How do you feel about it?

[BRKNRUN]

I look at it this way....If you are playing straight pool and the guy runs 30 balls on you....No one says "stop... now it his turn".

In straight pool you have to wait until the guy makes a mistake...then it's your turn to run 30...or more.

A point that is being left out here is...Let's say a player falls behind (like what happend to Johnny Archer in the BCA finals)...You could see he had pretty much given up because he knew with the format that Throrsten was going to break and run or at least break and control the table for at least the two or three games he needed... In this format we were all "robbed" of the possiblilty of Johnny stringing 3 or 4 racks to get back into the match...I personally like to watch "comeback" matches...

I have seen a few accustats tapes where Johnny/Earl or Efren/Earl etc were playing matches where a guy runs three or 4 and then the other player does it right back..(and under pressure I might add) Have you ever seen the last tape of the COM match between Efren / Earl????....(That was some real 9-ball by both players)

The alternate break takes the pressure off of the set because the player now knows that if they happen to lose this one game, they by default will be "given" access to the table in one of the next two games....

I think..(especially if you want to play in top level events) You should have the pressure of knowing that if you miss you may not get to shoot again for the rest of the set....(its the same for both players you know)

That is exactly the way it was/is for straight pool/8-ball/billiards/snooker...It should be the same for 9-ball.....Don't give the lesser player a "chance" just because they suck....force them to practice controle of the table...I thought that was part of the game????

 

[JPB]

When I was pretty new to pool a pro event came through town. I watched a bunch of it. Got to see Buddy Hall play a local player. Hall won a few, but the local player got a game or two and the crowd started hooting for the local player. Mistake. Now Hall woke up. After the local player won a game he was down 4-2, broke and missed on the 2 or 3 ball. That was his match. Hall won 11-2. Did I want to see the local guy I could see anytime get half the breaks and lose 11-5 or 11-6 in a no-momentum, no interest match? or did I want to see a great player break them perfect everytime and run out every time with perfect control? I think you know the answer. I remember Hall sticking the cue ball every break and running out. No banks combos or tough shots. If you can't run the match out suck it up and compete. Congratulate the guy who can. I can't run the match out - not even close - but have never whined when somebody runs balls and has me sit. That's the game. I like seeing it played well.

Now let's compare seeing a great player string racks and the almost unwatchable short race alternate break WPBA pool on ESPN.

 

[ARM9BALLER]

Not necisarily though. Say for instance that Archer and Reyes are playing...we all know that Archer has the upper hand but let's say Reyes wins the toss/lag. Reyes breaks and runs...then Archer breaks and runs...so on and so forth! In this case Reyes will hit the end of the race first. Players at this skill level will ultimately break and run 5 out of 5 racks as long as a ball is made on the break. If they can't make the 1, a good safe is played...I don't feel like the better player will always win. By taking winner breaks out of the equation, you set someone up to get their rythym broken...and in turn, someone who is not as likely to mess up...may mess up!

I watched Johnny play in the Predator Open here in Jacksonville...WOW! It is nothing like watching him on tv! I don't think I ever saw him miss a shot, a kick shot, or a jump shot...how do you hook a guy like that????!!!

So you think that Archer has the upper hand? Interesting...
Funny, I watched Archer on T.V. against Holmann. Archer does a real good impression of that statue "The Thinker".LOL...Just giving you a hard time Diva. How are you BTW?

 

[Snapshot9]

That depends ...

It depends on whom I'm playing. As a general rule, more opportunities is better for the weaker player so alternating breaks would be good for me if I'm the underdog (which is frequently the case for me in pro events). It is a momentum killer and no player really enjoys that, considering the way people casually play BUT you cannot ignore the fact that if you're breaking well, you can respond to your opponent's run-outs.

Another format that most people don't consider very often is to break-up the set into two short races and have one player break in one race and the other player break in the latter. That way, you can have your packages yet still provide both players a decent number of opportunities at the table.

On breaking one set, then the other player breakin next set, depends on
who you are playing and whether you know them or are friends with them.
Too many people will 1 set out too much nowdays. If a guy is playing a
lessor player, maybe giving up a spot, and the lessor player by hook or
crook wins the first set, quits, because he knows in his heart that he
will lose in the long run. Or the ole "I gotta go in 10 minutes act after
luckily winning the first set. Or the ole 'Lets play for $50 a game, and
then running out the door after winning the first game'. Too many Con
artists out there nowdays.

 

[mapman72]

I didn't read every posting, but I do have this to say: I was playing in an alternating break tournament this weekend and it felt exactly like Tennis. You had to "hold serve". If you didn't hold serve, you're oponent could get the upper hand right there. But I disagree with the notion that alternating breaks is fair. The first break I had, I controlled the cue ball perfectly in the center of the table and pocketed a ball, only to have another ball kick the cue ball in the upper corner pocket. My opponent runs out. Next, my opponent breaks and runs out. The next game, I break, make a ball, control the cue ball, but am hidden behind a ball and can't make the one. I push, my oponent plays the safe that I was going to play. I kick, make a good hit, then they run out. Then they break and run out. The score is 4-0 and, although I had a couple shots at the table, I really didn't make a mistake. So I think that because holding serve is so crucial, it makes luck a much bigger factor in each game that you are breaking. Not to mention the statement earlier about if each player holds serve the entire match, the person winning the lag/flip will win. In 9 ball, I'm in favor of winner breaks. In most bigger tournaments, even the pros are not likely to run the set. And even when they play great on you, you can often look back to a few chances that you had early in the match where you didn't convert. Those chances are something that you can control and didn't. Winner breaks is the fairest way, IMO.

 

[9balldiva]

I agree 100%.
Even though I won back to back this year , I still hate alternate breaks.
Atleast I'm not a hipocrit........

I watched you play at the predator open...it's people like you who can benefit from winner breaks. I like to see that "pro" nature come into play!

I am a weaker player, but I would rather have someone break and run 7 racks straight. That's the only time you can feel like you got beat...most of the other time you beat yourself with stupid mistakes. Don't take the break from the players...this is the way they show off their skills...why they have sponsers! Let them shine!

 

[Snapshot9]

Either can be difficult ..

Winner break for gambling.
Alternate for tournaments.
Although each can be difficult at times. Like when you are spotting
someone the wild 8, and you are on the hill in 3 different sets, and
they put a 5 pack on you, a 4 pack, and a 5 pack to win all 3 sets.
Yes, I know, but it is still hard to swallow, especially since in 30
years of playing them, it was the absolute best you ever saw them
shoot. (winner's break), and it cost you a grand.
At least with alternate break, you still have a chance to win, even if
you aren't breaking good, and you are a better run out player than they
are. It puts you down into the 'mechanics' of the game more.
What's really tough is these weekly handicapped tournaments that
have loser's break, and you are playing a 9-2 race ... lol

 

[RAG]

I have seen Johnny Archer's name evoked as one who would be against alternate break formats. Earlier this year at the San Destin Hilton Tournament a local asked Johnny that question and I was surprised at his answer. He actually said he liked the alternate break format. His point was that he felt he was not just a good breaker but that he felt he played as well as anyone and as some earlier posters have said the better player should win anyway. Most would be worried about him running the set out he didn't want anyone running out on him and felt he could out move them.

 

[Rickw]

Not necisarily though. Say for instance that Archer and Reyes are playing...we all know that Archer has the upper hand but let's say Reyes wins the toss/lag. Reyes breaks and runs...then Archer breaks and runs...so on and so forth! In this case Reyes will hit the end of the race first. QUOTE]

Good point. Maybe they should do it like tennis so they have to win by 2 games.