New US Open Break Rules

[Paul Schofield]

The new rules are a giant leap forward. The “wired ball” or “trick shot” has largely been rendered moot by the 9 on the spot and the break-box. Now we are down to the remaining “slopped ball”.

It has often been said that at the top levels, the break is the most critical shot of the game. Now the ball-on-the-break is nothing more than a slop shot. I have watched hours of dry breaks and slopped balls. The best players in the world are starting every game with a slop shot, slamming the balls and praying. This was the intent of the tournament operators. Was it not? If two top players are playing well, the outcome of their match will be determined by lucked balls. Is this really the desired outcome?

Get rid of the slopped ball! Alternate breaks and shoot what you break. It will make for better competition and advantage for the better player. The person that plays better deserves to win.

 

[Kim Bye]

The new rules are a giant leap forward. The “wired ball” or “trick shot” has largely been rendered moot by the 9 on the spot and the break-box. Now we are down to the remaining “slopped ball”.

It has often been said that at the top levels, the break is the most critical shot of the game. Now the ball-on-the-break is nothing more than a slop shot. I have watched hours of dry breaks and slopped balls. The best players in the world are starting every game with a slop shot, slamming the balls and praying. This was the intent of the tournament operators. Was it not? If two top players are playing well, the outcome of their match will be determined by lucked balls. Is this really the desired outcome?

Get rid of the slopped ball! Alternate breaks and shoot what you break. It will make for better completion and advantage for the better player. The person that plays better deserves to win.

I have seen several pro`s advocating for this. I think it`s a good thing, but I feel the long term solution is 10 ball.

 

[ineedaspot]

I agree with the idea of shoot what you break, and alternating breaks. Make it like tennis. The break would be a huge advantage, like holding serve. This doesn't have to be a bad thing. Winning a set requires breaking the other guy's serve/break.

I'm not sure that the US open rules are a giant step forward, though. The fact that it's harder to make a ball on the break actually makes the break more important, and more of a luck shot. If one guy figures out the break and the other doesn't, then the match is over. And if neither of them figure it out, then every rack starts out with a giant hit and hope slop shot.

 

[King T]

Well...,

I have seen several pro`s advocating for this. I think it`s a good thing, but I feel the long term solution is 10 ball.

10 Ball is another game. 9 Ball is the game that it is and if you catch a gear great, if the other guy makes the wing ball and runs out the set its not your turn to win that day.

 

[naji]

The new rules are a giant leap forward. The “wired ball” or “trick shot” has largely been rendered moot by the 9 on the spot and the break-box. Now we are down to the remaining “slopped ball”.

It has often been said that at the top levels, the break is the most critical shot of the game. Now the ball-on-the-break is nothing more than a slop shot. I have watched hours of dry breaks and slopped balls. The best players in the world are starting every game with a slop shot, slamming the balls and praying. This was the intent of the tournament operators. Was it not? If two top players are playing well, the outcome of their match will be determined by lucked balls. Is this really the desired outcome?

Get rid of the slopped ball! Alternate breaks and shoot what you break. It will make for better completion and advantage for the better player. The person that plays better deserves to win.

IMO this break rule fevers the weak players of whom their entry fee are financing part of this event! and deserves to shoot few balls! and who knows might advance a bit.

In pro only tournament i agree with you. But instead of alternating single rack break, i'd rather alternate every 3, 4 or 5 racks breaks!

 

[King T]

Im still having issues!

The new rules are a giant leap forward. The “wired ball” or “trick shot” has largely been rendered moot by the 9 on the spot and the break-box. Now we are down to the remaining “slopped ball”.

Get rid of the slopped ball! Alternate breaks and shoot what you break. It will make for better completion and advantage for the better player. The person that plays better deserves to win.

For all the complaints about the break you would think that lesser players that can run out too are firing in the wing ball and beating top level pro's, no.

You would think that any pro can win because the break in 9 Ball is so easy, no.

I'm still not seeing big runs, 7, 8 or 9 pack's? So is the break really that big of a deal? I still see lots of roll-outs after the break and lots of safety play?

 

[JD_Hogg]

How do you make the break an advantage to the player with the better break and still not make the game boring by making the wing ball every time? In tennis that answer is simple, in pool so far its not.

 

[hang-the-9]

The new rules are a giant leap forward. The “wired ball” or “trick shot” has largely been rendered moot by the 9 on the spot and the break-box. Now we are down to the remaining “slopped ball”.

It has often been said that at the top levels, the break is the most critical shot of the game. Now the ball-on-the-break is nothing more than a slop shot. I have watched hours of dry breaks and slopped balls. The best players in the world are starting every game with a slop shot, slamming the balls and praying. This was the intent of the tournament operators. Was it not? If two top players are playing well, the outcome of their match will be determined by lucked balls. Is this really the desired outcome?

Get rid of the slopped ball! Alternate breaks and shoot what you break. It will make for better completion and advantage for the better player. The person that plays better deserves to win.

Your post is a bit contradictory. You complain that making a ball on the break is luck and at the same time complain about people making a ball on the break by trying to. And if they make a ball on the break you say it's good to change it so you can't TRY to make a ball, but it's also bad to make a ball on the break by accident. So change it so you can only make a ball by luck but then complain about that also.

Any shot in pool is a "trick shot", I mean they just sit there and you shoot it in. What's the challenge, I mean you get 1 foot from the ball and it's straight in, that's too easy. Is position play a "trick shot" that we need to get rid of? I mean it's easy to run a rack if you are a pro if you can play position. Get rid of position play? All that crazy "aiming" and "making a ball on purpose".

I do like alternate breaks to even things out but that also has drawbacks. No racks strung which is fun to watch. No comebacks from being down 6-2 in a race to 7, or at least making the chances of that a lot smaller. Soon as you lose on your break you are in a hole.

 

[Poolshootindon]

Slopped Balls or Luck

The new rules are a giant leap forward. The “wired ball” or “trick shot” has largely been rendered moot by the 9 on the spot and the break-box. Now we are down to the remaining “slopped ball”.

It has often been said that at the top levels, the break is the most critical shot of the game. Now the ball-on-the-break is nothing more than a slop shot. I have watched hours of dry breaks and slopped balls. The best players in the world are starting every game with a slop shot, slamming the balls and praying. This was the intent of the tournament operators. Was it not? If two top players are playing well, the outcome of their match will be determined by lucked balls. Is this really the desired outcome?

Get rid of the slopped ball! Alternate breaks and shoot what you break. It will make for better completion and advantage for the better player. The person that plays better deserves to win.

Every game ever invented has an element of luck that can and will determine a winner. Hail mary pass in Football, 3/4 court shot at the buzzer to win a Basket Ball game, easy grounder hits the bag and caroms away the the infielder.

Luck has been around forever and will always be around. Just play the game and usually the better player will rise to the top.

Don

 

[StraightPoolIU]

I'm going to watch a little more before I come to a full conclusion, but so far I'll say I'm not a big fan of these new break rules. As a fan I'll be completely honest and tell you that I'm not the least bit concerned about "taking the luck out of the game" or "fairness". What I want to see is an entertaining match. I think the break rules thus far have made it less of an offensive game from the break, and I kind of miss that.

 

[336Robin]

The new rules are a giant leap forward. The “wired ball” or “trick shot” has largely been rendered moot by the 9 on the spot and the break-box. Now we are down to the remaining “slopped ball”.

It has often been said that at the top levels, the break is the most critical shot of the game. Now the ball-on-the-break is nothing more than a slop shot. I have watched hours of dry breaks and slopped balls. The best players in the world are starting every game with a slop shot, slamming the balls and praying. This was the intent of the tournament operators. Was it not? If two top players are playing well, the outcome of their match will be determined by lucked balls. Is this really the desired outcome?

Get rid of the slopped ball! Alternate breaks and shoot what you break. It will make for better completion and advantage for the better player. The person that plays better deserves to win.

I understand your intent and its good I like it, but I'm not sure that will prevent someone from breaking in such a manner as to leave the balls open and runnable which in effect is almost the same thing as having a ball wired or even breaking with a soft break.

Although I would like to see what you mention tried on the tournament level to see how things shake out. Its impossible to control the entire rack and where balls bump and go together might be enough of the forces of fate to be an equalizer in 9-ball.

I don't think the forces of fate can be taken out of the game of 9-ball because its only 9 balls after all. So the idea of alternating breaks is a good one indeed. One would need to win a rack where the other player was in charge of things so to speak and then win the next one as well to gain a definitive lead.

The more I type and think on it, your idea might be the very thing to do next and it might be more fair. Good post!

 

[sjm]

More than a few have demonstrated that they can succeed with this break. Players I know of that ran at least a three pack include Uchigaki, Pinegar, Woodward and Dechaine.

This is some of the most exciting pool I've ever watched and the cream is and will continue to rise to the top.

Yes, unlike a year ago, poor defensive players and kickers and those not skilled in the use of the two way shot will pay a price, but this event will, consequently, deliver a champion that has displayed excellence ranging across all the skills a great pool player ought to possess, befitting a national championship.

Finally, nothing makes our sport worse than racking disputes, but they are standard fare in the era of rack mechanics. Every time I attend an event with rack your own and one-on-the-spot, the racking disputes make our game seem cheap, our players look like sore sports, and it reminds me of why pool is unsellable to the general public. Worse than that, shot clocks are rarely employed in American pool so the game can become lethargic.

A break that makes players use all their skills, a shot clock that keeps the game moving and no racking disputes. That's how Matchroom does it and that is, at long last, how the US Open is doing it. The only thing they do that we don't do is have a neutral racker, and if you get one, you can rack the balls where you like. Rack your own has ruined rotation pool. At long last, someone has done something about it.

Kudos to all who made this change happen.

 

[336Robin]

I'm going to watch a little more before I come to a full conclusion, but so far I'll say I'm not a big fan of these new break rules. As a fan I'll be completely honest and tell you that I'm not the least bit concerned about "taking the luck out of the game" or "fairness". What I want to see is an entertaining match. I think the break rules thus far have made it less of an offensive game from the break, and I kind of miss that.

I understand what youre talking about here. There is something great about watching someone in their zone put racks down and that is what 9 ball has become. I haven't played the old rules in 9 ball in a long time but I might give that a try to see what ball in hand behind the line does for the game. It might even be that the old school rules wouldn't be a bad way to go. You give a professional ball in hand, he is supposed to run out barring balls being stuck together. This would at least take a little of the sting out of scratching.

 

[beetle]

I was worried since Jayson Shaw said on facebook that the 9 ball will be kicked in the corner about 15 % of the time (or more) with this break rule (and based on his practice), but I haven't seen that yet. I've seen a lot of tough patterns requiring more safeties--much like 10 ball, and a lot of dry breaks. Definitely an improvement from the predictable pattern runouts by having the 1 on the normal spot.

More than a few have demonstrated that they can succeed with this break. Players I know of that ran at least a three pack include Uchigaki, Pinegar, Woodward and Dechaine.

This is some of the most exciting pool I've ever watched and the cream is and will continue to rise to the top.

Yes, unlike a year ago, poor defensive players and kickers and those not skilled in the use of the two way shot will pay a price, but this event will, consequently, deliver a champion that has displayed excellence ranging across all the skills a great pool player ought to possess, befitting a national championship.

Finally, nothing makes our sport worse than racking disputes, but they are standard fare in the era of rack mechanics. Every time I attend an event with rack your own and one-on-the-spot, the racking disputes make our game seem cheap, our players look like sore sports, and it reminds me of why pool is unsellable to the general public. Worse than that, shot clocks are rarely employed in American pool so the game can become lethargic.

A break that makes players use all their skills, a shot clock that keeps the game moving and no racking disputes. That's how Matchroom does it and that is, at long last, how the US Open is doing it. The only thing we do that they don't do is have a neutral racker, and if you get one, you can rack the balls where you like. Rack your own has ruined rotation pool. At long last, someone has done something about it.

Kudos to all who made this change happen.

 

[naji]

I was worried since Jayson Shaw said on facebook that the 9 ball will be kicked in the corner about 15 % of the time (or more) with this break rule (and based on his practice), but I haven't seen that yet. I've seen a lot of tough patterns requiring more safeties--much like 10 ball, and a lot of dry breaks. Definitely an improvement from the predictable pattern runouts by having the 1 on the normal spot.

9 ball on the break counts only if it goes in side pockets or upper corner balls, otherwise it gets spotted back.

 

[Petros Andrikop]

The only way of coming into "definite" conclusions is to have statistics, if they are kept during the tournament it will help a lot.

 

[beetle]

9 ball on the break counts only if it goes in side pockets or upper corner balls, otherwise it gets spotted back.

Yes, I meant upper corners. (Kicked from behind)

 

[naji]

Yes, I meant upper corners. (Kicked from behind)

Sorry! that makes sense, i have not seen it in TV stream table yet!

 

[sfleinen]

I understand your intent and its good I like it, but I'm not sure that will prevent someone from breaking in such a manner as to leave the balls open and runnable which in effect is almost the same thing as having a ball wired or even breaking with a soft break.

Although I would like to see what you mention tried on the tournament level to see how things shake out. Its impossible to control the entire rack and where balls bump and go together might be enough of the forces of fate to be an equalizer in 9-ball.

I don't think the forces of fate can be taken out of the game of 9-ball because its only 9 balls after all. So the idea of alternating breaks is a good one indeed. One would need to win a rack where the other player was in charge of things so to speak and then win the next one as well to gain a definitive lead.

The more I type and think on it, your idea might be the very thing to do next and it might be more fair. Good post!

Robin:

Paul is a fan of getting rid of the requirement for "slopping in a ball off the break" in order to maintain the right to stay at the table. In other words, the breaker stays at the table irrespective if a ball was made on the break or not. The concept of breaking such that an "easy layout" is the result has been the bane of soft-breaking and "rack mechanics" for years (nothing new). That's fixed easily with a requirement for hard breaks, and randomizing the rack.

9-ball is a game with inherent luck "built-in." Meaning, the only requirement is that you must contact the lowest-numbered object ball on the table with the cue ball, and then either pocket an object ball or get a rail. There has never been call-shot rules in 9-ball like there traditionally has been in 8-ball, straight pool, bank pool, etc. Unlike those games I just mentioned, in 9-ball you literally can get away with tactics like poke-and-hope, slam-ball, etc. (although the banger won't go far with those tactics against a good player).

With that in mind, I think it's putting lipstick on a pig to try and remove the slopped ball on the break, but yet keep the "no call shot, anything goes" aspect of 9-ball. We're trying to "fix" a game that, for pros, is broken to begin with. Most pro-level rotation tournaments that I see, are 10-ball.

Now, if Paul were advocating for getting rid of the slopped ball requirement off the break for 10-ball, such that the breaker stays at the table irrespective if a ball was made on the break or not, I think he'd be onto something. Here's a call-shot game, but yet a slopped ball off the break determines if the breaker stays at the table, which, if you think about it compared to the "concept" of call-shot games, is counter-intuitive. And, it's 10-ball that has is creeping up on the game of 9-ball for the notoriety of building "rack mechanics."

Summary (IMHO): Paul's idea is great for 10-ball. Not for 9-ball, though.

-Sean

 

[AtLarge]

I was worried since Jayson Shaw said on facebook that the 9 ball will be kicked in the corner about 15 % of the time (or more) with this break rule (and based on his practice), but I haven't seen that yet. I've seen a lot of tough patterns requiring more safeties--much like 10 ball, and a lot of dry breaks. Definitely an improvement from the predictable pattern runouts by having the 1 on the normal spot.

After two days of play, in the 12 streamed matches (excluding 2 games I missed), the 9-ball was made on the break only twice -- once in a foot-rail corner pocket (spot it, not a win) and once in a side pocket.

In last year's Mosconi Cup, they used a little smaller break box, and the break did become a search for ways to make the 2-ball bound off the foot-rail and send the 9-ball toward a side or head-rail pocket. But even then the 9-ball was made only 7 times in 125 games, and I don't know how many of those resulted from being kicked by the 2-ball.