Multiple short races is a great format!

ineedaspot said:

First, for people complaining that races to 5 are two short, the mosconi format of race to 11 races to 5 is roughly the statistical equivalent to a single race to 65. If one team wins 51% of the games, in either race-to-65 or the mosconi format, the favorite has a 59% chance of winning. If the better team wins 55% of games, in both formats the favorite will win 87% of the time.

But how much more exciting is multiple short races than a race-to-65 would be? Pressure is on each set from the very beginning.

The same thing could work with regular tournaments. A race-to-11 is the rough statistical equivalent of best 2-out-of-3 races to 5. Best 3-out-of-5 races to 5 is about the same as a race to 17. In either case, especially in the race to 17, I think it would be a lot more exciting to watch multiple short races.

This is why in tennis, they play 3-out-of-5 sets, each of which goes to 6 games, rather than a single big 20-game set, which would statistically be the closest equivalent.


The only thing I think could be improved is that the lag is very important in a short race. I'd rather see win-by-2 in alternate breaks, with maybe some kind of tiebreaker like in tennis if it goes 5-5, though I don't know what the tiebreaker would be (forced push-out after the break maybe).

Click to expand...

ineedaspot said:

First, for people complaining that races to 5 are two short, the mosconi format of race to 11 races to 5 is roughly the statistical equivalent to a single race to 65. If one team wins 51% of the games, in either race-to-65 or the mosconi format, the favorite has a 59% chance of winning. If the better team wins 55% of games, in both formats the favorite will win 87% of the time.

But how much more exciting is multiple short races than a race-to-65 would be? Pressure is on each set from the very beginning.



The only thing I think could be improved is that the lag is very important in a short race. I'd rather see win-by-2 in alternate breaks, with maybe some kind of tiebreaker like in tennis if it goes 5-5, though I don't know what the tiebreaker would be (forced push-out after the break maybe).

Click to expand...

bdorman said:

Good point; I hadn't thought of it that way.

Click to expand...

Jaden said:

You're resetting and changing team composition, emotional dynamics etc..

Not to mention the psychological factors of it being accepted that races to 5 do NOT show the better player. Single rolls affecting the outcome of matches, etc...

It's a JOKE that is designed to entertain, not determine the best...

Jaden

Click to expand...

ineedaspot said:

First, for people complaining that races to 5 are two short, the mosconi format of race to 11 races to 5 is roughly the statistical equivalent to a single race to 65. If one team wins 51% of the games, in either race-to-65 or the mosconi format, the favorite has a 59% chance of winning. If the better team wins 55% of games, in both formats the favorite will win 87% of the time.

But how much more exciting is multiple short races than a race-to-65 would be? Pressure is on each set from the very beginning.

The same thing could work with regular tournaments. A race-to-11 is the rough statistical equivalent of best 2-out-of-3 races to 5. Best 3-out-of-5 races to 5 is about the same as a race to 17. In either case, especially in the race to 17, I think it would be a lot more exciting to watch multiple short races.

This is why in tennis, they play 3-out-of-5 sets, each of which goes to 6 games, rather than a single big 20-game set, which would statistically be the closest equivalent.


The only thing I think could be improved is that the lag is very important in a short race. I'd rather see win-by-2 in alternate breaks, with maybe some kind of tiebreaker like in tennis if it goes 5-5, though I don't know what the tiebreaker would be (forced push-out after the break maybe).

Click to expand...

King T said:

So who on this team other than Shane can beat any of the top players from Europe?
John, Justin H and Justin B are good players, but they are not going win in a race to 5 or 500 against far better players that are seasoned tournament players, Corey, might but not consistently.

This aint gambling where you keep playing as long as you money last, this is tournament play, discipline, decisions, execution is top priority.

Click to expand...

ineedaspot said:

First, for people complaining that races to 5 are two short, the mosconi format of race to 11 races to 5 is roughly the statistical equivalent to a single race to 65.

Click to expand...

jsp said:

I spent the the greater part of the morning convincing myself this is true since I found it counter-intuitive initially. But it is true.

This brought me to a rather startling discovery (at least for me). For a fixed number of games needed to win a match, statistically speaking it always favors the better player if it is split up into sets as opposed to a single race.

So using the above example, 11 races to 5 will favor the better player compared to a single race to 55. Another example, two sets of 8 will favor the better player compared to a single race to 16.

That's the math.

Thanks for the very illuminating post.

Click to expand...

ineedaspot said:

I see your point about keeping it short and simple. On the other hand, with the tennis analogy, the winner of the lag starts out the set "up a break", which kind of breaks the symmetry and the idea that you need to steal a break from the other guy to win.

How about win-by-2 with a tiebreaker of some sort at 5-5? For example, at 5-5 they play one more game with mandatory pushout after the break? The race length would be predictable in that case. I really think there's something to the "hold your serve" thing and needing to "break serve" to win a set.

Don't get me wrong, it's great the way it is. Just tossing out ideas here.

Click to expand...

sjm said:

I agree with everything except win by two. The Mosconi Cup, a marathon contest contrary to the views of a few, has everything a fan could ask for:

Short races, in this case to five
Alternate break rule in effect
Shot clock with one extension per rack
Golden breaks count in all pockets
No racking disputes, rack inspection allowed, no reracks
Only a few minutes of downtime between matches

Everyone gets to play, the sportsmanship remains high, the most exciting shot in the game counts, there is late match pressure in most matches and little time is wasted. Most importantly, the matches are of a fairly predictable length, something that win by two would ruin. I can actually plan my day around the Mosconi Cup, and I'm not sure that's true of any other pool event.

Matchroom is the only pool production company that doesn't let the whimsical requests of the pros get in the way of giving viewers what they want.

Click to expand...

jsp said:

I spent the the greater part of the morning convincing myself this is true since I found it counter-intuitive initially. But it is true.

This brought me to a rather startling discovery (at least for me). For a fixed number of games needed to win a match, statistically speaking it always favors the better player if it is split up into sets as opposed to a single race.

So using the above example, 11 races to 5 will favor the better player compared to a single race to 55. Another example, two sets of 8 will favor the better player compared to a single race to 16.

That's the math.

Thanks for the very illuminating post.

Click to expand...