News Carom Billiard

 

Carom Billiard - 3-Cushion - Bert's column (NED)

It's all about the break

Posted by on September 11, 2016

It's all about the break

© Kozoom

Everybody loves the shootout, right? Well, maybe the top players are not too crazy about it. But we, the spectators, are glued to the screen. We'll sometimes miss a few points here and there early in the match,  we'll walk the dog if we have to, but not if a World Cup quarterfinal has just ended 40-40 and it's time for "penalties", to use the soccer term.

The recent tournament in Guri provided plenty of excitement, and Blomdahl was right in the middle of it. He miraculously escaped in his quarterfinal against Jung Han Heo, who missed on match point six times. The match ended 40-40, TB ran two from the spots and an exhausted Heo missed the break. 

In the semifinal, the Swede again found himself in a shootout, this time against Vietnamese Quyet Chien Tran. Another two from Torbjörn, and three from Tran who exploded with joy.  TB was quick to blame himself, saying: "Two is not very good, and often it's just not good enough."    

We all know that in a long match, the stronger player will be an even bigger favorite to win. The shorter the match, the bigger the part that is played by Lady Luck. I could conceivably beat Caudron once or even twice, in a match to 10 points, if we played ten of those. The only way for me to beat him in a match to 100 points, would be if I handcuffed  his left wrist to his right ankle.  

So exactly HOW different are the chances between two players of unequal strength, if you vary the length of the match? The permutations are endless, but the sheet I made should give you some idea. You'll notice that the advantage a 0.700 player has over a 0.500 player is much more dramatic than the one held by a 2.000 player over a 1.500. Not in the sheet, but also noteworthy is the fact that  the best of five set system we've used for over 25 years, produces roughly the same percentages as a 50 point match. Forty point matches are quite a bit less "honest" than best of five, but more honest than best of three (to 15 points). That all makes sense.    

 

player percentages

 

We've seen a lot of shootouts in the past few seasons, and it's not a coincidence. The second echelon players have gotten much stronger, thirty or forty guys can no longer be bullied or overpowered. They defend too well, score too heavily  when they get in , and sometimes they lose 40 - 34 and calmly make the missing 6 in the equalizer. I love it when that happens, by the way. 

And then, there is the flip-a-coin moment. It's shootout time, and it's all about the break shot. You've practiced it before the match, but is the table still responding in the same way, or has it changed? If a table changes during a match, nine times out of ten, it has shortened.  Do you want the referee to clean the balls, which will give you a little more length? Or do you NOT want him to, because you want to hold on to your "feel" of the last few innings?   

Many break shots in the equalizing inning are missed, because the player hits it exactly as he did during warm-up. And it will often be short, 90 minutes later.

It is very tempting to always explain a shootout win by saying: "X was mentally stronger, he wanted it more than Y." But the truth often is, that half a roll of the ball, which provides or ruins position, decides about a player's fate. You can hit a perfectly fine "systematic" break (red to the top left half of the table, yellow to bottom left corner) and be left with nothing. Your opponent can hit a bad break with balls kissing, and he may end up with a prime position. Frustrating, but true.   

Referees (and the good ones know this!) should be extremely precise when placing the balls on the spots. A misplacement of the red ball by, let's say, 3 mm will result in a significantly different break shot. A little anecdote to illustrate that: Caudron was warming up for a balkline exhibition a few years ago, and the table was ridiculously long. He simply couldn't make the break shot, it kept sliding "below" the yellow. His opponent, the old maestro Mister 100 himself, quickly came to the rescue. He instructed the ref (that was me) to place the red 5 mm below its spot, and the white ball 5 mm to the right of its spot. It was invisible to the spectators, and the natural line of the cue ball was at least 10 cm shorter now.

One suggestion I would like to make about the shootout: under the current rules, the player who has started the match, also starts the shootout. I think it would be better if that was decided by chance (the ref flipping a coin), or by right: the players lagging again. 

 

Back to All News

My Comments

ertonoma
ertonoma
dramatic ?
Thanks Bert, a quick question:

0.700 player is %40 better player than 0.500 player and 2.000 player is only %33 better player than 1.500 player. Of course 0.700 player has more chance to win than 2.000 player. It is not dramatic according to math, is it?

Message 1/2 - Publish at September 12, 2016 6:51 AM

Francis007
Francis007
Re-Math
Are you sure that the 0.700 player is "just" 40% better than the 0.500 player? It is not rather 50%?!?

Publish at September 18, 2016 11:14 AM

ertonoma
ertonoma
Francis007
700-500=200
200x100/500=40%

Publish at September 19, 2016 10:20 AM

Francis007
Francis007
ertonoma
And 0.900 player is how much better than a 0.700 player?

Publish at September 19, 2016 8:18 PM

ertonoma
ertonoma
Francis007
900-700=200
200x100/700=28.5%

Publish at September 20, 2016 2:32 AM

Francis007
Francis007
ertonoma
it is not exactly what the Bert's tables show...

Publish at September 20, 2016 10:48 AM

ertonoma
ertonoma
Francis007
Francis, sorry but I think you do not get the point ! I was hoping Bert would have got it but he did not respond yet unfortunately.

Publish at September 20, 2016 8:11 PM

kreezer
kreezer
some math
Actually a 2 average player scores 20 points on 30 attempts... so 66.6% accuracy. A 1.5 average player scores 15 points on 25 attempts, so 60% accuracy. Difference only 6.5% between those players.

If you do same math for 0.7 & 0.5 player, you get 7 in 17 attempt & 5 in 15 attempts. 41.18% VS. 33.33%

Message 2/2 - Publish at September 12, 2016 10:15 AM

Post new comment

Log in or register now to leave a comment

Forgot your password?

Don’t have an account yet?

Sign up now for free to post comments, add your photos, partipate in our forums and receive exclusive Newsletter.

Then you can get a Premium Pass for a full Live and Video access.

Join Kozoom