Johnny Archer vs. Allison Fisher?

[Jaden]

You have to understand what ball spots mean at that level...

Well.... I may be wrong, but last year at the Derby wasnt Johnny giving the 7 to Shane playing some sets, I think they came out even, but I cant remember so please dont quote me on that, maybe someone can shed some light on it, but my point is if Johnny can give Shane the 7, then IMO his margain of victory against Allison should be quite substantial in a race to 100. Either way I would love to watch that match.

How often do players of that caliber miss on the seven, eight, nine????
The answer is not very often.... Giving ball spots like the seven, eight, last two, etc.... are a lot smaller spot than many would think when playing at that level, it's more of a confidence booster than a physical advantage....IMHO.... I know if I manage to get out to the seven, chances are pretty darn good, barring no extremely difficult shots, locked up balls etc, I am a favorite to get out, and those exceptions are pretty rare...

Often when I'm playing money games and someone offers me a ball spot, I'll turn around and say no let's play even or just give me the breaks....I turn it around and use my confidence to possibly throw them off....

 

[jay helfert]

There are four crucial areas in the game of 10 ball that the woman players are far behind the upper echelon male players. They are breaking,kicking,banking,and safety play.If the rules and conditions were designed to force players to utilize there skills in the four crucial areas as stated,then it is inevitable that the woman players will lose their confidence and break down,as would other male players as well.
Incidentally I think short rack games like 9 ball and 10 ball should be alternate break. It lends to closer matches ,and who doesn't like to watch close matches?

Billy nailed it again. He hit all the right buttons on what separates the top men from the top women.

I only disagree on the break issue. I love to see a guy string racks, if he is capable. I think it's damn exciting to watch. He could be pulling away or coming from behind. Either way, it's cool. And the fans love it! All those years with winner breaks, and we still had many hill-hill matches in every tournament. Just check Fleming's Accu-Stats catalogue.

 

[av84fun]

I remember during a time in the Midwest Tour when they had a winner break format, watching Dave Matlock running 9 and out playing a fairly good player. Guy never had a chance.

Then I saw David playing a guy and winning 8 to 2 and the other kid coming back and beating David 9-8 with alternate break format.

I thought more of the second match than I did watching David win 9 games in a row without the other player shooting. Anyone that can come back and win with alternate break makes a more exciting game in my opinion than a winner break format.

Great post...and memory. Yes, it is fundamentally more DRAMATIC to see the guy stage such a comeback when to opponent had every other break!

And the more DRAMA the more people it will appeal to. I don't dispute that some like to see "packs" put on. That is clearly their choice. But IHMO a significantly greater percentage of the potential viewing audience would respond as you did.

Regards,
Jim

 

[Rubyron]

I don't dispute that some like to see "packs" put on. That is clearly their choice. But IHMO a significantly greater percentage of the potential viewing audience would respond as you did.

The majority of people that voted in this small poll disagree with you.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=65026

I agree that alternate break is OK in short races but in longer ones I prefer winner breaks.

 

[av84fun]

I know for a fact she has turned down the six ball in a winner break format. The possible stakehorse said the six "wasn't even close." Of course, this was about seven years ago?

I don't know who you were referring to but whoever "she" is was VERY smart.

I am just shocked that there seem to be so many who don't know a hustle move when they see it.

The odds heavily favor a miss or hook with 8 balls left on the table to block routes vs. when there are 3-4 left.

. By the time the shooter gets to the 6 there will be 3-4 balls left on average so even a shortstop is a heavy favorite to run out to the 9.
So the 6 will only make a difference in maybe 2 or 3 racks in 10...TOPS.

In the meantime, the monster breaker is a threat to put 5-6 racks on you every time he gets to the table.

The great breaker's advantage is even greater in gambling matches where racking gamesmanship is more prevalent than in tournament play.

If you don't figure to make a ball AND get shape on a huge percentage of racks, then the champion can give you the 1 ball and still rob you...especially in ahead sets...the favorite format of roadies because in a 10 ahead set, the champion down 8-4 is STILL the favorite to win because he can put a six pack on you before you can blink.

I bet the rail for some decent money in EXACTLY the above scenario (not the one ball but the 5-7 wild) with Bobby Pickle playing what I would consider to be an APA 8...who had more money than brains.


The weight does you no good when you're sitting on your a$$.

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

There's one kinda big problem with winner breaks, that hasn't really been emphasized. Winner breaks can be an unfair non-competitive event.

Will use a very specific case scenario just for emphasis.

Player 1 basically runs 5 racks every turn.
Player 2 basically runs 7 racks every turn. Obviously better player.

These 2 players face each other in a race to 9 format.
If player 1 wins the lag, then he will run 5, making the score 5-0.
Player 2 then makes the score 5-7.
Player 1 runs the next 4 and wins 9-7.

The score looks a bit exciting. But in essence the outcome of the match was pre-determined. And the better player didn't win. Didn't even have a chance, unless he could miraculously beat his normal odds and run all 9 games. But, the odds just don't work in his favor.

Thus, there are numerous permutations of this, where winner breaks is a bad determinant of who's the better player, even on that night during that particular match.

In the example above, it took player 1 two turns to get to his 6th and 7th wins. It took player 1, a single turn to do the same. If the race were a little longer, say race to 21, then player 2 would win. If the race were greater than 25, then player 2 would win every time. But yet in the race to 9, winner breaks, the better player lost anyway.

EXACTLY...which is why ahead sets are the gambler's favorite and for exactly that reason...although ultra-long races are gaining popularity since so many (and yet so few) are getting wise to the HUGE advantages of winner breaks in ahead sets.

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

Ralph Soquet,Reyes,Orcullo,Bustamate,Archer,Alcano,Hohmann,and VanBoening are my players. You present a interesting prop,but I don't think it answers our question on how Allison and Karen would fare against my players in a competition with the rules and condition I developed.But my answer to your proposal is neither Allison or Karen would be a favorite against any of the players mentioned,nor is it pickem.IMO

You only named 8 not 10, but of your 8, I would play karen against Soquet at 6-5. But I don't think he'd take the match for serious money.

And yes, I agree with you that it does not answer your prop...I was just commenting on your suggestion that the top echelon of men are significantly better safety players then the top women.

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

Well.... I may be wrong, but last year at the Derby wasnt Johnny giving the 7 to Shane playing some sets, I think they came out even, but I cant remember so please dont quote me on that, maybe someone can shed some light on it, but my point is if Johnny can give Shane the 7, then IMO his margain of victory against Allison should be quite substantial in a race to 100. Either way I would love to watch that match.

SVB last year is not SVB this year. He is obviously young and getting better at a scary rate. Bobby Pickle gave him the 7 ball just a few years ago.

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

The majority of people that voted in this small poll disagree with you.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=65026

I agree that alternate break is OK in short races but in longer ones I prefer winner breaks.

Small is right...100 and change...and most of the winner breaks votes probably came from roadies!

Here's where I rest my case. Any of the major sports leagues, controlled by people with franchises worth hundreds of millions of dollars vote the other way every year when rules changes are proposed.

Tennis, for example, is in the dumpster for a popularity point of view these days so if any sport was going to change the rules to please the fans it would be tennis.

So, all they need to do to boost fan popularity is to let the winner of the game continue to serve until he/she loses a game.

I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

Billy nailed it again. He hit all the right buttons on what separates the top men from the top women.

I only disagree on the break issue. I love to see a guy string racks, if he is capable. I think it's damn exciting to watch. He could be pulling away or coming from behind. Either way, it's cool. And the fans love it! All those years with winner breaks, and we still had many hill-hill matches in every tournament. Just check Fleming's Accu-Stats catalogue.

With GREAT respect, Jay, I don't buy that.

1. Assuming the fans watching those matches were relatively evenly distributed, I don't think the fans of the guy warming his chair got up and cheered every time the opponent broke and ran.

2. Assuming the fans heavily favored the winner, the fact that they cheered only proves that they liked the unfair advantage a LOT.

3. Come-from-behind wins in the alternate break format are FUNDAMENTALLY more exciting because there IS no unfair advantage at work and therefore, it HAS to be more dramatic and therefore, more exciting.

4. I have no stats but I suspect that there are no more H/H matches in the winner breaks format than in alt...probably fewer. And what can POSSIBLY be more exciting than a H/H finish!

Make no mistake...I think it is cool to watch guys break and run long packs. The artistry of that feat is just hugely impressive. But that is an "exhibition" of great skill (which as you know, is what Willie did MOST of in his career...by far...exhibitions not tournement play.

But exhibitions are not Sporting Competitions and there is a massive difference in those two types of events.

If your going to hold COMPETITIONS then you have to let both players/teams COMPETE!


Regards,
Jim

 

[sde]

Compromise

Consider this compromise, if you will.

A breaker would keep the break if, it is a break and run and all 9 balls are pocketed in that game. If the 9 is made early the break goes to the non-breaker of the previous rack.

If both player have a turn at the table, for any reason, the break goes to the non-breaker of the previous rack.

Essentially it would be alternate break with the exception of break and runs.

Steve

 

[Jaden]

I like that idea....

Consider this compromise, if you will.

A breaker would keep the break if, it is a break and run and all 9 balls are pocketed in that game. If the 9 is made early the break goes to the non-breaker of the previous rack.

If both player have a turn at the table, for any reason, the break goes to the non-breaker of the previous rack.

Essentially it would be alternate break with the exception of break and runs.

Steve

I think that people have a misconception of how often there are multiple packs if you will. Sure, the top players CAN string multiple racks together, but it is not likely that they're going to string a five pack even every other time they come to the table....IT might be one in ten innings when a top player is in dead stroke....and that's probably pushing it....

 

[av84fun]

Consider this compromise, if you will.

A breaker would keep the break if, it is a break and run and all 9 balls are pocketed in that game. If the 9 is made early the break goes to the non-breaker of the previous rack.

If both player have a turn at the table, for any reason, the break goes to the non-breaker of the previous rack.

Essentially it would be alternate break with the exception of break and runs.

Steve

Interesting idea. But one thing it would do would be to substantially reduce if not eliminate combos on the 9. I think most top players would pass on even an easy combo (if there is any such thing) and go for the runout in order to preserve the break.

But another compromise might be to cap consecutive breaks at, say, 3.

That would give a measurable advantage to the better breaker while insuring that what was supposed to be a contest doesn't turn into an exhibition.


Regards,
Jim

 

[sde]

I think that people have a misconception of how often there are multiple packs if you will. Sure, the top players CAN string multiple racks together, but it is not likely that they're going to string a five pack even every other time they come to the table....IT might be one in ten innings when a top player is in dead stroke....and that's probably pushing it....

Thanks I'm glad you like it.

I think it would be interesting to see what a breaker would do, if faced with an easy one nine combo or a moderately difficult runout, knowing that playing the combo would give the break back to the opponent. The more I think about it the better I like it, but I'm sure some one will point out negatives that I have missed. lol

Steve

 

[av84fun]

I think that people have a misconception of how often there are multiple packs if you will. Sure, the top players CAN string multiple racks together, but it is not likely that they're going to string a five pack even every other time they come to the table....IT might be one in ten innings when a top player is in dead stroke....and that's probably pushing it....

Right, multi-packs don't happen on every other "possession" but they don't have to. Just once in a race to 11 with the score tied at 5-5.

But in ahead sets, my experience in sweating and staking them for 30 years is that the vast majority of them are won by the "pack percentage" if you will allow me to coin a phrase.

In other words, most ahead sets are won by one player who puts a 5-6+ pack on the other and then just trades racks from that point forward or by the guy who catches a Pack when he is 5-6 racks from the winning number.

This is just a wild guess from memory but my opinion is that maybe 4 ahead sets in 10 are won when the winner just wears the other guy down by winning 3 sets to 2 for example...at which rate it would take 100 racks for someone to win 20 ahead.

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

Thanks I'm glad you like it.

I think it would be interesting to see what a breaker would do, if faced with an easy one nine combo or a moderately difficult runout, knowing that playing the combo would give the break back to the opponent. The more I think about it the better I like it, but I'm sure some one will point out negatives that I have missed. lol

Steve

Do you have me on ignore?
(-:

 

[sde]

Do you have me on ignore?
(-:

LOL

No I don't. You just type faster and your post was not up when I started typing.

If I had you on ignore there would not be much to read in this thread.

Steve

 

[av84fun]

LOL

No I don't. You just type faster and your post was not up when I started typing.

If I had you on ignore there would not be much to read in this thread.

Steve

LOL back at ya! (-:

 

[klockdoc]

LOL

No I don't. You just type faster and your post was not up when I started typing.

If I had you on ignore there would not be much to read in this thread.

Steve

LOL. av84fun does make it exciting and contributes some interesting points to this thread.

 

[av84fun]

LOL. av84fun does make it exciting and contributes some interesting points to this thread.

THANKS...And this thread has been a model of decorum. 260 posts without a single impudent post.

That has inspired me. My New Year's Pledge is to not INITIATE an insulting post to anyone (and I have initiated a few...but not as many as some might think).

But from now on, if anyone points out that I IN FACT initiate an obvious and blatantly insulting post then I will resign the forum.

I will also do my best not to respond in kind...but that's not a pledge. The way I'm wired up, it will take me until NEXT New Year to work up to that.

(-: