US Open 9B October, 2022 -- Atlantic City

[skip100]

I reran the code for this year's format (race to 9 winner's qualification, race to 8 losers bracket except final round of the losers bracket which is race to 9, single elimination from 64 onwards, race to 9 in round of 64/32, race to 10 in round of 16/8, race to 11 semis, and race to 13 finals). The previous simulation had races to 9 all the way through.

The longer races at the end make it a tad more likely that a top player snaps it off but the overall story is the same - there is about a 50% chance that someone in the top 5 in the world will win and ~800 represents a reasonable minimum rating to have any kind of chance.

Of course, all this assumes that the Bradley-Terry model contains all the relevant information to make a prediction and that players will perform precisely at their past skill level for the entire event, both of which are not the case. But as George Box said, "All models are wrong but some are useful"

to add to the last comment, let's assume that a player's Fargo rating can vary uniformly plus or minus 50 points in a given match. This is actually a quite conservative assumption, as we have all seen players play well under or well over their usual skill level for no apparent reason. Mike Page recently posted about Yapp performing at an average 875 level for the entire US Open last year despite being currently rated 813 (a rating which incorporates the strength of that 875 performance).

This doesn't change much at the upper end but brings into contention a new group of players rated well into the 780s. That might not seem like a big difference, but there are 30 players rated 800 or better and another 26 rated 785-799 - almost doubling the pool of potential winners.

That's why they play the matches, right?

 

[8cree]

Yup. The key code in R is:

# Single-game win probability for player A vs. player B
fargo  (1 + exp(-(a - b) / 144.3)) }

# Simulate result of a race to 9 between player A and player B
result

From there you can set up the 256-player field and then go through various double elimination rounds and the ultimate single elimination bracket.

It looks like the single elimination rounds are actually a race to 11 but that shouldn't change the end results very much as most of the lower-rated players will have been eliminated by then. That said, the longer the race, the more favored the higher-rated player will be.

I need an aspirin from trying to read that

 

[kling&allen]

to add to the last comment, let's assume that a player's Fargo rating can vary uniformly plus or minus 50 points in a given match. This is actually a quite conservative assumption, as we have all seen players play well under or well over their usual skill level for no apparent reason. Mike Page recently posted about Yapp performing at an average 875 level for the entire US Open last year despite being currently rated 813 (a rating which incorporates the strength of that 875 performance).

This doesn't change much at the upper end but brings into contention a new group of players rated well into the 780s. That might not seem like a big difference, but there are 30 players rated 800 or better and another 26 rated 785-799 - almost doubling the pool of potential winners.

That's why they play the matches, right?

But if it's equally likely that the 800+ players play 50+ above their FR, it doesn't really help the 785-799 players? If a player (Filler) plays at 900 FR for the week, how much does that increase his odds of winning the entire tournament?

 

[skip100]

But if it's equally likely that the 800+ players play 50+ above their FR, it doesn't really help the 785-799 players? If a player (Filler) plays at 900 FR for the week, how much does that increase his odds of winning the entire tournament?

Filler is so highly rated that if he plays out of his mind, he has a huge advantage; if he plays below his rating, he is still competitive. It all kind of comes out in the wash.

By contrast, if the lower-rated player is guaranteed to play at his speed he is dead in the water matching up repeatedly against players in the 810+ range in the back half of the tournament. Giving him an opportunity to play above his rating offers him a fighting chance.

An even better model here is probably to have a single sample draw at the beginning indicating whether the player will overperform or underperform in general, staying constant throughout the event. This could be normally distributed with 95% tails starting at +/- 50. Then you get the uniformly distributed +/- on top of that which changes every match.

 

[Taxi]

It's probably been addressed before, but who's streaming the tournament in the U. S.?

 

[Nick B]

It's probably been addressed before, but who's streaming the tournament in the U. S.?

I suspect (but don't know for sure...) seeing as it's Matchroom event their usual method will prevail. Facebook/Youtube for early rounds followed by DAZN (US/Canada) for later part.

 

[camaro69926]

Good luck

Thank you

 

[AtLarge]

I suspect (but don't know for sure...) seeing as it's Matchroom event their usual method will prevail. Facebook/Youtube for early rounds followed by DAZN (US/Canada) for later part.

Yes. Matchroom has posted the information here (scroll down to "Watch"): https://matchroompool.com/usopenpool/

 

[Nick B]

Thx AtLarge...for those too lazy:

 

[Island Drive]

A couple things not mentioned.
In the early days of the Open, they did not seed players.
Winner breaks, loser racks, and all races were to 11.
In the finals, if you came thru the loser's side, you had to dbl dip the winner for the win.
Due to the changes/seeding, I think it's no longer likely for a TKO from FLA to win this type of event.
From my point of view, there's one BIG Unknown factor that can, has and will eventually happen.
In a venue like this sometimes, a Very Good young players game can JUMP, up to a completely different level.
When this happens, his perspective is, the game slows down, the balls become big as grapefruits and his clarity of thought is 100% PLUS.... his game and conditioning/rest are all in place.
This player will begin to surface in the final 64 and become very noticeable in the last 32.
If something like this was to happen my best guess, it's probably not coming from a US or European player and this person won't be above an 800 Fargo.

 

[sjm]

A couple things not mentioned.
In the early days of the Open, they did not seed players.
Winner breaks, loser racks, and all races were to 11.
In the finals, if you came thru the loser's side, you had to dbl dip the winner for the win.
Due to the changes/seeding, I think it's no longer likely for a TKO from FLA to win this type of event.
From my point of view, there's one BIG Unknown factor that can, has and will eventually happen.
In a venue like this sometimes, a Very Good young players game can JUMP, up to a completely different level.
When this happens, his perspective is, the game slows down, the balls become big as grapefruits and his clarity of thought is 100% PLUS.... his game and conditioning/rest are all in place.
This player will begin to surface in the final 64 and become very noticeable in the last 32.
If something like this was to happen my best guess, it's probably not coming from a US or European player and this person won't be above an 800 Fargo.

Could happen. Yapp, a year ago, wasn't under the radar, as he came 9th at the 2019 US Open and was very impressive.

Actually, there are two young Europeans well under the radar that could possibly make a deep run in Pijus Labutis of Lithuania (Fargo 778) and Aleksa Pecelj of Serbia (Fargo 790). Aleksa gave Filler his biggest scare in the UK Open in May in an 11-10 loss. Either of these would be a big surprise if they reached the last eight.

I agree that this format doesn't set up well for a Cinderella story, but we shall see.

 

[gambler67]

Hang on, Niels Feijen and Mario He are both missing from the list in post #1 but are found in the Cuescore list of matches.

terminator better be there

 

[spartan]

Good thing looking at likely winners through to the last 64, the strength of top and bottom half are about same in number of FR800 (Though top half is slightly stronger)
The not so good thing is arguably the 2 hottest players in world NOW, Gorst and Filler will likely face off early in last 32 round.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... The not so good thing is arguably the 2 hottest players in world NOW, Gorst and Filler will likely face off early in last 32 round.

If one of them loses a match in the double elimination, they will go to some other part of the chart.

 

[Black-Balled]

I never understand the point of "dead money" comments. Sure there are many high fargo players who are expected to finish strong, but anyone can get on a hot streak and go deep.

Plus the "dead money" people contribute to the prize fund and have the courage to play against top level players. Sometimes you play well enough to win, sometimes you're simply gaining experience. Either way can be advantageous to progress your game.

The dead money's financial impact is big but NO sub 700 rated player is making the final 16.

That hot streak? Is doesn't win 3 in a row against 3 anyones that have a chance to get top 3 finish.

 

[sjm]

If one of them loses a match in the double elimination, they will go to some other part of the chart.

Yes, and Fedor has the dangerous Aleksa Pecelj (Fargo 790) of Serbia in his draw. Fedor will be a clear favorite, but funnier things have happened.

It's a shame to have the world's two best players in the same draw, but this is not Matchroom's fault. Due to the ban, Fedor had to sit out some of the biggest events this year, so his seeding won't reflect his pedigree. Of course, there would have been no problem using the format of a year ago, for a "round of 32" match would not have been win or go home.

Unlucky for both Josh and Fedor.

 

[Island Drive]

Better rest up, wonder if FB will bet on this one, providing it happens.

 

[decent dennis]

My 16 year old son is playing at the US Open. So my family will be there.

What’s his name if you don’t mind?

 

[jasonlaus]

What’s his name if you don’t mind?

Camero06911

 

[Black-Balled]

I ran a simulation of the 256-player bracket assuming unestablished players follow the same distribution of the rest of the field. The median result across the simulation suggests a rating in the mid-700s for the lowest-rated player remaining in the top 16, but that has not been borne out by past experience - perhaps the impact of major tournament pressure? The simulations' average rating in the top 16 is about 800, which is also a bit low but matches up better with past events than the prediction of the lowest-rated player.

And that...is why cuesports ARE sports: the element of execution.

Do it correctly when it needs to be done or fail.