The long race myth

Blue Jam

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
"A better player will win in a longer race"

Not true. Longer races actually favours the weaker player.

In longer races (i.e. race to 100), a lower level of concentration is sustained as nobody can operate at maximum output for extended periods (even 100m sprinters are only at maximum effort for about 10m, according to Usain Bolt). Short races (i.e. race to 5-10) requires peak effort in all aspects; shot making and strategy. In a long race the stronger potter is more likely to prevail whereas in a shorter race the better all around player will turn down a 60-80% pot for a 95% safe. The added pressure of the increased cost of errors heightens the need to make better decisions.

Discipline, strategy and execution are more valuable than in a needlessly long race where simply making fewer potting errors in a lower quality mach will suffice, so the better player, the player better able to achieve a higher level, is more likely to succeed in a shorter race.

EDIT:
Short version for those not able consider the merits of a proposition they don't immediately understand or agree with - I'm not saying a bar banger will topple a world beater in if the set is long enough. When two players are closely matched, a shorter race gives the advantage to the better player, the player most able to reach a higher level of play. A longer race gives the advantage to whoever has the best stamina, which is a very minor aspect of pool ability."
 
Last edited:

drv4

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Look if I'm playing SVB I have the slightest of chances winning a race to 10, but 0 chance of winning a race to 100.
 

Nick B

This is gonna hurt
Silver Member
You are kidding yourself. Let a real power player zone in his break and run a bunch of packages and you have zero chance to catch up.

Your best chance vs. a stronger opponent is race to one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

RiverCity

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
giphy.gif
 

PoolBum

Ace in the side.
Silver Member
In a long race the stronger potter is more likely to prevail...

No, in a long race the better overall player is more likely to prevail, and the longer the race the more likely it is that the better overall player will win.
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
"A better player will win in a longer race"

Not true. Longer races actually favours the weaker player.

In longer races (i.e. race to 100), a lower level of concentration is sustained as nobody can operate at maximum output for extended periods (even 100m sprinters are only at maximum effort for about 10m, according to Usain Bolt). Short races (i.e. race to 5-10) requires peak effort in all aspects; shot making and strategy. In a long race the stronger potter is more likely to prevail whereas in a shorter race the better all around player will turn down a 60-80% pot for a 95% safe. The added pressure of the increased cost of errors heightens the need to make better decisions.

Discipline, strategy and execution are more valuable than in a needlessly long race where simply making fewer potting errors in a lower quality mach will suffice, so the better player, the player better able to achieve a higher level, is more likely to succeed in a shorter race.
I can't agree with you. The longer the race always favors the better player. However, many road players may prefer a shorter race, just because they figure they can win more $$ if the races are shorter and they can get up more sets.

The best proof of this is when you're playing a strong road player and you get to hill/hill with them, in which case they will likely ask you to double up the bet and start the set over. They know anything can happen in one single game, and their chances as the better player are improved in a longer race.
 

$TAKE HOR$E

champagne - campaign
Silver Member
Your best chance vs. a stronger opponent is race to one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When you surpass the almighty 1 you start drastically decreasing your chances. I remember the time I almost beat Dave Matlock in a race to 6...but it was a race to 9 :thud:
 

Dimeball

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
"A better player will win in a longer race"

Not true. Longer races actually favours the weaker player.

In longer races (i.e. race to 100), a lower level of concentration is sustained as nobody can operate at maximum output for extended periods (even 100m sprinters are only at maximum effort for about 10m, according to Usain Bolt). Short races (i.e. race to 5-10) requires peak effort in all aspects; shot making and strategy. In a long race the stronger potter is more likely to prevail whereas in a shorter race the better all around player will turn down a 60-80% pot for a 95% safe. The added pressure of the increased cost of errors heightens the need to make better decisions.

Discipline, strategy and execution are more valuable than in a needlessly long race where simply making fewer potting errors in a lower quality mach will suffice, so the better player, the player better able to achieve a higher level, is more likely to succeed in a shorter race.
Many years in the game and I’ve never seen this be true....
Sorry dude...
 

buckshotshoey

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I can't agree with you. The longer the race always favors the better player. However, many road players may prefer a shorter race, just because they figure they can win more $$ if the races are shorter and they can get up more sets.

The best proof of this is when you're playing a strong road player and you get to hill/hill with them, in which case they will likely ask you to double up the bet and start the set over. They know anything can happen in one single game, and their chances as the better player are improved in a longer race.

Nothing pisses me off more then someone wanting
to change the terms of the bet in the middle of a
game or race. That is the biggest reason I said
screw gambling.

As for the original post, short race or long,
the better (or smarter) player will prevail
either way.
 

td873

C is for Cookie
Silver Member
Longer races actually favor the weaker player.
This conclusion is wrong on so many levels. I'll just let the rest of the posters illustrate this.

But, as only one example: my kid is a way below a "D" player. There is no way he is a "favorite" in a long race, . And he's by far the weaker player. [He may have a better chance of winning ONE GAME in a long race, but a 0% chance of winning the entire race.]

-td
 

BasementDweller

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
We've officially ran out of things to talk and argue about so now the AZ staff has requested that we all start arguing the other side of the argument.

In other news, the US Mosconi Cup team this year will be heavy favorites.
 

Ak Guy

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Wow!

I play in a bar league with four shooters on each team. The tables are lousy bar boxes and the rules are beyond stupid bar rules. But, Alaskan winters are long and there is no real pool in this hick town.

I have my own 9' table at home and I am better then most of the players. But, as I tell my team mates, all we are doing on league night is playing a race to one, four times. So any one can win in a race to one. I play good enough to beat any one in the world in a race to one because I can run a table.

But, let me play those same league players a race to any thing over three and they will be in trouble. Let me play any real good pool player A level and above a race to five and I will be in trouble.

I am talking 8 Ball right now, but 9 Ball would be harder as most of the league players rarely run over five balls on a bar box. If a long race benefits a weaker player Shane would of lost more then one of those TAR Matches he dominated in when playing "weaker" players. My 2 cents.
 
Last edited:

BilliardsAbout

BondFanEvents.com
Silver Member
"A better player will win in a longer race"

Not true. Longer races actually favours the weaker player.

In longer races (i.e. race to 100), a lower level of concentration is sustained as nobody can operate at maximum output for extended periods (even 100m sprinters are only at maximum effort for about 10m, according to Usain Bolt). Short races (i.e. race to 5-10) requires peak effort in all aspects; shot making and strategy. In a long race the stronger potter is more likely to prevail whereas in a shorter race the better all around player will turn down a 60-80% pot for a 95% safe. The added pressure of the increased cost of errors heightens the need to make better decisions.

Discipline, strategy and execution are more valuable than in a needlessly long race where simply making fewer potting errors in a lower quality mach will suffice, so the better player, the player better able to achieve a higher level, is more likely to succeed in a shorter race.

What if the stronger player is the one used to all-night sessions? I was more of a threat when I'd play 18-hour sessions.
 

LeonD123

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A solid pro tennis player can beat Federer on a match, but will lose 95% of the time.

Length reduce variance.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
"A better player will win in a longer race"

Not true. Longer races actually favours the weaker player. ...
My curiosity compels me to ask: Are you just stirring the pot or do you really believe that?

As for the gist of your argument, people keep bringing up all sorts of psychological and pseudo-psychological wrinkles like the infamous "momentum" and the celebrated "hot hands" but when these are looked at in detail they vanish in a puff of greasy black smoke.

Did you want to back me in a 14.1 match to 2000 points against SVB? By your argument I should be a lead pipe cinch. I think we can sucker his side into betting $50,000.
 

Pacecar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
In statistics, the statistician usually requests a minimum of 20-25 data points to be able to draw statistical conclusions [such as one player is better than the other; or, the players are not statistically different from each other]. Therefore, for any fair race (alternating breaks) of more than 20 games, then the statistical determinations usually bear out over the long run.
But for a short race, upsets are more likely to occur.
 
Top