|
Post by BB Warrior on Nov 27, 2014 12:10:56 GMT
I was interested to read the discussion following the recent EU Conference and noticed the post by Tommo.... Perhaps we should have a separate thread specifically for suggestions as to how bar billiards may be tweaked to make it palatable for a TV audience........ So I thought why not start a thread for some alternative (maybe even radical) suggestions for things we could do to make the game more "exciting".... or simply something different.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 12:20:07 GMT
Thanks Warrior - Will leave Sav to repeat his suggestions, but meanwhile the Colemanator's has created some food for thought: What about following a darts type format? a check out could be a 50/30 50/20 50/10 50/100 shot. So presumably both players would start with, say, 3000 and have a timed minute each in turn to subtract from this score, culminating in a checkout as above ? It's certainly radical !
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Nov 27, 2014 12:43:46 GMT
I will start the ball rolling with this idea.... "Kwik-Pot Bar Billiards" (just for the sake of giving it a name!) Rather than the current game that normally lasts about 17 minutes, each match would consist of 4 timed games of possibly 3 minutes each. Times could obviously be different, I only chose that length of time as that would probably mean each completed match could be finished within the length of time for 1 "normal" match so only 1 coin would be needed. Players would have the break in alternate games giving them an equalf chance overall, in doubles it could be both players have one break each. Once the time has started, the player taking the break continues until he either misses, plays a foul shot or the time of that leg ends. Each game would start with the "normal" break shot and players can do this 3 times before they have to leave one ball up, so conventional rules would apply for that and the red ball would still count as double. At the end of the time, the bar is deemed to have dropped and the scorer would be responsible for ensuring that only the unused balls are used, the last ball would have to be potted in either the 100 or 200 hole unless the player has potted all of the remaining balls with their previous shot. So, nothing too radical so far with that.... until you spice it up a little bit by making the existing 100 hole worth 200 points and the existing 200 hole worth 500 points.... and then add an ADDITIONAL BLACK PEG immediately behind the 100 hole. That would mean that players could still choose to play the "Oxford Split Shot" but there would obviously be a very heavy penalty for getting the shot slightly wrong! At the end of the game, the player with the highest overall total over the 4 legs would be declared the winner. I am sure that there are many flaws in this suggestion and it may be too radical to even be a sensible idea.... but it may give others the chance to think of something different or better and healthy discussion can only be a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 13:32:42 GMT
Some good variants thrown up there amongst Dave's latest post, possibly too much of a pot pourri though, the concept needs to be kept simple so the viewers would be able to know what was going on.
One worth considering is what Berks did for the Speedbreak competition in the 4th Berks Open. Quoting own Timeline (Pt 2 of 3) referring to PF's BBQ17 (Apr 1995):
|
|
|
Post by Colemanator on Nov 27, 2014 15:37:14 GMT
the Colemanator's has created some food for thought: What about following a darts type format? a check out could be a 50/30 50/20 50/10 50/100 shot. So presumably both players would start with, say, 3000 and have a timed minute each in turn to subtract from this score, culminating in a checkout as above ? It's certainly radical ! Yes Tommo, start at 5010 and must finish on a split, simple really
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Nov 27, 2014 15:38:40 GMT
Some good variants thrown up there amongst Dave's latest post, possibly too much of a pot pourri though, the concept needs to be kept simple so the viewers would be able to know what was going on. The viewers....?? One man and his dog seem to be about normal for watching the games at the moment if we are lucky and always providing they manage to stay awake of course! My suggestion was not really aimed at trying to gain a "TV Audience", more just a different version of the game to maybe get younger/new players interested in playing the game without the fear that they are just going to stand there and watch an "established player" simply play the table out against them and not give them a shot. I suppose you could say it was an attempt to be the bar billiards equivalent to 20/20 cricket in comparison to test cricket.... the "purists" will say that it is not the proper game but it would perhaps add a bit of excitement...?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 19:10:13 GMT
My suggestion was not really aimed at trying to gain a "TV Audience", more just a different version of the game to maybe get younger/new players interested in playing the game without the fear that they are just going to stand there and watch an "established player" simply play the table out against them and not give them a shot. And in turn I would say that my request for a thread was specifically to discuss a tweak to the game for TV, thus developing Sav's and Ian's suggestions. We already have enough variations and don't need another one to encourage new players. The scenario you've given is completely hypothetical - who in their right mind would try and train a newcomer in such a fashion (not giving them a shot) ? It just wouldn't happen. The shortage of new young talent is, however, undeniable - but I would say was more down to the shortage of kit. Gone are the days when every pub in town had a table and you had to queue to get a game.
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Nov 27, 2014 23:15:55 GMT
And in turn I would say that my request for a thread was specifically to discuss a tweak to the game for TV, thus developing Sav's and Ian's suggestions. I would love to believe that one day our game would have the same level of exposure on TV as snooker, but I just can't see it ever happening. Tommo, I am very surprised that you have said this.... We already have enough variations and don't need another one to encourage new players. .... when you have personally embraced very strongly a different format of the game in the last couple of years, do you really think that a shorter and (possibly) more exciting version of the game would not be of more interest to younger/new players than our traditional "purist" version of the game? We can agree to disagree about that point rather than start a long discussion about it! I do have to disagree with you about this though.... [The scenario you've given is completely hypothetical - who in their right mind would try and train a newcomer in such a fashion (not giving them a shot) ? It just wouldn't happen. .... the version of the game I had suggested was not to "train a newcomer", it was simply to give players of all levels more fun and try to take some sort of lead from the (very successful) shortened version of cricket which has bought many new fans to watch the game. Having said that, from looking at some posts in other areas of the forum, they would appear to indicate that my comment was far from being "completely hypothetical".... Weaknesses: Lack of pubs to play in. Lack of teachers to demonstrate the game. Repetitive shot combinations. Unwillingness of top players to adapt the games rules to make it more interesting and even? The insular nature of many teams that do not welcome newcomers. Newcomers getting hammered in league games by the old hands. Lack of a proactive national association. Apathy rules as most just want to play and leave the organisation to others. Con's the winning-at-all-costs mentality All the weaknesses have been touched on before and as you rightly say Sav no one or group are prepared to deal with them, a few have tried to focus on these issues but have not had much support, all the time the top men wish to keep the status quo, I feel the long term future is a worry... for a few of us it's attracting new players that should be the focus, so we need to make the game more fun and fairer Looking at those posts, it seems perhaps we do need some new ideas of different formats.... I am NOT suggesting that these should REPLACE the existing format for normal League games or National Tournaments, rather that something could be trialed as an "alternative" competition to what the response is like. With that in mind, I may try "Kwik-Pot" out with some of my team mates over the next few weeks and see what they think.
|
|
|
Post by Dunplaying on Nov 27, 2014 23:31:50 GMT
So, nothing too radical so far with that.... until you spice it up a little bit by making the existing 100 hole worth 200 points and the existing 200 hole worth 500 points.... and then add an ADDITIONAL BLACK PEG immediately behind the 100 hole. % What about a peg in front of the 100 hole? That would make things interesting!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 23:37:20 GMT
There's plenty of ways to make the game interesting for newbies.......31's, Eastbourne's "5-Pin", 3000 break and off, etcetera etcetera. But I don't think they warrant a full-blooded discussion. Can we get back to the theme started by Sav and Colemanator please - ie suggestions for tweaks to the normal game to make it compatible to TV coverage ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 23:43:07 GMT
What about a peg in front of the 100 hole? That would make things interesting! LOL Great idea Dun but why stop there ? You could also bring forward the two white pins to the front of the 50 holes, and reverse the value of the 30 and 10 holes. Sounds a great version !
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Nov 28, 2014 7:53:25 GMT
There's plenty of ways to make the game interesting for newbies.......31's, Eastbourne's "5-Pin", 3000 break and off, etcetera etcetera. But I don't think they warrant a full-blooded discussion. Can we get back to the theme started by Sav and Colemanator please - ie suggestions for tweaks to the normal game to make it compatible to TV coverage ? the key is not being able to play the table out with possibly only 3 different shots to watch
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Nov 28, 2014 8:28:29 GMT
Can we get back to the theme started by Sav and Colemanator please - ie suggestions for tweaks to the normal game to make it compatible to TV coverage ? Okay, so how about somebody giving some information about how Colemanator's version of the game would actually work? How does it start, do both players start with the normal break? How long does the game last? How does the game end? So far, all we know is that you start on 5010, have some time limit for each player and you have to finish on a "split" shot.... but no real explanation of what that would be classed as?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2014 9:40:26 GMT
Well, Colemanator said 5000, but I reckon 4010 would be adequate for, say, a 10 minute frame. (Bearing in mind that, like Darts, there may be a bit of 'going bust' at the end.)
Yes it would be a 'normal' game, but it would need to be 'trialed' and if it were found that being able to break with 150 was making it too easy (or boring !) then the hole values could be reassigned (possibly just by saying that the red only counts as single on the break, ie 100 rather than 150 - the reason being to discourage a first attempt 'playout')
Two frames between the players - each with the break once to make it fair.
A bell to sound on 5 minutes (= "half time") whereupon the first player's break if still in progress to cease.
By 'split shot finish', two balls to be potted to finish rather than with a single pot to leave 100 or 200 which would count as 'bust'.
TV programme format would be very similar to Yorkshire TV's 'Indoor League' of the 1980s, with I suggest the top 8 in the National Rankings at the time invited to take part in a straight knockout; matches spread over a number of episodes, eg 1st programme, allowing for adverts and introductions shows first legs between A v H and B v G. 2nd episode C v F and D v E. 3rd and 4th shows 2nd legs for above. 5th episode first semifinal, 6th second semifinal. 7th and final 30 minute show for the Grand Final.
Above is an attempt to develop on a theme and further ideas for modification are welcome: *particularly how to 'tie-break' if the players have won one frame each !*
|
|
|
Post by Colemanator on Nov 28, 2014 10:28:19 GMT
You're more or less spot on Clive could be either or 5010, 4010, 3010, depending on players ability. Yes a normal type game, but with even breaks, the player would have to have some maths savvy, like the dart players, (they amaze me with their quick thinking) to achieve the finish and not go bust My 'finish' however would be more the 50/30 50/20 50/10 50/100. Would that be too difficult to achieve?
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Nov 28, 2014 11:27:37 GMT
You're more or less spot on Clive could be either or 5010, 4010, 3010, depending on players ability. Yes a normal type game, but with even breaks, the player would have to have some maths savvy, like the dart players, (they amaze me with their quick thinking) to achieve the finish and not go bust My 'finish' however would be more the 50/30 50/20 50/10 50/100. Would that be too difficult to achieve? Forgive me if I am being stupid here.... I am trying to keep an open mind about this suggestion rather than just saying that if you are trying to make bar billiards as exciting as darts then you are comparing apples with oranges. Okay, so it would be even breaks? Does that mean that the player going first could go on and play until he has "achieved the finish" without his opponent even getting a shot.... or would there be a time restriction on each players turn.... perhaps (like darts) would they only be allowed 3 shots each before the other player has a turn? I could understand some appeal to something like that as you would then effectively be able to try to stitch your opponent up and prevent them from trying to finish if only certain shots are allowed to end the game? Would you be allowed to play a shot to finish the game if there are other balls on the table, or would those have to be cleared first even if it means "busting" your score? What penalties would there be for missing a ball or knocking a peg over? With all respect to this proposal, you might as well play a game of "31" as that is effectively the same thing in reverse IMHO but at least playing "31" would be quicker and in most cases you are playing different shot combinations to the ones you play in the "normal" version of the game.... which some seem to think are very boring.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2014 13:59:20 GMT
I will leave the Colemanator to defend his own suggestion, this meanwhile being my own personal preference: One worth considering is what Berks did for the Speedbreak competition in the 4th Berks Open. Quoting own Timeline (Pt 2 of 3) referring to PF's BBQ17 (Apr 1995): The benefits here are that one player will usually outscore the other rather than both playing to achieve zero, thus with aggregate being taken into consideration no 3rd leg or tiebreak would be necessary. I would tweak the scoring even further though, reflective of the difficulty of the hole thus: 10 hole = 100 pts 20 holes = 50 pts 30 holes = 30 pts 50 holes = 20 pts 100 hole = 40 pts 200 hole = 400 pts
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Nov 28, 2014 16:16:13 GMT
you could limit the number of shots, might be easier to control especially if a shot is played as the timer ends. (does the shot count and if balls get moved where do they go etc.)
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Nov 28, 2014 16:25:37 GMT
There's plenty of ways to make the game interesting for newbies.......31's, Eastbourne's "5-Pin", 3000 break and off, etcetera etcetera. But I don't think they warrant a full-blooded discussion. Can we get back to the theme started by Sav and Colemanator please - ie suggestions for tweaks to the normal game to make it compatible to TV coverage ? the key is not being able to play the table out with possibly only 3 different shots to watch not with you on this one tommo (there has to be a first time), everything should be up for discussion and lets have plenty more input from ohers rather than just the 4 horsemen after I've been to the pub i'll put some bullets up, and see how many ganders I can get up
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Nov 28, 2014 19:58:15 GMT
I,d like to hear from junior and new members on this subject, could be a useful insight to us old farts on how the future world champs may be thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2014 20:22:39 GMT
not with you on this one tommo (there has to be a first time) LOL Although attracting more youngsters into the game is as Holmes would say a 'two pipe problem' you're not obliged to blow smoke up my a*** and agree with my every word....... I just think you won't get much of a response from novices - any I know have been very keen to learn the 'proper' way of the game and would consider it patronising to be taught an inferior version !
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Nov 29, 2014 11:09:22 GMT
not with you on this one tommo (there has to be a first time) LOL Although attracting more youngsters into the game is as Holmes would say a 'two pipe problem' you're not obliged to blow smoke up my a*** and agree with my every word....... I just think you won't get much of a response from novices - any I know have been very keen to learn the 'proper' way of the game and would consider it patronising to be taught an inferior version ! "Proper way" sorry again tommo, with respect, the whole point of this I believe is to rethink/reinvent and build a new "game" that is suitable and sustainable for the future
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2014 12:36:46 GMT
the whole point of this I believe is to rethink/reinvent and build a new "game" that is suitable and sustainable for the future Not with you either ! When was that agenda ever created, and who by ? You will find a lot of threads on here quoting the maxim "if it ain't broke, why try and fix it ?" Three good versions of the game (3-pin, off-the-spot and 4-pin) should be enough for anyone. Anything else just adds to the confusion.
|
|
|
Post by milko on Nov 29, 2014 13:03:11 GMT
the whole point of this I believe is to rethink/reinvent and build a new "game" that is suitable and sustainable for the future Not with you either ! When was that agenda ever created, and who by ? You will find a lot of threads on here quoting the maxim "if it ain't broke, why try and fix it ?"
Three good versions of the game (3-pin, off-the-spot and 4-pin) should be enough for anyone. Anything else just adds to the confusion. Sense at last...............
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Nov 29, 2014 14:45:24 GMT
the whole point of this I believe is to rethink/reinvent and build a new "game" that is suitable and sustainable for the future Not with you either ! When was that agenda ever created, and who by ? You will find a lot of threads on here quoting the maxim "if it ain't broke, why try and fix it ?" Three good versions of the game (3-pin, off-the-spot and 4-pin) should be enough for anyone. Anything else just adds to the confusion. Well we could always bury our heads in the sand and hope it goes away, or see the last wheels fall off our wagon, then its too late, but been here before tommo and the outcome will always be the same.. sadly
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Nov 29, 2014 16:39:34 GMT
the whole point of this I believe is to rethink/reinvent and build a new "game" that is suitable and sustainable for the future Not with you either ! When was that agenda ever created, and who by ? Errr.... it was by you Clive actually with your original post that inspired this thread.... Perhaps we should have a separate thread specifically for suggestions as to how bar billiards may be tweaked to make it palatable for a TV audience........ My understanding of the expression "tweaked" is that something is changed slightly or adjusted in order to improve it! It would seem that was not what you wanted at all now....??
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2014 19:47:47 GMT
Apples, oranges again..... Yes the normal game's rules need tweaking if ever there is to be TV coverage: that's the reason I asked for a thread where we could all discuss how. But the whole discussion has been hijacked on to a completely separate aspect, ie new formats to attract younger players to the game. At the Windmill we often get young lads through from the other bar - which has Pool - asking about the game. I always try to encourage them and make sure that they get a good opportunity to display their skills. I'd never dream of trying to show off by playing the table out and denying them a shot. I've taken the trouble to purchase a laminated card with the basic Rules and that is now pinned up in a prominent position. I'm also considering an 'open night' with the table on freeplay. Back on topic, it is an undeniable fact that the game would not translate well to TV in its robotic "three down one-up split" format - but here again the Yorkshire TV format was not exactly ideal either as the tables to put it politely looked 'awkward'. I'm basically an optimist and feel that there is still hope for the games survival. TV could help to win over some of the Pool merchants. I can't see how else youngsters are going to take up the game in their hordes, especially with a pub with a table being the exception rather than the rule. Changing the rules (except for a bespoke TV programme) will not help as far as I can see, but if some generous sponsorship came back into the mix that might well make a huge difference.
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Nov 29, 2014 23:47:18 GMT
1-change white peg to end of break only 2-change black peg to lose break only or have 3 white pegs and no black peg 3-change red spot position to make 50/50 break shot impossible 4-move black spot another 5mm from pocket 5-use 2 red balls 6-double break for all games 7-limit breaks to 15-20 shots only 8-make the game more difficult/interesting by adding more pegs 9-playing same shot on break twice is end of break I.e.balls end up in same holes off any cushions 10-increase angle of bulk line to 45 degrees 11-if following a foul you are unable to hit a part of a ball without going off a cushion you can place 2 balls or nearest 2 balls of any colour in the new break position and play them. Here endeth the tweaks today, we could take up 1 or as many item as you like, bearing in mind we are trying to make the game viewer friendly, so clear out your rusty old minds chaps and look at a version of bar billiards that could suit the spectator rather than the player. Wonder who will fall off his chair first
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Nov 30, 2014 0:11:20 GMT
Apples, oranges again..... Yes the normal game's rules need tweaking if ever there is to be TV coverage: that's the reason I asked for a thread where we could all discuss how. But the whole discussion has been hijacked on to a completely separate aspect, ie new formats to attract younger players to the game. New format for the game, it's the title of the thread Again imho if the game does become more popular in a format that suits tv then that version will inevitably became the new way to play. So again with respect to all, flex the old grey matter in a positive way.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2014 0:13:51 GMT
Maintaining Gandalf's theme, 1. Put the lid of the table on the wrong way round so you have to race round to the other end of the table to pick the ball out of the tray for your next shot. 2. Have a "Grand Prix" start, ie the players have to race from the next pub down the road to get into the bar to start the game. Someone would be bound to complain after a while that the game had got 'too easy' so you could insist the players had their shoelaces tied together, or run between the pubs with their trousers round their ankles. Now, what can we think of to thwart the best ladies ?
|
|