*** A Percentage and Odds Question for Dr. Bill ***

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
A Percentage and Odds Question for Dr. Bill

Billy, being one of the few members on this forum that has known me me over 45 years and played against and as a partner of mine. And, being you have a fair idea of playing 3 Cushion. And, also being known to be an excellent percentage man! I pose this question to YOU!

Here’s my question: If 2 players are equals and one of the player’s in a 50 point game makes a run of, 22 and 10 in the game, what are the odds that, that player WINS the game to 50!

I’m curious to get your opinion on this.

Bill Smith “Mr3Cushion”
 

sappo

Verified Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
1,415
From
Tucson AZ
A question, before your question can be answered you must first know just how good the 2 players are. If the runs of 10 and 22 are exceptional runs for the these players the player who made those runs would be a hugh favorite. But if these are 2 world class players and big runs are normal for them then the player who had the 10 and 22 would not be as big a favorite. Obviously, any game to 50 where a player has a 22 and a 10 he is 64 percent home and even a great player who may average say 1.8 would be a big dog in that match. Keith
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,693
From
Dallas Tx.
A Percentage and Odds Question for Dr. Bill

Billy, being one of the few members on this forum that has known me me over 45 years and played against and as a partner of mine. And, being you have a fair idea of playing 3 Cushion. And, also being known to be an excellent percentage man! I pose this question to YOU!

Here’s my question: If 2 players are equals and one of the player’s in a 50 point game makes a run of, 22 and 10 in the game, what are the odds that, that player WINS the game to 50!

I’m curious to get your opinion on this.

Bill Smith “Mr3Cushion”
Your question is one that is almost impossible to place an accurate win percentage to. However, lets assume that the two players are upper echelon 3 cushion players that have a yield average of approximately 1.50 billiards per inning. Would that be a reasonable average for a top player? Player A has ran 22 and then in his next inning he ran 10 for a total of 32 in two innings. His opponent has also had two innings where he maintained his 1.50 average for a total of 3 billiards. At the end of two innings player A is leading in a 50 point match by the score of 32 to 3 with player A at the table. For player A to lose the game player B would have to outscore player A by the score of 47 to 17 or less. There may be a mathematical solution to determine how often player A will win the 50 point match with the score the way it is, but it's certainly well above my guestimation for the reasons that I don't know the possible winning combinations for player A to win, as opposed to how many winning combinations player B has to surmount that kind of a deficit. However, for player B to win the game he would have to average 4 .30 billiards per inning in the next 11 innings, providing player A doesn't exceed the 1.50 average for the next 12 innings.:eek: How often do you think that will happen? I guess that was the original question, however, now you can look at it from possibly another perspective in case you weren't aware of the feat that lies ahead for both players.

Another way you could look at it to determine what the odds are for player A to win, would be to determine how many try's it will take a top player to amass 47 billiards in 11 innings. Every 11 innings is one try. How many try's do you think it would take you to accomplish scoring 47 billiards in 11 innings or less? The picture should be getting a little clearer for you or another top player that has a good understanding of what the feat is for a player of his skill set.

Being an accomplished 3 cushion player you would have a much better feel on the likelihood of player B surmounting the lead that player A has managed to amass. I would assume that it would be close to how many try's it would take you to average 47 billiards in 11 innings.

Dr. Bill
 

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
Your question is one that is almost impossible to place an accurate win percentage to. However, lets assume that the two players are upper echelon 3 cushion players that have a yield average of approximately 1.50 billiards per inning. Would that be a reasonable average for a top player? Player A has ran 22 and then in his next inning he ran 10 for a total of 32 in two innings. His opponent has also had two innings where he maintained his 1.50 average for a total of 3 billiards. At the end of two innings player A is leading in a 50 point match by the score of 32 to 3 with player A at the table. For player A to lose the game player B would have to outscore player A by the score of 47 to 17 or less. There may be a mathematical solution to determine how often player A will win the 50 point match with the score the way it is, but it's certainly well above my guestimation for the reasons that I don't know the possible winning combinations for player A to win, as opposed to how many winning combinations player B has to surmount that kind of a deficit. However, for player B to win the game he would have to average 4 .30 billiards per inning in the next 11 innings, providing player A doesn't exceed the 1.50 average for the next 12 innings.:eek: How often do you think that will happen? I guess that was the original question, however, now you can look at it from possibly another perspective in case you weren't aware of the feat that lies ahead for both players.

Another way you could look at it to determine what the odds are for player A to win, would be to determine how many try's it will take a top player to amass 47 billiards in 11 innings. Every 11 innings is one try. How many try's do you think it would take you to accomplish scoring 47 billiards in 11 innings or less? The picture should be getting a little clearer for you or another top player that has a good understanding of what the feat is for a player of his skill set.

Being an accomplished 3 cushion player you would have a much better feel on the likelihood of player B surmounting the lead that player A has managed to amass. I would assume that it would be close to how many try's it would take you to average 47 billiards in 11 innings.

Dr. Bill

Billy, GREAT explanation, NOW, I will give you another piece of the puzzle!
The 2 player's are at the TOP of the food chain in the World in 3 Cushion!
The game was over in 13 innings! WOW

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"
 
Last edited:

usblues

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
1,328
From
St Paul,Mn
Blomdahl...

Blomdahl...

...did 60 pts in 4 innings in 95-96 or so at Sang Lee's.Can't remember his opponent though I think Jaspers or Cadrone.Its a tribute to the table and equipment makers when some of the top players will average 2.00 for an entire tournament.When you look at Hoppe's stroke you have to believe he would have done at least that instead of the 1.25- 1.50 he played at in the 20's and 30's aye Bill?,cheers,James
 
Last edited:

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
...did 60 pts in 4 innings in 95-96 or so at Sang Lee's.Can't remember his opponent though I think Jaspers or Cadrone.Its a tribute to the table and equipment makers when some of the top players will average 2.00 for an entire tournament.When you look at Hoppe's stroke you have to believe he would have done at least that instead of the 1.25- 1.50 he played at in the 20's and 30's aye Bill?,cheers,James

Not too sure about the Blomdahl thing, but, NO doubt about it, James. "Talent is Talent," and Hoppe had in spades!

Hoppe was a straight-rail and balkline players for years, he KNEW where the balls were going, The KEY element in playing TOP level Billiards! And with the advent of "Modern Day" equipment, it aids the player in being , "more" accurate!

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"
 

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
...did 60 pts in 4 innings in 95-96 or so at Sang Lee's.Can't remember his opponent though I think Jaspers or Cadrone.Its a tribute to the table and equipment makers when some of the top players will average 2.00 for an entire tournament.When you look at Hoppe's stroke you have to believe he would have done at least that instead of the 1.25- 1.50 he played at in the 20's and 30's aye Bill?,cheers,James

James; Here's an idea of what some of the TOP 3 Cushion players in the World averaged in the, "European Team Championships"! The top 10 in averages (matches played):

1 Torbjörn Blomdahl (2 matches) 2.484
2 Roland Forthomme (3) 1.893
3 Murat Naci Coklu (4) 1.860
4 Adnan Yüksel (4) 1.818)
5 Frédéric Caudron (4) 1.754
6 Marco Zanetti (4) 1.733
7 Jean van Erp (2) 1.702
8 Tayfun Tasdemir (4) 1.699
9 Nikos Polychronopoulos (3) 1.692
10 Lütfi Cenet (4) 1.627

AMAZING, isn't it!

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"
 

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
This is the video of the previously mentioned game. Dick Jaspers #1 player and Frederick Caudron #2 player in 2011

This will show some of the members that are REALLY interested in 3 Cushion , how the, "Modern game" is played by the BEST.

I would suggest to try an pay attention to the differences in style and shot selection, also the COMPLETE control one of the players has over ALL 3 balls!

I know this is a one pocket forum, but, I think much can be learned from watching these two GREAT cue men's techniques and strokes!

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdnZW2w8Ik4[/ame]

Enjoy;
Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"
 
Last edited:

tylerdurden

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,959
The thing I thought of when I saw this question (forgive me if mentioned haven't read all replies), is I compared it to 9 ball. If a guy runs 2 big packages in 9 ball in 2 innings, there is a high likelihood that the other guy can put big packages up as well. Therefore, the odds are NOT as great as you would think against the trailer.

A PERFECT example of this was a match between Sigel and Varner years back, where the corner ball went almost every time, and Sigel had HUGE ("insurmountable") lead yet lost. For practical purposes I think this would have to be weighed into the equation.
 

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
The thing I thought of when I saw this question (forgive me if mentioned haven't read all replies), is I compared it to 9 ball. If a guy runs 2 big packages in 9 ball in 2 innings, there is a high likelihood that the other guy can put big packages up as well. Therefore, the odds are NOT as great as you would think against the trailer.

A PERFECT example of this was a match between Sigel and Varner years back, where the corner ball went almost every time, and Sigel had HUGE ("insurmountable") lead yet lost. For practical purposes I think this would have to be weighed into the equation.

Respectfully, Tyler, running 1 rack of 9 nine ball, (IMHO) might be compared to running 2 billiards in a ROW, by top notch players at both games!

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"
 

usblues

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
1,328
From
St Paul,Mn
You bet Bill....

You bet Bill....

....with the similiarities between 1P and 3C.Lots of stuff to learn which compliments the other.Not familiar with those players except for No's 2,5 and 6.I was off on that Blomdahl score,it was 60 in 17 innings against Caudron in 1996 at SL/s.No long runs,just beautiful,elegant and standard runs of 6 and 7's.Magnificent!
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,693
From
Dallas Tx.
The thing I thought of when I saw this question (forgive me if mentioned haven't read all replies), is I compared it to 9 ball. If a guy runs 2 big packages in 9 ball in 2 innings, there is a high likelihood that the other guy can put big packages up as well. Therefore, the odds are NOT as great as you would think against the trailer.

A PERFECT example of this was a match between Sigel and Varner years back, where the corner ball went almost every time, and Sigel had HUGE ("insurmountable") lead yet lost. For practical purposes I think this would have to be weighed into the equation.
Not a fair comparison to make Tyler. In 9ball the way the table breaks is indicative to the momentum the players share through the match. There is nothing in 3 cushion billiards that will give the players a better chance of stringing billiards other than their ability as a player. With this understanding then to play at a level that is far above ones average level is very hard to achieve without the assistance of something unrelated to their natural ability. Playing 3 cushion billiards "you get what you earn" Playing 9ball the way the table breaks can either hurt you or help you run racks. Really not a fair comparison.

Dr. Bill
 

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
Not a fair comparison to make Tyler. In 9ball the way the table breaks is indicative to the momentum the players share through the match. There is nothing in 3 cushion billiards that will give the players a better chance of stringing billiards other than their ability as a player. With this understanding then to play at a level that is far above ones average level is very hard to achieve without the assistance of something unrelated to their natural ability. Playing 3 cushion billiards "you get what you earn" Playing 9ball the way the table breaks can either hurt you or help you run racks. Really not a fair comparison.

Dr. Bill

Once again Billy, perfect analogy, I didn't want to go into any lengthy explanation. If you got the time, watch the video, you're one the few members that can appreciate it for the ultimate skill level these 2 players have!

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"
 

Tom Wirth

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
2,972
From
Delray Beach, Florida
Bill,
You mentioned in your opening thread to notice the control the players exhibited over all three balls. I have found in my limited experience playing three cushion and from what I have seen through video that somewhere within a decent run where the shooter has controlled all three ball with a high degree of accuracy there will be at least one situation where that control is somewhat lost and more than a little let's say extra is needed to recover that high scoring position.

That something extra might be in the form of knowledge and experience with odd ball shots, or it might be in the fact that the shooter has an extraordinarily big stroke. Of course this doesn't have to come in the middle of a run. It can also be a factor in the manufacture of big runs at the start of an inning stemming from a safe position.

These factors are the same factors which you will find in virtually every game which requires knowledge, skill, consistency, sound fundamentals, and heart. The degree to which one player has over the other is the difference in most cases. It's the more arrows in the quiver thing. In the case of the French Open Tennis Championships yesterday the difference was nothing more than power.

Three cushion is a beautiful game, an elegant game, and when played correctly has all the nuance of a Da vinci masterpiece. There is no question in my mind that three cushion billiards should be a discipline learned by all aspiring One Pocket players. I guaranty you will learn things more quickly about cue ball control by way of three cushion than in any other form of cue sport. A word of warning though, the game is addictive.:)

Hope I didn't go too far off on a tangent.

Tom
 
Last edited:

tylerdurden

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,959
Not a fair comparison to make Tyler. In 9ball the way the table breaks is indicative to the momentum the players share through the match. There is nothing in 3 cushion billiards that will give the players a better chance of stringing billiards other than their ability as a player. With this understanding then to play at a level that is far above ones average level is very hard to achieve without the assistance of something unrelated to their natural ability. Playing 3 cushion billiards "you get what you earn" Playing 9ball the way the table breaks can either hurt you or help you run racks. Really not a fair comparison.

Dr. Bill

I was trying to infer that perhaps the table was playing relatively "easy" (=consistent or true). I don't play, but that is what I was getting at.... ie if a guy runs 20 I would think there would be a higher chance for a guy to run a lot after that as opposed to if 2 guys are averaging .5 for their last 20 innings. See my point? :D To put it another way..... if you want to bet a player will run a 10 or more, when would you bet? After the other guy is only putting ones up, or sometime after a guy puts up a 20? I don't think those would be equal.
 

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
Bill,
You mentioned in your opening thread to notice the control the players exhibited over all three balls. I have found in my limited experience playing three cushion and from what I have seen through video that somewhere within a decent run where the shooter has controlled all three ball with a high degree of accuracy there will be at least one situation where that control is somewhat lost and more than a little let's say extra is needed to recover that high scoring position.

That something extra might be in the form of knowledge and experience with odd ball shots, or it might be in the fact that the shooter has an extraordinarily big stroke. Of course this doesn't have to come at the beginning of a run. It can also be a factor in the manufacture of big runs at the start of an inning stemming from a safe position.

These factors are the same factors which you will find in virtually every game which requires knowledge, skill, consistency, sound fundamentals, and heart. The degree to which one player has over the other is the difference in most cases. It's the more arrows in the quiver thing. In the case of the French Open Tennis Championships yesterday the difference was nothing more than power.

Three cushion is a beautiful game, an elegant game, and when played correctly has all the nuance of a Da vinci masterpiece. There is no question in my mind that three cushion billiards should be a discipline learned by all aspiring One Pocket players. I guaranty you will learn things more quickly about cue ball control by way of three cushion than in any other form of cue sport. A word of warning though, the game is addictive.:)

Hope I didn't go too far off on a tangent.

Tom

Tom thanks for the intelligent reply. As in ALL cue games, the BEST players in the World are going to get out of line now and then, as one the reasons you stated, it's usually the player with the most KNOWLEDGE in 3 cushion who recovers more quickly. Here's another point to consider, what you may perceive to be a difficult position, may not be for a TOP notch 3 cushion man.

Most of the TOP players in the World do NOT make the difficult positions better than any other TOP player. But, what some of them do, (and this is how the game should be played), is take FULL advantage of the shots that afford the player to PLAY POSITION, as Caudron did in this match.

Could you EVER imagine a game where 1 player runs 22 and later a 10 and lose, maybe, if the game had enough innings (per normal) for the other player to catch up. Caudron did it in ONLY 13 innings, can ANYONE here even fathom how DIFFICULT that is, mind blowing!!!!!

This is what my books and DVD's teach players, HOW TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SHOTS THAT AFFORD PLAYING POSITION. The basis for being able to control the balls is having the sound, BASIC, PROPER Fundamentals to have a RELIABLE, REPEATABLE, CONSISTANT stroke!

I could go on and on about the subject of billiards. To be honest, I used the, "Question to Dr. Bill" to, Segway into the video to show the members that, Willie Hoppe's statement form around the 40's still stand true today, if not MORE so with advent of todays BETTER equipment.

Hoppe said, "Billiards is the ultimate test in what a man can do with a sphere."

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"

P.S. I have a feeling that some of the pool players are going to take this the wrong way, I hope not!

For the time I've been playing, I came to an assumption about the differences between POOL and 3 Cushion Billiards, mind you, this IMHO!

Pool is 75% EXECUTION and 25% KNOWLEDGE, Billiards is 75% KNOWLEDGE and 25% EXECUTION.
 
Last edited:

mr3cushion

Verified Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,617
From
Cocoa Beach, FL
*** Where Percentages come into play in 3 Cushion ***

*** Where Percentages come into play in 3 Cushion ***

This is where percentages come into play, playing position in 3 Cushion.
As you'll note in this excerpt from my book, "The Concise Book of Position Play"


The High Percentage Table


The High Percentage Table is divided into four levels of desirability for the 3rd ball, (scoring ball) to be located. Zone 1, (corners) being the most advantageous because of the larger margin of error for scoring. The next most favorable area to have the 3rd ball and 1st object ball is zone 2 (lanes) along the long cushions, where the player has more options. Especially, when the 1st object ball lays in these lanes to play natural shots (3, 4, or 5 cushions to a Big Ball in zone 1), which will be explained in the following chapter. These lanes afford the player to make series of points far easier than zone 3. The simple fact is that the player approaches a smaller scoring target in the middle of the table as opposed to the larger area in the corners and along the long cushions. The one benefit to have the 3rd ball lay in the zone 3 is the player has the option to play the shot in a variety of ways, depending on the location of the cue ball and the 1st object ball. And, finally the least favorable area to have the 3rd ball come to rest is zone 4. The reason being is the area has limited to access when the cue ball lies along the long cushion to play a natural shot to outside of the 1st object ball, long, short, long. The only advantage of having the 3rd ball located in these zones is to play twice-across-table shots. This is when zone 4 becomes a large target.


View attachment 8403

Bill Smith "Mr3Cushion"
 
Last edited:
Top