Mosconi Cup -- At Least We've Proved the Coach Doesn't Matter

Here is what the US team needs to do. Take the top 10 or 15 or 20 American players and have 3 tournaments to decide who makes the Mosconi
Cup. Play the games under the exact same conditions as the Mosconi Cup. Same 4 1/4 pockets on the same type of table. Same shot clock. Same weird referee sharking you.

Assign a certain point value for each place. After the 3 tournaments the players with the most points make the team. No more playing favorites. The players who play the best under those conditions make the team.

Of course that assumes the whole thing is about winning. I get the feeling there are other factors involved.

I heard many players from Europe say they do drills, Appleton and Thorsten quickly come to mind.

From my observation year after year, safety has been the most critical factor. On to many occasions I seen USA go for the hero shot and miss leaving and easy out, rather than a routine safety. Like Billy did on the first win EU got, trying to bank the 8 ball on day two first match that sold out a win, I though he would leave the cue ball on the top rail, and play 8 ball two rails towards bottom rail, with the added possibility to leave it behind the 9 ball . Europe on the other hand, don't take as many risks as USA.

I didn't expect Johan would make that much of a difference, other than have them do drills in practice, including safety drills.

9andout said:

I think USA has only won 2 lags so far this year. ??
Do you have a count? ...

Click to expand...

Correct, 2 of 10 so far.

alstl said:

Here is what the US team needs to do. Take the top 10 or 15 or 20 American players and have 3 tournaments to decide who makes the Mosconi
Cup. Play the games under the exact same conditions as the Mosconi Cup. Same 4 1/4 pockets on the same type of table. Same shot clock. Same weird referee sharking you.

Assign a certain point value for each place. After the 3 tournaments the players with the most points make the team. No more playing favorites. The players who play the best under those conditions make the team.

Of course that assumes the whole thing is about winning. I get the feeling there are other factors involved.

Click to expand...

Interesting. Need a sponsort to put up the cash though.

AtLarge said:

Correct, 2 of 10 so far.

Click to expand...

Thanks. Hoping for a better day today! Heading on over again.

No chance? USA lost at least two matches on a narrow miss or bobbled ball. Win two more matches and the score is 4-6.

Or it could just as easily be 1-9

Most of these matches are coin tosses on who will win any given day.

ascu-stats and Mosconi Cup

Would like to see Round Robin format with the top eight players from Europe and USA competing. Play nine-ball with the magic rack so racking is not an issue. Depth of players on each team should could become a important issue. No players from outside Euro or USA. One more point, could you imagine the Ryder Cup US team with a foreign captain. No more scotch double just singles.

BasementDweller said:

(On a different note)
One last thing, for everybody that thinks the problem with pool is our amateur bar table leagues, I got news for you -- YOU'RE dead wrong! This past week I just played in the Grand Rapids Open and it was all on bar tables and guess what? Everybody had a blast! Amateur pool is about having fun -- and bar tables are fun. Get rid of the bar tables and the only thing that would happen is 95 percent of all these players would just give up the game. They would just disappear. POOF and they'd be gone! Pool is VERY DIFFICULT to play, especially if you aren't totally dedicated to the game. Bar tables give part timers a chance to accomplish something on the table. In other words, it's just not a zero-sum game when it comes to big tables and bar tables.

Click to expand...

Just wanted to comment on this aside. I've no problem with bar boxes and recognize that without them, currently there would be little to no pool in the states (at least midwest/south where I live). I will say that in order to compete on the national stage at the highest level, pro players must play on the equipment that they compete on, and that is nine foot tables, not bar boxes.

Swighey said:

By all means, change tournaments to races to 30 or 50 or 100 or whatever. But there will be two downsides to that format for the players who are currently good at taking players out of their comfort zones and taking their E£$¥ money - 1) those long races will be boring for the casual spectator and there will therefore be no sponsorship and therefore no tournaments, 2) the players who are better at tournaments will adapt their game to peak in the longer race format and will still be the better tournament players.

Click to expand...

+1 Good post.
It is all about conditioning. If there are many tourneys/money with long races, top players will adapt.
In chess, whether it is lightning chess or normal chess category, the top players adapt and dominate. It is nonsense to say tournament players who usually play short races cannot play long races and vice versa.

One last thing. While 8 ball on a bar box is a game that I do enjoy, pool in general is just not as difficult on a bar box nor the playing experience as satisfying as pool on a nine footer. No right or wrong I suppose, but that is certainly how I feel.

A coach can help you to prepare mentally and physically - but he can't shoot the balls for you. Once you're out there, you are on your own. You can either embrace the pressure or be suffocated by it. If you are suffocating, the best a coach can do for you is to tell you to get your hands out from around your own throat.

spartan said:

+1 Good post.
It is all about conditioning. If there are many tourneys/money with long races, top players will adapt.
In chess, whether it is lightning chess or normal chess category, the top players adapt and dominate. It is nonsense to say tournament players who usually play short races cannot play long races and vice versa.

Click to expand...

IMO, extending tourney races beyond a race to 11 just doesn't add much statistical value to the outcome to make it worth the extra time to run a tourney of any size. I guess that one could put on a short field long race tourney like the DCC's Bigfoot Challenge (great event, btw), but that's the only way to make longer races work.

This is a wonderful situation. After listening to and reading about Mosconi and Ryder cup captains being completely overrated for years and years, it turns out that if the players are not good enough, the captain cannot win the event.

end-of-year-bonus-tournament

I've been on a bunch of teams on some levels that exceed Pop Warner and I have found
after a certain level of play most coaches are about the same in things they say and do,
but not in organization.

I don't really think the talent level is all that different, some players have good and bad
days, some are self defeating some are positive, some lack focus.
Johann would appear to be an excellent coach but at that level of player just how much
more coaching are these guys gonna be willing to take.

I think the match ups aren't really favoring the Americans and neither is the format.
Something I thought about on the first day was that the longer the matches went on the stronger the
Americans seemed to play, but it was difficult for any of them to survive more
than 7 or 8 games, by then they were just too far behind.

I think the American's biggest issue is preparation. They can't rely on just raw talent, no
prep or fundamentals. I think they get tortured in those areas, just too much for them to
overcome. It's kind of difficult for me to watch any more, too much like watching a Bronco game.

9andout said:

Interesting. Need a sponsort to put up the cash though.

Click to expand...

Shouldn't be too hard to find a casino which would give some pool players a free hotel room and a place to play. Charge admission for fans, most of whom will spend money in the casino and buy a hotel room.

I would also try - probably unsuccessfully - to get the casino to allow gambling and make odds on the games as the Mosconi Cup does. That might eliminate a player or two who would otherwise qualify.

One thing that's obvious is the current way of selecting the team isn't producing a winning team.

Have to kinda feel bad for Johann, this can't be at all what he expected

Do the euros qualify for MC points playing bar table events? Is the MC event played on bar tables?

So why in the hell are the US boys qualified on that basis.

Until that is AXED to DEATH, event will get performances like we have seen.

Big boys play on big tables.

(Cross posting to Matchroom hopefully reads this...)

Dognit said:

Do the euros qualify for MC points playing bar table events? Is the MC event played on bar tables?

So why in the hell are the US boys qualified on that basis.

Until that is AXED to DEATH, event will get performances like we have seen.

Big boys play on big tables.

(Cross posting to Matchroom hopefully reads this...)

Click to expand...

Last year some of the qualifying events for Team USA were on 7-footers, but not this year.

AtLarge said:

Last year some of the qualifying events for Team USA were on 7-footers, but not this year.

Click to expand...

THKs for clarification.

TheLoneSilencer said:

No, it does not as it is a different form of the race in every match with sifferent players to boot.

Click to expand...

Of course there different players in the different matches. The point is determining the better team, so of course all the players have to play...lol.

TheLoneSilencer said:

A huge difference in a race to 30 in one setting versus 6 races of 5 spread out.

Click to expand...

There is. The big differences are that one of those puts a primary focus on testing who can play under the most pressure, who can come with it on demand when they have to, and who is capable of the highest levels of play. The other puts a primary focus on testing who has better endurance.

Long races are for players that can't handle pressure. Long races are for players who can't come with it on demand when they have to.

Before anybody gets confused I am not saying that a short race does a better job of determining the better player than a long race does. What I am saying is that three races to ten or even six races to five is a better test of the player's skills and does a better job of finding out who the better player is than one race to thirty. Similarly, nine races to eleven does a better job at testing and finding the better player than a single race to one hundred as another example. Now if what you primarily care about is stamina and endurance, and you don't care so much about the highest levels of play or pressure or consistency or being able to come with it when you have to, then by all means do a long continuous set...or just do a three mile foot race instead.