short rack

[crawdaddio]

Any of you experienced one holers ever play short rack one pocket? If so, please share some thoughts on breaks, advantages, dis-advantages, different strategies, likes or dis-likes about it.
Thanks,
DC<<<<just curious...... :p

[jrhendy]

Any of you experienced one holers ever play short rack one pocket? If so, please share some thoughts on breaks, advantages, dis-advantages, different strategies, likes or dis-likes about it.
Thanks,
DC<<<<just curious...... :p As I mentioned before on another thread, I used to play a lot of one ball one pocket. It's a good game for players that get frustrated with all the moves in the stack, and a seasoned one pocket player still has an edge over someone who hasn't learned the moves. It is a great way to introduce one pocket to a nine-ball player. The rules are simple - we always played winner breaks (it is a disadvantage). You freeze the one object ball on the end rail on the middle diamond. You freeze the cue ball on the other end rail on the center diamond & break from there. We always played the breaker has the right hand pocket to avoid confusion.
If you scratch or foul, you owe a ball and you spot a ball on the regular spot & now you need two. You put a ball on the spot with every foul, so you could need multiple balls to your opponents one. The ideal break is to bank the object ball up near the side pocket on the side of the table your hole is on. If you hit too much object ball, you double kiss & leave a one rail bank, if you shoot too hard, you may leave a long two rail bank. Nine-ball players will usually always try to send the ball near their hole, and will start learning one pocket moves after giving up cross banks or easy safties. You can graduate to 3, 5 or 9 ball one pocket from here, but this is a great way to get started.

[NH Steve]

... It is a great way to introduce one pocket to a nine-ball player. The rules are simple - we always played winner breaks (it is a disadvantage). You freeze the one object ball on the end rail on the middle diamond. You freeze the cue ball on the other end rail on the center diamond & break from there. We always played the breaker has the right hand pocket to avoid confusion. Or break from a 'break box' on your own side of the headstring as your own pocket. John, I've also found this to be a great way to entice non-One Pocket players to play a little One Pocket :) If they won't try this, then I like to suggest 9-ball bank
... You can graduate to 3, 5 or 9 ball one pocket from here, but this is a great way to get started. How would you rack 5 or 9? If you racked like regular 9-ball, the wing ball would be a very high percentage make I would think -- which might mess the balance up. For three balls, I've tried three lined up on the spot, rather than a triangle -- the three ball line-up being a fairly common situation in any standard One Pocket game. The problem with 5 balls lined up is that the 5th one cuts right into your pocket!

Six balls would make a standard triangle, which might work -- all you would have to do is both go to four and whoever makes the first legal ball, spots it up after they finish their inning, and then they only need 3 more, while their opponent still needs four. That would make the ball count come out right.

Ten balls could work the same way (going to six balls each and the first player to score spots one), but then you're getting up pretty close to needing eight anyway, so why bother.

I've never tried 6 or 10 balls or anything else other than 1, 3 or 15 balls so if anyone else has, I'd be curious to hear how it worked...

[Smorgass Bored]

I'd heard of short rack one pocket and decided to practice it one day while at the poolroom. I was playing/practicing with nine balls racked the same as a 9-ball game. After about an hour, I still hadn't figured out an effective break. About this time, Richie Richeson walked in and I asked him to show me the proper break for this game and he said OK. He placed the cueball very close to the break string and just to the right of the center 'spot' and shot a two rail kick from from close to the top
left hand corner. He made a ball in his pocket and proceeded to run six balls (when he only needed four)... Oy-Vey !

[BackPocket9Ball]

One Ball One Pocket is a great game and fairly popular in the Philadelphia area (where I started playing pool).

When I've gambled at it, we've put the cueball on the headspot for the break and the object ball frozen to the second diamond on the foot rail. We've also alternated breaks, and made a rule that you can't "go for the ball" on the break, meaning you can't try to four-rail the object ball or cut in the object ball with inside english. We usually lag/bank the ball to the side pocket.

A variation of the one ball one pocket game is back pocket 9-ball, which is essentially one ball one pocket at the end of a 9-ball rack. It was invented by Pete Fusco and Joe Veasey, I believe, in the 1970s, and it's a very big game in Philadelphia, and the action game of choice at Tacony Palmyra, perhaps the biggest action room on the east coast.

[Skin]

Or break from a 'break box' on your own side of the headstring as your own pocket. John, I've also found this to be a great way to entice non-One Pocket players to play a little One Pocket :) If they won't try this, then I like to suggest 9-ball bank
How would you rack 5 or 9? If you racked like regular 9-ball, the wing ball would be a very high percentage make I would think -- which might mess the balance up. For three balls, I've tried three lined up on the spot, rather than a triangle -- the three ball line-up being a fairly common situation in any standard One Pocket game. The problem with 5 balls lined up is that the 5th one cuts right into your pocket!

Six balls would make a standard triangle, which might work -- all you would have to do is both go to four and whoever makes the first legal ball, spots it up after they finish their inning, and then they only need 3 more, while their opponent still needs four. That would make the ball count come out right.

Ten balls could work the same way (going to six balls each and the first player to score spots one), but then you're getting up pretty close to needing eight anyway, so why bother.

I've never tried 6 or 10 balls or anything else other than 1, 3 or 15 balls so if anyone else has, I'd be curious to hear how it worked...

Steve, I pulled this old thread up to ask if you (or anybody) ever found a solution to 6 or 10 ball one-pocket. I have been thinking about both as a way to speed up the game for a local evening tournament. Most of the guys are balking at 15 balls because of the game length.

My idea was 10 balls, winner breaks, breaker goes to 6 and the other guy goes to 5, but I suppose both going to 6 and spotting the first ball pocketed might be better with alternate breaks.



Skin

[gulfportdoc]

My idea was 10 balls, winner breaks, breaker goes to 6 and the other guy goes to 5, but I suppose both going to 6 and spotting the first ball pocketed might be better with alternate breaks.

Some guys do play that way. But it's also easy to put an 11th ball in the last row of a 10 ball rack froze between the 2nd and 3rd balls. Then you can play first player to six wins.

I've heard some play with a 9-ball rack, but I've never tried it.

Doc

[Artie Bodendorfer]

Some guys do play that way. But it's also easy to put an 11th ball in the last row of a 10 ball rack froze between the 2nd and 3rd balls. Then you can play first player to six wins.

I've heard some play with a 9-ball rack, but I've never tried it.

Doc I will give you a Idea for a shorter game of one pocket. Nine ball one pocket is no good unless you can rack the balls a different way. because you can make a ball on the breack with a nine ball rack. And the balls spread to easy playing one pocket with a nine ball rack. So her is what I sugjest use 10 ball rack and the first player to get 5 balls wins. It does not matter if thier is one ball left on the table. And the will be learning different stratage with a ten ball rack. And it will speed p the game. And it will be easier for women to learn the game also. But I dont no if people are ready for those kind of changes. But its just a Idea. Or you can rack one ball then two balls then two 3 balls. Or one ball and 4 two balls thier are some different racks. And if everyone gives thier idea then you will come up with a answer.

[Skin]

Some guys do play that way. But it's also easy to put an 11th ball in the last row of a 10 ball rack froze between the 2nd and 3rd balls. Then you can play first player to six wins.

I've heard some play with a 9-ball rack, but I've never tried it.

Doc

Doc, it seems like I saw that suggestion about the 11th ball on here somewhere and set it up one time. It looks funny, but I didn't try a break to see what happens to the 11th ball. Maybe that is the best way to for 6 balls to win. I wouldn't consider the 9 ball rack for the reason Artie gives below.

Do you remember the old 7 ball rack where there is a ball in the center and 6 balls around it in a circle? That has some real interesting possibilities. Four balls to win. But how would you break that rack?

Skin

[Skin]

I will give you a Idea for a shorter game of one pocket. Nine ball one pocket is no good unless you can rack the balls a different way. because you can make a ball on the breack with a nine ball rack. And the balls spread to easy playing one pocket with a nine ball rack. So her is what I sugjest use 10 ball rack and the first player to get 5 balls wins. It does not matter if thier is one ball left on the table. And the will be learning different stratage with a ten ball rack. And it will speed p the game. And it will be easier for women to learn the game also. But I dont no if people are ready for those kind of changes. But its just a Idea. Or you can rack one ball then two balls then two 3 balls. Or one ball and 4 two balls thier are some different racks. And if everyone gives thier idea then you will come up with a answer.

Artie, I agree you'd need to rack 9 balls other than the normal way. I putzed around with a square configuration - 3 across the foot string and then 2 rows of three directly behind. I also tried racking them in a normal 9 ball diamond but rotating it 90 degrees. Both were very weird for the break. :)

I like the 10 ball rack also and thought about just going to 5 like you suggest, but that eliminates the fight for the last ball like you get in a 7-7 game. That's great part of the game. To me, that would be a lot to give up. But the game would go faster and would be different than with 15 balls.

What do you think about racking them like for 7 ball? I think this game would have a lot of potential but I have never heard of it being played. I imagine if anybody has played it before, it would be you!



Skin

[gulfportdoc]

Do you remember the old 7 ball rack where there is a ball in the center and 6 balls around it in a circle? That has some real interesting possibilities. Four balls to win. But how would you break that rack?
The 7 ball rack would be an interesting proposition! My room doesn't have one of those racks, so I wouldn't be able to set it up. My guess is you'd just have to come off the outermost ball and roll the CB back up to the 3rd diamond or so. There might not be a "pocket" in the rack to hit.

Doc

[SJDinPHX]

Artie, I agree you'd need to rack 9 balls other than the normal way. I putzed around with a square configuration - 3 across the foot string and then 2 rows of three directly behind. I also tried racking them in a normal 9 ball diamond but rotating it 90 degrees. Both were very weird for the break. :)

I like the 10 ball rack also and thought about just going to 5 like you suggest, but that eliminates the fight for the last ball like you get in a 7-7 game. That's great part of the game. To me, that would be a lot to give up. But the game would go faster and would be different than with 15 balls.

What do you think about racking them like for 7 ball? I think this game would have a lot of potential but I have never heard of it being played. I imagine if anybody has played it before, it would be you!





Skin

Skin,

To really simplify things, Artie stated the same thing weve been doing here in Phx. for 30 yrs. Rack 10 balls, first one to 5 wins (no ties) Likewise racking 6 balls first one to 3 wins. Very short, and simple. Granted, you won't have a last ball battle, but last 2 left on the table can be just as challenging most times. :eek:

Dick

[androd]

Skin,

To really simplify things, Artie stated the same thing weve been doing here in Phx. for 30 yrs. Rack 10 balls, first one to 5 wins (no ties) Likewise racking 6 balls first one to 3 wins. Very short, and simple. Granted, you won't have a last ball battle, but last 2 left on the table can be just as challenging most times. :eek:

Dick

Just like playing 8-7, 9-6, and so forth.

[NH Steve]

Skin,

To really simplify things, Artie stated the same thing weve been doing here in Phx. for 30 yrs. Rack 10 balls, first one to 5 wins (no ties) Likewise racking 6 balls first one to 3 wins. Very short, and simple. Granted, you won't have a last ball battle, but last 2 left on the table can be just as challenging most times. :eek:

DickIs the break so little an advantage with these undersized racks, that it would not work to have the breaker go that extra ball -- 6-5 or 4-3?

[MisterBanker]

The 7 ball rack would be an interesting proposition! My room doesn't have one of those racks, so I wouldn't be able to set it up. My guess is you'd just have to come off the outermost ball and roll the CB back up to the 3rd diamond or so. There might not be a "pocket" in the rack to hit.

Doc

Doc, you can rack 7 ball with either a 9 ball rack or a 15 ball rack. With the 9 ball rack you just turn the rack so that the "wingball" side is on the footspot.
With the 15 ball rack, put the cueball in the rack where the 1 ball would normally go, and then you can rack 7 ball behind it. Then turn the rack until the 1 ball is on the spot.
________
HERBAL VAPORIZERS (http://herbalvaporizers.info)