Possible Alternative to Winner Break vs. Alternate Break
- Thread starter BeiberLvr
- Start date
I played in a tournament a long time ago that was loser breaks format. It keeps the matches closer, but not by much. If you can't run out, it don't matter if you're breaking or not.
I would think we would see a lot closer matches at the pro level if this were their format.
Maniac (someone ought to try it on a regional tour at least once)
Trailer breaks
I think you may mean "trailer" breaks rather than "loser" breaks. Trailer breaks guarantees at least one more chance at the table in every game when you're behind in a match; loser breaks does not.
Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
I think you may mean "trailer" breaks rather than "loser" breaks. Trailer breaks guarantees at least one more chance at the table in every game when you're behind in a match; loser breaks does not.
Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
Yep, that's what I meant to say. It's been a long time since I was in that tournament. As long as you were behind, you broke. If you got back to a tie, your opponent broke.
Maniac (things get a little cloudy as I age
)better yet, flip a coin for each game in a match let luck decides fate!!
Loser breaks is a good and (I think fair) way to determine who breaks; I have never tried "trailer breaks". I will have to think about that; my initial thought is well in a race to say 7 and I am up 4-0, he has had all the breaks already now even if he wins the next 3 games not only did he have all those breaks in the beginning but he got all the breaks coming back and he has the next break to? That doesn’t seem fair to me; or am I missing something?
In the truest sense of the word, the only "fair" way to handle breaks is alternate breaks. That way, each player gets the same number of breaks (or as close to the same number as possible). However, the whole concept of "fair" is pretty silly when you consider the fact that pool tournaments are inherently "unfair" because some players are far better than others, and the best players usually win. Albeit, if the players are of a strong enough caliber, the match will basically be a coin-flip, most likely being decided by a single incident (dry break, bad kiss, etc.)
In winner breaks, the better player breaks more, and the worse player complains of it being "unfair". But, the worse player fails to realize the better player has put in far more time practicing to get better. All that hard work is rewarded with breaking after winning. Of course, it all depends what players the tournament is trying to bring in. Better players want winner breaks. Worse players want loser breaks. Alternate or trailer breaks is a compromise. Handicaps are a necessity if a large tournament turn-out is desired.
In winner breaks, the better player breaks more, and the worse player complains of it being "unfair". But, the worse player fails to realize the better player has put in far more time practicing to get better. All that hard work is rewarded with breaking after winning. Of course, it all depends what players the tournament is trying to bring in. Better players want winner breaks. Worse players want loser breaks. Alternate or trailer breaks is a compromise. Handicaps are a necessity if a large tournament turn-out is desired.