Break Stats -- US Open 10-Ball Championship, July 2015

AtLarge · Jul 26, 2015

Here are some aggregate break statistics from the US Open 10-Ball Championship, played the past three days at the Rio Las Vegas Resort & Casino. The promoter, CueSports International, provided pay-per-view streaming.

The conditions for this call-shot 10-Ball event included: Diamond 7-foot table with 4½" pro-cut corner pockets, Simonis 860 Tournament Blue cloth, Cyclop TV balls (including the cue ball), jump cues allowed, breaker racks using the Magic Rack template with the 2- and 3-balls on the back corners, alternating breaks from anywhere behind the head string, cue-ball fouls only, a break is a foul unless a ball is pocketed or at least 4 object balls reach a cushion (just one violation), opponent has choice to shoot or return the shot if a called ball goes in the wrong pocket or a ball is made on a safety, and a 10-ball pocketed on the break is spotted.

These stats are for all 18 streamed matches:

Friday, July 24

Skyler Woodward defeated Rodney Morris 10-2

Josh Roberts d. Scott Frost 10-9

Dennis Hatch d. Justin Bergman 10-8

Alex Pagulayan d. Ernesto Dominguez 10-8

Shane Van Boening d. Jeremy Sossei 10-8

Raymond Faraon d. Jason Klatt 10-7

Saturday, July 25

Johnny Archer d. Oscar Dominguez 10-9

Alex Pagulayan d. Shane Van Boening 10-7

Jeffrey Ignacio d. Greg Harada 10-5

Thorsten Hohmann d. Mike Dechaine 10-4

Shane McMinn d. Alex Pagulayan 10-2

Thorsten Hohmann d. Darren Appleton 10-5

Sunday, July 26

Shane Van Boening d. Sal Butera 10-3

Dennis Orcollo d. Darren Appleton 10-5

Shane Van Boening d. Dennis Orcollo 10-7

Justin Hall d. Thorsten Hohmann 10-6

Thorsten Hohmann d. Shane Van Boening 10-9 (semifinals)

Thorsten Hohmann d. Justin Hall 13-4 (finals)

Overall results -- The breaker made at least one ball and did not foul 72% of the time (209 of 291), won 57% of the games (167 of 291), and broke and ran 31% of the games (89 of 291).

Here's a more detailed breakdown of the 291 games.

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:

Breaker won the game: 140 (48% of the 291 games)

Breaker lost the game: 69 (24%)

Breaker fouled on the break:

Breaker won the game: 3 (1%)

Breaker lost the game: 17 (6%)

Breaker broke dry (without fouling):

Breaker won the game: 24 (8%)

Breaker lost the game: 38 (13%)

Therefore, whereas the breaker won 57% (167) of all 291 games,

He won 67% (140 of 209) of the games in which he made at least one ball on the break and did not foul.

He won 15% (3 of 20) of the games in which he fouled on the break.

He won 39% (24 of 62) of the games in which he broke dry but did not foul.

He won 33% (27 of 82) of the games in which he either fouled on the break or broke dry without fouling.

Break-and-run games: The 89 break-and-run games represented 31% of all 291 games, 53% of the 167 games won by the breaker, and 43% of the 209 games in which the break was successful (made a ball and didn't foul).

With alternating breaks, B&R "packages" of the normal type are not possible. But we can still look at the breaks of a given player and see how many he ran on his own successive breaks, and we can call these "alternate-break packages." The 89 break-and-run games consisted of 1 alternate-break 4-pack (by Van Boening), 5 alternate-break 3-packs, 17 alternate-break 2-packs, and 36 singles.

10-balls on the break: The 10-ball was made on the break 3 times (1.0% of the 291 breaks), and it was spotted rather than counting as a game win.

midnightpulp · Jul 26, 2015

AtLarge said:
Here are some aggregate break statistics from the US Open 10-Ball Championship, played the past three days at the Rio Las Vegas Resort & Casino. The promoter, CueSports International, provided pay-per-view streaming.

The conditions for this call-shot 10-Ball event included: Diamond 7-foot table with 4½" pro-cut corner pockets, Simonis 860 Tournament Blue cloth, Cyclop TV balls (including the cue ball), jump cues allowed, breaker racks using the Magic Rack template with the 2- and 3-balls on the back corners, alternating breaks from anywhere behind the head string, cue-ball fouls only, a break is a foul unless a ball is pocketed or at least 4 object balls reach a cushion (just one violation), opponent has choice to shoot or return the shot if a called ball goes in the wrong pocket or a ball is made on a safety, and a 10-ball pocketed on the break is spotted.

These stats are for all 18 streamed matches:

Friday, July 24

Skyler Woodward defeated Rodney Morris 10-2

Josh Roberts d. Scott Frost 10-9

Dennis Hatch d. Justin Bergman 10-8

Alex Pagulayan d. Ernesto Dominguez 10-8

Shane Van Boening d. Jeremy Sossei 10-8

Raymond Faraon d. Jason Klatt 10-7

Saturday, July 25

Johnny Archer d. Oscar Dominguez 10-9

Alex Pagulayan d. Shane Van Boening 10-7

Jeffrey Ignacio d. Greg Harada 10-5

Thorsten Hohmann d. Mike Dechaine 10-4

Shane McMinn d. Alex Pagulayan 10-2

Thorsten Hohmann d. Darren Appleton 10-5

Sunday, July 26

Shane Van Boening d. Sal Butera 10-3

Dennis Orcollo d. Darren Appleton 10-5

Shane Van Boening d. Dennis Orcollo 10-7

Justin Hall d. Thorsten Hohmann 10-6

Thorsten Hohmann d. Shane Van Boening 10-9 (semifinals)

Thorsten Hohmann d. Justin Hall 13-4(finals)

Overall results -- The breaker made at least one ball and did not foul 72% of the time (209 of 291), won 57% of the games (167 of 291), and broke and ran 31% of the games (89 of 291).

Here's a more detailed breakdown of the 291games.

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:

• Breaker won the game: 140 (48% of the 291 games)

• Breaker lost the game: 69 (24%)

Breaker fouled on the break:

• Breaker won the game: 3 (1%)

• Breaker lost the game: 17 (6%)

Breaker broke dry (without fouling):

• Breaker won the game: 24 (8%)

• Breaker lost the game: 38 (13%)

Therefore, whereas the breaker won 57% (167) of all 291 games,

• He won 67% (140 of 209) of the games in which he made at least one ball on the break and did not foul.

• He won 15% (3 of 20) of the games in which he fouled on the break.

• He won 39% (24 of 62) of the games in which he broke dry but did not foul.

• He won 33% (27 of 82) of the games in which he either fouled on the break or broke dry without fouling.

Break-and-run games: The 89 break-and-run games represented 31% of all 291 games, 53% of the 167 games won by the breaker, and 43% of the 209 games in which the break was successful (made a ball and didn't foul).

With alternating breaks, B&R "packages" of the normal type are not possible. But we can still look at the breaks of a given player and see how many he ran on his own successive breaks, and we can call these "alternate-break packages." The 89 break-and-run games consisted of 1 alternate-break 4-pack (by Van Boening), 5 alternate-break 3-packs, 17 alternate-break 2-packs, and 36 singles.

10-balls on the break: The 10-ball was made on the break 3 times (1.0% of the 291 breaks), and it was spotted rather than counting as a game win.

Reasonable percentages for a bar table, actually. Breaker has a slight edge, but not so massive that it's insurmountable.

AtLarge · Jul 27, 2015

Miscellany from the data for the 2015 US Open 10-Ball Championship
[This relates only to the 18 streamed matches, not to all matches in the event.]

• The most balls made on a single break was four, done seven times. Five of those seven resulted in B&R's, the other two games were losses for the breaker.

• The average number of balls made on the break was 1.4 (this includes dry and fouled breaks). Excluding dry breaks, the average was 1.8. Excluding dry and fouled breaks, the average was also 1.8.

• Following the 20 breaking fouls, the incoming player ran out the game 16 times (80%).

• 52% of the games ended in one inning -- 31% won by the breaker (B&R) and 21% won by the non-breaker.

• 41% of the games were run out by the player who was at the table following the break -- 31% won by the breaker (B&R) and 11% won by the non-breaker following a fouled or dry break.

• The average match score for the 17 races to 10 (i.e., excluding the finals) was 10 - 6.1.

• The average elapsed time for the 17 races to 10 was 86 minutes, or 5.4 minutes per game. The elapsed time was measured from the lag until the winning ball was made (or conceded), so it includes time for racking and breaks (time-outs).

• The Archer d. Dominguez match was longest in elapsed time at 127 minutes for the 19 games. The Van Boening d. Sossei match was highest in average minutes per game at 6.9 min./game for the 18 games.

• The Woodward d. Morris match and the Van Boening d. Butera match tied for shortest in elapsed time at 53 minutes, and the latter was lowest in average minutes per game at 4.1 min./game for the 13 games.

AtLarge · Jul 27, 2015

Hohmann (1st place) and Van Boening (3rd place) had the most appearances in streamed matches (5 each) and produced remarkably similar break results.

Broke successfully (made at least one ball and did not foul):

Hohmann -- 80% (32 of 40)

Van Boening -- 83% (35 of 42)

All others -- 68% (142 of 209)

Total -- 72% (209 of 291)

Won game on his break:

Hohmann -- 65% (26 of 40)

Van Boening 64% (27 of 42)

All others -- 55% (114 of 209)

Total -- 57% (167 of 291)

Break-and-run games:

Hohmann -- 43% (17 of 40)

Van Boening -- 43% (18 of 42)

All others -- 26% (54 of 209)

Total -- 31% (89 of 291)

Break-and-run games on successful breaks:

Hohmann -- 53% (17 of 32)

Van Boening -- 51% (18 of 35)

All others -- 38% (54 of 142)

Total -- 43% (89 of 209)

Cardigan Kid · Jul 27, 2015

Great statistics as always, sir.
Any comparable statistics in 10 ball race to 10 on 9 footer tournaments in your history books?

pt109 · Jul 27, 2015

High run....a one-pack
...one stat I'm never happy to see.

In this company, if you get way behind, you might as well crack your cue when playing
alternate breaks......no amazing comebacks allowed unless your opponent rolls over.

I think alternate breaks also affects the bnrs greatly....no momentum possible.

As usual, thanx to AtLarge for the over-view......they give us a clue

BRussell · Jul 27, 2015

Thanks AtLarge. I'm curious about your sense of the difference between these and the 9-foot events. The break-and-run % doesn't seem to be any greater. It seems that they miss less, but the problems come up with clusters and position errors.

JasBy · Jul 27, 2015

Here's link to last years CSI invitational on 9 footers with a fairly comparable sample size.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=370041&highlight=break+stats

AtLarge · Jul 27, 2015

Here's a comparison of break results from the streamed matches I watched at 10-Ball events on three different-sized tables.

The results for the 7-foot table are strictly for this recent 2015 US Open 10-Ball Championship.
The results for the 9-foot table are for the 2014 CSI Invitational 10-Ball Championship, for which the conditions were essentially the same as for the US Open except for table size.
The results for the 10-foot table are for the aggregate of all 5 Bigfoot events held at the Derby City Classic and the Southern Classic from 2012-2015. Conditions for these events differed in some significant ways from the conditions for the CSI events (no breaking templates, for example).

Broke successfully (made at least one ball and did not foul):

7' -- 72% (209 of 291)

9' -- 65% (150 of 232)

10' -- 54% (529 of 985)

Breaker won game:

7' -- 57% (167 of 291)

9' -- 49% (114 of 232)

10' -- 51% (500 of 985)

Break-and-run games:

7' -- 31% (89 of 291)

9' -- 21% (49 of 232)

10' -- 15% (151 of 985)

Break-and-run games on successful breaks:

7' -- 43% (89 of 209)

9' -- 33% (49 of 150)

10' -- 29% (151 of 529)

Run-outs by player at table following the break:

7' -- 41% (120 of 291)

9' -- 35% (82 of 232)

10' -- not calculated

jburkm002 · Jul 27, 2015

Thanks. Love the comparison between tables. 7ft do play easier but not by a large margin and some say. Break makes a big difference. Any stats on missed shots by players? Loved watching the aggressively play on the baby tables.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Skippy27 · Jul 27, 2015

AtLarge said:
Miscellany from the data for the 2015 US Open 10-Ball Championship
• 52% of the games ended in one inning -- 31% won by the breaker (B&R) and 21% won by the non-breaker.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt a B&R 0 inning and not 1. Also, wouldnt the same be said if a break and then miss (at any point) and then run by the opponent? I guess what I am saying unless the first shooter ever returns to the table then an inning is never completed.

Cardigan Kid · Jul 27, 2015

I'm also going to guess that the average time per rack was longer on bigger tables because of added safety play. With the seven foot table, the pro is more inclined to go for the run out?

Great table length comparison AtLarge.the numbers do not lie.

pt109 · Jul 27, 2015

Skippy27 said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt a B&R 0 inning and not 1. Also, wouldnt the same be said if a break and then miss (at any point) and then run by the opponent? I guess what I am saying unless the first shooter ever returns to the table then an inning is never completed.

Soooo...if you play a race to nine....and you run the set out...
....you've had zero innings?

AtLarge · Jul 27, 2015

Skippy27 said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt a B&R 0 inning and not 1. Also, wouldnt the same be said if a break and then miss (at any point) and then run by the opponent? I guess what I am saying unless the first shooter ever returns to the table then an inning is never completed.

A break-and-run game is a one-inning game won by the breaker.

A one-inning game won by the non-breaker would be a run-out by the non-breaker on his first trip to the table after any of the following -- a dry break, a foul on the break, or failure by the breaker to run out after a wet (successful) break.

When I say a game ended in one inning it means by either the breaker or non-breaker.

So, for example, a five-inning game means both players got to the table four times, and then either the breaker won in his fifth inning or the non-breaker won in his fifth inning.

Also, note that there is a difference between the number of one-inning games and the number of games run-out by the player who comes to the table following the break. The former includes the latter.

AtLarge · Jul 27, 2015

Cardigan Kid said:
I'm also going to guess that the average time per rack was longer on bigger tables because of added safety play. With the seven foot table, the pro is more inclined to go for the run out? ...

Hmm, the numbers aren't coming out like that so far.

7' -- 5.4 min./game for 291 games (2015 US Open 10-Ball)

9' -- 6.8 min./game for 232 games (2014 CSI Invitational 10-Ball)

10' -- 6.3 min./game for 510 games (2014 and 2015 DCC Bigfoot 10-Ball events combined)

The racking was a bit different in these events -- rack your own with a template on the 7-footer, referee racks with a template on the 9-footer, and rack your own with a wooden triangle on the 10-footers.

AtLarge · Jul 27, 2015

pt109 said:
High run....a one-pack
...one stat I'm never happy to see.

In this company, if you get way behind, you might as well crack your cue when playing
alternate breaks......no amazing comebacks allowed unless your opponent rolls over.

I think alternate breaks also affects the bnrs greatly....no momentum possible.

As usual, thanx to AtLarge for the over-view......they give us a clue

As to packages -- one just has to take a little different view of it -- how many did a player run in a row on his own break.

As to comebacks -- if it's possible for one player to get way ahead with alternating breaks, it's certainly possible for the other player to come back from a large deficit. Let's see how it went in this event's 18 streamed matches.

• In 9 of the matches the winner never trailed, but in one of those matches a 9-2 lead dwindled to 9-7 and in another match a 5-0 lead dwindled to 8-6.

• In 6 of the matches the winner was behind at some point but by no more than one game.

• In one match the winner trailed 3-7 before winning 10-9.

• In one match the winner trailed 0-4 before winning 10-9.

• In one match the winner's 7-3 lead turned to an 8-9 deficit before he won 10-9.

BRussell · Jul 27, 2015

AtLarge said:
As to comebacks -- if it's possible for one player to get way ahead with alternating breaks, it's certainly possible for the other player to come back from a large deficit. Let's see how it went in this event's 18 streamed matches.

• In 9 of the matches the winner never trailed, but in one of those matches a 9-2 lead dwindled to 9-7 and in another match a 5-0 lead dwindled to 8-6.

• In 6 of the matches the winner was behind at some point but by no more than one game.

• In one match the winner trailed 3-7 before winning 10-9.

• In one match the winner trailed 0-4 before winning 10-9.

• In one match the winner's 7-3 lead turned to an 8-9 deficit before he won 10-9.

Did you follow the game-by-game Fargo ratings? In quite a few cases I saw a player with a sub-10% chance of winning, but they came back and either won or made it a very close game. I almost wonder if they need some regressiveness in the model. But maybe with, say, a 5% chance of winning, you'd expect some to come back within a game or two but still lose, and 1 in 20 to come back and win.

AtLarge · Jul 27, 2015

BRussell said:
Did you follow the game-by-game Fargo ratings? In quite a few cases I saw a player with a sub-10% chance of winning, but they came back and either won or made it a very close game. I almost wonder if they need some regressiveness in the model. But maybe with, say, a 5% chance of winning, you'd expect some to come back within a game or two but still lose, and 1 in 20 to come back and win.

Yes, I was following the Fargo ratings, too. They could certainly jump up and down quite a bit as a game was won or lost. I'd like to know exactly how they are calculated, something I haven't found on the FargoRate website.

AtLarge · Jul 27, 2015

BRussell said:
Thanks AtLarge. I'm curious about your sense of the difference between these and the 9-foot events. The break-and-run % doesn't seem to be any greater. It seems that they miss less, but the problems come up with clusters and position errors.

For 10-Ball, I think the stats show that the 7-footer is simply easier. I haven't checked the numbers, but you're probably right about fewer misses. I don't know whether clusters are more of a problem and position errors more frequent; I didn't get that sense watching the US Open 10-Ball. I'd guess that kicking errors were fewer; maybe I'll try to check that at some point.

I'd still prefer that important events for pros and top amateurs be played on 9- or 10-foot tables. [Yes, I understand CSI's reasons, and it's not my money.] I simply believe that making long shots and playing good position from long shots is something done better by top players than by not-so-top players. The 7-footer removes some of the table's capacity to discriminate in that manner.

Cardigan Kid · Jul 27, 2015

AtLarge said:
For 10-Ball, I think the stats show that the 7-footer is simply easier. I haven't checked the numbers, but you're probably right about fewer misses. I don't know whether clusters are more of a problem and position errors more frequent; I didn't get that sense watching the US Open 10-Ball. I'd guess that kicking errors were fewer; maybe I'll try to check that at some point.

I'd still prefer that important events for pros and top amateurs be played on 9- or 10-foot tables. [Yes, I understand CSI's reasons, and it's not my money.] I simply believe that making long shots and playing good position from long shots is something done better by top players than by not-so-top players. The 7-footer removes some of the table's capacity to discriminate in that manner.

Also, do you think if the pros played more tournaments exclusively on 7-footers, they would get better acclimated to the subtle changes and their statistics could actually get better...maybe widening the gap and showing how much easier the game could be on 7 footers? So in time (if CSI held these over and over) could the stat percentages change?

Break Stats -- US Open 10-Ball Championship, July 2015

AzB Gold Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Gold Member

AzB Gold Member

AzB Silver Member

WO double hemlock

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Gold Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

WO double hemlock

AzB Gold Member

AzB Gold Member

AzB Gold Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Gold Member

AzB Gold Member

AzB Silver Member