Break Stats -- 2022 World Pool Championship (9-Ball), April 2022

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Here are some aggregate break statistics from the 2022 World Pool Championship played April 6-10, 2022 at Marshall Arena in Milton Keynes, England, with pay-per-view streaming in the USA on DAZN. This was a 128-player 9-Ball event, produced by Matchroom Sport, with double elimination down to 64 players (32 on the winners' side and 32 on the one-loss side) and then single-elimination to the end. Shane Van Boening won the tournament, defeating Albin Ouschan in the final match.

The main commentators were Michael McMullan, Jeremy Jones, and Karl Boyes. The referees in the streamed matches were John Leyman, Marcel Eckardt, Desislava Bozhilova, and Brendan Moore. The main MC/announcer/interviewer was Michael Bridge.

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 3 days (through the round of 32), triangle rack on the 4th and 5th 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 all 11 matches (191 games) that were played on the main arena's Table 1 during the single-elimination portion of the event (Stage 2, last 64 players). These matches were 17.5% of the total of 63 matches played in Stage 2. All Stage 2 matches were races to 11 except for the final match, which was to 13. These 11 matches are listed here in the order in which they were played.

Friday, April 8
1. Mario He defeated Pia Filler 11-2 (Last 64)​
2. Shane Van Boening d. Bahram Lotfy 11-9 (Last 64)​
3. Pin-Yi Ko d. Jayson Shaw 11-10 (Last 32)​
4. Jung-Kin Chang d. Niels Feijen 11-4 (Last 32)​

Saturday, April 9
5. Albin Ouschan d. Thorsten Hohmann 11-5 (Last 16)​
6. Van Boening d. Ko 11-8 (Last 16)​
7. Ouschan d. Joshua Filler 11-6 (Quarterfinal)​
8. Van Boening d. Chang 11-8 (Quarterfinal)​

Sunday, April 10
9. Ouschan d. Abdullah Alyouseff 11-3 (Semifinal)​
10. Van Boening d. Alex Kazakis 11-7 (Semifinal)​
11. Van Boening d. Ouschan 13-6 (Finals)​

Overall results
Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Match winners -- 95% (114 of 120)​
Match losers -- 87% (62 of 71)​
Total -- 92% (176 of 191)
Breaker won the game:
Match winners -- 76% (91 of 120)​
Match losers -- 55% (39 of 71)​
Total -- 68% (130 of 191)
Break-and-run games on all breaks:
Match winners -- 48% (58 of 120)​
Match losers -- 35% (25 of 71)​
Total -- 43% (83 of 191)
Break-and-run games on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Match winners -- 51% (58 of 114)​
Match losers -- 40% (25 of 62)​
Total -- 47% (83 of 176)

Here's a breakdown of the 191 games (for match winners and losers combined).

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:​
Breaker won the game: 128 (67% of the 191 games)​
Breaker lost the game: 48 (25%)​
Breaker fouled on the break:​
Breaker won the game: 0 (0%)​
Breaker lost the game: 5 (3%)​
Breaker broke dry (without fouling):​
Breaker won the game: 2 (1%)​
Breaker lost the game: 8 (4%)​
Therefore, whereas the breaker won 68% (130 of 191) of all games,​
He/she won 73% (128 of 176) of the games in which the break was successful (made at least one ball and did not foul).​
He/she won 13% (2 of 15) of the games in which the break was unsuccessful (fouled or dry).​

Break-and-run games -- The 83 break-and-run games represented 43% of all 191 games, 64% of the 130 games won by the breaker, and 47% of the 176 games in which the break was successful (made a ball and didn't foul).

The 83 break-and-run games consisted of 2 5-packs (1 each by by Chang and Van Boenig), 1 4-pack (Chang), 6 three-packs (2 by Van Boening and 1 each by He, Shaw, Feijen, and Ouschan), 12 two-packs, and 27 singles.

9-Balls on the break -- The 83 break-and-run games included 3 9-balls on the break (1.6% of all breaks), all by Van Boening -- two in successive games against PY Ko and one against Kazakis.
 
Last edited:

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Miscellany from the data for the 2022 World Pool Championship (9-Ball) event:
[This relates only to the 11 streamed matches I watched, not to all matches in the event.]

• The most balls made on a single break was 4, done 7 times. Five of those 7 were B&Rs, one was a game win but not a B&R, and 1 was a game loss.

• The average number of balls made on the break was 1.8 (this includes dry and fouled breaks). On successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul), the average was 1.9.

• 60% (115 of 191) of the games ended in one inning – 43% (83) won by the breaker (B&R) and 17% (32) won by the non-breaker. Only 3% (6 of 191) of the games lasted more than 3 innings.

• 49% (93 of 191) 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) – 47% (83 of 176)​
- By the non-breaker after fouls on the break – 100% (5 of 5)​
- By the non-breaker after dry breaks – 50% (5 of 10)​

• The player who made the first ball after the break:
- Won the game in that same inning 76% of the time (142 of 188)​
- Won the game in a later inning 9% of the time (16 of 188)​
- Lost the game 16% of the time (30 of 188)​
[Note -- total games used here are 188 rather than 191 to eliminate the 3 games in which no ball was made after the break.]​

• The loser won an average of 6.2 games in the 10 races to 11 (excludes the final match, a race to 13). One of the 11 matches went to hill/hill. The most lopsided match was one at 11-2.

• The average elapsed time for the 10 races to 11 was 102 minutes. The average minutes per game for all 191 games was 6.0. 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 or 4 games in a match, and lasting about 3 minutes each.

• The match that was longest in elapsed time, at 138 minutes, and tied for highest in average minutes per game, at 6.9, was Van Boening d. Lotfy 11-9. The other match at 6.9 minutes per game was Van Boening d. Jung-Lin Chang 11-8.

• The match that was shortest in elapsed time, at 68 minutes, was He d. P. Filler 11-2. The two matches lowest in average minutes per game, at 5.3, were He d. P. Filler 11-2 and Ouschan d. J. Filler 11-6.

• Breaking fouls averaged 1 for every 38.2 games, other fouls 1 for every 8.0 games, and missed shots about 1 for every 3.0 games.

• One or more safeties were played in about 35% of all games and in 61% of games that were not B&Rs.
 

Chicagoplayer

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Here are some aggregate break statistics from the 2022 World Pool Championship played April 6-10, 2022 at Marshall Arena in Milton Keynes, England, with pay-per-view streaming in the USA on DAZN. This was a 128-player 9-Ball event, produced by Matchroom Sport, with double elimination down to 64 players (32 on the winners' side and 32 on the one-loss side) and then single-elimination to the end. Shane Van Boening won the tournament, defeating Albin Ouschan in the final match.

The main commentators were Michael McMullan, Jeremy Jones, and Karl Boyes. The referees in the streamed matches were John Leyman, Marcel Eckardt, Desislava Bozhilova, and Brendan Moore. The main MC/announcer/interviewer was Michael Bridge.

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;​
• racking template on the first 3 days (through the round of 32), triangle rack on the 4th and 5th 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 all 11 matches (191 games) that were played on the main arena's Table 1 during the single-elimination portion of the event (Stage 2, last 64 players). These matches were 17.5% of the total of 63 matches played in Stage 2. All Stage 2 matches were races to 11 except for the final match, which was to 13. These 11 matches are listed here in the order in which they were played.

Friday, April 8
1. Mario He defeated Pia Filler 11-2 (Last 64)​
2. Shane Van Boening d. Bahram Lotfy 11-9 (Last 64)​
3. Pin-Yi Ko d. Jayson Shaw 11-10 (Last 32)​
4. Jung-Kin Chang d. Niels Feijen 11-4 (Last 32)​

Saturday, April 9
5. Albin Ouschan d. Thorsten Hohmann 11-5 (Last 16)​
6. Van Boening d. Ko 11-8 (Last 16)​
7. Ouschan d. Joshua Filler 11-6 (Quarterfinal)​
8. Van Boening d. Chang 11-8 (Quarterfinal)​

Sunday, April 10
9. Ouschan d. Abdullah Alyouseff 11-3 (Semifinal)​
10. Van Boening d. Alex Kazakis 11-7 (Semifinal)​
11. Van Boening d. Ouschan 13-6 (Finals)​

Overall results
Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Match winners -- 95% (114 of 120)​
Match losers -- 87% (62 of 71)​
Total -- 92% (176 of 191)
Breaker won the game:
Match winners -- 76% (91 of 120)​
Match losers -- 55% (39 of 71)​
Total -- 68% (130 of 191)
Break-and-run games on all breaks:
Match winners -- 48% (58 of 120)​
Match losers -- 35% (25 of 71)​
Total -- 43% (83 of 191)
Break-and-run games on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Match winners -- 51% (58 of 114)​
Match losers -- 40% (25 of 62)​
Total -- 47% (83 of 176)

Here's a breakdown of the 191 games (for match winners and losers combined).

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:​
Breaker won the game: 128 (67% of the 191 games)​
Breaker lost the game: 48 (25%)​
Breaker fouled on the break:​
Breaker won the game: 0 (0%)​
Breaker lost the game: 5 (3%)​
Breaker broke dry (without fouling):​
Breaker won the game: 2 (1%)​
Breaker lost the game: 8 (4%)​
Therefore, whereas the breaker won 68% (130 of 191) of all games,​
He/she won 73% (128 of 176) of the games in which the break was successful (made at least one ball and did not foul).​
He/she won 13% (2 of 15) of the games in which the break was unsuccessful (fouled or dry).​

Break-and-run games -- The 83 break-and-run games represented 43% of all 191 games, 64% of the 130 games won by the breaker, and 47% of the 176 games in which the break was successful (made a ball and didn't foul).

The 83 break-and-run games consisted of 2 5-packs (1 each by by Chang and Van Boenig), 1 4-pack (Chang), 6 three-packs (2 by Van Boening and 1 each by He, Shaw, Feijen, and Ouschan), 12 two-packs, and 27 singles.

9-Balls on the break -- The 83 break-and-run games included 3 9-balls on the break (1.6% of all breaks), all by Van Boening -- two in successive games against PY Ko and one against Kazakis.
Thank you!
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
The break was really big this tournament.
thanx AtLarge
Yes, maybe too big. Balls went in on all 5 of the fouled breaks, so at least one ball was made on 95% of the breaks. And 43% B&R may be the highest I have ever reported for a tournament on a 9-foot table (I haven't checked every thread).

I'm not sure why that Diamond table played as easy as it did. Last year's table in this event, a Predator, also had 4¼" corners (and was said to have "shallow pocket shelves"). So how did the stats compare this year vs. last year? My thread on this event last year included 12 matches from the first 2 days, whereas this year I included only matches from the last 3 days. In order to have a better comparison, I went back to last year's data and calculated a few stats from just the last 3 days -- same rounds of play as this year.

Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
2022 -- 92% (176 of 191)​
2021 -- 82% (159 of 193)​

Breaker won the game:

2022 -- 68% (130 of 191)​
2021 -- 63% (122 of 193)​

Break-and-run games on all breaks:

2022 -- 43% (83 of 191)​
2021 -- 32% (62 of 193)​

Break-and-run games on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):

2022 -- 47% (83 of 176)​
2021 -- 39% (62 of 159)​
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Seems to me, AtLarge, the players have been doing their homework.
Whoa, I just found a higher B&R% for the World 9-Ball event -- 2018, 49% for the 14 matches (236 games) I watched, even though an illegal-break rule was in effect. They used a Wiraka table with pocket sizes unknown to me. And at least one ball was pocketed on 95% of the breaks (though not all were successful).
 

skip100

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Fargo rating stats...

Biggest match upsets:
Code:
##  1 93 points: Pia Filler (641) def. Bashar Hussein Abdulmajeed (734), 9-6
##  2 93 points: Pia Filler (641) def. Ivan Meng Li (734), 9-3              
##  3 89 points: Ali Al Obaidli (711) def. Skyler Woodward (800), 9-8       
##  4 79 points: Eylul Kibaroglu (682) def. Michael Schneider (761), 9-8    
##  5 75 points: Daniel Schneider (724) def. Chang Yu-Lung (799), 9-3   
##  6 73 points: Darryl Chia Soo Yew (669) def. Chris Reinhold (742), 9-3   
##  7 72 points: Lo Ho Sum (747) def. Eklent Kaci (819), 11-7               
##  8 64 points: Abdullah Alyousef (753) def. Aloysius Yapp (817), 11-10    
##  9 61 points: Chris Alexander (713) def. Radoslaw Babica (774), 9-5      
## 10 60 points: Shane Wolford (742) def. David Alcaide (802), 9-7

Top performers:
Code:
##  1 Chang Jung-Lin (866 performance): 59 W-30 L against avg. 769        
##  2 Albin Ouschan (859 performance): 79 W-45 L against avg. 778         
##  3 Darren Appleton (859 performance): 50 W-29 L against avg. 780       
##  4 Oliver Szolnoki (858 performance): 52 W-30 L against avg. 779       
##  5 Alexander Kazakis (852 performance): 69 W-43 L against avg. 784     
##  6 Ralf Souquet (851 performance): 35 W-20 L against avg. 770          
##  7 Shane Van Boening (849 performance): 86 W-58 L against avg. 792     
##  8 Ko Pin Yi (846 performance): 52 W-38 L against avg. 801             
##  9 Robbie Capito (845 performance): 27 W-16 L against avg. 770         
## 10 Marc Bijsterbosch (839 performance): 38 W-24 L against avg. 773

Top overperformers vs. their rating:
Code:
##  1 91 points: Robbie Capito (845 performance vs. 754 rating)    
##  2 82 points: Mickey Krause (827 performance vs. 745 rating)    
##  3 76 points: Darren Appleton (859 performance vs. 783 rating)  
##  4 76 points: Ip Tung Pong (776 performance vs. 700 rating)     
##  5 74 points: Mats Schjetne (836 performance vs. 762 rating)    
##  6 72 points: Marc Bijsterbosch (839 performance vs. 767 rating)
##  7 71 points: Oliver Szolnoki (858 performance vs. 787 rating)  
##  8 70 points: Vincent Halliday (644 performance vs. 574 rating) 
##  9 66 points: Pia Filler (707 performance vs. 641 rating)       
## 10 61 points: Nicholas De Leon (782 performance vs. 721 rating)
 

Fatboy

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The break was really big this tournament.
thanx AtLarge
Always is.

Great tourney, couldn’t be happier with the result. Also some great wins for other players along the way. Good stuff the whole way around

Except the purple 5 balls!!!!

Best
Fatboy🤠🤠
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
A Magic Rack template was used for racking in all matches through the Round of 32 and a regular triangle thereafter (Last 16). Did it make much difference? Just 4 of the matches I tracked were with the Magic Rack, and 7 with the triangle, but here are the results from those samples:

Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Template -- 94% (65 of 69)
Triangle -- 91% (111 of 122)​

Breaker won the game:
Template -- 71% (49 of 69)
Triangle -- 66% (81 of 122)​

Break-and-run games on all breaks:
Template -- 43% (30 of 69)​
Triangle -- 43% (53 of 122)​

Break-and-run games on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Template -- 46% (30 of 65)​
Triangle -- 48% (53 of 111)​
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
For future reference, in case I can't easily fine it elsewhere, here is Shane's undefeated path to victory in the 2022 World Pool Championship.

1. Waleed Majid 9-4
2. Jan Van Lierop 9-6
3. Bahram Lotfy 11-9
4. Mika Immonen 11-10
5. Ko Pin-Yi 11-8
6. Chang Jung-Lin 11-8
7. Alex Kazakis 11-7
8. Albin Ouschan 13-6

Total -- 86-58 (winning percentage 60%)
 

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A Magic Rack template was used for racking in all matches through the Round of 32 and a regular triangle thereafter (Last 16). Did it make much difference? Just 4 of the matches I tracked were with the Magic Rack, and 7 with the triangle, but here are the results from those samples:

Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Template -- 94% (65 of 69)​
Triangle -- 91% (111 of 122)​

Breaker won the game:
Template -- 71% (49 of 69)​
Triangle -- 66% (81 of 122)​

Break-and-run games on all breaks:
Template -- 43% (30 of 69)​
Triangle -- 43% (53 of 122)​

Break-and-run games on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Template -- 46% (30 of 65)​
Triangle -- 48% (53 of 111)​

isn't this measure problematic, as the ones featured in the earlier rounds in general are lower ranked players?
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
isn't this measure problematic, as the ones featured in the earlier rounds in general are lower ranked players?
My stats are all on Last 64 matches (Stage 2). The only player at a significantly lower level in the 4 matches I tracked where they used a template was Pia Filler. She broke just 3 times in that match, all successful breaks, and she won 2 of those 3 games with B&Rs.

But, yes, the comparison would be better if I had more data and with the same players, or equally skilled players, in both groups (template and triangle).

Here's a comparison from last year with 16 matches that used a template and 7 matches that used a triangle: https://forums.azbilliards.com/thre...ionship-9-ball-june-2021.531566/#post-6975181. There, the results with a template beat those with a triangle on all 4 measures, despite the template matches being from earlier rounds.
 

Fatboy

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
For future reference, in case I can't easily fine it elsewhere, here is Shane's undefeated path to victory in the 2022 World Pool Championship.

1. Waleed Majid 9-4
2. Jan Van Lierop 9-6
3. Bahram Lotfy 11-9
4. Mika Immonen 11-10
5. Ko Pin-Yi 11-8
6. Chang Jung-Lin 11-8
7. Alex Kazakis 11-7
8. Albin Ouschan 13-6

Total -- 86-58 (winning percentage 60%)
That’s a tough draw
 

skip100

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
That’s a tough draw
out of the 64 players who advanced to the single-elimination stage, Shane had the 6th-toughest draw:

Code:
##  1 Michal Gavenciak: Opponents' average rating 811  
##  2 Oscar Dominguez: Opponents' average rating 801   
##  3 Ko Pin Yi: Opponents' average rating 801         
##  4 Mats Schjetne: Opponents' average rating 796     
##  5 Lo Ho Sum: Opponents' average rating 794         
##  6 Shane Van Boening: Opponents' average rating 792 
##  7 Thorsten Hohmann: Opponents' average rating 788  
##  8 Joshua Filler: Opponents' average rating 788     
##  9 Dimitri Jungo: Opponents' average rating 787     
## 10 Daniel Guttenberger: Opponents' average rating 786
 
Top