Alternate Break or Winner Break

[Scottster]

I agree; it seems like the arguments for alternate break are based on something that even the most hard-core pool fans have only witnessed a handful of times or less. Also, when they do see that happen, it is very impressive and they will remember it forever. Why take that away?

If I went to a tournament to watch Efren Reyes and in his match, Joe Blow won the lag and kept Efren in his chair to run 13 and out in one inning, I think seeing that would make it worth it to me to have missed seeing Efren play.

However, I propose a solution to make situations like this more fair for both players: Winner breaks with a guarantee of at least one inning per player.

Example: Race to 7. Player 1 wins the lag. Player 1 runs 7-and-out in the first inning. Since Player 2 is guaranteed one inning, Player 2 gets one inning to try to run 7-and-out. If Player 2 cannot run 7-and-out to match Player 1's performance, then Player 1 immediately wins when Player 2's inning ends. If Player 2 is able to match the 7-and-out in one inning, it goes into overtime.

In overtime, it is a race to 1, with the same guarantee of at least one inning per player in overtime. If Player 1 breaks and runs 1-and-out in overtime and if Player 2 matches that break and run out, then it goes to double overtime, and so on.

So, with this "winner breaks, 1-inning guaranteed" format, no one could complain that they didn't at least have some chance to prove that they were playing better than their opponent. It would still be rare to have one person break and run out the set, and extremely rare to see an overtime.

Seems like a good compromise to me, but what do I know?

Well, here is how you circumvent your idea.

On the last game, the person who has run out all those games, plays a lock up safe. The player has his chance at the table, whether he hits the ball or not. No more chance to run 7 or overtime.

 

[Cuebacca]

Well, here is how you circumvent your idea.

On the last game, the person who has run out all those games, plays a lock up safe. The player has his chance at the table, whether he hits the ball or not. No more chance to run 7 or overtime.

That's true. I considered that possibility too. However, in that scenario I don't think the shooter would choose to do that. I think Player 1 has a better chance at winning the match by finishing that last game without letting Player 2 back to the table.

That way, Player 2 is forced to run 7-and-out, vs. getting out of a safety (which may not have been successfully executed as a dead-nuts lock-up safety), winning that game and grinding out 6 more games in a row (not necessarily a 6-pack).

Player 2 has little chance of winning either way, but if I were Player 1, I'd definitely rather not give him a chance at the table in the first set. Then again, I'm not a pro.

 

[Cameron Smith]

That's true. I considered that possibility too. However, in that scenario I don't think the shooter would choose to do that. I think Player 1 has a better chance at winning the match by finishing that last game without letting Player 2 back to the table.

That way, Player 2 is forced to run 7-and-out, vs. getting out of a safety (which may not have been successfully executed as a dead-nuts lock-up safety), winning that game and grinding out 6 more games in a row (not necessarily a 6-pack).

Player 2 has little chance of winning either way, but if I were Player 1, I'd definitely rather not give him a chance at the table in the first set. Then again, I'm not a pro.

I tend to agree, I like my chances if my opponent has to run 7 racks or more. I don't care who it is. Between the luck factor on the break and pressure to do so, it would be very difficult for a player to hit 7 or more racks back at you.

 

[crosseyedjoe]

Oh well, this is why you will never see pool in Olympics. Many people are not thinking about making the format more like a competition between 2 opponents. If pool has to be a game between a person and the table, then time-trials will have to be formulated, Luc Salvas will love this.

 

[mtb_iowa]

depends

anything under 8 or so should be alternate. otherwise the coin flip or lag would be huge. being able to run the set out on someone without them shooting that would just suck for your opp. however winner break on long sets is good that allows players to gain momentum and put some racks together. so it pretty much comes down to the race. if your playing a ahead set you definetly want to go winner breaks. if your just playing game for game winner breaks. always.

 

[Takumi4G63]

Here is the thing.... I think pool would be way more exciting if all the tourny's were winner break. I'd love to see someone put up 9 in a row to win a finals match in a race to 9, or have someone put up 8 come up dry on the break then never get back to the table as the other guy puts up 9. That would be awesome!

I think more players would go for more shots too as they are in great stroke from staying at the table longer.

I'm sure lots of people like seeing the drag out matchs that alt break can offer, but a hill hill match in alt break is not as exciting as hill hill with winner break.

Just my 2 cents.

I agree completely. For example, the final few racks of WPC 2005 where Wu Chia-Ching ran I think 5 racks was very exciting. I think there's much more pressure and excitement because you never know if you will get another shot. Matches become much less exciting when someone gets a big lead, like the Alcano vs. Souquet match.

 

[Takumi4G63]

You see, all this argument would be moot if one-pocket was the big game. Not much luck in that game and both opponents get to shoot plenty.

 

[JAM]

One time at the Carolinas Open in Goldsboro, North Carolina, I witnessed a player make the same ball on the break in the exact same pocket 7 times in a row. It was a winner-rack format tournament.

Buddy Hall witnessed the same thing as I did at this tournament. We got to chatting about it, and he said he'd like to see a format come forth in which the loser gets to break. There are pros and cons to this format too, we both agreed.

Show me a player who runs a 6-pack with a neutral racker. Now, that would be phenomenal and worthy of mention.

At the pro event in the Super Billiards Expo, there were two well-known players who went back and forth with the rack, arguing before every single game in the match when it came time to rack the balls. During a smoke break in the middle of the match, one of these players said to me that he knew his opponent was rigging the rack, and so he was going to do the same thing back to him. The arguments continued, and finally, the TD was brought in to rack for each player to prevent the delay.

At the Skins Billiards Championship, the TD racked the balls for every game. The players were told in the players meeting that nobody could question the rack of the TD during the event. It sure did eliminate a lot of bickering.

JAM

 

[Hail Mary Shot]

You see, all this argument would be moot if one-pocket was the big game. Not much luck in that game and both opponents get to shoot plenty.

Down with Willie Mosconi for the 9-ball game !!!

 

[Hail Mary Shot]

It is great to hear that we are able to notice some things about pool that needs to be modified and agreed upon by the practitioners of the game. this is a healthy sign that pool is alive and becoming more and more popular and certain changes are needed to meet certain demands of the game. otherwise, all of us might as well be contented with the setup that we have now.

 

[chefjeff]

I like your thinking, I'd be breaking a lot more .

Funny thing is, we have started this idea in car racing in Australia. After the 1st Rnd of the season, starting position is determined by where you finished the race before, so if you won you start on the back of the pack. This allows for closer racing, and a more competive and enjoyable series to watch.
Daniel

Emphasis mine. Hint hint for all those who want MORE MONEY!!!!!

Jeff Livingston

 

[CaptainJR]

We're just not going to be able to make a game.

I think loser breaks is garbage.. and the same for alternate break.

Lets feel sorry for the loser and give him an even chance to win. BS! You win if you do what's necessary to to win. If you don't get the job done you lose. You have to make your own advantage.. you have to earn it. If someone is playihg so well that they never give up the table they EARNED the match win.

Na, we could make a game. I've only ever played loser breaks maybe 5 or 6 times. So I'm very use to playing winner breaks. I don't play for big money so I've never taken a spot from anyone no matter how good they were. When I beat a world beater I want to be able to think to myself that I beat them. You can't say that if there was a spot.

There have been a few times after not hardly getting a shot in the first set, when I've said, If you want to play another set with me, we are playing loser breaks. I don't consider playing loser breaks a spot. So if I win then I still consider it a clear win.

 

[Jamey Martin]

Aaron, I just wanted to let you know that the state 9-ball ended up, 1st Steve Matlock, 2nd Mike Borgmeyer, 3rd Don Crump....... About the alternate break, I am not a fan.... I think that the best player should win and this keeps it from happening, if you can run 9 or 10 racks then so be it, the best player should win.

 

[crosseyedjoe]

From time to time Efren Reyes will be invited by his buddy who owns a bar in Angeles City, they usually have "Play the Champ" promo or something. They usually time it when the American GI's are having R&R.

You get to play Efren for 500pesos($10) a rack, he gives everyone some crazy spots. BUT the only thing is that he gets to break everytime. This tells me that breaking is an advantage.



All I can say, when 9-ball is finally accepted into the Olympics, alternate break is the most likely choice, unless the current WPA board of directors all die.

Better practice your clutch games, now.

 

[teambizy]

It seems to me that in the alternate break format, players really have a tough time coming from behind. If a player is ahead 7-2 in a race to 9 its going to be very difficult to come back when your opponent will for certain get back to the table several times. On the flip side, in winner breaks, you could string some racks together and get right back in it.

 

[crosseyedjoe]

It seems to me that in the alternate break format, players really have a tough time coming from behind. If a player is ahead 7-2 in a race to 9 its going to be very difficult to come back when your opponent will for certain get back to the table several times. On the flip side, in winner breaks, you could string some racks together and get right back in it.

That only means that the winning player is good at protecting his turn.



This discussion is starting to sound like a mindset dilemma. Consider this quote from Mika.

"The alternate break format gives equal chance to all players. With this innovation it is now like it’s even for each and everyone," said 1998 champion Mika Immonen of Finland, who is seeded No. 11.

I have the feeling that most top players recognize/respect what they can do and how devastating they can be given the break.


South East Asian Games and Asian Games use alternate break format. I'm not surprise that WPA adapted the same during the last WPC. WPA is part of the group(WCBS) that lobbied for billiards/pool inclusion.

 

[Hail Mary Shot]

as of the moment, some people are not yet accustomed on playing an alternate break format. regardless of the odds, it is always difficult to come back when your lagging behind, be it a winner's break or an alternate break. luck still plays a crucial role in both departments. each and everyone have different preferences where they can maximize their chances in the playing field. it would be insane if a person chooses a format that doesn't favor him at all, of course this is just plain logic. either way, I like both formats and the competition that those two bring.

 

[Aaron_S]

Aaron, I just wanted to let you know that the state 9-ball ended up, 1st Steve Matlock, 2nd Mike Borgmeyer, 3rd Don Crump....... About the alternate break, I am not a fan.... I think that the best player should win and this keeps it from happening, if you can run 9 or 10 racks then so be it, the best player should win.

Hey Jamey, thanks for the info. I'm totally with you on the break issue. It sucks to get up there and grind out a tough runout, just to have to turn the break over and watch your opp. snap one on you (which only happened to me once last weekend, thankfully).

Take Care

Aaron

 

[chefjeff]

In a pool match, a game is like a goal scored in other sports.

The match is like a game won.

The team that makes a goal gives up the ball in other sports.

Imagine Duke getting the ball back everytime they make a basket. Imagine the run they could put together! Wow...that would be so exciting to watch them run maybe 30 baskets in a row! Score after 15 minutes: 60-0.

And then the opposing team would have a "chance" (how generous) to catch up. oooooooo....imagine that excitement....NOT! The stands would be empty, the TV black, and the fans spending elsewhere.

How would the fan (that we want) want to view this game? Not YOU, but the average fan? That's my question.

Jeff Livingston

 

[Cameron Smith]

DELETE. early accidental post.