double elimination strategy

justnum

TesticularCancer Survivor
Silver Member
for amateurs and bangers a double elimination tournament involves strategy.

Is it ever useful to take your first loss in a specific bracket to avoid the winner or another bracket?
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
for amateurs and bangers a double elimination tournament involves strategy.

Is it ever useful to take your first loss in a specific bracket to avoid the winner or another bracket?
In my opinion it’s very simple math - the longer you can survive in the winners bracket the far less matches you’ll need to play and the far better chance you have to make it to the finals!

However, there is certainly something to be said about getting knocked in to the one loss bracket early, and then finding your stroke by having to play and win far more matches compared to the players surviving through the winners bracket thus having progressively longer waits between their matches.
 
Last edited:

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
In my opinion it’s very simple math - the longer you can survive in the winners bracket the far less matches you’ll need to play and the far better chance you have to make it to the finals!

However, there is certainly something to be said about getting knocked in to the one loss bracket early, and then finding your stroke by having to play and win far more matches compared to the players surviving through the winners bracket thus having progressively longer waits between their matches.
Another possibility is that all the champs are in your half of the bracket, and if you lose your first match there is no chance you will see them until you're in the money.

But double elimination is a fundamentally obnoxious format. I wish it would go away.
 

Dead Money

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
for amateurs and bangers a double elimination tournament involves strategy.

Is it ever useful to take your first loss in a specific bracket to avoid the winner or another bracket?

The best strategy is always to try and win all your games and matches...especially in short races at local pool halls and bar events. The exception to this of course is if you are there on the down low looking for cash games after the event or on another day:wink:
 

ShootingArts

Smorg is giving St Peter the 7!
Gold Member
Silver Member
seen it done

I have seen people deliberately go to the one loss side. They might be ducking a particular player or some think it is a softer trip. One thing it is, you spend a lot more time on the table if you move over early.

It could be a good move to jump to the losers side late so that it only adds a match or two, a given that these matches will be against pretty tough competition though. I hate the hot seat when it leaves me chilling for a couple hours waiting for the losers side to catch up. It seems like a lot of people get iced sitting on the hot seat, I certainly have!

When everything is weighed, I think those giving up half of their entry fee deliberately going to the losers side are silly. With no seed in pool tournaments you may find yourself meeting monsters from your second match onwards. If you meet the guy on the winners side and lose, you are in the same place as if you took a deliberate loss except you are further along in the tournament. The only real reason I can see to go to the one loss side is to get more table time. That is a two edged sword and may leave you putting in your table time over on the coin box out of the way of the tournament players.

Best strategy: Ignore the bracket sheets! Who you are playing isn't going to change and a few minutes mental prep is better than it cooking for a long time that you are up against someone much better than you next match. Hit the deck with all guns firing and hope to get an early lead so the other person is chasing you.

Hu
 

sixpack

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
You have to beat everybody to win anyway. Might as well face them on the winners side if you can.

I played a regional pro/short stop one time who studied the bracket and then (I believe) deliberately lost to me because the other side of the bracket had some serious players. Wade Crane, Coy Lee, Danny Medina and Joe Alvarez.

He ended up losing his next match to a hungry young player. I played Coy Lee and lost and then went to the losers side and lost to AZBs Ironman (RIP). That guy kicked like a mule against me. I played some good safeties and he made some amazing kicks, not just to hit the ball but made it with position and run out. He kicked in and ran out 3 times against me in a race to 7!

This tournament was in Denver at the Billiard Institute at Colfax/Sheridan.
 

Dead Money

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
You have to beat everybody to win anyway. Might as well face them on the winners side if you can.

I played a regional pro/short stop one time who studied the bracket and then (I believe) deliberately lost to me because the other side of the bracket had some serious players. Wade Crane, Coy Lee, Danny Medina and Joe Alvarez.

He ended up losing his next match to a hungry young player. I played Coy Lee and lost and then went to the losers side and lost to AZBs Ironman (RIP). That guy kicked like a mule against me. I played some good safeties and he made some amazing kicks, not just to hit the ball but made it with position and run out. He kicked in and ran out 3 times against me in a race to 7!

This tournament was in Denver at the Billiard Institute at Colfax/Sheridan.

Ironman was a good dude! I played at some of the Fast Eddie's events in Texas he and his partner put on. They were also involved in the Texas Open for a good while. He is missed both here and out there in the pool scene as well.
 

bb9ball

Registered
Another possibility is that all the champs are in your half of the bracket, and if you lose your first match there is no chance you will see them until you're in the money.

But double elimination is a fundamentally obnoxious format. I wish it would go away.

What format do you prefer?
 

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I think unless you’re heads and shoulders better than everyone, you need a little luck to do well in a tournament. I’ve survived many hill-hill matches on deep tournament runs. A few times I’ve been lucky to eke out those wins that would’ve/should’ve/could’ve went the other way. I wouldn’t intentionally take a loss because I might need it if one of the times my luck goes the other way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

sixpack

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Ironman was a good dude! I played at some of the Fast Eddie's events in Texas he and his partner put on. They were also involved in the Texas Open for a good while. He is missed both here and out there in the pool scene as well.

Amen. He lived a heck of a life. Lots of great scary stories.

He and I were never close but managed to run into each other out of town a few times and traded stories.
 

9BallKY

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Most tournaments only pay the top 3 spots unless it is a really big tournament. Only one player from the losers side gets in the money. The final 2 on the winners side are locked in 2 of the top 3 positions. I think it would be unwise to lose and think you can be the one person to make it back to the money.
 

Dead Money

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Amen. He lived a heck of a life. Lots of great scary stories.

He and I were never close but managed to run into each other out of town a few times and traded stories.

For sure. If you are up for it maybe you could honor him with a short story you saw happen on here?
 

u12armresl

One Pocket back cutter
Silver Member
Lots of tourneys shorten the losers side race, so it could be a non productive thing to do. Especially if the race is shortened by 2 or more games.

for amateurs and bangers a double elimination tournament involves strategy.

Is it ever useful to take your first loss in a specific bracket to avoid the winner or another bracket?
 

Black-Balled

He Rides the Skies
Silver Member
Lots of tourneys shorten the losers side race, so it could be a non productive thing to do. Especially if the race is shortened by 2 or more games.

The premise that it could be beneficial to lose intentionally is only a 'good' idea if you are trying to hustle your way into a bigger payday elsewhere.
 

justnum

TesticularCancer Survivor
Silver Member
Lots of tourneys shorten the losers side race, so it could be a non productive thing to do. Especially if the race is shortened by 2 or more games.

your mental game is a lot better

sometimes the hot seat can be uncomfortable.

shuffling opponents is where i get lost, would I rather face off against someone I know has specific strengths that out shine my game.

Like someone with an amazing break, while I lack it.

or someone with amazing safety play, which can be challenging to see outs from.

Yes I have deficiencies but some are easier to improve than others.
A tournament helps me assess what type of match I think I can handle when trying for pro level standards of billiard play.
 

8cree

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Another possibility is that all the champs are in your half of the bracket, and if you lose your first match there is no chance you will see them until you're in the money.

But double elimination is a fundamentally obnoxious format. I wish it would go away.

Have you never won a tourney from the Losers bracket?

Doesn't everyone deserve s second chance:thumbup:

Just curious why you are against that format?
 
Top