Break Stats -- 4-Pocket 10-Ball Challenge, Appleton vs. Strickland, May 2016

A

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Here are some results from the Darren Appleton vs. Earl Strickland 4-Pocket 10-Ball Challenge played the past 3 days at Kings of Billiards in Akron, Ohio. Pay-per-view streaming was provided by AZBtv.

This was a race to 6 sets, with each set being a race to 9 games. If it had reached a 5-5 tie in sets, the 11th set would have been to 11 games. Appleton won 6 sets to 1, with scores, in order, of: 9-7, 7-9, 9-2, 9-5, 9-8, 9-8, and 9-7 (total 61-46). The first 3 sets were played Friday (May 6), the second 3 sets Saturday (May 7), and the last set today (May 8).

Conditions -- The conditions for this event included:
- 9-foot Diamond table with 4¼" corner pockets and no side pockets;​
- Simonis blue cloth;​
- Aramith Tournament balls with a measles cue ball;​
- Magic Rack racking template;​
- jump cues not allowed;​
- referee racks with the 1-ball on the foot string and the 2- and 3-balls on the back corners​
- winner breaks from anywhere behind the head string;​
- call-shot rules (but not call safe);​
- the winning 10-ball must be the last ball made (spot it otherwise); and​
- 40-second shot clock with one 40-second extension per player per rack.​

Appleton broke 60 times, with the following results:
  • Made at least one ball and did not foul -- 15 (25%)
    .....Won the game -- 10 (17%)
    .....Lost the game -- 5 (8%)
  • Fouled on the break -- 4 (8%)
    .....Won the game -- 1 (2%)
    .....Lost the game -- 3 (5%)
  • Broke dry -- 41 (68%)
    .....Won the game -- 21 (35%)
    .....Lost the game -- 20 (33%)

Strickland broke 47 times, with the following results:
  • Made at least one ball and did not foul -- 14 (30%)
    .....Won the game -- 7 (15%)
    .....Lost the game -- 7 (15%)
  • Fouled on the break -- 1 (2%)
    .....Won the game -- 0
    .....Lost the game -- 1 (2%)
  • Broke dry -- 32 (68%)
    .....Won the game -- 11 (23%)
    .....Lost the game -- 21 (45%)

For the two players combined, the breaker made at least one ball and did not foul 27% of the time (29 of 107), won 47% of the games (50 of 107), won 59% of the games (17 of 29) in which he made a ball on the break without fouling, broke and ran 1% of the games (1 of 107), and broke and ran 3% of the games (1 of 29) in which he made a ball on the break without fouling.

Break-and-run games -- on all breaks:
Appleton -- 1 of 60 (2%)​
Strickland -- 0 of 47 (0%)​
Total -- 1 of 107 (1%)​

Break-and-run games -- on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Appleton -- 1 of 15 (7%)​
Strickland -- 0 of 14 (0%)​
Total -- 1 of 29 (3%)​

Fouls (approximately):
Appleton -- 17 (including 4 on the break)​
Strickland -- 31 (including 1 on the break)​
Total -- 48​
​
Missed shots (approximately):
Appleton -- 46​
Strickland -- 48​
Total -- 94​

Run-outs from first shot after break:
By Appleton after his own successful break -- 1 of 15 (7%)​
By Appleton after Strickland's failed break -- 4 of 33 (12%)​
By Appleton, total -- 5 of 48 (10%)​
​
By Strickland after his own successful break -- 0 of 14 (0%)​
By Strickland after Appleton's failed break -- 10 of 45 (22%)​
By Strickland, total -- 10 of 59 (17%)​
​
Total for Appleton and Strickland -- 15 of 107 (14%)​

Run-outs from first shot after Appleton's break:
By Appleton -- 1 of 15 (7%)​
By Strickland -- 10 of 45 (22%)​
Total -- 11 of 60 (18%)​

Run-outs from first shot after Strickland's break:
By Strickland -- 0 of 14 (0%)​
By Appleton -- 4 of 33 (12%)​
Total -- 4 of 47 (9%)​

Match length = 10 hours and 24 minutes (approx.), for an average of 5.8 minutes per game. [Note: This includes lagging and racking but excludes intervals between sets.]
 
Last edited:
Miscellany from the data for the 4-Pocket Challenge:

• The most balls made on a single break was 2, done twice by each player (but one of Appleton's was fouled).

• The average number of balls made on the break was 0.3 (this includes dry and fouled breaks). On successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul), the average was 1.1. These two averages were the same for both players.

• The longest game -- 20 innings by each player -- was at hill/hill in Set 5. After a long safety and kicking battle, Appleton prevailed for the game and set win.

• The average elapsed time for the 7 races to 9 was 89 minutes.

• Breaking fouls averaged 1 for every 21 games, other fouls 1 for every 2.2 games, and missed shots 1 for every 1.1 games.

• About 69% of the games involved one or more safeties.
 
Proof the break was a non-event at best on this table, or in Earl's case, a liability. These are two powerful breakers, but I wonder if Shane would fare differently. Shane makes the corner balls a lot 4 rails. His break is strong enough to send the balls flying up-table too.
 
Last edited:
TATE said:
Proof the break was a non-event at best on this table, or in Earl's case, a liability. These are two powerful breakers, but I wonder if Shane would fare differently.
Click to expand...

Interesting question about Shane. Someone, in chat I think, speculated that Shane would find a way to make one of the corner balls 4 rails more than Appleton or Strickland did.

If this match is typical of what pros can do on that table, I think the table goes too far.

I was eager to watch this match to see what differences would follow from eliminating the side pockets. But then I was disappointed to see that they also made the corners smaller than we normally see on a Diamond. So the end result that we watched was the product of both changes rather than just the elimination of the side pockets.

It was nice to see the increased level of interaction among the players. But if a table leads top pros to (1) break successfully less than 30% of the time, (2) break and run almost not at all, and (3) run out after the break only one time in seven, I think the table has gone too far.
 
AtLarge said:
Interesting question about Shane. Someone, in chat I think, speculated that Shane would find a way to make one of the corner balls 4 rails more than Appleton or Strickland did.

If this match is typical of what pros can do on that table, I think the table goes too far.

I was eager to watch this match to see what differences would follow from eliminating the side pockets. But then I was disappointed to see that they also made the corners smaller than we normally see on a Diamond. So the end result that we watched was the product of both changes rather than just the elimination of the side pockets.

It was nice to see the increased level of interaction among the players. But if a table leads top pros to (1) break successfully less than 30% of the time, (2) break and run almost not at all, and (3) run out after the break only one time in seven, I think the table has gone too far.
Click to expand...

These are break stats more worthy of one pocket than 10 ball! :wink:

One of the issues is, with the cut angle of a Diamond pro and the shelf depth, 4 1/4" plays smaller than my Brunswick with 4" pockets (and small angle). One of my friends had a table set up like that and I rattled a lot of balls that would otherwise drop on my 4" Brunswick. The pockets are just not that receptive. This is important in break shots, where balls come in from all angles.

Good thing they dehumidified the room. If not those pockets would have played like a snooker table.
 
Strange, to me, looking at the stats, the match shouldn't have been so lop sided.

Earl is better at running out....by quite a bit.
...so Daz wins the fighting games...which sends Earl into give-up mode.

Earl reminds me of a trotter of years gone by...Replica Herbert....he had a lotta speed, but he used to break a lot also....like Earl, he was hard to beat if he didn't snap.
...so a lot of race trackers just wouldn't bet on any race Replica was in....
...he could make you sick betting on or against.


As usual, thanx AtLarge
 
Thanks AtLarge!

It seems this game plays out a bit like a battle on the colors in snooker. Mostly safes and few risks taken. Interesting to watch at times, but it further reduces risk-laden offensive shot-making, which imho is what our games need more of, not less.

I don't think Earl thought his dream game up very well. He needs a game that discourages safety in favor of shot making. There is a neat method in rotation games to achieve this.
1. Incoming Player has 2 options. To play at any ball first shot, then proceed in rotation, or to send the player back in, giving him the same option.
2. Make it a point per ball, and play any ball first after break, then proceed to rotation.

This way the shot-maker, ball runner, as Earl presumes he is, wins, provided conditions are tough enough to not make it a breaking game.

For a twist, I play this with 2 rail or carom / combo into/off an additional nominated ball as a positional requirement. This way, there are no Cosmo outs. Running a rack under this format is very tough, but there are plenty of huge shots made.

Colin
 
Last edited:
Interesting stats

At large,

thanks for taking the time to keep track & post.

Slim
 
JoshStodola said:
How many balls did Earl rake? Sad to watch :boring2:
Click to expand...

49

I was keeping track of concessions, but it is possible that I missed a minor one somewhere. Here's what my notes say.

• Appleton conceded 1 ball, the 10-ball that he hung in Game 16 of Set 2 -- the ball that would have tied the set at 8-8 but, instead, gave the set to Earl 7-9.

• Strickland conceded 49 balls in 16 games:
.....the 10-ball alone 4 times
.....the 9-ball and 10-ball 4 times
.....the last 3 balls 3 times
.....the last 4 balls once
.....the last 5 balls once
.....the last 6 balls twice
.....the last 7 balls once
 
Colin Colenso said:
... I don't think Earl thought his dream game up very well. He needs a game that discourages safety in favor of shot making. There is a neat method in rotation games to achieve this.
1. Incoming Player has 2 options. To play at any ball first shot, then proceed in rotation, or to send the player back in, giving him the same option.
2. Make it a point per ball, and play any ball first after break, then proceed to rotation.
...
Click to expand...

That's an interesting variation; I'd like to see it played!
 
AtLarge said:
49

I was keeping track of concessions, but it is possible that I missed a minor one somewhere. Here's what my notes say.

• Appleton conceded 1 ball, the 10-ball that he hung in Game 16 of Set 2 -- the ball that would have tied the set at 8-8 but, instead, gave the set to Earl 7-9.

• Strickland conceded 49 balls in 16 games:
.....the 10-ball alone 4 times
.....the 9-ball and 10-ball 4 times
.....the last 3 balls 3 times
.....the last 4 balls once
.....the last 5 balls once
.....the last 6 balls twice
.....the last 7 balls once
Click to expand...
Damn....I pondered about asking you that...but thought it might be too demanding.
....great stuff
 
Once again a huge Thank You to AtLarge for providing these interesting stats! btw, it was me who mentioned in the chat that I am convinced, that Shane would find the break spot and speed to get one or both of the standard 4-railers in the lower corners.

1 of 107 breaks has been a run-out! That figure is really startling! 68% dry breaks.... this inevitably leeds to safety exchanges, which I like. But this is not Earl's game. He was outplayed by the grinder Appleton in that department. by miles. Earl should focus on 9ball. It fits his style of play much better. I am sure, he won't like to hear this... but it is my opinion.
 
bicki said:
Once again a huge Thank You to AtLarge for providing these interesting stats! btw, it was me who mentioned in the chat that I am convinced, that Shane would find the break spot and speed to get one or both of the standard 4-railers in the lower corners.

1 of 107 breaks has been a run-out! That figure is really startling! 68% dry breaks.... this inevitably leeds to safety exchanges, which I like. But this is not Earl's game. He was outplayed by the grinder Appleton in that department. by miles. Earl should focus on 9ball. It fits his style of play much better. I am sure, he won't like to hear this... but it is my opinion.
Click to expand...

Thanks, bicki. My "fouled" category above includes both wet and dry fouls, so I can break it down a bit more as follows:
- wet and no foul -- 29 (27%)
- dry and no foul -- 73 (68%)
- wet and fouled -- 2 (2%)
- dry and fouled -- 3 (3%)

So, ignoring fouls, they made a ball on 31 breaks (29%) and didn't make a ball on 76 breaks (71%).
 
I think the break and run for this event is extremely low. No way would I expect that to be repeated by Johnny and John next time.
 
tate said:
i think the break and run for this event is extremely low. No way would i expect that to be repeated by johnny and john next time.
Click to expand...

i think the break & run will be very low no matter who plays on this table.
No side pockets & the narrow angle of the corner pocket just keeps balls from dropping on the break.
You cant even jaw two balls together at the mouth of the pocket, they just won't fit.

Slim
 
AtLarge said:
That's an interesting variation; I'd like to see it played!
Click to expand...
It's a bit too easy on standard tables and standard rules for top pros. But would force the odd aggressive offensive shot that we normally don't see, as a safety is a better percentage option.

I also include a breaking rule, to take out the break LUCK factor.

After the break, the player breaker can play from where the CB finishes, or off any position off either end rail. This includes when scratching or dry break. Only ball off table ends visit. So if you scratch, you can place CB anywhere on either end rail.... AND shoot at any ball first shot, but must play in rotation after that. Hence, like tennis, breaker always gets an advantage, but break is won by potting the final ball of the preceding rack.

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