Paging math nerds, handicap vs. first break

JarnoV

JarnoV

JarnoV
Silver Member
This is the specification: you're playing against a world-class player, on a tight table, magic rack / perfect rack, nine-ball on the spot, winner breaks, race to 7.

You have the option to either get one game handicap and your opponent gets the break in the first rack or start even (0-0) and the first breaker is decided with a toin coss.

Question: how good of a player you have to be for it to be a better option to give away the handicap and get a chance to be the first breaker? In other words, what is the estimated percentages of run-out of a world-class player and where is the turning point so that the one game advantage is better than the 50-50 chance to break first?

I know it's difficult to say, but that's why I paged math nerds. ;-)

(Let's assume there's no psychological advantage either way.)
 
Take the game on the wire,,no doubt.

If either player runs out 7 tables,,(or even 5),,,there not much chance for the other anyhow,because they are shooting hot!!!

And the chances are it's not going to happen and both players will get a win and a break somewhere along the line.

I don't know where math comes in on this. Unless you are simply asking what are the odds of "someone" running 7 racks. And all the scenario above does not mater.

What would matter,,,,,,,is ,,,,,,who this "someone" is ,,and how they have been shooting.
 
They're both lousy handicaps if you're playing a world class player (and you are not at that level). He will steamroll you in both cases. Once he gets control of the table, it's all over.
 
I think the percentage you need to be concerned with is how often your opponent makes a ball on the break.

A world class player just needs to make a ball then figure out how to take control of the game from there. They don't need to run out to take control of a short race. If you know your opponent tends to be too aggressive let him break the first game. But if you're not at his level it won't be enough.

If you watch Varner's "championship 9 ball" from back in the 80's he takes you through a few racks. Every time that he makes a ball on the break he poses the question of "how do I take control of this game from here?"
 
JarnoV said:
This is the specification: you're playing against a world-class player, on a tight table, magic rack / perfect rack, nine-ball on the spot, winner breaks, race to 7.

You have the option to either get one game handicap and your opponent gets the break in the first rack or start even (0-0) and the first breaker is decided with a toin coss.

Question: how good of a player you have to be for it to be a better option to give away the handicap and get a chance to be the first breaker? In other words, what is the estimated percentages of run-out of a world-class player and where is the turning point so that the one game advantage is better than the 50-50 chance to break first?

I know it's difficult to say, but that's why I paged math nerds. ;-)

(Let's assume there's no psychological advantage either way.)
Click to expand...
A 50/50 chance to break once vs. a sure thing game on the wire? Why do we need math to decide this?

pj
chgo
 
Like others have said, there are too many factors to assign any definitive odds. The biggest factor is your level of play (vs a world class player).

As far as the math (forgive me but i dont feel like doing the calculations), you would start by calculating the probability of a world class player breaking and running 1 rack, then a 2 pack, 3 pack, etc. Next, calculate the probability of you B&R 1 rack, 2 racks, etc. This would be a starting point. From there, you need to factor in the other variables such as safety play, kicking ability, etc. Using Pat Fleming's stats, supposedly, a sample group of world class players tend to B&R in the 30% range. So, if you give away the first break, there is a 30% probability that the world class player will break and run the first rack, therefore, negating your 1 rack spot. Thing is, there are other factors. because there may only be a 30% chance of a B&R in the first rack, doesn't mean you have a 70% chance of winning. What if the world class player plays a lock up safety and keeps control of the table?

As far as the coin toss, well, lets assume your odds of winning the break are 50%(for this example). For you, you ahve a 50% chance of winning the first break, then you have to factor in your B&R percentage.

Long story, short...take the 1 game spot.


Eric

beetle said:
They're both lousy handicaps if you're playing a world class player (and you are not at that level). He will steamroll you in both cases. Once he gets control of the table, it's all over.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I would take the game on the wire. As they say, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
 
Eric. said:
Like others have said, there are too many factors to assign any definitive odds. The biggest factor is your level of play (vs a world class player).

As far as the math (forgive me but i dont feel like doing the calculations), you would start by calculating the probability of a world class player breaking and running 1 rack, then a 2 pack, 3 pack, etc. Next, calculate the probability of you B&R 1 rack, 2 racks, etc. This would be a starting point. From there, you need to factor in the other variables such as safety play, kicking ability, etc. Using Pat Fleming's stats, supposedly, a sample group of world class players tend to B&R in the 30% range. So, if you give away the first break, there is a 30% probability that the world class player will break and run the first rack, therefore, negating your 1 rack spot. Thing is, there are other factors. because there may only be a 30% chance of a B&R in the first rack, doesn't mean you have a 70% chance of winning. What if the world class player plays a lock up safety and keeps control of the table?

As far as the coin toss, well, lets assume your odds of winning the break are 50%(for this example). For you, you ahve a 50% chance of winning the first break, then you have to factor in your B&R percentage.

Long story, short...take the 1 game spot.


Eric
Click to expand...

I agree. A bird in hand...etc. Bad ball rolls can kill even the best players at times, plus odd scratches on the break etc. If you break, can you run the breaks to the win? I asume you were referring to a winner break scenario. Either way the one game spot is an advantage in my opinion. At least you can say you were not shut out. I know. I know. It was a spot. Please don't waist time & space jumping me for that.
 
The only way giving up a free game makes sense is if both players can run out the whole set, or at least play perfect safeties and stay in total control. Even for a world class player that's a tall order for 7 straight racks. For the other guy it's Mission Impossible.

If you didn't rack the 9 on the spot, I'd say someone like Donny Mills might consider giving up that free game vs. efren or earl. But 9 on the spot removes your guaranteed ball on the break.

I'd say the game on the wire is a no-brainer, for me at least.
 
You don't have enough information to make a conclusion using math:

You're Player A; your opponent is Player B.

You can either begin with a score of:

Option 1) 1A - 0B with B breaking,

or,

Option 2) 0A - 0B with A-B having a 50/50 chance of breaking.

All you really need to estimate is the probability of Player A and Player B winning the rack (whether A or B sinks a ball on the break or runs the rack is immaterial...it's just who wins the rack).

Without that information there's a slight advantage to taking the game and letting him break. But if your estimates (above) are that he's going to win every game, then it really doesn't matter.
 
game on the wire is infinitely stronger than only 1 break. no math needed. 1 break does not guarantee success. However if the ? were alternate break format(racing to a typical odd number) then it would be closer but I would still take the game on the wire.
 
beetle said:
They're both lousy handicaps if you're playing a world class player (and you are not at that level). He will steamroll you in both cases. Once he gets control of the table, it's all over.
Click to expand...

What you really need is the 7 out and the breaks if your not making money as a pool player.....
 
The reason I'm asking is that there is a tournament where this is the situation for some players. There is a world-class player there (Mika) and everyone gets at least one game on the wire. Top players in Finland, other than Mika, all get one game on the wire if they want. However, some players have refused it and instead want a chance at the first break. It was my feeling too that the game on the wire is still the better option.

That said, I don't know if they refused the handicap for some other reason (they want to win Mika fair and square etc).

Edit: I'm not sure if they get a guaranteed first break if they refuse the handicap. That would change the equation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top