Break Stats -- 2022 UK Open Pool Championship (9-Ball), May 2022

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Here are some aggregate break statistics from the 2022 UK Open Pool Championship played May 17-22, 2022 at Copper Box Arena in London, England. This was a 256-player 9-Ball event, produced by Matchroom Sport, with double elimination down to 16 players (8 on the winners' side and 8 on the one-loss side) and then single-elimination to the end. Joshua Filler won the tournament, defeating Francisco Sanchez-Ruiz in the final match.

The commentators were Michael McMullan, Phil Yates, Jeremy Jones, Karl Boyes, and Jayson Shaw. The referees in the streamed matches included John Leyman, Marcel Eckardt, Desislava Bozhilova, and Brendan Moore.

Conditions -- The conditions for the streamed matches included:
• A Diamond 9-foot table with 4 1/4" corner pockets;​
• Simonis 860 shark grey cloth;​
• Aramith Tournament Black balls with a black-measles cue ball;​
• Accu-Rack racking template on the first 4 days (through the round of 32), triangle rack on the 5th and 6th days (last 16 players);​
• referee racks with the 1-ball on the foot spot (2-ball not necessarily in back location);​
• winner breaks from anywhere behind the head string;​
• no illegal-break rule;​
• 30-second shot clock (60 sec. after the break), with one 30-sec. extension per player per rack;​
• foul on all balls;​
• jump cues allowed;​
• all slop counts; and​
• lag for the break in each match.​

These stats are for the 8 matches (131 games) that were streamed on Facebook during the single-elimination portion of the event (Stage 2, last 16 players). These matches were 53% of the total of 15 matches played in Stage 2, but only 1.6% of all 503 matches played in the event. All Stage 2 matches were races to 11 except for the final match, which was to 13. These 8 matches are listed here in the order in which they were played. [Note: the stats are for 122 games instead of 131, because the first 9 games of Match 1 below were not shown on the stream I watched.]

Saturday, May 21
1. Francisco Sanchez-Ruiz defeated Dennis Orcollo 11-7 (Last 16)​
2. Joshua Filler d. Imran Majid 11-3 (Last 16)​
3. Shane Van Boening d. Marc Bijsterbosch 11-1 (Last 16)​
4. Van Boening d. Skyler Woodward 11-7 (Quarterfinal)​
5. David Alcaide d. Mario He 11-8 (Quarterfinal)​

Sunday, May 22
6. Filler d. Alcaide 11-4 (Semifinal)​
7. Sanchez-Ruiz d. Van Boening 11-4 (Semifinal)​
8. Filler d. Sanchez-Ruiz 13-7 (Finals)​

Overall results

Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Match winners -- 93% (78 of 84)​
Match losers -- 92% (35 of 38)​
Total -- 93% (113 of 122)

Breaker won the game:
Match winners -- 77% (65 of 84)​
Match losers -- 42% (16 of 38)​
Total -- 66% (81 of 122)

Break-and-run games on all breaks:
Match winners -- 46% (39 of 84)​
Match losers -- 26% (10 of 38)​
Total -- 40% (49 of 122)

Break-and-run games on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Match winners -- 50% (39 of 78)​
Match losers -- 29% (10 of 35)​
Total -- 43% (49 of 113)

Here's a breakdown of the 122 games (for match winners and losers combined).

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:​
Breaker won the game: 77 (63% of the 122 games)​
Breaker lost the game: 36 (30%)​
Breaker fouled on the break:​
Breaker won the game: 1 (1%)​
Breaker lost the game: 2 (2%)​
Breaker broke dry (without fouling):​
Breaker won the game: 3 (2%)​
Breaker lost the game: 3 (2%)​
Therefore, whereas the breaker won 66% (81 of 122) of all games,​
He won 68% (77 of 113) of the games in which the break was successful (made at least one ball and did not foul).​
He won 44% (4 of 9) of the games in which the break was unsuccessful (fouled or dry).​

Break-and-run games -- The 49 break-and-run games represented 40% of all 122 games, 60% of the 81 games won by the breaker, and 43% of the 113 games in which the break was successful (made a ball and didn't foul).

The 49 break-and-run games consisted of 1 7-pack (by Van Boening), 1 5-pack (by Filler), 8 two-packs, and 21 singles.

9-Balls on the break -- The 49 break-and-run games included 3 9-balls on the break (2.5% of all breaks), all by Van Boening -- two against Bijsterbosch and one against Woodward.
 
Miscellany from the data for the 2022 UK Open Pool Championship (9-Ball):
[This relates only to the 8 streamed Stage 2 matches I watched, not to all matches in the event.]

• The most balls made on a single break was 4, done 8 times -- 6 by Van Boening (3 B&Rs and 3 game losses) and once each by He and Sanchez-Ruiz (both game wins).

• The average number of balls made on the break was 1.7 (this includes dry and fouled breaks). On successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul), the average was 1.8.

• 58% (71 of 122) of the games ended in one inning – 40% (49) won by the breaker (B&R) and 18% (22) won by the non-breaker. Only 5% (6 of 122) of the games lasted more than 3 innings. The longest game ended on the non-breaker's 8th visit to the table.

• 44% (54 of 122) of the games were run out by the player who was at the table following the break. These run-outs were:
- By the breaker after successful breaks (B&R games) – 43% (49 of 113)​
- By the non-breaker after fouls on the break – 67% (2 of 3)​
- By the non-breaker after dry breaks – 50% (3 of 6)​

• The player who made the first ball after the break:
- Won the game in that same inning 69% of the time (82 of 119)​
- Won the game in a later inning 10% of the time (12 of 119)​
- Lost the game 21% of the time (25 of 119)​
[Note -- total games used here are 119 rather than 122 to eliminate the 3 games in which no ball was made after the break.]​

• The loser won an average of 4.9 games in the 7 races to 11 (excludes the final match, a race to 13). The closest of those matches was 11-8; the most lopsided was 11-1.

• The average elapsed time for 6 of the 7 races to 11 was about 96 minutes (length of Match 1 above unknown). The average minutes per game for those 6 matches plus the Finals was 6. The elapsed time was measured from the lag until the winning ball was made (or conceded), so it includes time for racking and commercial breaks. Commercial breaks were significant in these matches, generally occurring after every 3 games in a match, and lasting about 3 minutes each.

• The match that was longest in elapsed time, at 147 minutes, and highest in average minutes per game, at 7.8, was Sanchez-Ruiz d. He 11-8.

• The match that was shortest in elapsed time, at 60 minutes, and lowest in average minutes per game, at 5.0, was Van Boening d. Bijsterbosch 11-1

• Breaking fouls averaged 1 for every 40.7 games, other fouls 1 for every 5.3 games, and missed shots about 1 for every 3.2 games.

• One or more safeties were played in about 33% of all games and in 55% of games that were not B&Rs.
 
AB103F3B-B350-4DD9-BF69-F278CF8D41CF.jpeg
 
SVB's breaking ability is on another level.
Here's a post of mine from another thread after Stage 1 of the event:

SVB went undefeated through 5 matches in Stage 1 to get to the Final 16 starting tomorrow. Four of his 5 matches were streamed. In those 4 streamed matches:​
• He broke 35 times.​
• He broke successfully 35 times (100%).​
• He broke and ran 21 times (60%).​
• He won the game on his break 32 times (91%).​
But he wasn't perfect, missing about a dozen shots (5 on banks) and fouling twice.​
For all 5 of his Stage 1 matches, his record was 45-12 (winning percentage 79%).​
[I think things are about to get tougher.]​
All 3 of his Stage 2 matches were streamed. If we add those 3 matches to the 4 out of 5 streamed in Stage 1 (yielding stats on 7 of the 8 matches he played in the event, all but a 9-3 win over Juan Carlos Exposito) we get that Shane:

• broke 60 times.​
• made at least one ball on his break all 60 times (100%).​
• broke successfully (made at least one ball and did not foul) 59 times (98%).​
• broke and ran 33 times (55%).​
• won the game on his break 50 times (83%).​
• pocketed an average of 2.1 balls on the 60 breaks.​
 
Thank you for this!

Your diligence to data is even more impressive than Shane's breaking stats, which again, are pretty damn incredible. 🙂
 
Thanks yet again AtLarge for your statistics! During the UK Open my gut feeling was telling me that the number of golden breaks is considerably lower with a template in use. Do you have any shortcut to check if it is really like that? Looks like with a template the balls don't take the paths which cross the position where the 9 usually rests. And with a triangle the 9 tends to travel some distance and gets kicked more often, hence the golden breaks (I'm not taking into account awful tracking of the 9 directly to the closest corner as happened at the recent WPC).
Also I guess the placement of the rack could make some statistical effect (1 on the spot vs 9 on the spot).
 
Thanks yet again AtLarge for your statistics! During the UK Open my gut feeling was telling me that the number of golden breaks is considerably lower with a template in use. Do you have any shortcut to check if it is really like that? Looks like with a template the balls don't take the paths which cross the position where the 9 usually rests. And with a triangle the 9 tends to travel some distance and gets kicked more often, hence the golden breaks (I'm not taking into account awful tracking of the 9 directly to the closest corner as happened at the recent WPC).
Also I guess the placement of the rack could make some statistical effect (1 on the spot vs 9 on the spot).
Your logic sounds good to me, except I'm not sure whether the word "considerably" is correct.

If the balls are racked tightly, the 9-ball tends to stay near where it was racked regardless of whether a template or triangle is used, and 9s on the break are rare. But templates probably produce more good racks than triangles, which would say that the 9-ball moves more often with triangles and is more vulnerable to being kicked in by other balls. But 9s on the break are still rare.

I just looked at 9 of the most recent events I tracked where they racked with a triangle, and the 9-ball was made on 1.0% of the breaks in about 1,700 games. The high was 2.5% (3 9s on the break) this past weekend in the UK Open.

And I looked at 5 of the most recent events I tracked where they used a template, and the 9-ball was made on 1.1% of the breaks in about 2,000 games. The high was 1.7% (4 9s on the break) in the 2021 International. The 9-ball was on the spot for these "template" events, whereas the 1-ball was on the spot for the 9 "triangle" events mentioned above.

But a 9-ball on the break is such a low frequency occurrence that it would take many, many events using both types of racks to get good numbers for comparison. And we'd want similar conditions (rules and equipment) in both cases. As you mentioned, rack placement could have an effect, and so could other factors such as who racks, the skill of the racker(s), where the cue ball must be for the break, and the difficulty of the tables.

So those are my late-night thoughts on your question; sorry they aren't definitive.
 
The percentage of 9-ball breaks by non-pros is higher than tournament pros. There are three main reasons for this.
1) Almost all pros break the same way- the cut break- whereas amateurs break from all over the kitchen.
2) Pros don't generally hit with 100% power-- they're more controlled, whereas amateurs blast the rack.
3) The pros are usually hitting consistent, tight racks, whereas amateurs break a lot of inconsistent racks.
SVB sinks more balls on the breaks in 9-ball games because he uses more power than most pros on his cut break, which then sends more balls randomly flying all over the table and moves the 9-ball more often. SVB has mastered the controlled power/cut break.
I too break with more power than most (as an amateur) and get more 9-ball and multiple ball breaks than most. (So much so that my friends play a "no golden breaks" rule with me lol).
But I feel most pros don't hit their breaks with enough power, and for many, it's the main factor that's holding them back.
In all pool games, the break is the 2nd most important shot of the game, only behind the last shot. Get those balls moving!
 
... 1) Almost all pros break the same way- the cut break- whereas amateurs break from all over the kitchen.
...
In the case of the UK Open, I don't recall any pro who was using a cut break. All of them tried to hit the one ball nearly full with the intent of the cue ball not hitting any rails.
 
An oddity, albeit it on a small sample- if Svb gets 4 balls down on the break, he is only even money to win it!
 
Back
Top