Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does something need to be done?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Does something need to be done?

    Congratulations to Pilot on his victory, and to Jerry on his amazing stamina as a 70 year old playing all day and night. The California Billiards room (what little of it we got to see) was very impressive. Watching the "action" games going on was entertaining.

    All that being said, and having watched as much as I could stay awake to watch, I am left with a singular overriding impression. One pocket, as played by well experienced non professional players such as the members of One Pocket.org in a tournament format is not a "spectator sport".

    Trying to see the game and the play as an unbiased viewer (which I ain't) I must admit that I can understand the critisms about the game being tooo slow and boring "to watch". I think we should openly and honestly discuss whether what we saw helps or hinders the growth and expansion of one pocket to the wider public audience.

    Not being able to execute a 32 man tournament in three full days without playing all night long is an indicator in and of itself, isn't it? Maybe we should take our heads out of the sand and take some steps to address the slow play and boring bump bump play, all too common in tournaments before it's too late.

    I know, I know, one pocket seems to be more popular today than a few years ago. I think though that this is true among players and not spectators.

    I think we should consider ways to make the game more exciting and faster, and we should display the conviction to use our events to "test" ideas put forward, if not for an entire event perhaps for a round or two. Isn't that our obligation as a rules promulgator and as mentors of this great game?
    The early bird may get the worm...but the second mouse gets the cheese...Shutin@urholeisOVERATED.

  • #2
    Very well written.

    I believe a shot clock is the only option which doesnt entirely change the game. Of course I play faaast.

    Comment


    • #3
      One of the problems is the tournament races need to be dropped from to 3/3 to 3/2. To me that is a good middle ground without messing with the purists. I would think that after three years of very late finishes this has become obvious. JMO

      Comment


      • #4
        Does something need to be done?

        Originally posted by crabbcatjohn View Post
        One of the problems is the tournament races need to be dropped from to 3/3 to 3/2. To me that is a good middle ground without messing with the purists. I would think that after three years of very late finishes this has become obvious. JMO


        I played 1 match on Friday. 4 on Sat and 3 on Sunday. Would have been 5 if I got to finals. I was dead tired after sitting around for 3 hours.

        I would do three things. Do a draw before we get there. Start earlier/play more matches on Friday. Go to Grady rule as soon as all balls get above headstring two balls come out and get spotted.

        At minimum we need 3 rounds on Friday.



        Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
        Regards,

        Nick B

        Name: Nick Beretanos
        Location: Vancouver BC

        Comment


        • #5
          Race to 1 that’ll make it exciting

          Comment


          • #6
            I tried to explain this before Chicago. In the current format we are using. A double elimination format with a single finals.... It takes 10 total rounds of play to finish the tournament. If... it takes 3 hrs of play per round, thats 30 hours of play to finish the tournament.
            Now. After the first round is over.. There are 9 more matches left to play on the losers side and 5 on the winners to finish. At three hours per round, there will be 12 extra hours of play needed on the losers than on the winners. That is almost a full day. So to scrub off time where should that time come from?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by crabbcatjohn View Post
              I tried to explain this before Chicago. In the current format we are using. A double elimination format with a single finals.... It takes 10 total rounds of play to finish the tournament. If... it takes 3 hrs of play per round, thats 30 hours of play to finish the tournament.
              Now. After the first round is over.. There are 9 more matches left to play on the losers side and 5 on the winners to finish. At three hours per round, there will be 12 extra hours of play needed on the losers than on the winners. That is almost a full day. So to scrub off time where should that time come from?
              Here's a post I made in another thread.
              Later, I'll try to revive an old post I made before the first Members Tournament. The gyst was to use round robin groupings to winnow the field down to 8 players who would then play a single elimination bracket. I still think that would be an improvement on several fronts. It uses tables more efficiently because they are all in near-continuous use until the cut is made. More efficient use of tables means the total tournament time is reduced. Everyone gets to meet and play more people. And it's longer until the first person is eliminated. Play would continue on Saturday night until all RR brackets are completed and Sunday would have 3 rounds to determine the winner.

              I'll try to post details tonight. Last time, I think it was actually Dave Gross and Jeff Sparks who were intrigued and everybody else wanted to stick with a traditional DE.
              "LOL ... judging by your shot selections you play good" -- Hacker, September 29, 2015.

              Comment


              • #8
                Too Slow?

                Actually, one of the slowest rounds took about 5+ hours on Saturday. A shot clock would have been helpful there. However, that doesn't explain the overtime for Sunday. I guess when you're in the heat of battle you don't want to be the first one to make a mistake and sell out. The players at this tournament were top notch and everyone played their hearts out to win. I don't know what the correct format to play unless you reduce it to a race to 2. I don't think anyone who travels to a tournament like this would want to use this format.

                That being said, great tournament, great guys and a great venue.

                Comment


                • #9
                  i posted this in the other thread
                  another idea
                  standard onepocket until 2 hours
                  then gradys rules

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Cory in dc View Post
                    Here's a post I made in another thread.
                    Later, I'll try to revive an old post I made before the first Members Tournament. The gyst was to use round robin groupings to winnow the field down to 8 players who would then play a single elimination bracket. I still think that would be an improvement on several fronts. It uses tables more efficiently because they are all in near-continuous use until the cut is made. More efficient use of tables means the total tournament time is reduced. Everyone gets to meet and play more people. And it's longer until the first person is eliminated. Play would continue on Saturday night until all RR brackets are completed and Sunday would have 3 rounds to determine the winner.

                    I'll try to post details tonight. Last time, I think it was actually Dave Gross and Jeff Sparks who were intrigued and everybody else wanted to stick with a traditional DE.
                    i played in a round robin 1p tourney onerock promoted
                    i enjoyed it and knew going in i had no chance
                    but i got to play 3 rounds and then could sweat the action or play some on the side
                    if the idea of the tourneys are to meet the members /play some/and for those with the skill ..WIN ..the round robin format accomplishes that
                    this would work for me as a format for the members and seniors too
                    since i havent attended any of the tourneys my opinion is just that an opinion

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Ok... after 2 hours we go to two pockets.
                      You get the side and the corner.

                      LET THERE BE BLOOD!!!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by lll View Post
                        i posted this in the other thread
                        another idea
                        standard onepocket until 2 hours
                        then gradys rules
                        That exact format has been discussed, put in place a few weeks back and will be tested in a new 16 player max members tournament to be announced tomorrow. My only reservation is after watching last nights play, it wouldn't have helped a whole lot with the slow play in some of the matches. Me and the other tournament directors will need discuss it further to see if we ALSO need to drop the losers side to 2.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Let's keep in mind that this event is unique and doesn't have to be managed like normal pool tournaments. 1p.org is a creature of social media, and while we want to have a format that leads to a winner, an equally important goal is creating an environment to meet and play each other as much as possible. In the format we have, there is a very real possibility that a player who has travelled from far away might only have two matches. I'd much prefer a format that guarantees lots of playing time for all, and provides a chance to lock horns with more competitors.

                          I'd advocate for a round robin format on Friday and Saturday, that leads to a Sunday single elimination shoot out between the top eight players to emerge from the round robin series. I'm not exactly sure how the timing would work out, but what if we divided our 32 entrants into 4 groups of 8 players. Within each group, we'd play all of the 7 other contestants in a race to 2. Matches would go off in whatever order made sense depending on the flow of the other matches within the group. Everybody would be playing all day Friday and Saturday because nobody would be knocked off early. The two players with the best outcomes in each group would advance to the Sunday single elimination event. (Ties would have to get decided somehow, maybe a one game shoot out late Saturday.) On Sunday, the final 8 come back to play it off in races to 3, with the finals a race to 4. If we start off with 4 matches at 11, we ought to be able to get to the final match by dinner time.

                          Something like that. Every player gets at least 7 matches with 7 different players. Fun. Who cares if the individual matches aren't long enough to always allow the better player to emerge victorious. We all know that even a race to 3 doesn't really determine anything. Just look at Chohan v. Orcullo...a race to 40 doesn't really determine anything either.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by HowardK View Post
                            Actually, one of the slowest rounds took about 5+ hours on Saturday. A shot clock would have been helpful there. However, that doesn't explain the overtime for Sunday. I guess when you're in the heat of battle you don't want to be the first one to make a mistake and sell out. The players at this tournament were top notch and everyone played their hearts out to win. I don't know what the correct format to play unless you reduce it to a race to 2. I don't think anyone who travels to a tournament like this would want to use this format.

                            That being said, great tournament, great guys and a great venue.
                            I was one of the flailers in this match, and a shot clock wouldn't have changed how long it took. Kevin and I have played many times in recent years, and neither of us wanted to lose, so our match was a brilliant display of stunning defensive moves that kept us off balance and our audience mesmerized (stupefied?). The problem wasn't excessive pondering, just excessively defensive play. For my part, I also couldn't make my shots. I really had a hard time adjusting to the equipment. Damn those pockets are small, especially when the pressure is on. And I like to slow roll it and none of my aiming gimmicks were working, on that cloth, with those balls, under the cyclone conditions on table 5 with that fan and A/C blasting away. The match went to a fifth game, down to the last ball, of course, which took at least 20 minutes of batting it about until I finally figured out that I couldn't slow roll my way to a win, and put it away with crisply hit sharply angled cut shot that surely would have been a sell out if I'd missed. Whew!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Tobermory View Post
                              Let's keep in mind that this event is unique and doesn't have to be managed like normal pool tournaments. 1p.org is a creature of social media, and while we want to have a format that leads to a winner, an equally important goal is creating an environment to meet and play each other as much as possible. In the format we have, there is a very real possibility that a player who has travelled from far away might only have two matches. I'd much prefer a format that guarantees lots of playing time for all, and provides a chance to lock horns with more competitors.

                              I'd advocate for a round robin format on Friday and Saturday, that leads to a Sunday single elimination shoot out between the top eight players to emerge from the round robin series. I'm not exactly sure how the timing would work out, but what if we divided our 32 entrants into 4 groups of 8 players. Within each group, we'd play all of the 7 other contestants in a race to 2. Matches would go off in whatever order made sense depending on the flow of the other matches within the group. Everybody would be playing all day Friday and Saturday because nobody would be knocked off early. The two players with the best outcomes in each group would advance to the Sunday single elimination event. (Ties would have to get decided somehow, maybe a one game shoot out late Saturday.) On Sunday, the final 8 come back to play it off in races to 3, with the finals a race to 4. If we start off with 4 matches at 11, we ought to be able to get to the final match by dinner time.

                              Something like that. Every player gets at least 7 matches with 7 different players. Fun. Who cares if the individual matches aren't long enough to always allow the better player to emerge victorious. We all know that even a race to 3 doesn't really determine anything. Just look at Chohan v. Orcullo...a race to 40 doesn't really determine anything either.
                              I think you are on to something here the round robin sounds fun

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X