When Did Alternate Break Start In Pool Tournaments?

HawaiianEye said:

There is always a debate going on whether professional (an amateur, for that matter) pool tournaments should be winner break or alternate break. I have always advocated for winner break.

In professional pool, does anyone know what the ORIGINAL format was? Whether it was winner break or alternate break.

If it was winner break, when did they start doing alternate break?

I bet Jay Helfert knows the answer.

Aloha

Click to expand...

Well straight pool is winner break after each rack :wink:

Original to what events? I don't think I have seen any of the PBT matches be alternate break.

Probably when a bunch of no playing whine backs started up...
Just like ball in hand rule-
I heard 2 pros supposedly say
when 2 shot roll out was eliminated,
is when 9 ball died.
The lizard told me that both
Earl and St Louie Louie made that statement

HawaiianEye said:

Earl has said it, Keith has said it, CJ has said it, and probably 99% of any of the players who played it before they went to 1 foul BIH.

That was done to speed up the game for TV. Not to make the game BETTER.

I'm sure the same thing was done for the breaking. They didn't want one guy doing most of the shooting.

For gambling, 2 shot roll out was the game I learned on and it was a way better game.

The new format sucks if you ask me.

Click to expand...

Well yea but even if it was done for TV who are the professionals playing for, them or the audience? If you want an audience you do what is interesting to them. That is why one pocket won't be on TV anytime soon nor will something like straight rail billiards where one guy taps the balls 1 inch 200 times. You won't get rich selling goose liver flavored ice cream not matter if it wins top flavor as judged by 10 of the fanciest chefs out there, because when you stick it on a store shelf what will sell is chocolate.

And I have to say as a fan of pool, I really don't care about the roll-out after a safe rule, I'm just fine with "make the hit or ball in hand". With how the players kick and play safe it is still a good game. Same thing for alternate vs winner break, they both have advantages and drawbacks, you can argue well for either one, and we have LOL. In fact if we said you had to take the opposite side you would be able to come up with as many reasons for as against almost any rule you can pick. Jump cues, sure many don't like them, but also they are fun to see done well. Alternate breaks can make the games closer and punish mistakes as much as winner break. You mess up on your break and you have a much harder time to come back so each game is worth more. Then again you mess up on your break in winner break and the same thing is true if the guy runs 4-5 racks on you. There is no right or wrong answer, things can be as equal one way as another, just in different ways. Like saying what weighs more a pound of feathers or a pound of iron?

The only person and company I can think of that did what he thought was right and shoved it down our throats and people ate it up was Jobs and Apple. They took away the headphone port, people still bought the phone, they priced it at $1,000 people still bought the phone, they made their computers and devices only run on specific hardware and use their approved software and people still bought it. Because they turned the brand more into as much Gucci or Ferrari than a tech brand, so the people just shrugged and took it.
The other people and companies (outside of what is actually needed vs just nice to have) need to do what the people want to pay for. Look at Tesla, guy was brilliant, his ideas were often better than his competition which was mostly Edison. But who won the public because Tesla was also a bit of a nut and hard to deal with and Edison played the political and public game much better?

HawaiianEye said:

There is always a debate going on whether professional (an amateur, for that matter) pool tournaments should be winner break or alternate break. I have always advocated for winner break.

In professional pool, does anyone know what the ORIGINAL format was? Whether it was winner break or alternate break.

If it was winner break, when did they start doing alternate break?

I bet Jay Helfert knows the answer.

Aloha

Click to expand...

To my recollection, alternate break crept into our game in about 2000, but was the exception rather than the rule back then. I believe that alternate break was used in the 2000 BCA Open won by Johnny Archer.

HawaiianEye said:

Well, I guess the "audience" is so damn interested in it now that I can't find a channel that it isn't on 24 hours a day. Hell, pool is so popular and playing so damn much I'm having a hard time flipping through all the channels and getting some Corona Virus news.

Sterile pool will never be a popular TV sport. Two guys, dressed in tuxedos, playing in a room that is as quiet as a mausoleum isn't going to stimulate anybody in today's audience to watch it.

There needs to be some sort of action going on, besides just the making of balls. People like loud mouths like Fats and people who are animated. People go to sleep watching somebody being as quiet as a mouse sneak up on the table and go up and down on every shot 50 times before they shoot.

If EVERYBODY got as excited and animated as Earl, maybe pool would take off. Not only would you see pool, you could probably see some good fights in between racks and they could knock each others teeth out with cues like they do with sticks in hockey.

Click to expand...

I thought the question was which game format was better not how people played it, as in the new rules ruined 9 ball? Popularity of pool does not does not rest with exactly what the game is. There is no 8 ball played on TV as much as there is no push out 9 ball or one handed no look one pocket, but the fact is that a slower and more boring game to watch would only appeal to those that know the intricacies of the game. I play chess, but not at a very good level and I find watching chess matches super boring. If I was a master player, or aspiring to be one I'm sure it will look very different to me because I would understand what the moves meant or how clever they were. Same for the non-"Players" when they watch pool, they don't understand when a shot or position is hard, just that some ball goes in and the guy won. For them to really understand that you need a game they understand.

Take something that is not popular as a spectator sport, then make it harder to understand, go slower, and played in a new format is just asking for failure. Look at the current status of bonus ball or 7 ball or 14.1. 14.1 died out because society changed to quicker faster more better from classic and elegant and take your time. 7 ball was never really a thing past a few events and bonus ball even the pool fans did not bite.

I would bet that 14.1 as a game will be even more obscure in 30 years when the fans of it that grew up with it are too old to play or dead. But I have a feeling games like 9 ball, 8 ball and even 10 ball will be around when my generation and the generation after me is gone. The old ways of paying them will be just a historical notation in the rules. If anything the new rules made 9 ball more popular, it just made it different for the older players.

sjm said:

To my recollection, alternate break crept into our game in about 2000, but was the exception rather than the rule back then. I believe that alternate break was used in the 2000 BCA Open won by Johnny Archer.

Click to expand...

It began to show up in tournaments about twenty years ago and gradually became the norm. The grumbling about Winner Breaks began over ten years earlier when Earl kept winning matches and tournaments by putting six and seven rack barrages on players. I worked tournaments where Earl ran packages in every match he played, just completely shutting down his opponents.

The fans loved it, watching Earl string those racks, counting them right along with him. "Earl ran six," they would say, or "Earl ran seven!" When he played, everyone flocked to the table to watch him put on another display of run-out pool. There is no question that at the time, Earl's high gear was a notch above everyone else.

A lot of the other pros began to say it was unfair, that they were not getting a chance to play. And the powers that be at the WPA listened to them and began instituting new guidelines that included allowing promoters to use the "Alternate Break" format. I often wonder if this was one of the contributing factors to Earl's decline as a player and may have affected his mental health as well. I do know that when Earl was at the peak of his game he rarely caused any problems at tournaments. His deteriorating mental state somewhat coincides with the change in rules that affected him more than the other top players.

jay helfert said:

It began to show up in tournaments about twenty years ago and gradually became the norm. The grumbling about Winner Breaks began over ten years earlier when Earl kept winning matches and tournaments by putting six and seven rack barrages on players. I worked tournaments where Earl ran packages in every match he played, just completely shutting down his opponents.

The fans loved it, watching Earl string those racks, counting them right along with him. "Earl ran six," they would say, or "Earl ran seven!" When he played, everyone flocked to the table to watch him put on another display of run-out pool. There is no question that at the time, Earl's high gear was a notch above everyone else.

A lot of the other pros began to say it was unfair, that they were not getting a chance to play. And the powers that be at the WPA listened to them and began instituting new guidelines that included allowing promoters to use the "Alternate Break" format. I often wonder if this was one of the contributing factors to Earl's decline as a player and may have affected his mental health as well. I do know that when Earl was at the peak of his game he rarely caused any problems at tournaments. His deteriorating mental state somewhat coincides with the change in rules that affected him more than the other top players.

Click to expand...

I wonder about Earl too-
I watch him , earlier days-
Absolute great player and gentleman too
Man, Could he ever play :smile:

jay helfert said:

It began to show up in tournaments about twenty years ago and gradually became the norm. The grumbling about Winner Breaks began over ten years earlier when Earl kept winning matches and tournaments by putting six and seven rack barrages on players. I worked tournaments where Earl ran packages in every match he played, just completely shutting down his opponents.

The fans loved it, watching Earl string those racks, counting them right along with him. "Earl ran six," they would say, or "Earl ran seven!" When he played, everyone flocked to the table to watch him put on another display of run-out pool. There is no question that at the time, Earl's high gear was a notch above everyone else.

A lot of the other pros began to say it was unfair, that they were not getting a chance to play. And the powers that be at the WPA listened to them and began instituting new guidelines that included allowing promoters to use the "Alternate Break" format. I often wonder if this was one of the contributing factors to Earl's decline as a player and may have affected his mental health as well. I do know that when Earl was at the peak of his game he rarely caused any problems at tournaments. His deteriorating mental state somewhat coincides with the change in rules that affected him more than the other top players.

Click to expand...

Yeah. I remember playing in an alternate break format tournament in Wichita for the first time in ‘99. I think it was the result of players who grew up with participation trophies.

jay helfert said:

It began to show up in tournaments about twenty years ago and gradually became the norm. The grumbling about Winner Breaks began over ten years earlier when Earl kept winning matches and tournaments by putting six and seven rack barrages on players. I worked tournaments where Earl ran packages in every match he played, just completely shutting down his opponents.

The fans loved it, watching Earl string those racks, counting them right along with him. "Earl ran six," they would say, or "Earl ran seven!" When he played, everyone flocked to the table to watch him put on another display of run-out pool. There is no question that at the time, Earl's high gear was a notch above everyone else.

A lot of the other pros began to say it was unfair, that they were not getting a chance to play. And the powers that be at the WPA listened to them and began instituting new guidelines that included allowing promoters to use the "Alternate Break" format. I often wonder if this was one of the contributing factors to Earl's decline as a player and may have affected his mental health as well. I do know that when Earl was at the peak of his game he rarely caused any problems at tournaments. His deteriorating mental state somewhat coincides with the change in rules that affected him more than the other top players.

Click to expand...

Jay,

All due respect I think it was closer to 25 years ago. Was before 2000. Time flies-I remember it in the late 90’s here and there.

In any case I can’t stand it. There are good arguments for it and be that as it may, it still sucks. Packages are great. Break & run & take a seat is bullshit.

Happy Easter
Fatboy

HawaiianEye said:

Well, I guess the "audience" is so damn interested in it now that I can't find a channel that it isn't on 24 hours a day. Hell, pool is so popular and playing so damn much I'm having a hard time flipping through all the channels and getting some Corona Virus news.

Sterile pool will never be a popular TV sport. Two guys, dressed in tuxedos, playing in a room that is as quiet as a mausoleum isn't going to stimulate anybody in today's audience to watch it.

There needs to be some sort of action going on, besides just the making of balls. People like loud mouths like Fats and people who are animated. People go to sleep watching somebody being as quiet as a mouse sneak up on the table and go up and down on every shot 50 times before they shoot.

If EVERYBODY got as excited and animated as Earl, maybe pool would take off. Not only would you see pool, you could probably see some good fights in between racks and they could knock each others teeth out with cues like they do with sticks in hockey.

Click to expand...

I, for the life of me, can't understand how we can have 1000 channels on TV and
not one is pool related. Especially when content is what they are all looking for.

As to your other views, it's really a 'to each their own'. Snooker has a pretty good
audience across the pond... not sure that 3c does... but I really enjoy watching
both of those. I very much understand I am less than a fraction of a small minority.

td