Instead of the player who breaks being random there should be some sort of gadget that lets the players choose who breaks. For instance like a coin being flipped to decided the players get to choose heads or tails. The break can win a match. This could help in tournements. The good players wont necessarily break and clear up

As far as I know, the player who breaks off if already chosen at random. Playing heads or tails would be quite funny, but I think it wouldn't add any randomness to the first shooter's choice.

the players can contribute to deciding who breaks

rock sissor paper

gd idea

or how about how they do itn in real pool you both get a shot you hit the far rail and the ball comes back and the closet to the rail where you hit gets to decide who goes first so its like its real

yes even better

But here we play snooker, not pool.
And it's just against curtisorren's first motivation: it would give an advantage to good players...

I really don't know why we should change the server-side decision of the first player. We can have solution of 2 types:
* like heads or tails, which won't change anything to the randomness, so are useless (meaning exactly the same as the current situation) in practice
* like pool's, which would give an advantage to the best players, on which many people wouldn't agree

i agree but the players are contributing to the choice of who breaks. at least the weaker player will get a chance instead of

they dont break and the stronger player clears up. They geta say in who breaks. It would also bring a sense of more fun into the game

curtisorren, I really don't get your point. Weaker players would not have more chances to begin if we add such an "active" way of deciding. In any case, they have exactly 50% chances to begin, being "server-randomness" (like now), "heads or tails" or "rock sissor paper".

Players would have the feeling of contributing to the choice, but would really not being contributing, because the probability stays 50% in every case.

Or, explain how it would give weak players more chances to begin. Personally, I don't see how.

i agree with droflehz a lagg would be a better idea as it would help the lesser players and would also take away the randomness of it. This is a good thing as games can be decided on who breaks. once the 1st break is done then it should be alterating break from then on.

Do we really need this feature though, if you play the other user twice you take it in turns like...

Game 1 - Player1 breaks
Game 2 - Player2 breaks
Game 3 - Player1 breaks

etc,etc.....

Why do we need to change that?

well if someone thinks that its snooker not pool( can't be stuffed looking up ) well maybe just same thing but on a snooker table!