Break Stats -- 2023 World Pool Masters 9-Ball, May 2023

[AtLarge]

Here are some aggregate break statistics from the 2023 World Pool Masters event played May 10-13, 2023 at Brentwood Centre in Essex, England. This was a 16-player, single-elimination 9-Ball event produced by Matchroom Sport with pay-per-view live streaming in the USA on DAZN. Fourteen of the 16 players were determined by Matchroom's Nineball World Rankings; the other two players were wild-card picks by Matchroom. Eight of the players were ceded based on the rankings. Ko Pin Yi won the tournament, defeating Eklent Kaçi in the final match.

The commentators were Phil Yates, Michael McMullan, Jeremy Jones, and Karl Boyes. The referees, alternating matches, were Desislava Bozhilova and Marcel Eckardt. The announcer/interviewer was James Savundra, and the MC on Friday and Saturday was Tahir Hajat.

Conditions -- The conditions for this event included:

• Rasson OX 9-foot table with 4" corner pockets;​

• Simonis 860 Shark Grey cloth;​

• Aramith Tournament Black balls with a black-spots cue ball;​

• triangle rack;​

• referee racks with the 9-ball on the foot spot (2-ball not necessarily in back location);​

• winner breaks from behind the head string in a box approximately 8" to either side of the long string;​

• no illegal-break rule, but referees enforce a forceful-break requirement;​

• 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 15 matches (249 games) that were played in this event. The races were to 9 in the first round, to 11 in the second and third rounds (Quarterfinals and Semifinals), and to 13 in the Finals. The 15 matches are listed here in the order in which they were played.

Wednesday, May 10

1. Niels Feijen defeated Joshua Filler 9-5​

2. Max Lechner d. Mohammad Soufi 9-4​

3. Ko Pin Yi d. Jayson Shaw 9-1​

Thursday, May 11

4. James Aranas d. Francisco Sanchez-Ruiz 9-7​

5. Wiktor Zielinski d. Zheng Xiao Huai 9-6​

6. Eklent Kaçi d. Albin Ouschan 9-7​

7. Mario He d. Alex Kazakis 9-5​

8. Shane Van Boening d. David Alcaide 9-6​

Friday, May 12 -- All Quarterfinals

9. Feijen d. Lechner 11-6​

10. Arabas d. Zielinski 11-10​

11. Kaçi d. He 11-10​

12. Ko d. Van Boening 11-7​

Saturday, May 13

13. Kaçi d. Feijen 11-10 (Semifinal)​

14. Ko d. Aranas 11-9 (Semifinal)​

15. Ko d. Kaçi 13-5 (Finals)​

Overall results

​

Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):​

Match winners -- 69% (98 of 143)​

Match losers -- 74% (78 of 106)​

Total -- 71% (176 of 249)​

​

Breaker won the game:​

Match winners -- 70% (100 of 143)​

Match losers -- 52% (55 of 106)​

Total -- 62% (155 of 249)​

​

Break-and-run games on all breaks:​

Match winners -- 35% (50 of 143)​

Match losers -- 26% (28 of 106)​

Total -- 31% (78 of 249)​

​

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

Match winners -- 51% (50 of 98)​

Match losers -- 36% (28 of 78)​

Total -- 44% (78 of 176)​

Here's a breakdown of the 249 games (for match winners and losers combined).

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:​

Breaker won the game: 129 (52% of the 249 games)​

Breaker lost the game: 47 (19%)​

​

Breaker fouled on the break:​

Breaker won the game: 4 (2%)​

Breaker lost the game: 13 (5%)​

​

Breaker broke dry (without fouling):​

Breaker won the game: 22 (9%)​

Breaker lost the game: 34 (14%)​

​

Therefore, whereas the breaker won 62% (155 of 249) of all games,​

He won 73% (129 of 176) of the games in which the break was successful (made at least one ball and did not foul).​

He won 36% (26 of 73) of the games in which the break was unsuccessful (fouled or dry).​

Break-and-run games -- The 78 break-and-run games represented 31% of all 249 games, 50% of the 155 games won by the breaker, and 44% of the 176 games in which the break was successful (made a ball and didn't foul).

The 78 break-and-run games consisted of 2 4-packs (one each by He and Kaçi, both including a 9-ball on the break), 5 3-packs (one each by Filler, Ko, Sanchez-Ruiz, Ouschan, and Zielinski), 10 two-packs, and 35 singles.

9-Balls on the break -- The 78 break-and-run games included 15 9-balls on the break (6.0% of all breaks). This included 4 9's on the break in the Lechner/Soufi match (3 by Lechner) and 3 in the Aranas/Zielinski match (all by Zielinski).

 

[AtLarge]

Miscellany from the data for the 2023 World Pool Masters (9-Ball) event:

• The most balls made on a single break was 4, done 5 times -- once by He (in a game won by B&R), twice by Kaçi (1 B&R and 1 game loss), once by Van Boening (B&R), and once by Aranas (B&R).

• The average number of balls made on the break was 1.2 (this includes dry and fouled breaks). On successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul), the average was 1.6 and the distribution was 57% 1 ball, 31% 2 balls, 9% 3 balls, and 3% 4 balls.

• Number of innings:

48% (120 of 249) of the games ended in one inning – 78 games on the breaker's first inning (B&Rs) and 42 games on the non-breaker's first inning.​

20% (50 of 249) of the games ended in the second inning.​

32% (79 of 249) of the games went beyond the non-breaker's second visit to the table. The game with the most visits to the table ended on the non-breaker's 10th visit.​

• 42% (105 of 249) 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) – 44% (78 of 176)​

- By the non-breaker after fouls on the break – 71% (12 of 17)​

- By the non-breaker after dry breaks – 27% (15 of 56)​

• The player who made the first ball after the break:

- Won the game in that same inning 58% of the time (135 of 234)​

- Won the game in a later inning 16% of the time (38 of 234)​

- Lost the game 26% of the time (61 of 234)​

[Note -- total games used here are 234 rather than 249 to eliminate the 15 games in which no ball was made after the break.]​

• The loser won an average of 5.1 games in the 8 races to 9 and 8.7 games in the 6 races to 11 (excludes the final match, a race to 13). Three of the matches went to hill/hill. The most lopsided match was one at 9-1.

• The average elapsed times per match were 89 minutes for the 8 races to 9 and 133 minutes for the 6 races to 11. 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 highest in average minutes per game, at 7.6, was Feijen d. Lechner 11-6. The match lowest in average minutes per game, at 5.8, was Lechner d. Soufi 9-4 The average minutes per game for all 249 games was 6.6.

• Breaking fouls averaged 1 for every 14.6 games, other fouls 1 for every 5.9 games, and missed shots about 1 for every 1.8 games.

• One or more safeties were played in about 39% of all games and in 57% of games that were not B&Rs.

 

[pt109]

AtLarge…thanx again for your very useful threads….I always look forward to them…figures don’t lie…but sometimes our reactions do.
….there were complaints about so many 9s made on the break…but 6% doesn’t seem outrageous….are these stats on that historic?
…a guy I used to give the 5 6 7 8 to made had five golden breaks in a row in a money match…loser racks.bigger pockets, mind you.

 

[MattPoland]

I’m curious about the break. Seeing 17 scratches and 15 golden breaks does mean there’s some risk and luck in the format. 6% isn’t really as much as some would have you believe. But maybe there is a secret sauce where Max and Wiktor had a better chance at it with their style of break. Maybe they are trying to send that cueball over and back the same way every time.

I started to wonder watching Ko whether he was trying to let the cueball drift low when the 2 was at the bottom of the rack and let the cueball pull high when the 2 was at the top of the rack. It was looking that way when I started paying attention but that could have been coincidence. It also appeared he was making the 1 in the side less often when he was trying to drift the cueball low (2 at the bottom half of the rack).

 

[sjm]

I think a 31% break and run rate is impressive on this tough equipment. Of course, the field was extremely elite.

The 6% nine on the break rate is only a little high, given the break that is now in vogue in which the cue ball cuts across the rack area, often hitting the nine.

I like a "breaker won the game stat of about 60%, so the 62% shows that the breaker has an edge but the edge is not that great. As we know, Kaci won both his hill-hill matches without owning the double hill break.

Thanks for the stats.

 

[AtLarge]

….there were complaints about so many 9s made on the break…but 6% doesn’t seem outrageous….are these stats on that historic?
...

I haven't taken the time to go through lots of previous threads, but I remember only one past event with 9-balls on the break anything like 6%. That was the 2013 Mosconi Cup, where they racked with a triangle, 9-ball on the spot, and a break box about 6" to each side of center. Successful breaks were only 33%. The breaker's side won 44% of the games. Nine-balls on the break numbered 7 on 125 breaks, or a bit under 6%. B&Rs in games in which the 9-ball was not made on the break numbered just 6 in 118 games, about 5%. The breaking tactic became using a full power break trying to send the 2-ball (at the back of the rack) off the foot rail into the 9-ball to make it in a side or head pocket.

Here are the 9-on-the-break percentages from the matches I tracked in other recent events where the 9-ball was racked on the spot and breaks were from a box about 8" to each side of center (unless otherwise noted):

• 2023 Predator Premier Pool League (racking template, 4¼" corners) -- 2.3% (2 of 133)​

• 2023 World Pool Championship (template, 4¼" corners) -- 1.5% (3 of 206)​

• 2022 Mosconi Cup (triangle, 4" corners) -- 1.5% (2 of 137)​

• 2022 International (template, 4¼" corners, box 9" each side of center) -- 1.7% (4 of 240)​

• 2022 US Open (template, 4¼" corners) -- 2.4% (5 of 205)​

• 2022 European Open (template, 4¼" corners) -- 1.3% (3 of 223)​

TOTAL for these 6 events -- 1.7% (19 of 1,144)​

 

[AtLarge]

Here's a comparison of a few stats for this year's World Pool Masters vs. last year's event.

The equipment was the same for both years. The rules that differed were:

2023 -- 9-ball racked on the foot spot, break from a fairly narrow central box​

2022 -- 1-ball racked on the foot spot, break from anywhere behind the line​

The stats for both years are for all of the matches played in the event -- 15 matches in 2023 (249 games) and 23 matches in 2022 (240 or 237 games, depending on the stat). The stats are for 2023 first, then 2022.

Successful breaks -- 71%, 91%​

Breaker won game -- 62%, 62%​

B&R on all breaks -- 31%, 36%​

9-balls on the break (included in B&Rs) -- 6.0%, 1.3%​

B&R on successful breaks -- 44%, 40%​

One-inning games -- 48%, 57%​

Games with safeties (of all games / of games that were not B&Rs) -- 39%/57%, 32%/51%​

Average minutes per game (including racking and commercial breaks) -- 6.6, 6.3​

 

[MattPoland]

Here's a comparison of a few stats for this year's World Pool Masters vs. last year's event.

The equipment was the same for both years. The rules that differed were:

2023 -- 9-ball racked on the foot spot, break from a fairly narrow central box​

2022 -- 1-ball racked on the foot spot, break from anywhere behind the line​

The stats for both years are for all of the matches played in the event -- 15 matches in 2023 (249 games) and 23 matches in 2022 (240 or 237 games, depending on the stat). The stats are for 2023 first, then 2022.

Successful breaks -- 71%, 91%​

Breaker won game -- 62%, 62%​

B&R on all breaks -- 31%, 36%​

9-balls on the break (included in B&Rs) -- 6.0%, 1.3%​

B&R on successful breaks -- 44%, 40%​

One-inning games -- 48%, 57%​

Games with safeties (of all games / of games that were not B&Rs) -- 39%/57%, 32%/51%​

Average minutes per game (including racking and commercial breaks) -- 6.6, 6.3​

That is the most shocking post I think I’ve seen you make. When I saw the first stat of successful breaks 71% vs 91%, that was a very significant spread. I’m shocked to see that the rest of the stats didn’t follow a similar spread. At the same time there was some restrictions in 2022. I’m sure people are tired of me bringing it up but the 2022 APF Asian 9-ball Open will always be my standard for which we want to avoid. It appears it doesn’t take much to achieve that.

 

[AtLarge]

That is the most shocking post I think I’ve seen you make. When I saw the first stat of successful breaks 71% vs 91%, that was a very significant spread. I’m shocked to see that the rest of the stats didn’t follow a similar spread. At the same time there was some restrictions in 2022. I’m sure people are tired of me bringing it up but the 2022 APF Asian 9-ball Open will always be my standard for which we want to avoid. It appears it doesn’t take much to achieve that.

You felt that the breaking rules at last year's Asian Open made the game too simple, dumbed it down, right? Is your point here that you feel the current Matchroom breaking rules, as used in this year's World Pool Masters, haven't done enough to improve that situation? What were the restrictions you mentioned?

 

[MattPoland]

You felt that the breaking rules at last year's Asian Open made the game too simple, dumbed it down, right? Is your point here that you feel the current Matchroom breaking rules, as used in this year's World Pool Masters, haven't done enough to improve that situation? What were the restrictions you mentioned?

I can clarify. I’m only shocked that in 2023 a successful break percent of 71% led to the breaker winning the game 62% of the time while in 2022 a successful break percent of 91% led to the breaker winning the game 62% of the time also. I can’t fathom how to interpret that. I don’t feel like I should be able to say, “I can increase your successful break percentage by 20% and it won’t make a bit of difference on your likelihood to win the game.” At this level that can’t be right but I just can’t put my finger on what the difference is.

I mention the Asian Open because there’s no doubt Matchroom did more than enough to improve over that events format. The eyeball test shows it. In both the WPM and AO you can strive to predictably make a specific ball but making the 1 in the side at WPM is harder than the wing in the corner for the AO. But more specifically you can’t predictably control both the cueball and the next lowest ball on the table at the WPM where at the AO you could. So the contrast between WPM and AO is much starker than the ‘22 WPM vs ‘23 WPM contrast. I bet at AO you saw successful breaks at 91% or higher, however I’m betting the breaker won the game was much higher than 62% too.

And that contrast only serves to emphasize how shocked I am that ‘22 WPM and ‘23 WPM were both 62%. I wouldn’t expect ‘22 WPM to be the same as AO. Hand racking alone will pull the numbers down some. So I expected ‘22 WPM to be somewhere in between and I can’t suss out why it wasn’t.

 

[skogstokig]

I can clarify. I’m only shocked that in 2023 a successful break percent of 71% led to the breaker winning the game 62% of the time while in 2022 a successful break percent of 91% led to the breaker winning the game 62% of the time also. I can’t fathom how to interpret that. I don’t feel like I should be able to say, “I can increase your successful break percentage by 20% and it won’t make a bit of difference on your likelihood to win the game.” At this level that can’t be right but I just can’t put my finger on what the difference is.

I mention the Asian Open because there’s no doubt Matchroom did more than enough to improve over that events format. The eyeball test shows it. In both the WPM and AO you can strive to predictably make a specific ball but making the 1 in the side at WPM is harder than the wing in the corner for the AO. But more specifically you can’t predictably control both the cueball and the next lowest ball on the table at the WPM where at the AO you could. So the contrast between WPM and AO is much starker than the ‘22 WPM vs ‘23 WPM contrast. I bet at AO you saw successful breaks at 91% or higher, however I’m betting the breaker won the game was much higher than 62% too.

And that contrast only serves to emphasize how shocked I am that ‘22 WPM and ‘23 WPM were both 62%. I wouldn’t expect ‘22 WPM to be the same as AO. Hand racking alone will pull the numbers down some. So I expected ‘22 WPM to be somewhere in between and I can’t suss out why it wasn’t.

asian open was played on looser pockets (GC clones)

 

[AtLarge]

We certainly expect a positive correlation between the successful-break percentage and the breaker-won-game percentage. More successful breaks lead to more opportunities for B&Rs or for putting the opponent in trouble. While it is a fairly rare event where the breaker wins 62% or more of the games while breaking successfully at 71% or less, it is not unique; I have tracked several such events.

As for WPM '23 vs WPM '22, the breaker won a higher percentage of the games on both successful and unsuccessful breaks this year -- 73% and 36% in 2023 vs. 66% and 24% last year. Missed shots were down a bit this year, although fouls were up. Another oddity this year was that match losers had a higher successful-break rate than match winners -- 74% vs. 69%. Several players won matches despite subpar breaking results.

And don't discount the possibility of rather strange results when the data set is fairly small.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... And don't discount the possibility of rather strange results when the data set is fairly small.

Were the "golden breaks" significant in the percentage of "breaker wins"?

 

[MattPoland]

Were the "golden breaks" significant in the percentage of "breaker wins"?

Breaker won the game: 62% (155 of 249)
9-Balls on the break: 6% (15 of 249)
Almost 1 out of every 10 times the breaker won it, was due to golden break.


3 by Lechner in a single match he wins. (significant)
3 by Zielinski in a single match he loses. (semi-significant)

So the other 14 players accounted for the remaining 9 golden breaks. (not-so-significant)
That means a few players never got a golden break.

 

[AtLarge]

Were the "golden breaks" significant in the percentage of "breaker wins"?

Yes and no. The 15 9s on the break were about 6% of all breaks and 10% of the games won by the breaker. But I think the real effect was more like raising the overall winner-breaks percentage by about 2% rather than 6%. Here's my logic (clearly, with assumptions).

A "normal" amount of 9s on the break in 249 games would have been about 4 rather than 15. So let's say we had 11 "excess" 9s on the break. Balls in addition to the 9-ball were made on 13 of the 15 breaks on which the 9-ball was made, so we can say that something like 9 of the breaks in the 11 games with "excess" 9s on the break would have been successful even without the 9s. And the breaker would have won a good share of those 9 games, let's say 6. So that leaves just 5 (15 - 4 - 6) of the 15 games with 9s on the break that really raised the overall breaker-won percentage. Without those 5, the breaker-won percentage would have been 60% instead of 62%.

 

[AtLarge]

... That means a few players never got a golden break.

3 each for Lechner and Zielinski
2 each for He and Ko
1 each for Filler, Soufi, Zheng, Ouschan, and Kaçi
none for the other 7 players

 

[spartan]

We certainly expect a positive correlation between the successful-break percentage and the breaker-won-game percentage. More successful breaks lead to more opportunities for B&Rs or for putting the opponent in trouble. While it is a fairly rare event where the breaker wins 62% or more of the games while breaking successfully at 71% or less, it is not unique; I have tracked several such events.

True.
Maybe it is an anomaly an exception rather than the rule or a possibility is this year's format distribute the balls more openly with show at lowest than last year's format.
But my guess is the ratio of Breaker Won to Successful Breaks this year of 87% (i.e. 62/71)] is much higher than last year 68% (i.e. 62/91) mainly because the field this year is probably strongest ever with 15 of 16 players >FR800 much stronger than last year when only 12 out of 16 players (in last 16 stage) >FR800