One Ball One Pocket

[darmoose]

Thanks for clarifying darmoose. The same outcome could be achieved by banking one rail towards my middle pocket which is an easier shot so perhaps Steve’s rule is less restrictive in that sense?

I have no problem with your rule no 2 (especially if the players’ preference is that there should only be one object ball on the table at all times (otherwise, a foul is not much of a penalty as per my earlier post).

Discussio mater veritas est

I agree with you that there is an easier way to break, which is how we all play this game currently. But the rulemakers want to tie a nice tight little bow around all this so no one can "game or cheat" the rules by "secretly" making a break that is tooo "offensive". As you can see there is now a full page of rules and clarifications for this simple little game.

While this rule for the break is a bit more difficult, it is entirely doable and the breaker has complete control of how much risk he wants to take to get a better result. That's all anyone can ask for, and all "offensiveness" is removed, don't you see....

I am only trying to keep it KISS..able.....

 

[darmoose]

Buffalo's is starting a handicap one ball one pocket tournament in about a week. Pros and short stops go to 3 games, intermediate players go to 2, beginners have to win 1 game. Double elimination, $20 entry fee. Also he's beginning a steak night on the night of the tournament. Should be a lot of fun.

That is great........it is amazing how this little game that has been around forever is catching on so much..........it makes me think that the wonderful game of "golf" has a chance of doing the same........it just needs the proper exposure like what has happened here......for those of you that have never experienced "golf" ...you don't know what your missing........

 

[BRLongArm]

That is great........it is amazing how this little game that has been around forever is catching on so much..........it makes me think that the wonderful game of "golf" has a chance of doing the same........it just needs the proper exposure like what has happened here......for those of you that have never experienced "golf" ...you don't know what your missing......

We are going games on the wire so that the handicap really counts. How would you like to be going to three against somebody going to one? Can't just shoot all our normal shots for fear of leaving the return. I'll give a report after the first tournament. As for the game's resurgence, we can thank Jeremy Jones for pushing Buff and Ray Hansen to put it on the Wednesday before Buffalo's big tournament. It got worldwide viewing and Ray is streaming over 30 tournaments a year. So expect his tournaments to feature it as well.

 

[Rt66]

The two-rule version, exactly as Darmoose outlined, has always made OBOP a great game - - for its simplicity and complexity. It really is a fabulous game.

I very much appreciate the desire to promote all things one pocket, but the old “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” seems to fit here.

 

[sheldon]

Tried both balls frozen to end rails for breaking last night, it seems to work pretty well. Sold out a couple of times before I got comfortable hitting it. We stuck with alternating breaks.

 

[NH Steve]

Here at Bogies I asked a local if he played it. He said yes he loved the game — great for the end game of one pocket, etc. I asked how he played, he said just like I hoped for i.e. BIH, ball on center spot, start with a defensive shot, spot up a ball if you scratch. I said ok let’s play a little bit until my buddy’s match is done. His idea of defensive shot indeed turned out to be nibbling the ball over toward his pocket and coming upstairs with the cue ball.

I didn’t mind until he left it about 6” from his pocket. He considered that a defensive shot Clearly for some people you have to clarify to some degree, in some way, what is meant by defensive shot. Having a definition you can fall back on — like “at least a diamond away from your pocket” does that.

I’m sure there are other ways to say it, and some might be even simpler, but I think “at least a diamond away” actually is KISS — and it also has the advantage of giving the breaker freedom to play the break in any way that they want — as long as they don’t get too close to their own pocket

 

[stevelomako]

Here at Bogies I asked a local if he played it. He said yes he loved the game — great for the end game of one pocket, etc. I asked how he played, he said just like I hoped for i.e. BIH, ball on center spot, start with a defensive shot, spot up a ball if you scratch. I said ok let’s play a little bit until my buddy’s match is done. His idea of defensive shot indeed turned out to be nibbling the ball over toward his pocket and coming upstairs with the cue ball.

I didn’t mind until he left it about 6” from his pocket. He considered that a defensive shot Clearly for some people you have to clarify to some degree, in some way, what is meant by defensive shot. Having a definition you can fall back on — like “at least a diamond away from your pocket” does that.

I’m sure there are other ways to say it, and some might be even simpler, but I think “at least a diamond away” actually is KISS — and it also has the advantage of giving the breaker freedom to play the break in any way that they want — as long as they don’t get too close to their own pocket

Hey! Here’s a thought.


Just pretend your opponent broke and put the balls where you think they should be after the break…and start from there.

 

[stevelomako]

And by the way, I’m spotting everyone on here the break.

 

[unoperro]

I always played you spotted a ball up if you fouled. Then you had to hope you didn't give up a spot shot and you had 2 balls to protect.

Yes it is true that both players had to protect against leaving a shot on either ball.

 

[gulfportdoc]

...
I’m sure there are other ways to say it, and some might be even simpler, but I think “at least a diamond away” actually is KISS — and it also has the advantage of giving the breaker freedom to play the break in any way that they want — as long as they don’t get too close to their own pocket

How about, "The breaker must not shoot the OB toward his pocket."

 

[NH Steve]

How about, "The breaker must not shoot the OB toward his pocket."

The problem with that is most everybody breaks toward their side — which especially if it is low — is technically “toward his pocket”.

 

[darmoose]

The problem with that is most everybody breaks toward their side — which especially if it is low — is technically “toward his pocket”.

True enough...........unless your break rule REQUIRES them to go the other way.........

 

[darmoose]

What I don't like about spotting balls on a foul is this. Many a good player can, if they get an initial shot, get shape on the spot, or a ball on the spot (depending on when you spot the ball) and win the game. So, while making the first ball is dependent on the opponent giving up a shot, making the second ball from the spot is purely in the hands of the player who committed the foul. That means the second ball is less difficult and could be said to be less valuable than the first ball. It also means the opponent has to defend two balls instead of one ball, which changes the game.

Alternatively, if you played that when a player fouls, and he goes on to pocket the one ball on the table, he simply continues by placing another ball on the foot rail and breaking again from the kitchen. This would at least value both balls equally, as well as fully valuing his penalty for fouling.

Fort those not wanting to lose the game on a foul......this rule would accommodate both views without making the game more difficult for the non-fouling player....

 

[Bob Jewett]

Do we have enough potential versions yet?

Yet another one is loss on any foul but not with the "poison pockets" rule. A ball pocketed extraneously is just spotted on the foot spot.

If the break is restricted (only safe, not closer than one diamond, to other side ...) the restriction has to be well defined and the penalty for a breaking violation needs to be specified.

 

[darmoose]

Do we have enough potential versions yet?

Yet another one is loss on any foul but not with the "poison pockets" rule. A ball pocketed extraneously is just spotted on the foot spot.

If the break is restricted (only safe, not closer than one diamond, to other side ...) the restriction has to be well defined and the penalty for a breaking violation needs to be specified.

If you you are referring to my explanation above, I think when one expresses an opinion it's best to offer a logical rationale if you have one. Otherwise it's just an opinion, not supported by anything.

I think Steves intention is that if the break violates the rule, the opponent has the option to accept it or require a re-break.

It's pretty apparent at this point that Steve is gonna follow his own advice on this, and whether it impacts how players play this game or not is TBD.

 

[cincy_kid]

How about, "The breaker must not shoot the OB toward his pocket."

what if the breaker shoots a little hard and it comes off the side pocket titty and then back towards their hole. They didn't intend to do it but now the ball is in front of their pocket. Do you re-break? Opponents choice to play from there or rebreak I assume? Or if a ball ends up in the breaker's quadrant, then the ball is spotted on the head string middle and shoot from there? That way if the breaker puts in their quadrant, they are giving up a straight back for the cheese....

 

[NH Steve]

I’m listening to all of you and trying to follow — paying particular attention to what I am hearing about how people are already — or have been — playing the game. Plus I am listening to what the issues for potential conflict are and looking for simple ways to pre-address those. If I appear to be stuck it might be because that reflects the feedback

 

[gulfportdoc]

The problem with that is most everybody breaks toward their side — which especially if it is low — is technically “toward his pocket”.

IMO, banking the ball up towards the side pocket on the shooter's side could not be considered shooting toward his pocket.
A dribble cut or a 4-railer would be.

 

[BRLongArm]

You know, in a real game, the only problem is if the breaker shoots the ball into his jaws on the first shot. Any other shot can be cleared or banked into your hole. Why are you agonizing over the definition of "playing safe"? If a guy cuts the ball into his jaws on the first shot, it's loss of game for a flagrant foul. Same if he four rails at his pocket. Do that one time and you'll never have a problem with that nonsense ever again.

 

[Tobermory]

Tried both balls frozen to end rails for breaking last night, it seems to work pretty well. Sold out a couple of times before I got comfortable hitting it. We stuck with alternating breaks.

200 posts into this thread I've realized why this is the way the game has started in 98% of the 1b1p games I've ever played: it is really hard to devise and execute an offensive shot at your hole. You might try to kick one rail and cut it into your pocket, but good luck to you...you're much more likely to leave an easy bank. When you have to break off the rail from the center position, the break shot is all about survival, not selling out. A successful break is one that doesn't leave your opponent a shot. Breaking from that position is uncomfortable, and not easy, so I've often felt it held out too many chances to screw up and it might be better to play with the cue ball in hand behind the line so that the break shot wasn't disadvantageous. But after reading this long discussion about how to precisely state the rule about breaks so that the breaker can't and won't try any offensive shots, clarity strikes: just start with the cue ball frozen on the center of the rail and let the breaker do whatever they want. KISS, purity.