Break Stats -- Derby City 10-Foot 10-Ball, Jan. 2014

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Here are some break statistics from the 2014 Diamond Bigfoot 10-Ball Challenge streamed by Accu-Stats from the Derby City Classic. This was an invitational 16-man, single-elimination event.

The conditions for this event included: Diamond 10-foot table with 4 7/16" (I think) corner pockets, Simonis cloth, Diamond wooden rack, Cyclop TV balls, winner breaks, rack your own (2-ball and 3-ball on the back corners), break from anywhere behind the line, no jump cues allowed, all slop counts (except spot any 10-ball made on the break), and a 40-second shot clock (one extension per player per rack unless at hill/hill, then two extensions per player).

The 15 matches (267 games), all of which were streamed from the same table, were as follows. The figures in parentheses are the Accu-Stats Total Performance Averages (TPA), as calculated by Accu-Stats:

Fri., Jan. 24 (Round 1)​
J. Shaw (.826) def. R. Saez (.742) 11-8​
S. Van Boening (.890) d. D. Orcollo (.819) 11-8​
J. Morra (.810) d. L. Vann Corteza (.811) 11-10​
E. Strickland (.798) d. O. Dominguez (.745) 11-8​
Sat., Jan.25 (Round 1)​
R. Souquet (.874) d. C. Biado (.800) 11-7​
E. Reyes (.840) d. R. Morris (.653) 11-4​
N. Feijen (.857) d. C. Deuel (.688) 11-3​
F. Bustamante (.836) d. D. Appleton (.813) 11-7​
Sun., Jan. 26 (Round 2)​
Souquet (.874) d. Shaw (.615) 11-3​
Feijen (.889) d. Reyes (.854) 11-8​
Van Boening (.875) d. Morra (.811) 11-10​
Bustamante (.881) d. Strickland (.846) 11-7​
Mon., Jan. 27 (Rounds 3 and 4 -- semi-finals and finals)​
Feijen (.896) d. Souquet (.745) 11-4​
Van Boening (.862) d. Bustamante (.740) 11-8​
Van Boening (.908) d. Feijen (.875) 11-7​


Overall results -- The breaker made at least one ball (and did not foul) 58% of the time (155 of 267), won 52% of the games (139 of 267), and broke and ran 16% of the games (44 of 267).

Here's a more detailed breakdown of the 267 games.

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:​
Breaker won the game: 97 (36% of the 267 games)​
Breaker lost the game: 58 (22%)​
Breaker fouled on the break:​
Breaker won the game: 6 (2%)​
Breaker lost the game: 17 (6%)​
Breaker broke dry (without fouling):​
Breaker won the game: 36 (13%)​
Breaker lost the game: 53 (20%)​
Therefore, whereas the breaker won 52% (139) of all 267 games,​
He won 63% (97 of 155) of the games in which he made at least one ball on the break and did not foul.​
He won 26% (6 of 23) of the games in which he fouled on the break.​
He won 40% (36 of 89) of the games in which he broke dry but did not foul.​
He won 38% (42 of 112) of the games in which he either fouled on the break or broke dry without fouling.​

Break-and-run games: The 44 break-and-run games (16% of all the games) consisted of 5 two-packs and 34 singles. No one broke and ran 3 or more games in a row.

10-balls on the break: The 10-ball was made on the break 6 times without scratching (2.2% of the 267 breaks), but it was spotted (with the breaker continuing to shoot) rather than counting as a win.
 
Last edited:

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Here are the break-and-run results for each player.

Saez (1 match) -- 1 B&R out of 9 breaks = 11%​
Orcollo (1 match) -- 1 of 8 = 13%​
Vann Corteza (1 match) -- 0 of 11 = 0%​
Dominguez (1 match) -- 3 of 8 = 38%​
Biado (1 match) -- 3 of 8 = 38%​
Morris (1 match) -- 0 of 4 = 0%​
Deuel (1 match) -- 0 of 3 = 0%​
Appleton (1 match) -- 1 of 8 = 13%​
Shaw (2 matches) -- 1 of 13 = 8%​
Reyes (2 matches) -- 0 of 20 = 0%​
Morra (2 matches) -- 6 of 20 = 30%​
Strickland (2 matches) -- 0 of 18 = 0%​
Souquet (3 matches) -- 5 of 26 = 19%​
Bustamante (3 matches) -- 5 of 30 = 17%​
Feijen (4 matches) -- 8 of 39 = 21%​
Van Boening (4 matches) -- 10 of 42 = 24%​

Total -- 44 of 267 = 16%​

The 5 two-packs were by Morra, Biado, Souquet, and Van Boening (twice). All the other 34 B&R's were singles.
 
Last edited:

beetle

Do I bug you?
Silver Member
Thanks for these statistics. It's remarkable that the break is essentially not an advantage.
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
Thanks for these statistics. It's remarkable that the break is essentially not an advantage.

In the 70s, the 8 vs the break was considered equal on a 9 foot.
On a 10 foot, the 8 was considered more valuable.

Looks like it's still that way....sorta
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Thanks for these statistics. It's remarkable that the break is essentially not an advantage.

The percentage of games won by the breaker in pro events is generally in the range of 45% - 60%. It can get much higher than that for the top players near the end of an event when they are dialed in on the break and running out a lot. It can also be influenced by matches involving a strong player and a weak player. A very lopsided match in a winner-breaks format obviously leads to a very high "breaker-won-game" percentage.

Despite the fact that the stats sometimes seem to indicate that it is no great advantage to be breaking, I doubt that many top players would want to give the break to an opponent coming down the stretch in a big event.

[Repeated from an older thread.]
 

Playin4Dinner

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Tx again AtLarge... You're a valuable member to this forum.


Just wanted to add that svb's 2 2-packs and 5 of his 10 bnrs came when it mattered the most... In the finals
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... Just wanted to add that svb's 2 2-packs and 5 of his 10 bnrs came when it mattered the most... In the finals

You are correct. He had 2 B&R's in his first match, 3 in the second match, none in the third match (when have we ever seen that!?), then 5 in the finals.
 

CreeDo

Fargo Rating 597
Silver Member
You are correct. He had 2 B&R's in his first match, 3 in the second match, none in the third match (when have we ever seen that!?), then 5 in the finals.

He does sometimes seem to dial it up (or down) as necessary depending on how close
the finish line he is... and how far ahead he is.

In another thread there's a debate about whether he basically lacks the ability
to close matches once he develops a lead.
Wonder if there's a way to show that statistically.
Is there anything that you track that might show whether there's any truth to this?

Unless you track shot-by-shot I'm not sure it's possible.
If you tracked game-by-game maybe.
You could for example show that there were many occasions where shane got something like...
50% of the race length ahead of his opponent, but won by only a few games.
 

Jude Rosenstock

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Thanks for these statistics. It's remarkable that the break is essentially not an advantage.

Well, that's one way of looking at the statistics. It also provides statistical differences between a successful break and the varying degrees of an unsuccessful break. It shows that there's about a 3/2 swing depending on who gets to shoot first after the break. If the breaker makes a ball and keeps whitey on the table, he's a 3/2 favorite to win. If the breaker ends his turn at the table, he's a 3/2 favorite to lose.
 

Colin Colenso

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Great stats, thanks AtLarge!

Considering there were 4 matches or so where a player dominated, whereby the opponent's form often drops, and considering the breaking player usually has the advantage of having been at the table, I'd say, that breaking is about a 50% proposition for even players playing winner breaks, and a losing proposition in an alternating format.

FWIW: From what I recall, the IPT 8-ball rate for ball potted with legal break was about the same, on slowish 9 footers, I'd estimate 60-65% for the top 20 players. However, win rate was much higher as evidenced by a break and run average of about 40% for the top 20 players.

Would love to see the 10 ball stats for win% on the first to pocket the 3 ball, when it's not made on the break. I'll guess over 80%. Which would indicate that the game is primarily a race to the 3 ball for the top players.
 

Johnnyt

Burn all jump cues
Silver Member
In the 70s, the 8 vs the break was considered equal on a 9 foot.
On a 10 foot, the 8 was considered more valuable.

Looks like it's still that way....sorta

I'll take Shane with all the breaks on a 7, 8, 9, or 10' table instead of the 8' Efern I'd bet with the 8. johnnyt
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
I'll take Shane with all the breaks on a 7, 8, 9, or 10' table instead of the 8' Efern I'd bet with the 8. johnnyt

I was talking 9 foot table....break or the 8 were considered equal.

If the table was tight or the cloth very slow, the 8 was looking better.

Mind you, I didn't quite agree with the conventional wisdom......
...anybody I was playing even, I would offer them the 8 if I could keep
the break.
I liked the idea that I could run packs.....and they couldn't.

...and I don't recall anybody saying Billy Johnson's break was only worth the 8.

The 8-break was only a rule of thumb....didn't apply to everyone....
...and I'm sure it's even more up in the air these days.
 

Cdryden

Pool Addict
Silver Member
Although making a ball on the break is important, I think it is even more important not to foul on the break as shown by these stats.

I have been keeping track of my own break stats and I have found that when I foul on the break I tend to lose the game more often than not.

Unforced errors are such a huge factor in this game.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... In another thread there's a debate about whether he basically lacks the ability to close matches once he develops a lead. Wonder if there's a way to show that statistically. Is there anything that you track that might show whether there's any truth to this?

Unless you track shot-by-shot I'm not sure it's possible.
If you tracked game-by-game maybe.
You could for example show that there were many occasions where shane got something like...
50% of the race length ahead of his opponent, but won by only a few games.

Yes, I think that would take a lot of work to analyze. How often does Shane get a big lead and then either lose the match or win by just a little. And you'd have to compare results for him versus similar results for a lot of other top players to have any idea whether his results are atypical.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Great stats, thanks AtLarge!

Considering there were 4 matches or so where a player dominated, whereby the opponent's form often drops, and considering the breaking player usually has the advantage of having been at the table, I'd say, that breaking is about a 50% proposition for even players playing winner breaks, and a losing proposition in an alternating format.

FWIW: From what I recall, the IPT 8-ball rate for ball potted with legal break was about the same, on slowish 9 footers, I'd estimate 60-65% for the top 20 players. However, win rate was much higher as evidenced by a break and run average of about 40% for the top 20 players.

I remember seeing those IPT results at the time, but I can't find them online any more. But I think you're right that the top guys were around 40% B&R.

Would love to see the 10 ball stats for win% on the first to pocket the 3 ball, when it's not made on the break. I'll guess over 80%. Which would indicate that the game is primarily a race to the 3 ball for the top players.

Well ... maybe I'll look at that if the snow gets deeper.:)
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Although making a ball on the break is important, I think it is even more important not to foul on the break as shown by these stats. ...

Certainly. I just looked at a number of the results I posted during the past year, and, in aggregate, breaker lost about three-quarters of the time when he fouled on the break.
 

Jude Rosenstock

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Although making a ball on the break is important, I think it is even more important not to foul on the break as shown by these stats.

I have been keeping track of my own break stats and I have found that when I foul on the break I tend to lose the game more often than not.

Unforced errors are such a huge factor in this game.

I think this is one of the most ignored facts in 9ball (and 10ball). Keep that cue-ball on the table and your chances for success increase exponentially. Scratching on the break is the most significant statistical thing you can do. If you assume that every game starts at 50/50 and your odds are consistent with these professionals (probably not true but we'll use these numbers because it's convenient), then making a ball on the break and keeping the cueball on the table gives you 13 points but scratching will take away 24 points. It's clear that scratching is more significant an act than making a ball on the break.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Miscellany from the 2014 Bigfoot data:

• The most balls made on the break was four, twice -- once by Souquet (who ran out from the break) and once by Orcollo (who scratched, and his opponent ran out).

• Three balls were made on the break, without fouling, 16 times. Van Boening accounted for 10 of those 16 times. Orcollo (twice) and Feigen (once) made 3 balls on the break while fouling.

• The average number of balls made on the break was 1.0, and the average was the same on the 23 fouled breaks as on the 244 non-fouled breaks.

• Following the 23 breaking fouls, the incoming player ran out the game 14 times (61%). [While commentating, Jay Helfert wondered aloud what this stat might be.]

• The loser won an average of 6.8 games.

• The average elapsed time for the matches was 113 minutes, or 6.3 minutes per game. The elapsed time was measured from the lag until the winning ball was made, so it includes time for racking, bathroom/smoking breaks, calls to the referee, and "discussions."

• The longest match in elapsed time was Morra def. Vann Corteza -- 137 minutes.

• The match with the highest average number of minutes per game was Feijen def. Souquet -- 8.4 minutes per game.

• The shortest match in elapsed time and lowest in minutes per game was Shaw def Saez -- 88 minutes, or 4.6 minutes per game for the 19 games.
 
Last edited:

Colin Colenso

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Miscellany from the 2014 Bigfoot data:

• The most balls made on the break was four, twice -- once by Souquet (who ran out from the break) and once by Orcollo (who scratched, and his opponent ran out).

• Three balls were made on the break, without fouling, 16 times. Van Boening accounted for 10 of those 16 times. Orcollo (twice) and Feigen (once) made 3 balls on the break while fouling.

• The average number of balls made on the break was 1.0, and the average was the same on the 23 fouled breaks as on the 244 non-fouled breaks.

• Following the 23 breaking fouls, the incoming player ran out the game 14 times (61%). [While commentating, Jay Helfert wondered aloud what this stat might be.]

• The loser won an average of 6.8 games.

• The average elapsed time for the matches was 113 minutes, or 6.3 minutes per game. The elapsed time was measured from the lag until the winning ball was made, so it includes time for racking, bathroom/smoking breaks, calls to the referee, and "discussions."

• The longest match in elapsed time was Morra def. Vann Corteza -- 137 minutes.

• The match with the highest average number of minutes per game was Feijen def. Souquet -- 8.4 minutes per game.

• The shortest match in elapsed time and lowest in minutes per game was Shaw def Saez -- 88 minutes, or 4.6 minutes per game for the 19 games.
Great stuff. Especially the 61% run out after breaking foul. This shows that they all should beat the ghost about 3 to 2, hence it should take them about 50 frames to get 10 up.

Although, seems they scratch about 1 in 10, so if scratches count as misses, they'd be 27 to 23 after 50 frames, in which case it would take them twice as many.

Of course, this 61% would include lots of games where the a safe is played in preference to a lower odds shot, which means most are even stronger against the ghost.

Add to that the advantage of working out the break and the ghost looks like a big loser.
 
Top