Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
carpe demi

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                     

Negative Pool

 Bumpers is corners, pocket in rails
  (+2, -1)
(+2, -1) 		  [vote for,
against]

This game would be the opposit of pool. The idea is to keep as many balls in play for as long as possible.

The table is opposite, with pockets along the side rails, and bumper where the pockets are in a standard pool table.

Points are awarded 1 point per ball hit, and multiplied by the number of bumpers hit, so hit 2 balls an 3 bumpers, 6 points. Fail to hit a bumper, no points.

1 point is deducted for balls sunk.

Players alternate shots. Player with highest ( or least negative if you both suck) score when the table is clear is the winner.

—xylene, Oct 07 2003

[link]






       Your game needs a name: Loop?
—cloudface, Oct 07 2003
   

       And welcome to the Halfbakery.   

       I'm looking forward to your ideas on breakfast and smoking.
—grip, Oct 07 2003
   

       Look up billiards some time.
—waugsqueke, Oct 07 2003
   

       You don't need a pool table to play this - any smooth flat top table will do, if you could g-clamp the bumpers on the sides.
—DrCurry, Oct 07 2003
   

       Nice. This would definitely make one think about a shot before playing and emphasise shot delicacy over shot power.
—Jinbish, Oct 07 2003
   

       Wouldn't most of the balls disappear on the break?
—phundug, Oct 07 2003
   

       Not if you broke very softly
—hippo, Oct 07 2003
   

       [hippo] AFAIK, in pool (and snooker, billiards), a break is a foul if no balls other than the cue ball hit the bumpers. The next player has a shot according to local rules for playing after a foul (two shots in England/Australia, ball placed anywhere on table in America, I think). Some people play that the break is made again by the other player (or ignore the rule altogether).   

       This would make it a LOT harder to make a valid break - so [Jinbish]'s point is even more pertinent. :) (+)
—Detly, Oct 07 2003
   

       Aw, heck. I like it (as well as other billiard games).   

       BUT, I can see how the game might drag out awhile...   

       'Your turn.' "Okay, I get to move it where I want, 'cause the cueball didn't hit the other ball." 'Did so.' "Did NOT! It didn't even touch it!" 'Yeah, it did! It just bounced back a smidge.' "All right! We'll see." (barely touches cueball, which may or may not have hit the other ball yet again. Repeat)
—galukalock, Oct 08 2003
   

       This is off topic but [xylene] - why have you appropriated the name of a nasty, smelly, toxic chemical?
—madradish, Oct 08 2003
   

       To solve the break problem, how about a set of temporary bumpers that come up just during the break, then retract? (WTAGIPBAN)
—krelnik, Oct 08 2003
   

       Thats a good solution... except that on a break shot in most (all) pool formats it is desirable to pot a ball and then continue your break. With temporary cushions (rails) to hem in the balls, there would have to be some way of having a 'good' break and maintaining your 'go'.
I guess you could have a sensor around the permanent bumpers to indicate a point on the break shot.
—Jinbish, Oct 08 2003
   

       If you're resorting to mechanics to resolve the break problem, then why not change it slightly so that the cushions/bumpers continuously move around the table - so the position of the holes/pockets is constantly changing. Darn - should have posted this as a separate idea.
—PeterSilly, Oct 08 2003
   

       As I attempted to point out before, the rules and game presented sounds very much like cushion billiards only with gaps in the cushions.   

       Realistically, I think you'd very quickly end up just a few balls on the table and all players with negative scores.
—waugsqueke, Oct 08 2003
   

       ...and bad attitudes.
—k_sra, Oct 08 2003
   

       Why not simply modify the rules instead of the table? I was only quoting competition rules ot be pedantic. :P We should come up with a set of Negative Pool Rules - similar, but different.
—Detly, Oct 08 2003
   

       Ah - but there still needs to be a bit of jiggery-pokery with the physical aspect, otherwise the break shot will be a nightmare. If you keep the proposed negative table (as is) and then break off you would probably (unless some complex rule is in force) have to break very softly (as pointed out by [hippo]).   

       This would then become a game based on tapping shots until a ball becomes clear of the pack and available for scoring. This would become very 'cat and mouse' and probably not very fun to play. I think you need a regular style pool break to distribute the balls before play can commence.
—Jinbish, Oct 09 2003
   

       The author doesn't state how many balls would be in play. It seems this table would work best with a low number of balls. In cushion billiards there are only three balls - two cues and an object ball. No break shot required. Since the intent is not to sink balls, I'd recommend something like that.
—waugsqueke, Oct 09 2003
   
      
[annotate]
   


 

back: main index
business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle