PDA

View Full Version : Soft break in Manila



Vapros
11-09-2007, 03:53 PM
At the World Pool Championships, most (or all) the players are breaking gently and making one or more balls on virtually every break, and a lot of people are not happy about it.

Here's a quote from Shane Van Boening: "It's too easy. It's a big advantage for everybody and everybody has a chance. I don't think it's very fair."

Come again, Shane!?

1hit1der
11-09-2007, 04:19 PM
In the story on the BD homepage, they say there are considerations for changing the rules to help prevent this. The three options listed are:

1. Minimum speed for break, enforced with a speed gun.
2. Moving the rack so the 9 ball is on the spot.
3. Breaking from the box.

I think the third option is the most sensible because it's the least complicated. I know the 9 ball on the spot has been used in at least one tournament in the past, but that may serve to confuse the casual spectator.

If they went with option one, I think the best thing to do would be to make it the opponents shot regardless of if a ball is pocketed if the minimum speed isn't met, or at least give the opponent the option.

Comments? Rants? Raves?

1Time
11-09-2007, 07:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vapros:</font><hr> At the World Pool Championships, most (or all) the players are breaking gently and making one or more balls on virtually every break, and a lot of people are not happy about it.<hr /></blockquote>

So long as the rules are not in violation, nobody should give a rip what people think about break speed. Whatever wins.

Rich R.
11-09-2007, 08:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vapros:</font><hr> At the World Pool Championships, most (or all) the players are breaking gently and making one or more balls on virtually every break, and a lot of people are not happy about it.<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 1Time:</font><hr> So long as the rules are not in violation, nobody should give a rip what people think about break speed. Whatever wins. <hr /></blockquote>

I have to agree. If the rules are not violated, why should players be told how to break.
I know the hard break is more exciting for the crowd.
I also know that many players spend countless hours practicing their hard break, in order to make balls consistently.
It is also a fact that some players have practiced and are able to read racks and give themselves an advantage on the break.
What I don't understand is why there is such an uproar when some players are successful using a soft break. Obviously, they have put in a certain amount of practice time, developing a good soft break. Why should they be denied the benefit of their practice? If players make balls with every break, using a hard break, no one complains. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

I know I'm in the minority with this issue, but I don't see the problem with players using the soft break.

BTW, I don't use a soft break myself. I have enough trouble making balls using my wimpy hard break. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Warbler
11-09-2007, 10:40 PM
I've of soft breaking in straight pool, but in 9 ball? How could one do it? How does one sink a ball and break the remaining balls apart via a soft break? I don't get it. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

shojingod
11-10-2007, 01:20 AM
I got a better solution. Let's go back to straight pool. The real game of masters. 9 ball is getting to be too easy and quick for any high caliber player.

av84fun
11-10-2007, 03:08 AM
Another option is at least 3 balls must pass the centerline. The way they are breaking, 0-1 are getting that far up table.

DSAPOLIS
11-10-2007, 09:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vapros:</font><hr>

Here's a quote from Shane Van Boening: "It's too easy. It's a big advantage for everybody and everybody has a chance. I don't think it's very fair." <hr /></blockquote>

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!

Everybody SHOULD have a chance. rotflmao!!!

I'm so tired of hearng about this.

If you don't like the way the other guy breaks, keep his a$$ in the chair.

Soft break, hard break, who cares? When the other guy misses its your turn - don't worry about what he does at the table, just do YOUR job and keep quiet and quit the whining - it's bad for the image of The United States.

BigRigTom
11-10-2007, 09:51 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DSAPOLIS:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vapros:</font><hr>

Here's a quote from Shane Van Boening: "It's too easy. It's a big advantage for everybody and everybody has a chance. I don't think it's very fair." <hr /></blockquote>

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!

Everybody SHOULD have a chance. rotflmao!!!

I'm so tired of hearng about this.

If you don't like the way the other guy breaks, keep his a$$ in the chair.

Soft break, hard break, who cares? When the other guy misses its your turn - don't worry about what he does at the table, just do YOUR job and keep quiet and quit the whining - it's bad for the image of The United States.
<hr /></blockquote>


TAP TAP TAP!
I agree with BlackJack!
The whimpy whinnnnnner are slowly taking over the world and we are just sitting back watching.
Enough it enough just shut up and play!
When the whinnnnner misses he still has to sit back down.

DSAPOLIS
11-10-2007, 10:57 AM
Tom

I am currently trying to get funding to start a national training center for pocket billiards, separate from the BCA - separate from this whining attitude - and hopefully over the next few years we can start producing champions from the US of A just like they are producing champions in England, Germany, Taiwan, and Japan. We need to start taking the game seriously - we need to start producing champions instead of backroom gamblers. I am willing to commit myself to doing this FROM SCRATCH - but we need support. This is what needs to be changed in North America, and we need more people step onboard and support this effort.

Fran Crimi
11-10-2007, 12:22 PM
Shane is an amazing kid, Tom. He's practically deaf, and just look at the way he performs! Try shooting pool without hearing the click of the balls. I have nothing but ultimate respect for him. I think what he means by his comment is that hard breaking with success requires quite a bit of training, and soft breaking negates that.

I think he poses a legitimate question that needs to be looked at. I'm not saying that the end result of all this should go one way or another, but for anyone to accuse him of being a whining cry-baby type is WAY out of line.

Fran

DSAPOLIS
11-10-2007, 01:25 PM
Fran,

The break speed should not matter. It should have been addressed PRIOR to the tournament, it was not - so for this tournament the soft break is a NON-ISSUE. Perhaps the WPA Board can look at that for next year - just give me a call prior to the meeting so I can at least make an argument on the side for the soft break.

As a competitor, you know as well as I do, that you will encounter changes to the game as it evolves, and you will see opponents taking advantage of rules, equipment, and so on. That's pool. In the end, you just have to deal with it.

Also, breaking soft and maintaining control is just as skillful as blasting the balls to smithereens.

I play with ear plugs 99% of the time, so I don't hear the balls clicking, music, railbirds, etc. I have no problem with it, neither does Shane.

Jager85
11-10-2007, 02:22 PM
There is nothing wrong with breaking soft. If they can make a ball and get good spread with control, then they have a good break. Whether they break soft or hard if they make a ball and have a good spread, many of the players at that level will run the table regardless. That is why it is the world championships.

Should we put restrictions on drawing the cue ball back 2 inches on a straight in shot and say you must cheat the pocket with alot of follow to get the cue ball back where you want because draw is too easy? No! Play your game and don't try and make rules to make the game hard on a group of people.

Fran Crimi
11-10-2007, 04:22 PM
David, I'll be happy to present your argument to the WPA Board. You should put it in the form of a formal letter and send it to me at bcainstructors@aol.com.

I guarantee you that I will make sure your opinion will be heard. I think you should reconsider the name-calling thing with Shane, though. That's beneath you.

Fran

DSAPOLIS
11-10-2007, 10:11 PM
I never called Shane a "name". I believe you have mistaken my post with another post where a forum member called someone a whiner. I didn't and wouldn't call Shane that, although his comments rub me the wrong way. I won't say anything here that I would not say standing in front of Shane, and he knows that, and we're cool with each other.

As far as taking my argument to the WPA, I'm pretty sure you know as well as I do that they will make a decision in the best interest of the WPC. My argument is that the soft break is a NON ISSUE this year as there is nothing in the current rules that challenge its legality. Therefore, I will continue to encourage my players to use it in the WPC and while competing in international play.

av84fun
11-10-2007, 10:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DSAPOLIS:</font><hr> Tom

we need to start producing champions instead of backroom gamblers. <hr /></blockquote>

I admire what you are trying to do and wish you well, but the road players that you refer to as back room gamblers are one of the things that is keeping this sport alive.

There are quite a few road players who would be highly competitive in pro tournaments but don't want anything to do with them A) because the men's pro matches are totally disjointed and lack any kind of organization and B)all but a handful of touring pros aren't making more than minimum wage afer expenses.

MANY times I've sweated "back room gambling" matches that had way more spectators then numerous pro matches I've attended.

There is very little "drama" in an event that allows a soft break so that no ball goes past the centerline leaving no shot on the table longer than 3-4 ft.

And DRAMA is what sells tickets and creates advertiser sponsorship. THAT is why slam dunks are allowed in basketball...and fighting in hockey if the truth were told.

Watching Superman and others put on one man exhibitions stringing 3 foot chip shots together is just boring except to a few purists...like most of us here, who know how hard it is do what they are doing...but it's not EXCITING.

When a player makes a 7 foot jump shot or a razor thin full table cut or a 3 rail kick...the crowd goes wild! but they don't go wild watching some guy drain the wing ball every time and then bunt 8 more into the hole.

Another recent thread here asks whey pool is dying. I don't think it is dying in the U.S. but pro matches are certainly declinging in popularity and soft breaking is not going to do anything the remedy that problem.

Those who say "let 'em break any way they want" are missing the point. 9 Ball is 9 Ball and it is not straight pool or one pocket or any other game. If anything goes on the break...why not a safety break like in 14.1?

9 Ball is SUPPOSED to be a rock 'em sock 'em fast paced game featuring tough 8-9 foot shots, jumps, kicks and full table "straight back for the cash" bank shots...things that make people CHEER!

I didn't hear much cheering when Gomez made 11 racks worth of 2 foot shots.

Don't get me wrong YOU know how great he played and I know now great he played but it was not EXCITING for most people to watch.

SO IMHO the nonsensical winner breaks format and soft breaking certainly will do nothing to help the popularity of the sport to grow.

(NOTE: Anyone who favors winner breaks has to favor the winner of a tennis game getting to keep serving...or the team scoring a basket getting to keep the ball or the team scoring a touchdown getting to receive a kick off from the other team etc. because it is the same thing!)

Just my two cents and of course, and only my own personal opinion.
Regards,
Jim

Vapros
11-10-2007, 11:23 PM
I began this thread to call attention to the strange and contradictory complaint from Van Boening, but it seems that the discussion of the soft break has created much more interest.

That being said, I will offer my own thoughts about it. I think it would be ridiculous to try to tell the players how hard to hit the rack. If you don't approve of what's happening and feel you have to change something, move the rack or make a rule about driving a number of balls back toward the head of the table, or something like that.

The table and the balls and the rack are your business. The guy's stroke is not.

av84fun
11-11-2007, 01:03 AM
"or make a rule about driving a number of balls back toward the head of the table, or something like that."

Right...but that IS telling the players how hard to hit the break shot....at least it would set a minimum standard higher than the current BCA rules (as of January, 2006) which require a ball to be pocketed OR 4 numbered balls being driven to a rail.

But you can get 4 to the rail with the super-soft breaks being used at the WPC...in fact, it's pretty hard to hit them so soft that 4 balls don't go.

I think that what some are saying is that especially with a tapped rack area that obviously means the wing ball is going in 90%+ of the time, a firmer break should be required...just as a "safe break" with less than 4 going to a rail is disallowed.

Finally, as you may have noticed in the Gomez/Feijen match (so-called match IMHO) not only did the wing go nearly every time but the 1 ball ended up sitting in front of the left side...maybe 80% of the time.

So, with the wing and 1 basically going down automatically, Gomez was playing 7 ball with no ball passed the centerline! That's just silliness...as the 11-0 score against a world champion player attests...and was a total bore.

Why don't we let tennis players

A. Serve as close to the net as they want and
B. Let them KEEP serving until they lose a set.

Then we could see some FANTASTIC 6-0/6-0/6-0 matches!!

(-:

Jim

av84fun
11-11-2007, 01:08 AM
"I play with ear plugs 99% of the time, so I don't hear the balls clicking, music, railbirds, etc. I have no problem with it, neither does Shane. "

Right David. Shane turns his hearing aid OFF during matches and says it helps him concentrate.

Actually, I LOVE hearing the click of the balls but can't imagine how that could affect play one way or the other.

Regards,
Jim

Warbler
11-11-2007, 01:21 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> If anything goes on the break...why not a safety break like in 14.1?
<hr /></blockquote>

there's a big difference between a 9-ball break and a Straight pool break: Straight pool is call shot on the break, and 9-ball isn't. Please forgive me if I'm mistaken, but a hard break became the thing to do in 9-ball not because "9 Ball is SUPPOSED to be a rock 'em sock 'em fast paced game", but because strategically it was the best way to break.

Perhaps the rules should be changed in 9-ball to force a hard break,if its too easy for someone to soft break and then run the table. But right now, as far as I know, soft breaks are perfectly legal in 9-ball. I just didn't know, until now, that there was a way to do it so it made sense strategically wise.

New2Pool
11-11-2007, 10:00 AM
It seems to me like the biggest physical advantage a man has over a woman in playing pool is the ability to break harder. Does the soft break equalize the game or are there other areas where being male offers a physical advantage?

1Time
11-11-2007, 10:03 AM
I'm addressing my reply to all and not to anyone in particular.

A soft break made sense back in the 80's. Keith McCready was using one.

Subject #1:
If the rules are followed, no problem. The champion is the champion. If you have a problem with this, that's your problem. Get over it. Get up to speed. That's the way competition is done, in any sport. A given set of rules are used, and there is a winner. Done.

Subject #2:
If enough want the rules changed for a future competition, the rules may get changed. That's the way it is in any sport or competition. Rules change.

Subject #3:
What's best for pool? Leave the 9-ball rules as-is, or change them?
First, the rules for 9-ball are not the same around the world, just like the rules at various levels of competition or venues for other sports are not the same.

Subject #4:
Would it be best for there to be only one set of 9-ball rules? Maybe, maybe not. May be interesting to discuss.

Subject #5:
How likely is it that one set of 9-ball rules could be agreed upon and used world-wide? Zero.

Subject #6:
If there should be only one set of 9-ball rules for a particular competition (not world-wide), what would it be? Good subject to discuss, and it deserves its own thread.

Fran Crimi
11-11-2007, 10:39 AM
Do you actually think he hears the same way you do with his hearing aid on? How much do you think he hears? I heard he has 90 percent hearing loss.

Please don't try to compare a person with the ability to hear well who decides to wear ear plugs once in awhile vs. someone who NEVER can hear remotely close to normal.

Fran

Fran Crimi
11-11-2007, 10:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DSAPOLIS:</font><hr> I never called Shane a "name". I believe you have mistaken my post with another post where a forum member called someone a whiner. I didn't and wouldn't call Shane that, although his comments rub me the wrong way. I won't say anything here that I would not say standing in front of Shane, and he knows that, and we're cool with each other.

As far as taking my argument to the WPA, I'm pretty sure you know as well as I do that they will make a decision in the best interest of the WPC. My argument is that the soft break is a NON ISSUE this year as there is nothing in the current rules that challenge its legality. Therefore, I will continue to encourage my players to use it in the WPC and while competing in international play. <hr /></blockquote>

Okay. Your choice. Don't say you didn't have an opportunity to be heard.

As for the name calling, you can split hairs, but I think I was pretty accurate. I think you're better than all that nonsense. That's all I was trying to say.

Fran

DSAPOLIS
11-11-2007, 11:05 AM
Fran,

If you're speaking of the "Wahhhhhhhhhhhh" comment - sorry... but I'm not going to feel bad for a guy that has won a US Open, The Action Challenge, The World 10 Ball Championship, etc etc etc because he feels that the soft break is "unfair". Like I said, I would say what I said directly to Shane, and he would probably smile about it.

The soft break was not a factor in the final match - but it was throughout the entire tournament. I am confident that Ian, yourself, and the entire board of directors will make the correct decision. It's really an either/or thing with most players depending on the equipment they are playing on. Forcing the hard break seems a bit unfair - but if that is teh rule, then so be it.

BigRigTom
11-11-2007, 12:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DSAPOLIS:</font><hr> Fran,

If you're speaking of the "Wahhhhhhhhhhhh" comment - sorry... but I'm not going to feel bad for a guy that has won a US Open, The Action Challenge, The World 10 Ball Championship, etc etc etc because he feels that the soft break is "unfair". Like I said, I would say what I said directly to Shane, and he would probably smile about it.

The soft break was not a factor in the final match - but it was throughout the entire tournament. I am confident that Ian, yourself, and the entire board of directors will make the correct decision. It's really an either/or thing with most players depending on the equipment they are playing on. Forcing the hard break seems a bit unfair - but if that is teh rule, then so be it. <hr /></blockquote>

That Whhhhhhhhhiner comment was probably mine. It was NOT directed at any one individual and especially NOT Shane.

I would just like to point out that you never hear the winner whhhhhhhinnnning about the rules. It is ALWAYS THE LOSER who whines. Maybe we should let the losers make the rules on all games like we like to let the loser start the next match by alternating the break.

In competition there will always be winners and losers and as long as both players play by the same rules then the rules are NOT at fault.
I agree with 1time that if you don't like the rules you should lobby to change them but the winners should have an equal voice in those changes.

Qtec
11-11-2007, 11:16 PM
Shaun wasn't whining, he was complaining.

Q

av84fun
11-12-2007, 01:16 AM
Warbler..."there's a big difference between a 9-ball break and a Straight pool break: Straight pool is call shot on the break, and 9-ball isn't."

That is a distinction without a difference because I doubt that anyone has ever called a ball on a straight pool break in any pro competition in the history of the sport.


Straight pool breaks are all safety breaks and there is no such thing as a safety break in 9 Ball.

The issue is whether the rules should be changed so that the game is not RUINED by limiting virtually all shots to half table shots or less...which is EXACTLY what happened at the WPC.

This debate is especially meritorious when the racking area is tricked up by tapping which resulted in the wing ball going in a HUGE percentage of the time.

Making a ball on the break nearly every time is a massive and unfair advantage to the player winning the lag who can...will and DID (at the WPC) run 6,7,8+ racks in a row...helped along by the utterly silly winner breaks rule.

And by comparison to most other pool games, 9 Ball IS a rock 'em, sock 'em game. In 14.1 for example, the vast majority of shots are struck at soft-medium speeds wherein the CB travels little more than a diamond or two for shape on the next ball...since most of the balls remain on the lower half of the table most of the time.

Don't misunderstand, I LOVE 14.1 but it is NOT 9 Ball...and is not supposed to be 9 Ball.

Regards,
Jim

av84fun
11-12-2007, 01:16 AM
Warbler..."there's a big difference between a 9-ball break and a Straight pool break: Straight pool is call shot on the break, and 9-ball isn't."

That is a distinction without a difference because I doubt that anyone has ever called a ball on a straight pool break in any pro competition in the history of the sport.


Straight pool breaks are all safety breaks and there is no such thing as a safety break in 9 Ball.

The issue is whether the rules should be changed so that the game is not RUINED by limiting virtually all shots to half table shots or less...which is EXACTLY what happened at the WPC.

This debate is especially meritorious when the racking area is tricked up by tapping which resulted in the wing ball going in a HUGE percentage of the time.

Making a ball on the break nearly every time is a massive and unfair advantage to the player winning the lag who can...will and DID (at the WPC) run 6,7,8+ racks in a row...helped along by the utterly silly winner breaks rule.

And by comparison to most other pool games, 9 Ball IS a rock 'em, sock 'em game. In 14.1 for example, the vast majority of shots are struck at soft-medium speeds wherein the CB travels little more than a diamond or two for shape on the next ball...since most of the balls remain on the lower half of the table most of the time.

Don't misunderstand, I LOVE 14.1 but it is NOT 9 Ball...and is not supposed to be 9 Ball.

Regards,
Jim

av84fun
11-12-2007, 01:16 AM
Warbler..."there's a big difference between a 9-ball break and a Straight pool break: Straight pool is call shot on the break, and 9-ball isn't."

That is a distinction without a difference because I doubt that anyone has ever called a ball on a straight pool break in any pro competition in the history of the sport.


Straight pool breaks are all safety breaks and there is no such thing as a safety break in 9 Ball.

The issue is whether the rules should be changed so that the game is not RUINED by limiting virtually all shots to half table shots or less...which is EXACTLY what happened at the WPC.

This debate is especially meritorious when the racking area is tricked up by tapping which resulted in the wing ball going in a HUGE percentage of the time.

Making a ball on the break nearly every time is a massive and unfair advantage to the player winning the lag who can...will and DID (at the WPC) run 6,7,8+ racks in a row...helped along by the utterly silly winner breaks rule.

And by comparison to most other pool games, 9 Ball IS a rock 'em, sock 'em game. In 14.1 for example, the vast majority of shots are struck at soft-medium speeds wherein the CB travels little more than a diamond or two for shape on the next ball...since most of the balls remain on the lower half of the table most of the time.

Don't misunderstand, I LOVE 14.1 but it is NOT 9 Ball...and is not supposed to be 9 Ball.

Regards,
Jim

Fran Crimi
11-12-2007, 09:52 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Shaun wasn't whining, he was complaining.

Q <hr /></blockquote>

Exactly. David is very vocal with his complaints but I certainly wouldn't call him a whiner. So, why accuse Shane of whining just because he expressed one complaint?

Fran

Snapshot9
11-12-2007, 10:46 AM
As long as there has been Pool, there have been winers and winners. Anyone that feels like they don't get their turn at the table to win always complains. I get guys that complain when I run a table or 2. Am I suppose to let up to be fair to them ... LOL

This is an old argument, jump cues, break cues, masse shots, phenolic tips, jump shots with a regular cue long ago, etc..

Most of the complaints on soft breaking was against Corey Deuel at first because he figured out a better break to use, and hence the 3 balls past the side pocket. I watched Bustemante soft break good, and 3 balls went past the side pocket, so I don't think that rule is a good one.

For the record, any way of breaking legally is okay with me.

But, if the Politically Correct Crowd has to be appeased, I think the Eurotour's new rule that 2 balls have to reach the kitchen (past the head string) on the break is the best solution.

And although I haven't played 14.1 for a long time, I never safety broke in it, I always banked the corner ball back uptable to the corner pocket.

av84fun
11-12-2007, 11:41 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Do you actually think he hears the same way you do with his hearing aid on? How much do you think he hears? I heard he has 90 percent hearing loss.

Please don't try to compare a person with the ability to hear well who decides to wear ear plugs once in awhile vs. someone who NEVER can hear remotely close to normal.

Fran
<hr /></blockquote>

Fran, I don't understand your position. It seems off the mark to me.

Your original view was that not being able to hear the click of the balls is a handicap and to compliment him for overcoming it.

I merely pointed out that Shane doesn't care about hearing the clicks because he takes his hearing aid out when playing matches.

"Please don't try to compare a person with the ability to hear well who decides to wear ear plugs once in awhile vs. someone who NEVER can hear remotely close to normal."

I made no such comparison...the poster who wears the ear plugs did.

Regards,
Jim

DSAPOLIS
11-12-2007, 11:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Shaun wasn't whining, he was complaining.

Q <hr /></blockquote>

Exactly. David is very vocal with his complaints but I certainly wouldn't call him a whiner. So, why accuse Shane of whining just because he expressed one complaint?

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

I challenge you to go to any forum and find where I have complained about equipment, player strategy, the break, the draw, etc. It has never happened.

I am vocal about many issues, but when it comes to competition - playing conditions - and your opponents - the professional thing to do is to take the good rolls with the bad rolls and keep moving forward quietly.

There were many people that predicted that SVB would have trouble with the format, the environment, and some of the players at the WPC. He's a young player and that is to be expected during his first trip abroad. I believe next year Shane will finish much higher, mainly because he will know what to expect.

bradb
11-12-2007, 12:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Snapshot9:</font><hr> As long as there has been Pool, there have been winers and winners. Anyone that feels like they don't get their turn at the table to win always complains. I get guys that complain when I run a table or 2. Am I suppose to let up to be fair to them ... LOL


Most of the complaints on soft breaking was against Corey Deuel at first because he figured out a better break to use, and hence the 3 balls past the side pocket. I watched Bustemante soft break good, and 3 balls went past the side pocket, so I don't think that rule is a good one.

For the record, any way of breaking legally is okay with me.


<hr /></blockquote>

Thought I would jump in and join the fray.

I agree with your position.

I think (let me know if I'm wrong) the soft break is mostly used when the Sardo rack is used to rack. The soft break depends on a near perfect rack. In the early rounds where the balls are hand racked, everybody is smacking the rack hard. I've watched Archer switch back and forth from hard to soft break and he seems to use that strategy.

Its true that in the soft break Sardo situation the wing ball or 1B is almost automatic, but then again its a level playing field, if one player can do it more effectively, than the other better improve his game.

Having said that, the break should be alternate (as it is mostly now) so both players have a turn.

I say leave the game alone except for that last exception. -brad

Rich R.
11-12-2007, 12:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> I merely pointed out that Shane doesn't care about hearing the clicks because he takes his hearing aid out when playing matches.<hr /></blockquote>
Just to be accurate here, at the U.S. Open, Shane did not take his hearing aid out. However, it did appear that he turned it off during his match.

Fran Crimi
11-12-2007, 02:11 PM
Brad, it's not necessarily the rack itself that causes the players to soft break. There seems to be a correlation between pounding balls into the cloth and soft-breaking.

I believe there was some ball-pounding going on at this event, as well as some other events where there was soft-breaking.

On the WPBA tour, the players are no longer allowed to pound the balls into the cloth, nor is the referee, at least as far as I can recall. The ref may be called over to lightly tap a ball if the rack doesn't freeze, but other than that there is no tapping of balls. We don't see the women soft-breaking on the WPBA tour these days. I'm sure that they would if it guaranteed them a ball on the break, but obviously it hasn't.

These are all areas that will be examined by the WPA. So before everyone goes jumping to conclusions about what should or shouldn't be done, I think it's important for there to be investigations and maybe even some testing first.

Fran

Derek
11-12-2007, 05:33 PM
I think the rack should randomly be adjusted "x" of degrees after it's been set at the head spot. So if "x" is zero degrees on a standard rack, let's break up the monotomy of the standard rack and rotate it 15 degrees. And then 10 degrees to the right next rack. And then 25 degrees to the left the rack after. Let's see what break works then if any.

I find the soft break kind of lame. As one poster stated, it takes out a degree of excitement. However, I'm sure as hell going to learn it better if it's working that well for everyone. I might get chased out of some of my leagues though.

av84fun
11-12-2007, 06:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> I merely pointed out that Shane doesn't care about hearing the clicks because he takes his hearing aid out when playing matches.<hr /></blockquote>
Just to be accurate here, at the U.S. Open, Shane did not take his hearing aid out. However, it did appear that he turned it off during his match. <hr /></blockquote>

Right you are. That's what I meant. Thanks for correcting me.

Regards,
Jim

bradb
11-12-2007, 06:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Brad, it's not necessarily the rack itself that causes the players to soft break. There seems to be a correlation between pounding balls into the cloth and soft-breaking.

I believe there was some ball-pounding going on at this event, as well as some other events where there was soft-breaking.

On the WPBA tour, the players are no longer allowed to pound the balls into the cloth, nor is the referee, at least as far as I can recall. The ref may be called over to lightly tap a ball if the rack doesn't freeze, but other than that there is no tapping of balls. We don't see the women soft-breaking on the WPBA tour these days. I'm sure that they would if it guaranteed them a ball on the break, but obviously it hasn't.

These are all areas that will be examined by the WPA. So before everyone goes jumping to conclusions about what should or shouldn't be done, I think it's important for there to be investigations and maybe even some testing first.

Fran

<hr /></blockquote>

Thanks Fran, I did'nt know that. Thats what I get for listening to the broadcasters. (I used to play a bit of snooker with Jimmy Wych. That was a long, long time ago)
So you are saying the Sardo rack may be banned because it presses the balls into the cloth? -Brad

av84fun
11-12-2007, 06:16 PM
Fran..."On the WPBA tour, the players are no longer allowed to pound the balls into the cloth, nor is the referee, at least as far as I can recall. The ref may be called over to lightly tap a ball if the rack doesn't freeze, but other than that there is no tapping of balls. "

RIGHT. And at the DCC, there is NO tapping allowed...period. If a player taps, it is a foul and LOSS OF RACK.

I don't recall seeing much, if any, soft breaking at the DCC...because without tapping, I don't think the wing is going to go much more than 50-60% of the time and if it DOESN'T go, you would be lucky not to have sold out.

Regards,
Jim

Fran Crimi
11-12-2007, 07:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>
Thanks Fran, I did'nt know that. Thats what I get for listening to the broadcasters. (I used to play a bit of snooker with Jimmy Wych. That was a long, long time ago)
So you are saying the Sardo rack may be banned because it presses the balls into the cloth? -Brad <hr /></blockquote>


Brad, I think the Sardo Brothers did eventually create a rack that doesn't demand 'training the table' which involved someone banging the balls into the cloth ahead of time. The rack itself was never designed to bang the balls. It was designed to tighten them only.

But yes, I think the possible effects of banging the balls is something that has to be seriously looked at for World Championship events.

Fran

Warbler
11-12-2007, 08:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>
That is a distinction without a difference because I doubt that anyone has ever called a ball on a straight pool break in any pro competition in the history of the sport.
<hr /></blockquote>

of course not. It would be stupid to call a ball on the break in straight pool.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>
Straight pool breaks are all safety breaks and there is no such thing as a safety break in 9 Ball.
<hr /></blockquote>

But it is perfectly legal to do a safety break in 9-ball. It just doesn't make sense strategically to do it.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>
Making a ball on the break nearly every time is a massive and unfair advantage to the player winning the lag who can...will and DID (at the WPC) run 6,7,8+ racks in a row...helped along by the utterly silly winner breaks rule.
<hr /></blockquote>

correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the pros make a ball on almost every break even when using the normal hard break?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>
And by comparison to most other pool games, 9 Ball IS a rock 'em, sock 'em game.<hr /></blockquote>

but only because it is not call shot on the break. Its the same way in 8-ball.

Let me ask you a question, if, in straight pool, someone figured out a way to be able to call a ball from the pack and make it into to the called pocket every time (thus making major change to the way straight pool is player) would you then want to make it illegal to pocket a ball on the break? Just how far should we go in changing the rules in efforts to force people to play the game the way its "supposed" to be played?

bradb
11-13-2007, 11:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>

Brad, I think the Sardo Brothers did eventually create a rack that doesn't demand 'training the table' which involved someone banging the balls into the cloth ahead of time. The rack itself was never designed to bang the balls. It was designed to tighten them only.

But yes, I think the possible effects of banging the balls is something that has to be seriously looked at for World Championship events.

Fran

<hr /></blockquote>

Fran, the match I watched (which was a semi finals) where the Sardo was used may have also had new cloth! In this match Archer pocketed a ball everytime with a soft break and left the ball exactly in the same place after the hit. It looked like an instant replay as he ran out the table each time.

I'm wondering if it all comes down to tournament conditions that dictate the type of break the players use? I know I've played on tables that had such a banged up ball spot that its almost impossible to get a tight rack. I've tried the soft break myself and unless the rack is perfect it does'nt work at all.

Personally I think it would be best to let the players use what ever break that is neccessary to get the best from the conditions they face.

I agree that tapping can raise problems, how much? how far do you go? Best to get the tightest rack you can without tapping and live with it.

-brad
/ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Qtec
11-13-2007, 11:17 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The problem isn’t just confined to the main TV table, although it appears to be the most reliable locale for the soft break. In a Thursday match on a peripheral table between Shane Van Boening and Vilmos Foldes, both players employed the slow- or medium-speed break, and sank at least one ball on the break in all 18 racks of Foldes’ 10-8 victory.
<hr /></blockquote>
/ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

4 1/2 inch pockets? A WPC should be a test of skill, not a lottery.


I your first post you did give the impression that S was whining. The next poster reinforced that idea and you didn't correct him in your reply.
Sounds to me that the barmaid could have made a ball on the break almost every time. That can't be right.

Q............IMO......no tapping and no Sardo. Read the rack and make the shot. Two challenges and thats it.

DSAPOLIS
11-13-2007, 12:52 PM
Qtec

You're right, I didn't correct Tom because I believe that if you play poorly and lose, you shouldn't start blaming anything else except "yourself". If you or anybody else can can find something wrong with that, feel free to get back with me. Like I said before, I would have said that directly to Shane and he knows that.

I don't see what the problem is. It seems to me (from that comment) that if Shane doesn't win, he believes that he has been slighted somehow by his opponent or by the rules. I hope that is not the case - because I heard similar complaints from another past US Open champion about the conditions in Taiwan a few years ago - these comments were made in the presence of Shane Van Boening also - this was 2 years ago at an event in Florida - and the guy was complaining that he lost badly at the WPC because the pockets were too big. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

If the US players continue to complain about the soft break, the equipment, the conditions, etc - then it will be a VERY long time before we see another American win a WPC. Like I said in another forum - they aren't having these discussions in Manila or Tapei. They don't care. They just want a chance at the table so that they can run out. That's what Daryl Peach did - he dealt with the situation and persevered. That is what Champions do.

Derek
11-13-2007, 01:06 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DSAPOLIS:</font><hr>Like I said in another forum - they aren't having these discussions in Manila or Tapei. They don't care. They just want a chance at the table so that they can run out.<hr /></blockquote>

Maybe the pros aren't having the discussions, but the fans that were posting in the World Championship Pool forums were complaining a lot about the soft break. This appeared to be mainly a contigent of Pinoy and Taiwanese fans. Granted, they wanted their players to win no matter what, but there seems to be a worldly disfavor towards the soft break.

Neils Feijen wasn't too happy about the soft break either.

Bob_Jewett
11-13-2007, 01:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vapros:</font><hr> At the World Pool Championships, most (or all) the players are breaking gently and making one or more balls on virtually every break, and a lot of people are not happy about it.... <hr /></blockquote>
The bottom line is that nine ball is fundamentally flawed. If the rack is as tight as possible, the wing ball goes in. If the rack is not tight, the player has been cheated, according to the rules.

It took the Sardo rack to show us this. It was the first common way that tournaments could get a tight rack most or all of the time. I counted balls on the break at one of the World Championship in Cardiff, and the wing ball went 90% of the time with the Sardo.

On the Eurotour, I hear they usually use "tapping" to train the table. Some don't like this because it gives a consistent, tight rack quickly. Others like training the table because it gives a consistent, tight rack quickly. If the table is trained, no triangle is needed and in fact the triangle should be avoided because its use can ruin the training.

Also on the Eurotour, a requirement is added to drive three balls above the head string or into a pocket.

At the last Mosconi Cup I saw, the table was trained but a triangle was used (carefully, I assume). The players had agreed to rack the balls about a ball forward of the spot, but the wing ball was still going in.

bradb
11-13-2007, 02:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote>
The bottom line is that nine ball is fundamentally flawed. If the rack is as tight as possible, the wing ball goes in. If the rack is not tight, the player has been cheated, according to the rules.

It took the Sardo rack to show us this. It was the first common way that tournaments could get a tight rack most or all of the time. I counted balls on the break at one of the World Championship in Cardiff, and the wing ball went 90% of the time with the Sardo.

On the Eurotour, I hear they usually use "tapping" to train the table. Some don't like this because it gives a consistent, tight rack quickly. Others like training the table because it gives a consistent, tight rack quickly. If the table is trained, no triangle is needed and in fact the triangle should be avoided because its use can ruin the training.

Also on the Eurotour, a requirement is added to drive three balls above the head string or into a pocket.

At the last Mosconi Cup I saw, the table was trained but a triangle was used (carefully, I assume). The players had agreed to rack the balls about a ball forward of the spot, but the wing ball was still going in. <hr /></blockquote>

Bob, this was exactly my point to Fran. The soft break only works when you have a perfect rack.

In reality the soft break from the side is exactly the same as a power break from the side as the same balls go in!... The difference is the soft break allows the player to control the cue ball and eliminate any possibility of carooming the QB into a scratch. So for anyone to complain about a soft break is a moot point, its a just a matter of how hard.

I'm still against tapping or training, but I don't know what the answer is...
I think the best rule now is the "center only break" and eliminate all training except by the referees discrimination should the head ball refuse to settle in correctly.

I've seen people fiddle around forever manipulating the rack and its an argument who gets the best guy to do it as some people are better at it.

Fran Crimi
11-13-2007, 04:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vapros:</font><hr> At the World Pool Championships, most (or all) the players are breaking gently and making one or more balls on virtually every break, and a lot of people are not happy about it.... <hr /></blockquote>
The bottom line is that nine ball is fundamentally flawed. If the rack is as tight as possible, the wing ball goes in. If the rack is not tight, the player has been cheated, according to the rules. <font color="blue"> It has always been considered an acceptable rack when you can't see spaces between the balls. You also can't see the spaces between the balls if you pound divots into the table to where the balls are riding up on to each other. To the naked eye, both racks look identical and fit the description of acceptable, only it is possible that the second rack may be considered to be abnormal due to the divots in the cloth. I even bet that if you could put both sets of racked balls on a level surface, you may see some balls from the divoted rack not even touching the table. </font color>

It took the Sardo rack to show us this. <font color="blue"> Actually, it was the flaws in the Sardo rack that led to all this. Once it was realized that the rack couldn't keep the balls from moving ( I think the problem was in lifting the rack off the table), then the Sardo Bros. came up with the idea of 'training the table' which was nothing more than pounding balls into the table so that the balls would not move out of place once the rack was released. </font color> It was the first common way that tournaments could get a tight rack most or all of the time. I counted balls on the break at one of the World Championship in Cardiff, and the wing ball went 90% of the time with the Sardo. <font color="blue"> The WPBA was the first to use the Sardo rack and they didn't play one event where the tables weren't trained, so I imagine that the tables were also trained in Cardiff. </font color>

On the Eurotour, I hear they usually use "tapping" to train the table. Some don't like this because it gives a consistent, tight rack quickly. Others like training the table because it gives a consistent, tight rack quickly. If the table is trained, no triangle is needed and in fact the triangle should be avoided because its use can ruin the training. <font color="blue"> Three big problems with creating divots: The first is only a theory of mine of the balls actually being so tight that some ride up on to each other; the second is that the ones that do sit in the divots actually pop out of them rather than roll. That doesn't sound legal to me. The third issue is the effect the divots leave on the table during play. Balls rolling over divots have been known to take strange turns. </font color>

Also on the Eurotour, a requirement is added to drive three balls above the head string or into a pocket.

At the last Mosconi Cup I saw, the table was trained <font color="blue"> More divots, I see. </font color> but a triangle was used (carefully, I assume). The players had agreed to rack the balls about a ball forward of the spot, but the wing ball was still going in. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> I'm afraid that I'm not ready to say that Nine Ball is a fundamentally flawed game; at least not until you get rid of the divots. Then we can see if the soft break really works or not.

Fran </font color>

bradb
11-13-2007, 07:37 PM
Fran you mention divots but I don't think they are factor on shaved cloth...

On napped cloth you can dimple the cloth but Simonis (which I have on my table) is a very hard surface. The problem is roll off from tiny strands of fiber that stick up. You can freeze the balls all together, but they part slightly as they settle over these fibers. These strands are so small they don't effect normal play. If you press down very slightly on the intire rack these fibers lie down temporarily. The problem in using the triangle is it does'nt hold the balls tight enough for you to apply an even pressure. Thats how the Sardo rack is effective.
-brad

Koenig
11-13-2007, 08:33 PM
As stated by others I donŽt think the problem is the break in itself. The problem is that no balls are played on the head rail, and the spectators missing out of great shots.

9-ball should be 2, 3 or 4 rals for position. At least once in a while. The final match was so much more fun to watch thanx to the harder break.

Like others said, if I want to see 1 foot stop shots IŽll go watch straights. WPC is now the boring part of 9-ball and 14:1 combined.

Shotmaking, man!

Warbler
11-13-2007, 10:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>
It took the Sardo rack to show us this. It was the first common way that tournaments could get a tight rack most or all of the time. I counted balls on the break at one of the World Championship in Cardiff, and the wing ball went 90% of the time with the Sardo.<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>The problem in using the triangle is it does'nt hold the balls tight enough for you to apply an even pressure. Thats how the Sardo rack is effective.
-brad<hr /></blockquote>

boy am I now confused on what kind of rack I should use on my table. I'm glad I haven't wasted money on a Sardo Rack.

bradb
11-13-2007, 10:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Koenig:</font><hr> As stated by others I donŽt think the problem is the break in itself. The problem is that no balls are played on the head rail, and the spectators missing out of great shots.

9-ball should be 2, 3 or 4 rals for position. At least once in a while. The final match was so much more fun to watch thanx to the harder break.

Like others said, if I want to see 1 foot stop shots IŽll go watch straights. WPC is now the boring part of 9-ball and 14:1 combined.

Shotmaking, man! <hr /></blockquote>

Thats why I like the straight on break rule which eliminates slow breaking and other advantages. But even with power breaks the game usually goes fast and the players make it look so easy its boring. I liken it to soccer which is just the opposite. The scoring is so rare you can go out for a couple of beers and not miss anything.

About the only thing that will make it really interesting is tighten the pockets even more. That way players will have to get better shape plus we would see more safety play.

... or start watching snooker!

Fran Crimi
11-14-2007, 07:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> Fran you mention divots but I don't think they are factor on shaved cloth...

On napped cloth you can dimple the cloth but Simonis (which I have on my table) is a very hard surface. The problem is roll off from tiny strands of fiber that stick up. You can freeze the balls all together, but they part slightly as they settle over these fibers. These strands are so small they don't effect normal play. If you press down very slightly on the intire rack these fibers lie down temporarily. The problem in using the triangle is it does'nt hold the balls tight enough for you to apply an even pressure. Thats how the Sardo rack is effective.
-brad <hr /></blockquote>

First, you have to remember that the cloth we're discussing at these events is always brand new. I agree that when Simonis gets worn, it's possible that divots may not make as much of a difference, but on a new cloth, the holes are pronounced and really do have quite a substantial effect. Believe me, I know.

Like I wrote before, I believe the Sardo Bros. did eventually create a rack that no longer came with a template to train the table first. But for the first few years, that template was there and there was a reason it was there. Training the table did not mean lightly tapping the balls.

In fact, I remember on tour, dreading whenever the 9 Ball had to be spotted because that would mean it was sitting in a hole. If it was still on the spot when came time to shoot it, you were in trouble if you had to shoot a cut shot on it because you knew it was going to pop out of the hole when the cb hit it. (You could actually see the ball jump when the cb hit it.) A cut shot made it all the more unpredictable.

Fran

Rich R.
11-14-2007, 09:02 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I liken it to soccer which is just the opposite. The scoring is so rare you can go out for a couple of beers and not miss anything.<hr /></blockquote>
Or, you go out for the beer and miss the only score of the entire game. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Deeman3
11-14-2007, 09:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Derek:</font><hr> I think the rack should randomly be adjusted "x" of degrees after it's been set at the head spot. So if "x" is zero degrees on a standard rack, let's break up the monotomy of the standard rack and rotate it 15 degrees. And then 10 degrees to the right next rack. And then 25 degrees to the left the rack after. Let's see what break works then if any.

<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Some form of this approach might not be as silly as it sounds at first glance. Introducing some randomness into the game would certainly cause the breakers to try for more ball movement. I am not sure how it would be done fairly but it should be tried in some format to see. </font color>

bradb
11-14-2007, 11:32 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I liken it to soccer which is just the opposite. The scoring is so rare you can go out for a couple of beers and not miss anything.<hr /></blockquote>
Or, you go out for the beer and miss the only score of the entire game. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif <hr /></blockquote>

I'll take the beer Rich. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Rich R.
11-15-2007, 09:40 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I liken it to soccer which is just the opposite. The scoring is so rare you can go out for a couple of beers and not miss anything.<hr /></blockquote>
Or, you go out for the beer and miss the only score of the entire game. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif <hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>I'll take the beer Rich. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif <hr /></blockquote>
Brad, I would skip the soccer completely. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif

TennesseeJoe
11-15-2007, 10:19 AM
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with a more random racking approach but one way to achieve this would be using some new and some old balls. The variance in size should give a more random dispersion.

bradb
11-15-2007, 10:37 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TennesseeJoe:</font><hr> I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with a more random racking approach but one way to achieve this would be using some new and some old balls. The variance in size should give a more random dispersion. <hr /></blockquote>

I guess I'm a purist at heart, I hate to see any game messed with, because then all the past records have to be frozen and its like starting over. Of course pool has changed so much now already especially with the new cloth and the Sardo rack.

The complaint is the game has become almost robotic with the perfect rack and soft break. Personally I would hate to go any further except to regulate the break from the center of the table. If we change the spot or the balls it just would'nt be the same game.

I'm an old time player, I'd like to see it go back to napped cloth and hand racking but then again I still want my old 56 chevy back so what do I know. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Fran Crimi
11-15-2007, 11:18 AM
One of the problems with these message boards is that people claim things as fact when they probably shouldn't. There is no evidence that a perfect rack is the culprit behind soft breaking. There are other possible correlations which I have said over and over and over here which have to do with pounding balls into the cloth.

And as long as anyone keeps relating "perfect rack" to soft breaking, I will keep referring to balls being pounded into the cloth. Holes in the cloth do not make for a perfect rack. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The rack is imperfect, and even possibly illegal, since the cloth is being used for reasons other than what was intended.

Bob Jewett even wrote it himself, that it wasn't until the Sardo rack when all this started happening. Well, that was because the balls were being pounded into the cloth.

Fran

bradb
11-15-2007, 08:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> One of the problems with these message boards is that people claim things as fact when they probably shouldn't. There is no evidence that a perfect rack is the culprit behind soft breaking. There are other possible correlations which I have said over and over and over here which have to do with pounding balls into the cloth.

And as long as anyone keeps relating "perfect rack" to soft breaking, I will keep referring to balls being pounded into the cloth. Holes in the cloth do not make for a perfect rack. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The rack is imperfect, and even possibly illegal, since the cloth is being used for reasons other than what was intended.

Bob Jewett even wrote it himself, that it wasn't until the Sardo rack when all this started happening. Well, that was because the balls were being pounded into the cloth.

Fran

<hr /></blockquote>

Fran. I was using the term perfect rack to describe a rack of balls set up by the tapping of balls or using the Sardo to have all the balls frozen and perfectly placed over the spot. It is in this situation that many players are breaking from the side with reduced pace and getting more consistant results. Now what ever those balls are doing, whether they are sitting in dimples as you say or whatever, this is the problem as pointed out by Bob. The term perfect may not be correct in whether it is legal but that is to be determined.

In other words..... The balls are "perfectly replaced" (either legal or not) into the exact same formation every time!

I will say this.... you could hit my 6 month old Simonis with a sledge hammer and there would be no dent in the cloth. I would be interested if the makers of Simonis have any answers on this. -brad

av84fun
11-15-2007, 09:26 PM
Warbler..."But it is perfectly legal to do a safety break in 9-ball. It just doesn't make sense strategically to do it."

Actually, no it is not legal...unless you were to invent a meaning of the phrase "safety break" that would include sending 4 OBs to a rail which is a requirement in the current World Standardized Rules.

It would be virtually impossible to end up safe...except by accident, in 9 Ball after sending 4 to a rail (or pocketing a ball which eliminates the 4 ball rule).

Regards,
Jim

bradb
11-15-2007, 10:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> Warbler..."But it is perfectly legal to do a safety break in 9-ball. It just doesn't make sense strategically to do it."

Actually, no it is not legal...unless you were to invent a meaning of the phrase "safety break" that would include sending 4 OBs to a rail which is a requirement in the current World Standardized Rules.

It would be virtually impossible to end up safe...except by accident, in 9 Ball after sending 4 to a rail (or pocketing a ball which eliminates the 4 ball rule).

Regards,
Jim

<hr /></blockquote>

I posted a diagram a while back in this forum that shows a safety break in 9 ball that provides a good hook. Once you practise it it's about 75% effective. The problem is if your opponent can escape from it you will probably be hooked back as the balls are clustered tight around the table break end. -Brad

sygfrid
11-15-2007, 11:37 PM
There should be at least 4 balls to hit the rail or a ball making it into the pocket after a break for a legal break as per World Standardized Rules for 9 Ball

Why would they want to mess up the speed of the break? /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif