My report on the "Express rules" used at Buffalo's last week

[12squared]

"Just when one pocket was getting popular in Europe, this could kill it" classic, Steve.

 

[NH Steve]

"Just when one pocket was getting popular in Europe, this could kill it" classic, Steve.

I had a lot of fun doing that commentary with Pascal! I might have gone 2 and out last year so I had plenty of time lol

 

[12squared]

I had a lot of fun doing that commentary with Pascal! I might have gone 2 and out last year so I had plenty of time lol

Haha but you didn't go 2 n out because we played to see who went to the final 8 single elimination. (sorry)

 

[NH Steve]

Haha but you didn't go 2 n out because we played to see who went to the final 8 single elimination. (sorry)

Oh yeah, I remember that now -- it was this year I went 2 and out. Last year I missed the cut, so I started doing commentary for your final rounds.

 

[baby huey]

I remember when all our nine ball tournaments were PUSH OUT then suddenly we began playing SHOOT TO HIT.. If I'm not mistaken GRADY was influential in changing the game around to speed it up and make it more interesting and shorten the time elapsed in length. Does anyone know the origins of how the rotation games changed nationally and internationally?

 

[NH Steve]

I remember when all our nine ball tournaments were PUSH OUT then suddenly we began playing SHOOT TO HIT.. If I'm not mistaken GRADY was influential in changing the game around to speed it up and make it more interesting and shorten the time elapsed in length. Does anyone know the origins of how the rotation games changed nationally and internationally?

Janscos eliminated the push out in 9 ball for their tournaments — that’s about 20 before most people think.

 

[gulfportdoc]

I didn't realize that the Jansco's eliminated the push out. I wonder which version they played? Don't know if Cardone would remember.

John McChesney instituted the no-push out, 3 foul rule in the mid 1980s for his Texas Express events. That's the first I'd heard of it. IMO it ruined the game of 9ball.

 

[lfigueroa]

There are some traditionalist players that would "just say no" -- and I'm not talking about limited to you Lou. But TD's, room owners and promoters (who incidentally are ponying up a lot of money for One Pocket these days!) are all looking for tools so that they can more confidently run more One Pocket tournaments, in more locations, to reach more players. I like that. My suggestions above still allow for a hell of a lot of traditional One Pocket.

I am not sure if you have competed in any "Grady rule" tournaments, but one thing I saw at the recent Buffalo's was that just because a game becomes subject to the Grady rule, doesn't actually mean it necessarily ever comes into play. I'm pretty sure I commentated a stream match that hit that trigger, but as I recall it, it never actually came into play. That is pretty unobtrusive

Don't you worry Lou, there will still be certain promoters and poolrooms that will want their One Pocket tournaments 100% traditional One Pocket start to finish, schedule be damned. But I am guessing a lot of the significant people who are greasing the wheels of 1P tournaments got a bit spooked by what happened at Bogies a month or two ago

i'm not worried -- I decide where I'll go and what tournaments I'll play.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

Please give us a hand and get a list together of banned players for our upcoming members tournament. I really don't know them myself and we need to start a public list to make sure they won't enter.

How about I get the list started?

Feel free to jump in:

1. Varner.
2.
3.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

3 hours for a race to 3 absolutely factors in time for some matches to go longer than others. A little longer for a few matches here and there is not a problem. But a string of long matches that happen to fall in the same critical path -- that can be a problem. Bogie's actually got very luccky that their two longest matches were both in the last match of the night slots, so it didn't actually mess with the tournament schedule -- just a few players lost sleep, while the PPV viewers and commentators ended up sleeping through much of those matches.

From my experience, three hours for a race to three -- potentially five games -- is not excessive.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

As is often the case, I couldn't agree with lfigueroa more.

However, I would like to take this opportunity to:

1) highlight that lfigueroa is correct when he says a few “mischievous cowards” (my words not his) are the real culprit

2) put forward a new theory and rule, which we can call “Kollegedave’s Hypothesis on the Merits of Public Shame”.

1) Do players generally take a lot of time between shots when the shot choice they have is one where the choice is about what ball to shoot directly into their hole? I would respectfully submit that the answer is no, even though these choices may represent more of a choice then scenario #2. Conversely, do players generally take a lot of time when they are confronted with a very difficult trap? For example, you have the world’s fair in front of your pocket and you have them frozen behind a ball by their side pocket. In this second scenario, I have had any number of opponents stare at this situation, as if when they look into the refrigerator a second or third time, new groceries will magically appear. New groceries are at the store, and their ass is still in a trap after 30 seconds, 5 minutes, or 10 minutes. Ironically, in these situations people are generally faced with far fewer options: thin the ball this way or that way, take a foul, or “fram” the pile. There is no need to take a lot of time for this decision UNLESS they are 1) trying to annoy me (it works) or 2) they are too cowardly to face the inevitable truth.

2) Public shame works in pool halls. If a guy air barrel’s his fellow pool-wagering-brethren, he is rightly criticized publicly in his community. Air Barrel’s threaten the entire mode of existence for one pocket players. Therefore, as a community, we have decided that those who engage in this reprehensible practice are worthy of public shame. Players that are too cowardly to take their medicine once trapped or who are intentionally slowing play to annoy their opponent (or both), are threatening the ability of our community to put on one pocket tournaments in a reasonable time and are therefore entirely deserving of public condemnation.

Instead of Grady’s Rule, we should consider making signs for “mischievous cowards” to wear. These signs could say, “I was recently out moved in a one pocket match. Instead of facing this difficulty with decisiveness and courage, I tried to shark my opponent and slowed the tournament for all of you.”

kollegedave

lol.

Yes, we should shame two groups of players: the indecisive nellies and guys who whistle in the pool room.

Lou Figueroa
groceries will
magically appear
in the frig, lol

 

[lfigueroa]

In my younger days, Grady and I played several times. If you remember, he never took longer that about 5 seconds to find a shot. He couldn't stand anyone taking longer than him. Thus the Grady rule. Now he and I played so long ago that there was no three foul rule. I remember him taking 4 or 5 intentionals against me one time and then complaining I was taking too long to shoot. That's when they came up with the phrase the kettle calling the pot black or something like that. Bless his heart, I miss him.

I played Grady for couple of days at his room and you're on the money about how long he took to choose a shot and shoot.

He wanted a quick paced game without any dawdling.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

With the Grady rule in place, I am sure players will have cases of either accidentally or on purpose forgetting to spot a 5th (or 6th or more) ball from the kitchen. And there is no question that if it was to someone's advantage to suddenly remember, that would likely trigger their memory lol. But in any case, those extra balls in the kitchen are only spotted between innings -- not during an inning. It behooves all players to be aware of a potential spotted ball as they wrap up their inning. That has always been the case, but it gets even more important if you have the Grady rule going and balls hanging around the kitchen.

What is different with the Grady rule is that if players notice -- hey there are 5 or more balls in the kitchen, and we must have forgotten to spot one up earlier -- there is no delay spotting up the discovered extra ball/s in the kitchen (other than it has to happen between innings). Whereas other slept balls are held for spotting until "each player has shot". There is no such hold for the Grady rule. It's good to be on your toes

It's gonna fook things up.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

The Grady Rule:
When an inning ends and there are more than 4 balls within the kitchen, then the balls closest to the head rail spot up to bring the ball count back down to 4 balls within the kitchen.
Whitey

After reviewing the discussions, I came up with this writing for the Grady rule. For me, I believe this to be a good writing, for it is simple, easy to understand, no loop holes, and includes all of the disciplines of the rule.
TD's are welcome to use it!

 

[unoperro]

Whitey you slept what happens if a player sleeps it?

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Whitey you slept what happens if a player sleeps it?

Thanks for bringing this up so I can clarify. As a rule writer it is not appropriate to add a hypothetical such as; sleeping the balls. Sleeping the balls is not part of the rule. It is much better to keep it simple and to the point. I have every trust in Steve's interpretation of the Grady Rule.

I could write the rule with a warning as we see below. But, as a rule writer I did not feel comfortable doing this, for warning a player is up to the governing rule making power or the TD to include this. It does absolve the outgoing player of being accused of trying to make a move, whether intentional or not, and saves an argument by those that want to self interpret the rule.

The Grady Rule:
When an inning ends and there are more than 4 balls within the kitchen, then the balls closest to the head rail spot up to bring the ball count back down to 4 balls within the kitchen. If balls are equally closest to the head rail it then is the shooter's choice. Note: it is the responsibility of the incoming player to recognize when there are more than 4 balls in the kitchen.
Whitey

unopero, I appreciate the question. When minds come together it can lead to a better rule writing, and in this case we now have a writing that works for governing powers and TD's.
I like it, hope it works for you!
thanks, Whitey

 

[jay helfert]

First off this was a real nice event, with $5000 added by Diamond Billiards and Joe Long and only a $200 entry, so it attracted a good mix with a handful of top pros and the rest of the 34 player field made up of solid shortstops and amateur players.

Jason Hill, the Buffalo’s tournament director, explained the “express” rules, with a demonstration of the “Grady rule” by Joe Long. Ray Hansen handled the calcutta auction, which netted $20, 045, only modest by Buffalo’s sky high standards.

The tournament was played on 10 Diamond tables with 4-1/4” pockets plus the 4” pocket PoolActionTV table, all with well broken in cloth, so all the tables played tough. It was a race to 3 both sides in a standard double elimination format, except a single race to 5 in the finals.

The special “Express” rules used here were an experiment to avoid schedule problems caused by long matches, with Buffalo’s as the laboratory. All matches started with standard One Pocket rules. If after 2 hours, three games had not been completed, “phase1” the “Grady Rule” went into effect. Played here at Buffalo’s that meant that between innings, a maximum of 4 balls were allowed in the kitchen. The 5th (or 5th, 6th or more) closest to the head rail were spotted so only 4 balls maximum remained in the kitchen. That rule stayed in place for the remainder of that match.

The “phase2” time management rule only kicked in if a match was not finished or hill-hill after 3 hours. Phase2 meant all games remaining to be played were full rack but each player needed only 6 balls (not 8) to win.

Friday night the Beaux Guidry vs Richie Richeson match saw the phase1 Grady rule kick in, then for the final game only, phase2 kicked in. That match still logged in at over 4 hours. That was the first of only 4 matches in the entire tournament that went to the phase2 rule.

With 34 players there were 66 matches in total, with the average match length being almost exactly 2 hours to completion. The shortest match finished in 36 minutes; the longest match 4 hours 50 minutes.

Of the 66, 4 matches went 4 hours plus; 5 more went 3 hours plus. Because rules were never changed mid-game, and because hill-hill games were exempted from phase2, only 3 matches got into phase2, with 5 more going to phase1 only.

There was confusion in one match that had gone to phase1 but not phase2, where one player forfeited by raking the table after scoring 6 balls, when in fact the phase2 rule was not in effect.

TD Hill was diligent watching match times to inform players whenever their match reached one of the express trigger points, and reviewing the phase rules if necessary. From my observation players adapted easily to the Grady rule, with only the understandable pauses to both look at whether a ball was in fact in or out of the kitchen when it was close, or which ball to spot.

The whole tournament finished “on schedule” under these rules, without any late night or morning matches needed to stay on schedule. In that regard the express experiment was a success.

That is the news angle, for what was a well-received One Pocket tournament at a popular poolroom. Thank you to the host room, the sponsors, the TD and PoolActionTV!


My editorial conclusions:

• The Grady rule is a very good speed up option that is effective at avoiding extended up table games. Players readily understand it and there did not seem to be any problems following it at this tournament. It probably works best if it is in place start to finish, to keep an entire tournament moving more efficiently than can happen with traditional One Pocket, with minimal confusion and minimal disruption to the game.
• The shortened races only came up a little bit, so there wasn’t really enough evidence to know how significant a difference it would make. As noted above there was confusion in one match as to whether it was in effect or not, which leads to my 3rd point…
• The double trigger points set for this tournament required some extra diligence in time keeping and explanations by the tournament director. He handled it fine, but that is an area that I might suggest the triggers be simplified if possible.

If the decision is to shorten the final games of matches that are running long, keep it simple and make it certain to shorten those matches. My suggestion would be whatever time is allotted for matches, play regular One Pocket the entire allotted time. Only if a match is not finished within the allotted tournament time then that match could go to something definitive like One Ball One Pocket to finish up

I have used the Grady rule in several One Pocket tournaments we put on at Hard Times. Simply put, it works! Just use it from the start of the match and you won't have to change the rules midway in the match. My experience was that by using it all the time players quickly remember and are looking for situations with more than four balls down table. They rarely snooze on that! In fact, more often I've seen players shoot balls in the wrong pocket. This one rule change alone will speed up the matches and allow you to keep a regular schedule.

PLus you should always play Three Fouls in a row is loss of game, otherwise players will end up owing multiple balls on both sides, and that game becomes a stretched out snooze fest. I like the rule Pat and Greg used at DCC when they decided to subtract an equal number of balls owed by each player, but I don't think it's necessary when using the Grady rule.

I must have officiated over 100 One Pocket tournaments in my life and I hated the long, drawn out matches when I had to keep reminding players to speed it up please. I was never in favor of using a 45 second or one minute shot clock, but sometimes was forced to do it. That said I wouldn't mind watching One Pocket with a shot clock that allows one or two extensions per game. The problem with this is finding the manpower to run the clock, but perhaps the clocks used in chess would work.

Once again, my experience was that implementing the Grady rule eliminated the need for any other rule changes. In the end it was still the best players winning the money. The bottom line is that they played smarter and shot better, and they would win with or without this rule.

 

[crabbcatjohn]

Thanks for the input Jay.
I'm also a fan of having the rule all the way through tournaments. One of the biggest complaints is "why should I be penalized for another person's slow play". Everybody playing the same rules from the start eliminates the rule being a penalty and saves on confusion/policing of games. The European tournament organizers recognized that and installed it for every game...

 

[lfigueroa]

I have used the Grady rule in several One Pocket tournaments we put on at Hard Times. Simply put, it works! Just use it from the start of the match and you won't have to change the rules midway in the match. My experience was that by using it all the time players quickly remember and are looking for situations with more than four balls down table. They rarely snooze on that! In fact, more often I've seen players shoot balls in the wrong pocket. This one rule change alone will speed up the matches and allow you to keep a regular schedule.

PLus you should always play Three Fouls in a row is loss of game, otherwise players will end up owing multiple balls on both sides, and that game becomes a stretched out snooze fest. I like the rule Pat and Greg used at DCC when they decided to subtract an equal number of balls owed by each player, but I don't think it's necessary when using the Grady rule.

I must have officiated over 100 One Pocket tournaments in my life and I hated the long, drawn out matches when I had to keep reminding players to speed it up please. I was never in favor of using a 45 second or one minute shot clock, but sometimes was forced to do it. That said I wouldn't mind watching One Pocket with a shot clock that allows one or two extensions per game. The problem with this is finding the manpower to run the clock, but perhaps the clocks used in chess would work.

Once again, my experience was that implementing the Grady rule eliminated the need for any other rule changes. In the end it was still the best players winning the money. The bottom line is that they played smarter and shot better, and they would win with or without this rule.

If it’s at the same room, with the usual suspects playing, I can see how players would get used to it.

Lou Figueroa
udderwise, not so much

 

[NH Steve]

If it’s at the same room, with the usual suspects playing, I can see how players would get used to it.

Lou Figueroa
udderwise, not so much

Could have a point but you’re not actually speaking from any experience with the rule — just speculating and expressing your personal opinion. Jay just spoke from significant experience Big difference — in my opinion