View Single Post
  #7  
Old 08-17-2019, 07:01 PM
Tom Wirth's Avatar
Tom Wirth Tom Wirth is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delray Beach, Florida
Posts: 2,539
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sappo View Post
It was Tres Kane that said that is the rule he has used in events he has run. Every time this topic comes I always used the example of what happens if on the 2nd break you either scratch or sell out the corner ball. My feeling this is not fair. I think Tres' solution moves toward a fairer solution but I don't think solves the case where the breaker sinks a ball on the break and then sells out the corner ball on the 2nd break. Here in this example the breaker has been penalized for his good break and now has to live with his 2nd break where his opponent has a chance to run out or at least take control of the table

Expanding on Tres' rule I would like to see the breaker have the option of a 3rd break if he sells out that ball. Its the only truly fair solution if your are going the repack if the breaker makes a ball.

The best solution is 1 break and whatever happens, happens. Keith




Keith, This is the way I see it too. Rack for yourself or rack for each other. the opposing player has the option to inspect the rack. What could be more fair than that? Unfortunately, times have changed. So what is to be done to make this new re-rack rule be more fair. Tres' option is one solution. There are others.

In speaking to Jakie, he mentioned the possibility of giving the breaker the option of spotting the ball and surrender the inning to the opponent or risking a re-rack and break the balls again, taking whatever comes.

As I see it, this is not a bad alternative.
Something to consider leading to the next event.

Tom
__________________

"Controlled Aggression" trwirth369@gmail.com
Reply With Quote