British Foosball Association

If you want to do well at table football under the current rules you need to learn a set shot.  Period.

Despite the Hereford tournament banning the snake the tournament will be won by someone with a set shot.

It will be won by someone who stops the ball waits for a while then shoots.

And when the novices see this they will either try to emulate it much to the irritation of their piers who have to watch and wait ages while they struggle to pin it OR give up because they see the top level game as dull and their friends are no longer interesting to play as they spend all their time trying to pin it.

All because the way to win involves setting  up a shot and waiting for a bit and then shooting.

But what if we removed the set shot waiting game from foosball? I started on Geoff’s tables and loved the fast flowing game. I only play a set shot game because that is what it takes to win. Like most I play the way I play because it makes me win more.  

The only way you to stop the best players from being set shot players is to change the rules. Would that create a more accessible game for novices? Would we need a slightly different table?

Would you pros still play?

Yes, absolutely.

I think it might be a good idea to bring in a 1 second 'stopped ball' rule.

Advantages:

- speed up play considerably
- set shots would still be possible, but would become more interesting, as it would require more skill to execute them (perhaps snake would be allowed, as long as it was walked constantly)
- 1 sec rule would probably be necessary to allow the ball to be brought back into play - true rollerball would prob not be possible in 1 against 1 games.
- makes the game more physically demanding
- requires more skill from players

Most Oxford players in my time played the 'Brice-style' of t-f, playing rolling tap bangs and pull shots (a bit like Shovo's). Ben Greedy was especially good at playing in this way.

It would be ridiculous if most players secretly felt this way about the game while playing the 'set shot' style!

I dare say that if you organised a tournament with this kind of rule change, a large number of players would turn up. The very formulaic players may not, but they would be replaced by Brice's enthusiasts/pub players more used to a fluid game.  :D

I always enjoy games against fast, fluid players much more. I like having to use my reactions to defend, but agaisnt the regular crop of 3-bar shots it's more about reading, timing and rythm than true reactions. The vast majority of real reaction saves I make these days are against slop and random deflections, stuff that no-one enjoys.

Some care would have to be taken in working the rules out (like Andrei says, allowing one second or something), along with some playtesting. I think most people would want to avoid simply super fast random play with lots of angled hacks and multiple deflections. Rollerball, as it is, is possibly a little too frenetic.

If done correctly, a rules variation like this could be a lot of fun.



Just a passing thought, but one possible problem would be if this made the snake even more exclusive and an even greater deterrent to less good players.

Maybe we could work on some provisional rules in this thread, here are my suggestions:

Suggested name: floos ('fluid foos')

1 the ball must not be kept still for more than 1 second

(ball can be still for a while to allow players to switch between rods)

2 the ball must be moving or be only momentarily still before executing a move that leads to a goal

(this doesn't mean that the ball can't be moving very slowly before shooting, so some setshotishness is still possible; also very brief pinning followed by repin or shot are allowed)

3 no shots allowed which involve applying the wrist to the handle directly

4 no shots that involve a 270 degree+ spin of the rod

(snakes/wrenches are silly and readjusting to shoot them slows the game down)

5 no sloppy goals allowed - the ball must enter the goal cleanly, ie. without touching the opponent's players

(slop ban will encourage accuracy/produce fair results)

6 rod possession time limit of 5 seconds (can be regenerated by rebounding ball off opponent's players)

(short rod possession time to ensure fluid game/help prevent almost-as-dull-as stationary-shots hypnotic tic-taccing before passes or shots)

I suggest that everybody who wants to produce a more fluid al-volo cum rollerball game produce their own set of rules, with brief reasoning for each.

Hopefully, in this way we'll soon be able to guage opinion and produce something that would meet with most people's approval.

I very much doubt you would manage to get the rules changed.

But you could introduce a floos 'fun event' at some tournies.

Yawn.....................

All very well in *principle* Phil, But as you know most pull shot players 'set' the ball up first.
Where is this going all going to end?

Next no pin shots?
Then no whistling on a Tuesday!

As a parting shot may i ask if you  find Rob Atha boring?
Here is a guy who is at the TOP of his game and many people look up to
Watching this guy play is a inspiration,
How can his walking snake and pin shots be boring?  (I know he does pulls on tornado)

You’re all mad I tell thee (LOL)


Paddy

PS - If you are not up for defending the snake or pin, then maybe competitive foos is not for you.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////



The swines! How could they......



Andrei, So many rules, How can us Noobs keep up? (LOL)



All tourneys are fun events anyway, We might not laugh at the same time but they are fun events.



Yes that sounds about right Phil,  :roll:
Where are you coming from on this one?

The way I see it, having all these different rules in place, such as the ball can only be stopped for one second, would just cause so many arguments and such confusion between players that all the novices would just get Bloop off and give up. And in tournaments, you'd need several referees for a single game to spot all these potential infringements that there wouldn't be enough refs to satisfy the demand and the tournament would turn into a farce.

Imposing limits on the way people play is in my opinion BAD for foosball. Having almost no limits as we do now (I say almost because of the obv limits like no spinning and no kicking people under the table etc) allows more freedom for players to develop their own style, or indeed copy a style that works wonders, like snaking. However, I don't think the best way to counter act this apparent "boring" play is to ban "set shots". Rather, if you're so bothered about being apparently boring, or not attracting enough novices to the game, you should find a style of play that (to your eyes) is more attractive. Of course that might mean that your tournament results may suffer (at least temporarily), so I guess it depends on whether you think it is worth it...

Arguably, the fact that piers are irritated by someone trying to learn a skill such as pinning the ball is their own problem. They are not the type of people who will develop into keen foosers anyway, because they are happy to just hit the ball randomly and do not care about getting better. The ones that do want to get better are the ones that wont mind people trying to learn or try something new, as they'll want to know about it themselves.

Myself and a few of the other Warwick lads all came from the same school, all played on the same table (one of Geoff's) at school, and indeed there were a few people who when we played them weren't too keen on us taking a bit of time trying things out. However there were lots of people who were interested in new stuff, including set shots like pull/push shots etc. When I've gone back to my school, people have asked me to show them stuff such as snaking and other "set shots", and a few of them even came to the Oxford Open to see what the tournament scene is like. So i guess it varies from place to place.

For me personally, I actually like snaking. I like the feel of it, I like trying to figure out my opponents defence, and I like the noise it makes when the ball hits the back plate. The reason I'm not going to Hereford is that I only come back from uni this weekend, so I'll be too busy.

I also dont see how having the ball flying all over the place all the time is any better to watch. It's pinball...



Obv

I post retaliation to the anti snake feeling many players have and in response to the recent no-snake tournament. My point is I don’t think a snake ban will close the gap between grass roots players and Pros.

While I accept that it is futile to try and chance the international game, I think it might be nice to have some events under similar rules to what Andrei suggested.  Rules that remove the waiting element from the game and act as an equalizer for the different types of shot that can be done.



Patrick in response to you amateur sarcasm; I have been to many tournaments, played international standard players such as Rob and I am ranked Pro on Garlando. So yes I am up for defending pins shots thank you.  And to answer your question; do I find the likes of rob interesting to watch? Fairly is the answer, if I’m in the same room as a big game I’ll watch it, but I wont wait round at the end of the tournament to watch the open final.

This thread is not about changing the rules of foosball worldwide. Rather it is about the posibility of holding a fun event and bridging the gap between casual players and pros.

For years I played the Italian roules on blooky feet garlando and it was the fastest game ever ,The only way I got beat is when someone controled the game set the balls and shot before I got my five balls in.
I still beleave that a fast game which is played by an experiance player on garlando would beat a player with a slow controled game unless the players are the top 10in the country .
George

Excellent post Steve - 100% Agree

No it will be won be someone who has more than one shot,
They will also have a strong 5 bar and they will have a really good defence.
It takes *more* than one set shot Phil



I shall repeat myself again....
No it will be won be someone who has more than one shot,
They will also have a strong 5 bar and they will have a really good defence.
It takes *more* than one set shot Phil

It wouldbe won by someone with a rolling set shot (e.g. shovo's pull on the move), or something else that was a set shot that somehow got round the rules (e.g. the euro to fakey (the shot didn't start in a pinned position (pass it twice before shooting is the rule, then do the euro to euro to fakey))) or some other clever way round it....

Patrick you come across a little patronising. You have now quoted my original point that I think a set shot is what wins the game multiple times and in multiple posts.

I realise a set shot is not all the game consists of but as I said earlier I do think it 1) scares novices and 2)set shots are not interesting to watch for those not as into the game as you or I. I would like to see the odd event that removes this barrier for novices joining the tournament scene.


Yes.



The number of shots you have is not important. I think I may have played you at oxford, I shot nothing but a snake at oxford. I do not shoot anything else at tournaments. I think this is a shame as but I only need 1 shot under the current rules.

Guys all i want is people to consider is the possibility of an event that bans set shots (like rolerball).

Whatever the table and whatever the rules the best player on that table and within those rules usually wins on that table and within those rules.

probably true, but yet I fear not very informative or helpful to this discussion

i reckon include some doubles rollerball at more tournies as thats great fun

andrei: not impressed by 270 degree rule as not only will this be ridiculously hard to judge but would stop the radish!

ps have been playing some great fun 4 ball rollerball recently and managed to win a game with a walking pin to mark williams  8)

'Tired Of This Rollover Disccusion' - Thread from ezboard

http://p067.ezboard.com/ffoosball6358fr ... 1749.topic

Tongue in cheek Dan - the ultimate iteration of this argument is tournaments for one with rules that that player likes - and which they are sure to win. I just don't get it.

Aren't you just replacing one thing with another? I'm not sure I could be arsed to keep playing long enough to develop a high percentage tic tac series. I think this is infact harder, more time consuming and less successful than learning to play a setup shot. You may infact be widening the gap.

Looking at it from another angle, wouldn't changing to a more fluid game style be very similar to moving from doubles to singles games. Firstly; I got the impression a majority of people prefer the doubles style to singles. Secondly; we all already have the option of playing in singles and playing a more fluid style to take advantage of the fact there's only one player on the other side of the table - we don't see a huge skew towards people playing singles, nor do we see a large number of players using a fast moving fluid game style that may suit singles. Just a thought.


Theres a surprise... Andrei agrees with a fast flowing game...


Disagree, I think rollerball is perfectly possible in singles. We've even played 4 ball...


Good point Harry


Awesome post Steve! Lots of good points. Feel I should just add in follow up that if piers are irritated by a playing taking time trying to learn something more complicated, why don't they just play with someone else...


Two suggestions:

- If you want this style of play to be developed I suggest the inclusion of 1 ball rollerball events at tournaments.

- If you want to encourage players into the game perhaps we should have smaller regional affairs with a lower density of snaking semi pros where the n00bs can get into the game, play competitively with each other, see a sample of the game at a higher level and be inspired.

This purely comes down to what type of game people want to play.

Everyone who thinks what their best ever foos moments are will have a different view. For some it will be that 29th snake (out of 34 attempts) that won their first amateur event, for others it will be the game of 2brb. Personally, my best foos experience was at college playing the likes of Andrei, Juj and others. back then everyone had 3 or 4 shots, and would alternate between them all the time. I remember being very disillusioned after my first national tournament seeing the seasoned players all come rolling up with their set shots.

I think Philo is a) making the observation that for some (at least a sizeable minority of tournament players if not the majority) the current set-shot nature of the tournament game is not their favourite game, and b) is concluding that this feature is inhibiting the novice game. I agree on both accounts.

Ultimately, rules are there to be changed to adjust the game accordingly. The millions of rules in the tornado game are the perfect example of that. Andrei's rules were just one suggestion. I am gessing Paddy has never appreciated the brilliance of the al volo style game.