US Open 10 Ball - Seeded Brackets
- Thread starter watchez
- Start date
But... but... the NCAA is not an "open" tournament.
Sure it's great for the seeds and the promoter who is assured the better players are still standing at the end, which means better matches for spectators. But for the unseeded it blows chunks -- they're taking it in the shorts as far as the relative value of their entry fee and expenses.
Pool has always struck me as a pretty egalitarian sport. Holding a local tournament and a pro wants to get in who will basically steal the prize money -- sure, no problem, the more the merrier. But then the coin is flipped and it's a big event and they get seeded, guaranteeing an easier path to the prize money.
What next? Seeding at the DCC?
Lou Figueroa
Yes the brackets are most difficult to find. You have to know the secret passage way to find it. I’ve told the leaders of CSI that their website is the most difficult to navigate on the intrawebs. They told me I was wrong. And then they banned me. But I don’t mind drawing some web traffic to their site they certainly would never get.
9 footers- moved to Griff’s last year for that purpose
I don’t disagree with the rest of your post, but I’m not sure this part is true. If you’re a low seed in the NCAA basketball, you’re in big trouble. But these pool tournaments are mostly all double elimination, so when you lose you’re unlikely to hit a top player on the loser’s side until the end of the bracket. Is that better or worse than standing a chance of getting unlucky and hitting a top seed in the first round, but also a chance of getting a lucky draw and not having a top seed until the finals?
My point was that the NCAA is not "open" in the sense that you pay $500 and get in with your 5-man pick-up squad of college guys.
This pool tournament is truly open, and if you pay, you play. Sure, a lesser player is still dead money regardless. However, I have seen many, many instances where an unknown catches a gear, maybe assisted by a draw that has many of the killers in the other half of the double-eloimation bracket, and *just maybe* he gets some cheese and a little glory. With a seeded tournament that is next to impossible.
Some guys will still go and donate anyways. But not only will they be playing against professionals, they will also be playing against professionals with the deck stacked against them, and that is seeded brackets.
Lou Figueroa
I cashed in the Banks one year at DCC. That $150 is the best money that every touched my hands! ha ha.
Seeded pool tourneys will always have poor turnout in number of players.
Unfair to average shooters and shortstops who want the luck of the draw to
have a chance of advancing.
Seeded tourneys increases the odds that most of nonpro players will be dead money. Hence, poor turnout in number of entries.
Unfair to average shooters and shortstops who want the luck of the draw to
have a chance of advancing.
Seeded tourneys increases the odds that most of nonpro players will be dead money. Hence, poor turnout in number of entries.
oh yeah!
I've cashed at the DCC several times and it's sweet monies. And I believe part of the reason they get such a tremendous turnout every year is that every player goes into the pot and takes their chances on the draw *equally.* It always tickles me when I draw a guy I have not seen on a DVD or stream, or don't get a hit on a Google search, or just have never heard of, and I seen two champions paired up the first round. And that's what I mean about pool being an egalitarian sport -- everyone takes their chances equally.
If the day comes that the DCC, or many other events, become seeded, it will reduce the entries, current subject case in point.
Lou Figueroa
Seeded pool tourneys will always have poor turnout in number of players.
Unfair to average shooters and shortstops who want the luck of the draw to
have a chance of advancing.
Seeded tourneys increases the odds that most of nonpro players will be dead money. Hence, poor turnout in number of entries.
Totally agree -- seeding in an "open" pool tournament is fundamentally unfair to a segment of the field. And when you seed an open event, the one tiny edge a lesser player might possibly, maybe have, is taken away. It's like playing at a casino where you get even money on a blackjack.
Lou Figueroa
Jay gets it. How many tourneys have you run Jay?
I’ve only done a few hundred myself.
There is a way to do this Steve rather easily. You remove all the numbers in the brackets with the sixteen seeded players and than add three more byes to the tournament chart. That leaves 29 numbers to draw from for the remaining players. 26 of them will play first round matches and three will get a bye. It's been done that way before many times, just not always. It's perfectly okay what they've done here, just that it reduces the advantage to being a seeded player.
Last edited:
The #3 seed is Alex, who is in the bottom half with Orcollo, the #2 seed. Aranas, the #4 seed, is up top with Shane.
I kind of think it's a good idea for the 16 top seeds to get 16 of the 19 1st round byes in this case, with 45 total players on a 64 player chart. Yes, it's an advantage for the top 16 ranked players to be given their first round match, but it can also be of tremendous benefit to the non seeded players - they are guaranteed they will not have to play against a seeded player right off the bat in the opening round. And the winner of that opening match between non-seeded players then has some momentum and a feel for the tables when they go in to that 2nd round match, likely against a seeded player.
Last edited:
Yeah I got you. I’m just not sure that the premise is true that a seeded double-elimination tournament is worse for a lower-ranked player, even though it’s probably perceived that way.
Seeded pool tourneys will always have poor turnout in number of players.
Unfair to average shooters and shortstops who want the luck of the draw to
have a chance of advancing.
Seeded tourneys increases the odds that most of nonpro players will be dead money. Hence, poor turnout in number of entries.
I understand that, but it isn’t just the shortstops that are missing- many elite players aren’t there either- Mika, Appleton, Shaw, Morris, Bergman, Morra, etc
The math doesn't make sense for most of them.
$1000 in entries plus at least $200 a day for hotel/expenses every day they are in Vegas. If they come in the day before and leave the day after thats $1600 plus airfare which is $300-$500 usually. So call it an even $3000 to take a shot at two $10K added events against a field full of killers. In Vegas in July where its currently averaging around a balmy 110 degrees.
If a guy wants to chop up a room or lives close enough to drive it makes it easier but all the guys on your list are over cramming four to a room and living on fast food.
If you look at it from a business perspective its a not a great investment.
Its no ones fault. Just the state of the game.
First time I went to the US Open nine ball....2000...it was seeded...64 seeds
....seemed like nobody minded..286 entries
True. However I thought the other tournaments they could enter at the rio might entice them if they don’t overlap. Oh well! I was hoping to see more of the elite players, but at least some of the greats are there