If you break the rack and squat the cue ball perfectly center table, only to have an OB come around and knock it into the side pocket....that is fate's fault.
(I agree that in just about any other scenario a scratch is the player's fault.)
Dual stage tournaments are superior to true double elimination
- Thread starter iusedtoberich
- Start date
(I agree that in just about any other scenario a scratch is the player's fault.)
I understand your question. I'm referring to when your cue ball is controlled perfectly and yet another object ball kisses it into the side pocket at some absurd and ridiculous angle and by some miracle missing the other 6 balls that magically danced around it on it's way to the hole... has me starring straight up talking to the invisible man every single time.
In my eyes a true 'PRO' event would be all tour-level pros. I could not care less about watching dead-money players on vacation getting wailed on. That's one thing i don't like about the USOpen. It is now an elite world-class event but you still have a bunch of people playing just to say they did.
I went all the way to Austria (from Canada) to play in the World 8 ball. Very cool that I earned a spot. But If it was single elimination, no way i'd go. I also won't go again if it's winner break, it's too easy at this level. But that's a whole nother topic lol
In this interim period, that's what's nice about the dual stage. When you get to the second stage, that's when to "really" start watching.
If MR continues to grow pool, maybe we will have 200 true pros over 770 in a few years guaranteed a spot, and 56 spots open to qualifiers.
Last edited:
The 3-Cushion World Cup events have another multi-stage format that allows lots of qualifiers to play and eventually ends up at single elimination:
The "qualification" rounds select 12 players to join the 20 seeded/wildcard players. They work like this:
36 unseeded players are put into groups of 3 who play round robins to select one per group, giving 12 players to advance
24 seeded but weak players are added to give 36, groups of 3 play, giving 12 players to advance
(the step above is repeated possibly multiple times, with 24 stronger players added each time and 24 eliminated)
Now we have the "main" tournament:
The 12 qualified players join the 20 top seeded players. Those 32 are divided into 8 groups of 4 that play round robins. The top 2 advance.
The remaining 16 players play single elimination with somewhat longer matches.
Advantages: Weak players get to play in roughly even matches. Lots of people can enter the qualifiers. Everyone gets to play at least two matches. Seeding gives a reasonable advantage to the stronger players. If you are seeded into one of the later qualification rounds, you don't have to be there the first day. The top 20 don't have to be there for the first several days.
It used to be that the final 32 started with single elimination, but the round-robin of four phase gives the seeds a chance to get used to the tables.
The "qualification" rounds select 12 players to join the 20 seeded/wildcard players. They work like this:
36 unseeded players are put into groups of 3 who play round robins to select one per group, giving 12 players to advance
24 seeded but weak players are added to give 36, groups of 3 play, giving 12 players to advance
(the step above is repeated possibly multiple times, with 24 stronger players added each time and 24 eliminated)
Now we have the "main" tournament:
The 12 qualified players join the 20 top seeded players. Those 32 are divided into 8 groups of 4 that play round robins. The top 2 advance.
The remaining 16 players play single elimination with somewhat longer matches.
Advantages: Weak players get to play in roughly even matches. Lots of people can enter the qualifiers. Everyone gets to play at least two matches. Seeding gives a reasonable advantage to the stronger players. If you are seeded into one of the later qualification rounds, you don't have to be there the first day. The top 20 don't have to be there for the first several days.
It used to be that the final 32 started with single elimination, but the round-robin of four phase gives the seeds a chance to get used to the tables.
If I ever run an event that attracts top pro's there will be no split. I quit going to tournaments as a spectator after staying around eight or ten hours to see the final, only to have a chop. I didn't stay up all night to see them split the money. If there are any savers I would demand that they be public knowledge also.
That they do. Sometimes just the calcutta runs over eight hours but the tournament starts immediately after the calcutta so those of us with bad backs and hips may leave our game at the calcutta before the first match! Some tournaments are pitifully short on tables for the number of entries allowed and again it can be a many hour wait to play even the first match. When I wait around, usually having to stand, for twelve or fourteen hours before I play my first match you can just stick a fork in me, I'm done. I have played my last tournament unless it is some little weekly thing.
Especially tough on those who don’t play/practice much regularly. I may get into the zone and win all my warm-up games, but usually lose my stroke & get cold while waiting to play in the tournament.
Instead of single 8-ball games & double elimination, I’m thinking sets & single elimination would be a better way to determine who’s best (?). Although, that would likely deter weaker players from participating.
In my experience, most TDs should find other hobbies. They are supposed know how many tables are available and when play should start and how long matches should take and who is slow in their neighborhood. They are also supposed to know the rules. Fewer than half come close to the job requirements. Still, players show up hoping for some good competition.
As for being unhappy when the final two or three split the pot, don't be mad at them. Blame the idiot TD who couldn't figure out how to end the two-day event earlier than 4AM Monday morning. And if you're irritated, let both the TD and the room owner know that you won't be back.
There are examples of tournaments done right. The first US Open under Matchroom was the largest open event that they had ever run, so far as I know. The 500 or so matches all started within a few minutes of the scheduled times. I'm not sure but that might have been the Open where the balls didn't show up for a couple of days. Fortunately, there was a backup plan.
As for being unhappy when the final two or three split the pot, don't be mad at them. Blame the idiot TD who couldn't figure out how to end the two-day event earlier than 4AM Monday morning. And if you're irritated, let both the TD and the room owner know that you won't be back.
There are examples of tournaments done right. The first US Open under Matchroom was the largest open event that they had ever run, so far as I know. The 500 or so matches all started within a few minutes of the scheduled times. I'm not sure but that might have been the Open where the balls didn't show up for a couple of days. Fortunately, there was a backup plan.
It’s hard to start at 9am when the Calcutta takes 3 hours!!Why do events start at 1pm?
There are two 9's in the day use them both.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I like that format. A round Robin lets everyone get some matches in. I'm not a contender in most tournaments but if I can put up a good set I feel I got my money's worth.
Yeah, I don't care for single games. They can still be fun, but you wouldn't pay one hole of golf, one game of tennis, or one hand of cards. A couple of the 8 ball tournaments around here are line tournaments, where winners move up a table and losers move down a table. Everyone gets 5-7 games, and the people with the most wins can cash.
I know and understand why a lot of people don't like handicaps, but for a casual tournament the players find their equilibrium and everyone plays straight up. It's not the pinnacle of pool competition, but it's a fun thing to do on Tuesday night. And if a less experienced player has a good night, they can cash. We all want to play in a professional tournament format, but it's good for newer players To be able to have some fun.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
Yeah, balls are pretty important. How does that happen?
Truck trailer got misplaced, I think.
Nice post. Actually, for WPA majors outside of America, two stage events as you describe have been the norm for decades. Eurotour has done it this way for a long, long time. America lagged behind and I think we've reached the point where true double elimination is as outdated as the horse and buggy.
I'd like to see them get rid of the true double elimination format at Derby City. I recall how in 2009, I had dinner plans for just over an hour after the one pocket final between John Schmidt and Scott Frost John was undefeated and Scott had a loss, so the prospect of a five or six hour final was real in the true double elimination format. I cancelled my dinner plans but Schmidt ended up winning the first set and I would have made it! Viewers need to have some sense of how long a match will take and a true double elimination format gets in the way of this.
The recently completed International 9ball had 128 entrants and played down to sixteen before going to single elimination. For me, that's perfect.
It's not exactly double elimination. It's true that towards the end anyone with only one loss is almost guaranteed to buy back, but I don't think they're required to. And of course many players exit after their first loss because they just wanted to shoot a few racks and get a free spectator pass. At this point I think there is zero chance of denying a one-loss player the right to buy back.
Sadly, I agree with regard to the Derby. At Turning Stone, however, it's true double elimination until two players remains but the final is one race to 13. Let them do that at the Derby City 9-ball.
The one type of two-stage event that I find unconscionable is when players who haven't earned it are seeded in Stage 2. Seeding Stage 2 based on ranking is a disgrace that always ensures that undefeated players meet each other in the first elimination round. Thankfully, Matchroom never engages in this regrettable practice.
I was with you right up until, "You packed all your food and drinks in a cooler and NONE of you stayed in a HOTEL/too expensive now to a room for the night." I'm all for not staying in a hotel, but support the room and buy food and drink while you are there. That's how most of them make their money. It certainly isn't on table time and green fees.It's all just too much. Takes forever,
You nailed it.......IU2Brich.
My WBT.com creation, is this.
I looked at the critical things ALL POOL PLAYERS HATE when in a tournament.
1. Gas $$ to and from event.
2. If your 3 hrs or more away from a 2 event.....$$$$$ ROOM
3. Eating out $$$ Fri$/Sat$/Sun$ They calcutta yah FRIDAY PM, so you HAVE to get a rm at least one night.
4. If you make it to the final 16 for Sunday gonna have to get another....$$$$$ROOM
5. If you lose your first match/losers side. on SUNDAY....your one out of the money.
6. I played in Denver 96 player event, a mth ago, this EXACT scenario happened.
And the TD video man could not tell you, ever when your next match was up.
I'm currently talking to sponsors, end of year budgets and next yrs budgets are in cue. I workin' on it.
WBT, All players play every session, dbl elimination.
I can have a 100 players more/less/depending on table count, start Sat. at 11 am, and finals are 8pm.
If you get knocked out in the second round, almost 1/4 of the rooms tables open up for rent.
If you make it to the FINAL TABLE of 8 player, where all the cash is paid out, thru the play Sessions, you might have met and now know em by name, at least 10 people you never really knew.
By mid afternoon most all room tables are opening up for the two and outs. NO LATE NIGHTs
By dinner time 90% of the table are available for rent to gamble or the Sat Night Crowd regulars.
Imagine this. 4 guys jump into car, drive 3 hrs arrive for Sat. only play. Begins at 11.
You all play some stay in, some get knocked out.
One of you 4 make it to the final table/Like World Poker Tour/All the cash.
You still get out of there by 10pm, all four of yah.
Drive home.
You could go to a high entry fee event like this, because your splitting gas 4 ways. You packed all your food and drinks in a cooler and NONE of you stayed in a HOTEL/too expensive now to a room for the night.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Tend to agree but at Derby the food sit. is horrible. The shit sucks and is waaaaaaaaay over-priced. New Albany(Fedor's new home btw) is just a few min. away with some decent and fair priced grub.
I'm fine with two-stage events, especially the practicality of them. But I still find it fundamentally unfair that a player who goes undefeated in the first stage doesn't have some type of advantage when playing someone who had a loss in the first stage. Whether it be getting a single game on the wire or automatically winning the lag, the undefeated player should have some earned advantage when playing a one-loss player in the second stage. Thinking of it the other way, the one-loss player should have some penalty when playing an undefeated player in the second stage.
If it were up to me, the 'advantage' for the undefeated player would be that the match ends early if the undefeated player makes it to the hill first. For example if it's typically a race to 10 and an undefeated player plays a one-loss player in the second (SE) stage, then the undefeated player wins the match if he makes it to 9 (on the hill) first. If the one-loss player makes it to 9 first, then it's a race to 10 for both of them. That way there can still be true hill-hill matches (but only if the one-loss player makes it to the hill first).
If it were up to me, the 'advantage' for the undefeated player would be that the match ends early if the undefeated player makes it to the hill first. For example if it's typically a race to 10 and an undefeated player plays a one-loss player in the second (SE) stage, then the undefeated player wins the match if he makes it to 9 (on the hill) first. If the one-loss player makes it to 9 first, then it's a race to 10 for both of them. That way there can still be true hill-hill matches (but only if the one-loss player makes it to the hill first).