Managing One Pocket tournament time --DCC edition

[One Pocket Ghost]

Although, so far everybody is focused and all over the place with changing the complete game...



Personally I think things have gotten out of hand a little with so many new threads started about changing the game to this, changing the game to that



I don't think there's anything wrong with the rules or how the game is played right now.



The main problem is the few matches that run long and what to do about them when they do as to not affect the entire length of the tournament.

To start, I think you can identify most of the main culprits that "play slow" ahead of time and just make sure their matches are at the beginning of the rounds instead of the last grouping or two so it doesn't impact the next rounds draw by waiting for them to be done with their match.



I think it's better to start from the beginning and work forward instead of from the end and work backwards.

For example:
All these proposed "new games" and "new rules" still might and probably will have, games and matches that take a long time. Then you're back in the same boat you were before.

Bro, I agree with what you've said here.

- Ghost

 

[Knuckles54]

Bro, I agree with what you've said here.

- Ghost

Kind of reminds me of being in school...... the kids that disrupt the class have to sit up front.

 

[Island Drive]

Bro, I agree with what you've said here.

- Ghost

If we ''tag'' all slow players from past history, just give em a clock and send em to their table.

Or start the entire one pocket event earlier the first day. Most players are there the day before.

 

[Scrzbill]

I have a great way to speed up One Pocket games at the DCC. Don’t take a day off from scheduling One Pocket games.
The other way to speed up One Pocket is to make sure five balls at least have to pass the side pockets. Sometimes known as an eight ball break.:frus

 

[stevelomako]

I know Steve Booth has talked to Greg which is why he started this thread. Greg and I talked for almost an hour a few days ago about things at the DCC and will be talking again.

You're correct about wanting and keeping as many players as possible which is why he wanted input from players on this site.


Although, so far everybody is focused and all over the place with changing the complete game...like you find with bar room 8 ball all the the country.



Personally I think things have gotten out of hand a little with so many new threads started about changing the game to this, changing the game to that and not one person has tried any of it out yet.



I don't think there's anything wrong with the rules or how the game is played right now.



The main problem is the few matches that run long and what to do about them when they do as to not affect the entire length of the tournament.

To start, I think you can identify most of the main culprits that "play slow" ahead of time and just make sure their matches are at the beginning of the rounds instead of the last grouping or two so it doesn't impact the next rounds draw by waiting for them to be done with their match.




I think it's better to start from the beginning and work forward instead of from the end and work backwards.

For example:
All these proposed "new games" and "new rules" still might and probably will have, games and matches that take a long time. Then you're back in the same boat you were before.

Bro, I agree with what you've said here.

- Ghost

Kind of reminds me of being in school...... the kids that disrupt the class have to sit up front.

If we ''tag'' all slow players from past history, just give em a clock and send em to their table.

Or start the entire one pocket event earlier the first day. Most players are there the day before.

We all know most of the "slower" or "methodical" players. There's really not a ton of them. Just seems like it.


We just have 3 or 5 people/players point them out after the entries are finished and the desk can put an asterisk after their name and start those matches first.

If any of those matches are going long you "red flag" the next match that will be on that table to alert those players they will be going to the next available table or a buffer table somewhere (the action room maybe) as to keep the round moving.

Then you have to give both of the original players an asterisk to start both of them early in the next round because you really don't know who was holding up who.


For example:
Round one starts at 10am, round two at 12:00 and round 3 at 2pm.
The first rounders are still playing at noon.
You shift the noon match to another table.
Now the 2pm match should start on time.

There are too many empty tables from quick matches and then you have people waiting and waiting to get on a certain table. It holds everything up.

The tournament staff will have to do a little juggling to switch some table assignments but it wouldn't be much and they should earn their money anyway. They are getting paid after all.



And a player doesn't get punished for someone else being "methodical" and then being forced to play some funky way just to keep it moving.

 

[kollegedave]

The vast majority of one pocket decisions should be made fast, imho. I mean, if some guy is froze to a ball, more than likely he will have to thin it. There are only so many places to go? To me, there is very little reason to take a lot of time deciding. However, how would Greg propose to enforce a shot clock on 40 ish tables? This seems like a recipe for disaster, as much as I might prefer a shot clock. I hate watching some 85 year-old stare at the cue ball frozen on the back of a ball in front of his hole. Shoot!!!:frus

One thing they can do is to get rid of shimmed Diamonds, so balls fall easier. Diamond tables are tough. They are tougher under tournament conditions. There is no need to have tables that are shimmed. I played on two tables where the pockets were significantly smaller than a standard Diamond--one was Table 25, and then I forgot the number to the other table. With bigger (regular Diamond pockets), balls fall, games get done faster. Also, the whole point of Diamond (at least as I see it) was to have a standard consistent playing table. Quit screwing with pocket sizes.

I think they should put some data collection into place to try and get a handle on WHY they fell behind rather than making knee-jerk changes. One thing to do would be to find a way to record the times of all the matches. They could then use that information to develop a more informed approach at how long a race to three SHOULD take. It might be that rule changes don't need to kick-in until a match reaches a certain point.

They could also start earlier in the morning. This gives them more time, and they will get a few forfeits.

One pocket is the best game, I don't really like people messin' with the rules. If someone makes a ball on the break--they broke well, and they should not be penalized for that.

kollegedave

 

[sappo]

The vast majority of one pocket decisions should be made fast, imho. I mean, if some guy is froze to a ball, more than likely he will have to thin it. There are only so many places to go? To me, there is very little reason to take a lot of time deciding. However, how would Greg propose to enforce a shot clock on 40 ish tables? This seems like a recipe for disaster, as much as I might prefer a shot clock. I hate watching some 85 year-old stare at the cue ball frozen on the back of a ball in front of his hole. Shoot!!!:frus

One thing they can do is to get rid of shimmed Diamonds, so balls fall easier. Diamond tables are tough. They are tougher under tournament conditions. There is no need to have tables that are shimmed. I played on two tables where the pockets were significantly smaller than a standard Diamond--one was Table 25, and then I forgot the number to the other table. With bigger (regular Diamond pockets), balls fall, games get done faster. Also, the whole point of Diamond (at least as I see it) was to have a standard consistent playing table. Quit screwing with pocket sizes.

I think they should put some data collection into place to try and get a handle on WHY they fell behind rather than making knee-jerk changes. One thing to do would be to find a way to record the times of all the matches. They could then use that information to develop a more informed approach at how long a race to three SHOULD take. It might be that rule changes don't need to kick-in until a match reaches a certain point.

They could also start earlier in the morning. This gives them more time, and they will get a few forfeits.

One pocket is the best game, I don't really like people messin' with the rules. If someone makes a ball on the break--they broke well, and they should not be penalized for that.

kollegedave

Tap, Tap, Tap!

 

[baby huey]

I think this is the first time where we have THREE threads going at the same time about the same topic. Steve can you consolidate all these threads under the same general topic?

 

[NH Steve]

I think this is the first time where we have THREE threads going at the same time about the same topic. Steve can you consolidate all these threads under the same general topic?

I could, but maybe for the DCC thread, it's better if we thrash out the ugly details of those two ideas in their own separate threads lol.

 

[NH Steve]

Trying to summarize the ideas here

Trying to summarize the ideas here

I had a followup conversation with Greg Sullivan. The DCC location is committed for the next few years as they are part way through a contract. Locations are not that easy, and the old ExWest became untenable because not enough room was being made available to him there due to hotel changes. He is already bringing in as many tables as the Horseshoe can accommodate. They might squeeze in two more by relocating the TD desk (although that might have unintended consequences of less ease of TD supervision of matches and convenience for addressing player questions and calls for rulings). The buy back is not going anywhere -- Greg considers it a big part of what makes the DCC work. The buy back money goes to the all-around bonuses as well as added money for the extra events. He is looking to increase the prize money in any case.

He wants to have plans in place to NIP IN THE BUD any drastically slow matches.

First I am listing general ideas that don't change the game at all -- then on to the ideas that do change the game to one degree or another. These are all just IDEAS!!

1. Any ideas the TD's would have to make the redraw's and table assignments move more timely so delays are minimized in that process.
2. Is there a way to better utilize tables that become open early due to a quick match time or forfeit? I.e. Add a table assignment category for players "On deck" for next available table, rather than waiting until the next full time slot?
3. Stricter adherence to 15 minute (or maybe less than 15 minutes) start time for players to be at their table for their match (possible exceptions for immediately after re-draws -- but see #1 above)
4. Players who are behind due to overrun, might have later at night match starts (rather than waiting until the next day), or earlier morning match starts the next day in order to get caught up.
5. Limited player time-outs
6. Flag players who are behind and tend to fall behind and get their matches to the first available tables every round; and/or assign their tables close to the TD desk for monitoring slow play
7. A shot clock for players that are taking too long even after being warned
8. Some variation of Grady's Rule comes into play if a match is behind schedule
9. Rack 11 balls and race to 6 if a match is behind schedule

More radical ideas

1. Some variation of darmoose rule for foul scoring
2. Chess clock

 

[baby huey]

Speaking for myself only, this tournament costs me about $2K to attend. I don't mind this because I get my opportunity to play my game. It's pure One Pocket with no added measures (rules) to speed up the game. If we are to consider changing the format such that it now becomes a game where the best players are now going to dominate even more, than what has been accomplished? I have to play defensive pool to be in the mix and occasionally I break through to the eighth round or so. I don't believe One Pocket should be played in such a way as to force the weaker player into shooting offensively when that's not a part of their game. Change the rules significantly and you'll likely lose players. I believe Greg knows this and he has a product to protect and right now its in jeopardy.

 

[darmoose]

Speaking for myself only, this tournament costs me about $2K to attend. I don't mind this because I get my opportunity to play my game. It's pure One Pocket with no added measures (rules) to speed up the game. If we are to consider changing the format such that it now becomes a game where the best players are now going to dominate even more, than what has been accomplished? I have to play defensive pool to be in the mix and occasionally I break through to the eighth round or so. I don't believe One Pocket should be played in such a way as to force the weaker player into shooting offensively when that's not a part of their game. Change the rules significantly and you'll likely lose players. I believe Greg knows this and he has a product to protect and right now its in jeopardy.

Jerry,

I can relate totally with what you are saying. I feel that there is growing pressure trying to force the more defensive players to abandon their game and play faster and shoot at their hole more than they are comfortable doing. Delegitimizing the more conservative styles of play appears to be in full bloom.

I think as long as one shoots within a reasonable time period, he should be allowed to play his particular style without being critisized. Either you can defeat an opposing style or you can't. The rules we are playing by already favor the better players and the players that run balls better.

The way we play intentional fouls needs to be addressed to level the playing field.


JMHO (see below)

 

[Scrzbill]

Jerry and Darmoose, I believe defensive, up table players, should be shackled, chained, and or tortured. If you want to play a defensive game that is fine, but with a shot clock. I have seen defensive players “study” the table for minutes only to shoot a simple safe. You know your not going to shoot at your hole so why the wait? You have already eliminated 50% of the game opportunities, get it done. You have 1 1/2 hours per game, same as your opponent.
The reason this whole discussion is happening has NOTHING to do with the speed of the players or the speed of One Pocket. When the DCC decided to put nine ball play ahead of finishing the One Pocket, they decided to create a problem in need of a solution. BTW, slow players have to provide their own chains and shackles. You will be able to choose three forms of torture from a list of five. One of the tortures will be your listening to Kentucky broadcasting your match. Excruciating at best.:lol:lol:lol
Jerry, I like your game and always learn something each time we play. I wish I could play you every day, my patience quotient would go up 100%.

 

[baby huey]

Kentucky, AKA Sizzr Bill; you are one of my favorites of all time. You speak your mind. There is so much information going on in this thread that none of us really knows what happened this last DCC. Steve probably knows the most about what happened and is closer to Greg than the rest of us are. i think modified One Pocket rules do have their place in let's say one day tournaments but not with this caliber of players and this prestigious event. It's the best One Pocket event of all time and changing anything about it must be thoughtful, not based on speculation and/or merely attempting to increase the speed of play. Lastly, I watch 3C on You Tube and noticed that a shot clock is in place. Unless the shot is automatic the players are all looking at the shot clock and seem rushed when shooting. It looks poor and favors the speeder players. I hope this doesn't happen to "Our Game."

 

[Scrzbill]

Jerry AKA champ, are you working nowadays? I need a week or so of constant play so I can get back to being able to compete. Are there players at your place that play one pocket? Is there a good Best Western close? I will play nine ball to get in stroke. Strokin......it to the west

 

[baby huey]

Kentucky, there is a Best Western and yes I'll find players who won't heist you.

 

[Pogue]

Use a chess clock for timed matches. Allocate 1 1/2 hours to each player.

After player hits each shot, he hits his/her button to start his opponent's time running. If you have one really fast player against one really slow player, the slow player does not get to monopolize the entire time of the match. Make the penalty for exceeding the first time control loss of one game.

In the case of one fast/one slow player, the match is unlikely to take a full 3 hours.

 

[baby huey]

I would like to see the One Pocket event staged exactly as it has been done for all the years previously. We finished on time as scheduled until last year? So, don't schedule nine ball events in the One Pocket time slots and let em play. Also, the 14.1 event was also impacted and it may be gone; at least that's what I heard. I hope that's not true.

 

[Scrzbill]

DCC management discussion. The one pocket tournament is going fine. Lets use the OPOrg HOF as an excuse to play nine ball on Wednesday instead of continuing matches as normal. That way when we run late we can implement some changes to the game WE want, like no jumping off the table. Soon, because we are the dominate player in the tournament game, we can make players dance through our hoops. Now lets see if we can run One Pocket until late Friday night.

 

[jay helfert]

The four ball rule (one of the better rules that Grady thought up) will take care of all the up table slow matches, PERIOD! I know that many people don't like this rule but it works to speed up what would otherwise be a very long and slow match. The four ball rule only adds one more facet to an already great game. The bottom line from my observations of hundreds of games played with this rule in place is that the better player will still win the match, and the weaker player will lose, so nothing is really changed. There is no real advantage or disadvantage that favors either player.

As far as making the corner ball on the break, I think it should count and the inning continues. That is the way One Pocket has been played for eons and doesn't need to be changed now. It's rare that it happens anyway and even making the first ball is no guarantee of winning the game.

I feel the same way about jumping the cue ball when making a ball hanging in the opponent's pocket. It's an important part of the game and being able to successfully execute this shot is an important skill to have. I don't like jump cues for One Pocket and picking up the cue ball to be cleaned can only be done when it is not touching another ball.

That's my two cents.