PDA

View Full Version : Nevel and Deuel quit in middle of matches



Wally_in_Cincy
12-01-2004, 01:54 PM
The front page of www.insidepool.com (http://www.insidepool.com) reports that Nevel and Deuel quit their respective matches for unknown reasons at the inaugural event of the North American Pool Tour.

What's with these guys?

I'm sure the sponsors will be pleased /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif.

woody_968
12-01-2004, 02:03 PM
Man thats a bad deal, it will be interesting to hear why they pulled out.

MikeJanis
12-04-2004, 05:13 PM
I spoke with Corey earlier today and he told me that he walked out in protest of the alternating break format. I didn't talk to Nevel but the protest seems to be important to the players. I also spoke with Shawn Putnam who did not attend this event and he told me that he won't attend another UPA event until they bring the winner breaks format back.

Mj

Popcorn
12-04-2004, 05:30 PM
What was the score when they quit? For it to be a protest, they would have to quit just prier to pocketing the last 9-ball to win for it to have meaning, somehow I bet that was not the case. Either way, you agreed to play so be a man and play.

LBBill
12-05-2004, 05:06 PM
I must say, another step forward for the sport of 9 ball in having the Hilton events and another 2 steps back to where we have been for too long. Way ta go guys, as if you have got it so good your able to be picky. And some wonder why the BCA in Colorado Springs has pulled away from the players. Guess you players showed them eh????

Wally_in_Cincy
12-06-2004, 07:12 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote MikeJanis:</font><hr> I spoke with Corey earlier today and he told me that he walked out in protest of the alternating break format. I didn't talk to Nevel but the protest seems to be important to the players. <hr /></blockquote>

Mike,

That is just plain frigging stupid. How would you feel if Durb or Shawn did this to you? I know if I went to the trouble of going to one of your events to watch some top players and they walked out in the middle of a match I would be quite upset. And I was a sponsor I would be livid.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote MikeJanis:</font><hr> I also spoke with Shawn Putnam who did not attend this event and he told me that he won't attend another UPA event until they bring the winner breaks format back.

Mj <hr /></blockquote>

That is certainly his right to not attend, but for Pete's sake don't walk out in the middle of a match. This isn't the Friday night 8-ball tourney at the Dew Drop Inn where nobody cares if you forfeit your B-side match. They are supposed to be professionals.

Chopstick
12-06-2004, 08:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote LBBill:</font><hr> I must say, another step forward for the sport of 9 ball in having the Hilton events and another 2 steps back to where we have been for too long. Way ta go guys, as if you have got it so good your able to be picky. And some wonder why the BCA in Colorado Springs has pulled away from the players. Guess you players showed them eh???? <hr /></blockquote>

I couldn't agree more. As I understand it, the alternating break format is to equalize the game and hold down cheating. Rigging racks is getting bad among the pros. They have even learned to cheat the Sardo. It doesn't have to rack them the same every time. Grady Matthews showed me how they are doing it.

Ironic that these two should be protesting. I saw one of the above players in a rack your own tournament. He was playing Buddy Hall and he made the exact same ball in the same pocket every time. Buddy got hopping mad and was railing on the director to change to an alternating break format.

Steve Lipsky
12-06-2004, 09:11 AM
Hey Mike. This is all very strange to me... they quit in the middle of their matches? Over THAT?

If alternating break is upsetting them, fine, but... you'd think they would have noticed it was an alternating break format before the middle of their matches.

Had they shown up to the players' meeting and were then told about the "new format", I could see them choosing not to play in protest. But to start the match where they already know the rules and then use that as the excuse? It's very strange, no?

That's like buying a green car and then refusing to drive it... because you don't like the color green.

- Steve &lt;--- likes dumb analogies on Monday mornings /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Rich R.
12-06-2004, 09:34 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Steve Lipsky:</font><hr> - Steve &lt;--- likes dumb analogies on Monday mornings /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>
Steve, it may be a dumb analogy, but it is an accurate one. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Steve Lipsky
12-06-2004, 10:05 AM
LOL, thanks Rich /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif.

One of the reasons (albeit a small one) that I did not play in the US Open last year is because of some of the rules that tournament has adopted. I remember getting there the year before and either Barry or Scott said during the players' meeting: "So this year we are going to use jump cues." Nice.

Incidentally, one of the two players involved in this protest fouled on a jump shot against me in that tournament and did not call it on himself.

One more reason that I do not care for the jump cue, and that I do not care about this silly protest, lol.

- Steve

Rod
12-06-2004, 12:09 PM
Jeez if I bought a green car I wouldn't want to drive it either. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif That reason for a protest is about as lame as they come. The men sure know how to screw things up. They don't make money now so lets make less? How is this even rational thinking? People get what they deserve.

Rod

RailbirdJAM
12-06-2004, 12:50 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr>...As I understand it, the alternating break format is to equalize the game and hold down cheating. Rigging racks is getting bad among the pros. They have even learned to cheat the Sardo. It doesn't have to rack them the same every time....<hr /></blockquote>

I agree 100 percent. Rack mechanics are on the rise, and the players know who they are. I've seen it in my neck of the woods, and every single time I watch them racking the balls, ESPECIALLY IN WINNER'S RACK FORMATS, pressing, caressing, finger-licking balls, it's sickening. It is quite obvious what they are doing, and it's just as bad as playing with a marked deck of cards in poker and creates an unfair advantage for the rack-rigger.

I really liked the format of the recent Skins Billiards Championship. Scott "The Shot" Smith was the TD for this event, and the rules were that he was to rack every single time and the players were not allowed to look at it. This prevents a lot of arguments and creates a level playing field.

At the Carolinas Open, I witnessed one player run an 8-pack, pocketing the exact same wing ball in the exact same corner all eight times. Buddy Hall was there, too, and he commented that he thinks the challenger having the option to break is a good format and would prevent a lot of this rack-rigging.

Everybody loves to see a player run racks, but it would be even more impressive to see this occur when there is a neutral racker (IMO).

Can you imagine seeing a bowler place their own pins in the formation and then bowl a strike eight times in a row? It ain't going to happen very often, and if and when it does, it is a rarity.

JMHO, FWIW! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

RailbirdJAM

poolplayer1988
12-06-2004, 06:38 PM
Wow! I can't figure out if I am just so naive that I've never seen rack-rigging or if the town I live in is just so small that we don't do that kind of thing here. I have played in a few tournaments on the KBP Carolina tour and haven't seen or heard of any odd racking practices. Hmmm....

So just for my info, can anyone tell me what to look for when someone is rigging a rack? I promise, as a Christian, not to use any of those practices in my game.

Doug Talbot

malaguista
12-07-2004, 04:00 AM
I hope that Team USA have been informed that the format for the Mosconi Cup has been changed this year.
The tournament which starts on 16th December will have the doubles section as Scotch Doubles for the first time. Previously the player who went to the table played all shots until he finished or failed to pot.
Another new aspect of the Mosconi this year is that the players will be miked up and that TV viewers will be able to hear their comments while working out their tactics.
Please do not send any cry babies to Europe it would be embarrasing to see them walking out on TV because they don't like the rules.

Rich R.
12-07-2004, 04:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr> How is this even rational thinking? <hr /></blockquote>
Rod, I don't believe rational thinking enters into this equation.
These players had expenses for travel and lodging, for this tournament. Then they quit, before they gave themselves a chance to recoup any of their money. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

A rational player would have done his best to win some cash, then protested to the UPA and advised them that they would not enter another tournament until the rule was changed.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with the alternating break, but what do I know. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

eg8r
12-07-2004, 05:16 AM
[ QUOTE ]
That reason for a protest is about as lame as they come. The men sure know how to screw things up. They don't make money now so lets make less? How is this even rational thinking? People get what they deserve.
<hr /></blockquote> No kidding. I know that retaliation probably will not help solve the problem, but it might help in some way. How about the UPA not say anything and wait for the next tournament. When these guys pay their entry, travel, hotel and food bills, the UPA should tell them they are protesting these two players and not let them play. This way the two players have wasted some of their own money instead of the money of the people putting on the tournament and the fans that came to watch.

eg8r

Drake
12-07-2004, 07:43 AM
I heard Corey was losing when He stopped playing. Did he only walk out because he was losing and chose to make a protest then??? I like to see people and players express their opinions but the fact of the matter is that people came to see Corey and Larry play and might have even paid an admission fee of somekind and they left. Making a protest by not playing a match is not acceptable. Having a petition signed by all of the players supporting winner breaks would have been a better approach. Anyway, Why do they dislike Winner Breaks so much ?? Yes, It usually makes the matches closer because each player gets to the table equally. I wouldn't like playing alternate breaks gambling but for a tourny I would prefer it....at least I can't get strapped to the chair for a 6 pack.

Ross
12-07-2004, 11:10 AM
Railbird, I think you and Buddy have some incorrect assumptions behind your intepretation of events.

If you watch tournaments where the Sardo is used correctly you learn a lot about what perfect racks do. First the 9-ball doesn't move at all unless kicked by another ball coming off the rail. Second the movement of the 1 ball and the wing ball becomes very predictable for a break of a particular speed. So what does this mean?

1. The fact that a player makes a ball in the same pocket every time is NOT evidence of rack rigging. In fact it is just the opposite. If the player is able to get a perfect rack (difficult to do by hand) then the action on the 1 ball and the wing ball will be much more consistent and predictable. A lot of pros can make either the 1 or the wing ball consistenly with a Sardo rack. Corey is a master of this.

2. Fiddling with the rack (pressing, caressing) could be evidence of rack rigging. However, it is also what you see when someone is trying to set up a perfect rack. When racking manually it is very hard to get all of the balls really touching so conscientious rackers do spend a lot of time pressing, resetting, etc. (Now if they are wetting their fingers, then I agree that IS evidence of rack rigging since there is no reason to do that for a fair rack.)

3. When your opponent makes the 9 on the break frequently against you that doesn't mean he is a great breaker or you are unlucky. It means that you are not giving him a perfect rack. If you were then the 9 would only go in when it is kicked in from its position right behind the spot, which doesn't happen that often.. In fact if your opponent makes the 9 on the snap frequently it usually means there is a small gap between the 9 and one of the 2 balls directly behind it.

John_Madden
12-07-2004, 12:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr>
I know if I went to the trouble of going to one of your events to watch some top players and they walked out in the middle of a match I would be quite upset. And I was a sponsor I would be livid. but for Pete's sake don't walk out in the middle of a match. This isn't where nobody cares if you forfeit. They are supposed to be professionals.<hr /></blockquote>
Sad is the only word! Especially for all the players who have been trying for years to take this sport to the popularity it should have. Most of the players I know play for the love of the game - I do.
John Madden
www.johnmaddencues.com (http://www.johnmaddencues.com)

RailbirdJAM
12-07-2004, 01:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> Railbird, I think you and Buddy have some incorrect assumptions behind your intepretation of events.
If you watch tournaments where the Sardo is used correctly you learn a lot about what perfect racks do...The fact that a player makes a ball in the same pocket every time is NOT evidence of rack rigging....<hr /></blockquote>

I respect your opinion, Ross, about the correct way to rack balls, always with the expectation of an honest rack. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Those who have perfected their breaks, whether it be a medium-speed break suited for the Sardo rack or a power break utilized on some equipment, will excel, since it is believed in some circles that the break is 50 percent of the game. /ccboard/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

Rack-rigging is one of pool's dirty little secrets, and when it is done intentionally, it gives one player an unfair advantage. /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif

Check out the book "Racking Strategies." There are a variety of ways to rig a rack. If you recognize a pattern and have this peculiar knowledge of rack-rigging, there's even a break that will fit the bill. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Neutral rackers, whether it be with a wooden or Sardo rack, is the only solution to rack-rigging. Unfortunately, it is not economically feasible in some venues. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

RailbirdJAM

malaguista
12-08-2004, 01:38 AM
The Eurotour, the professional circuit of Europe last week held their last tour stop of the year in Spain.
The balls were tapped into the tables before the start of the matches and were placed one ball nearer the centre of the table than is normal.
It was possible to rack the balls perfectly each time without the use of a triangle.
The break was alternating and as far as I know there were no complaints from players many of which have done more in the game than either Deuel or Nevell

Ross
12-08-2004, 07:55 PM
Railbird, I agree with you completely that players will sometimes try to rig the rack. Knowing the character, or lack of it, of a portion of the pool playing population I would be shocked if it didn't happen.

And I have read Joe Tucker's "Racking Secrets" which opened my eyes to how gaps in the rack work. And in fact it was after reading this that I became more skeptical when I heard players claims about rack rigging (especially right after they lost a match). Because it was clear that the reasons they gave for knowing this didn't quite make sense.

If a player was racking for themself I would suspect rigging if the 9-ball went directly toward one of the corner pockets because this can be caused by a gap behind the 9-ball. But if they were making the wing ball or the 1 ball in the side everytime I would have to say that this wasn't really evidence either way, since this happens most often with perfect Sardo racks.

If the balls break terribly I always look at the cb before I get suspicious. If the cb stays parked in the middle of the table or just moves a little to the right/left or back and isn't sitting there spinning then I know there was a pretty good hit on the 1 so I'm suspicious of the rack. But I've seen players break and get no action and then give the racker (say me, for example /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif) a dirty look. Meanwhile the cb has caromed 3 rails, flying around the table, or is sitting there spinning like a top. It wasn't the rack - the breaker just didn't hit the cb or the 1 solid. But don't try to tell them that! They won't stop to think about it for a second, probably because they just want to blame someone else for their mistake. Of course this happens less with the pros who hit the 1 pretty dead on 90% of the time.

Anyway I just think players should be careful and just think it through a little more before concluding that someone is a rack cheat.

RailbirdJAM
12-09-2004, 06:58 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> Railbird, I agree with you completely that players will sometimes try to rig the rack. Knowing the character, or lack of it, of a portion of the pool playing population I would be shocked if it didn't happen. <hr /></blockquote>

It is curious in some venues when the Sardo rack is used that the 1-ball lays on the spot, and in others, the 9-ball is placed on the spot. At the Open, the 9-ball was on the spot. At the World Summit of Pool, I was told that the 1-ball was placed on the spot.

I enjoy seeing a player run rack after rack, but I do believe a neutral racker should be on hand in high-level competitions.

Again, at the Skins Billiards Championship, Scott Smith, the TD, was the neutral racker, which provided a level playing field to all of the competitors. It eliminates the bickering as well as the rack-rigging.

Bowlers don't rack their own pins. Rack-rigging is a reality in today's pool world when it comes to the game of 9-ball. I have witnessed players sharing racking strategies with others. It's amazing what a few gaps in the rack can do for one's break, whether it is the Sardo or wooden rack.

Although not economically feasible in some venues, it would seem prudent to have a neutral racker (IMO).

RailbirdJAM

Ross
12-09-2004, 08:56 AM
Rilbird, when the Sardo Rack originally came out the 1 ball was racked on the spot like always. When players like Corey figured out the exact hit you needed to make the wing ball every time with the Sardo there were a lot of complaints. So some tournament directors decided to try racking the 9 ball on the spot to make it harder to make the wing ball in the corner (it now tended to hit above the corner). No conspiracy - just an attempt to solve a new problem created now that we could get a perfect rack.

thepoolnerd
12-10-2004, 04:01 PM
9 ball is a stupid game to try to focus a professional circuit around. Any professional and many non-professionals are capable of running several racks often. When championship matches are played in races to 7, this is absolutely inane. With an open table there are hundreds of people who can clear the table every time. Shrinking the pro-tables in the 50's from 10 feet to nine feet and leaving the pockets bucket size has leveled the playing field of 1,000 players and most matches become a breaking contest. They either need to shrink the pockets or play 10 ball or something to add difficulty to the game. This would be analogous to the PGA switching to all par-3 courses to incorporate a more TV friendly format. Sinse players started figuring out the break in the 90's, you've had virtually no repeat champions at any event like you did over the past 100 or so years. At least at the DCC they still play on tight tables. Many of the (straight billiards, 18.1, 18.2) billiard games were mastered and obsoleted; it's time to do the same for 9 ball on the pro circuit. Anybody can beat anybody, nothing but a breaking contest.

Ross
12-10-2004, 07:16 PM
OK, here goes another Mythbuster:

One of the big myths in pool (rampant even among pros) is that the break is a big advantage and that the difference in them and the player that beats them is the break. It sounds reasonable, but the facts don't bear it out. In fact, I believe it has been found that against the same opponent a pro player will have a slightly better winning percentage when they don't break than when they do.

Why is this myth so prevalent? Because players remember when their opponent breaks and runs out a rack or two or three very clearly. That event just stands out in their minds because it is such a helpless feeling to sit there and watch. But what they don't remember are all of those occasions where: 1. opponent breaks makes nothing, player runs out. 2. opponent breaks, makes ball but has no shot, forced to give player a slight edge (since opponent has the power to take the shot or make you take it), 3. opponent breaks, makes a ball, runs 6 and gets out of line and misses shot or safety leaving player easy out or easy lock-up safety, 4. opponent breaks and scratchs, player starts with bih and gets out. Combined these 4 scenarios occur more often than the break and run.

The other myth associated with this are that 4-packs, 5-packs, and 6-packs are common among the pros. In the hundreds of televised matches I've seen and dozens of live pro matches and dozens of accustats tapes I've watched, I have yet to see a 6-pack (opponent does not get out of chair for 6 full racks). If anyone knows of an accustats tape where this occurs, let me know. Railbirds are always talking about some guy running five or six racks but they have a tendency to "misremember" things in a way that makes for a good story. And there is no videotape to check their claims like there is in the TV matches. I'm sure it does happen but it is a rare event.

Steve Lipsky
12-10-2004, 11:13 PM
Hey Ross. I've written numerous posts expounding on the same myth. Five and six packs just do not happen anywhere near as often as many people think. I've been around some great players for about 10 years, and I've only seen a true 6-pack a handful of times. In live pro competition, I've never seen one. I'm sure of that. That includes 4 US Opens and many major pro tournaments.

There is a 10-pack (either 9 or 10) on Accustats, by Danny Medina. They advertise it as such... it's worth checking out.

By the way, even in some of the instances you hear about it, it's along the lines of when Earl did it for a million - 5 nines on the break in 11 racks.

- Steve

thepoolnerd
12-10-2004, 11:47 PM
Sorry. Not true. No way can you prove to me that breaking in nine ball is a disadvantage. If the break is a disadvantage then why have all of the players been studying the racks before they break? To make sure that they don't make a ball?!? Also, the non-breaker never gets more turns at the table while the breaker may get one more turn.

Alfie
12-11-2004, 12:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> One of the big myths in pool (rampant even among pros) is that the break is a big advantage and that the difference in them and the player that beats them is the break. [snip]

The other myth associated with this are that 4-packs, 5-packs, and 6-packs are common among the pros. [snip]<hr /></blockquote>Say your opponent needs two games for the win in a winner breaks pro match. Wouldn't it be to his advantage to be able to make a ball on the break and put the CB and first OB in good position? And if this is true needing two, wouldn't it also be true for three, etc.? (induction /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif)

Qtec
12-11-2004, 04:22 AM
[ QUOTE ]
OK, here goes another Mythbuster:

One of the big myths in pool (rampant even among pros) is that the break is a big advantage and that the difference in them and the player that beats them is the break. It sounds reasonable, but the facts don't bear it out. In fact, I believe it has been found that against the same opponent a pro player will have a slightly better winning percentage when they don't break than when they do.
<hr /></blockquote>

I totally disagree.
If player A makes a ball 7 times out of 10 and player B makes a ball on the break 4 times out of 10, Player A will have first shot on the table 13 times out of 20 , which gives him a huge advantage, especially when two pros are playing.
There are a lot of players who could run 6 and 7ns if only they could make a ball on the break more often.

Q

Popcorn
12-11-2004, 07:17 AM
Only a few things can happen after the break. 1. You make a ball and have an opening shot. 2. You make a ball and don't have a shot and need to push if you choose. 3. You don't make a ball and leave a shot. 4. You don't make a ball and don't leave a shot and your opponent needs to push. To have a distinct advantage the breaker needs to first make a ball on the break more the 50% of the time and then have a workable opening shot. Accu-stats has proven that statistically the break is just is not the big advantage it would seem and depending on the table and conditions can even be a disadvantage. I.E. Never making a ball on the break and your opponent starting with an open rack more then 50% of your the breaks. Of course the same would be true for him as well. The point is, it just isn't that big a thing some would like to think it is and may actually mean very little in the final outcome of a match.

Sid_Vicious
12-11-2004, 07:43 AM
"1. You make a ball and have an opening shot. 2. You make a ball and don't have a shot and need to push if you choose. 3. You don't make a ball and leave a shot. 4. You don't make a ball and don't leave a shot and your opponent needs to push."

You forgot number 5, the breaker by trying so hard to knock hell out of the rack, scratches and many times makes 3 balls in the process. THAT definitely turns the win in the other direction. I am in the camp for not thinking that the break is the key to the game of 9-ball, making a ball and squatting the CB is imperative. Control and consistency, not force is what it's all about. This is why I never could understand the commentators criticizing Allison's break during her first dominating years here, hell she was sinking a ball and getting shape most all the time, and she ran over the field. Why the heck can anyone run that accomplishment down the road...sid

LBBill
12-11-2004, 08:01 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote malaguista:</font><hr> I hope that Team USA have been informed that the format for the Mosconi Cup has been changed this year.
The tournament which starts on 16th December will have the doubles section as Scotch Doubles for the first time. Previously the player who went to the table played all shots until he finished or failed to pot.
Another new aspect of the Mosconi this year is that the players will be miked up and that TV viewers will be able to hear their comments while working out their tactics.
Please do not send any cry babies to Europe it would be embarrasing to see them walking out on TV because they don't like the rules. <hr /></blockquote>

NICELY PUT:

HERE IS AN EXTREMELY VALID CONCERN FOR THE PROMOTER/EVENT. IF THE FEW (JUST ONE) AMERICAN "WHINER" PRO ( AND I'M DIRECTING THIS COMMENT AT COREY, UNLESS HE DOESN'T LOSE HIS MATCH, LOL)BOYCOTTS THIS FORMAT, WILL THE USA HAVE SECOND LEVEL PLAYERS ATTENDING IN THIER PLACE, I HOPE NOT, THO I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED IF SOMEONE DID, IT MUST BE BECAUSE WE AMERICAN PLAYERS KNOW WHATS RIGHT, RIGHT???? MAKES SENSE WHY JIMMY REMPE QUIT ATTENDING EVENTS EVEN IS HIS BACK YARD. I'M GLAD I GOT MARRIED, HAD KIDS AND DIDN'T CONTINUE MY DREAM OF BEING AGAIN IN THIS POSITION THAT WE WERE IN 20 YEARS AGO. AT LEAST THE REST OF THE WORLD IS MOVING FORWARD WITH THE SPORT, NOT HERE WHERE THE WORLD THINKS OF THE US AS THE FOUNDER OF THE SPORT, NOW ALSO THE "MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY", IT DOESN'T TAKE MANY BAD APPLES TO SPOIL THE REST.

RailbirdJAM
12-11-2004, 08:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> OK, here goes another Mythbuster: One of the big myths in pool (rampant even among pros) is that the break is a big advantage and that the difference in them and the player that beats them is the break...The other myth associated with this are that 4-packs, 5-packs, and 6-packs are common among the pros. In the hundreds of televised matches I've seen and dozens of live pro matches and dozens of accustats tapes I've watched, I have yet to see a 6-pack (opponent does not get out of chair for 6 full racks)...I'm sure it does happen but it is a rare event. <hr /></blockquote>

Here's some rack-running I personally witnessed.

'04 Carolinas Open: Jeremy Jones ran an 8-pack on Ryan McCreesh.

'03 Glass City Open: Johnny Archer ran a 10-pack on Danny "Kid Delicious" Basavich.

PP 9-Ball Tour-Rockville, MD: Danny Basavich ran a 6-pack against Ryan McCreesh.

PP 9-Ball Tour-Richmond, VA: Ryan McCreesh ran a 6-pack in a race to 7 against Keith McCready. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

'04 Glass City Open: Danny Basavich runs either a 6- or an 8-pack against Corey Deuel -- (I've got to see it again to be sure)-- in the semi-finals, televised by BCn and Accu-Stats. Corey must have liked the GCO format because he remained seated, with a wide grin on his face the whole time as Danny ran out, I might add, as the cameras were rolling! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

These are just several pack-runnings that come to mind at the time of this writing. Three of the five instances were WINNER-RACK formats.

I don't think one would witness a guy running 6-, 7-, and 8-packs, such as the examples above, in an alternate break and/or challenger break format scenario.

Neutral rackers or 10-Ball would provide a better venue for displaying one's skills set, to include breaking, choice of ball patterns, and running out. If a guy ran an 8-pack with a neutral racker, I'd be pretty impressed. Is it coincidental that rack-running occurs frequently in winner-rack formats?

I don't want to take anything away from the art of BREAKING. Granted, those who have perfected the break AND the ability to adjust on different equipment have a big advantage. A lot of folks I've spoken to seem to think Francisco Bustamante has the best break in today's pool world. Shannon Daulton was warming up before the semi-finals at the last Carolinas Open. The only thing he did was practice breaking balls over and over again, no warm-up shots, only racking and breaking.

Ultimately, in a professional setting, it should be a level playing field. Neutral rackers is the answer to 9-ball's rack-riggers. JMHO, FWIW! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

RailbirdJAM

Ross
12-11-2004, 12:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote thepoolnerd:</font><hr> Sorry. Not true. No way can you prove to me that breaking in nine ball is a disadvantage.

<font color="blue">Well at least we are starting with an open mind! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif </font color>

If the break is a disadvantage then why have all of the players been studying the racks before they break? To make sure that they don't make a ball?!?
<font color="blue">I wasn't saying that players shouldn't try to make the best break they can. I just said that when they have bothered to track it, in matches among the pros (where they all try to break well and are good at it) the pro wins the game slightly more often when he is not breaking the rack than when breaking. Beliefs are one thing, facts another. </font color>

Also, the non-breaker never gets more turns at the table while the breaker may get one more turn.
<font color="blue">The only turn that counts in the game is the last one. </font color>
<hr /></blockquote>

Wally_in_Cincy
12-11-2004, 01:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr>
...when they have bothered to track it, in matches among the pros (where they all try to break well and are good at it) the pro wins the game slightly more often when he is not breaking the rack than when breaking. <hr /></blockquote>

Actually I read somewhere, according to accu-stats, that the breaker wins something like 56% of the time. Can't remember exactly.

DSAPOLIS
12-11-2004, 02:01 PM
This is not about 9 ball, and this is not about the break.... AT ALL. This about sportsmanship. I have never met either of these players, I only know what I have seen from their behavior, more Corey Deuel than Nevel. This is about the absence of sportsmanship, and its also about quitting. I cover quitting extensively in all of my books, and this is a prime example of it. I remember Corey had another incident a while back in Japan where he destroyed a cue... that was uncalled for, and if I remember correctly, they had banned him from using his "soft" break or something like that, so he had an outburst. I cringe every time I see his "soft" break, because I don't agree with it. When his little break works, he's a happy person...when it doesn't, you've seen what he's capable of. A "player" would have seen the match to its conclusion, and if he lost the match fairly under the rules that structured the tournament, then you shake the man's hand, wish him luck, and accept the fact that it was HIS day not YOURS. Packing up your stuff and going home is childish, no matter who you are or what you've won in the past. When these player realize that their tour (whatever it is these days) is a mess because of THEM, not the industry, not because of ESPN, Camel, Don Mackey, 9 ball, break formats, or sponsors. The players are the ones that have not been loyal to the game, the fans or the industy. This brings that back to the forefront. I KNOW, I USED TO BE ONE OF THEM . Everybody wants to take and nobody wants to give. I find it disheartening that with the exception of a very small few, NONE of these players are giving back to the game. It's all take, take, take. Let's go where we can win money and boost our ego and reputation, NOT the game of pool. Until this changes, the men are going to be stuck with the bucket of manure that is called men's professional pool these days. Steve and I, as well as other pros that frequent this forum know that ego plays a big part out there as well. Two players had their egos put in check, so to avoid losing - THEY QUIT . That's all this was. /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Bob C
12-11-2004, 06:28 PM
Probably no one individual has studied the statistical aspects of this issue more than Pat Flemming of Accu-Stats. He has been known, on more than one occasion, to give his opponent the breaks in tournament play because the odds favor it. On some equipment, under some conditions and against some opponents, this seems to be a reasonable tactic.

Popcorn
12-11-2004, 06:40 PM
I think in some of those examples there were probably 9's on the break and 9's made in combinations. People seem to only count the consecutive games won but not exactly how it was done. I would like to see the 9 spotted if it is made on the break and the player continue to shoot. I haven't liked the idea of a player winning the game by just breaking ever since I have been playing pool over 45 years.

pooltchr
12-11-2004, 07:23 PM
TAP! TAP! TAP!
Well said! That should be required reading for every "pro" player out there!

Ross
12-12-2004, 01:32 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr>
...when they have bothered to track it, in matches among the pros (where they all try to break well and are good at it) the pro wins the game slightly more often when he is not breaking the rack than when breaking. <hr /></blockquote>

Actually I read somewhere, according to accu-stats, that the breaker wins something like 56% of the time. Can't remember exactly. <hr /></blockquote>

Wally, surprisingly (at least it was to me at first) that stat doesn't answer the question of whether the break is an advantage when computed from tournaments run with the winner-breaks format (which the vast majority are). The reason is that the stronger player wins more often and hence breaks more. In other words, winning causes breaks but not necessarily the reverse.

The stat you need is to compare winning percentages for each player breaking and not breaking against the same opponent. For example you might find that Archer wins 55% of his matches against Nevel when he breaks, but 58% of the time when he doesn't break.

I looked into this a couple of years ago and found that against the same opponent a player wins slightly more often when he isn't breaking. I will try to dig up thost stats and post them.

Ross
12-12-2004, 12:57 PM
Ok, I found the analysis I did a couple of years ago. These are based on data I got from in an e-mail from Koehler from 224 pro matches where he studied the breaks (% making the 9, etc.).

I thought that the following two numbers would give different answers: 1) % of time the breaker wins and 2) the break advantage (% of time a player wins when breaking compared to the % of time the same player wins when not breaking).

But it turns out if you include both players in each match you get the same results either way you calculate it. For these matches the win-when-breaking percentage is 56%. And the average break advantage is 12%, which is equivalent to the 56% vs 44% advantage.

Of course this is still a small sample overall and a very small sample for each player (1 to 3 matches each). So we can't tell if particular players generally have a high break advantage. For example, in one match Kennedy only won 3 out of the 10 matches he broke. In another he won 7 out of 7 when breaking.

Anyway here are the stats. In order the "columns" are: player, wins/breaks in the match, % wins when breaking, % wins when not breaking, and the break advantage for the palyer (the difference in the last two).

player, wins/breaks, % won breaking, %won not breaking, break advantage

Ellin 6/13 46% 70% -24%
Kennedy 3/10 30% 54% -24%

Andam 6/12 50% 50% 0%
Varner 6/12 50% 50% 0%

Breedlove 8/13 62% 45% 16%
Siegel 6/11 55% 38% 16%

Pierce 5/10 50% 56% -6%
Wetch 4/9 44% 50% -6%

Reyes 7/13 54% 50% 4%
Strickland 6/12 50% 46% 4%

Fusco 9/14 64% 40% 24%
Davenport 9/15 60% 36% 24%

Hopkins 6/12 50% 42% 8%
Rempe 7/12 58% 50% 8%

Archer 3/6 50% 33% 17%
Hall 2/3 67% 50% 17%

Archer 1/2 50% 0% 50%
Kennedy 7/7 100% 50% 50%

Chao 4/6 67% 75% -8%
Souquet 1/4 25% 33% -8%

Chao 2/5 40% 20% 20%
Ortman 4/5 80% 60% 20%

Davenport 6/8 75% 30% 45%
Archer 7/10 70% 25% 45%

Total 125/224 56% 44% 12%

Cali
12-13-2004, 02:59 AM
I really hate green cars and will never own one. I have a red truck and I love it. I would drive it for free for a long time. If you paid me lots of money and threw me on TV once in awhile I could really let the green car grow on me. I would'nt even bitch about it, especially after I have already sat in it.

Qtec
12-13-2004, 09:09 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Also, the non-breaker never gets more turns at the table while the breaker may get one more turn.
The only turn that counts in the game is the last one.
<hr /></blockquote>

Quite often, amongst good players, the first turn is the last one!


One thing about big breakers is that they frequently make more than one ball on the break! If you only have to make 6 balls instead of 8 that is also an advantage.
Having a good break gives you more chances. Thats a fact. What that player does with those chances is another question.
When it comes down to two players of equal skill, a big difference in breaking capabillities can be decicsive.

Qtec