PBS Women's 9 Ball World Championship
- Thread starter Lowell
- Start date
Not sure this is possible. WNT rankings should be based strictly on 9 ball play. Excelling at 10 ball or 8 ball should have no bearing on 9 ball rankings.
The big question for WNT is, should its rankings include 9 ball events NOT sponsored by Matchroom. Tough one. The conditions might not be uniform, as they are with most WNT events.
WPA could, if it wanted, create a unified ranking system by including 8, 9 and 10 ball events. I am not sure what the incentive is. Predator doesn't hold many big 9 ball events. The company has chosen to focus on 10 ball and 8 ball.
Last edited:
In an unrelated matter, I watched a new instructional video by Ko Ping Chung recently on pool stances. He just changed his to more of a snooker stance.
He explained the switch by noting the difference in traditional 9 ball and Chinese 9 ball. "When I used to play American 9 ball ..." Chung said.
Sure sounds like he's not coming back anytime soon, if at all. Be interesting to see if either of the Ko brothers gets invited to the WPM in Taipei in January. An effort to lure them back could even get a rejection.
He explained the switch by noting the difference in traditional 9 ball and Chinese 9 ball. "When I used to play American 9 ball ..." Chung said.
Sure sounds like he's not coming back anytime soon, if at all. Be interesting to see if either of the Ko brothers gets invited to the WPM in Taipei in January. An effort to lure them back could even get a rejection.
Yup, well said. Agreed in full.
The sets approach by Predator just doesn't excite me all that much. I applaud the company for trying something different, but I just can't cotton to it. Especially the early rounds.
I might like it a bit better if it was races to 5 in a best two of three sets. Races to four seem too short in a 2 of 3 format. As I stated in another thread, I find races of 3 out 5 sets too long.
Problem with long races, imo, is it's hard to fans to developing rooting interest in lots of players. You realistically can only watch so many matches and players if races are long.
I might like it a bit better if it was races to 5 in a best two of three sets. Races to four seem too short in a 2 of 3 format. As I stated in another thread, I find races of 3 out 5 sets too long.
Problem with long races, imo, is it's hard to fans to developing rooting interest in lots of players. You realistically can only watch so many matches and players if races are long.
Last edited:
I like a Race to 5, MC length.
insidesp.in
Member
I would love to work on a computerized ranking system that makes sense for all. My first swing at it I feel is decent, Im sure it could use improvement, but I think with a few intelligent fans it could be quite powerful. People like you, @sjm, and others.
The system is documented at length here: https://www.insidesp.in/ratings
But in short, it builds off of matches from back in the 1990s. Using all available match data I could find. It weighs recent performance heavily, it weighs longer races heavier than shorter races. It only counts pro events (those are events with 5+ pro players, completely arbitrary)
But to your point, its quite flexible in how discipline specific, tour specific, and the combination of the 2 are kept. I only chose discipline and tour because I thought those were the most interesting dimensions to analyze ratings by.
I think the math and the system is solid, but the weights could be tweaked a bit I'm sure.
I feel strongly that professional pool needs 1 unified rating system, and it didnt feel like any of the big players were the right entity to build it. That's why I built it. Obviously Matchroom cant do it, Predator cant do it, WPA maybe could, but even their existing rating system feels weak at best.
I honestly feel like no one has the data I have to build the rankings off of, *maybe* Fargo does, but they seem reluctant to build anything new.
I also generate match predictions based on this rating system which are at about 80% accuracy in most events. Lower in predator events because of their short race (set) format, creating a lot more variance. I am not even sure how to quantify what a good system's accuracy should even be.
Any way, would love to hear feedback on it!
I'm really in the opposite camp. I have come to like the short sets because they seem to amp up the pressure. You seem to get a lot of 3-2 and 3-3 sets, which are both exciting to watch because a single error often causes loss of set, and one great shot can win the set. I also like the fact that every set is in doubt until the last ball drops, which means that a match is never over.
Pehlivanovic took a drubbing in the first two sets of his World 10ball quarterfinal against Fortunski, but when he captured the third set, the game was on and he came all the way back to reach the semis. In another World 10ball quarterfinal, Capito won 11 racks long before Kaci did, but when Kaci eked out the third set double hill, the game was on and Kaci manhandled Robbie in the fourth and fifth sets. The purist will suggest that Capito should have won that match but, just like in pro tennis, sets don't work like games.
.... but all of that said, I hate shootouts, because deciding a match through a contest in just one of the several skills that pertain to playing great pool is not fair in my eyes.
I wouldn't want this format in every tournament, but the variety makes pro pool more interesting.
I disagree. One may have been the better ball pocketer, played better position, shown better speed control, played better defense, kicked better or jumped better. Why is a ball pocketing contest fairer, as a tiebreaker, than a safety play contest, a kicking contest, a jumping contest, etc.? The answer is that it isn't.
Winning pool is about all around skills, and any tiebreaker must reward the better all-around performer. Tennis and golf tiebreakers test all skills, and that's as it should be in pool.
Interestingly, Rubilen Amit's straight shooting also figured prominently in the tiebreaker at the World Teams Championship in February, in which she helped Team Philippines to the title.
Yup, the evidence is overwhelming that short races excite the viewers far more than long races. It's a big part of the winning formula at the Mosconi.
in exchange for the high fargo players knocking each out early round, single elim is guaranteed to have at least half a dozen players in the 600-700 ish range. hard to see this as evidence for "fields are getting deeper", when they had a softer than normal route, and will get torched in SE.
I don’t know that I agree with the conclusion.
The MC is exciting because it’s US vs Europe. It’s been races to 5 for as long as I can remember. Is there any evidence of that it would be less interesting to viewers if it was races to 7 or 8?
I think it was made short races to begin with because Europe was so far behind the US that short races were their only shot. Ironically you could say the reverse is true now, but I’m not sure that’s right - SVB, Gorst and Bergman all seem to be slower starters who warm up into a match.
Ryder cup they play a full 18 holes per match. Davis Cup is the usual 2 of 3 sets.
I don’t expect they will change the MC or Reyes Cup, but it’s also not deciding a world championship.
I have attended WNT events, Mosconi Cups and Predator PBS events. Obviously, I haven't been to them all, but I feel that, based on the events I have attended, the fans are more engaged and the buzz is greater when the races are short.
PS Actually, they tried race to six at the 2011 Mosconi Cup at the MGM Grand. I didn't enjoy it as much, and the format was abandoned the next year. Race to five has been the format ever since.