When the wing ball or 1ball is dead on every friggin rack, alternate breaks is just the most stupid format ever. I've watched two matches live so far, and not ONCE did someone fail to pocket a ball on the break. No dry breaks at all in two whole matches, last one was hill hill, and this one might go down to the wire. If you get behind in this format, it's impossible to come back. Who's dumb idea was it to take the excitement out of 9ball? This is ridiculous.
Alternate Breaks is Stupid Like This....
- Thread starter cuetechasaurus
- Start date
Have to agree with you there. I originally did think the alternative break format was better but come to realise that this is exactly the kind of reasons why Winner breaks is better and more exciting.
The table seems to be breaking a little too well as almost every rack is guaranteed to make a ball in the side. No more magical comebacks as there no oppertunity to make the deficit.
Btw didn't want to disrupt your thread but your doing a excellent job in the live score thread between Holtz and Wu. Nice One
The table seems to be breaking a little too well as almost every rack is guaranteed to make a ball in the side. No more magical comebacks as there no oppertunity to make the deficit.
Btw didn't want to disrupt your thread but your doing a excellent job in the live score thread between Holtz and Wu. Nice One
Last edited:
cuetechasaurus said:
When you get to the final 64 play it like the US Open, race to 11 dbl elimination winner break. This tried and true format makes it it a physical contest, every one has a bad day, why should just one match determine your skill, hell they all had allot better chances of advancing in the early rounds than the final 64. Its no different than in golf, front nine back nine, make the cut play the last two days. You get two chances to make the cut, once there you get another 2 to win, much more exciting. Seeing someone come from the losers bracket tells us much more about a players caliber and ability than winning one race to 10 or 11, plus there's nothing better than seeing somone down 7 or 8 games and come back and cause their opponent to fold, that's special. Matchroom needs to put the "game" back into the game, ok to leave the weeding out stages as is, but when you finally have the 'best' going at it, let em go.
Last edited:
From reading this board, it looks like race to 30 is popular in big money matches in the Philippines. I say, race to 30, winner breaks, single elimination. I know each match will take 5-6 hours. So be it. You can have multiple sessions like in snooker. It's not like you need to fit the whole match on a one-hour espn2 program, people in Philippines (and other parts of Asia) love pool (or so I have read...).
There's a lot of luck in 9-ball (and pool in general, except maybe 1-pocket) in the short run. That's not so bad, it just means you need longer races. The "street" is well aware of this, that's why you don't see many races to 11 for 10-20k. If you put up cash, you don't want the outcome to hinge on two or three rolls. In a short race, there's less fear of the opponent's skill than there is fear of a few dry breaks or tough rolls. And if you win, there's not much in the way of bragging rights, because in most cases it could have gone the other way just as easily. I think of tennis as a contrast: you win a best-of-5-set match against Federer and you got something to brag about.
Race to 30. Make it a war. May the best man win.
There's a lot of luck in 9-ball (and pool in general, except maybe 1-pocket) in the short run. That's not so bad, it just means you need longer races. The "street" is well aware of this, that's why you don't see many races to 11 for 10-20k. If you put up cash, you don't want the outcome to hinge on two or three rolls. In a short race, there's less fear of the opponent's skill than there is fear of a few dry breaks or tough rolls. And if you win, there's not much in the way of bragging rights, because in most cases it could have gone the other way just as easily. I think of tennis as a contrast: you win a best-of-5-set match against Federer and you got something to brag about.
Race to 30. Make it a war. May the best man win.
Alternate break or winner` break, each has it`s own good and bad points. Fyi, in the last BCA open, Efren Reyes was able to come back from being 10-1 down in a race to 11 with alternate break format against Allen Hopkins and win. It`s possible!cuetechasaurus said:
its possible but not common. also, you cant make an alternate break format match race to an odd number of games.thats completely stupid!the first player to break gets to break the hill-hill game, as well. i lost 3matches in a championship in europe 2 in the finals(1 9ball,1 8ball,1 in the quarter-f of the 8ball all because i lost the lag!!?!? if playing alteernate break it has to be a race to an even number of games.jmo.
I can`t seem to see any diffrence if its odd or even number of games. Anyway, they played race to 8 in the group stages, race to 10 in the 64 and 32 rounds, race to 11 in the last 16, quarter and semi-final, 17 in the final.berberov said:
the difference is not about the comebacks or big deficits the difference is when you win the lag and have the first break and say playing a race to 11 and when the match goes hill-hill 1st breaker gets to break again and all im saying is thats a huge advantage for the lag winner. also when winner breaks, the guy whos done all the hard work and come from behind gets to break.thats good punishment for the first player on the hill since he shouldnt have let his opponent to the table in the first place right?
"ni znayu"
"ni znayu"
berberov said:
Unless I am missing something, or there was something else about the format aside from alternating breaks, the player who wins the lag will break at hill-hill regardless of how long the race is, because hill-hill will always occur after an even number of total games.
In theory, alternating break vs. winner breaks "shouldn't" affect the outcome of any matches, and the advantage to the player who wins the lag is the same. For example, if the match is a race to 7 and it goes hill-hill, the player who wins the lag will have broken 7 times, once in the first rack, and 6 times after each of the wins. And, in general, if the sequence of wins and losses on each players break is the same, the outcome of the match will not change if the breaks are alternated or if the winner keeps the break. The final score might change, but the winner will be the same.
Having said that, players are not robots, and so alternating vs. winner break can change a match for psychological reasons. For example, if I win the lag and run out the match, I win 7-0. With alternating breaks, I still win if I break and run 7 times, but my opponent could break and run 6 times, and then I would be breaking at 6-6, rather than 6-0, so there's a lot more pressure. Also, it's arguably harder to get into a rhythm and run multiple racks if you can't stay at the table.
I tend to prefer winner breaks because it's easier to come back, which makes it more exciting IMO. It's also cool to see players dominate the table, and I think it's mentally tougher in a way, since when you miss you never know if you're gonna get another shot.
For alternating breaks, I'd like to see win by 2, that way winning the lag is less of an advantage when it goes hill-hill. But then again, win by 2 could take forever.
(edited... typo fix)
Last edited:
I go either way. I am confued now but wasn't last year's WPC winner breaks? I ask because I thought I remembered Wu breaking and running the last five racks which was incredible.
Winner breaks pool is the only competitive sport I know of where one participant can win without allowing the opponent to play.
Alternate breaks however gives each player the opportunity to play and is a real test of nerves and skill when the breaks don't lay out perfectly.
I think that both formats have their pros and cons. Perhaps win by two with alternate breaks would be a good way to go. It would wreak havoc on the time though. But then hopefully pool will get to the point where the game dictates the coverage rather then the promoter/broadcaster dictating the format/rules to fit their desires. I can't imagine that Tiger Woods is told to hold off on a tee because of a commercial break. Or a tennis tournament does away with tiebreakers because they take too long.
Winner breaks pool is the only competitive sport I know of where one participant can win without allowing the opponent to play.
Alternate breaks however gives each player the opportunity to play and is a real test of nerves and skill when the breaks don't lay out perfectly.
I think that both formats have their pros and cons. Perhaps win by two with alternate breaks would be a good way to go. It would wreak havoc on the time though. But then hopefully pool will get to the point where the game dictates the coverage rather then the promoter/broadcaster dictating the format/rules to fit their desires. I can't imagine that Tiger Woods is told to hold off on a tee because of a commercial break. Or a tennis tournament does away with tiebreakers because they take too long.
yup youre right thats my math at work. i was wondering why they dont let me touch computers at work. so all this time after the tournament its all clear to me now that i actualy didnt lose the matches because i lost the lag!!?!? relief.finally.
anyway winner breaks is the better format for multiple rack runners. but i guess matchroom figured both players will came to the table with this format for sure. and i also think they guessed all matches would be close ones since these guys run out almost every time they break.
"ni znayu"she said.
anyway winner breaks is the better format for multiple rack runners. but i guess matchroom figured both players will came to the table with this format for sure. and i also think they guessed all matches would be close ones since these guys run out almost every time they break.
"ni znayu"she said.
I saw the first UPA event at the Bike three years ago.
It was winners' break format.
The wing ball was going in like an extra-pointer in NFL.
Some poor souls had to sit for a few racks before they got to shoot.
They switched to alternate breaks the year after.
It made the matches much closer.
Really, if you're gonna use the sourdough rack or a triangle outline on the cloth, 9-ball becomes too easy.
Make it 10-ball.
It was winners' break format.
The wing ball was going in like an extra-pointer in NFL.
Some poor souls had to sit for a few racks before they got to shoot.
They switched to alternate breaks the year after.
It made the matches much closer.
Really, if you're gonna use the sourdough rack or a triangle outline on the cloth, 9-ball becomes too easy.
Make it 10-ball.
You`re correct, last year`s WPC was played with winners break in the knockout stages, however alternate break was used in the group stages.Roadie said:
ineedaspot said:
Yeah, tho it would be brutal for the crowd to 'sit' that long and the TV production of those matches probably would not work in the real world. With double elimination when you lose, you can take time away, time to go over your errors, time to work on them before your next match and allot can happen after a good nights sleep or a good one on one talk with yourself. The US Open format has always brought the best player of that venue to the top. Race to 30 gambling ok, but for the public that would be a tough sell. I enjoy a 3-4 hour tennis match (doesn't happen allot). The tennis world has found the 3 out of 5 matches are causing more player problems, players missing other venues (injuries) and its been having a negative effect on the sport because of no shows. It's hard to think of a pro tennis player that doesn't have injuries and cancelling because of this.
Schon-desi said:
There is always a difference when you 'increase' the games. I have seen players have easy runouts after breaks for awhile but eventually it turns (not always) in the others favor. It difficult to get all the rolls the longer the match.
berberov said:
Win by 2 games would be the equalizer...............
JoeyInCali said:
Or spot all balls made and shooter continues........
