wonder how much we're missing out on

sneakynito

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
440
May be a bit melancholy, but I was looking at the SVB v Orcollo 10-ball match stats posted on AZB and lamenting the fact that we don't see SVB in the one pocket world more. Spoiler, Shane BBQ'd DO 120-85. SVB's BNR % was 44%....

But the fact is, Shane is smart, and it makes no sense monetarily for him to put any focus on one pocket.
And even then, Shane can win back to back DCC 1p's, and 2 years ago while Tony was still at the top of his game Shane went hill-hill in a 10k match race to 10 playing even.
With Shane's ability and dedication, if he focused on one pocket, I don't think he'd have any problem dominating this discipline as he does the rest.
However, practicing your 10b break for 8 hours a day is what takes you around the world and makes you the highest earning pool player.

But how many others are we missing out on?
The best ball strikers in the world for the most part never play the game.
SVB, Filler, Ko brothers, Chang, Cheng, Shaw, Wu.
We do have consistent 1p players that play all games well (Alex, Deuel, DO) but they would think very seriously before matching up against any of the aforementioned in a 10ball match.
Even our top young players don't show up for a lot of the big 1p events (Sky, Bergman, Thorpe). Can't blame them of course. Much more in their interest to score those points and get their way into the Mosconi Cup.

It is a testament to the game though, that when these monsters dip their toes in one pocket they quickly realize there's a bit more to it.
I watched Chang get handled pretty easily here in Houston by a local short stop, getting weight too, i think.

But still, I wish there was greater incentive to draw more of the top talent to the game. Really makes me appreciate all the work people do to grow one pocket. The big 1p pro events, the streamers, this site, Roy for putting on the exciting matches.
 

crabbcatjohn

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
2,673
Sky and Shane have beat every top player in tournaments and both won a few. The fact is there is just too much money via sponsorship, appearance fees etc for them not pursue rotation over 1 pocket. I don't see any one pocket tournament promoters flying them all over the world to play
 

jtompilot

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
3,823
May be a bit melancholy, but I was looking at the SVB v Orcollo 10-ball match stats posted on AZB and lamenting the fact that we don't see SVB in the one pocket world more. Spoiler, Shane BBQ'd DO 120-85. SVB's BNR % was 44%....

But the fact is, Shane is smart, and it makes no sense monetarily for him to put any focus on one pocket.
And even then, Shane can win back to back DCC 1p's, and 2 years ago while Tony was still at the top of his game Shane went hill-hill in a 10k match race to 10 playing even.
With Shane's ability and dedication, if he focused on one pocket, I don't think he'd have any problem dominating this discipline as he does the rest.
However, practicing your 10b break for 8 hours a day is what takes you around the world and makes you the highest earning pool player.

But how many others are we missing out on?
The best ball strikers in the world for the most part never play the game.
SVB, Filler, Ko brothers, Chang, Cheng, Shaw, Wu.
We do have consistent 1p players that play all games well (Alex, Deuel, DO) but they would think very seriously before matching up against any of the aforementioned in a 10ball match.
Even our top young players don't show up for a lot of the big 1p events (Sky, Bergman, Thorpe). Can't blame them of course. Much more in their interest to score those points and get their way into the Mosconi Cup.

It is a testament to the game though, that when these monsters dip their toes in one pocket they quickly realize there's a bit more to it.
I watched Chang get handled pretty easily here in Houston by a local short stop, getting weight too, i think.

But still, I wish there was greater incentive to draw more of the top talent to the game. Really makes me appreciate all the work people do to grow one pocket. The big 1p pro events, the streamers, this site, Roy for putting on the exciting matches.
SVB has been playing in the U.S. open 1P. I think Shane would come to New Orleans for Buffalo’s big 1P tournament if it was non-smoking. I think Shane needs to go at Tony again in a longer race, although it may end up being the same result.
 

sneakynito

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
440
Sky and Shane have beat every top player in tournaments and both won a few. The fact is there is just too much money via sponsorship, appearance fees etc for them not pursue rotation over 1 pocket. I don't see any one pocket tournament promoters flying them all over the world to play
Yeah think we're saying the same thing.
I don't know if it was true or not but I thought i remembered hearing Buffalo covered Efren coming into the Buffalo's tourney. Not exactly the same as it's more a celebrity appearance than promoting top talent but was still awesome and great to see stuff like that to draw attention.
 

sneakynito

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
440
SVB has been playing in the U.S. open 1P. I think Shane would come to New Orleans for Buffalo’s big 1P tournament if it was non-smoking. I think Shane needs to go at Tony again in a longer race, although it may end up being the same result.
Bummer something so trivial can keep folks away.
I think longer race is definitely the way to go against Tony.
 

beatle

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,138
one pocket is a gambling game and not a spectator sport so the non gambling side that want to make their money on tournaments and sponsorships play what people want to watch. that may change but for now its 9 and 10 ball.

sooner or later they all will play it as part of their income. same as straight pool of years ago. when 9 ball became the game of gambling.

8 ball and one pocket are the two games left where two people can play and it isnt evident which onehas no chance of winning in the long run if moderately close.. in rotation or straight pool you can watch your opponent for a couple racks or even one rack and realize whether you have a chance or not.

and one pocket is a game where except against the best players the bad players get to shoot many times every game. other games not so much. so which game do you think a bad player wants to bet his money at.
 

BrookelandBilly

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
169
one pocket is a gambling game and not a spectator sport so the non gambling side that want to make their money on tournaments and sponsorships play what people want to watch. that may change but for now its 9 and 10 ball.

sooner or later they all will play it as part of their income. same as straight pool of years ago. when 9 ball became the game of gambling.

8 ball and one pocket are the two games left where two people can play and it isnt evident which onehas no chance of winning in the long run if moderately close.. in rotation or straight pool you can watch your opponent for a couple racks or even one rack and realize whether you have a chance or not.

and one pocket is a game where except against the best players the bad players get to shoot many times every game. other games not so much. so which game do you think a bad player wants to bet his money at.
Good point. I’ve become bored with rotation games even 8 ball. One pocket is as much imagination and strategy as it is shot making.
 

El Chapo

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
1,562
The reason there is no money in it is because people can't watch it. I can hardly watch it when the "wrong" players are playing, and i love one pocket.

You need to speed up the game to make it more palatable to average viewers, and every time common sense suggestions get brought up on how to do it, they are shunned.

You can make huge changes to one pocket's pace without affecting the integrity of the game at all. In fact, I would argue some of the stuff i proposed the game would have more "integrity" (whatever that means).

Take scratching in a pocket for example, I think it is penalized about right in a game of 9 ball between two great players... ie the player who scratches, loses the goddamn game. Quick too.

In one pcoket when someone scratches you could just let incoming player choose which "string" he is going to shoot behind, 3 being available (head, middle, foot). This would speed up amateur events drastically! It would speed up pro events, punish scratching more which i believe is highly justified.

That is just one change. A half a dozen other good ones and one pocket would be viewable by your average player, and players like Ruslan the russian and svb would be playing one pocket and destroying people and it would be a ton of fun to watch.

The answer to the original question is we are missing out on everything.
 

darmoose

Verified Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,441
The reason there is no money in it is because people can't watch it. I can hardly watch it when the "wrong" players are playing, and i love one pocket.

You need to speed up the game to make it more palatable to average viewers, and every time common sense suggestions get brought up on how to do it, they are shunned.

You can make huge changes to one pocket's pace without affecting the integrity of the game at all. In fact, I would argue some of the stuff i proposed the game would have more "integrity" (whatever that means).

Take scratching in a pocket for example, I think it is penalized about right in a game of 9 ball between two great players... ie the player who scratches, loses the goddamn game. Quick too.

In one pcoket when someone scratches you could just let incoming player choose which "string" he is going to shoot behind, 3 being available (head, middle, foot). This would speed up amateur events drastically! It would speed up pro events, punish scratching more which i believe is highly justified.

That is just one change. A half a dozen other good ones and one pocket would be viewable by your average player, and players like Ruslan the russian and svb would be playing one pocket and destroying people and it would be a ton of fun to watch.

The answer to the original question is we are missing out on everything.

I agree wholeheartedly that OP needs to be sped up in order to make it viewable by the masses (so to speak). I am just as totally against ever putting BIH into the game. That would turn OP into a game much like 9 ball and would completely destroy the strategic and most fascinating aspects of our game.

Watching converted 9 ball shootists run balls after receiving BIH is not what knowledgeable viewers want to see, and certainly fails to differentiate OP from the other more mundane pool games.

The answer to slow play in all pool games for tournaments and PPV events is the introduction of a shot clock. It has been said innumerable times that OP is like chess, and chess without a clock can be unbearable for the viewer, as can be OP.

I do agree that scratches could be made more important, but BIH is too much. You might find with BIH as the consequence for scratching that players would become even more careful, might never turn the CB loose and we would lose the innumerable imaginative shots that make OP so interesting and rewarding both to play and to watch. I would favor adding value to scratching by implementing the "only go forward and never backward" rule that adds a ball to your opponents score on every foul.

The other rule change that I think would speed up the game of OP is the "return the shot option" rule after any foul, as this would reduce the intentional foul being used to lengthen and change the game and to escape well played traps.

Whatever is done, if anything is ever done to help speed up OP, we must protect the aspects of the game that don't involve running balls. Failure to do this will ruin OP and make it just another pool game with no distinctive skill requirements inherent to OP alone.

Maybe someday someone with some ability to start the ball rolling will implement at least a trial test to evaluate how best to speed up OP. It could well be just a shot clock.

:)
 

BRLongArm

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
681
There is no money in 9 ball or 10 ball except a few select tournaments. They play fast. Nobody watches it because pool is not a good spectator sport.

One Pocket is a niche sport for experts. Most won't watch it because they have the attention span of about 10 minutes max. It's not a game for millennials. In that vein, it will never gain widespread appeal. But that's ok. With the internet, those who want to watch can watch.

We are going to try a chess clock type of variant next year. We will be able to see if it is viable. Maybe instead of giving a ball handicap, you take time from a player. We'll brainstorm it to see if we can speed up play.
 

sneakynito

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
440
There is no money in 9 ball or 10 ball except a few select tournaments. They play fast. Nobody watches it because pool is not a good spectator sport.

One Pocket is a niche sport for experts. Most won't watch it because they have the attention span of about 10 minutes max. It's not a game for millennials. In that vein, it will never gain widespread appeal. But that's ok. With the internet, those who want to watch can watch.

We are going to try a chess clock type of variant next year. We will be able to see if it is viable. Maybe instead of giving a ball handicap, you take time from a player. We'll brainstorm it to see if we can speed up play.
Ouch.
I'm a millennial.

Guess i'll start working on my pattern racking.
 

Island Drive

Verified Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
3,698
There is no money in 9 ball or 10 ball except a few select tournaments. They play fast. Nobody watches it because pool is not a good spectator sport.

One Pocket is a niche sport for experts. Most won't watch it because they have the attention span of about 10 minutes max. It's not a game for millennials. In that vein, it will never gain widespread appeal. But that's ok. With the internet, those who want to watch can watch.

We are going to try a chess clock type of variant next year. We will be able to see if it is viable. Maybe instead of giving a ball handicap, you take time from a player. We'll brainstorm it to see if we can speed up play.
Bingo!...............
 

beatle

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,138
no shot clock needed. just like the politicians. punish everyone and hope it sorts things out.

all the faster or normal speed players now have to deal with a clock. instead of just punishing those that ruin things.
 

darmoose

Verified Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,441
no shot clock needed. just like the politicians. punish everyone and hope it sorts things out.

all the faster or normal speed players now have to deal with a clock. instead of just punishing those that ruin things.

just ban Dennis and Alex and Justin, etc, got it, but wait, who decides?
 

cincy_kid

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Messages
4,497
There is no money in 9 ball or 10 ball except a few select tournaments. They play fast. Nobody watches it because pool is not a good spectator sport.

One Pocket is a niche sport for experts. Most won't watch it because they have the attention span of about 10 minutes max. It's not a game for millennials. In that vein, it will never gain widespread appeal. But that's ok. With the internet, those who want to watch can watch.

We are going to try a chess clock type of variant next year. We will be able to see if it is viable. Maybe instead of giving a ball handicap, you take time from a player. We'll brainstorm it to see if we can speed up play.
Nice!

I am looking forward to seeing how that pans out Joe!
 

Island Drive

Verified Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
3,698
With the final W/L score lopsided....and your dealing with Gamblers/Rounders (pinoys).

Does anyone think of Lemonade? It's hard for me Not too.

I've known many players when gambling, will change their game, when certain people $tart watching em. A little brainwashing going on here? For the next score?
 

sneakynito

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
440
With the final W/L score lopsided....and your dealing with Gamblers/Rounders (pinoys).

Does anyone think of Lemonade? It's hard for me Not too.

I've known many players when gambling, will change their game, when certain people $tart watching em. A little brainwashing going on here? For the next score?
You talking about the DO/SVB match?

If so, from the numbers, it looks like DO mostly lost cause of the break. Or at the very least broke and had a look at the next ball.
Which is really what i'd expect.

Here's the link to give credit to AtLarge
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=502253

Some real notable ones:
Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Van Boening -- 106 of 119 (89%)
Orcollo -- 58 of 86 (67%)

Break-and-run games -- on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Van Boening -- 52 of 106 (49%)
Orcollo -- 24 of 58 (41%)

DO actually missed less frequently, SVB just broke and ran so much.

Missed shots (est.):
Van Boening -- 54 misses in 181 games at the table (a rate of 1 for every 3.4 games at the table)
Orcollo -- 36 misses in 153 games at the table (a rate of 1 for every 4.3 games at the table)
 

Island Drive

Verified Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
3,698
You talking about the DO/SVB match?

If so, from the numbers, it looks like DO mostly lost cause of the break. Or at the very least broke and had a look at the next ball.
Which is really what i'd expect.

Here's the link to give credit to AtLarge
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=502253

Some real notable ones:
Successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Van Boening -- 106 of 119 (89%)
Orcollo -- 58 of 86 (67%)

Break-and-run games -- on successful breaks (made at least one ball and did not foul):
Van Boening -- 52 of 106 (49%)
Orcollo -- 24 of 58 (41%)

DO actually missed less frequently, SVB just broke and ran so much.

Missed shots (est.):
Van Boening -- 54 misses in 181 games at the table (a rate of 1 for every 3.4 games at the table)
Orcollo -- 36 misses in 153 games at the table (a rate of 1 for every 4.3 games at the table)
I know, but laying off....seen it too many times with rounders. I got in the middle of a side bet with RA matching up at Janscos. Losing a $100 in 1969 for a college student (ton of money)....STICKS
 

sneakynito

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
440
I know, but laying off....seen it too many times with rounders. I got in the middle of a side bet with RA matching up at Janscos. Losing a $100 in 1969 for a college student (ton of money)....STICKS
I guess you never know. Another testament to the sad state of pool.

But I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt and not bring anything like that up, especially when these guys are all we really got going for us in pool right now.

Roy's building a brand and is no stranger to these big money matches, and SVB seems like an altar boy as far as pool goes.

I've no personal reason to suspect things aren't on the up and up so I wont suggest otherwise.
 
Top