| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
 Posted - 06/16/2005 : 11:12:45 AM
|
I've been thinking about creating a new format, but I need some help in dreaming it up. It would be a singles format, but one without a fixed schedule.
The idea is to create something similar to Texas Hold'em for pool. Each player pays the same buy-in and starts with a number of points. Matches consist of challenges from one player to another. The player making the challenge "wagers" any number of his/her points at the time of the challenge. The player being challenged can "call", "raise", or "fold". If the challenge is "called", the two players play a match, with the winner taking the wagered points from the loser. If it is "raised", the original challenger must either call or raise, or forfeit the original wager to the other player. If a player is challenged and elects to fold, he/she would forfeit some small number of points to the challenger. When you run out of points, you're done. When one player has all the points, that player is declared the winner.
This format doesn't have to be a one-day type format. It could run for months with players arranging their own matches. Obviously, there would have to be some sort of penalty for not playing at all (like the blinds in Hold'em), and some set of rules concerning who can challenge whom, to keep players from "teaming up" and pre-arranging the results.
I would like to develop this idea into something real, but I need everyone's help. Let's get some discussion going and see if we can come up with something solid, something we can actually try. I could even set up a forum on this board just for the hold'em format, if that would facilitate the discussion. Later on, we could use that forum to officially issue challenges, etc.
Phil
|
|
|
trhxke
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 06/16/2005 : 12:06:01 PM
|
I think this is a good idea and could be lots of fun.
I personally don't play much poker and don't fully understand the rules of Hold'm but would be willing to learn as I go.
Are you thinking 9 ball, 8 ball or a combination of both like the Masters?
Would the match be based on the Skill Level ranking or be played even up without handicaps....such as race to 5 or what ever?
Maybe the players could give or get a spot based on what they negotiated among themselves while making and accepting (or rejecting) a challege....
Tom Hardinger
www.BigRigToys.com
Your Internet Source for pool cues, darts and colletibles. |
 |
|
|
Torsten
USA
401 Posts |
Posted - 06/16/2005 : 12:47:40 PM
|
Phil I like the idea very much. Here are some thoughts...
We could let the challenging player declare which game will be played. Or better yet, the challengee! "Phil, I bet you 25 points I can take ya." "Ok, 9-ball beotch! Lets do it!" Ok, so maybe the conversation wouldn't transpire in those words exactly but...
How about tournament style play. Start at noon. Every hour or two the minimum bet increases. Each player must either post a challenge or accept one every half hour or so. This would discourage players from sitting on or conserving their points.
I'll give it some more thought. I should probably for now try to get some work done.  |
|
|
|
Matt
38 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2005 : 5:52:52 PM
|
Very interesting, I'd love to try it. As far as the rules go, I think the simpler the better. The more dense the rules get the less people will be willing to try it, I think. You've pretty much laid out everything you need say in the first post here. A few ideas:
You could have 3 tiers going at once to accomodate the various skill levels (2-3, 4-5, 6-7), or you could start players with an amount of points inversly proportional to their skill level-- start a 2 with 200 points, a 3 with 180, a 4 with 160, etc. OR, I liked the idea suggested of allowing players to negotiate their own handicaps as well as points. A player's challenge could read, "I bet you 25 points I can beat you 4 games before you win 2."
Perhaps 200 points is too much, some players could bet 1 point each match and try to wait everyone else out, without being docked for not playing at all. Maybe better to start everyone around 15 points, and assume that most of the matches played will be for 1 point, unless some players wish to get aggressive and wager more (or all) of their points.
To induce wagering, a rule such as every set amount of time gone by without accepting or challenging costs X amount of points. If none of your challenges are called (resulting in no actual matches) you shouldn't be penalized any points-- at least you're trying. Maybe nobody wants to play you, that should be to your advantage, and they'll have to play you eventually.
Although I know you like the resemblance to Texas Hold 'Em, I'm not sold on the idea of being able to "raise" someone. If you decide to allow players to negotiate handicaps and points themselves, then the challenge should either be accepted or rejected, at no cost to the player being challenged. The motivating factor would be the points lost for not playing at all, and you could make that fairly steep. Or, if you decide to play the format in tiers or something similar, then there would be no handicaps to negotiate and in that case if a player rejects a challenge ("folds"), they could be docked a set amount of points.
To avoid 2 players "teaming up", only allow the same two players to challenge each other once during a set amount of time. That's a tough one to govern, but even in real poker it's possible to team up at the table, and even then you still need to posess the skill to win after your friends have given you all their money. In any pool tournament it's possible to get a few friends to enter with you and attempt to knock off everyone they can except you, in theory making it easier for you to win. BUT, you still have to have the skill to beat the best player in the tournament or else it's all for naught. You may just have to assume that this kind of a format will only attract those players just looking to have a really good time shooting pool in the spirit of the APA, and not those who want to cheat to win.
I think the most difficult aspect might turn out to be the logistics of keeping track of the whole thing. Good luck! Sorry this post got so long.
Matt |
|
|
|
StevenPWaldon
USA
1 Posts |
Posted - 06/20/2005 : 11:07:24 AM
|
I like this idea.
It sounds much like the "Ball Breakers" TV show format, wherein all 5 competitors are given $5,000 to gamble with. Anyone can challenge anyone, and the amount wagered is up to the discretion of the two players.
Even more interesting, people can make as many side bets as they want. "I'll bet you my $1000 to your $500 that the current shooter doesn't run the next 4 balls."
The idea behind infinitely variable wagering and games makes it much more interesting, especially when you get good at matching up. As anyone who gambles, it's half the battle. |
|
|
|
ApaMVP
USA
19 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2005 : 08:20:32 AM
|
How about this (I like the idea as well)
1) All Players start with a set # of chips
2) Have a double blind system
A) Each hour, day, etc... ALL active participants much ante an equivalent WAGER blind BACK to the house whether they play or not. This would be a HOUSE Blind.
B) Each challenge must be a minimum of what the blinds are. The minimum can even be a bit less than the house blind.
This would encourage playing matches instead of losing the house blinds without participating.
(3) Challenges must be a minimum of what the WAGER blinds are
(4) HOUSE and WAGER Blinds increment over time (as hold'em) as to ensure increased wagering as time goes (also eliminates
(5) Require the matches to all be the same format and to alleviate confusion, make it just as their match would be in an APA match (ie. 5-3 in 8-ball, or perhaps 46-31 9-ball).
(6) Perhaps a special bonus % for challenging and beating a higher ranked player.
(7) A player can not challenge the same player in consecutive rounds (unless the tournament is at end and there are no additional players to challenge)
(8) Although I believe a thread in our forum might work well for documenting challenges, etc... there are many players who do not have this ability yet. Phil may want to get a memo or mailer out to all Apa members, notifying them, as he determines the rules.
In the words of many of my poker bretheren... "I'm All in"
Larry Nicholson |
|
|
|
johnnyshotmaker
USA
9 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 12:08:20 AM
|
How bout straigt pool?
Who's Your Daddy! |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Let's create a new format
