Go Back   AzBilliards.com > Main Category > Main Forum
Reload this Page Break Stats -- World Pool Series, Aramith Masters Championship 8-Ball, April 2017
Reply
Page 1 of 2 1 2
 
Share Thread Tools Rate Thread
Break Stats -- World Pool Series, Aramith Masters Championship 8-Ball, April 2017
Old
  (#1)
AtLarge
AzB Gold Member
AtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 8,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 76 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2008
   
Break Stats -- World Pool Series, Aramith Masters Championship 8-Ball, April 2017 - 04-08-2017, 09:57 PM

Here are some 8-Ball stats from the second event of Darren Appleton's new World Pool Series -- the Aramith Masters Championship. It was played April 5-8 at Steinway Billiards in Queens, New York with free live streaming by High Rock Productions. The winner was 18-year-old Klenti Kai of Albania.

This was an 82-player event, with double elimination down to the final 16 players (races to 9 with a shootout at hill/hill) and then single elimination (2 out of 3 races to 6, win by 2 in each race, with a tiebreaker or shootout at hill/hill). The stats are for 13 matches played on one of the two streaming tables, and they represented 8.6% of the total of 151 matches played in the event. [Note -- these 13 matches were all from the main event, none from the second-chance event.]

The conditions for this event included:
- Brunswick Gold Crown 9-foot table for some of the matches (first 4 listed below) and Rasson 9-foot table for the others. With corner pockets just over 4", the Rasson table was a bit tighter than the Brunswick table.
- Simonis 860 Tournament Blue cloth;
- Aramith Tournament balls with the measles cue ball;
- breaker racks in some matches, the referee in others -- using the RYO triangle rack;
- break from outside a 3-diamonds-wide central box behind the head string (i.e., break from within about 6" of either side rail);
- break shot must contact the head ball first;
- alternate breaks;
- take the group you make more of on the break (table open if breaker made same number of each group, or fouled, or broke dry);
- ball in hand behind the line after a foul on the break;
- making the 8-ball on the break is not a game win;
- mixed-group combinations not allowed with an open table;
- call shots;
- foul on all balls, and 3-foul rule in effect;
- jump cues allowed, but only 3 times per player per match (once per set in single-elimination matches) and only after the opponent's shot;
- 30-second shot clock (60 seconds after the break) on the Rasson table; and
- lag for opening break.

The 13 matches (219 games) were as follows (shown in the order in which they were played).

Wednesday, April 5, 2017
  • Roberto Gomez defeated Hunter Lombardo 9-6 (stats exclude first 4 games of this match)
    Johnny Archer d. Shaun Wilkie 9-7
    Skyler Woodward d. Maksim Dudanets 9-2
    Lee Vann Corteza d. Corey Deuel 8-8 plus a shootout
    Gomez d. Naoyuki Oi 9-3

Thursday, April 6
  • Frankie Hernandez d. Tony Robles 9-2
    Jayson Shaw d. Warren Kiamco 9-4
    Billy Thorpe d. Jeffrey de Luna 9-7
    Darren Appleton d. Johann Chua 9-6

Friday, April 7
  • Chris Melling d. Gomez 6-3, 6-3 (Round of 16)
    Shaw d. Melling 6-4, 3-6, 6-6 plus a shootout (Quarterfinal)

Saturday, April 8
  • Klenti Kai d. Shaw 6-4, 7-6 on a tiebreaker (Semifinal)
    Kai d. Carlo Biado 6-4, 7-5 (Finals)

Overall results -- The breaker made at least one ball (and did not foul) 45% of the time (96 of 215), won 46% of the games (99 of 215), and broke and ran 18% of the games (38 of 215).

Here's a more detailed breakdown of the 215 games tracked.

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:
  • Breaker won the game: 54 (25% of the 215 games)
  • Breaker lost the game: 42 (20%)

Breaker fouled on the break:
  • Breaker won the game: 4 (2%)
  • Breaker lost the game: 9 (4%)

Breaker broke dry (without fouling):
  • Breaker won the game: 41 (19%)
  • Breaker lost the game: 65 (30%)

Therefore, whereas the breaker won 46% (99 of 215) of all games,
  • He won 56% (54 of 96) of the games in which he made at least one ball on the break and did not foul.
  • He won 31% (4 of 13) of the games in which he fouled on the break.
  • He won 39% (41 of 106) of the games in which he broke dry but did not foul.
  • He won 38% (45 of 119) of the games in which he either fouled on the break or broke dry without fouling.

Break-and-run games: The 38 break-and-run games represented 18% of all 215 games, 38% of the 99 games won by the breaker, and 40% of the 96 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 38 break-and-run games consisted of 1 alternate-break 3-pack (Corteza), 3 alternate-break 2-packs (Woodward, Kai, and Biado), and 29 singles. No one in these 13 streamed matches broke and ran more than 3 games in a row on his own break.

8-balls on the break:
The 8-ball was never made on the break (it would not have counted as a win).
  
Reply With Quote

Old
  (#2)
AtLarge
AzB Gold Member
AtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 8,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 76 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2008
   
04-08-2017, 09:57 PM

Miscellany from the 8-Ball data for the 2017 Aramith Masters Championship -- World Pool Series event #2

The most balls made on a single break was 3, done 8 times. The breaker won 4 of those games (all by B&R) and lost 4.

The average number of balls made on the break was 0.6 (this includes dry and fouled breaks). On successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul), the average was 1.3.

57% (122 of 215) of the games ended in one inning 18% (38) won by the breaker (B&R) and 39% (84) won by the non-breaker. Fifty-six games (26% of 215) ended in the second inning of either the breaker or non-breaker, and 37 games (17% of 215) went beyond the second inning.

42% (91 of 215) 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) 40% (38 of 96)
- By the non-breaker after fouls on the break 62% (8 of 13)
- By the non-breaker after dry breaks 42% (45 of 106)

The player who made the first ball after the break:
- Won the game in that same inning 48% of the time (103 of 215)
- Won the game in a later inning 18% of the time (38 of 215)
- Lost the game 34% of the time (74 of 215)

The loser won an average of 5.0 games in the 9 races to 9.

The average minutes per game for all 13 matches (215 games) was 7.4. The elapsed time for each match was measured from the lag until the winning ball was made (or conceded), so it includes time for racking and timeouts. [Exception -- a 19-minute trick-shot exhibition between the two sets of the Finals was excluded.]

The match that was highest in average minutes per game (10.1 min./game) was Thorpe d. De Luna 9-7.

The match that was lowest in average minutes per game (5.6 min./game) was Woodward d. Dudanets 9-2.

Breaking fouls averaged about 1 for every 16 games, other fouls 1 for every 5 games, and missed shots 1 for every 1.3 games.

About 19% of the games involved one or more safeties.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3)
AtLarge
AzB Gold Member
AtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 8,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 76 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2008
   
04-08-2017, 10:44 PM

Here's an extension of the stats comparison I posted 3 months ago after the first World Pool Series event. The most significant change in the first WPS event was breaking outside a 2-diamonds-wide central box. This second WPS event narrowed the allowable breaking area even more, to about a half-diamond width off of either side rail, and used a table with even tighter pockets for most of the streamed matches.

So, the 5 events compared here are:

• CSI Invitational 8-Ball Championship, July 2014 -- template rack, break from anywhere behind the line, table open after the break
• Accu-Stats MIH 8-Ball Invitational, Nov.2014 (final 2 days only) -- template rack, break from anywhere behind the line, table open after the break
• Accu-stats MIH 8-Ball Invitational, Nov. 2016 -- template rack, break from anywhere behind the line, take what you make more of
• World Pool Series #1, Molinary Players' Championship, Jan. 2017 -- triangle rack, break from outside a 2-diamonds-wide central box, take what you make more of
• World Pool Series #2, Aramith Masters Championship, April 2017 -- triangle rack, break from outside a 3-diamonds-wide central box, take what you make more of

The first 3 events used Diamond tables with standard pro-cut 4" pockets. WPS event #1 used a Brunswick Gold Crown with 4" corners. But I doubt that the difficulty factor for this Brunswick was any higher than for the Diamonds (shallower shelf depth on the Brunswick, e.g.). Most of the streamed matches for WPS event #2 used a Rasson table with corner pockets just a bit over 4". The WPS events used a regular triangle instead of a breaking template, and that may have had an effect on the stats. The WPS events also had several other differences in the rules/conditions, but I doubt that they caused any significant difference in the stats. The field strength for the streamed matches was high for all 5 events.

Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 71% (154 of 218)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 73% (85 of 117)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 73% (182 of 251)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 53% (155 of 293)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 45% (96 of 215)

Breaker won the game:
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 64% (139 of 218)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 61% (71 of 117)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 55% (139 of 251)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 48% (141 of 293)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 46% (99 of 215)

Break-and-run games, on all breaks:
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 54% (118 of 218)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 50% (59 of 117)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 41% (102 of 251)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 29% (85 of 293)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 18% (38 of 215)

Break-and-run games, on successful breaks:
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 77% (118 of 154)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 69% (59 of 85)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 56% (102 of 182)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 55% (85 of 155)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 40% (38 of 96)

Runouts by the player at the table following the break:
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 74% (162 of 218)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 68% (80 of 117)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 59% (147 of 251)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 54% (159 of 293)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 42% (91 of 215)

Games won by the player at the table following the break:
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 78% (169 of 218)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 76% (89 of 117)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 69% (172 of 251)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 66% (193 of 293)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 60% (128 of 215)

Games ending in one inning (by B&R or on non-breaker's first visit):
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 88% (192 of 218)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 85% (99 of 117)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 78% (195 of 251)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 69% (201 of 293)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 57% (122 of 215)

Games involving safeties:
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 4% (8 of 218)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 5% (5 of 117)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 8% (21 of 251)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 12% (36 of 293)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 19% (41 of 215)

Average number of balls made on all breaks and on successful breaks:
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 1.3, 1.6
    2014 A-S MIH -- 1.3, 1.7
    2016 A-S MIH -- 1.3, 1.6
    2017 WPS #1 -- 0.8, 1.4
    2017 WPS #2 -- 0.6, 1.3

Average number of minutes per game:
  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 6.6 for 218 games (no shot clock)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 5.4 for 117 games (45-sec. shot clock)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 5.5 for 251 games (45-sec. shot clock)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 7.0 for 293 games (no shot clock)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 7.4 for 215 games (30-sec shot clock in the majority of the matches)


So, moving from the first two events to the third, we saw the effect of not having an open table after the break -- a reduction in the rate of run-outs from the break and in the breaker's win percentage. Then moving from the third event to the fourth, we saw that breaking outside the box and using a regular triangle instead of a breaking template had a further effect in making the game more difficult -- a lower success rate on the break, reductions in B&R's and breaker wins, and more player interaction.

After WPS #1, I said that it certainly looked like Darren Appleton's tweaks to the WPA rules did make the game more difficult for top pros, and I wondered whether he would feel that he had gone far enough. We now have the answer -- no he didn't. Will he make any further changes in that direction? We'll see.

Last edited by AtLarge; 04-09-2017 at 09:59 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#4)
skip100
AzB Silver Member
skip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond repute
 
skip100's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,171
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2013
   
04-09-2017, 12:19 AM

Thanks for the stats.

Quite a performance by Klenti Kai. He looked and acted like a veteran who expected to win.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#5)
terryhanna
AzB Silver Member
terryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond reputeterryhanna has a reputation beyond repute
 
terryhanna's Avatar
 
Status: Online
Posts: 4,745
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Oct 2013
   
04-09-2017, 12:28 AM

Thank you for doing these great stats all the time great job.

I know it takes a lot of hard work and time to post them here.

Thanks, Terry
Attached Images
 
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#6)
AtLarge
AzB Gold Member
AtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 8,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 76 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2008
   
04-09-2017, 10:01 AM

To the comparisons in post #3, I just added this:

Games won by the player at the table following the break:

  • 2014 CSI Invit. -- 78% (169 of 218)
    2014 A-S MIH -- 76% (89 of 117)
    2016 A-S MIH -- 69% (172 of 251)
    2017 WPS #1 -- 66% (193 of 293)
    2017 WPS #2 -- 60% (128 of 215)

This is games won by the breaker after successful breaks plus games won by the non-breaker after fouled or dry breaks.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#7)
AtLarge
AzB Gold Member
AtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 8,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 76 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2008
   
04-10-2017, 09:40 AM

57% (123 of 215) of the tracked games were won with stripes.



[true, but, in other words, ............ bump]
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#8)
skip100
AzB Silver Member
skip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond repute
 
skip100's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,171
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2013
   
04-10-2017, 10:12 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtLarge View Post
57% (123 of 215) of the tracked games were won with stripes.



[true, but, in other words, ............ bump]
Do you have any other historical data on this?
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#9)
BRussell
AzB Silver Member
BRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond reputeBRussell has a reputation beyond repute
 
BRussell's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,793
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Apr 2013
   
04-10-2017, 10:20 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtLarge View Post
57% (123 of 215) of the tracked games were won with stripes.
That's interesting. Might just be random, except that the rules required the 1-ball on the spot in the rack.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#10)
AtLarge
AzB Gold Member
AtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 8,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 76 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2008
   
04-10-2017, 11:01 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by skip100 View Post
Do you have any other historical data on this?
Yes, I usually keep track of this in 8-Ball, although I don't always post it.

In the first WPS event it was 46% stripes (133 of 290 plus 3 unknowns).

In the 2016 Accu-Stats Make-It-Happen Invitational it was 50% stripes (125 of 249 plus 2 8-balls on the break).

So it bounces around. Maybe I'll look up more on this from the past at some point.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#11)
Danimal
AzB Silver Member
Danimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond reputeDanimal has a reputation beyond repute
 
Danimal's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 358
vCash: 500
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NNJ/NYC
   
04-10-2017, 11:09 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtLarge View Post
After WPS #1, I said that it certainly looked like Darren Appleton's tweaks to the WPA rules did make the game more difficult for top pros, and I wondered whether he would feel that he had gone far enough. We now have the answer -- no he didn't. Will he make any further changes in that direction? We'll see.
At this point, all he could do left is have the players break and do the spot shots out of the jaws of the top corner pockets.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#12)
denwhit
AzB Silver Member
denwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond repute
 
denwhit's Avatar
 
Status: Online
Posts: 942
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
   
05-01-2017, 10:56 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtLarge View Post
Here are some 8-Ball stats


- foul on all balls, and 3-foul rule in effect;
.
I did not know there is a three foul rule in 8 ball. Are you sure about that? I thought that rule only applied to 9 and 10 ball. ???


*Pool is not my only fun thing. I love passing those gas stations in the Tesla.
*US Navy 1964-1970, USS Chicago CG-11
* Mark Gregory walnut rails
*RKC set up w/ 42 pt. leveling system
*ProjectorProBilliards MicroComputer

Last edited by denwhit; 05-01-2017 at 11:39 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#13)
skip100
AzB Silver Member
skip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond reputeskip100 has a reputation beyond repute
 
skip100's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,171
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2013
   
05-01-2017, 11:43 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtLarge View Post
Yes, I usually keep track of this in 8-Ball, although I don't always post it.

In the first WPS event it was 46% stripes (133 of 290 plus 3 unknowns).

In the 2016 Accu-Stats Make-It-Happen Invitational it was 50% stripes (125 of 249 plus 2 8-balls on the break).

So it bounces around. Maybe I'll look up more on this from the past at some point.
That would be interesting. If you have enough data we could do a hypothesis test on whether the pros like stripes more than solids
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#14)
AtLarge
AzB Gold Member
AtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond reputeAtLarge has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 8,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 76 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2008
   
05-01-2017, 12:16 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by denwhit View Post
I did not know there is a three foul rule in 8 ball. Are you sure about that? I thought that rule only applied to 9 and 10 ball. ???
Yes, that was one of Darren's changes to the normal 8-Ball rules. But no streamed game was lost on 3 consecutive fouls.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#15)
denwhit
AzB Silver Member
denwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond reputedenwhit has a reputation beyond repute
 
denwhit's Avatar
 
Status: Online
Posts: 942
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
   
05-01-2017, 06:05 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtLarge View Post
Yes, that was one of Darren's changes to the normal 8-Ball rules. But no streamed game was lost on 3 consecutive fouls.
I am so surprised by that! Seems so easy to get three fouls when shooting at different balls... but what do I know? Give me ball in hand and a cluster of my balls and I think I might be able to get two more. Strange rule for 8 ball. I'm surprised the pros didn't use it.


*Pool is not my only fun thing. I love passing those gas stations in the Tesla.
*US Navy 1964-1970, USS Chicago CG-11
* Mark Gregory walnut rails
*RKC set up w/ 42 pt. leveling system
*ProjectorProBilliards MicroComputer

Last edited by denwhit; 05-02-2017 at 06:17 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.