50 vs 100

[dmgwalsh]

Was this meant for me or mr lipsky ?

Well, Steve, I quoted your post where you said that your comfort zone wasn't in the 20s or 30s and that you had been running 50s and 60s lately, so yeah, I was meaning it for you.

I think Lissky has a much higher comfort zone.

 

[stevekur1]

Well, Steve, I quoted your post where you said that your comfort zone wasn't in the 20s or 30s and that you had been running 50s and 60s lately, so yeah, I was meaning it for you.

I think Lissky has a much higher comfort zone.

okay, i just wasnt sure with multiple steve's on this forum !!

plus you had aske me that question way at the bottom of your post

i dont think 50s - 60s is my comfort zone just yet though..maybe 40s.....let it settle in a bit and i will get back to ya on that !

-Steve

 

[PoolSharkAllen]

How many attempts did Bill have in those 22 months? I have no idea, but, again for the sake of an illustration, let me assume it was 20 per day for 5 days a week for 95 weeks. That makes a total of 9,500 attempts (or innings). So with 195 or 200 "successes" at running 50, the relative frequency was about one time out of 50. So if we could say that someone has a probability of .02 (1 in 50) of running at least 50, then the probability of doing that twice in a row (without a miss) for a run of 100 or more would be 1 in 2,500, or .0004. 100 would be "50 times as hard" as 50. Bill's results actually are pretty close to this, with a ratio of about 40 to 1 for runs of 50-99 versus 100 or more.

One caveat though is that the probability of running 100 balls changes as the balls get pocketed. So before the inning starts, the probability of Marop running 50 balls may be 2% and the probability of running 100 balls may be 0.04%, as you mentioned.

However, once the inning is in progress and you pocket the first 50 balls, the probability of you pocketing another 50 balls on your way to 100 is still 2% (not 0.04%).

 

[AtLarge]

... once the inning is in progress and you pocket the first 50 balls, the probability of you pocketing another 50 balls on your way to 100 is still 2% (not 0.04%).

Sure. The probability of rolling a six-sided die and getting a "five" is 1/6. If you have just rolled a "five," the probability of now rolling another "five" is again 1/6. But before you roll it the first time, the probability of rolling two "fives" in a row is 1/36.

In talking about the difficulty of running 100 versus running 50, I mean the relative difficulties before the runs start. If I've already run some portion of the 100, of course the probability of getting to 100 in that inning is higher than if I haven't yet started (again, this oversimplifies).

 

[AtLarge]

... Btw, the percentages game can get interesting in another way as well. Someone who plays the game well enough to make 95% be the average difficulty of every shot will have an "average" run of 19 (he'll miss one time every 20 balls). But if you can raise that average to just 98% you will have an average run of 49 (one miss every 50 balls)....

But, interestingly enough,

• The guy with a "make" probability of .95 on every shot has only a 38% chance of making 19 shots in a row and a 0.6% chance of making 100 shots in a row;
• The guy with a "make" probability of .98 on every shot has only a 37% chance of making 49 shots in a row and a 13% chance of making 100 shots in a row;
• So the .98 guy is 22 times as likely to run 100 as the .95 guy; and
• It takes a guy with an every-shot "make" probability of .993 to have a 50% chance of making 100 shots in a row.

Man, this game is tough.

 

[Dan Harriman]

50 vs 100 ball run

Today I ran my 200th run over 50 within the last 22 months. 189 are on video. I am breaking down the runs by category to illustrate the the difference in difficulty from running 50 compared to running 100. Any thoughts?

50 - 59 = 110 times
60 - 69 = 49
70 - 79 = 18
80 - 89 = 12
90 - 99 = 6
100-120 = 5

-Bill

Hi Bill, I have read your posts in the past and from what I can tell your one of the more cool posters on here, the old expression is "a person can get lucky and run 50 but they cannot get lucky and run 100." There are some who say I ran an ugly 41 - I do think they are on to something with this, I have run some 200's that were indeed down right ugly. I erased these runs as I did'nt think they were fit to show others, the 280 was not my high run but probably the most smooth for me. I like Lipsky's saying about how he is always searching for that perfect run, kudos to this way of thinking Mr. Lipsky.

 

[mosconiac]

50 - 59 = 110 times
60 - 69 = 49
70 - 79 = 18
80 - 89 = 12
90 - 99 = 6
100-120 = 5

I took a rather unscientific look at these stats & the loose trend I see if pretty interesting. Each improvement in 10 balls results in about 50% less occurrence. Said another way, it seems that at Bill's skill level, it is twice as hard to run each extra 10 balls.

I would guess that Bill's 100-120 range is constituted of about 3-4 100-109's and 1-2 110-119's. Which would mean he would top out in the 120-129 range with 1 occurrence?