Go Back   OnePocket.org Forums > One Pocket Forum
Register FAQ Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-17-2016, 08:24 AM
Jeff sparks Jeff sparks is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,911
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NH Steve View Post
I played a guy two games last night who took at least a full minute every shot (except for when he was running balls), and mostly took between 2 and 4 minutes per safety. I know that for a fact because after a little while when I realized what he was doing, I used my cell phone to time him. I won't be playing him again unless there is a shot clock, lol. A minute should be enough most of the time (some exceptions, granted).
When I first started watching one pocket matches I commented in another thread about how long it took Alex Pagulayan to shoot, getting down, getting up, getting down, getting up, going around and around the table looking at every conceivable angle and taking an inordinate amount of time with each and every shot... It drove me nuts.... I wanted a shot clock!!!

Seems several people in that particular thread thought that was his prerogative and that he was well within his rights to take as long as he wanted considering there were no rules governing TIME... I thought it was a ploy, a shark if you will, but the more I watched, the more I understood about the intricacies of shot selection and how each and every shot usually can and sometimes definitely will determine the outcome of the game...

With this in mind, I have altered my thinking somewhat regarding time taken in a particular inning... I would still advocate the use of a shot clock in a tournament format, with 60 seconds being the standard, plus two 60 second extensions anytime during the game. Exceeding all extensions would be a foul and forfeit of the present innings shot selection, you'd spot a ball ( or owe one ) plus lose your turn if you haven't pulled the trigger yet. This seems enough time to accurately survey the entire table and decide upon a shot.

When two deliberate players meet, especially two very knowledgeable players, it can be painful to the average pedestrian to watch. However for the players involved, it's not at all, it's a battle, it's Mano a Mano, it's wits against wits, skill against skill and for them it's exciting.

It's not the casual fan who enjoys a pitchers duel in baseball or a low scoring defensive battle in football, however the purists do...

So, should we abandon all past tradition in order to speed up the game and please ( broaden ) the fan base, or retain status quo and let match ups decide how fast a tournament will be completed?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-17-2016, 09:06 AM
Mkbtank's Avatar
Mkbtank Mkbtank is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Philly Pa
Posts: 4,999
Default Shot clocks for one pocket?

Quote:
Originally Posted by southavenrecreationcenter View Post
What is accu-stats rule for exceeding the 60 seconds. Is it loss of shot ...loss of shot and a ball, and what happens if your opponent shots after the clock has expired? Thanks


I believe: It's 45 seconds. If you exceed the first time, you get an automatic extension (another 45). If you exceed a second time, it is a foul. You spot a ball and your opponent shoots from where the cue lies. Incidentally, this came up a week or so ago when Efren and SVB were playing. Shane forgot that he had already used his extension, and the resulting foul and position pretty much cost him the game. (I do agree there should be a warning at 10 seconds ((not that it would have helped in Shane's case)))
__________________
Mitch needs to remember to play the score and that it's better to win than to look like a hero.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-17-2016, 10:14 AM
LSJohn LSJohn is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: monett missouri
Posts: 7,280
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff sparks View Post

So, should we abandon all past tradition


This is rant material, but I'm going to try to restrain myself.

I know I should quit smoking, but I wouldn't want to abandon a 50-year tradition.

Slow play has retarded the growth of the game.

We love one pocket because it rewards skill, knowledge, planning and perceptive analysis. I like the idea of offering more reward for accomplishing planning and analysis more quickly than an opponent.

It's only personal -- your mileage may vary -- but I dislike rather than admire gamesmanship. I think the outcome should be determined by performance on the battlefield, not inside an opponent's head. Slow play often verges on gamesmanship, and in high profile matches detracts from the enjoyment of observers, without whom the contenders would frequently be playing for only half as much cash.

I'd love to see a match between Alex and JJ with a 30-second shot clock. I wonder if you can guess who I'd bet on
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-17-2016, 11:47 AM
petie petie is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Citrus Springs, FL
Posts: 3,314
Default

Say you allow 45 seconds per shot and get one extension per game and the tournament director allows 2 hours between the start of sessions. I think it would make more sense to give each player a 1 hour limit for the session. When he tapped out, he would forfeit. He could take as much time as he wanted but all his time, including potty breaks, would come out of his hour. That way he could take extra time when and where he wanted to. Nobody sharking him with warnings etc.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-17-2016, 11:58 AM
LSJohn LSJohn is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: monett missouri
Posts: 7,280
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by petie View Post
I think it would make more sense to give each player a 1 hour limit for the session.
That would work great if it didn't take a time clock manager for every table. Fine for events like MIH, but no good for ordinary tournament formats or for action games. Could be done with opponent responsible for managing a player's clock, but I don't want to spend half my match time doing that on every opponent's shot.)
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-17-2016, 12:07 PM
cincy_kid's Avatar
cincy_kid cincy_kid is online now
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Northern KY
Posts: 3,957
Default

How about when your opponent is shooting, you start counting out loud so he can hear you, backwards from 45...44....43........3...2....1 and then make a real loud buzzer sound!

(just kidding of course but that made me laugh picturing that in an action match haha)
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-17-2016, 12:13 PM
lll lll is online now
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: vero beach fl
Posts: 14,343
Default

for tournament play
i am not against a shot clock
with rules similar to what accustats used (i have an email into accustats to get the rules)
in order to keep the matches flowing at a reasonable pace
but i wouldnt want it to become the new standard way to play
in tennis many years ago
in order to be sure the feature singles match would start on time
and that the doubles matches would not run into the start times of the singles
professional tennis changed the rules in doubles where by at deuce whomever won the next point won that game instead of having to win by 2 points
yet all amateurs still play you have to win by 2
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-17-2016, 12:19 PM
Jeff sparks Jeff sparks is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,911
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LSJohn View Post


This is rant material, but I'm going to try to restrain myself.

I know I should quit smoking, but I wouldn't want to abandon a 50-year tradition.

Slow play has retarded the growth of the game.

We love one pocket because it rewards skill, knowledge, planning and perceptive analysis. I like the idea of offering more reward for accomplishing planning and analysis more quickly than an opponent.

It's only personal -- your mileage may vary -- but I dislike rather than admire gamesmanship. I think the outcome should be determined by performance on the battlefield, not inside an opponent's head. Slow play often verges on gamesmanship, and in high profile matches detracts from the enjoyment of observers, without whom the contenders would frequently be playing for only half as much cash.

I'd love to see a match between Alex and JJ with a 30-second shot clock. I wonder if you can guess who I'd bet on
I don't think the comparison between quitting smoking and speeding up play is related... One generally deals with quality and length of life while the other is opinion based... Tradition might be a poor use of the word when referring to a smoking habit. Perhaps tradition might also be a poor word selection when referring to an age old lack of a rule concerning using to much time...

I too believe that speeding up the game with a shot clock would help the fan base and go further and eons faster towards acquiring more players and a much broader fan base.
I am not however in the camp that would hurt or denigrate the game of one pocket, such as has happened in Pro Basketball IMHO... I do understand the reasoning behind the changes made in basketball, and they deal largely with TV and the money it pays...

Popularity is in the eyes of the beholder, and for me personally, taking more than two steps is traveling, touching anything but the top of the basketball when dribbling is palming ( also called traveling) and being able to hold the ball on the bottom ( side ) and stutter step ( juke ) your opponent is just being allowed because of it's entertainment value to the newer generation of fans. While that's cool and popular to some and here to stay, I rarely watch the game anymore because of it.

I'm also positive that me not watching because of the changes made to basketball mean about as much as a single grain of sand in the Sahara desert...

It's a moot point, unless some authoritative group or governing body takes the bull by the horns and incorporates a reasonable shot clock rule for tournament play. One that proves out over time and is wholly accepted and welcomed by the players and the public.

Until then we will just have to suffer the old traditional (oops!) the same way we have been playing the game since it was invented...

Who would you bet on? The winner gets to play Cory Dueul...another speedster at the table.

Last edited by Jeff sparks; 06-17-2016 at 12:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-17-2016, 03:55 PM
povpool povpool is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 352
Default

Okay so, because there's a 'Chess Clock' should there be a 'One-Pocket, Shot Clock'? It's a tough question, because with pool, you are never in exactly the same situation twice in a row, but chess has so many standard moves and outcomes, they have names for most of them.

The thing about one-pocket is, if you don't play the 'right shot', you'll probably sell out faster and it won't be, what most players call a 'good game' or 'match'. You would see more 'donkey' moves like the ones I play and less of the correct moves that sometimes take great thought and consideration to execute.

More time = Higher quality play

The shot clock would mostly affect the dynamics of the least skilled player and favor the stronger player. Things like 'mental planning' and 'shot pressure' during the final seconds are going to be easily overcome by most pros where an 'A' player or shortstop might struggle. Alex is only one example of slow players, but even he would have an edge on most players with a shot clock.

ALSO: When it comes to betting the line or making game predictions, you'd literally have to consider shot-clock criteria when it came to determining the line/s on certain games or matches too.

Example:
Frank Almanza beats John Henderson >
  • Was there or wasn't there a shot clock?
  • What's the result of the match with or without a shot clock?
  • How would you bet on this match with or without a clock?
  • Should a 'shot-clocked' match be used to determine those lines at all?

After a second thought about this, I'm not too inclined to support the shot clock for One-Pocket; at least until my reasons above get shot down by any logic I may have overlooked.

Oh and, I'd love to see a Frank vs John match sometime.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-17-2016, 04:14 PM
petie petie is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Citrus Springs, FL
Posts: 3,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LSJohn View Post
That would work great if it didn't take a time clock manager for every table. Fine for events like MIH, but no good for ordinary tournament formats or for action games. Could be done with opponent responsible for managing a player's clock, but I don't want to spend half my match time doing that on every opponent's shot.)
Don't get me wrong, I don't want shot clocks. From the tone of this thread, I thought that a lot of posters were heading that way. I'm just sayin' if you must, this would be a good way to do it. You could use a cheap chess clock to manage the match.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All original content Copyright Onepocket.org and/or the original author. All rights reserved.