A Small Data Sample from Earl/Shane

A

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I watched only the final 36 games of the match. Here's some info for those games:


Breaker Made at Least 1 Ball on the Break and Did Not Foul
Strickland -- 12 of 20 (60%)
Van Boening -- 9 of 16 (56%)
Combined -- 21 of 36 (58%)​


Breaker Won the Game
Strickland -- 11 of 20 (55%)
Van Boening -- 6 of 16 (38%)
Combined -- 17 of 36 (47%)​


Break-and-Run Games
Strickland -- 4 of 20 (20%)
Van Boening -- 2 of 16 (13%)
Combined -- 6 of 36 (17%)​
 
Last edited:
This is awesome. I remember the TAR for Shane vs Mika someone put a whole spreadsheet of stats together. I was wondering if anyone did the same for this match. 20% b and r on a ten foot table? SICK!
 
peteWazzup said:
This is awesome. I remember the TAR for Shane vs Mika someone put a whole spreadsheet of stats together. I was wondering if anyone did the same for this match. 20% b and r on a ten foot table? SICK!
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it was only 36 games I watched out of 183 (20%), so I don't really know if these results represent the entire match very well.
 
AtLarge said:
Yeah, but it was only 36 games I watched out of 183 (20%), so I don't really know if these results represent the entire match very well.
Click to expand...

Interesting stats for sure. The most notable for me is that the break was no advantage whatsoever. The best 10 ball breaker on this planet had a losing win percentage when he broke. And I'm pretty sure these stats were indicative of the whole match.

So the 64K question is why break? You could always deliberately foul - fire the cue ball into the pocket and let the other guy break.
 
Last edited:
I think it is really great that an older player has come back from a less than good last couple of years to get back into the game. Efren and Earl have been around for three or four decades and they are the only two that are still kicking ass. I remember earl and Efren at reds in houston as youngsters. None of the other hot shots from back then are still winning much nowdays.
 
Here is the data sample I would like to see...down the rail (ball farther than 2 feet or more. Earl consistantly nailed this shot. It was freaky to watch. Tough 9 after tough 9 with perfect finish on the 10.

Shane on the otherhand missed enough that it was getting into his head. The three things I saw most that turned the game.

1. Earl knew how to play teaser "you can't make that from here" safeties time and time again. Up just passed the side pocket, close to the rail and long. On a snooker table you do not try these unless as Danny would say you are mad at your money.

2. Earl made better tough side shape. Again and Again. Not just to a zone but ball in hand type stuff.

3. Earl knew when to come with the power shot that can't lose. Example. He lands flat on the 8 and instead of loading up the outside he draws back 14 feet for perfect.

CueTable Help



He would look at it. Curse. And fire.
 
I didn't see any of Fridays match but I seen Saturday & Sunday's matches & If I remember rite Earl never used a bridge. Granted he had a Big Stick but I think that's a hell of a stat for a 10' table.
 
The break

When I was a kid, the break on a 9 ft was considered equal to the 8.
On a 10 ft, the 8 was considered more valuable than the break.

..so I was thinking that this relationship has not changed...
..but then I remembered that they were using a very small break-box.
They never really got to find the table's 'sweet spot'.

If Earl gambles with Corey,it would be interesting with no break box.
Got a feeling Corey would change those break stats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top