8-Ball: Winner Break or Alternating Break?

Which do you [U]prefer[/U] for [U]8-ball[/U]

  • Total voters
    77
Cuebacca

Cuebacca

________
Silver Member
Please note that this thread and poll are intended to discuss 8-ball only. If you want to compare to other games, by all means, feel free, but please keep 8-ball in mind for the poll at least. :)

The poll asks, which do you prefer for 8-ball?

I am also curious to know which is more common amongst pros for gambling and tournaments now-a-days and in the past. ;)
 
Last edited:
For both eight ball and nine ball I say winner breaks always. If you get hot and can string them then good for you, and if I get hot then good for me. Non of this going back and forth.
 
winner should awalys break except in 1P and 14.1(i think-i dont play 14.1)

this alt. break to me is just more PC shit, you win you earned the right to break, the only exception being the format Allen just used at the Million Dollar Shootout.
 
Thanks everyone for your participation so far. I've only seen a small amount of pro matches in 8-ball, which is why I'm wondering. I think the only gambling I've seen was alternating break and same with the tournaments* (USBTC, pro; and BCAPL, good amateurs). The reason I ask is that I wonder if it's maybe just coincidence and perhaps winner break in high level 8-ball is more common than I've seen.

So far the preference definitely tends towards winner-breaks. Looking forward to more input though. :)

* Oh yeah, I forgot about the IPT, which was winner breaks. :groucho:
 
Last edited:
Fatboy said:
winner should awalys break except in 1P and 14.1(i think-i dont play 14.1)

this alt. break to me is just more PC shit, you win you earned the right to break, the only exception being the format Allen just used at the Million Dollar Shootout.
Click to expand...
I agree. The alternating breaks format in tournaments is a detriment to the better player and just another way to make sure most of the tournament prize $$$ doesn't go back to the Philippines. I'd much rather see a player string some racks together -- unless I'm betting against him. :D

What was the format Allen just used at the Million Dollar Shootout?
 
In our 8-ball league, breaks are determined by the schedule. Actually it's not really the break, its the "choice to break'. Some guys are good players, but just don't have a good break. I'll often let them spread the rack when it's my choice, thereby upping my runout chances.
 
Winner breaks every day of the week.

It's more exciting for the fans. I maintain that if my opponent ran 11 racks and out on me and I never got I shot, it means I need to practice my lag. Running out a set is such a rare occurance that it really shouldn't be a concern.

With that said, I propose that tournaments impose an equal innings rule. If player A runs 11 racks and out in a race to 11 and player B didn't get to shoot, player B should be given the option to attempt an 11 rack run.

If TAR were doing race to 100 matches alternating breaks it would be a 14 hour snore fest.
 
Fatboy said:
winner should awalys break except in 1P and 14.1(i think-i dont play 14.1)

this alt. break to me is just more PC shit, you win you earned the right to break, the only exception being the format Allen just used at the Million Dollar Shootout.
Click to expand...

Bull$hit...alternate break is not "PC" it is the best way to determine who the best player is.

over long periods of time breaking works out to 50/50.. it is equal to the coin flip in a football game..."flip ya for it"

in serious competition among roughly equal players alternate break is the best way to play.. it levels the field.. no matter how hot you are.. you can never run more than (nearly)2 racks. and you only get that chance half the time . only if the other guy breaks dry.

and on the flip side you can never wait more than two racks..

both players of equal speed are both allowed to stay in the game.. he runs a rack you answer with a run of your own. just like in real sports..

we play winner break... in a really easy game like say 9-ball.. and I am facing Efren.. and its race to 5 and I catch a gear and pull off a 5 pack... does that mean I am better than Efren?.. of course not he never got to the table..

in serious competition both sides get to play..

if you rip a pack off against a champion.. you got hot..

if you want to find out which player is better.. you know like trivial things .. oooohhh like world champion. both players should be allowed to the table.

if both sides don't get to play.. it is not competition.. it is exhibition..

winner breaks is a great way to run a guy out of money when you get hot... but it is not nor will it ever be the best way to determine which player is better...
 
Last edited:
softshot said:
Bull$hit...alternate break is not "PC" it is the best way to determine who the best player is.

over long periods of time breaking works out to 50/50.. it is equal to the coin flip in a football game..."flip ya for it"

in serious competition among roughly equal players alternate break is the best way to play.. it levels the field.. no matter how hot you are.. you can never run more than (nearly)2 racks. and you only get that chance half the time . only if the other guy breaks dry.

and on the flip side you can never wait more than two racks..

both players of equal speed are both allowed to stay in the game.. he runs a rack you answer with a run of your own. just like in real sports..

we play winner break... in a really easy game like say 9-ball.. and I am facing Efren.. and its race to 5 and I catch a gear and pull off a 5 pack... does that mean I am better than Efren?.. of course not he never got to the table..

in serious competition both sides get to play..

if you rip a pack off against a champion.. you got hot..

if you want to find out which player is better.. you know like trivial things .. oooohhh like world champion. both players should be allowed to the table.

if both sides don't get to play.. it is not competition.. it is exhibition..

winner breaks is a great way to run a guy out of money when you get hot... but it is not nor will it ever be the best way to determine which player is better...
Click to expand...

i gotta respectfully disagree softshot. first of all,we're talkin 8 ball, not 9 ball. why shouldn't you be able to put a 5 or 6 pack on a guy?

is it a bad thing to allow a player to get into high gear? that's one aspect on how most would judge how great a player really is - by

how many consecutive racks he/she can run. it would be a shame if no one ever saw just how great a legendary player like keith

mccready was b/c he didn't have a chance to string together a ridiculous number of racks like he was known for. second, i disagree that

over a long set, breaking works out to 50/50. some days you're going to have the better breaks, sometimes the other guy will. the thing

is that if you're not the one breaking well off the get-go, how would you even have a chance at mounting a comeback if you don't have

that oppurtunity to get into a gear and put racks together?
 
Last edited:
JE54 said:
Alternating in a league or tournament. Winner when gambling.
Click to expand...
Yep! Most gambling matches is not about who is the better player. It's about who walks away with the cash.
 
So far, only 4 people answered that they prefer alternating break for gambling. Is it that rare of an occurrence for pros to use alternating break when gambling at 8-ball?

I had never seen pros gamble at 8-ball until the BCAPL event last year when Shane played Dennis Orcullo on a Diamond bar table. They were playing race to 15 with alternating breaks. I didn't see the whole thing but during the part I watched, they pretty much traded off break-and-runouts back and forth with very few exceptions.

I think the only other gambling match up I've seen by pros playing 8-ball was when Shane and Cliff played at the DCC, which was streamed by TAR. I can't remember if they played winner breaks or alternating (anyone remember?). I think that was also a race to 15, with Cliff getting a 4 game spot (although I could be mis-remembering).

So anyway, this is what made me wonder if the break was too big of an advantage in 8-ball for pros for it to be playing winner break.

For a shmoe like myself, there's no "harm" in winner break because my opponent won't have to wait for very long at all; but if the race is to say, 2, in a local tournament, I think alternating is definitely better. A race to 2 for me probably equates to like a race to 4 or 5 for a pro, so I can understand how a tournament like the USBTC would have alternating breaks for their short race to 5.

The longer the set, the more I'd figure that winner break is better in 8-ball. For instance, a race to 100, as someone mentioned, would be more exciting in my opinion using winner breaks, and with a long race the lag becomes way less relevant.

Anyway, I'm still wondering about pros matching up. Is alternating break in 8-ball as uncommon as the poll would suggest?
 
Cameron Smith said:
With that said, I propose that tournaments impose an equal innings rule. If player A runs 11 racks and out in a race to 11 and player B didn't get to shoot, player B should be given the option to attempt an 11 rack run.
Click to expand...

I really like this too, and proposed something similar a while back. Players could have a 1-inning guarantee for each match when playing winner break. If player B didn't get to shoot, he should be guaranteed 1-inning to attempt to match Player A's 11-pack. In the extremely unlikely event that it's matched, it could go into an overtime of some sort.
 
macneilb said:
i gotta respectfully disagree softshot. first of all,we're talkin 8 ball, not 9 ball. why shouldn't you be able to put a 5 or 6 pack on a guy?

is it a bad thing to allow a player to get into high gear? that's one aspect on how most would judge how great a player really is - by

how many consecutive racks he/she can run. it would be a shame if no one ever saw just how great a legendary player like keith

mccready was b/c he didn't have a chance to string together a ridiculous number of racks like he was known for. second, i disagree that

over a long set, breaking works out to 50/50. some days you're going to have the better breaks, sometimes the other guy will. the thing

is that if you're not the one breaking well off the get-go, how would you even have a chance at mounting a comeback if you don't have

that oppurtunity to get into a gear and put racks together?
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

Alternating breaks simply allows weaker players to compete with better players. It's not very hard to run 9 balls. 9 ball and 8 ball are sufficiently easy enough that good amateurs can compete against pros in alternating break format.

What makes a pro so tough to beat is, their break is good enough that allows them to run multiple racks, and even when they aren't recieving good opening shots their safety game allows them to maintain control of the table. Alternate breaks removes this advantage.

It's like that stupid 10/20 straight pool game they did in the 60's. Any decent amateur has a shot against Willie Mosconi in that format.
 
Cuebacca said:
I really like this too, and proposed something similar a while back. Players could have a 1-inning guarantee for each match when playing winner break. If player B didn't get to shoot, he should be guaranteed 1-inning to attempt to match Player A's 11-pack. In the extremely unlikely event that it's matched, it could go into an overtime of some sort.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I hate it when people use the example of someone breaking and running a set as a reason to abolish winner breaks, because it's incredibly rare. I was informed at one point that Accu-Stats doesn't have a single 9 ball match tape of someone running out a set, which should say a lot.

Furthermore, given the option I doubt player B would even bother to try and run 11 racks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top