Breaking Stats -- 2011 US Open 9-Ball

AtLarge.....

I know you had to watch the stream to compile the stats... I do hope you weren't too busy with them to miss the shout out given to you by Jim Wych on one of the full production matches.... He mentioned this thread several times thru the week.... Keep up the good work......
 
I took a break from looking at breaking results, but today I got the notes out again.



How about push shots? Conventional wisdom is that the player who pushes out is at a disadvantage, because it is the other player who then has the choice on whether to shoot. What did the numbers say for this event?

Out of the 660 games that were streamed, 68 games (10%) involved a push out, and the results were as follows:

  • Breaker pushed and won the game -- 24
  • Breaker pushed and lost the game -- 23
  • Non-breaker pushed and won the game -- 7
  • Non-breaker pushed and lost the game -- 14

So, overall, the person who pushed won 31 of the 68 games (46%) and lost 37 (54%). But breakers who pushed came out about even, while non-breakers who pushed lost twice as many as they won!

Great stuff. I don't think who broke the rack has much meaning in push out situations. The 46% figure is the key here, and it substantiates the conventional wisdom that the player forced to push out is a slight underdog to win the rack at pro level.
 
you're taking too much from the data...

Well, I agree with what you said, so maybe i posted something not clear, haha.

Take home point with these data: players that don't know how to rack (this can, and probably does, mean giving yourself a loose rack -- at least in certain spots) are losing, as it seems they are all on the losers side. In essence, racking is almost the whole game.

Maybe i'm taking too much from the data, but that is how i see it.

KUDOS to OP once again. If there is karma you got some comin. Thanks.

You would need to have a LOT more specific information to come to that conclusion.

You cannot determine causality with the stats given.

People on the losers side are likely to be more mentally out of it, since they have been punished by losing, so they are less likely to break successfully out of lack of confidence.

That is as likely an explanation as the other, i.e. that they are on the loser's side BECAUSE they aren't breaking successfully.

You would have to analyze their winner's side matches to determine if they lost due to not breaking properly or making too many mistakes to get a better idea of the proper correlation, but causality would still be impossible to determine.

Jaden
 
Hello, folks; I'm back. The snowstorm here in New England (and elsewhere) a week ago today knocked out my home's power for 5 1/2 days and my phone/TV/internet for 6 1/2 days. The destruction to trees caused by wet snow on leaves, and the resulting effects on power lines, were just amazing.

But speaking of breaks... I promised two weeks ago that I would try to refine the info a little bit. In looking at my notes again, I spotted a few errors in what I had previously posted -- one more game in which the breaker made a ball on the break and did not foul (on Day 4), one more game won by the breaker (on Day 3), and three more break-and-run games (one on each of Days 3, 6, and 7). I have edited Post #1 with these corrections. They had little effect on the overall results, which I'll restate here for completeness:

For all 39 streamed matches combined (660 games), the breaker made at least one ball (and did not foul) 62% of the time, won 58% of the games, and broke and ran 21% of the games.​

So we know from the above how often the breaker made a ball and how often he won the game. But how closely did the one affect the other? Here's a little more detailed breakdown of the 660 streamed games.

Breaker made at least one ball and did not foul:
Breaker won the game: 267 (40% of the 660 games)​
Breaker lost the game: 139 (21%)​

Breaker fouled on the break:
Breaker won the game: 18 (3%)​
Breaker lost the game: 31 (5%)​

Breaker broke dry (without fouling):
Breaker won the game: 97 (15%)​
Breaker lost the game: 108 (16%)​

Therefore, whereas the breaker won 58% (382) of all 660 games,
He won 66% (267 of 406) of the games in which he made at least one ball on the break and did not foul.​
He won 37% (18 of 49) of the games in which he fouled on the break.​
He won 47% (97 of 205) of the games in which he broke dry but did not foul.​
He won 45% (115 of 254) of the games in which he either fouled on the break or broke dry without fouling.​
 
Last edited:
AtLarge.....

I know you had to watch the stream to compile the stats... I do hope you weren't too busy with them to miss the shout out given to you by Jim Wych on one of the full production matches.... He mentioned this thread several times thru the week.... Keep up the good work......

Yes, Wych first mentioned it during the first match on Wednesday, Day 4 (Hopkins d. Hohmann), and he then quoted some numbers a couple other days. That was kind of neat to hear.

And thanks to all who mentioned my efforts here and/or gave me rep.

Did it surprise anyone else (but me) that the breaker won 45% of the games in which he broke dry (or fouled) -- see Post #65?
 
You would need to have a LOT more specific information to come to that conclusion.

You cannot determine causality with the stats given.

People on the losers side are likely to be more mentally out of it, since they have been punished by losing, so they are less likely to break successfully out of lack of confidence.

That is as likely an explanation as the other, i.e. that they are on the loser's side BECAUSE they aren't breaking successfully.

You would have to analyze their winner's side matches to determine if they lost due to not breaking properly or making too many mistakes to get a better idea of the proper correlation, but causality would still be impossible to determine.

Jaden

Of course, i was making inferences, which is what savvy people would do when they look at this (not that im savvy). You think a book maker is gonna look at this and say I need more data to "determine causality." He may, but in the meantime he will make inferences, and being "mentally out of it" probably would not be one of them for players who have traveled to get there, paid entry, and their whole lives are based on pool (ie im sure they have lost before).

I think you missed the point anyway. Making a ball on the break is determined more by the player's racking than the players breaking ability at any given time. That is another opinion i guess, but it is one that is hard to argue with if you have played enough.
 
Last edited:
I just wanted to bump this thread and also say thanks to AtLarge. Great stats here.

Also, I think that an interesting stat would be to compile the average number of innings per game. Just wishing...
 
I just wanted to bump this thread and also say thanks to AtLarge. Great stats here.

Also, I think that an interesting stat would be to compile the average number of innings per game. Just wishing...

Thanks. Average number of innings, eh? I suppose I could go back to the data ... Do I get the same pay as last time?
 
Back
Top