Double-backs vs. Pope Rule

So Peter and I debate rules all the time and the one rule that we always seem to go back and forth on is how to handle double-backs. We both agree that if a team hits both shots, they deserve to shoot again... but how many shots should they get? If they get both shots (double-backs), then they have the chance of doubling up again and again and going on a huge run. If you limit the bonus shot to one (the so-called Pope rule from the World Series of Beer Pong), then it gives a team a bonus shot, while preventing the huge run.

Personally, I like double-backs because it never means you're out of a game. If you start cold you can make up for it by getting hot, but I'd like to hear how others play.

Peter's picture

Leaning toward Catholicism

After seeing the double back simply dominate games in the past two weeks at the Scarlet Lady, I'm leaning towards supporting the Pope rule for tournament play.

I would support double-backs if there was a mini-series of games (best 2 out of 3) - but consider the following

- Last week Katie and I had 3 or more runs of 6 straight cups, but got taken down in the finals by Tyler/Fred from a 6 cup run
- This week Tyler and Grant hit 6 straight to take us down, then hit 9 straight in their second turn to lay a goose egg.
- The upside - after Tyler/Grant hit 6 straight, we still had 7 left and had a chance for redemption, and put a scare into them by hitting 5 straight

I just feel less and less that it is good for a tournament. Prelim games, league games, or games involved in a series - I'm all for double backs, but hate seeing a team not even really have a chance cause the other team catches an insane run. Limiting the bring-it-back to one ball limits a team to a run of 3. It still puts a ton of pressure on the other team, but keeps games in check - which I feel is good for tournament play.

What's wrong with a run?

I totally agree that only giving one extra shot instead of two eliminates teams from going on an "insane run", but my response is... what's wrong with that??? One of the most exciting things that can happen in a beer pong game is a team catching fire and hitting 6+ shots in a row. When Grant and i hit the 9 straight last week, it was straight money (for us any way). And it's not like I'm saying no redemption... the other team had the chance to do exactly what we did, it just didn't happen. Consider the following scenerio...
You're down 4-3 and the other team has the balls. They hit 2, plus they're bonus. You've now lost, with 4 cups to hit and only three possible shots... sucks to be you.
With double-backs, you could hit four straight and ride the momentum into overtime. Oh well.
But honestly, I'm thinking it's time for a new poll... let the people decide.

Peter's picture

Jokes and Jokes and Jokes and Jokes

9 cups is a monumental run to try to overcome, and I would just like to see teams have a chance at winning a game. Giving a team a 9 cup deficit to start the game is hardly a fair chance. That's all I'm arguing.

BUT... I would attribute part of the ease of accomplishing that feat to the rules at the Lady. Pushing the cups forward at the rearranges definitely makes it easier to hit cups, and there is an extra rearrange in there to boot. Both of those factors make bring-it-backs an easier feat, and maybe I shouldn't worry about it.

Spaghetti , Spaghetti

i would hate to be in the opposing position and have to come back from a 9 cup deficit. BUT i also love those moments. the feeling of "heating up" and being "on fire."

maybe no double backs until each team has had one full turn? that starts to get complicated though. or maybe get two balls back so each player can shoot, but no double-double backs. then at most you can get 4 in a row.

i have to say, at least with 10 cups there is some room for anything to happen. with 6 cup (which we played last night at 710), even 1 double back can be devastating.