Break Stats -- 2017 US Open 8-Ball Championship, July 2017

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Here are some aggregate break statistics from the 2017 US Open 8-Ball Championship, played July 29-31 at Griff's Bar & Billiards in Las Vegas. The promoter, CueSports International, provided pay-per-view streaming. This 52-player, double-elimiiination event was won by Alex Pagulayan.

Conditions -- The conditions for this call-shot 8-Ball event included:
- Diamond 9-foot table with 4¼" corner pockets;​
- Simonis 860 Tournament Blue cloth;​
- Cyclop TV balls, including the red-spot cue ball;​
- jump cues allowed;​
- breaker racks using the Magic Rack template;​
- alternating breaks from anywhere behind the head string;​
- table open after the break;​
- ball in hand anywhere on the table after a foul on the break;​
- cue-ball fouls only;​
- for an 8-ball made on the break, it is breaker's choice to spot the 8-ball and continue shooting or to re-break..​

The 18 streamed matches (232 games) were as follows (shown in the order in which they were played). These 18 matches represented 18% of the event's total of 99 matches played.

Saturday, July 29
Manny Perez d. Mitch Ellerman 8-4​
Roberto Gomez d. Donny Mills 8-2​
Skyler Woodward d. Billy Thorpe 8-4​
Rodney Morris d. Chris Melling 8-3​
Thorsten Hohmann d. Jesse Bowman 8-4​
Josh Roberts d. Dennis Hatch 8-7​

Sunday, July 30
Warren Kiamco d. Thorpe 8-5​
Hatch d. Vilmos Foldes 8-5​
Hohmann d. Kim Laaksonen 8-4​
Vinnie Calabrese d. Nick Malaj 8-7​
Shane Van Boening d. Lee Vann Corteza 8-6​
Dennis Orcollo d. Alex Pagulayanl 8-7​

Monday, July 31
Hohmann d. Morris 8-1​
Corteza d. Calabrese 8-5​
Van Boening d. Orcollo 8-4 (hot-seat match)​
Pagulayan d. Corteza 8-3​
Pagulayan d. Orcollo 8-6 (semifinals)​
Pagulayan d. Van Boening 10-9 (finals)​

Overall results -- The breaker made at least one ball and did not foul 68% of the time (157 of 232), won 56% of the games (130 of 232), and broke and ran 41% of the games (96 of 232).

Here's a more detailed breakdown of the 232 games.

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:​
Breaker won the game: 110 (47% of the 232 games)​
Breaker lost the game: 47 (20%)​
Breaker fouled on the break:​
Breaker won the game: 5 (2%)​
Breaker lost the game: 22 (9%)​
Breaker broke dry (without fouling):​
Breaker won the game: 15 (6%)​
Breaker lost the game: 33 (14%)​
Therefore, whereas the breaker won 56% (130 of 232) of all games,​
He won 70% (110 of 157) of the games in which he made at least one ball on the break and did not foul.​
He won 19% (5 of 27) of the games in which he fouled on the break.​
He won 31% (15 of 48) of the games in which he broke dry but did not foul.​
He won 27% (20 of 75) of the games in which he either fouled on the break or broke dry without fouling.​

Break-and-run games: The 96 break-and-run games represented 41% of all 232 games, 74% of the 130 games won by the breaker, and 61% of the 157 games in which the break was successful (made a ball and didn't foul).

With alternating breaks, B&R "packages" of the normal type are not possible. But we can still look at the breaks of a given player and see how many he ran on his own successive breaks, and we can call these "alternate-break packages." The 96 break-and-run games consisted of 1 alternate-break 5-pack (Van Boening), 1 alternate-break 4-pack (Kiamco), 6 alternate-break 3-packs, 16 alternate-break 2-packs, and 37 singles.

8-balls on the break: The 8-ball was made on the break just once (0.4% of the 232 games). The breaker chose to spot it and continue shooting rather than to re-break.
 
Last edited:

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Miscellany from the data for the 2017 US Open 8-Ball Championship:
[This relates only to the 18 streamed matches, not to all the matches in the event.]

• The most balls made on a single break was 4, done 3 times -- by Roberts (B&R), Pagulayan (B&R), and Orcollo (lost game).

• The average number of balls made on the break was 1.2 (this includes dry and fouled breaks). On successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul), the average was 1.6.

• 78% (180 of 232) of the games ended in one inning – 41% (96) won by the breaker (B&R) and 36% (84) won by the non-breaker. Seventeen percent of the games (40 of 232) ended in the second inning of either the breaker or non-breaker, and only 5% (12 of 232) went beyond the second inning.

• 62% (144 of 232) of the games were run out by the player who was at the table following the break. These run-outs were:
- By the breaker after successful breaks (B&R games) – 61% (96 of 157)​
- By the non-breaker after fouls on the break – 78% (21 of 27)​
- By the non-breaker after dry breaks – 56% (27 of 48)​

• The player who made the first ball after the break:
- Won the game in that same inning 66% of the time (154 of 232)​
- Won the game in a later inning 9% of the time (20 of 232)​
- Lost the game 25% of the time (58 of 232)​

• The loser won an average of 4.5 games in the 17 races to 8. Three of those matches went to hill/hill; one finished at 8-1 (the shortest).

• The average elapsed time for the 17 races to 8 was 75 minutes. The average minutes per game for all 18 matches was 6.0. The elapsed time was measured from the lag until the winning ball was made (or conceded), so it includes time for racking and timeouts.

• The race to 8 that was both longest in elapsed time (100 min.) and highest in average minutes per game (7.1 min./game) was Pagulayan d. Orcollo 8-6.

• The match that was shortest in elapsed time (46 min.) was Hohmann d. Morris 8-1. The match that was lowest in average minutes per game (4.8 min./game) was Hohmann d. Bowman 8-4.

• Breaking fouls averaged about 1 for every 9 games, other fouls 1 for every 13 games, and missed shots 1 for every 2.1 games.

• About 8% of the games involved one or more safeties.
 
Last edited:

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
As always, thank you for this amazing service you provide.

The data and analysis is always interesting.

FYI, I've added the data summary and a quote of your post on the break stats resource page.

Regards,
Dave
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
The US Open 8-Ball Championship was played on 9-foot tables this year instead of the 7-footers in recent years. So a stats comparison is in order.

Shown here are stats for the streamed matches for 2015 and 2016 on a 7-footer vs. 2017 on a 9-footer. The comparison may also be affected by somewhat tighter pockets in 2017 -- 4¼" corners in 2017 vs. 4½" corners the prior two years. The other conditions and rules were the same for the 3 years, and the field strength for the streamed matches seems similar each year.

Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
2015 -- 67% (157 of 233)
2016 -- 76% (149 of 197)
2017 -- 68% (157 of 232)

Breaker won the game:
2015 -- 64% (148 of 233)
2016 -- 64% (127 of 197)
2017 -- 56% (130 of 232)

Break-and-run games, on all breaks:
2015 -- 52% (120 of 233)
2016 -- 53% (104 of 197)
2017 -- 41% (96 of 232)

Break-and-run games, on successful breaks:
2015 -- 76% (120 of 157)
2016 -- 70% (104 of 149)
2017 -- 61% (96 of 157)

Runouts by the player at the table following the break:
2015 -- 75% (174 of 233)
2016 -- 69% (136 of 197)
2017 -- 62% (144 of 232)

Games won by the player at the table following the break:
2015 -- 78% (182 of 233)
2016 -- 74% (145 of 197)
2017 -- 71% (165 of 232)

Games ending in one inning (by B&R or on non-breaker's first visit):
2015 -- 87% (203 of 233)
2016 -- 86% (170 of 197)
2017 -- 78% (180 of 232)

Approx. games involving safeties:
2015 -- 3%
2016 -- 5%
2017 -- 8%

Average number of balls made on all breaks and on successful breaks:
2015 -- 1.2, 1.6
2016 -- 1.4, 1.7
2017 -- 1.2, 1.6

Average number of minutes per game:
2015 -- 6.2 for 233 games (no shot clock)
2016 -- 5.7 for 197 games (no shot clock)
2017 -- 6.0 for 232 games (no shot clock)
 
Last edited:

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I apologize if my question hints at not understanding your analysis.

I'm curious how the percentages change when only evaluating the performance of the final 16 players. I wonder if the win/loss outcomes as influenced by break results look different when distilling out the relatively less competitive players.

That said, I respect the effort behind this and wouldn't really expect you to crunch numbers again on my behalf.
 

Cornerman

Cue Author...Sometimes
Gold Member
Silver Member
The comparison may also be affected by somewhat tighter pockets in 2017 -- 4¼" corners in 2017 vs. 4½" corners the prior two years. The other conditions and rules were the same for the 3 years, and the field strength for the streamed matches seems similar each year]

Just to add clarity, the conditions were not the same by any stretch. "Somewhat tighter pockets" doesn't come close to describing the differences.

The location was at Griff's as opposed to the pro arena of the Rio.

The tables, and specifically the streaming table was a 9' Diamond with worn-in cloth, as opposed to the brand new, sliding cloth of the 7' Diamond in previous years.

The streaming table was about 5 degrees hotter or more than the rest of the tables. This was due to the location of the table (right next to the entrance, with 107F always blowing in). The balls got sticky very quickly.

Even within the room, the streaming table was easily the most difficult table.

Alex and Shane of course made it look easy.

Freddie
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I apologize if my question hints at not understanding your analysis.

I'm curious how the percentages change when only evaluating the performance of the final 16 players. I wonder if the win/loss outcomes as influenced by break results look different when distilling out the relatively less competitive players.

That said, I respect the effort behind this and wouldn't really expect you to crunch numbers again on my behalf.

Sure, it's likely that the players who finish high in an event, as a group, will statistically outperform the ones who do not. And it is fairly typical for the stats for the streamed matches to improve as the event progresses and the lesser players, or top players playing poorly, are weeded out.

But the matches chosen for the streaming table normally have at least one top-level player. As the event winds down, they are all top-level players, or at least the ones playing well that week.

Here's some additional info about this 2017 event:

• 21 different players appeared in the 18 streamed matches -- 12 players appeared just once and the other 9 players accounted for the remaining 24 "player appearances" (18 matches x 2 = 36 player appearances).

• 13 of the 21 players in streamed matches finished in the top 16 positons for the event.

• 8 of the 9 who appeared more than once finished in the top 16 positions.

• 27 of the 36 player appearances were by players finishing in the top 16 positions.

• The top 6 finishers accounted for 18 of the 36 player appearances in the streamed matches.

• Only 3 of the top 16 finishers did not appear on stream -- Grabe (7th/8th), Olson (9th/12th), and Bergman (13th/16th).

• For 11 of the 18 streamed matches, both players finished in the top 16 places. Here's a small stats comparison -- the first number is for those 11 matches alone, the second number is for all 18 streamed matches:
- Successful breaks -- 69%, 68%
- Breaker won game -- 56%, 56%
- B&R on all breaks -- 42%, 41%
- B&R on succesful breaks -- 60%, 61%
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Just to add clarity, the conditions were not the same by any stretch. "Somewhat tighter pockets" doesn't come close to describing the differences.

The location was at Griff's as opposed to the pro arena of the Rio.

The tables, and specifically the streaming table was a 9' Diamond with worn-in cloth, as opposed to the brand new, sliding cloth of the 7' Diamond in previous years.

The streaming table was about 5 degrees hotter or more than the rest of the tables. This was due to the location of the table (right next to the entrance, with 107F always blowing in). The balls got sticky very quickly.

Even within the room, the streaming table was easily the most difficult table.

Alex and Shane of course made it look easy.

Freddie

Freddie -- Thanks for the supplemental information about the conditions. When I said "The other conditions and rules were the same for the 3 years" I was speaking about what I list as "Conditions" in post #1 of each stats thread. And those conditions are simply factual information about the rules and equipment being used.

There are always other elements to the conditions than what I know about (and post in my threads) from watching on stream -- e.g., temperature, humidity, noise level, lighting effects, crowd effects, table rolls, and on and on. The condition of the cloth is certainly important, but cloth that is new at the start of the event is usually fairly worn-in near the end of the event. How much each element of the differences in conditions ("conditions" broadly) affects the statistical results is unknowable. But table size and pocket size are two factors that are always of interest, and the 2017 event did differ for both of those.

Thanks again for the extra info.
 
Top