what is a reasonable "race to", 2, 4 6 more?

oldplayer

oldplayer

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I do not know if skill level applies here, maybe so. I do not think that a race to 2 or 4 or maybe even 6 is indicative of a fair competition between opponents. the other day I raced an opponent in 9 ball for 1 1/2 hours, score in the beginning was 3-3 then at the end, 12-5 my favor. last night a race to 3.in 9 ball...I win first one and then the opponent lucks in the 7 and has easy 8 & 9 for win, then they break dry and I have no shot on 1 and play push, they luck in the 1 and have difficult 2 - 9 combo and as luck would have it, they make it! match done...WTH? so, what is a fair race? does it matter if it is 8, 9, or 10 ball. in some of the pro events, once it gets to the last 4 or so players, the number of games in the race goes up, sometimes to 10 or more. so, what is a fair race?
 
It seems that when top pros play each other in races to, say, 11, there are a lot of hill-hill matches, which indicates that a lucky roll here or there could decide the match. If you look at the TAR matches, which have had races to 100 or even just to 25 or 27, those typically are won by 5 games or more. I believe the closest race to 100 they have had was something like 90-100. But even judging from their races to 25 it would seem to me that a race of that length is usually good enough to see who was playing better that night; they don't go hill-hill much.

With that said, SVB and Earl have gone hill hill once or twice this year in matches at Steinway, races to 25.
 
Speaking of race lengths, why are races usually to an odd number? 5, 9, 11, 13, 25...
 
It depends on firstly the skill level of the players (the higher the level, the longer the race needs to be) and
secondly the difference in skill level. If I am playing against a complete banger a race to 2 is more then enough,
but if I am playing against a player of similar level I would need at least a race to 7 or more to determine who
is the best player that day.

In general I would say 10 ball will give the better player the biggest edge, 8 or 9 is pretty close. I play in a league where we race 10-ball to 7, 8-ball to 8 and 9-ball to 9.

However I also play in a league where we play 8-ball race to 2 and the best players are over 90%.

gr. Dave
 
Last edited:
Think of it this way. There are 2 goals you can have when setting the length of the race.

1. Long enough to see who is playing better "that day".
2. Long enough to see which player is better overall.

If the race is so short someone can run out the set, that's no good.
Well.. it's ok if the odds of running out the set are like 1-in-a-million.
Pretty much all tournaments use #1 as their goal... trying to do #2 takes too long.

So to figure out a good race with goal #1 in mind, you can just use simple statistics.
Decide how many chances you think you want to give the player...
I personally like 3 chances. Like in baseball, 3 strikes.

Track how many racks a player runs, on average, when he steps up to break.
Let's say it's somewhere between 2 and 3 racks. So if you want to ensure 3 chances,
then race to 9 should be ok. Round up to 10 to be safe.

Goal #2 is different and much tougher to calculate.
You can have two APA 5's, who both play very very similar.
If they played 100 racks, it might end up with a score of 51 - 49 or something.
So for that specific pair of players you need a very long race.

If you suspect two players are extremely close, and you have goal #2 in mind,
Then you should race to the absolute maximum they will tolerate.
I think oldschool races to 100 in TAR follow this thinking.

The funny part is, pool is hugely psychological. Momentum is a real thing even
if you can't quantify it. Mindset, attitude, what people call "heart" can change from day-to-day.
So if Alex beat Shane in one race to 100, and then Shane wins the next race to 100,
does that mean 100 is not long enough?

Maybe. But probably the 'intangibles' affected the outcome.
They play close but not so close they need 500 racks to figure it out.
 
You should have made this into a poll.

IMO, to insure that the better player can overcome any "luck" factors, I believe that races to at least 11 or 13 are the answer.

This is as subjective as tip choice.

Maniac
 
Race length also depends on break format: winner breaks or alternating break.

I think winner breaks requires a longer race like 13-15. That gives an early loser a chance to mount a comeback.

Alternating break accomplishes the same "fairness" in a shorter race, say 9-11.

Races to 5 (like the Mosconi Cup) are a joke, but necessary when you consider the cost of TV time and production. They're also necessary for league play unless everyone's willing to finish around breakfast time.
 
oldplayer said:
last night a race to 3.in 9 ball...I win first one and then the opponent lucks in the 7 and has easy 8 & 9 for win, then they break dry and I have no shot on 1 and play push, they luck in the 1 and have difficult 2 - 9 combo and as luck would have it, they make it! match done...WTH?
Click to expand...

That doesn't seem like a race to 3 if he only won 2 games and the match is over.

I personally like to play a race to 5 in gambling situations, which means the first person to win 5 games is the winner. (Sometimes we play race to 5 but you have to be up 2 to win, no hill/hill hearbreaker loss.) I think a shorter race allows for luck to be too much of a factor. For pros, I think at least races to 11, as they can string together some serious racks. So yes, skill level should impact the length of the race, in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top