Tennis Tournament Format

[StraightPoolIU]

Perhaps this is forward of me since I've only played in a handful of tournaments in my life, but I had an idea the other day while I was watching Wimbledon. To all those on this board that have so much experience organizing tournaments what would you think of a tournament format that is single-elimination, but with seeding and really long races (3 out of 5 sets race to 7 for example)? What would be the drawbacks or advantages of doing this in pool? This is purely an academic excercise, but I was just curious.

 

[mnShooter]

First of all this would take an enormous amount of time. Maybe the womens version where they do best of three sets in a race to seven would be best.

Also it would take away all the luck factor. A player may be able to luck one set but the better player would win the match a much larger percentage of the time.

 

[Fuji-whopper]

Russell Stewart (I think) tried to do this in 2000, it was two races to 6, alternate break and if the players split sets they had a spot shot shootoff.

He was a tennis player and wanted to equalize things just as you guys are talking about it now. His format was also single elimination and he imposed strict rules on the players and the host room. No smoking in the pool room, no alcohol consumption, if you were in the pool room you had to be in dress code to name a few.

His tour obviously didn't last long but I don't recall if the players were grumbling about the format or not.

 

[unknownpro]

Russell Stewart (I think) tried to do this in 2000, it was two races to 6, alternate break and if the players split sets they had a spot shot shootoff.

He was a tennis player and wanted to equalize things just as you guys are talking about it now. His format was also single elimination and he imposed strict rules on the players and the host room. No smoking in the pool room, no alcohol consumption, if you were in the pool room you had to be in dress code to name a few.

His tour obviously didn't last long but I don't recall if the players were grumbling about the format or not.

It sucked. I would like to see more thinking along the lines of pro tennis, though. To me it is the sport most similar to pool as far as tournaments go. Studying how the players organized themselves into the ATP after years of taking whatever was dished out by the corporate sponsors would seem to make sense. Anyone know any inside info?

unknownpro

 

[macguy]

Perhaps this is forward of me since I've only played in a handful of tournaments in my life, but I had an idea the other day while I was watching Wimbledon. To all those on this board that have so much experience organizing tournaments what would you think of a tournament format that is single-elimination, but with seeding and really long races (3 out of 5 sets race to 7 for example)? What would be the drawbacks or advantages of doing this in pool? This is purely an academic excercise, but I was just curious.

This has been done, I played in an 8 ball tournament in Germany that was race to 5, 4 out of 7. I would actually prefer playing in tournaments that were say race to 11 two out of three sets single elim.

 

[macguy]

First of all this would take an enormous amount of time. Maybe the womens version where they do best of three sets in a race to seven would be best.

Also it would take away all the luck factor. A player may be able to luck one set but the better player would win the match a much larger percentage of the time.

Not really, it cuts the field in half each round. There is nothing wrong with the players having to play a legitimate longer match instead of just one set, what is there to be afraid of. What is good is if you have a really bad set you can make come back and get back in the match and maybe go on to win instead of having to play through a losers side.

It also helps in scheduling. The players can play just once or twice a day instead of getting on the losers side and maybe having to play five matches in a row or something.

 

[StraightPoolIU]

First of all this would take an enormous amount of time. Maybe the womens version where they do best of three sets in a race to seven would be best.

Also it would take away all the luck factor. A player may be able to luck one set but the better player would win the match a much larger percentage of the time.

I think it was mentioned in another response, but I think that while matches themselves might be longer obviously the single elimination format would speed up the tournament itself. In response to your second point I think reducing the luck factor especially playing 9-ball would be a good thing. Actually that would be the point except this might even work better to that end and in less time than a double elimination format with fairly short races. Roundrobins are good for this, but in a large format that's a lot of matches per day (i.e. IPT) for the players to be in top form. However, I am able to be persuaded by those who say the stamina requirement should be an attribute of a top player.

 

[Cameron Smith]

Currently the International Challenge of Champions (or whatever the tournament is called), does two matches to 7 (I think) alternate breaks.

This is the closest to your idea (which I think is wonderful by the way), but I think this tournament really messes it up. It is ridiculous that the winner of the first set has to win a second to win the match, but the winner of second set only has to win a one rack tie breaker. You can win only 8 racks to you opponents 13 but still win the match.

I would love to see your idea implemented, who do we have to call?

 

[StraightPoolIU]

Well that's why I posted it on here...maybe someone will notice. Seems like a no brainer, but I'm sure there is something of which I have not thought.