Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Opinion : Game 1 Importance
Game 1; many may argue that is the center piece of irrelevance with regards to many matches. Others, call it the pinnacle of the match in which momentum is either gained or lost. Amidst all of the dust, smoke and barriers, the truth that many fail to uncover is that Game 1, barring game 7, is the most important. I say that with absolute confidence. As a captain, home or away, nothing makes me happier at the beginning of a match then getting that first win out of the way. It takes the pressure off of the next couple of players, as they won't have to worry about putting the team into a hole, which allows them to play their game. Besides this, it also provides the obvious: a surge of momentum. How does winning game 1 effect a captains strategy? How does losing game 1 effect a captains strategy? And possibly the most important: What kind of players should play game 1? All of these questions will be discussed in the first of (hopefully), a series of discussion posts, which will be put up every couple of weeks. I can hear all of those "good players" out there snickering, already.
Note: Many factors contribute to matches such as stength of opponent, home/visitor, who has break, etc.; for the purpose of this article, I will be looking at all of the following in basic context, ignoring most/all of these variables.
Alright, your team has just lost game 1, as a captain, where do you go from here? Basic math tells me that we now need to win 4/6 of the remaining games, or 67%. Not gunna lie - that kinda sucks. So what kind of player should I play now? Someone that shoots like Cubby? Fuck no. He's playing game 8. The most important thing to note here is that no one wants to fall into an 0-2 hole and be forced into winning 4/5 (80%) games down the stretch no matter who they have on their roster. Depending on your depth, you're more-than-likely going to have to move someone you wanted to play in game 4 or 5 up into this slot. Game 2 has now become an almost must-win situation, and all of this because of the loss in game 1. Lose game 2 as well (*cough* like those hacks over in TPL *cough*), and you're going to need one hell of a comeback to pull out this match. Personally, game 2 is where I like to stick my weaker players (no offense if any of you reading this play #2 for TPL at any point for the duration of the season), after a game 1 victory. Since I've now had to move a player up into the #2 spot, my weaker player is now going to have to play at a more crucial stage in the match.
Okay, now you've won game 1; what next? Winning game 1 is always the plan, so a captain shouldn't need to adjust their initial strategy. Basic math says you now only have to win 3/6 games (50%) to win the match. You gain an entire 17% just by winning the first game in comparison to losing it! As I mentioned previous, I now have the option of playing my weakest player without risking falling behind in the match. Everyone else stays exactly where I was hoping to play them later on, and who knows, maybe player #2 can give us a commanding 2-0 lead. That's just my thinking though, some captains prefer taking the torch and running with it after they get that first win, hoping to knock their opponent out early. As you can see, it is much easier to captain after getting that game 1 win under your belt, in comparsion to losing and having to switch gears.
Finally, what kind of players are suited for playing in the #1 spot? Personally, my ideal #1 player would be someone who is great at adjusting to whatever style of play is required from him/her. In game 1, you don't know who has break, so playing a pure runner with a weak snooker game is out of the question - unless, of course, that's the only type of player you have in your arsenal lol. I'd also suggest playing someone who is confident w/ their game. When a person believes that they're going to beat whoever is thrown at them, it goes a long way in determining how well they play. Of course, many of these people don't take too kindly to losing. If you have a player like this on your squad, and they're not already your game 7 player, perhaps you should step back and think about where this player is going to be most useful in your lineup.
Now, before you "godly players" snicker about how you're "too good" to play that early, take a step back and think about how much winning that first game can do for your team. Why not give your team some momentum? Why not give them better odds at winning the match? Why not give your captain a chance to stick to their gameplan? If you ask yourself all of these questions and still find a selfish response, perhaps you're one of those players a team would be better off doing without. Until next time, MLP!
Take advantage of the comment feature at the bottom. Seeing as how this is an opinion post, I'd love to hear what everyone elses views are on this topic!
Note: Many factors contribute to matches such as stength of opponent, home/visitor, who has break, etc.; for the purpose of this article, I will be looking at all of the following in basic context, ignoring most/all of these variables.
Alright, your team has just lost game 1, as a captain, where do you go from here? Basic math tells me that we now need to win 4/6 of the remaining games, or 67%. Not gunna lie - that kinda sucks. So what kind of player should I play now? Someone that shoots like Cubby? Fuck no. He's playing game 8. The most important thing to note here is that no one wants to fall into an 0-2 hole and be forced into winning 4/5 (80%) games down the stretch no matter who they have on their roster. Depending on your depth, you're more-than-likely going to have to move someone you wanted to play in game 4 or 5 up into this slot. Game 2 has now become an almost must-win situation, and all of this because of the loss in game 1. Lose game 2 as well (*cough* like those hacks over in TPL *cough*), and you're going to need one hell of a comeback to pull out this match. Personally, game 2 is where I like to stick my weaker players (no offense if any of you reading this play #2 for TPL at any point for the duration of the season), after a game 1 victory. Since I've now had to move a player up into the #2 spot, my weaker player is now going to have to play at a more crucial stage in the match.
Okay, now you've won game 1; what next? Winning game 1 is always the plan, so a captain shouldn't need to adjust their initial strategy. Basic math says you now only have to win 3/6 games (50%) to win the match. You gain an entire 17% just by winning the first game in comparison to losing it! As I mentioned previous, I now have the option of playing my weakest player without risking falling behind in the match. Everyone else stays exactly where I was hoping to play them later on, and who knows, maybe player #2 can give us a commanding 2-0 lead. That's just my thinking though, some captains prefer taking the torch and running with it after they get that first win, hoping to knock their opponent out early. As you can see, it is much easier to captain after getting that game 1 win under your belt, in comparsion to losing and having to switch gears.
Finally, what kind of players are suited for playing in the #1 spot? Personally, my ideal #1 player would be someone who is great at adjusting to whatever style of play is required from him/her. In game 1, you don't know who has break, so playing a pure runner with a weak snooker game is out of the question - unless, of course, that's the only type of player you have in your arsenal lol. I'd also suggest playing someone who is confident w/ their game. When a person believes that they're going to beat whoever is thrown at them, it goes a long way in determining how well they play. Of course, many of these people don't take too kindly to losing. If you have a player like this on your squad, and they're not already your game 7 player, perhaps you should step back and think about where this player is going to be most useful in your lineup.
Now, before you "godly players" snicker about how you're "too good" to play that early, take a step back and think about how much winning that first game can do for your team. Why not give your team some momentum? Why not give them better odds at winning the match? Why not give your captain a chance to stick to their gameplan? If you ask yourself all of these questions and still find a selfish response, perhaps you're one of those players a team would be better off doing without. Until next time, MLP!
Take advantage of the comment feature at the bottom. Seeing as how this is an opinion post, I'd love to hear what everyone elses views are on this topic!
