Watching professional pool, do you prefer winner break or alternate break?

Watching professional pool would you prefer winner breaks, or alternate break?

  • Winner breaks

  • Alternate break

Results are only viewable after voting.
I personally like to watch alternate break, at a high level. Mistakes are more punishing, more pressure to hold your break and win. It also leads to more hill hill/ closer matches, which is exciting for me as a viewer. If two players are on (usually at a high level) you see tight close hill/hill matches all the time. If a player gets blown out in alternate break, they deserve to lose anyway, as they're not performing very well.

When I play I don't have a preference, I'm good with either or. But I do enjoy watching alternate break better.
 
I think someone's suggestion in another thread of automatic pushout after the break is in interesting thought. Anything is better than watching a wired wing ball fly in the pocket and then a professional player making short work of a wide open spread. I even found myself praying several times for clusters and hooked object balls just to break up the monotony.
 
jokrswylde said:
I think someone's suggestion in another thread of automatic pushout after the break is in interesting thought. Anything is better than watching a wired wing ball fly in the pocket and then a professional player making short work of a wide open spread. I even found myself praying several times for clusters and hooked object balls just to break up the monotony.
Click to expand...
Should play 10 ball at the pro level. 10 on the break doesn't count. Combos on the 10 spot and scratch on the break is behind the line. Probably more fine tuning but it can be done. They don't have to reinvent the wheel. I was just watching an old World open on youtube and they played scratch on the break was behind the line.
You have to wonder why they changed rules making the game worse. Rules are not arbitrary, rules prove their value or lack of, once put into practice. Then you can tweak them.
 
Last edited:
Maniac said:
Depends on the length of the race.
Click to expand...
Well yes, but in a professional event there shouldnt be any race lesser that at least 7. I don't care how many sets you play or if you do a shootout or not.

In the case of a race to 7. I still prefer to see Winner Breaks.
 
Icon of Sin said:
Well yes, but in a professional event there shouldnt be any race lesser that at least 7. I don't care how many sets you play or if you do a shootout or not.

In the case of a race to 7. I still prefer to see Winner Breaks.
Click to expand...
Races to 11 or 13 would definitely keep one player from running out the set in a winner breaks format. Races to 7 games or less is a joke. There is just no need in having two sets of short races. So, I agree with your post.
 
middleofnowhere said:
You can play variations. Say, play alt breaks or loser breaks till one player is on the hill. Then switch to winner breaks. If the trailing player makes a comes back and ties the score, the winner now must win by two to determine the match.

If you really want to, you can fashion a set of rules that are really fair as well as enjoyable by the spectator.

I believe no matter how you play a final should be win by two and iliminate hill hill.

Whether you play winner breaks, loser brakes, alternate brakes or however. The flaws in these rules show up when put into practice. That's why most rule books seem so long because you have to fix things so they work in most all circumstances. It can't really be all one way or all the other.

Rules can't be ambiguous if you can't explain why a rule exists and it's not a very good rule.
Click to expand...

Thats a great idea. Provide a player a chance to come back with winner breaks at a point.
 
I only like winner breaks if the conditions are tougher than they were for this recent world championship.
 
Gatz said:
I personally like to watch alternate break, at a high level. Mistakes are more punishing, more pressure to hold your break and win. It also leads to more hill hill/ closer matches, which is exciting for me as a viewer.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Mistakes are less punishing with alternate break because your longest possible trip to the chair is two racks without returning. There's less pressure to hold your break for the exact same reason --- opponent won't have a chance to run a package on you. That said, you are 100% correct in your final point that alternate break brings more close matches than winner breaks, although, as is so often noted on the forum, fewer comebacks.

I think knowing Albin, who ran a lot of packages on his way to the final, was the guy in the chair gave Shane an added sense of urgency in the later stages of the championship match, which may well have helped him to make sure Albin's chances were few.

Of course, you know what you enjoy. Thanks for sharing your point of view.
 
middleofnowhere said:
give an example.
Click to expand...
Breaker scratches on the break. Incoming player has to shoot from behind the line. The one-ball is up on the head rail with multiple balls blocking its path. It cannot be hit, by a straight path or a kick.
Guess who's about to get ball-in-hand anywhere on the table??? Other scenarios, but I'm not going to post them. I think you should just think and you will come up with some yourself. But if anyone would like to add some, then knock yourselves out.
 
Maniac said:
Breaker scratches on the break. Incoming player has to shoot from behind the line. The one-ball is up on the head rail with multiple balls blocking its path. It cannot be hit, by a straight path or a kick.
Guess who's about to get ball-in-hand anywhere on the table??? Other scenarios, but I'm not going to post them. I think you should just think and you will come up with some yourself. But if anyone would like to add some, then knock yourselves out.
Click to expand...
That's not how the rules work. If the 1 ball or lowest numbered ball is also behind the line it spots.

When we would gamble in the pool room, if the lowest numbered ball was behind the line you threw it down and shot the next lowest ball in play. You may have to throw down two or three balls. 9 ball was designed to be a fast moving gambling game back then.

Straight pool players hated 9 ball and often would not play it. Different places played by different rules but the game still usually had a big element of luck.

The rules were often different it you were playing two handed or a ring game. We often played ring games with 3, 4, 5, players. You may go several games and never shoot. There was no ball in hand in those games. It was honest attempt, and if the guy didn't hit the ball and you didn't like the shot you made him shoot again.
 
Last edited:
Scratching on the break should be a full table ball in hand penalty.

Otherwise it's just another copout for players to not work on their break as much as other players do.
 
middleofnowhere said:
That's not how the rules work. If the 1 ball or lowest numbered ball is also behind the line it spots. Rules are designed to fix problems not create them.

When we would gamble in the pool room, if the lowest numbered ball was behind the line you threw it down and shot the next lowest ball in play. You may have to throw down two or three balls. 9 ball was designed to be a fast moving gambling game back then.

Straight pool players hated 9 ball and often would not play it. Different places played by different rules but the game still usually had a big element of luck.

The rules were often different it you were playing two handed or a ring game. We often played ring games with 3, 4, 5, players. You may go several games and never shoot. There was no ball in hand in those games. It was honest attempt, and if the guy didn't hit the ball and you didn't like the shot you made him shoot again.
Click to expand...
None of those rules were mentioned in any previous post. Let's just make the rules up as we go.
 
Maniac said:
None of those rules were mentioned in any previous post. Let's just make the rules up as we go.
Click to expand...
Watch any old accu-stats video with the BIH behind the line rule. They always spotted the one ball if it was in the kitchen.
 
Maniac said:
None of those rules were mentioned in any previous post. Let's just make the rules up as we go.
Click to expand...
You created a what if scenario, I'm just saying that it has already been dealt with in previous rules in 9 ball. The game was predominantly played originally as push out. No one plays that way anymore either.

You can come up with what if scenario's but they won't be something that has not been thought of and fixed by a rule.

If you play push out what do you prefer, two by the same player or any two?
 
Last edited:
easy-e said:
Watch any old accu-stats video with the BIH behind the line rule. They always spotted the one ball if it was in the kitchen.
Click to expand...
In my example a few posts ago, I explained a scenario where the one-ball was up next to the head rail and unhittable from the kitchen.. See post #92. I don't think the current rotation games rules on scratches on the break needs any changes. Behind the line doesn't always equate into an advantage, which is what the incoming player should have after a foul.
 
middleofnowhere said:
You created a what if scenario, I'm just saying that it has already been dealt with in previous rules in 9 ball. The game was predominantly played originally as push out. No one plays that way anymore either.
Click to expand...
So....now you've added push-out to the discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top