How much longer must we endure this insane format CSI is pushing

[sjm]

While I respect your opinion, I dont agree with it. If what you say is true, where are the numbers to prove it? So far I dont see anything any more successful in the market.

My comments were simply an observation that their steps don't suggest that the "instant gratification" motive is what this tour is about, and I offered three indisputable examples of how their actions are a step in the opposite direction. It is not a matter of opinion that ten ball takes longer than nine ball. It is not a matter of opinion that call shot slows the game down a little. It is not a matter of opinion that disallowing golden breaks, by forcing additional racks to be played out, lengthens the game.

Still, what you are saying here is very important. These features of the play don't mean that their plan and vision are wrong, and the ratings, while not relevant to the discussion of whether "instant gratification" is what they're going for, matter a whole lot. If people enjoy this, that's great, for I'd be delighted to see this tour succeed. That said, Predator has made it clear that they expect to lose money from this tour. Hence, whether this tour is good business for Predator will come down to whether they can sell cues and tables, and, as is being discussed in another thread, both players (SVB among them) and viewers have a very low opinion of the new Predator table. Even a person who plays twice a year in a bar would have been shocked watching balls roll off time and time again.

Predator is a fantastic company having superior management, but they've had a false start with regard to their new table. Their commitment to pro pool is indisputable and greatly appreciated and they are a positive force in pool. This tour is certain to increase Predator's brand recognition and help them sell more cues and other equipment.

I wish them every success in the world.

 

[sjm]

But then in a 9 ball tournament, someone breaks and makes a ball but has to sit down.

This is no longer true, as the three-point rule has been eliminated in all Matchroom events.

 

[rexus31]

...disallowing golden breaks,

Stu, please refer the 10B on the break as a Sapphire Break. After all, the 10B isn't yellow...LOL!

 

[sjm]

Stu, please refer the 10B on the break as a Sapphire Break. After all, the 10B isn't yellow...LOL!

LOL for sure. I think that "golden break" derives from the term "golden goal" in football/soccer, referring to a game ending goal. I don't think soccer balls are gold, so they, too, may need to address this!

 

[ChrisSjoblom]

An alternate format occurred to me while reading the comments.

1. Lag for break on first set
2. First set is race to 5, alternate break
3. Second set is possible race to 5, alternate break, with loser of the first set getting first break
3a. Winner of the match to be determined by the total number of games won by each player in both sets
3b. If loser of the first set wins the second set, and the total number of games for each player are tied, then:
4. One tiebreaking set. Race to 2, alternate break, lag for first break

Note: The second set could end early if the winner of the first set wins enough games in the second set that the loser of the first set cannot catch him in total wins. As an example, player A wins the first set 5-3. In the second set, player A wins 4 games before player B wins 5 games. At the point where player A wins that 4th game in the second set, the match is over with player A the winner.

As I said, this just occurred to me. I haven't thought it through at all. What do you guys think of it. Good, bad, genius, stupid, crazy....? And why do you think so?

 

[FastManners]

As someone who views at home. I don’t love the format, I prefer longer races and a battle utilizing a multitude of skill sets to decide a match, not just the ability to make a tricky spot shot.
That all being said, I think it is a great format for CSI to achieve their goals. Their goal is clearly to grow a number of state championships and have mini expos in states throughout the year. I can only imagine that the shootouts create a buzz at the event. The short races and shootouts also give the illusion that any strong player can take down one of the monster players who are there. Facts prove that this is not the case, however facts are often ignored by people confident in their own ability. Hell, I even think I could win a match or two and I am delusional donkey of a player.
The Pro Billiard Series is a loss leader designed to attract top players in need of a decent payday and be a spectacle for the rest of the attendees of the expo.

I disagree with paying out more for people who finish lower. If you want to get paid, get better and perform better. Period.
Fundamentally it is one of the things that holds back real talent in the US, they are not hungry enough as they are used to getting paid by winning handicap and level capped tournaments.
I love that this tournament series is dominated by high level players, they deserve the pay day for being both talented and being dedicated.

 

[Fatboy]

LOL for sure. I think that "golden break" derives from the term "golden goal" in football/soccer, referring to a game ending goal. I don't think soccer balls are gold, so they, too, may need to address this!

I don’t remember that term “golden break” from the distant past.

Do you recall the first time you ever heard it used?

Sounds very “European” to me. Which is cool, but I can’t recall it being used 10 years ago. Maybe I missed something along the way

Thanks Stu I’m really curious how long you have heard it

Best

Eric

 

[Fatboy]

As someone who views at home. I don’t love the format, I prefer longer races and a battle utilizing a multitude of skill sets to decide a match, not just the ability to make a tricky spot shot.
That all being said, I think it is a great format for CSI to achieve their goals. Their goal is clearly to grow a number of state championships and have mini expos in states throughout the year. I can only imagine that the shootouts create a buzz at the event. The short races and shootouts also give the illusion that any strong player can take down one of the monster players who are there. Facts prove that this is not the case, however facts are often ignored by people confident in their own ability. Hell, I even think I could win a match or two and I am delusional donkey of a player.
The Pro Billiard Series is a loss leader designed to attract top players in need of a decent payday and be a spectacle for the rest of the attendees of the expo.

I disagree with paying out more for people who finish lower. If you want to get paid, get better and perform better. Period.
Fundamentally it is one of the things that holds back real talent in the US, they are not hungry enough as they are used to getting paid by winning handicap and level capped tournaments.
I love that this tournament series is dominated by high level players, they deserve the pay day for being both talented and being dedicated.

That’s notnit

It’s to get more matches on the board with higher variance for the sports books to mop up the stupid money willing to pay huge vig on dumb bets.

That’s all it’s about.

Nothing to do with pool fans

It’s all about making money through sports books

Best
Fatboy <———knows about gambling

 

[tomatoshooter]

Stu, please refer the 10B on the break as a Sapphire Break. After all, the 10B isn't yellow...LOL!

I'm on board with this. Everybody gets a gin and tonic! Is the 8 on the break an onyx break?

 

[sjm]

I disagree with paying out more for people who finish lower. If you want to get paid, get better and perform better. Period.
Fundamentally it is one of the things that holds back real talent in the US, they are not hungry enough as they are used to getting paid by winning handicap and level capped tournaments.
I love that this tournament series is dominated by high level players, they deserve the pay day for being both talented and being dedicated.

The Pro Billiard Series is a loss leader designed to attract top players in need of a decent payday and be a spectacle for the rest of the attendees of the expo.

I disagree with paying out more for people who finish lower. If you want to get paid, get better and perform better. Period.

A thoughtful and well-considered post for sure. I am always torn on this, and I think I'd feel differently if this wasn't the only major professional tour in America right now. Some of me agrees with you, and I'm not bothered too much if the dead money makes next to nothing in prize money. On this tour, however, everybody carrying a Fargo of under 750 is practically dead money and that seems too tough a standard for this fan.

Just as you observe, as a showcase for the most elite, this tour works. As a developmental ground for those with reasonable hope of becoming pro level players, it doesn't deliver. Most of the aspiring pros will lose money consistently on this tour, and I don't think this is good for our sport.

Despite the presence of two rock solid regional tours in the Mezz Tour and the Joss Tour, America lacks a true training ground for emerging talent. Pro basketball in America has its developmental "G" league and its summer league, and there are pro leagues all over the world, and all of these offer an income to participants. Pro football has the practice squads and even the Candian football league where those with dreams of playing in the NFL can develop their skills while still earning an income.

When we had the America-based Professional Billiards Tour (PBT) in the 1980's and 1990's, many hopefuls could afford to chase the dream of reaching professional level while making some income in the process. Those two decades probably produced more great American pro players than any others in the history of our game, including future hall of famers Buddy Hall, Johnny Archer, Nick Varner, Mike Sigel, Kim Davenport, Allen Hopkins, Earl Strickland, and Jim Rempe, and the presence of the PBT in America had much to do with it.

Yes, the elite deserve all the money they are making, but part of our sport's future is dependent on making sure that the path to becoming a pro is a reasonable one.

 

[sjm]

I don’t remember that term “golden break” from the distant past.

Do you recall the first time you ever heard it used?

Sounds very “European” to me. Which is cool, but I can’t recall it being used 10 years ago. Maybe I missed something along the way

Thanks Stu I’m really curious how long you have heard it

Best

Eric

I think it's first use was in the mid-1990s during the Mosconi Cup, and it is definitely European in origin. I highly doubt the term "golden break" was used in commentary before the first Mosconi Cup in 1994.

 

[Fatboy]

I think it's first use was in the mid-1990s during the Mosconi Cup, and it is definitely European in origin. I highly doubt the term "golden break" was used in commentary before the first Mosconi Cup in 1994.

I was thinking more about it and that seems about right. Has to be a Euro thing. Probably Mcup commentary-makes perfect sense. I suppose for TV it’s cool.

Sure doesn’t sound like a term one might have heard in a hardcore action joint late at night.

I have never used that term. It’s just not part of my vocabulary. But at the same time I think for TV it’s pretty good.

Thx for your input Stu

Best
Fatboy

 

[mista335]

I also think 3 sets is the answer. Like 60 percent of the matches went to a shootout this tournament, which is way too many. Hockey and soccer shootouts are rare.

Make it a race to 9 and be done with it.

 

[tomatoshooter]

Make it a race to 9 and be done with it.

Yes, the hockey and soccer shootouts are when all other means of finding the better team have been exhausted. This is a format that cannot reliably produce a winner. Even a race to 7 would be better although the trailing player get to break after game 6 and maybe when the leader gets to the hill. Someone suggested best of 3 sets of 3, I think that would be great, let the loser of the previous set break. I'm not a big fan of alternate breaks but sometimes winner breaks can get out of hand.

 

[Swighey]

That's a fair way to look at it. But the shootouts seem to have a magnified importance in this format if they are the decisive factor in most matches.

The first set is of huge importance because it gives you the opportunity to win the match before the shootout. Assuming that 40% is correct over the long run, the winner of the opening set wins the match 70% of the time (40% for winning 2 sets plus half of the remaining 60%, assuming the shootout is 50-50). The second set then becomes a second chance for the first set loser who is now on the back foot. I like this concept but agree with many that races to 4 are a little on the short side.

 

[Swighey]

LOL for sure. I think that "golden break" derives from the term "golden goal" in football/soccer, referring to a game ending goal. I don't think soccer balls are gold, so they, too, may need to address this!

yeh it probably has its origins in "golden goal". "Golden goal" in turns follows on from "golden boot" or "golden shoe" which is an actual golden boot presented to the top scorer in tournaments such as the World Cup. Next were the awards presented to the best goalkeeper and outfield MVP - "golden glove" and "golden ball". But yep a regular ball is certainly not golden.

The 9 ball is yellow though, which is a bit goldy-ish.

 

[Woodshaft]

A single race to 8. Winner breaks. Same shot clock.
Easy, and the weaker player is much more likely to lose.
And, with a max of 15 games played possible, it would take the maximum same amount of time as a (4-3, 3-4, shootout) current format match.

 

[BeiberLvr]

You can easily tell how something popular actually is by the number of views on YouTube.

The Wisconsin Open (shootout format) was held a little over a month ago. Looking at all of the match videos (not including the highlight videos), the average viewers across 24 videos was 39k. This is due to 3 videos in particular. Two Jasmin matches and the Kaci/Gorst match. All 3 had over 100k views. The rest of them were in the teens and mid 20's.

We can even go back further, 6 months ago, to the Michigan Open. Most of those videos are only topping out in 30's

Now compare it to some of the videos posted on Matchroom Pool's page. They already have 7 matches posted with over 100k views just in the last 3 weeks.

 

[mista335]

You can easily tell how something popular actually is by the number of views on YouTube.

The Wisconsin Open (shootout format) was held a little over a month ago. Looking at all of the match videos (not including the highlight videos), the average viewers across 24 videos was 39k. This is due to 3 videos in particular. Two Jasmin matches and the Kaci/Gorst match. All 3 had over 100k views. The rest of them were in the teens and mid 20's.

We can even go back further, 6 months ago, to the Michigan Open. Most of those videos are only topping out in 30's

Now compare it to some of the videos posted on Matchroom Pool's page. They already have 7 matches posted with over 100k views just in the last 3 weeks.

Or maybe that 9 ball is just more popular and more professionally presented by Matchroom.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Yes, the hockey and soccer shootouts are when all other means of finding the better team have been exhausted. This is a format that cannot reliably produce a winner. Even a race to 7 would be better...

Actually the data shows that single races to 7 in 10 ball would do a worse job of finding the better player than this format does.

The data shows that this format finds the better player at about the same rate that single races to 8 in 10 ball does, so single race lengths would have to be to 9 or more (in 10 ball) before they would start to do a better job.

A single race to 8. Winner breaks. Same shot clock.
Easy, and the weaker player is much more likely to lose.

See the above. The weaker player is not "much more likely to lose" "in a single race to 8" in 10 ball. The data shows that the weaker player would lose at the same rate with this format as they would in a single race to 8 in 10 ball so they are actually functionally equivalent in that sense.

Also, there is no difference in how often you will lose a match with winner or alternate breaks either. The belief that the winner or alternate break format will change your chances for winning a match is a false misconception caused by the fact that whether it is winner or alternate break will indeed change how close the score lines will tend to be. That fact naturally, but very erroneously, makes people assume that if it affects how tight the scores are then it must also be affecting how often you win, but it doesn't, at all.