We dont know that.
What we do know is that Corey can work his way through a 2nd ball break probably better than anybody in the world.
Never had a doubt Corey would win(if they'll give up a spot, take it)
Jason
Stats -- Bergman vs. Deuel 8-Ball Champions Challenge, February 2019
- Thread starter AtLarge
- Start date
We dont know that.
What we do know is that Corey can work his way through a 2nd ball break probably better than anybody in the world.
Never had a doubt Corey would win(if they'll give up a spot, take it)
Jason
Realistically, I think any top 5 American player who has really worked on their head ball 8 ball break is supposed to win against Corey if Corey breaks second ball. I lost some weight back around 3 years ago, and was playing a lot of barbox 8 ball breaking head ball, and had a fair few matches (alternate breaks) when I broke and ran all 5 of my innings... Due to the weight loss and playing a lot of barbox 8 ball at a regional level, I was playing pretty sporty, but not sporty enough to play with those monsters.
I just think Corey is giving up too much equity by making it so difficult on himself. It worked out for him, as he was playing someone who obviously didn't prepare their headball barbox break as much as they could.
Years back, I played a lot on Valleys with slow cloth, and made 2-8 balls on the break consistently when playing barbox 8 ball with a head ball break. Granted, I knocked the ever-loving shizz out of them to drop those kinda numbers, but in my humble opinion, with even minimal preparation on his barbox 8 ball break, Justin should have been running 3s, 4s, and 5s at will, even with take what you make.
Corey ran two 9 packs on Filler at the Derby playing same game in the Action room in one race to 30 
That second ball break he has works great for him, he makes the corner ball likes its a wired ball lol
That second ball break he has works great for him, he makes the corner ball likes its a wired ball lol
I played a little BB 8 ball Friday night, Broke and ran all 4 racks with head on break - in about 10mins including racking. Was showing my GF why I was so pissed off at Justin taking 9min/rack to play 8 ball. Lol
Jason
Yah.. This is my point exactly... It is not hard for top players to put MASSIVE packages together playing barbox 8 ball, and there's not a lot of reason for those packages to be super-hard to run out, either..
I watched the last part of the match between Filler and Corey, final score 30-23, and I truly believe the only reason Filler lost that was because he was basically helpless on the break.
Hard to fade a guy putting 2 9 packs on you though. Unreal the score was that close if Fillers break wasnt working - that kid is a monster!
Wish I would've seen it, not sure how I missed it, if it was streamed.
Jason
Not streamed. Not sure if'n I've seen more than a few minutes of streaming centered around the barbox at DCC, over the multiple years I've attended..
ALL 4 SETS COMBINED
Breaks that determined group
Breaks that left table open
Breaks that determined group
Made just 1 ball (of either group) -- 61
Made more than 1 ball, but all of same group -- 20
Total -- 81
Made more than 1 ball, but all of same group -- 20
Total -- 81
Breaks that left table open
Made 2 or more balls of mixed groups -- 58
Made 8-ball alone -- 2
Fouled breaks --10 (5 wet, 5 dry)
Dry (but not fouled) breaks -- 56
Total -- 126
Made 8-ball alone -- 2
Fouled breaks --10 (5 wet, 5 dry)
Dry (but not fouled) breaks -- 56
Total -- 126
Last edited:
Regarding: Wins with table open or not
As shown above, the 141 successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul) consisted of 81 where the break determined the group (stripes or solids), i.e, the table was not open, and 60 where the table was open after the break. So how did these two groups compare in games won by the breaker after a successful break:
Bergman
Deuel
Both players combined
So, a bit surprisingly, whether the table was open or not did not make much difference to either player in terms of the percentage of such successful breaks that resulted in winning the game.
Let's look at a subset of this info -- the percentage of break-and-run games on successful breaks when the table was open or not:
Bergman
Deuel
Both players combined
And here it does show a bit better results (though slight for Deuel) when the table was open.
As shown above, the 141 successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul) consisted of 81 where the break determined the group (stripes or solids), i.e, the table was not open, and 60 where the table was open after the break. So how did these two groups compare in games won by the breaker after a successful break:
Bergman
Table not open -- 77% (33 of 43)
Table open -- 81% (17 of 21)
Total -- 78% (50 of 64)
Deuel
Table not open -- 63% (24 of 38)
Table open -- 64% (25 of 39)
Total -- 64% (49 of 77)
Both players combined
Table not open -- 70% (57 of 81)
Table open -- 70% (42 of 60)
Total -- 70% (99 of 141)
So, a bit surprisingly, whether the table was open or not did not make much difference to either player in terms of the percentage of such successful breaks that resulted in winning the game.
Let's look at a subset of this info -- the percentage of break-and-run games on successful breaks when the table was open or not:
Bergman
Table not open -- 58% (25 of 43)
Table open -- 81% (17 of 21)
Total -- 66% (42 of 64)
Deuel
Table not open -- 53% (20 of 38)
Table open -- 59% (23 of 39)
Total -- 56% (43 of 77)
Both players combined
Table not open -- 56% (45 of 81)
Table open -- 67% (40 of 60)
Total -- 60% (85 of 141)
And here it does show a bit better results (though slight for Deuel) when the table was open.
Last edited:
Bergman and Deuel played another 7-foot 8-ball challenge match in 2016. Bergman won that one 21-16, and some stats can be found here: https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=432035
Some significant differences in the conditions were:
Some of the stats are quite different between the two matches. Let's compare. Results for each measure are given first for the 2019 match (all 4 sets combined) then for the 2016 match, separated by a comma.
Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Fouled and/or dry breaks:
Breaker won game:
Break-and-run games -- on all breaks:
Break-and-run games -- on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Foul Rates:
Missed-shot rates:
Games with 1 or more safeties: 8% (17 of 207), 5% (2 of 37)
Average number of balls made on: all breaks/successful breaks:
Run-outs from first shot after break:
Games ending in number of innings:
Break-and-run packages:
8-balls on the break -- 5 (2.4% of all breaks), none
Minutes per game -- 8.3, 5.7. [Note: This includes racking and timeouts.]
Some significant differences in the conditions were:
- 2019: triangle rack; 2016: Magic Rack template;
- 2019: winner breaks; 2016: alternating breaks; and
- 2019: table open after the break unless balls are made from just one group; 2016: table always open after the break.
Some of the stats are quite different between the two matches. Let's compare. Results for each measure are given first for the 2019 match (all 4 sets combined) then for the 2016 match, separated by a comma.
Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Bergman -- 64 of 104 (62%), 14 of 19 (74%)
Deuel -- 77 of 103 (75%), 17 of 18 (94%)
Total -- 141 of 207 (68%). 31 of 37 (84%)
Fouled and/or dry breaks:
Bergman -- 40 of 104 (38%), 5 of 19 (26%)
Deuel -- 26 of 103 (25%), 1 of 18 (6%)
Total -- 66 of 207 (32%), 6 of 37 (16%)
Breaker won game:
Bergman -- 56 of 104 (54%), 15 of 19 (79%)
Deuel -- 57 of 103 (55%), 12 of 18 (67%)
Total -- 103 of 207 (55%), 27 of 37 (73%)
Break-and-run games -- on all breaks:
Bergman -- 42 of 104 (40%), 10 of 19 (53%)
Deuel -- 43 of 103 (42%), 12 of 18 (67%)
Total -- 85 of 207 (41%), 22 of 37 (59%)
Break-and-run games -- on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Bergman -- 42 of 64 (66%), 10 of 14 (71%)
Deuel -- 43 of 77 (56%), 12 of 17 (71%)
Total -- 85 of 141 (60%), 22 of 31 (71%)
Foul Rates:
Bergman -- 1 for every 13.7 games at the table; 1 for every 12.5 games at the table
Deuel -- 1 for every 11 games at the table; 1 for every 13.5 games at the table
Total -- 1 per 7.7 games; 1 per 9.3 games
Missed-shot rates:
Bergman -- 1 for every 5.7 games at the table; 1 for every 12.5 games at the table
Deuel -- 1 for every 3.8 games at the table; 1 for every 3 games at the table
Total -- 1 per 2.9 games; 1 per 3.4 games
Games with 1 or more safeties: 8% (17 of 207), 5% (2 of 37)
Average number of balls made on: all breaks/successful breaks:
Bergman -- 1.1/1.7, 1.1/1.4
Deuel -- 1.3/1.8, 2.2/2.3
Total -- 1.2/1.7, 1.6/1.9
Run-outs from first shot after break:
Bergman -- 60 of 90 (67%), 11 of 15 (73%)
Deuel -- 76 of 117 (65%), 15 of 22 (68%)
Total -- 136 of 207 (66%), 26 of 37 (70%))
Games ending in number of innings:
1 inning -- 172 of 207 (83%), 32 of 37 (86%)
2 innings -- 28 of 207 (14%), 4 of 37 (11%)
3 or more innings -- 7 of 207 (3%), 1 of 37 (3%)
2 innings -- 28 of 207 (14%), 4 of 37 (11%)
3 or more innings -- 7 of 207 (3%), 1 of 37 (3%)
Break-and-run packages:
2019 -- the 85 B&R games (41% of all games) consisted of 1 5-pack, 2 4-packs, 3 3-packs, 17 2-packs, and 29 singles.
2016 -- the 22 B&R games (59% of all games) consisted of 2 alternate-break 4 packs, 2 alternate-break 3-packs, 2 alternate-break 2-packs, and 4 singles.
8-balls on the break -- 5 (2.4% of all breaks), none
Minutes per game -- 8.3, 5.7. [Note: This includes racking and timeouts.]
Last edited:
Games won -- by Bergman, by Deuel
Own successful break, table open -- 17 of 21 (81%), 25 of 39 (64%)
Own successful break, table not open -- 33 of 43 (77%), 24 of 38 (63%)
Opponent's successful break, table open -- 14 of 39 (36%), 4 of 21 (19%)
Opponent's successful break, table not open -- 14 of 38 (37%), 10 of 43 (23%)
Own fouled break -- 1 of 6 (17%), 1 of 4 (25%)
Opponent's fouled break -- 3 of 4 (75%), 5 of 6 (83%)
Own dry (no foul) break -- 5 of 34 (15%), 7 of 22 (32%)
Opponent's dry (no foul) break -- 15 of 22 (68%), 29 of 34 (85%)
Total -- 102 of 207 (49.3%), 105 of 207 (50.7%)
Own successful break, table open -- 17 of 21 (81%), 25 of 39 (64%)
Own successful break, table not open -- 33 of 43 (77%), 24 of 38 (63%)
Opponent's successful break, table open -- 14 of 39 (36%), 4 of 21 (19%)
Opponent's successful break, table not open -- 14 of 38 (37%), 10 of 43 (23%)
Own fouled break -- 1 of 6 (17%), 1 of 4 (25%)
Opponent's fouled break -- 3 of 4 (75%), 5 of 6 (83%)
Own dry (no foul) break -- 5 of 34 (15%), 7 of 22 (32%)
Opponent's dry (no foul) break -- 15 of 22 (68%), 29 of 34 (85%)
Total -- 102 of 207 (49.3%), 105 of 207 (50.7%)