alterante break format

Gerry

Gerry

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I was just going over some of the recent big tourney payouts and noticed that the tourneys using alternate break seem to pull weaker fields. Maybe I'm on crack but there was a time when Efren and the rest of the Phillippine crew would not miss a $20k first place event like the EXPO.

Personally, I don't like alt break. I miss seeing guys get down early, and then put together a package to come back for the win.

I understand the theory of making the matches closer in alt break, but I still would rather see a player keep the table after winning a rack. I like the fact that if you lose the lag, you might just lose the set.....winner break always keeps me interested in the fact that no matter the score....anyone can come back for the win!

what do you think?
 
Gerry said:
I was just going over some of the recent big tourney payouts and noticed that the tourneys using alternate break seem to pull weaker fields. Maybe I'm on crack but there was a time when Efren and the rest of the Phillippine crew would not miss a $20k first place event like the EXPO.

Personally, I don't like alt break. I miss seeing guys get down early, and then put together a package to come back for the win.

I understand the theory of making the matches closer in alt break, but I still would rather see a player keep the table after winning a rack. I like the fact that if you lose the lag, you might just lose the set.....winner break always keeps me interested in the fact that no matter the score....anyone can come back for the win!

what do you think?
Click to expand...

I like alternate break. There aren't very many sports where a player can get sat in his chair and not have a chance.

Take Tennis for example, if it was winner serves Andy Roddick would be the best player ever. That's just not right because his game is not as complete as other players.
 
I like it

For the most part I like it. I think it helps level out the field a little in like weekly open tournaments. I drew a guy about a year ago, called a bad toss, (tails as always), and the dude broke and ran the entire set(race to 6). Im sorry but i like the idea of knowing im going to get my chance.
 
I prefer winner break. I think that's something that sets pool apart from other sports. With alternating break format, you're trying to put pool on the same pedistal as basketball, American football, futbol, tennis, etc... with all of the other sports on the same pedistal, there is no where for pool to shine. In my opinion, each pool match should be a race to at least 13 or 15... it's not very likely that a player is going to run 13 or 15, even when practicing. With long races and winner break format, more pressure is put on each player. If my opponent steps up to the table and runs 7 off the bat, that puts more heat on me and forces me to really concentrate to try and top him. This way, the player that wins the match is the person who is not only physically playing better, but also mentally playing better. I would much rather lose to someone who ran multiple racks in a row on me than lose to someone just because they won the lag, alternate break format, race to 7 and we both played perfect.
 
I'd be surprised if the top pros are passing on a tournament just because of the break format.

It's an interesting question though about which is better. There are some things I like about both.

Winner break has the obvious advantage of getting the chance to see a player string racks while freezing his opponent.

To me the big advantage of alternate breaks is that both players get their turns at the table, and I think with this format there's no question that the better player that day wins, just because with winner breaks it can be over before one player has a chance to settle in to the match.

I know TV seems to like alternate break because on paper matches should be closer, but I wonder if it is documented that this is true. I mean, in this format if a guy gets down 2 or 3 games in a race to 7, it is kind of hard to come back. Plus I'm not sure that the audience cares so much about a tight match as the promoters seem to think. It just seems to me the audience is mainly serious pool players and I think winner breaks is more compelling for the serious fan because he knows it's not over until it's over. But if a guy is down 2-3 games and his opponent is on the hill in alt break the serious pool fan knows the likely outcome.

Personally I often could care less about how close it is, I'm getting one hour of coverage regardless of the score. I'm more interested in guys making shots, playing position and running patterns.

I would have to say though that the case for winner breaks seems the more compelling argument.
 
Last edited:
I like winner breaks. Without a winner breaks format we never would've been able to see Earl put together so many 6-packs in his prime.

It doesn't seem like the alternate break format makes matches any closer anyway. There are just as many lopsided matches as ever.
 
cowboyup200560 said:
For the most part I like it. I think it helps level out the field a little in like weekly open tournaments. I drew a guy about a year ago, called a bad toss, (tails as always), and the dude broke and ran the entire set(race to 6). Im sorry but i like the idea of knowing im going to get my chance.
Click to expand...


Should have called heads
 
I like alternate breaks in the first round of the WPC so some players that barely made it in can have some table time before Busty or whomever send 'em packing- winner breaks in the rounds after that, though.
 
s0lidz said:
I like alternate break. There aren't very many sports where a player can get sat in his chair and not have a chance.

Take Tennis for example, if it was winner serves Andy Roddick would be the best player ever. That's just not right because his game is not as complete as other players.
Click to expand...


Sorry man, but Roddick wouldn't even be top American of the last 15 years if it was winner serves. Sampras would still spot him at least 1 set and first serve and rob him(and, to be honest, Andre A would also be stealing, imo). :) I personally LOVE winner breaks. To me, running out a set is one of the few things that make pool unique as a sport/activity. There is no feeling on Earth like running out a set. I, personaly, wouldn't trade it for 25% higher payouts.
 
I like alternate break but I do a remember a race to 5 eight ball bar box tourney where 9 racks where run in the final match using the alternate break so essentially the guy that won the coin toss won the match and tourney.
 
The ability to string racks together and/or control the table after the break is what seperates top pros from lower level pros and shortstops. Alternating Breaks removes that advantage and is effectively a handicap in disguise.

Imagine if they forced 14.1 players to give up the table after every 20 or 30 ball run. Hell, even I would have a shot at winning a few matches under that format. But the thing is I'm not good enough to compete with these guys and shouldn't be given an opportunity to win, unless I can play up to the pro standard of around 30-40 balls per scoring inning.

Alternating breaks and 9 ball are the primary reasons why I've shifted my focus to snooker.

P.S. the Tennis analogy does not work, since top Tennis players do not lose on their serve very often (maybe 2-3 times per match). Pool players lose on the break at a far higher frequency.

P.P.S. How many here have actually witnessed someone run out a full set in a race to 11 or better where an opponent never gets a shot?

P.P.P.S How many have witnessed anyone run out a 10 ball set in a race to 9 or better where the opponent never gets to the table?
 
123

Gerry said:
I was just going over some of the recent big tourney payouts and noticed that the tourneys using alternate break seem to pull weaker fields. Maybe I'm on crack but there was a time when Efren and the rest of the Phillippine crew would not miss a $20k first place event like the EXPO.

Personally, I don't like alt break. I miss seeing guys get down early, and then put together a package to come back for the win.

I understand the theory of making the matches closer in alt break, but I still would rather see a player keep the table after winning a rack. I like the fact that if you lose the lag, you might just lose the set.....winner break always keeps me interested in the fact that no matter the score....anyone can come back for the win!

what do you think?
Click to expand...

alternate breaks will help pool, the best players will try their best, the weaker players know that they have a chance, alot more players will play in tournaments.

efren and the filipinos didnt turn up for EXPO, they have own tournament to play in philipines
 
Alternate breaks, I think the best players still come through. You may get one or 2 suprises but in general the best player just like tennis will hold his serve and control the match.
I think the money is just not enough to atract the players anymore from overseas. They have got bigger events going on for half the cost. I also think the standard has got way better over here and its no where near as easy for them to make money. they were stealing 15 years ago now they are gambling.

We cant even get a full field of US players for a 20k added because the money is so bad. if you dont finish in the top 4 you lose money. Its a great sport LOL
 
Winner or loser break is a fiasco.

No other sport does not allow an opponent a chance to display his skills.
The alternate break format is the ONLY way to level the playing field.

Name one sport that is oriented any other way.

Stringing racks together requires great skill, but please, let me win the coin flip. Is that how you decide who's the best at ANYTHING ?
 
Last edited:
I like the winner breaks format slightly better than the alt. It's not the break that is the problem with 9 & 10-ball, it's the game itself. Play 14.1 or 15-ball rotation. Play 1-hole. Maybe players should lag before each game to see who breaks next. Bring back 14.1, there are no trick racks in that. Everyone worries about TV not wanting the long games. Pfft, they wouldn't even pick up 6-ball.

As far as fans paying to watch, I don't believe that's a big plus for many tournaments now. F*** TV. PPV and free streaming with sponsorship is the way to go. Johnnyt
 
Cameron Smith said:
Alternating breaks and 9 ball are the primary reasons why I've shifted my focus to snooker.
Click to expand...

You don't like alternating breaks so you quit pool to concentrate on snooker - which has alternating breaks???....

I think I'll go back to watching the China Open. I don't understand what they are saying either:D:D:D
 
I like alternate breaks - when I'm watching a match on TV. I think the better player is going to win either way, and I want to see both players at the table. Now, in the real world, I think winner breaks is the way to go (though in my case, that can also be spelled "suicide" much of the time).
 
SJDinPHX said:
Winner or loser break is a fiasco.

No other sport does not allow an opponent a chance to display his skills.
The alternate break format is the ONLY way to level the playing field.

Name one sport that is oriented any other way.

Stringing racks together requires great skill, but please, let me win the coin flip. Is that how you decide who's the best at ANYTHING ?
Click to expand...

why are we looking to level the playing field SJD? I don't go to tourneys to get a "spot" I go to see if I stack up with the best there.

Also, I never like to flip a coin....takes no skill! Lagging, now that is a skill and should be practiced.

If I"m tuned into a match and see a great player run the set out....I'm happy as a clam....same as if the set goes 10-11 IMO.
 
Gerry said:
I was just going over some of the recent big tourney payouts and noticed that the tourneys using alternate break seem to pull weaker fields. Maybe I'm on crack but there was a time when Efren and the rest of the Phillippine crew would not miss a $20k first place event like the EXPO.

Personally, I don't like alt break. I miss seeing guys get down early, and then put together a package to come back for the win.

I understand the theory of making the matches closer in alt break, but I still would rather see a player keep the table after winning a rack. I like the fact that if you lose the lag, you might just lose the set.....winner break always keeps me interested in the fact that no matter the score....anyone can come back for the win!

what do you think?
Click to expand...


What do you mean "weaker fields"???? Smaller fields or weaker players???. Thanks randyg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top