Last time I talked about how crazy it is that slop counts in nine ball and how this is not helping the credibility and thus the marketability of pool in mainstream sports media.
On a similar note, I would like to propose that making the nine on the break should not count as a win. Not only on ESPN, but in all tournaments and in all rule books. The break shot is the opening break, and should serve as such. While a high level of effectiveness and consistency can be achieved on the break, it is arguably the most unpredictable and uncontrollable shot on the table. While there are ways to increase your chances of making the nine on the break, on any given break it is a matter of luck to sink the nine.
So why does this count as a win? Why do we let such a lucky shot have the potential power to decide the outcome of a match? Are we really such suckers for the thrill of seeing the nine go in on the break that we let it count as a win? It is especially unfair and anti-climatic in hill-hill situations when the breaker makes the nine to win the match. I will dare to say that the crowd would much rather see an exciting hill-hill game played in its entirety, and so would the player who did not break. If the breaker breaks and runs out then at least she earned it, but it is truly sickening to have shot your way to the hill, only to see your opponent actually WIN the match on a total BS, lucky shot.
When the nine ball is pocketed on the break, it could be spotted, and the breaker could be credited with making a ball and remain at the table. Or maybe even give the breaker ball in hand. At least make the game be decided on a skilled run out. This makes sense.
