I would thank you for not ignoring me, except I really wish you would ignore me, I beleive I've asked you to ignore me on several occasions now that I think about, but yet you persist. I think you just continue to respond because secrectly, deep down in the dark recesses of aflumpirity, you love me.

By reading the first post on this thread

More seriously tho, no you can't stop flukes, but you can minimize the changes of them happening - by for example requiring pockets being nominated.

This is obviously only a guess, but I think it's a fair assumption that well above 90% of all flukes drop balls in non-intended pockets. By adding pocket nomination, all but the few flukes who pots in the intended pocket would be eliminated.

Furthermore, you would remove incentive to "slam as hard as I can and see what happens" - which in my humble opinion think would been a good thing.

And here I was, working SO hard to resist the urge to post something similar lol

Yikes buddy, put on the brakes already lol

Spinner does a good job at elaborating and backing up his views, and although I definitely don't agree with him on this topic either, there are plenty ways to disagree in a more respectful manner

But back on topic: If we like to encourage the "just slam and hope for the best" line of thought, we frankly might as well go play lottery instead.

The current problem with this "strategy" is that it helps lowbies a ton more than anyone else: More often than not, it does NOT pay off to play wildly and hope for the best. Which is why good players don't. The problem is that you DO get lucky occasionally - which is what helps a player that otherwise would have had an even lower win-rate.

In short, if you consider two players who would normally have a 1 in 10 win rate, flukes will over time offset that to 2 in 10 or more.

Edited at 14:49 Sat 19/04/08 (BST)

Exactly.




Thank you. I was becoming worried no-one was noticing!



Yes, i do, anyone who has played me will know that.

If you search through the forum you will find a post i made in an attemt to save the pro tables where i pointed out that smacking the balls at random, with the newer tables (with their larger pockets) was a viable strategy to adopt, especially when some are near pockets.



Yes there is.

There are many online pool games which include pocket nominating, and it always affects the smooth flow of the game and the playability (learning curve, if you will)

As was pointed out a while back, if you wish to play with nominating rules, you can do so by simply typing "top middle" or whatever in the chat window.

The popularity of the new US games and arcade snooker have proven that more users enjoy the simple and fun games, than the more accurate "simulation" style.

I've always said that, if the demand arose, "pro" games, with 3D physics and full rules (inc nominations) would be a great addition.

There is another solution... play 8-ball, then instead of a loss you get a win

Edited at 20:31 Sat 19/04/08 (BST)

Well spinner that post was a bit less ridiculous so I do appreciate that. I simply disagree that it would make the game even a fraction more difficult to understand, or affect the flow and playability. All I'm talking about is clicking a nominate button, then a button, then taking your shot. If the 9 goes in that pocket you win, if it doesn't you keep playing, if another ball legally pots, its still your turn. I think you drastically underestimate the intelligence of funkypool members when you say it would be a longer learning curve. You are right, I should probably play 8 ball, but I just don't like it, heck I don't like anything. BTW I LOVE janmb I should just let janmb do all my posting for me.

I like when people disagree. The forums would be frankly pathetic if we didnt!

Almost like being on ya... er, who? ach, i forget, but some other pool site i remember...

Touching on the underestimation of intelligence of members though - not at all. Intelligence has nothing to do with it.

I guess it's no secret that a complicated rule set with a 10 sec limit would be a potential roud to glory for me, but one has to be realistic - people simply love to logon and play, hassle free.

I'm sure Nick will read this, and if who knows! A trial may come.

It's great to see people passionate about the game. This thread has seen tempers flare, and personal issues surface but remain relatively in control.

Nice one guys, keep the dissagreements coming

P.S. - wibble.

Edited at 02:21 Sun 20/04/08 (BST)

wow! I have never seen so much argument in here!

lol, but still...go onto Yahoo pool. You have to nominate the 8 ball and for those that are new to the game, they dont know about the rule of nominating the 8 ball.

Many people who are new on funkypool dont even play as a guest; I never did anyway.

So for those entirely new people, they struggle to get the concept of 9 ball as it is straight away (the learning curve). So then why add in another STUPID rule of them to learn?

Like I have said, flukes are a part of life. Not many golfers aim to put the ball in the hole in one or 2 bounces; not many soccer players are really wanting a goal from half way; not many baseball players try to hit the ball so hard to hit it out of the park.

All of these examples are due to luck. Yes, they are good players but luck plays a major hand into the situation.

Flukes happen, please....CALM DOWN!

I'll calm down when you grasp the idea. When you says something like "So then why add in another STIPID rule of them to learn", then you have ran out of any REAL debate. To say something is STUPID just means you don't have the knowledge specifically state why it should'nt be instituted.

you have repated yourelf again when you say "Like I have said, flukes are a part of life,". Ok fine, I didn't say they weren't, I also have overstated the fact that nominating a pocket wouldn't eliminate flukes. It would just cut down on the nonsensicle nature of players wildly banging the 9 with just a prayer it will find a pocket. And yes, baseball players do try to hit the ball out of the park depending on the pitch, wind, and what the count is. (different thread if you want to debate sports). There's nothing to suggest that nominating ONE ball would slow down a game.

but like i said earlier (i hate repeating myself lol), this would only work if you made it that you had to nominate all balls.

if not, it wont work; combos would come more rarely and more games would go down to the 9, which is a shame as some skill is taken out of the game with combo's.

but, if you want to make this game just be boring, un interesting and no unpridictability about it, then im 100% for this idea....but I like the unpridictable part of nine ball. Thats why I play nine ball more than 8 ball, because in 8 ball, your always plotting and planning and the games take longer.

With nine ball, its fast. Many people like myself only have a linited time to come on and just play a few games of nine ball where we would only get 1, maybe 2 games of 8 ball.

keep nine ball fast, fun and unpridictible.

*unpredictable......

You wouldn't have to nominate all balls, I can think of one 9 ball touurnament, pro or amateur, where all balls were called, I have seen many where the 9 only was called. Like I said, I'm not trying to rid the game of flukes, I just think that a game winning shot should be made in the pocket the shooter intended.

at least we are calming down now.

But with these tournaments that you see on TV; these are skilled professionals and they have many more varyables like human error, nerves, more dynamics to the game (in spin ect)...funkypool is just an arcade game, not a professional snooker table.

if this game was more realistic (which is pretty hard to do with current technology), then yes, I support your idea.

But when its just a few people, jumping online to have some fun and shoot some balls, keep it arcade.

We are not playing for millions of dollars or prestitious world titles; we are playing for a rank and to win hourly tournaments (with 24 or so different winners everyday)

but when funkypool does become near realistic, 3D and playing for world championships, then I MAY support your idea!

you would have to nominate the 9 ball on every shot as the majority of flukes are from combo's which is practically the same as nominating all balls

Edited at 19:10 Sun 20/04/08 (BST)

thankyou!!!

what?

Thats the bit people dont seem to be realising.

Its not like 8-ball where it's a case of nominating only when on the black.

In 9-ball, to do what is being asked, the option to nominated the 9 ball would have to be present every shot in the game.

People who want to "go for it" (otherwise known as flukey) would therefore nominate almost every shot just in case, thus slowing the game etc etc.

This is by far the most important reason, and in fact close to being the only reason for having a forum at all, imo.

Very little could ever been gained from this if people didn't have differing opinions.

Precisely my idea as well, but you could skip the button all together.

You simply highlight all pockets, have the player click (directly) on one, then take the shot as normal. It would add tenths of a second to the overall time it takes to take a shot.

No new buttons or compexity needed at all, simply a click on the corner you want to go for (hard to get any more intuitive than that lol)

It's very simple: You nominate a single pocket on every shot. If you legally pot any ball in that pocket, you keep your turn, otherwise you lose the turn to your opponent.

No reason what so ever to make a big deal out of 9 ball. The definition of a legal shot has nothing to do with what ball it is - as long as you hit the correct ball, and any ball is potted in the nominated pocket, the shot is legal.

If that ball happens to be the 9 ball - you win the game. Nothing more to it.

You don't nominate any ball on any shot. You nominate a pocket.

(see my suggestion in the above post)