Turning Stone XXIII finals: Shaw vs Shane thread

barrymuch90

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
For the gentleman debating the differences with break formats I'll give you this. One of the best pool matches I've ever seen was at last years US Open when Jason Shaw was down I think 12-3 going to 13 or some insane amount and came back and won it was truly glorious he put a massive package and held control of the table for like an hour. Hopefully someone can actually give the correct details because it truly was one of the greatest comebacks ever and it was only possible with winner breaks. Plus if the original color of money match( earl vs. Efren) was alternating break there's no way it would of been as good: that's the greatest comeback in pool history as far as I'm concerned. For the record i like both formats but feel long race world class 9 ball is best displayed with a winner breaks format!!!
 

Cardigan Kid

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
For the gentleman debating the differences with break formats I'll give you this. One of the best pool matches I've ever seen was at last years US Open when Jason Shaw was down I think 12-3 going to 13 or some insane amount and came back and won it was truly glorious he put a massive package and held control of the table for like an hour. Hopefully someone can actually give the correct details because it truly was one of the greatest comebacks ever and it was only possible with winner breaks. Plus if the original color of money match( earl vs. Efren) was alternating break there's no way it would of been as good: that's the greatest comeback in pool history as far as I'm concerned. For the record i like both formats but feel long race world class 9 ball is best displayed with a winner breaks format!!!

Very good examples, and yes, holding the table is a talent and a joy to watch unto it's own.
Do you you know if that Shaw match was the one against ko pin yi in the quarterfinals of the US Open?
I'm remember seeing that and it was an unbelievable comeback.
And then he did it again in the semi finals but fell short on the last rack.

I gotta order that from accu stats. It was unbelievable.
So many special matches have been produced from winners break formats. So that's why I'm a fan of both as well.
 

HawaiianEye

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I think alternate breaks is superior simply because all good logic and rational thought tells you it is in every way possible and it can also be demonstrated in a number of ways. Has nothing to do with my break. Besides, someone wanting alternate breaks because they don't break as good as their opponent is probably also irrational as it doesn't really increase their chances to win. Alternate breaks certainly makes the scores closer, but it doesn't really change who wins how often.

Another of the many reasons alternate break is superior is because the races don't have to be as long to more accurately find out who the better player is. All winner breaks does is make each turn at the table worth more points on average, and when turns are worth more points it takes a longer race to accurately determine who is better. Imagine if basketball was played as a race to 100 points. Right now regular baskets count as 2 points each, and so by the time one team reaches 100 points there is a pretty good chance that it was the better team that got there first. Imagine if baskets were worth 40 points each though? Now a race to 100 points doesn't tell you as much any more and you would need to race to 2000 points to get the same accuracy in results. And so it is with winner breaks because each turn is worth more points on average it takes a longer race to give the same accuracy in determining the better player.

Now stop and give some serious consideration to what I mentioned earlier. Do you want football and basketball and every other sport to go to the format of the scoring team/person retaining offensive possession as it is in winner breaks pool? Of course not, because you would think it was dumb on a number of levels--every level actually. They only reason you prefer it in pool is simply and totally because it is what you are used to and your resulting bias simply isn't allowing you to see the reality that it is just as dumb in pool as it would be in any other sport. Some people have an easier time than others in allowing their logic to prevail over their irrational biases though and I get that.

There is not one single advantage to winner breaks. Not one.

9-ball has historically been played as winner breaks. They also had a push-out option. Why do some people keep insisting that the game turn into some other game?

9-ball isn't another game...it is 9-ball.

If we are going to compare it to another sport, then let's try tennis. If everybody should get the same number of turns, should we not allow "aces" on the serve? Sure, both players have the opportunity to serve "aces", but if one person is hitting 95% of their "ace" attempts, should we outlaw them from doing that?

Quit trying to equate it to baseball, basketball, or even curdling.

One of the advantages of winner breaks is that it allows a player who is a couple games behind to catch up if they hit a gear. In alternate break format, if a player makes a mistake and loses a game and then they both break and run all of their respective racks, the player who made a single mistake or gets an unlucky roll is usually the loser.
 
Last edited:

barrymuch90

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yup it was very close to the end of the tourny quite possibly the semis against Ko but I'm not 100% sure. I'm hoping AtLarge can chime in. N yes I also remember him being in a similar situation the next round and doing it again except losing hill hill I believe he's such an amazing 9 ball player to watch possibly my favorite at the current time.
 

ceebee

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
:
That's your opinion and that's OK.

IMHO, I think winner breaks is better.

FWIW, the majority of the people I've ever seen who didn't like winner break were people who didn't break as well as their opponent.

9-ball has historically been played as winner breaks. They also had a push-out option. Why do some people keep insisting that the game turn into some other game?

9-ball isn't another game...it is 9-ball.

One of the advantages of winner breaks is that it allows a player who is a couple games behind to catch up if they hit a gear. If a player makes a mistake and loses a game and then they both break and run all of their respective racks, the player who made a single mistake or gets an unlucky roll is usually the loser.

I grew up on Winner Breaks, that was just some kind of reward for winning the game. When I started gambling, since I had a good break, I was in favor of Winner Breaks. I shut down in 1979, started again in 1999. We played 8 Ball, Winner Breaks for the longest, then I went back to Snooker. When I came back from the Snooker Table & my Break Shot had disappeared. Then I wanted to play Alternating Breaks to insure myself at least a chance. 5 & 6 Packs would & could happen at anytime, but only in the Winner Break format.

In this match we are discussing, Van Boeing played great & his Break Shot was a monster. Shaw couldn't get started & his Break Shot slowed him down, so he lost the match... It was a one sided situation...on that day...
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
It's a real treat to watch great pool players run out and display their talents. Sometimes in less than a half hour (the infamous Shaw over Mika in 23 minutes).
It would be a real treat if football were a race to 30 points and you could get to see teams display their talents by putting together big packages and even winning without the other team ever having possession of the ball. It would be a real treat for basketball to do the same.

You just can't find this kind of excitement in alternating breaks (which carries it's own form of excitement but in a different way).
You can't find any excitement in football because after one team scores the other team starts with the next offensive possession. You can't find any excitement in basketball because after one team scores the other team starts with the next offensive possession. Now if football and basketball would just have the scoring team retain offensive possession then they just might have a chance to be exciting like pool. See how silly that sounds when you get to think about it without having to look through the bias you have with pool due to what you are used to?

I will say it again. The only reason anyone prefers winner breaks pool is because that is what they are used to. If pool went exclusively to alternate breaks for a period of time to where you got used to it, you would prefer it just like every other fan in the world prefers it for every other sport in the world, because it is clearly superior, including for excitement level. You just aren't used to the idea for pool yet and so your bias won't yet allow you to see reality.
 

easy-e

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
It would be a real treat if football were a race to 30 points and you could get to see teams display their talents by putting together big packages and even winning without the other team ever having possession of the ball. It would be a real treat for basketball to do the same.


You can't find any excitement in football because after one team scores the other team starts with the next offensive possession. You can't find any excitement in basketball because after one team scores the other team starts with the next offensive possession. Now if football and basketball would just have the scoring team retain offensive possession then they just might have a chance to be exciting like pool. See how silly that sounds when you get to think about it without having to look through the bias you have with pool due to what you are used to?

I will say it again. The only reason anyone prefers winner breaks pool is because that is what they are used to. If pool went exclusively to alternate breaks for a period of time to where you got used to it, you would prefer it just like every other fan in the world prefers it for every other sport in the world, because it is clearly superior, including for excitement level. You just aren't used to the idea for pool yet and so your bias won't yet allow you to see reality.

That's just not true. I prefer it because I like to see people run packages and make big comebacks.
 

PoppaSaun

Banned
It would be a real treat if football were a race to 30 points and you could get to see teams display their talents by putting together big packages and even winning without the other team ever having possession of the ball. It would be a real treat for basketball to do the same.


You can't find any excitement in football because after one team scores the other team starts with the next offensive possession. You can't find any excitement in basketball because after one team scores the other team starts with the next offensive possession. Now if football and basketball would just have the scoring team retain offensive possession then they just might have a chance to be exciting like pool. See how silly that sounds when you get to think about it without having to look through the bias you have with pool due to what you are used to?

I will say it again. The only reason anyone prefers winner breaks pool is because that is what they are used to. If pool went exclusively to alternate breaks for a period of time to where you got used to it, you would prefer it just like every other fan in the world prefers it for every other sport in the world, because it is clearly superior, including for excitement level. You just aren't used to the idea for pool yet and so your bias won't yet allow you to see reality.

You're a genius! What pool really needs is blocked shots and tackles!
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
For the gentleman debating the differences with break formats I'll give you this. One of the best pool matches I've ever seen was at last years US Open when Jason Shaw was down I think 12-3 going to 13 or some insane amount and came back and won it was truly glorious he put a massive package and held control of the table for like an hour. Hopefully someone can actually give the correct details because it truly was one of the greatest comebacks ever and it was only possible with winner breaks.

One of the greatest most exciting come backs ever that was heavily discussed on here happened last year as well and was under the alternate breaks format. You do get to see it in alternate breaks and it is even more exciting under that format.

Again, if the scoring team retaining offensive possession is so great why aren't you for it with basketball or football? You could make your exact same arguments that it would be so exciting to get see the Cowboys put up massive packages before the other team every got possession of the ball, or even for the Cowboys to win the game without the other team ever having offensive possession. Think of the come backs that could happen too. Dallas could be up 28 to 0 in a race to 30 points and then their opponent scores five touchdowns in a row to score 35 points and win the the game and there was nothing Dallas could do because they never got the ball again but oh how exciting the come back right?

If it was a better format some other sport would be doing it. It isn't better in any way at all, not for excitement, and not for anything else. You only prefer it with pool because you are used to it and as soon as you got used to alternate breaks you would be able to see reality again and would prefer it just like you and everybody else prefers that format for every other sport on earth.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
That's just not true. I prefer it because I like to see people run packages and make big comebacks.

No you don't, otherwise you would be campaigning for football and basketball to go to the same format. You are just used to that with pool and therefore think you prefer it with pool simply because it is what you are used to. Have pool change to alternate breaks exclusively and when you get used to it after a while you will end up preferring it just like you and everybody else prefers it for every other sport on earth because it is superior in every way. You just can't imagine that right now because it is so foreign to what you are used to.
 

easy-e

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
One of the greatest most exciting come backs ever (IMO) that was heavily discussed on here happened last year as well and was under the alternate breaks format. You do get to see it in alternate breaks and it is even more exciting under that format (IMO).

Again, if the scoring team retaining offensive possession is so great why aren't you for it with basketball or football? You could make your exact same arguments that it would be so exciting to get see the Cowboys put up massive packages before the other team every got possession of the ball, or even for the Cowboys to win the game without the other team ever having offensive possession. Think of the come backs that could happen too. Dallas could be up 28 to 0 in a race to 30 points and then their opponent scores five touchdowns in a row to score 35 points and win the the game and there was nothing Dallas could do because they never got the ball again but oh how exciting the come back right?

If it was a better format some other sport would be doing it. It isn't better in any way at all (IMO), not for excitement (IMO), and not for anything else (IMO). You only prefer it with pool because you are used to it (IMO) and as soon as you got used to alternate breaks you would be able to see reality again and would prefer it (IMO) just like you and everybody else prefers that format for every other sport on earth.

I made some minor edits to your post. Maybe you'd get more of a healthy conversation going if you didn't state everything you think like it's a g.d. fact.
 

easy-e

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
No you don't, otherwise you would be campaigning for football and basketball to go to the same format. You are just used to that with pool and therefore think you prefer it with pool simply because it is what you are used to. Have pool change to alternate breaks exclusively and when you get used to it after a while you will end up preferring it just like you and everybody else prefers it for every other sport on earth because it is superior in every way. You just can't imagine that right now because it is so foreign to what you are used to.

Why can't I like pool one way and football a different way? You have NO IDEA what anyone else likes. Who do you think you are telling everyone why they like certain things?
 

easy-e

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
No you don't, otherwise you would be campaigning for football and basketball to go to the same format. You are just used to that with pool and therefore think you prefer it with pool simply because it is what you are used to. Have pool change to alternate breaks exclusively and when you get used to it after a while you will end up preferring it just like you and everybody else prefers it for every other sport on earth because it is superior in every way. You just can't imagine that right now because it is so foreign to what you are used to.

I don't consider pool to be a sport, but that's a topic for a different thread.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
Why can't I like pool one way and football a different way? You have NO IDEA what anyone else likes. Who do you think you are telling everyone why they like certain things?

Use some logic. What is more likely, that you and everybody else in the world likes every sport in the world to allow both sides to have equal scoring opportunities and pool is somehow magically different from all 56 billion other sports, or you are biased because of what you are used to and once you got used to the other way you would end up preferring it just like you and everybody else does with every other sport in the world. While what you are saying is certainly technically possible, it isn't even remotely close to as likely. You have to use logic to see that though instead of "feelings".
 

HawaiianEye

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I will say it again. The only reason anyone prefers winner breaks pool is because that is what they are used to.

I WILL SAY IT AGAIN!

I PREFER WINNER BREAKS.

So, THERE!

I prefer it because I put in hours and hours of practice over the years to learn how to break. I play only on Sundays and with people who play several times a week. I play young people and old people and I play A-rated people. I can break as well, if not better, than most of them. Even as old and blind as I am, I can still put some "packs" on people when I'm hitting the balls good. I had a couple two-packs and a three-pack Sunday and I've put a 5-pack together not too awful long ago. Would have been a 6-pack, if I had not scratched on the break when I made the 9 on the break.

Anybody who breaks well prefers winner break. In order to put "packs" on people they have to shoot well, also. The other balls don't just magically disappear in the pockets after the break is done.

If the break wasn't an important part of the game, why do people ask for the break as a "spot"?

ANYBODY, who can shoot well, can occasionally run a rack or two. How many people can put multiple packs on people? It takes concentration and consistency to keep the string going...and good breaks...and some lucky rolls to keep the shot after the break open.

That is more exciting to ME, than just watching people taking turns pocketing balls and playing safeties every other shot.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
I PREFER WINNER BREAKS.

I prefer it because I put in hours and hours of practice over the years to learn how to break.....Even as old and blind as I am, I can still put some "packs" on people when I'm hitting the balls good. I had a couple two-packs and a three-pack Sunday and I've put a 5-pack together not too awful long ago. Would have been a 6-pack, if I had not scratched on the break when I made the 9 on the break.

Anybody who breaks well prefers winner break.

First, having a good break does not increase your chances for winning more under winner breaks than under alternate breaks. It will have an effect on the score, but not on who wins how often. If you are a good breaker you are going to convert on more of your turns under alternate break too.

Second, even if it were true that a better break makes it more likely that you would win under winner breaks, which it isn't (even though you and many others erroneously believe that), then that would be even more reason to go to alternate breaks because the break already plays way too big of a factor in pool. A good portion of the time the break is more important than all other skills combined. The two matches that this very thread is about between Shaw and SVB are a perfect example. Shaw won the first set they played because of his break. Shane could have been twice as good at pocketing balls, playing shape, playing strategy, picking patterns, etc, and it wouldn't have made any difference and he still would have lost. The exact same is true in the second set where SVB won. It wouldn't have mattered how much better Shaw was at every other skill outside of the break he could not have won that set. The break plays way, way, way too much of a factor in todays game, more than all other skills combined.
 

sixpack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
You want it to go back to what it have winner breaks and loser racks and the breaker can't check the rack except from the kitchen side of the table.

The 'art of racking' was critical to keeping guys from getting big packages. Especially since the tables were so loose.

Some guys, like Danny Medina for instance, could out break even a bad rack.
 

PoppaSaun

Banned
No you don't, otherwise you would be campaigning for football and basketball to go to the same format. You are just used to that with pool and therefore think you prefer it with pool simply because it is what you are used to. Have pool change to alternate breaks exclusively and when you get used to it after a while you will end up preferring it just like you and everybody else prefers it for every other sport on earth because it is superior in every way. You just can't imagine that right now because it is so foreign to what you are used to.

Your are obtuse if you try to compare pool to any other sport. Precisely what is unique about pool is the fact that a person can win without their opponent ever getting a chance to play. That's pool, there is no other sport like it, at all. The fact that a player can win a game without the opponent getting to play logically should extend to the entire set.

The fact will always remain that the opponent did get a chance to play, even if they never have a chance to make a ball...it's called the lag.

I could, possibly, support lag-for-break, but alternating or loser-break are ridiculous.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... in the second set where SVB won. It wouldn't have mattered how much better Shaw was at every other skill outside of the break he could not have won that set. ...

Nah, the break wasn't all there was to that match.

Shane missed once and fouled 3 times. Jayson ran out after all 4 of those errors, including twice after breaking fouls.

Jayson missed 6 times and fouled twice. Shane ran out after 6 of those 8 errors, including twice after breaking fouls. Shane's 5-pack followed one of Jayson's missed shots.

So shooting errors played a significant role in Jayson's demise.
 
Top