(except technically it's not a foul)

The other compramise would be to award the 2 points but you lose your place at the table, therefore you could purposely try an pot 3 in a row if you were on 32 and win the game with a super shot

Same rule would apply for potting of the break.

Personaly, although i'm not overly fond of the rule myself, I find the game to be rather enjoyable, so i'm not too fussed either way

but then you do encourage the hit and hope factor even more (we are trying to get rid of it arnt we??).

im sure that no one would mind having 2 points and losing the ball at any stage over 0 points and continuing.

If its the 2-ball rule or nominating to eliminate hit n hope, I prefer the 2-ball rule. Nominating every shot would be tedious.

Although Id also like a quick & fun version of the game where you can pot as many as you like, go in off with the white, and only need to get to 20. By the time I reach 35 pots everyones gone home and the lights are out.

Edited at 14:35 Wed 26/11/08 (GMT)

I'd say the idea of potting two balls, continuing, but recieving no points, is the best compromise.

i think that you are the first person to agree with something i say

lol

I just think it makes the most sense.

I think that potting two balls shouldn't be punished, it should just not be rewarded, and your idea fits perfectly with that.

I would not mind the tedium of nominating ball and pocket. You'd get used to it quicker than you realise.

agreed - and we are talking about a game that ought to be distinctly different from what already exists

have to say though - without nominating - i think the rule ought to stay as it is, and thats from someone that gets more frustrated by it than anyone (I'm sure someone will confirm that if asked )

lmao i'm not sure why you do get so frustrated though you win every damn game , you should be in my shoes then you would know what frustration really is lol

x x x

see - and not even asked

<<<<<<<< gob on legs , i never wait till i'm asked lol x x

but if you play on a laptop more often than not, it would be harder (for me anyway). Yeah, I could get a mouse but then again, I dont use my computer on a desk or anything..(on the floor of my room )

maybe nominate on the break shot of each rack maybe?? or nominate at the start of the game so if you do pot, you can keep going? just not all the time

Nominating at the start of a game - I wouldn't be opposed to that. Then if someone wants to smash the pack, they have to hope their nominated ball ends up in the nominated pocket. And if it doesn't, then it's end of turn, even if any other ball goes in.

Proper straight pool players on this site laugh when their opponent smashes the rack. Anyone who has ever played against me: if you smashed the rack, I laughed at you. And if you potted, I cursed you; in my experience, about once in every 6 or 7 goes does smashing on the break pot a ball, so it really isn't worth it. If you try it, you will fail. And if it works, well you had already lost my respect.

so then its a case of risk and reward if you did bring in noms for breaking - nothing is better than risk and reward

With straight the only thing that interests me is highest break and pot success. So when I played the game I would always smash into the pack for my pot success stats more than anything.

Besides, playing ranked games of straight pool seem to be a waste of time as far as I'm concerned since straight pool is a game where the current ranking system favours people who only play to win, i.e. by beating players of limited ability. We have already seen a guy at the top of the straight rankings playing and beating one player only. I can see one or two guys on the site getting max rankings on straight pool without losing any games while its still first to 35 points. Tournament games would be interesting however.

Tournies - yip. Best of one game, though. 35 points is enough over one game! Otherwise, increase the points limit for tournament games. Although for two players of low calibre, this could also take a while.



.....? All the ranking systems across all games are like this.

I meant to say favours these people the most since in 8 ball you can foul on the black and lose or your balls could go awkward and you lose that way. In straight you are very unlikely to lose if you play someone poor.

There's a way round the top players beating players of lower ability.

Intermediates need to score 25.
Adepts score 35.
Pros score 50
Virtuosos score 50 + 1 ball per 1 rating over 900 they have.

Meaning to get to 1000 you'd have to clear 150

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

now there is the basis for an original and interesting idea.

At a stroke that has the potential to provide a handicap system to allow any two players to compete evenly against each other.

In the past it has been argued that the current ranked weighted scoring system works as a handicap system allowing players of differing ability to compete evenly against each other. Unfortunately that is completely misguided as in any given game the vastly superior player is always going to win barring a freak disaster. This leads to all the problems that walker666 is referring to in his post, and which I agree with, where players opt to only play low 'ranked' players in order to maintain and slowly increase their own score without allowing themselves to be challenged by the so called 'better' players.

Unfortunately this only would work in the Straight game but certainly is worthy of consideration.

nice one squeezy