Quick question about X-ahead matches

bdorman

Dead money
Silver Member
If the Alex-Scott match was an 8-ahead match, doesn't the winner have to lead by 8 racks to win?

The final score was 8-1 which puts Alex ahead by 7.

What am I missing?
 
Just because someone says the score was 8-1 does not make it true.
Alex made it to 8 ahead, the final score (which actually was 8 ahead but for the sake of explaining) was either 11-3 or 12-4.

gr. Dave
 
Without knowing for sure, I'd hazard a guess that the score of the game that put Alex ahead by 8 to win the match was 8-1... Ball count vs game count.

The best part about forums is being able to spout wild-ass guesses. Sorry if I'm completely off base.
 
Without knowing for sure, I'd hazard a guess that the score of the game that put Alex ahead by 8 to win the match was 8-1... Ball count vs game count.

The best part about forums is being able to spout wild-ass guesses. Sorry if I'm completely off base.

LOL!!!!

I know it was a long morning, but since Scott's last hurrah was a scratch, the final score of the final game I supposed was 8 to -1. Or 7 to -1 (Frost conceeds).

Something like that.

Scott won a game in the first five games (4-1, +3 Alex)

(I think) Scott won at least one game when Alex had reached 6.

Alex got to the hill three times but Scott backed it up twice before the last game so that's another two games for Scott.

I'm guessing 12-4, but I could have slept a game (literally).

Freddie <~~~ one tired puppy
 
Many thanks.

I didn't get to stay up past the 2nd rack. Had to get up at 5:30am CST.

When I checked in the main thread I picked up 8-1, not realizing that was ball-count (maybe).

Out of curiosity, what time did the match end?
 
Many thanks.

I didn't get to stay up past the 2nd rack. Had to get up at 5:30am CST.

When I checked in the main thread I picked up 8-1, not realizing that was ball-count (maybe).

Out of curiosity, what time did the match end?

Right around 630 AM EST/ 330 AM PST
 
If the Alex-Scott match was an 8-ahead match, doesn't the winner have to lead by 8 racks to win?

The final score was 8-1 which puts Alex ahead by 7.

What am I missing?

in an ahead set, you don't keep score with 2 coins, only one. It's no X-X, it's +X. Make sense?

People were saying Scott only won 3 or 4 games, but but the final score was Alex ahead 8 games. Make sense?
 
in an ahead set, you don't keep score with 2 coins, only one. It's no X-X, it's +X. Make sense?

People were saying Scott only won 3 or 4 games, but but the final score was Alex ahead 8 games. Make sense?

It makes sense, but it sure seems to leave out important information that is easily included in a 12-4 score.
 
It makes sense, but it sure seems to leave out important information that is easily included in a 12-4 score.

It was 9008 to 9000.

It doesn't make any difference what the score is. You need to be up 8.
 
It was 9008 to 9000.

It doesn't make any difference what the score is. You need to be up 8.

If someone asked me "How did the Cubs do last night?"

I could say "Cubs by 3", or "Cubs won 9 to 6."

Maybe a bettor is only interested in "Cubs by 3" but most fans get more information from "Cubs won 9 to 6."

Of course, this is completely theoretical....since it's the Cubs. :rolleyes:

But seriously, since most were expecting this to be a very long match, 12-4 tells me interesting information: that it wasn't long at all. +8 tells me nothing.
 
If someone asked me "How did the Cubs do last night?"

I could say "Cubs by 3", or "Cubs won 9 to 6."

Maybe a bettor is only interested in "Cubs by 3" but most fans get more information from "Cubs won 9 to 6."

Of course, this is completely theoretical....since it's the Cubs. :rolleyes:

But seriously, since most were expecting this to be a very long match, 12-4 tells me interesting information: that it wasn't long at all. +8 tells me nothing.

The interesting thing about ahead matches is they are much more subject to offers and negotiations. For example, let's say Alex gets to 6 ahead, he or Scott may offer the other a buyout for 10K or 15K. Sometimes this is a good strategy. Those last couple of games can be really hard to get. We didn't see it but the momentum can swing quickly. I think we were all expecting Scott to make one big push back.

Personally I think ahead sets are the best way to ensure the better player that night wins. Multiple races are like the electoral college - you can win more games and still lose.
 
If someone asked me "How did the Cubs do last night?"

I could say "Cubs by 3", or "Cubs won 9 to 6."

Maybe a bettor is only interested in "Cubs by 3" but most fans get more information from "Cubs won 9 to 6."

Of course, this is completely theoretical....since it's the Cubs. :rolleyes:

But seriously, since most were expecting this to be a very long match, 12-4 tells me interesting information: that it wasn't long at all. +8 tells me nothing.

The main difference with baseball, as with other sports, the winner is the winner when time runs out. In pool, you're racing to a certain score. If baseball were played race to 9 or 9 ahead, games could take a WHOLE lot of innings.

I understand what you're saying, but the good thing about an ahead set is that you really have to out play them. There is no hill hill. I saw a 10ahead set where one player was +9, then -4, then come back and win. And it took about 24 hours playing 10ball. Who knows how many games either of them won. But to beat someone by 10, is strong and says a lot about how the game went.
 
Back
Top