use a soft break. Maybe it had something to do with the one being racked on the spot, rather than the nine which is more common. He couldn't make a ball on the break.

Bustamante has the best break in the game. He'd be making 3-4 on the break no matter if the Sardo is used or where the balls are racked. He was consistently pocketing 4 or so on every break. Dynamite!

The Sardo rack definately adds controversy. I would prefer more excitement in the break... less predictability but if nothing else, the Sardo has nearly ended the BS arguments between players over loose racks. It is much harder to put a move on the rack. I was bored stiff watching Corey and Earl argue for 5 or more minutes between each rack pre-Sardo. Now the arguments are much shorter and more easily resolved. Whether or not that compensates for the problems it creates is another matter for another time.

Vicki

Ross
01-29-2003, 10:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cueball1950:</font><hr> ... Also alot of 9's were being made on the break. .<hr /></blockquote>
That's surprising. In all of the tournaments that I've seen with the Sardo, the 9 does not move an inch unless it is kicked by a ball on the break. Do you have any theories why the 9 was moving in this tourney?

By the way, this points to another disadvantage of the Sardo that does not seem to be widely recognized. Not only is the break predictable, but so is the end of the rack. A VERY high percentage of Sardo games end with the 9 in its original position just behind the foot spot. So you are less likely to see more difficult layouts where the 9 is in a more challenging position, such as against the short rail at the head of the table, etc.