Watching professional pool, do you prefer winner break or alternate break?

Watching professional pool would you prefer winner breaks, or alternate break?

  • Winner breaks

  • Alternate break

Results are only viewable after voting.
Poolplaya9 said:
Truth is that neither of you are correct and it has been proven beyond all doubt that whether it is winner or alternate break format does not in any way change the rate at which the better player will win (although what it does change is how close the score line is going to look).

I agree with middleofnowhere on what would seem to make the most intuitive sense though as wrong as it is. If I'm playing SVB I would intuitively want to be playing winner breaks I think. He is the better player so I have little chance of trading racks and keeping up with him when we both have equal breaking opportunities, whereas with winner breaks I could catch a gear and put a pack on him at the right time that takes me over the finish line first, or I could put together several smaller two packs or so here and there along the way where he just wasn't able to because the balls didn't lay as good for him.

Also, alternate break is way more pressure and the better player generally handles the pressure better, and for sure SVB is going to deal with the pressure better than I do, so I want to take away some of his pressure handling advantage by playing the format that has less pressure, winner breaks.

The facts are that SVB is going to beat me the same percentage of the time either way, but if I were to somehow get weak in the mind and allow myself to use my intuition and feeling rather than my logic and knowledge then in such case I'm going to erroneously feel I have a better chance playing winner breaks because it gives the false appearance of giving the underdog more of a chance for an upset.
Click to expand...
The thing is, in most cases they are playing double elimination. If they were playing round robin or gambling with no time limit then yes, the percentages will play out. These tournaments are often like sudden death, lose your first match and you are in trouble no matter who you are.

I remember being in a bar once and some guy asks to play a game for $50.
I agree and he wins the game. I get ready to rack the balls and he is at the bar. We were not playing $50 a game, we were playing a game for $50. As bad a player as he obviously was he was certainly capable of winning one game and he did.
I left out the best part of the story.

This place was a real dump. Our washer had died and we were doing laundry next door and wandered in. We were both playing with junk bar cues and he picked out a cue with no tips on it.
That is one of my wife's favorite stories she loves to tell. Me losing $50.00 to a drunk playing with a cue with no tip.
 
middleofnowhere said:
The thing is, in most cases they are playing double elimination. If they were playing round robin or gambling with no time limit then yes, the percentages will play out. These tournaments are often like sudden death, lose your first match and you are in trouble no matter who you are.
Click to expand...
But that has zero to do with the fact that the players will win or lose at the exact same rate with winner breaks or alternate breaks formats.

As you point out, the longer the race or the more races you play the more it favors the better player (with both alternate or winner breaks of course), but this is a completely separate issue that has nothing to do with the breaking format issue.
 
Poolplaya9 said:
But that has zero to do with the fact that the players will win or lose at the exact same rate with winner breaks or alternate breaks formats.

As you point out, the longer the race or the more races you play the more it favors the better player (with both alternate or winner breaks of course), but this is a completely separate issue that has nothing to do with the breaking format issue.
Click to expand...
I agree, no matter what the format the best player remains the best player and the weaker player remains the weaker player.
 
middleofnowhere said:
I have beaten top players in tournaments like Miz, Jersey Red, Jimmy Reid, Danny DiLiberto, Louie Roberts and more. I would have a much harder time winning if the game was tit for tat. Jersey Red had me 8 to 2 race to 11 and he only shot one more time at a safety before I won the set.
Click to expand...
On a separate note, your posting history over time indicates that you have competed with, traveled with, and been close friends with a who's who of top pool players from a time before the current crop. While I seem to recall you have indicated you were not a champion, based on various related stories you would almost certainly have to be a player of some skill and note and who some here would be familiar with. Care to share who you are or would you prefer it remain private?
 
To the OP, and I didn't read any threads.

SVB just proved again, why two races to four with a shootout, is Impossible to compare to a comeback from 10-3 down to Mika.

Can't compare the two.

One represents the sport, the other represents a game.
 
middleofnowhere said:
I agree, no matter what the format the best player remains the best player and the weaker player remains the weaker player.
Click to expand...

And the spectators?????...the question of this thread.

Loser breaks is good for the spectators. Winner breaks is boring IF one is into watching a match and not a performance.


Jeff Livingston
 
Jeff, can you clarify what you meant by saying this.....

''Winner breaks is boring IF one is into watching a match and not a performance.''

When Shane came back from 10-3 down and wins....your saying that's not a performance?

I don't understand why its not.....
 
Proponents of alternate break want to see each player equally.

Those in favor of winner break want to see packages and comebacks.

A compromise...

Race to 5, best 2 out of 3 sets.
Player A gets all the breaks in Set 1
Player B gets all the breaks in Set 2
If a 3rd set is needed, then relag, and play alternate break for the final set.

The finals can be a race to 7, or race to 5 (best 4 out of 5 sets)


Problem solved.
 
Island Drive said:
Jeff, can you clarify what you meant by saying this.....

''Winner breaks is boring IF one is into watching a match and not a performance.''

When Shane came back from 10-3 down and wins....your saying that's not a performance?

I don't understand why its not.....
Click to expand...

It is a performance. He did it brilliantly, apparently. I didn't see it.

I want to watch a competition, not a performance, when I go to watch a match. I want two guys going after each other, back and forth, fighting for every inch of victory. If I want to watch perfect pool, I'll rent the video with the high runs on it.

Maybe pool should be like ballet.




Jeff Livingston
 
middleofnowhere said:
Voting would indicate otherwise.
Click to expand...

Players seem to be voting on how they like to play not how they like to watch, the theme of this thread.

Take any other sport and what is the best viewing experience? E.g., is it more exciting to watch the home run derby or watch a nail-biting walk off home run?

1650036533446.jpeg


If you take away the sporting part of a sport, there is no sport left.


Jeff Livingston
 
chefjeff said:
Players seem to be voting on how they like to play not how they like to watch, the theme of this thread.

Take any other sport and what is the best viewing experience? E.g., is it more exciting to watch the home run derby or watch a nail-biting walk off home run?

View attachment 637731

If you take away the sporting part of a sport, there is no sport left.


Jeff Livingston
Click to expand...
How do you know this?
 
middleofnowhere said:
How do you know this?
Click to expand...

It seems, by the many insistent posts right here, that posters are saying what they like to play. The thread is about watching.

So, I guess I don't know it, I sense it.

That's why I started a thread on entertaining pool vs. recreational pool.



Jeff Livingston
 
chefjeff said:
It seems, by the many insistent posts right here, that posters are saying what they like to play. The thread is about watching.

So, I guess I don't know it, I sense it.

That's why I started a thread on entertaining pool vs. recreational pool.



Jeff Livingston
Click to expand...
The opinions on how they like to play and what they watch are most likely one and the same. With the vote about 2 to 1, I would say it seems definitive.
 
middleofnowhere said:
The opinions on how they like to play and what they watch are most likely one and the same. With the vote about 2 to 1, I would say it seems definitive.
Click to expand...

The real vote for such displays is closer to zero. As in there are zero dollars spent by Americans for that "value" in the entertainment business.

Posts are posts; money is money.



Jeff Livingston
 
Winner break
Can't run packages or have big comebacks with alternating breaks.

Also pro pool should always be a race to 9 at least for 9 or 10 ball. This isn't the APA.

Shane won the World Nine Ball by beating Mika 8 games straight when he was on the hill to keep going.

Mika won a US open from the losers side, winning 13 matches.

These moments do not happen with alternating break.
 
chefjeff said:
It seems, by the many insistent posts right here, that posters are saying what they like to play. The thread is about watching.

So, I guess I don't know it, I sense it.

That's why I started a thread on entertaining pool vs. recreational pool.



Jeff Livingston
Click to expand...
I saw that thread. You don't pose a question you make an argument. It is just a continuation of this thread with your opinion. Thats fine we all have opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top