This is correct, but the problem is that the win doesn't matter. We're not playing for the win, we are playing to get as many frames as humanly possible. "winning" gets you nothing - just the frames. And since any 9 ball frame that's part of the overall match result represents a higher average fluke factor than any of the 8 ball games, the less there are of them the better.

Point taken jan, but at the end of the day, this formate has been in place since the beginning of the new era of clans, and there has never been any issue or complaint with them til now, so why change it? It seems perfectly reasonable to me to keep it as it is, and the total possible score of 10 frames is ideal in my opinion.

For the moment I will watch other people's opinions on this........as with anything related to this, I am open to change if it makes the League better

Just a bit of healthy debate Niall. Just because something has worked for a time now doesn't mean it can't work even better. I'm not making a big deal of this, I find the current system quite ok, I'm just supporting the views of others that it could possibly be even better by reducing the 9 ball significance a bit.

10 points total per game is an advantage, but not a significant one really since it's not used for anything other than adding up tables.

i think those against changing it are with respect missing the point.

playing to 4 in 9 ball doesnt eliminate fluke factor it simply increases its possibility.

at the end of the day we all have formats we prefer.

i like them all but feel 9 ball is more a chance game than a skill or potting ability but do not want to punish those who prefer 9 ball, however, there should be no advantage for any format and the way to ensure this is to play to 3 in all versions.

just because its always been that way does not make it right by the way.

whatever the argument for or against playing to 4 in 1 format gives that format an unfair influence on overall game.

matches where one player wins 2 formats to one but loses overall or draws simply because one format has an extra game cannot be fair or correct

it would be interesting to look at results this league and others and see how many were ultimately decided by a big win in the 9 ball

I like the idea of all game types being first to 3 but im not keen on the idea of adding straight, as already said, games can take too long.

Sorry just seen this. Every frame counts to an extent but since how many frames you concede is fairly irrelevant I'd rather have a longer race in 9 ball to ensure that I can get max points. Thought I'd made this clear earlier

It's also interesting how you want to reduce the number of 9 ball games because of this "fluke factor" Jan. If I remember correctly on a previous thread you insulted by intelligence when you said that I didn't understand the 9 ball ranking system after I said there was no value in playing a lower ranked person because of this very same "fluke factor". You seemed to suggest then that it didn't exist and the system was the same as for 8 ball US. Just pointing out an inconsistent line of thought here Jan.

Believe me, race to 3 9 ball in the clan world cup is a bit hit and miss, whereas race to 4 I'm more likely to pick up full points for the clan.

How many frames you concede is every bit as important as how many frames you gain. Nothing irrelevant about it at all.

Not entirely sure what you're trying to claim that I said and didn't, but here's the deal anyway:

9 ball is a flukier game. Who wins any given frame is a little bit less down to skill than it is for the other game types.

What that means for the clan matches is that the entire points from the 9 ball part of the game has a higher randomness to it than the other contributions.

What it means for ranked games is a different ball game. If we assumed the higher fluke frequency to be the same for high ranked players as for lowbies, what I said would hold true - who you play wouldn't matter and it would all balance out. This is however not the case. Lowbies, in average, are more prone to fluke a win than higher ranked players who play a more controlled game. Which in turn supports your view of not playing low ranked players in that particular game type. If I ever said otherwise, I was mistaken and naive.

I think it should remain 1st to 4 in 9 ball as there is that random factor the hit and hopers that can fluke wins. To eliminate this factor and allow the best 9 ball players to win the match the format should remain 1st to 4.

On a seperate note regarding peoples comments regarding 9 ball and that to win a frame it is not as skillful as other formats.
This is not the case as to become a truely skillful player @ 9 ball you have to be able to control the cue ball to a far higher degree than other formats as you only have 1 ball each time to get position on. On other formats if you do not get your position correct on many occasions you have other balls which are available to pot and were not your intended target.
People regard 9 ball as easier due to people hit and hoping and on many occasions not playing positional shots to run balls, but choosing to smash the 9 and to go for a combo.

No one is saying 9 ball is easier. Far from it.

Just because newbies in hit-and-hope mode have a tiny bit higher chance of actually beating a pro, doesn't mean the game as such is easier.

Personally I don't agree the 9 ball positioning game is any harder than the other formats either though - yes you have a single target ball to get to, but you also have a lot less other balls obstructing it.

This is going completely off topic though, lets keep focus on game format.

just like to point something out if you flip a coin there is a 50% chance of it being heads or tails
if you flip a coin 2 times, tails wins twice one being a "fluke"
if you flip the coin 100 times, the range changes to between 45-55 wins by tails and thus more flips even out the odds and make things "the way they should be"
in the same way, a good player plays four times and loses in 2 "flukes" to the lower rated player 3-1
however, as you add more matches it evens out
now in seven matches in a comeback brought by his/her skill the higher rated player wins 4-3
do you see what i am saying? rather than suggesting that it should be lowered, anyone who wants to have a better chance winning against a weaker player should ask for it to be raised

i think it should stay the same.

the scores generally add up to 10, to the maximum of 14...its cleaner, more simple; and if flukes are there to be had, well take them! its no different to a tournament.

i dont like the idea of straight - had that in my league and thats what most people struggled to play, so it was scrapped after a season and a half.

3-4
2-3
3-2
total 17 17 is max

Familyguy, we all understand basic statistics I'm sure. The more samples you have, the more stable and predictable the total result is.

This would been relevant if we got points for the overall win and not by each frame. If only the win mattered, the more frames played, the better. But since each and every frame counts equally toward the final score, you gain no such stability by adding more frames.

In fact, the best thing you could do to reduce the fluke factor as much as possible, would be to get rid of the concept of counting frames directly (both on the winning and losing side), and instead reward points for the win only (in each game type of course). In THIS case, you'd want to play as many frames as practically possible, for an as stable as possible result.

a win is a win in my book no matter how many points you give up
of course fluking would be eliminated if shots could be called

Edited at 00:43 Thu 7/05/09 (BST)

Well that's quite simply incorrect and not really a matter of opinion at all.

A result of 3-4 (a loss) in 9 ball is worth as many points as any win in any other game type, so of course the frames you concede matter.

true