amazing details of world cup final

A

albatross

cynical squared
Silver Member
jae ho cho vs. jung won choi. 40 points with equal innings. choi breaks and gets to 40 in 25 innings. cho now starts with a break shot, which he makes. HE THEN MAKES SEVEN MORE POINTS to send the match to sudden death. on the grid they call it "penalty" which they borrow from a soccer shootout. each player starts with a break shot and keeps shooting until he misses. they go in the same order that they started the game. choi gets up and runs two. then cho RUNS THREE TO WIN THE TOURNAMENT!!!!!!!!
 
There are as many formats as there are opinions. I am agnostic about most formats. The important thing is that the players are made aware of the format before the tournament begins. No one is forced to play in any tournament.

Here is the argument for equlized innings: Think of innings like baseball. Each team has "equal innings" opportunity to win/lose. The visiting team should not have the advantage of having an extra inning over the home team.

So...back to caroms...should the lag winner (visiting team) be allowed to have an extra inning? Do we want the lag to be a crucial part of the game?

You decide.
 
In such a short game of 40 points, the lag is Crucial so equalizing innings is good. The power of winning has shifted dramatically with this format. How about sets of 3 games of 20 points each?
 
Last edited:
i agree with zensteve regarding equal innings. if first player to 40 wins, the lag is much too important. furthermore, it is not even a 3-cushion shot. while it requires skill it shouldn't determine the outcome of a game.

changing subject - i think the extra point and field goals should be taken out of football. football is running, throwing and tackling. kicking a ball straight or crooked has too much value. remember, a super bowl was decided by "wide right".
 
Formats intentionally or unintentionally can favor one player over another. Take pool for example. Let's say the format is winner breaks. Do you want to disproportionately favor a stronger breaker which may consequently create more rack runs?

Or how about this out of the box format: In a 3 cushion format let's say scratch shots are disallowed. If you remember Jae Ho Cho scratched in his run before getting to equalized innings. Should a World Cup be decided on a scratch?

You decide.
 
zensteve said:
There are as many formats as there are opinions. I am agnostic about most formats. The important thing is that the players are made aware of the format before the tournament begins. No one is forced to play in any tournament.

Here is the argument for equlized innings: Think of innings like baseball. Each team has "equal innings" opportunity to win/lose. The visiting team should not have the advantage of having an extra inning over the home team.

So...back to caroms...should the lag winner (visiting team) be allowed to have an extra inning? Do we want the lag to be a crucial part of the game?

You decide.
Click to expand...

The baseball analogy does not work: the visiting team does not have to stop at 40 (or any number) in the ninth inning? They play until they make 3 outs. To work the first player after reaching 40 should be allowed to shoot until he misses. Then the second player should be allowed to shoot until he misses.

Also, the lag should be a crucial part of the game. Why shouldn't the winner have the advantage......that's what it's for. Otherwise just flip a coin or play eenie meenie minee moe to see who shoots first. A cue and a ball are used because that's part of the game.
 
The other thing is that equal innings is a tradition at carom billiards. It's particularly important at the "small" games where the top players can run out the game. See Willie Hoppe's "Billiards As It Should Be Played" for a big match that was won by the lag. It's getting that way at 3-C where both players might be averaging over 3 in a match and the lag shouldn't be worth 3.

At any rate, it's the rule and it's clearly a reasonable way to play the game.
 
Hi Jerseychris,

Let me reiterate that I am agnostic about formats in general. I don't have a dog in this hunt.

That said, you are correct about the baseball analogy. But analogies inherently breakdown. That is why they are analogies. The idea in using the baseball analogy is to emphasize the idea of innings.

Lagging is a tradition. A very nice tradition. And you are welcome to put as much weight on the importance of the lag as you wish. If a tournament director wants to dispense with the lag and flip for the break, you can decide whether you want to enter that tournament or not. Likewise, if the tournament director employs the equalized inning format you are welcome to enjoy the game from the sidelines.
 
zensteve said:
Formats intentionally or unintentionally can favor one player over another. Take pool for example. Let's say the format is winner breaks. Do you want to disproportionately favor a stronger breaker which may consequently create more rack runs?

Or how about this out of the box format: In a 3 cushion format let's say scratch shots are disallowed. If you remember Jae Ho Cho scratched in his run before getting to equalized innings. Should a World Cup be decided on a scratch?

You decide.
Click to expand...
ZenSteve: This world cup was decided on a scratch when Cho scratched his 38th point. (may have been his 37 or 39th point ) senior retention issue
 
One down side of the equalized inning format is that it confuses many viewers. Many room players that i talk to do not know how the equalized inning format works and what the penalty shots are.
 
It gets worse. Try describing a round robin format. Explain that a player can lose 2 matches and win his flight. Flight...what's a flight?
 
Steve seems to have the answer for every question asked and so just out of curiousity, why the prize for the worldcups are so little? Is it because of the cost of organizing or too little sponsorship.
 
It's about time you recognize I have all the answers. ;)

Actually as you get older you do have more answers...you just realize that none of them are necessarily correct.
 
I like a pure baseball format.

Let's say I am playing a match to 40 points against ZenSteve and the score is 38-32 in favor of Steve. Steve was the one who broke.

Steve gets up and runs 2 points, giving him 40. He keeps shooting until he misses. Let's say he ends up with 41. Then I shoot. As in baseball, this is my last inning. My last chance. I need to run a 9. If I run a 10, I win the match. If I run a 9, then it's a tie and there are extra innings as in baseball. Everything is virtual sudden death now.

If Steve scores 2 and I don't, then I lose. If he scores 2 and I score 3, then I win.

Not that hard to understand. Very fair because the loser never has one less inning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top