World Champion DOMINATION

JoeyA

JoeyA

Efren's Mini-Tourn BACKER
Silver Member
It doesn't exist in pocket billiards, IN ANY DISCIPLINE. I think the lack of domination in all disciplines, at the world class level, illustrates just how difficult pocket billiards can be.

When you look at the World Class Champions of the last decade, no one has dominated in any discipline. A couple of the world champions have won two titles in the same discipline, two years in a row but that is about it.

Are the days of domination in pocket billiards, a thing of the past?
 
Last edited:
JoeyA said:
It doesn't exist in pocket billiards, IN ANY DISCIPLINE. I think the lack of domination in all disciplines, at the world class level, illustrates just how difficult pocket billiards can be.

When you look at the World Class Champions of the last decade, no one has dominated in any discipline. A couple of the world champions have won two titles in the same discipline, two years in a row but that is about it.

Are the days of domination in pocket billiards, a thing of the past?
Click to expand...

To answer your question, yes! Look at the recent loss SVB suffered in the first round of the World 9-ball tournament. Who was the guy that beat him? I never even heard/seen his name before. On any given day anyone can beat anyone else and possibly knock them out of a tourney, or at least make the task of WINNING it very difficult.

Count the number of shots two players take in a typical tournament match. Then, figure that any one (or more) of those balls rolling bad for one of the players could mean the difference in that match. Todays players are so adept at running out, all it takes is one bad roll or one dry break to end their chance of winning the tournament.

You are still gonna see the occasional 1 or 2 year run of excellence like Mika had a few years ago (and that SVB is sorta in this year), but I doubt anyone in pocket billiards is gonna reign supreme for any great length of time, ever again.

Remember Daryl Peach's amazing short run of greatness he had a couple years ago? He's hardly a blip on the radar anymore as far as tournament winning goes (although he still finishes in the money a lot).

Pocket billiards IS a difficult sport. Add to that the luck/bad roll factor and it can get even more difficult for the players on the wrong side of them, even the best players in the world.

Maniac
 
Maniac said:
To answer your question, yes! Look at the recent loss SVB suffered in the first round of the World 9-ball tournament. Who was the guy that beat him? I never even heard/seen his name before. On any given day anyone can beat anyone else and possibly knock them out of a tourney, or at least make the task of WINNING it very difficult.

Count the number of shots two players take in a typical tournament match. Then, figure that any one (or more) of those balls rolling bad for one of the players could mean the difference in that match. Todays players are so adept at running out, all it takes is one bad roll or one dry break to end their chance of winning the tournament.

You are still gonna see the occasional 1 or 2 year run of excellence like Mika had a few years ago (and that SVB is sorta in this year), but I doubt anyone in pocket billiards is gonna reign supreme for any great length of time, ever again.

Remember Daryl Peach's amazing short run of greatness he had a couple years ago? He's hardly a blip on the radar anymore as far as tournament winning goes (although he still finishes in the money a lot).

Pocket billiards IS a difficult sport. Add to that the luck/bad roll factor and it can get even more difficult for the players on the wrong side of them, even the best players in the world.

Maniac
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was looking at the titles of the World Champions in various disciplines on the WPA site and that makes the case quite well.
 
JoeyA said:
Yeah, I was looking at the titles of the World Champions in various disciplines on the WPA site and that makes the case quite well.
Click to expand...

It's not just pool, Joey.
72 holes of golf is a fairer duration to establish a champion, but the last
15 majors have been won by 15 different golfers....and #1 on the ranking
list, Luke Donald, has never won a major.

For me, it puts into perspective the fact that the Lion is #71 on the WPA
list....I wonder how many players ranked above him would gamble with him?

Knowledge is a lot more available now at everything....lots of new faces
that will run racks on anybody.
The days of someone like Earl winning 6 world titles and 5 US Opens may
be over.

I would like to see straight pool and 1-pocket become the dominant games.
 
There are too many good players, longer races

I think you should make the game more offense oriented.
They do this in the NFL.

Here are my thoughts?

The races were longer, the better player should win.
Go to push out, that way you will see great shots and shotmakers?
Winner breaks, this should make the games quicker for the longer races?
 
JoeyA said:
It doesn't exist in pocket billiards, IN ANY DISCIPLINE. I think the lack of domination in all disciplines, at the world class level, illustrates just how difficult pocket billiards can be.

When you look at the World Class Champions of the last decade, no one has dominated in any discipline. A couple of the world champions have won two titles in the same discipline, two years in a row but that is about it.

Are the days of domination in pocket billiards, a thing of the past?
Click to expand...

I think the Philippines will change that this year. At least, just for this tournament. They are all playing so well, I think you will see them rising as far as the brackets will allow (meaning they may be knocking one another out--not sure how they decide who goes where on the seeding).
 
BarneyCalip said:
I think you should make the game more offense oriented.
They do this in the NFL.

Here are my thoughts?

The races were longer, the better player should win.
Go to push out, that way you will see great shots and shotmakers?
Winner breaks, this should make the games quicker for the longer races?
Click to expand...

I could live with this....I especially hate to see alternate breaks in a
championship..a championship by definition should be elitist..alternate
breaks levels the playing field somewhat...which is good for handicap
tournaments and leagues...but may not establish a true champion.

I could get tired of seeing another tournament where the high run is a
one -pack...probably tied by everyone in the field.:rolleyes:
 
A lot of random things can happen in pool, even SVB can get the cue ball kicked in the side pocket on the break no matter how good and controlled his break is, shit can happen. I think that's why it's harder to dominate something like pool that has random variables that you can't always 100% control, a little luck never hurts.
 
I think everybody knows the anwser. There are few millions players in this planet can pull out a 5-pack now, one match race to 9 alternate break lol, it's like play 1 tie-break in tennis.

The day we see a World 10 ball Champion with 64 players ( even 32 players like the World Snooker Championship ) , Seeded bracket , simple-KO, race to 20 winner break. That day you will never see Darry Peach or Hudji See, nothing against these two, but I'm sorry they are not at the level of : Souquet, Darren, Wu, Alcano, Orcullo, Alex, Bustamante, Shane...
That day you will see a real domination :smile:
 
no real test right now

I agree with those that say the current formats don't let the skill differences produce the winner. I don't really know the answer and sometimes a dominant champion can harm a form of competition so I'm not even sure the crapshoot part of competitions is a bad thing for the sport. Little doubt in my mind it is bad for the best competitors.

We can't make events take longer so any solution seems to involve a change in format or equipment. Would some kind of scramble or round robin, even a skills test serve better as a preliminary sorting of competitors and then the main event feature a 32 or 64 player field that had to be qualified for in the prelim?

I tried Allan Jr's game a little this morning. I don't think it is the solution simply because the scoring format seems like it would lead to a lot of ties if you were using it to sort out players in a format that had all entrants basically heads up at first.

A handful of things would be available with a real tour but the current tourney format means some people have a fairly easy trip until deep in the competition while others might face two monsters and go two and out although they are playing much better than someone else that went deep. We need some sort of time trials, if for nothing else to buld the bracketes in a more equatable manner.

Theory is fairly easy and in theory I know a handful of approaches that I think would make tournaments fairer. The catch is that there are issues trying to implement any of these fine thoeries! :rolleyes:

I think something close to this has been done but I have thought that a gambling tourney might be fun. Give everyone chips or script that nobody knows what it looks like to copy before the event and let the players gamble on their set each round. Each round would have higher and higher minimum and maximum bets but between those two limits the players could decide what to bet with some kind of rough justice style of quick arbritation to decide the bet if they couldn't decide after five minutes of discussion max. Lack of aggression or losses could force you out of the event as the field gets pared down by who has the most cheese. This could be gamed of course but so can every other pool tourney format ever devised.

Hu
 
ShootingArts said:
We can't make events take longer so any solution seems to involve a change in format or equipment. Would some kind of scramble or round robin, even a skills test serve better as a preliminary sorting of competitors and then the main event feature a 32 or 64 player field that had to be qualified for in the prelim?
Click to expand...

There is already a skills test available, it's called the PAT system endorsed by the WPA. Having built my own training regimen based around the PAT tests I can testify to their value as a great means of truly defining a score of one's skill set. The problem is that no one in the USA looks at the tests, takes the tests, none of the amateur pool organizations promote the tests, or requires a test to be taken as a means of measuring someone's skill for handicapping. But in Europe and Asia tests are conducted all over the place.

The only major pros to have taken the tests are Thorsten Hohman, Ralf Souquet, Jasmin Ouschan, Marcus Chamat. You cant find any American pros to have taken the test, you wont find any other women pros to have taken the tests except for Jasmin.

If every major pro player in the world took the tests you could have a definitive breakdown of how pros compare against each other in terms of skill level. Because they all would have taken the same tests. And if all the amateur pool organizations encouraged their members to take the tests they could use that information to better refine their own handicapping systems and reduce the issue of sandbagging at the amateur level. And then the amateur players would all know and understand how they compare to their favorite pro players.

And at the international level, pro world event organizers could use PAT scores as part of their seeding process in future events. And combine PAT scores with other events results info to define world rankings.

The adoption of the PAT tests across the board could offer alot of benefits to players and event organizers worldwide. But no one seems to think along those lines.
 
World champion domination

The formats are wrong for a lot of reasons.
PAT is a great testing system - but that is not the same as competition.

Sometimes too many games can also be distractive - because there are 5 or 6 world champions.

Pool is blessed to have so much variety - and cursed because there is so much variety.

So how to determine which game (discipline) to use?
And which tables (pocket sizes) to use?

The push towards alternate breaks (in the games currently played) just increases the opportunity for different players and helps to create the many champions.

I have part of the answer - but this problem will plague us until there are some fundamental changes.

Btw, I have always felt that a dominant player would help promote the game and garner more attention to the game.

Mark griffin
 
BarneyCalip said:
I think you should make the game more offense oriented.
They do this in the NFL.

Here are my thoughts?

The races were longer, the better player should win.
Go to push out, that way you will see great shots and shotmakers?
Winner breaks, this should make the games quicker for the longer races?
Click to expand...

How many spectators would be sitting in the stands or wtching the stream if the best player was winning ten to five in a race to thirteen.

Just us diehards Barney. The tournaments today with short races and alternate break are designed for more exciting hill/hill matches to attract more spectators.

We had a dominant player in all disciplines, Efren, and as much as we have enjoyed him, he never was appreciated as much as he should have been in this country IMO
 
Mark Griffin said:
The formats are wrong for a lot of reasons.
PAT is a great testing system - but that is not the same as competition.

Sometimes too many games can also be distractive - because there are 5 or 6 world champions.

Pool is blessed to have so much variety - and cursed because there is so much variety.

So how to determine which game (discipline) to use?
And which tables (pocket sizes) to use?

The push towards alternate breaks (in the games currently played) just increases the opportunity for different players and helps to create the many champions.

I have part of the answer - but this problem will plague us until there are some fundamental changes.

Btw, I have always felt that a dominant player would help promote the game and garner more attention to the game.

Mark griffin
Click to expand...

As usual :thumbup: in all points!
 
It can go either way

Mark Griffin said:
Btw, I have always felt that a dominant player would help promote the game and garner more attention to the game.

Mark griffin
Click to expand...


Mark,

A great champion, a great person and champion, can be a huge benefit for a sport as long as they have legitimate challengers. A true monster that is head and shoulders above the competition can hurt a sport, especially if he or she isn't likeable as a person. You see a great deal of this on the local level, a dominant player that kills a competition. Any time rules are changed directed at one person it is usually due to this problem.

A fine handsome fellow that speaks well or an attractive young lady that speaks well could do a lot for the sport if they got some attention. A short fat man or lady that had no couth that was equally skilled would insure the sport stayed buried another decade or two. Fair or not you have to have a "complete package" to market as the music industry says.

The top earning athlete a few years back never won a major singles event. She does have a very nice smile though.

Hu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top