China Open

[Island Drive]

For starters, I have interacted with pool's fan base on a regular basis since 1976, having attended several hundred events live over that period. Nonetheless, that is only a small part of the picture.

The fans have not only spoken out on this subject but they have screamed out. Twenty-five years ago, several players and event producers tried to replace 9ball with 10ball, speculating that the fans wanted a harder game and that 9ball would soon fall of the face of the earth. Twenty-five years later, there are probably still twenty 9ball events for every 10ball event in pro pool. Call shot 10ball is not what the fans wanted. 9ball was, and 9ball remains the game in which pool players make most of their livings. When a couple of event producers tried call shot call safe 10 ball, they were even more wrong, and that version of 10ball basically disappeared, ultimately rejected by both fans and players.

Poker has to be the most boring thing on television. Pool was not better to watch back in the day and few were watching. Pool was worse. There are plenty of "characters" in the game today (Shaw, Oi, Pagulayan, Melling, Kaci, Souto, Sanderson to name a few). Perhaps the action scene was more vibrant back in the day, but more people watch action matches today than ever before.

I am on the other side of this argument. I think the game may already be too hard. The four inch pockets with the narrow break box version of 9ball in use in WNT events makes the game very difficult and packages are few and far between. At the World 9ball in July, there was just one 5-pack and one 4-pack in the entire event. Packages are not as big a part of the game as they were back in the day. The 4 3/4" pockets of yesteryear meant more, not less, offense and less strategy than today.

Finally, I have seen no evidence that player personalities come out more when the game is harder.

This line truly has allot of good meaning.... I believe the sport/players should decide POCKET SIZE.
Too me it's exactly the same as having every tee box in golf lined with trees narrowly for at least 200 yrs.
Takes the game outta the game.
I've felt strongly that 4 1/4'' for all the corners is correct.
The fans want scoring/offense..... not a game where a non player can tell what a pros going to do ''most the time''.
Making the pockets too small also keeps top end pros in their 40's More outta the game.

 

[sjm]

Have you seen evidence to the contrary? I'm going to go out on a limb and say players show more raw emotion (personality) when frustrated than they do with success. The table-jumping-fist-pumping celebration after a big finals victory is so contrived it's cringeworthy.

Another point (please don't take offense): yourself and the people you interact with at tournaments (including me) are not a good representation of the average person promoters would hope to attract to increase pool viewership. Reminds me of the old adage "fish see water last".

As a social experiment, try polling random adults in a busy mall to name five famous pool players from any era, dead or alive. I'm guess that on average, people will be able to name 3 or 4 in total and then draw a blank. Guess what the most common answer would be. I'd speculate it would either be Willie Mosconi or Minnesota Fats. Of course, Willie Mosconi we could all understand because of his accomplishments. Minnesota Fasts is where we should draw our attention though. He was largely known because of his entertaining personality.

In my opinion, we will increase viewership and make pool spectatorship more mainstream when we focus more on entertainment then the subtleties of world class pool that only a tiny fraction of the general public will ever see or understand. As diehard pool fans like us, we can only hope that answer doesn't dilute the beauty of the game itself.

Having all that been said, I hope you don't mind me challenging you on this. Trust me, if I ever planned on dumping big money into a pool calcutta, I would seek out your advice first and take it above all others. We just differ on how to increase pool viewership and of course...I could be wrong; I'm wrong often.

Nice post, and rest assured that no offense is taken. You have debated with civility, clarity, and in a tone of mutual respect. Your opinion matters a lot to me.

There's no need for us to see eye to eye here as we come from different points of view and different experiences. I think I'm much more in tune with the existing pool fan than the prospective fan, and yet the latter, as you seem to sense, may be of far greater importance.

Where we agree is that the focus must be on entertainment value of the game. In fact, the premise of the thread is that some of the pool's entertainment value was compromised by the use of alternate break and many agreed. In my opinion, things like "winner breaks" and "30 second shot clock" cater to the entertainment value of pool more than the needs of the players, and I think Matchroom has shown a keen understanding on these points.

We have slightly different views regarding what would make pool more entertaining, but what's wrong with that? All points of view matter here and this is the kind of debate that AZB is all about.

 

[jay helfert]

The break is tougher, call pocket, and no early 10s (generally) make 10b much tougher than 9b. A place for both, and 8b, and 1p, and 3c, and and and... Variety is good, but I'll let longer 10b matches differentiate skill.

Personally I like Ten Ball using the 9-Ball rules; no call shot and the ten counts on the break. If it ain't broke don't fix it! It's much harder to make the ten ball on the break and happens far less frequently than in 9-Ball. Call shot takes the two way shot out of the game. In Ten Ball I say "let 'em rip!"

That's the way we've always played the Bigfoot Ten Ball tournament at DCC and it worked just fine. Unless they've changed it since I left.

 

[jay helfert]

I know what you mean. Sure, over the course of a match you can see those subtle differences (if you're a pool nut like us). For the casual fan, watching a 750 run an open table looks the same as an 850. In fact, even for us pool nuts, 750s can play flawless for an entire set. Make the table tougher and stop putting so much emphasis on pattern breaking combined with a little luck, and I think the game gets better for viewers. Plus, we'd get to see their personalities come out more under the pressure. Few enjoy watching emotionless robots run out an easy rack.

How come nobody agrees with me? There's got to be someone. Anyone?

Where you'll really notice the difference is nearing the end of a close match. Both players know who the better player is and will often act accordingly. The 750 is more likely to dog a shot under pressure than the 850. I've seen it a million times when they fail to get out on an open rack at hill-hill!

 

[jay helfert]

probably also because it's better for the racking integrity in money games. break success relies on a tight, not tilted rack

9-Ball racking secret. Leave the back three balls slightly loose from the front six. A minute fraction of an inch is enough. You've just given your opponent a dead rack, but don't tell anyone I told you.

I'd only do this when my opponent was being an ass about my racking, usually complaining about the head balls. I'd rack the top six dead solid and the back three also tight. But I'd leave a minute gap they he might not see unless he inspected carefully. I'd love it when they whined about the bad break or slug rack. I'd tell him it's the balls or cloth, lol.

 

[skogstokig]

9-Ball racking secret. Leave the back three balls slightly loose from the front six. A minute fraction of an inch is enough. You've just given your opponent a dead rack, but don't tell anyone I told you.

I'd only do this when my opponent was being an ass about my racking, usually complaining about the head balls. I'd rack the top six dead solid and the back three also tight. But I'd leave a minute gap they he might not see unless he inspected carefully. I'd love it when they whined about the bad break or slug rack. I'd tell him it's the balls or cloth, lol.

here's a professional ref applying that same magic, earlier today:

 

[bud green]

100% agree with ten ball with nine ball rules. Extra ball mitigates almost all of the effects of easy breaking tables , I don't have to listen to people squabble about call shot BS with ten ball, and I actually like a little luck or fluke shot excitement in anything other than a race to one or two even in low money local tourneys. People remember crazy lucky shots more than someone running out a hanger nine ball rack repeatedly. Everyone usually gets there share of flukes in the long term...although the crafty ones increase their odds.

I trust in Jay, how long has he been involved in pool at this point, half a century basically?

 

[jay helfert]

here's a professional ref applying that same magic, earlier today:

That's what a "slug" looks like.

 

[skogstokig]

That's what a "slug" looks like.

did it again in the final. the fillers still won

 

[sudocrushms]

Personally I like Ten Ball using the 9-Ball rules; no call shot and the ten counts on the break. If it ain't broke don't fix it! It's much harder to make the ten ball on the break and happens far less frequently than in 9-Ball. Call shot takes the two way shot out of the game. In Ten Ball I say "let 'em rip!"

That's the way we've always played the Bigfoot Ten Ball tournament at DCC and it worked just fine. Unless they've changed it since I left.

If i were running an event, it would be no early 10s EXCEPT on the break. For the reason you noted. I primarily play 10b and can count on one hand the number of times i've made it on the break.
I strongly disagree that you can't play 2-way shots. You see players do it all the time, you just need to be more careful about it than in 9b.

If i want flukes and early ending games, i'll play 9b. I'd rather have more of a distinction between the games.

 

[AtLarge]

did it again in the final. the fillers still won

Ah, thanks for mentioning that, as I had not been watching the Box Billiards Mixed Doubles Open. I checked, and the Fillers' winning ($40,000) record was:

Matches -- 6 - 0​

Sets -- 12 - 2​

Games -- 48 (+ a shootout win) - 26​

​

Second place ($20,000) went to Ko Ping Chung / Chou Chieh-Yu.

 

[AtLarge]

... I strongly disagree that you can't play 2-way shots. ...

Correct. WPA 10-Ball rules do not eliminate the most common form of 2-way shot, where you play to make a ball but leave your opponent safe if you miss. They do, however, eliminate a second type of two-way shot where you try to make either or both of two balls, since WPA rules require that you designate only one ball and one pocket.

 

[jay helfert]

If i were running an event, it would be no early 10s EXCEPT on the break. For the reason you noted. I primarily play 10b and can count on one hand the number of times i've made it on the break.
I strongly disagree that you can't play 2-way shots. You see players do it all the time, you just need to be more careful about it than in 9b.

If i want flukes and early ending games, i'll play 9b. I'd rather have more of a distinction between the games.

You can't play two way shots in Call Shot Ten Ball. That's what I was referring too. Plus in your version of Ten Ball there would be no combinations or billiards on the ten ball. Takes a lot of skill and interest out of the game imo.

 

[sudocrushms]

You can't play two way shots in Call Shot Ten Ball. That's what I was referring too. Plus in your version of Ten Ball there would be no combinations or billiards on the ten ball. Takes a lot of skill and interest out of the game imo.

That's what 9-ball is for. <shrugs>

Also, you can play combos/caroms on the 10, it just doesn't win the game. Spot up and play on.

 

[jay helfert]

That's what 9-ball is for. <shrugs>

Also, you can play combos/caroms on the 10, it just doesn't win the game. Spot up and play on.

I happen to like Ten Ball with 9-Ball rules. Whatever floats your boat!

 

[AtLarge]

You can't play two way shots in Call Shot Ten Ball. ...

See Post #112.

 

[skogstokig]

Ah, thanks for mentioning that, as I had not been watching the Box Billiards Mixed Doubles Open. I checked, and the Fillers' winning ($40,000) record was:

Matches -- 6 - 0​

Sets -- 12 - 2​

Games -- 48 (+ a shootout win) - 26​

​

Second place ($20,000) went to Ko Ping Chung / Chou Chieh-Yu.

i only watched three matches. kind of weird format with pairs from different countries, and a bit hard to follow. pia saved josh a couple times so that was fun.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Alternate breaks does not let a player catch a gear and perform to their true potential.

I think there is at least as good if not better an argument to be made that it is the winner breaks format that more often keeps players from being able to catch a gear and perform to their true potential. It is that format where players sit for prolonged periods of time getting cold, and then when they do finally get to the table all they have is some kick shot and then back to more sitting for a while. Once they do finally have a good chance at the table to actually run some balls they have been sitting too long and their performance is sub-par and not to their true potential. It is winner breaks that can keep guys from being able to catch a gear. It is winner breaks that can put someone on ice and take someone out of a gear they were previously in. It is winner breaks that more often keeps a player from being able to perform at their true potential.

Alternate break on the other hand actually does the opposite and prevents those bad things above from being able to happen. It allows players to catch a gear and stay in gear and play to their true potential because they never sit for more than a couple of minutes. They never go long periods of time without chances to run balls. In alternate break they get to run balls at least every few minutes and as a result they are always able to catch a gear, stay in gear, and play to their true potential for the whole match, and that just isn't always the case in winner breaks.

 

[Poolplaya9]

I know that alternate break, as several have demonstrated statistically on this forum, has little impact on the outcome of a match, but the fans enjoy packages and are not as likely to tune in when they know they won't see them.

This is simply not true, and at best is extremely misleading. You see just as many packages in alternate break (actually more, but will get to that later) as you do in winner breaks.

Here is an example to illustrate. Let's say you and I decide to have a little free throw competition at the local court to see who can make the most free throws out of 50 attempts. You shoot your 50 attempts, and then I shoot my 50 attempts. Well you have a great day and not only do you end up beating me, but you put a package together of 27 in a row at some point there in the middle as well. You try to be humble and don't rub it in though. Great shooting.

I want a rematch so we go again the next day, same thing, 50 attempts each, but this time we decide to do alternate shots. I make an attempt, then you make an attempt, then I go again, back and forth. Well damned if not only do you beat me again, but you end up with a stretch there in the middle where you make 27 in a row once again. This time you can't help yourself though, and rightfully proud of the major accomplishment you decide to rub it in a little bit and tell me about the massive "27 free throw package" you put on me. My response is "what are you talking about, you didn't have have any package of 27 today. Heck, you never even had a run of more than 1 today, I was shooting in between all of your shots. Now yesterday was most impressive, I have to admit, but today you didn't do anything special and never did even put together a package of more than 1 so stop acting like you did something." Do you think that argument really holds water, or is it 27 in a row either way, because that is the argument you and others have been making when it comes to pool.

I think it is 27 in a row either way, and that the "well the other guy was getting to go in between so it doesn't count as a package" is a dumb argument. Whether we were doing the consecutive free throw shot format like on the first day, or that alternate free throw shot format like on the second day, it is still the same 27 in a row either way. Whether your opponent was getting their own attempts in between or not is a difference that makes no difference, same as it is with pool.

One more example. Let's say you and I go to the pool hall and decide to play a race to nine, alternate break. You win the lag, and we both end up breaking and running every single one of our games, but because you broke first you of course end up 9-8 winner. According to the way you have been wanting to look at it, neither one of us had a package. Neither one of us had a run of over one rack. That just makes no sense at all. You had a 9 pack, and I had an 8 pack, and it doesn't matter what was happening in between our break and runs.

Every consecutive rack than we ran when it was our break is part of a break and run package, same as it would be in winner breaks format. Doesn't matter if your opponent was getting to do their own break and run attempts in between or not. Doesn't even matter if you ended up having to shoot in some of those games when they failed to get out. Your break and runs that happen in a row are by definition a package of break and runs, and because of that there are just as many packages, and the packages are just as large, in the alternate break format as they are in winner break. Let me correct that. There are actually more packages in alternate break since, as in my example above, one player can have a package/s that equal to the length of the race, and the other can have a package/s that equal to one less than the length of the race, and that amount of packages simply aren't possible in the winner breaks format.

Now whether you prefer seeing the packages the way they happen in winner breaks over the way they happen in alternate breaks is something else entirely, and everybody has their preferences (although I think most are largely biased by what we are so incredibly used to as opposed to what is actually better, and if we had grown up with alternate break being the dominating format that would be what we preferred instead the same way that we prefer that for every single other major sport), but to say or insinuate that packages don't happen in alternate breaks is just completely incorrect as they happen just as much (actually more, as noted above) in alternate break as they do in winner breaks.