PDA

View Full Version : suggestion for compromise w/ the Sardo rack



heater451
03-25-2002, 07:38 PM
Here's an idea:

What if, the head ball (the one) was racked back on the spot, WITH the Sardo rack, but break shots had to start from a Snooker-style "D".

Would it make any difference, concerning consistently pocketing a wing ball?

Cuemage
03-25-2002, 07:42 PM
Heater,
I've never heard of a snooker style "D"...what is it?

The Cuemage

Troy
03-25-2002, 07:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: heater451:</font><hr> Here's an idea:

What if, the head ball (the one) was racked back on the spot, WITH the Sardo rack, but break shots had to start from a Snooker-style "D".

Would it make any difference, concerning consistently pocketing a wing ball? <hr></blockquote>

You would still have the CRATERS / DIVOTS created during the "training" of the cloth /ccboard/images/icons/frown.gif

heater451
03-25-2002, 08:33 PM
Note: I did say "compromise".

Racking the 9 on the spot annoys me a lot more than the little divots on the table.

I've played small tournaments on bar tables, complete with holes in the cloth and beer stains for ambiance, I can accomodate. . . .

heater451
03-25-2002, 08:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Cuemage:</font><hr> Heater,
I've never heard of a snooker style "D"...what is it?

The Cuemage <hr></blockquote>

http://www.billiardworld.com/snooker.gif

If you go to http://www.billiardworld.com/ ,where this image is linked from, you will see that breaks go in the "D", or on the Baulk line (29" from the head rail).

If a "Baulk" line is also allowed, we may be back in the same boat, as far as the wing balls are concerned.

Cuemage
03-25-2002, 09:14 PM
thanks Heater...I kinda like the "D" idea then...I believe it requires more of a "cut" break for results

The Cuemage

Ken
03-26-2002, 11:38 AM
My suggestion:
On every table, prior to the "training", have one of the Sardo brothers rack and let the players inspect the rack. If the rack is not adequate and they can't make it adequate let them "train" the table in front of the audience and preferably while being recorded by accustats or ESPN. Let's have "truth in advertising".

Rod
03-26-2002, 03:31 PM
ha ha ha, to funny Ken! Who's going to "train" the audience to be patient while all this is going on? Maybe one of the brothers can do a juggling act, ha ha, OR that lady Caroll mentioned that had a drip, to wet the spots for training!!
It wouldn't be a foul that way. I can see it now, lady bending over table, umm just put a squirt here mam! ha ha !
It gives a completely new meaning to the term squirt in pool terms! ha ha ha ! Sorry for the visual, I just had to say that.~~ Rod's not really sorry, LMAO ha ha

shojingod
03-26-2002, 03:55 PM
Therefore they should have a break box area. I would also be good if they put the one on the spot instead of the nine. Either way with time players will learn how to make the break a skill shot anyway no matter what they decide to do with it. The soft break is here to stay it is like a de-evolution to straight pool ideology. Hard break are more eratic in my personal opinion. With a soft break on even reasonnably fast cloth there is huge spread but the ball are limited to maybe just one bank bounce each. I
guess it depends what you consider a soft or hard break. I find it easier the soft break when I focus on just the right area of the pack. It seems like I can judge the spread much better. /ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif

Doctor_D
03-27-2002, 07:06 AM
Good morning:

Why, if I may be so bold as to ask, must we modify how a game is played and/or governed because of a piece of mechanical equipment?

Dr. D.

03-27-2002, 12:34 PM
There is a logical reason that players have been breaking hard in 9-ball for so many years. The balls move more. Obviously, if you read a rack and see something that tells you there's a better chance of pocketing a ball with a soft break, then you should go ahead and soft break that rack. However, both methods have been used by road players for years. It's really not a new concept. I agree that there are some stubborn players out there who will continue to pound away at a rack even though they're not making a ball on the break when they should be adapting to what the rack is giving them. But players should beware that soft breaking doesn't always get the job done (with the one ball on the spot) or the top players would have changed their breaks to strictly soft breaking long ago.

I think that new players out there just becoming aware of the soft break in 9 ball should understand that it is not necessarily the best way to break. It depends on the rack, and they need to keep that in mind. The other down-side to soft breaking is that even on a new cloth, the balls will tend to cluster. I see it all the time.

While I can understand the comparison made here between soft breaking in 9-ball to 14.1, there is a major difference in that in 14.1 you are pocketing a ball and then driving the cue ball into the rack. In 9 ball you need to determine first what the rack is giving you and evaluate your percentages of making a ball on the break. Big difference.

Fran

03-27-2002, 12:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Doctor_D:</font><hr> Good morning:

Why, if I may be so bold as to ask, must we modify how a game is played and/or governed because of a piece of mechanical equipment?

Dr. D.

<hr></blockquote>

in the words of deep throat...no, the other one..."follow the money".

so you're promoting a tourney and you're confronted with this philosophical/ethical conundrum: do i take this huge pile of money or do i preserve and protect the integrity of the game??? money or ethics; money or ethics??

bet they grieved over that one for a long time.

dan

Doctor_D
03-27-2002, 01:02 PM
Good afternoon Dan:

In my humble opinion, if we are to sacrifice ethics and historical preservation, then there needs to be a really really really big check. One with lots and lots of zeros, like a minimum of Six (6) zeros, at the end !!!

Dr. D.

stickman
03-27-2002, 01:14 PM
Fran, 9 ball is my game of choice. I break with a medium hard break. I gave up on the hard break because I couldn't shoot accurate and had no control of the cueball. I break to the right side of the table about 3 inches or so from the side and try to hit the one ball as squarely as possible with no english. I try to leave the cue ball in the center of the table. Making a ball on the break is just a matter of luck for me. I'll drop one or more about 50% of the time. When I do it right, the one ball either goes in the side pocket or back towards me near one of the corner pockets, and the cue ball is near the center of the table where I have a shot. The balls normally scatter well for me unless someone gives me a screwy rack. Can you expand of how to read a rack? I'm not familiar with this. Also when would you soft break and when hard break?

JimS
03-27-2002, 01:37 PM
ANY big businessperson will tell you that we can all be bought.

JimS
03-27-2002, 01:42 PM
Joe Tucker, pro player, wrote an excellent book that explains all this. "Racking Secrets". It was available at <a target="_blank" href=http://www.hillhill.com>www.hillhill.com</a> but the last time I tried that site it was down. He posts here sometimes and I just saw a post from him at playpool.com so you might be able to email him from here or that site.

I just tried to go to hillhill. I got there but the book store is now working. Try emailing Joe.The email address I have is ne10ball@home.com and that may not work either since locally the home.com emails were changed to insightbb.com. You might try ne10@insightbb.com Hell the bottom line is I don't know how to get hold'a Joe!

03-27-2002, 01:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: JimS:</font><hr> ANY big businessperson will tell you that we can all be bought. <hr></blockquote>

well, i, for one, cannot be bought! absolutely, positively not!!!


dan...rental rates available upon request.

Doctor_D
03-27-2002, 02:09 PM
well, i, for one, cannot be bought! absolutely, positively not!!!


dan...rental rates available upon request. <hr></blockquote>


Good afternoon Dan:

Music to the ears of any red blooded American CFO!

Dr. D.

03-27-2002, 02:32 PM
Stickman, I think that Joe Tucker's book is very good and would be helpful to players learning how to read a rack. Also, I feel that the best way to learn is to experiment. Loosen up a ball in the rack here or there, try breaking with different speeds from different places and see what you get. You may find that maybe sometimes it's to your advantage to allow a ball to be loose. Not just the wing balls either. There are other ways a loose ball can be beneficial to the breaker. Even with a tight rack there's a lot to learn.

A lot of top players feel that stopping the cue ball in the middle of the table is risky. Usually, if the one doesn't go into the side pocket, it will bank back near center of the top rail (in the kitchen area), and if the cue ball stops in the center of the table, you most likely won't have a shot on the one. Some players prefer to break hard just to keep the one ball from settling on the top rail. Others prefer to break medium hard with a little side spin and draw to bring the cue ball back off the side rail for a shot on the one ball on the top rail. Other top players still swear by the randomness of a go-for-it hard break. There's less control, but when you're making three balls on the break, it's often worth the trade-off.

But you won't figure any of this out unless you take the time to experiment on your own.

Fran

03-27-2002, 03:21 PM
Thanks, Fran and Jim. I found it here. http://www.roadplayer.com/JTProLessons.asp
I'm going to order it and see if I can do better than 50%.

stickman
03-27-2002, 03:25 PM
Whoops, I forgot to log back in. Thanks for the advice. The above anon post was mine.

Fred Agnir
03-27-2002, 03:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Anonymous:</font><hr> Thanks, Fran and Jim. I found it here. <a target="_blank" href=http://www.roadplayer.com/JTProLessons.asp>http://www.roadplayer.com/JTProLessons.asp</a>
I'm going to order it and see if I can do better than 50%. <hr></blockquote>

You may want to start by keeping an actual log, on varying equipment. I have yet to meet anyone on these boards that has a make percentage as high as they "think" they have.

Fred

Troy
03-27-2002, 04:31 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Doctor_D:</font><hr> Good afternoon Dan:


In my humble opinion, if we are to sacrifice ethics and historical preservation, then there needs to be a really really really big check. One with lots and lots of zeros, like a minimum of Six (6) zeros, at the end !!!

Dr. D.
<hr></blockquote>

Man says "Will you go to bed with me for $1,000,000 ??"
She answers "Well, for $1,000,000, YES !!"
Man then says "How abouy $10 worth ??"
She replies "Just what do you think I am ??"
Man retorts "We have already decided THAT, now we're discussing price".

03-27-2002, 05:19 PM
This posted by Tony 2-17-02

Goodbye CCB !!!!! You have ruined this wonderful Board by going to this lousy format from the user friendly WebBBS format.

now after being run off from that OTHER BOARD
lil Tony is right back at it on this terrible board...
now Tony you know Patrick posts here... You going to start harassing Patrick again? and get off Sardo everyone knows everything about that rack.

todays cute lil post by Tony on THIS BOARD...

Man says "Will you go to bed with me for $1,000,000 ??"
She answers "Well, for $1,000,000, YES !!"
Man then says "How abouy $10 worth ??"
She replies "Just what do you think I am ??"
Man retorts "We have already decided THAT, now we're discussing price".

Drake
03-27-2002, 05:29 PM
Ok, nobody really enjoyed watching the soft break and runs. Why not change the format to Alternate breaks?? or maybe 10 ball??? 10 ball with the rule that 4 balls must hit rail would be great!!

Rod
03-27-2002, 05:55 PM
Drake, I like the idea of ten ball, but I'm not sure TV would like that format. Not that it would be televised anyway, or cut up if it was televised.

stickman
03-27-2002, 08:05 PM
You're right Fred, if I kept track it might be more like 25%. No matter what it is I would like to improve it. /ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif

stickman
03-27-2002, 09:19 PM
Maybe it's because I'm getting older and more set in my ways, but why change a game that has been around as long as pool, and enjoyed by so many, to accomodate a better mouse trap? Did I say better? ??????scratching head?????? I take that back.

heater451
03-27-2002, 11:22 PM
The thing is: THE GAME HAS ALREADY BEEN CHANGED

The point of my suggestion, was to suggest a compromise between those who want the Sardo (whether it be those who want a tight, consistent rack, or those who managed to get it in the Game, in order to make $), and those who don't.

And, regardless of the rack, the rules have been changed before. Take, for example, the killing of the every shot push-out. Now, if you want to argue, "How much is enough?", I won't touch it. . . .

If you want to bring in history and change, consider billiards, which began as straight billiards. According to Robert Byrne/Danny McGoorty, "Jack Schaefer's father killed it as a spectator sport", and the game was changed, with one iteration being '18.2 balkline'. The game was changed to "balkline" w/ lines 8" from the cushions, then "14.2" (14"), "18.1", and "18.2 balkline", which suffered the same fate as straight billiards, "the players got so good they were boring to watch for the general public." The end result was the game known as 3-cushion. Is 9-ball any more untouchable?

[Just as reference, these games were played in the 1900s-1930s, as spectator sports.]


Okay, time to change tracks. . . .

An apples/oranges comparison, have you ever noticed that most other sports eliminate any "unfair advantage" equipment. For example, corked bats, certain golf equipment, etc., etc..

Of course, there is a major difference, if you consider the above mentioned equipment as "active", and a Sardo rack as "passive". Plus, I think it would be a battle, proving the the Sardo makes the play "better" (not giving special consideration to the consistency of the soft break).

In any case, you might want to think about another advancements to the sport from a few centuries ago. One has been attributed to an English billiards teacher, Jack Carr, who brought us the addition of chalk. The other great "invention" was evidently created by the Frenchman, (Capt.) Mingaud, who brought us the current (modern?) cue shaft/tip, and the added leather tip!

Does anyone want to go back to pushing balls around with club-like sticks, since a cue makes the game far too easy? --Didn't think so.

Oh, and while we're at it, let's bring back the 10-ft table standard. . . .


~~more than 2 cents, but food for thought.

stickman
03-28-2002, 06:24 AM
I have no problem with racks being more consistant, in fact I like that concept, but at what cost? If we have to change the game to accomodate the racking machine, I'm not sure I wouldn't be happy with inconsistant. In fact the consistancy sounds like most of the problem. The pros have become too good at making balls on the break. Well maybe the Sardo is one of those good ideas that just didn't pan out.

You're right. The game has been changed before. I wasn't here when it happened, and probably wouldn't have liked it then either. I admitted, I was getting older and more set in my ways. LOL

Leather tips? That improved the game, but it didn't change the way the game was played. What if when they started using leather tips, someone had said, since the leather tip allows you to get such good english on the ball we're only going to allow high or low english, no side? Maybe this is an exageration, but illustrates my point.

Just like you said, corked ball bats, long drivers and long drive golf balls, sounded like an improvement, but didn't pan out.

HeHe, What about lazer sighted pool sticks?

03-28-2002, 06:46 AM
Good point!and if you can make a ball with a soft break the spread of the balls around the table is much less leading to easier run-outs.IMO the game is'nt about pleasing an audience or rail,but about winning...right?...Gerry

Drake
03-29-2002, 04:02 AM
Alternate Breaks????