Pro 9-ball is a breaking contest.

[AtLarge]

http://www.pool-trax.net/Players/PlayerTrax.aspx?TraxTag=OP_501600

The perception of how often a Pro wins a game without the other person shooting is higher than the reality.

I'm not sure what your statement means, nor am I clear on what numbers you are pointing to from Pool-Trax to support your statement. Maybe you could explain that a little more.

The only time one player wins without the other player having an inning (including a return on a push-out) is on break-and-run games. The link you provided shows stats for Shane for 39 of his matches tracked by Pool-Trax. It shows a B&R of nearly 40%, but nearly half of those breaks were on 3½x7 tables (where his B&R was 47%).

I posted some information recently showing how many streamed games in an event were won by the breaker and non-breaker in 1, 2, 3, etc. innings. Here's that post for the CSI Invitational 10-Ball Championship 3 months ago: http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4818728&postcount=8

Within the next few days, I'll try to do something similar for the just-concluded U.S. Open 9-Ball Championship.

 

[AtLarge]

... I'd actually like to see the statistic of how often the guy who makes the first ball after the break ends up winning the rack.

I'll determine this for you for the streamed matches of the just-concluded U.S. Open. But I'm taking a break from looking at the numbers today, so it'll be a day or two.

Is late better than never?

I still haven't gotten through all of the games again to answer your question. But here is an interim (which may become the one-and-only) report based on the first 17 of the 33 streamed matches for the 2014 U.S. Open 9-Ball Championship.

Those 17 matches consisted of 303 games. I missed 2 of the games and the 9-ball was made on the break in 3 others. That leaves 298 games:

• Breaker made the first ball after the break and won the game -- 100 (34%)
• Breaker made the first ball after the break and lost the game -- 39 (13%)
• Non-breaker made the first ball after the break and won the game -- 109 (37%)
• Non-breaker made the first ball after the break and lost the game -- 50 (17%)

So, in total, the first player to make a ball after the break won 70% of the games (209 of 298).

 

[JB Cases]

I watched the finals with a few friends, some of whom are not avid pool players. It didn't take them long to figure out that the most pivotal part of most racks is whether a ball goes in on the break and whether there is a shot on the 1.

Not to take anything away from Shane. He didn't make the rules, he recognizes the importance of the break, and worked on it to the point where he is better at breaking than anyone else. And the rest of his game is obviously great too. He's a deserving champion.

For me, the very high level of play, not just at the finals, but all week, has been great to watch. But I don't really see this as the product that the pool world wants to or is going to be able to market to wider audiences. The real dramatic tension in the finals was whether Dennis was going to be able to figure out the break or not. From a spectator point of view, the fact that you can reliably guess the outcome of most racks just by what happens on the break is a problem.

I don't know the answer. 10-ball isn't really much better. 8-ball is just as bad or worse. One pocket is great but too slow and complicated for non-pool players. Jiggling the rules so that it's harder or easier to make a ball on the break doesn't address the basic problem. Maybe something like forcing a push-out at the start of each rack, so at least it starts out with a tactical exchange, but that would drastically alter the whole character of the game.

Does Dennis need more than a week to figure out the break?

In addition to killer safes and daring shots Shane also made a jump shot off two stacked bridges and a super thin cut with the bridge from 8 ft away.

 

[cleary]

The answer is pump money into 14.1/straight pool. One pocket is slow because of the importance of defense. SVB said he doesn't like playing straight pool because here's no money in it. The money's there for one pocket, just not 14.1. Even when you take the break out of the game, it's still the same people in the finals each time. The break is one more shot players need to learn, and a lot feel as if it's not needed. Those people never finish well in tournaments.

I'd rather not watch pool than watch straight pool. A lot of people ha e ideas. Most of them are just bad so don't beat yourself up about it

 

[sjm]

Is late better than never?

I still haven't gotten through all of the games again to answer your question. But here is an interim (which may become the one-and-only) report based on the first 17 of the 33 streamed matches for the 2014 U.S. Open 9-Ball Championship.

Those 17 matches consisted of 303 games. I missed 2 of the games and the 9-ball was made on the break in 3 others. That leaves 298 games:

• Breaker made the first ball after the break and won the game -- 100 (34%)
• Breaker made the first ball after the break and lost the game -- 39 (13%)
• Non-breaker made the first ball after the break and won the game -- 109 (37%)
• Non-breaker made the first ball after the break and lost the game -- 50 (17%)

So, in total, the first player to make a ball after the break won 70% of the games (209 of 298).

These stats are just where I'd like them to be. As we saw, break and run racks were largely unchanged from 2013 (20% vs. 21%) but the racks in which both players shot had to be earned, moreso than in the past because the layouts were tougher, befitting a national championship.

The result of this break rule was the most exciting US Open we've ever seen, and, contrary to the predictions of some, the rules certainly didn't slow down America's two best breakers in Van Boening and Dechaine, both of whom reached Saturday's "final four."

Kudos to Jay Helfert and the others who made this happen.

 

[skogstokig]

i kind of agree but what about using tighter pockets and racking the nine on the spot?

 

[sjm]

i kind of agree but what about using tighter pockets and racking the nine on the spot?

Nine was, for practical purposes, on the spot this year since the spot was moved forward by four inches.

I'm on board with your idea and always have been. Golf sets up its US Open to offer the toughest conditions of the year on the American golf calendar. I'd like to see pool do the same, using tighter pockets in its national championship.

 

[Island Drive]

Let Em Run

Yeah, and golf is only about driving. Having a great break, to me, is like hitting the fairway more than the next guy, but others skills are also required in both golf and pool, and we all know that you "drive for show and putt for dough."

Sometimes, watching Shane play ten ball bores the hell of me, because he so often has the same shot of the one in the top corner and a layout that is so wide open and so easy by pro standards that it robs a viewer of some of the excitement of seeing difficult racks attempted and/or completed.

... but in the just completed US Open, in which one could not easily play shape off of the break, the runouts were much harder, and in the final, the runouts were super-difficult on a few occasions. That's one reason that the breaker, according to AZB break statistician At Large, won only about 50% of the racks in the US Open.

Watching Shane complete the difficult racks in the final last night was such a treat. I've never enjoyed watching nine ball more than I did in the two Shane/Dennis matches (winners bracket semifinal and the final) in this US Open.

Suggesting that Shane won with his break is an insult to him. He won with his break, his pocketing, his position play, his defense and his kicking, excelling in all of these.

Yes, being a racking guru helps, as the presence of America's two best breakers in the final four (Van Boening and Dechaine) evidences, but this US Open called on the contestants to do a lot more than break well, and that's why the final that many would have predicted as the most likely matchup going into the event was the one we got.

sjm :thumbup:
Spot on thoughts....

When two players ''lock horns'' it's special....many times I've watched tennis and did housework to wait "Just" for the inevitable ''tie breaker'' sets. To me those are enjoyable. Pool is also appreciated in this manner, especially when one can hear the balls being pocketed or the classic 147 break is attained on a snooker table, or if there's 5 stop shots to tie the score or???? And NEVER do all pros have a perfect day of breaking, all of em have bad and good days. Like those that saw the epic match at the Open this year, I too remember one match when two players were in their prime/youth/gamble, Marino and Rempe....phew that was special. & Lassiter and the rest were there if ya wanted some action.