Please keep our forum rules in mind: we aspire to provide a safe environment for our users, so will not tolerate discriminatory, hateful, inflammatory or threatening posts. Thank you. http://mcgam.es/forum-rules
Please note that registration for the forum is age-restricted.

Hiding the ball - fair or not?

2»

Comments

  • Nanny OggNanny Ogg Growing Old DisgracefullyPosts: 10,206 Pool Forum Veteran
    COOLOCKER wrote: »
    davylfc66 wrote: »
    Hiding the ball is a fair tactic , i hide it from myself in most games :D

    LAMO. Post of the week there.

    I think there is another contender for post of the week in this thread...

    https://8ballpoolforum.miniclip.com/discussion/27916/win-streak#latest

    It's the one by theoneandonnly and it beats all others hands down imo LOL
  • COOLOCKERCOOLOCKER youvebeenservedPosts: 3,098 Pool Champion
    lol, johny rockets. We might see theoneandonly back here in a few months telling us his game is the best its ever been, lol. And i just noticed my typo in there also LAMO. ;)
  • Nanny OggNanny Ogg Growing Old DisgracefullyPosts: 10,206 Pool Forum Veteran
    COOLOCKER wrote: »
    lol, johny rockets. We might see theoneandonly back here in a few months telling us his game is the best its ever been, lol. And i just noticed my typo in there also LAMO. ;)

    LOLO ! :D ;)
  • KnutKaseKnutKase Posts: 5 New Member
    KnutKase wrote: »
    Deimos666 wrote: »
    I don't have the patience to win a frame by timing out my opponent, I hate sitting waiting in the tournaments for players to finish, I try it win as fast as possible. :D

    Likewise.

    But surely that contradicts what your saying. If you win fast it is likely you will be waiting for your next opponent to finish. Whereas if you win slowly then you won’t have any time to wait.

    I see no contradiction. By winning as quickly as I can, I control the game. But when I'm against a player that doesn't trust his/her own skill enough to pot the balls to win and simply plays hide and seek, it's not easy to get that control over the game. Yeah ... that causes me to wait sometimes for the next opponent in tournament play ... sometimes it doesn't. I don't have a problem with that.
  • Carlos TalesCarlos Tales Posts: 1,044 Pool Champion
    edited February 16
    KnutKase wrote: »
    KnutKase wrote: »
    Deimos666 wrote: »
    I don't have the patience to win a frame by timing out my opponent, I hate sitting waiting in the tournaments for players to finish, I try it win as fast as possible. :D

    Likewise.

    But surely that contradicts what your saying. If you win fast it is likely you will be waiting for your next opponent to finish. Whereas if you win slowly then you won’t have any time to wait.

    I see no contradiction. By winning as quickly as I can, I control the game. But when I'm against a player that doesn't trust his/her own skill enough to pot the balls to win and simply plays hide and seek, it's not easy to get that control over the game. Yeah ... that causes me to wait sometimes for the next opponent in tournament play ... sometimes it doesn't. I don't have a problem with that.

    The contradiction is what you agreed with..... Something I don’t agree with which you have said is that someone who plays hide and seek has no skill. It sounds like it’s you that can’t cope with someone who has a good safety game. If you’d like to prove me wrong then let’s play a few games?
  • ObelObel Posts: 65 Pool Player
    Yes. Lets play. Been so long after our last match
  • Carlos TalesCarlos Tales Posts: 1,044 Pool Champion
    edited February 17
    Obel wrote: »
    Yes. Lets play. Been so long after our last match

    Omg yes you’ve aged considerably since last time I played you. :o But I’m afraid the offer to play wasn’t to you :D
    Post edited by Carlos Tales on
  • ObelObel Posts: 65 Pool Player
    You avoid me at all cost riter :D
  • Carlos TalesCarlos Tales Posts: 1,044 Pool Champion
    Obel wrote: »
    You avoid me at all cost riter :D

    I will play you in Monaco and no limit. So you can take me all in?? When shall we play? :D
  • G11gamingG11gaming Mr lover, lover. :)Posts: 3,831 Pool Champion
    a good safetybattle is one of the most enjoyabale things in the game and a very good skilltest! and if someone dislikes your moves you know they cant have much clue about the game!
    go for it.....lol

    Best answer!!!.... i will do what ever it takes to win my game, cheers Chris. I like to snooker, and i'm very good at it.
  • odlllboodlllbo Posts: 157 Pool Pro
    Agree with all the pro-snookering posters. Safety battles are one of the most fun parts of the game imo. And if your a fan of safety battles Dallas 9 ball is for you, esp early in the rack when there's still plenty of blockers to work with.
  • !Murray!Murray Posts: 19 Pool Player
    It just adds some extra strategy to the games, skill also cuz it can go horribly wrong if you misjudge power or where the balls will go.
  • Chris ChoppyChris Choppy Posts: 8 New Member
    It is a "fair play," but I wouldn't say its entirely fair. LOL. I have always had an issue with the fact that the game can be won by timing out the other player. As many here have said it's a defensive move, and sometimes it is simply the only good option available (the old "sometimes the best offense is a good defense"). But the way the rules are currently set it feels like they give too much benefit to one side than the other. By snookering someone you are making a legal shot with the intention of leaving your opponent without a shot, fair enough. But the ultimate goal of the game is to sink all your balls followed by the 8ball. So how can it be considered a win when neither player has dropped the 8ball? It gets annoying when a player purposely putts their balls around the table, waits for the other player to sink basically all their balls and if unable to run it out is given not just a shot but decided control which if done right they can keep and win by running out the clock. The benefit is too lopsided.
    Let's say player "A" breaks and plans and takes their shots and runs 7 balls off the table, and in doing so used a sizeable amount of their game clock only to miss the final shot on the 8ball. At that point, player "B" is not only given a good opportunity to make a comeback, being the playing field is clear of all but one obstacle (the 8), they are also rewarded with the luxury of having their entire game clock. This adding the bonus that if the table is set up right they can choose to win by simply "snookering" player "A" until their time runs out?! It would seem better to me if each player was given a set of "snooker" shots each per game (example 3 each) after having used all their shots they would receive a time penalty or something along those lines, which may or may not be enough to level the field so to speak. Or maybe it could be that if the game times out (meaning the 8ball has not been dropped), whichever player has the least amount of balls remaining on the table (excluding the 8ball) is declared the winner. Something along those lines. That to me seems a much more balanced playing field.
  • Chris ChoppyChris Choppy Posts: 8 New Member
    And to clarify a little. The time penalty I mentioned would be goven for every "snooker" shot after having used all shots. But of course, there would be no real way of doing that because it would require determining if you took a real shot and it just ended up as a snooker, which happens all the time, versus an intentional snooker. But I think you get the idea of where I was trying to go with the example.
  • COOLOCKERCOOLOCKER youvebeenservedPosts: 3,098 Pool Champion
    So how can it be considered a win when neither player has dropped the 8ball?

    An absolutely fair point Chris. And one that you wouldnt see happen in real life. But you also have to remember that in the gaming world, players wouldnt have the time to wait around for a game to finish, if 2 players involved in one of the rounds where playing a safety game without time limits. Imagine if one of those players won, and came up against another safety player in the next round?

    There would be uproar by the other players, and miniclip would be swamped with complaints about tournaments taking way too long to finish. But that brings me to your next point.

    It would seem better to me if each player was given a set of "snooker" shots each per game (example 3 each) after having used all their shots they would receive a time penalty or something along those lines, which may or may not be enough to level the field so to speak.

    Actually a great idea there Chris. It would allow some safety play in the game, while still allowing the clock feature to exist, so that tournaments could move along swiftly.
    But of course, there would be no real way of doing that because it would require determining if you took a real shot and it just ended up as a snooker

    Thats the problem, and the only real way i could see that being fixed is an option to click a button to nominate your next shot as an attempt at a snooker.

    In saying that, it would take miniclip some time and resources to go and put that feature into the game. But if they dont think its broken (like im sure many dont) then they wont bother. I guess we just have to carry on as usual. Good points Chris, but if it doesnt bother me, then i dont see a problem. But yeah, i see what your saying.
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.

Who's Online15

COOLOCKER
COOLOCKER
Mateusz Hubert Kowalczyk
Mateusz Hubert Kowalczyk
RollYour Rock
RollYour Rock
WhoWouldNotLet
WhoWouldNotLet
Wilbur
Wilbur
+10 Guests