Tournament One Pocket

baby huey

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,461
I was watching an old thread on You Tube and in their race to three, with the score tied 2/2 they re-lagged for the break in the final game. I thought this was a very good idea so as to add suspense to the final game. Some would say that they already decided who would break in the final game with the first lag but I think the re-lag puts pressure on each player to perform at the highest level. Also it makes the player who was up 2/1 think about what he's going to shoot not knowing that he is not guaranteed the last break in the final game.
 

jrhendy

Verified Member
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
4,691
I was watching an old thread on You Tube and in their race to three, with the score tied 2/2 they re-lagged for the break in the final game. I thought this was a very good idea so as to add suspense to the final game. Some would say that they already decided who would break in the final game with the first lag but I think the re-lag puts pressure on each player to perform at the highest level. Also it makes the player who was up 2/1 think about what he's going to shoot not knowing that he is not guaranteed the last break in the final game.
I like this idea too, and it would work best in a race to three IMO. Most of our local smaller tournaments are races to two and winning the lag at the start is huge. I have always thought loser breaks would give some of the players who almost never cash a chance to be more competitive and get more bang for their buck.
 

Frank Almanza

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2005
Messages
2,402
I like this idea too, and it would work best in a race to three IMO. Most of our local smaller tournaments are races to two and winning the lag at the start is huge. I have always thought loser breaks would give some of the players who almost never cash a chance to be more competitive and get more bang for their buck.
John did you mean to say that it would work better in a race to two? I also like the idea of loser break but for races to three or more.
 

jrhendy

Verified Member
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
4,691
John did you mean to say that it would work better in a race to two? I also like the idea of loser break but for races to three or more.
I think it would work in any format where you have the same few players winning the top spots most of the time.
 

cincy_kid

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Messages
4,820
I was going to type "I almost think it would be better if the loser got to break"...but didn't type it and Hendy beat me to it :)

I like the idea but if the loser player has a very weak break and scratches or sells out a lot its much of a spot hehe...
 

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,875
I was going to type "I almost think it would be better if the loser got to break"...but didn't type it and Hendy beat me to it :)

I like the idea but if the loser player has a very weak break and scratches or sells out a lot its much of a spot hehe...
Speaking for my own weak-ass self, even if the weaker players don't end up benefitting, at least we'd think we were getting a better shot.

I've said for a long time (not entirely selfishly I hope :D ) that the weaker players should be catered to more. They (we) are carrying a lot of these tourneys. The more dead money the merrier, and it's most likely to happen if the cadavers think they are only zombies. :heh

It doesn't matter with me... I'm gonna play no matter what, as long as my wife lets me spend the money..... WAIT! She already dumped me. Screw her, I'll play if I want to :cool: :cool: :cool:

(Not really, she's the best Ex-wife I ever had..... recently. :D )
 

stevelomako

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Messages
1,055
Why not just play "break and move one to the spot" in these monthly tournaments?

It's a better advantage for the weaker players than anything I've read so far.
 

beatle

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,567
let the B players get all the breaks and fouls cost two balls for the A players.

this way the weak player isnt always behind shooting from a terrible spot early on. and the good players are not taking scratches to leave them in sellout spots.

if you want weak players in tournaments they need to think they have a chance which unless you give them the world they really dont.

of course the A+ players wont like giving up their sure money in the tournaments.
 

Billy Jackets

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
1,472
Speaking for my own weak-ass self, even if the weaker players don't end up benefitting, at least we'd think we were getting a better shot.

I've said for a long time (not entirely selfishly I hope :D ) that the weaker players should be catered to more. They (we) are carrying a lot of these tourneys. The more dead money the merrier, and it's most likely to happen if the cadavers think they are only zombies. :heh

It doesn't matter with me... I'm gonna play no matter what, as long as my wife lets me spend the money..... WAIT! She already dumped me. Screw her, I'll play if I want to :cool: :cool: :cool:

(Not really, she's the best Ex-wife I ever had..... recently. :D )
Thats what I hate most about getting old, that damn zombie shuffle.
 
Top