WPA Players Championship - Tie Breaker Rules - Lagging Issue

FeelDaShot

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I heard the announcer say that the format is race to 7, win by 2. However, if the score becomes 9-9, they will lag to determine a winner.

My question is regarding the tiebreaking lag. Unlike the opening lag, there will be a lot of pressure on this shot and players will likely to take a little extra time on the shot. As such, how will they ensure that both players shoot at approximately the same time?

If I was shooting a lag for the match and my opponent shot a little early I wouldn't want to be rushed to shoot before I'm ready. If I wait, how long of a wait is allowed?

Has this situation ever came up?
 

jay helfert

Shoot Pool, not people
Gold Member
Silver Member
I heard the announcer say that the format is race to 7, win by 2. However, if the score becomes 9-9, they will lag to determine a winner.

My question is regarding the tiebreaking lag. Unlike the opening lag, there will be a lot of pressure on this shot and players will likely to take a little extra time on the shot. As such, how will they ensure that both players shoot at approximately the same time?

If I was shooting a lag for the match and my opponent shot a little early I wouldn't want to be rushed to shoot before I'm ready. If I wait, how long of a wait is allowed?

Has this situation ever came up?

If this is true I really don't like this rule, deciding a long and important match on a lag. :eek:
 

WoodyMPW

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I don't think they're lagging for the match. Rather lagging for the sudden death rack.
 

FeelDaShot

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I don't think they're lagging for the match. Rather lagging for the sudden death rack.

I hope you’re right. I couldn’t find the written set of rules anywhere.

Update: I found the rules and you are correct. Sorry for the confusion. Why can't they put all information in one place? Some is on the WPA site, some is on the CSI site, some is in a press release, some is on Facebook...not the most organized.
 
Last edited:

Chili Palmer

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've played win by 2 when playing for money but I've never seen it in a tournament.


Is this common?
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
If the rule is ‘win by two’ why put a cap on it.
...the excitement would build if it became a long match...good for the game, no?

When Cliff Thorburn ran t he first 147 at the Crucible in 1982, even the other match
stopped to watch...nobody remembered to breathe for about ten minutes.
....or doesn’t anybody want the game to be exciting?
 

Chili Palmer

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If the rule is ‘win by two’ why put a cap on it.
...the excitement would build if it became a long match...good for the game, no?

When Cliff Thorburn ran t he first 147 at the Crucible in 1982, even the other match
stopped to watch...nobody remembered to breathe for about ten minutes.
....or doesn’t anybody want the game to be exciting?

I agree, but I wouldn't want to be the guy waiting for the winner of a match that goes back and forth for an hour or two.
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've played win by 2 when playing for money but I've never seen it in a tournament.


Is this common?
It makes sense - as big an advantage as breaking is now on the pro level - particularly when using template racks. Very similar to the advantage the server has in a pro level tennis match.
 

hang-the-9

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If the rule is ‘win by two’ why put a cap on it.
...the excitement would build if it became a long match...good for the game, no?

When Cliff Thorburn ran t he first 147 at the Crucible in 1982, even the other match
stopped to watch...nobody remembered to breathe for about ten minutes.
....or doesn’t anybody want the game to be exciting?

6 hr baseball games come to mind.
 

PoolBum

Ace in the side.
Silver Member
Did you notice any seats available?

If they thought this was good for tennis they wouldn't have changed the rule to prevent it from happening again.

I would find a one game sudden death pool match much more exciting than a race to 11 that ends up 70-68 and takes three days to finish.
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
If they thought this was good for tennis they wouldn't have changed the rule to prevent it from happening again.

I would find a one game sudden death pool match much more exciting than a race to 11 that ends up 70-68 and takes three days to finish.

I had a five ahead (snooker) that went int o the third day...I was excited.
...but I just might have to agree with you when it’s commercial....
...even the rent has a limit.
 
Top