True Double Elimination vs Extended Game Single Elimination Match

HawaiianEye

HawaiianEye

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I don't care who won and both players played like true champions, but, if I got my numbers right, the following occurred between the final two players during the course of the tournament:

Chang defeats SVB 11-4 and puts Shane in the loser bracket

SVB defeats Chang 13-9 in the extended format final and wins the tournament

If my math is correct, between the two matches combined:

Chang wins 22 games and SVB wins 17

How is that fair? Chang was in the winner bracket and is 5 games ahead in total wins.

Shane should have had to beat him two sets in a row to win, IMHO.
 
They did away with the double sets because the players have a plane to catch.

Jim Rempe's words during the finals match between Efren and Earl in the famous Sands finals where Efren did the zigzag kick to win it .

CJ Wiley had the same complaint after losing to Efren in the finals of the Bike Open . He was on the winners' side. Beat Efren earlier.
Lost in the final match to Efren.

Just imagine the finals today lasting four hours .
2 sets of race to 11.
It would have been exhausting to the audience.
 
JoeyInCali said:
They did away with the double sets because the players have a plane to catch.

Jim Rempe's words during the finals match between Efren and Earl in the famous Sands finals where Efren did the zigzag kick to win it .

CJ Wiley had the same complaint after losing to Efren in the finals of the Bike Open . He was on the winners' side. Beat Efren earlier.
Lost in the final match to Efren.

Just imagine the finals today lasting four hours .
2 sets of race to 11.
It would have been exhausting to the audience.
Click to expand...

Screw the audience. They ain't playing. I'm sure there are other airplanes flying. I just flew thousands of miles to the mainland and back a couple weeks ago. I had plenty of choices.
 
U.S Open 10b 2013, Rodney double dipped Dennis in the finals.

I prefer True Double Elimination.

Start playing a little earlier in the day. Matches didn't start til 1pm est on Saturday. The other days, it started at 10:30est.
 
gxman said:
U.S Open 10b 2013, Rodney double dipped Dennis in the finals.

I prefer True Double Elimination.

Start playing a little earlier in the day. Matches didn't start til 1pm est on Saturday. The other days, it started at 10:30est.
Click to expand...

It should be true double elimination in the finals, if the rest of the tournament is played that way.
 
Modified double elimination is the best way to play, imo. Doing full double elimination adds way too much additional time and matches.

I would have to see some statistics showing there is a true major benefit to using it. Otherwise if you lose in the first 2 rounds then you go to losers side, after that and you are out if you lose.
 
Skippy27 said:
Modified double elimination is the best way to play, imo. Doing full double elimination adds way too much additional time and matches.

I would have to see some statistics showing there is a true major benefit to using it. Otherwise if you lose in the first 2 rounds then you go to losers side, after that and you are out if you lose.
Click to expand...

The MOST it can add is ONE additional match for the title;)
 
HawaiianEye said:
I don't care who won and both players played like true champions, but, if I got my numbers right, the following occurred between the final two players during the course of the tournament:

Chang defeats SVB 11-4 and puts Shane in the loser bracket

SVB defeats Chang 13-9 in the extended format final and wins the tournament

If my math is correct, between the two matches combined:

Chang wins 22 games and SVB wins 17

How is that fair? Chang was in the winner bracket and is 5 games ahead in total wins.

Shane should have had to beat him two sets in a row to win, IMHO.
Click to expand...

It depends on how someone looks at it. I think the path Shane had to take to win was way more difficult. His final record 12 wins 1 loss (with no easy opponent). 138 games won.
Chang 7 wins 1 loss. 86 games won. Seems fair that SVB is the winner.

I have been in the finals of hundreds of tournaments some double elimination with one final match, some true double elimination. Some of the time I was on the winner side and sometimes came from the loser side. I never once thought about how either format was fair or unfair and I never cared. I am pretty sure most players are the same way because I have never had any of my opponents ever complain to me.
 
HawaiianEye said:
I don't care who won and both players played like true champions, but, if I got my numbers right, the following occurred between the final two players during the course of the tournament:

Chang defeats SVB 11-4 and puts Shane in the loser bracket

SVB defeats Chang 13-9 in the extended format final and wins the tournament

If my math is correct, between the two matches combined:

Chang wins 22 games and SVB wins 17

How is that fair? Chang was in the winner bracket and is 5 games ahead in total wins.

Shane should have had to beat him two sets in a row to win, IMHO.
Click to expand...

11+9=20.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
Skippy27 said:
Modified double elimination is the best way to play, imo. Doing full double elimination adds way too much additional time and matches.

I would have to see some statistics showing there is a true major benefit to using it. Otherwise if you lose in the first 2 rounds then you go to losers side, after that and you are out if you lose.
Click to expand...



The "true benefit" is that the player that claws his way through the tournament to the hot seat gets the same consideration as every player that gets sent to the B side earlier in the tournament, not being out yet because he's only lost once.

I always found it unusual the guy that has played the best through the tournament suffers this penalty at the end
 
Double elimination is OK in earlier stages of an event because it guarantees players two chances and this ensures that players who travel long distances are not discouraged from entering an event. It is no fun to find yourself headed home two hours after a tournament starts.
But the format should change to knockout as soon as players reach the prize money. So it is then a case of another chance or cash in but not both.

The 'got to catch a plane' crap is ludicrous. The finalists will have earned a tidy sum of money enough to reschedule a ticket. These are professional players, not pool tourists.

Even spectators should plan for the extra time to play a second final. Chang conceded only four racks in defeating Shane. Then when they played again Jung Lin racked up 9. So they could have played the second final on the basis that Shane would have had to score 9 racks before his opponent chalked up 4.

For 41 years they have been tinkering with this event. How long do they need?

Apart from this gripe it must have been the best US Open to date. I think that it is probably the current top tournament in the game in terms of qualiity players attending.
HawaiianEye said:
I don't care who won and both players played like true champions, but, if I got my numbers right, the following occurred between the final two players during the course of the tournament:

Chang defeats SVB 11-4 and puts Shane in the loser bracket

SVB defeats Chang 13-9 in the extended format final and wins the tournament

If my math is correct, between the two matches combined:

Chang wins 22 games and SVB wins 17

How is that fair? Chang was in the winner bracket and is 5 games ahead in total wins.

Shane should have had to beat him two sets in a row to win, IMHO.
Click to expand...
 
HawaiianEye said:
Screw the audience. They ain't playing. I'm sure there are other airplanes flying. I just flew thousands of miles to the mainland and back a couple weeks ago. I had plenty of choices.
Click to expand...

I agree, i was there one day for the 10:30 am matches and stood until sometime after 1 am. I was fine, a second set would of went an additional hour ? a small price to pay for a 50K prize.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Although playing the last 32 or 16 or 8 as single elimination is a good option.
Click to expand...

Yes, and fans have no problem accepting using double elimination to populate an 8 or 16 or 32 player elimination championship stage.

But when you use double elimination to populated a 2-player champion stage, they get all bent out of shape.

That's the way you have to look at this. It's not "modified double elimination." Rather you choose in advance to have a championship match between two players who emerge from the crowd. Double elimination is used to determine who those two players are.
 
Watch out for what you ask for with double elimination down to 4 or 8 players then single elimination. Example was the Pro 10 Ball at Super Billiards Expo this year. They didn't do a re-draw and the Winners side players were punished by having to play each other in the semi-finals to and the one lost side got a spot in the final. The format for the Open is fair and is stated in advance, not some change made on the fly.

Good job by Pat and his crew on a Great Event! Congratulations to all of the players for some of the best pool in recent history!

Congratulations to Shane!

Ricky Bryant

Also to clarify this was not a Tournament Directors decision bu the promoter. ALSO the Great Team at SBX have reviewed the format and are making changes to improve for the future.
 
Last edited:
mikepage said:
Yes, and fans have no problem accepting using double elimination to populate an 8 or 16 or 32 player elimination championship stage.

But when you use double elimination to populated a 2-player champion stage, they get all bent out of shape.

That's the way you have to look at this. It's not "modified double elimination." Rather you choose in advance to have a championship match between two players who emerge from the crowd. Double elimination is used to determine who those two players are.
Click to expand...

Unless those fans are Americans on AZ Billiards:wink:
 
HawaiianEye said:
I don't care who won and both players played like true champions, but, if I got my numbers right, the following occurred between the final two players during the course of the tournament:

Chang defeats SVB 11-4 and puts Shane in the loser bracket

SVB defeats Chang 13-9 in the extended format final and wins the tournament

If my math is correct, between the two matches combined:

Chang wins 22 games and SVB wins 17

How is that fair? Chang was in the winner bracket and is 5 games ahead in total wins.

Shane should have had to beat him two sets in a row to win, IMHO.
Click to expand...
Yeah he has to win twice, and everyone gets a gold star for participation so we don't hurt their self esteem. And no you didn't get your numbers right. (I'm new at this Internet, did I do that right?)

Seriously, pool needs to dump double elimination. It sounds like Darren Appleton's new 8-ball series is going to be single elimination. Who else wants to change a big tournament to single elim? CSI played around with group stage + single elim final stage, and it confused people and then SVB replacing a forfeiting Souquet caused a backlash. Just go all-in with complete single elimination like most every other sport.

I can understand amateur tournaments being double elim - they just want to play. But pro tournaments should all be single elimination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top