[POOL] Re: Argonne Pool League PROPOSED CHANGES

[Brian R. Toonen]

I really would still like to see the number of matches reduced to four per
night even if the match ups are changed.  Getting five players to show up
(on time) each night was a problem for more than just our team last year.
If prize money really is an issue, raising the price per match to $7 doesn't
bother me at all.

Otherwise, I'm cool with everything you said.

--brian

|-----Original Message-----
|From: owner-mcs-pool at mcs.anl.gov [mailto:owner-mcs-pool at mcs.anl.gov] On
|Behalf Of Craig Stacey
|Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 18:51
|To: mcs-pool at mcs.anl.gov
|Subject: [POOL] Re: Argonne Pool League PROPOSED CHANGES
|
|Here's my take on everything below, which comes out of discussion
|here as well as discussion on the initial mail between the team
|captains.
|
|On Sep 4, 2007, at 5:19 PM, Kevin A. Beyer wrote:
|
|> First, the following rule changes have been proposed:
|>
|> 1) Call-shot vs. slop-shot.
|> 2) Because of 1), there are called safeties.
|> 3) The table is always open after the break.
|> 4) 8-ball on the break is *not* a win.
|> 5) Scratching on the 8-ball is *not* a loss if the 8-ball is not
|> pocketed.
|>
|> These are the rules from the World Pool-Billiard Association.  The
|> main difference between WPA and what we currently use are as
|> above.  (http://www.wpa-pool.com/index.asp?content=rules_8ball)  It
|> is also proposed that we put these rules into effect for a period
|> of time (say, four weeks) to evaluate them before deciding if
|> people like them, or want to continue on with our current rules.
|
|I'm against these rule changes.  I believe they will cause confusion,
|arguments, and longer matches.  If you look at the URL for the rules,
|it says obvious shots need not be called.  I guarantee that the
|judgement of what's "obvious" or not will cause conflicts.  Ron
|Shepard has said the rule clarified is that straight shots need not
|be called, but caroms and combos need to be called.  Let's say I'm
|trying to get the 1 ball into the side.  I hit it at an awkward angle
|and it instead goes into the corner.  No banking involved.  I've done
|things like that before (you know, because I suck).  By Ron's
|definition, that was a legal shot.  Were I not an honest man, I could
|claim I was making that shot all along.
|
|8 on the break is so rare to have that rule change in is silly.  It's
|like saying a hole-in-one in golf requires a do-over.  It's a great
|shot, and if you can pull it off, take the win.
|
|I get the impression that, nobody on the team is strongly for these
|rule changes, so unless anyone has an objection, I'll say the team
|vote on this first one is "no".  (More than one team has already said
|'no', I'd be surprised if it passed.)
|
|
|> Second, a change in the matchup charge has been proposed:
|>
|> Chart-4  up to 39   [same as before]
|> Chart-6  40-59
|> Chart-8  60-79
|> Chart-10 80-109
|> Chart-12 110-up
|>
|> This will have the effect of reducing the number of games played
|> per match.  It is thought that if we reduce the number of games per
|> match by approximately 2, this will save as much as 60 - 90 minutes
|> in the evening.  This will mean that the matches will get over
|> quicker and we will not have to reduce their number.
|
|I like this a lot.  For those who like the 10-1 matches, rest easy --
|Ron and Dean are still firmly in the 10-1 match range with these
|handicaps above.  Michael Sprung is as well, I think.
|
|> Third, barring the idea previously proposed, it has been suggested
|> that we reduce the number of matches played in an evening from 5 to
|> 4.  This will certainly cut short the evening, but it leaves a
|> situation where there is no clear cut winner for the evening.
|
|This was discussed on the list of captains some.  Here's the
|summary:  Ron pointed out this would reduce revenue.  Kevin pointed
|out that we're renting 2 less tables than we used to rent (since they
|got rid of them!) which means our cost has gone down as well.  I
|pointed out that, if we were to actually pursue this, we could raise
|the match fee from 6 to 7, meaning instead of collecting $30 per
|team, we collect $28.  Bobby liked that.
|
|I also pointed out that not having a clear "winner" for a night that
|isn't playoffs isn't a big deal.  During regular season we don't play
|best of five, we play five matches.  At the end of the season, we're
|seeded based on matches won (not games won, mind you, but matches).
|We're just as capable of having a tie now as we would be with 4
|matches per night.  During the playoffs, we'd obviously still play a
|best of five format.
|
|In general, though, reception was lukewarm to this throughout the
|discussion.  The second option above (adjusting the charts) seemed to
|be the most popular.
|
|So, unless I hear someone say "No, let's discuss this further", I'll
|send out team vote tomorrow as No to rule changes, yes to chart
|adjustments, and no to 4 matches.
|
|In the meantime, league starts on 9/18 -- one week from this coming
|Tuesday.  The pool page at http://www.mcs.anl.gov/pool is set to
|reflect that.