Whatever Happened To Winner Breaks

L

LORD OF THE 9`s

Registered
hi , this may sound silly yet may not , remember the days when the greats ran packs in tournaments. What happened, i always thought alternating breaks was for handicapping, when you have different skill levels, i miss watching a player squirm in his seat because he hasn`t shot a ball in five or so racks and then those great comeback packs that you just don`t see anymore. Bring back winner breaks. by LORD OF THE 9`s
 
LORD OF THE 9`s said:
hi , this may sound silly yet may not , remember the days when the greats ran packs in tournaments. What happened, i always thought alternating breaks was for handicapping, when you have different skill levels, i miss watching a player squirm in his seat because he hasn`t shot a ball in five or so racks and then those great comeback packs that you just don`t see anymore. Bring back winner breaks. by LORD OF THE 9`s
Click to expand...
IMO, the Sardo ruined winner breaks. Besides, alternating breaks gives both players a chance to play. Running 11 may be great for gambling, but does little to promote the sport. Just imagine if an opposing golfer didn't get to hit a ball until his opponent didn't land in the fairway. No one would watch that...

-td
 
Is there any evidence that the alternating breaks format gets better ratings than the winner breaks format? I see that argument a lot on here, but without any studies, I am not convinced that alternating break is "better for pool" than winner breaks.
 
Cuebacca said:
Is there any evidence that the alternating breaks format gets better ratings than the winner breaks format? I see that argument a lot on here, but without any studies, I am not convinced that alternating break is "better for pool" than winner breaks.
Click to expand...
I read this as there is no evidence that "winner breaks" is better either...

In any event, alternating breaks has been the ESPN format for a while. I can assume that they made a determination that it was better - for whatever reasons. Thus, IMO, it is irrelevant what any "studies" would show at this point, since the decision has already been made ;)

-td
 
td873 said:
I read this as there is no evidence that "winner breaks" is better either...
Click to expand...

I agree. We can make the argument for either side, but without some sort of research we can't really know for sure.

td873 said:
In any event, alternating breaks has been the ESPN format for a while. I can assume that they made a determination that it was better - for whatever reasons. Thus, IMO, it is irrelevant what any "studies" would show at this point, since the decision has already been made ;)

-td
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure you can assume that ESPN has put that much thought into what is good for pool. Plus, I see no reason why something like this would be permanently set in stone. Either way, what ESPN does shouldn't, IMO, be the template for all of professional pool. If it is, then pro pool is in bigger trouble than I thought. :( ;) :)
 
tecunningham said:
You alternate in nearly all sports. Tennis, basketball, football, etc.
Click to expand...

I think this is a very good argument. Can anyone name another sport, besides pool, that doesn't alternate? Unfortunately for me (as someone who prefers winner breaks), I can't. LOL.

However, pool is pool, and analogies are never perfect. Somehow I just see pool as being different enough from these other sports that pool can be an exception to the general rule of alternating.

I also can't think of another game where the opponent gets to set up a shot for you, the way pool typically has the players rack for each other. Therefore, any time there is an alternating break format, I sure hope they are not playing rack-for-each-other. :) LOL.
 
Cuebacca said:
Can anyone name another sport, besides pool, that doesn't alternate? Unfortunately for me (as someone who prefers winner breaks), I can't. LOL.
Click to expand...

Hmm, that show, Jeopardy, uses a winner-keeps-control format. OK, maybe game shows don't count, but it was the best I could think of. :D
 
The "problem" with Winner Breaks is that players were figuring out how to break and make a ball every time (usually the corner ball). That made running out much easier. They then, only had to play position for the One ball after the break.

Personally, I thought Winner Breaks made for exciting pool, watching players string racks. It's like a bowler going for a 300 game. It worked both ways, sometimes players jumping out to big leads and sometimes players making big comebacks.

With the advent of Ten Ball tournaments, I can see it going back to Winner Breaks. It's much harder (I would estimate 20-25%) to break and run out in Ten Ball. I say, reward the player for a good run out. Let him keep shooting.
Hey, Straight Pool works that way, doesn't it?
 
jay helfert said:
The "problem" with Winner Breaks is that players were figuring out how to break and make a ball every time (usually the corner ball). That made running out much easier. They then, only had to play position for the One ball after the break.

Personally, I thought Winner Breaks made for exciting pool, watching players string racks. It's like a bowler going for a 300 game. It worked both ways, sometimes players jumping out to big leads and sometimes players making big comebacks.

With the advent of Ten Ball tournaments, I can see it going back to Winner Breaks. It's much harder (I would estimate 20-25%) to break and run out in Ten Ball. I say, reward the player for a good run out. Let him keep shooting.
Hey, Straight Pool works that way, doesn't it?
Click to expand...
I agree Jay. Johnnyt
 
I like to watch women's beach volleyball sometimes (for the volleyball of course :p). They play "winner serves," so it's kind of like "winner breaks" in a way.
 
Cuebacca said:
Is there any evidence that the alternating breaks format gets better ratings than the winner breaks format? I see that argument a lot on here, but without any studies, I am not convinced that alternating break is "better for pool" than winner breaks.
Click to expand...

When you are watching 2 Americans go at it, probably NO. If the televise event is international, YES; people want to see their bet on the table.
 
Samiel said:
I like to watch women's beach volleyball sometimes (for the volleyball of course :p). They play "winner serves," so it's kind of like "winner breaks" in a way.
Click to expand...

LOL, in volleyball, the serving team is at a disadvantage.
 
crosseyedjoe said:
When you are watching 2 Americans go at it, probably NO. If the televise event is international, YES; people want to see their bet on the table.
Click to expand...

Wait, are you saying that this has actually been proven to affect the ratings? You make a good point, but it is still just an opinion, isn't it?
 
IMO; You only give up the table when you MISS or PLAY Safe.
Winner should always break unless it's One Pocket, then you alternate (because of the advantage the breaker has in this game)

If you want big money and lots of LIVE TV exposure, you have to be willing to be a 'whore' and let those that have the money make up the rules for you to live and play by.

What other amature sport do you know about has weekly monthly and annual events that the payouts are the same as the PROS?
 
I personally like to see "Winner Breaks" for many reasons.

First and foremost, it is tradition. It has always been "Winner Breaks" for a looonng time. Why change to "Alternatate Break" when there is absolutely no proof that it is better for the game?

Secondly, as a fan, I find it exciting to watch/witness a player able to put together a string of racks. If someone catches a gear, he/she could become legend. Case in point, when Archer matched up with Busta in Ohio a long time ago, he did a 13-pack Break-N-Run to win the set (13-0). That is history legend and is still talked about today. (I know, Archer is already a legend. But you get the idea. By the way, will somebody finish the punch line on this story? :) ).

In the ideal world of "Alternate Breaks" format, both players would do a break-n-run which would lead to a Double-Hill match. However, this is as rare as the ideal world of "Winner Breaks", where one player puts together a long string of racks to get on the hill. Then to see his opponet also put together a long string of racks to get to Double-Hill.

Anyway, pool is such a difficult and skillful game enough as it is. Why creates "alternate break" to separate the playing field even more?

I would like to see someone doing a research to find out if which format creates more Hill-Hill matches, "alternate break" vs. "winner break". I am curious what the percentage will be.
 
Last edited:
Winner Break

I really wish all the tournaments would go back to a winner's break format. I also think by going to a winner's break, you might be able to have a longer race as well. It is great to catch a groove and start putting games together. In my opinion, winner breaks brings back the same principles of straight pool. You don't want to make a mistake on any shot or you might be in the chair for some time, a long time!

Going to a loser's break or alternate break format is just an equalizer.
 
LORD OF THE 9`s said:
hi , this may sound silly yet may not , remember the days when the greats ran packs in tournaments. What happened, i always thought alternating breaks was for handicapping, when you have different skill levels, i miss watching a player squirm in his seat because he hasn`t shot a ball in five or so racks and then those great comeback packs that you just don`t see anymore. Bring back winner breaks. by LORD OF THE 9`s
Click to expand...


its politically correct to penalize success so if you win by running out you have to be fair and give the other guy a chance. It is 100% the stupidest rules in 9 ball, it makes 9 balll a stupid game,

alternating breaks isworse than 20 years ago when someone broke the balls and made a couple balls and scratched, leaving the guy who didnt foul, ball in hand behind the line shooting at the 2 spotted balls, that made things good for the guy who broke the balls a advantage because he is going get another inning after he fouled 99% of the time. if you foul on the break you should be at risk to lose but spotting the balls benefits the guy who fouled, sure the 2nd shot has be a safty shot but sometimes its hard to get safe when shooting from behind the line.

When express rules came around it was great you would see great 9 ball, pure 9B, not stupid rules to make the game more even, if you want to make it even then handycapp it not change the rules.
 
Last edited:
ESPN does what's good for ESPN, not pool. Alternating break formats make tighter races, thus creating more drama to keep viewer's attention. I'd rather watch a champion run 5 or six racks too. :p
 
Cuebacca said:
Wait, are you saying that this has actually been proven to affect the ratings? You make a good point, but it is still just an opinion, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, there is no Neilsen rating for international broadcast. So you are right it's an opinion, but based on my own experience if I don't care much about the other player, I'm still tempted to flip channel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top