Who's winning with Omar and Oscar.

Thanks. I thought Omar would've taken this off by now. I am soooo glad I didn't purchase this. If there is one thing I hate is long races that somehow come out even.
 
So the scoring was as follows (Omar's score first):

Day 1: 31 - 33
Day 2: 35 - 32 (2-day total 66 - 65)
Day 3: 34 - 33

Total: 100 - 98
 
garczar said:
I'd MUCH rather see these matches go to a 3-out-of-5 races to 25 than one long set.
Click to expand...
You got that right. Even better would be 4-out-of-7 races to 15, or 5-out-of-9 races to 11 or 13.

Long a$$ single races such as those to 100 or even to 50 are for people with no heart and who can't handle pressure. Yes everybody heard that right and it is true if you really think about it. They are also for inconsistent streaky players that can't come with it when they need it. Even some of the best don't have a heart of a lion or the ability to handle great pressure and a single long race is what is optimal for them.

That was from the players side of things. From the spectators side of things, a best of some number of shorter races is infinitely more exciting to watch than a single long race as well. There is more pressure, the matches are tighter, there isn't room for any "coasting" or "give up" even for short periods of time, every game matters so much more, and both players are still in it and still have a chance to win (or will at least appear to) until the last ball falls, all of which making for a lot more beginning to end edge or your seat excitement. It often increases the level of play as well which is an added bonus. 95% of the time these races to 100 are blow out snooze fests, and the other 5% of the time when they aren't, such as the case here where it was 100-98, it literally proves nothing anyway. So you won by 2 games in a race to 100. Utterly meaningless. Proved nothing. Quite a catch 22 there--if it is the usual blow out it proved something but was boring as hell, and if it was the rare close result it was exciting (but mostly only towards the end) but proved absolutely nothing. Now if you had to come with it set after set, where every game mattered and the pressure was so much higher, and you bested somebody by more sets than they got off of you, not only does it actually mean something but it was more exciting to watch too.

And a "best of" shorter races is way better from the streamer's side of things (and the players if they are getting some of the profits) too. Most people can't watch three days of streaming for one reason or another. Would people pay to watch only the 2nd quarter of a football game? Or the sixth inning of a baseball game? Nope, because it doesn't mean anything, and in the same way and for the same reasons many aren't going to pay to watch a section of a pool match either and so you lose out on a big portion of your potential paying viewers. About the only section that people would be real inclined to watch by itself would be the ending, but even then only if it was still close, and of course 95% of the time in these long races it is already a blow out by then. But if they were doing say three races to 11 each day, instead of the relatively meaningless sections out of the race to 100 each day, now people who couldn't watch on the other days would still tune in and buy the days where they could watch because those days now mean something, and because the level of play would be higher, the sets would be tighter, and the excitement level would be more.

Except for the players who have no heart and can't deal with pressure, there are literally no benefits to doing single long races. None. Yet there are tons and tons of good reasons and advantages (for everybody) for doing a best of some number of shorter sets and I mentioned only some of them--there are more.

Races to 100 and other similarly long single races are for players who have no heart and can't deal with pressure, for streamers that don't like views and revenue, and for spectators that don't like the most excitement and seeing the highest levels of play.
 
Last edited:
Poolplaya9 said:
You got that right. Even better would be 4-out-of-7 races to 15, or 5-out-of-9 races to 11 or 13.

Long a$$ single races such as those to 100 or even to 50 are for people with no heart and who can't handle pressure. Yes everybody heard that right and it is true if you really think about it. They are also for inconsistent streaky players that can't come with it when they need it. Even some of the best don't have a heart of a lion or the ability to handle great pressure and a single long race is what is optimal for them.

That was from the players side of things. From the spectators side of things, a best of some number of shorter races is infinitely more exciting to watch than a single long race as well. There is more pressure, the matches are tighter, there isn't room for any "coasting" or "give up" even for short periods of time, every game matters so much more, and both players are still in it and still have a chance to win (or will at least appear to) until the last ball falls, all of which making for a lot more beginning to end edge or your seat excitement. It often increases the level of play as well which is an added bonus. 95% of the time these races to 100 are blow out snooze fests, and the other 5% of the time when they aren't, such as the case here where it was 100-98, it literally proves nothing anyway. So you won by 2 games in a race to 100. Utterly meaningless. Proved nothing. Quite a catch 22 there--if it is the usual blow out it proved something but was boring as hell, and if it was the rare close result it was exciting (but mostly only towards the end) but proved absolutely nothing. Now if you had to come with it set after set, where every game mattered and the pressure was so much higher, and you bested somebody by more sets than they got off of you, not only does it actually mean something but it was more exciting to watch too.

And a "best of" shorter races is way better from the streamer's side of things (and the players if they are getting some of the profits) too. Most people can't watch three days of streaming for one reason or another. Would people pay to watch only the 2nd quarter of a football game? Or the sixth inning of a baseball game? Nope, because it doesn't mean anything, and in the same way and for the same reasons many aren't going to pay to watch a section of a pool match either and so you lose out on a big portion of your potential paying viewers. About the only section that people would be real inclined to watch by itself would be the ending, but even then only if it was still close, and of course 95% of the time in these long races it is already a blow out by then. But if they were doing say three races to 11 each day, instead of the relatively meaningless sections out of the race to 100 each day, now people who couldn't watch on the other days would still tune in and buy the days where they could watch because those days now mean something, and because the level of play would be higher, the sets would be tighter, and the excitement level would be more.

Except for the players who have no heart and can't deal with pressure, there are literally no benefits to doing single long races. None. Yet there are tons and tons of good reasons and advantages (for everybody) for doing a best of some number of shorter sets and I mentioned only some of them--there are more.

Races to 100 and other similarly long single races are for players who have no heart and can't deal with pressure, for streamers that don't like views and revenue, and for spectators that don't like the most excitement and seeing the highest levels of play.
Click to expand...
I'd rather watch a race to 25 than a race to 100. I've not seen the match so I can't comment on the level of play, but with a 2 game difference, what does it prove? I'd say it proves the players are equal in skill level, and maybe there were a half dozen more bad rolls total for the "loser."
 
Poolplaya9 said:
You got that right. Even better would be 4-out-of-7 races to 15, or 5-out-of-9 races to 11 or 13.

Long a$$ single races such as those to 100 or even to 50 are for people with no heart and who can't handle pressure. Yes everybody heard that right and it is true if you really think about it. They are also for inconsistent streaky players that can't come with it when they need it. Even some of the best don't have a heart of a lion or the ability to handle great pressure and a single long race is what is optimal for them.

That was from the players side of things. From the spectators side of things, a best of some number of shorter races is infinitely more exciting to watch than a single long race as well. There is more pressure, the matches are tighter, there isn't room for any "coasting" or "give up" even for short periods of time, every game matters so much more, and both players are still in it and still have a chance to win (or will at least appear to) until the last ball falls, all of which making for a lot more beginning to end edge or your seat excitement. It often increases the level of play as well which is an added bonus. 95% of the time these races to 100 are blow out snooze fests, and the other 5% of the time when they aren't, such as the case here where it was 100-98, it literally proves nothing anyway. So you won by 2 games in a race to 100. Utterly meaningless. Proved nothing. Quite a catch 22 there--if it is the usual blow out it proved something but was boring as hell, and if it was the rare close result it was exciting (but mostly only towards the end) but proved absolutely nothing. Now if you had to come with it set after set, where every game mattered and the pressure was so much higher, and you bested somebody by more sets than they got off of you, not only does it actually mean something but it was more exciting to watch too.

And a "best of" shorter races is way better from the streamer's side of things (and the players if they are getting some of the profits) too. Most people can't watch three days of streaming for one reason or another. Would people pay to watch only the 2nd quarter of a football game? Or the sixth inning of a baseball game? Nope, because it doesn't mean anything, and in the same way and for the same reasons many aren't going to pay to watch a section of a pool match either and so you lose out on a big portion of your potential paying viewers. About the only section that people would be real inclined to watch by itself would be the ending, but even then only if it was still close, and of course 95% of the time in these long races it is already a blow out by then. But if they were doing say three races to 11 each day, instead of the relatively meaningless sections out of the race to 100 each day, now people who couldn't watch on the other days would still tune in and buy the days where they could watch because those days now mean something, and because the level of play would be higher, the sets would be tighter, and the excitement level would be more.

Except for the players who have no heart and can't deal with pressure, there are literally no benefits to doing single long races. None. Yet there are tons and tons of good reasons and advantages (for everybody) for doing a best of some number of shorter sets and I mentioned only some of them--there are more.

Races to 100 and other similarly long single races are for players who have no heart and can't deal with pressure, for streamers that don't like views and revenue, and for spectators that don't like the most excitement and seeing the highest levels of play.
Click to expand...

Step up and play “No Heart SVB”.
 
HawaiianEye said:
Step up and play “No Heart SVB”.
Click to expand...
As great a player as he is, those that know the game and his game the best know that his game is known to suffer more than occasionally when he feels under the greatest pressure (ever seen the Mosconi Cup as one of many examples?), and of course he is well aware of it too.

With races to 100 no player is really ever under the greatest levels of pressure until near the end of the match, and even then only if the race is relatively close otherwise they never do end up feeling the strongest heat at any point.

With say best 5-out-of-9 races to 11, both players are under maximum pressure for every game in every set from beginning to end. Every game counts so much more because you don't have as much ability to be able to tell yourself that "well there is always still a chance that I will be able to catch up later", because there simply is never as much "later" time for catching up so the pressure is always on full force. You have to come with it now, or lose this set. And you are never (or at least rarely) able to build enough lead that you can feel completely relaxed and comfortable about your lead either. Your opponent is almost always still in it with a realistic chance of being able to come back and win this set so the maximum pressure stays on you until you pocket the final ball to close each set out. In races to 100 players can and do get to relax and coast, or go into "give up" stroke for periods of time, sometimes for long periods of time. There is rarely such luxury when the sets are shorter. You are under maximum pressure all the time to have to come with it now and play at your highest level whether you are ahead or behind. Long races are of course better for those that can't fade pressure as well.

A best-of-some-number-of-shorter-sets does a better job of:
-putting the players under more pressure
-making every game matter more
-ensuring that players have to play at higher levels more of the time
-determining who the better player really is
-making sure no player is ever out of reach of a comeback in any set, so no snooze-fests, coasting, or give up strokes
-keeping maximum viewing excitement from beginning to end of the entire match
-giving people a reason to tune in or order smaller portions of the match even if they can't watch the whole thing
-getting more views and PPV revenue
-etc

There are lots of great benefits to such format over the single long races, and literally no draw backs. Races to 100 are dumb for everybody, player, streamer, or spectator alike, except for the player who doesn't fade pressure as well being the lone exception.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbb
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top