Breaking from the head spot

mnorwood

mnorwood

Moon
Silver Member
Everybody knows why the WNT have the break set up the way they do. However players figured it out and now the 1 still ends up in the side. So if you really wanted to eliminate that from the game why not require players to break from the head spot? Or would they just figure that out too and they find a way to always make a ball?
 
mnorwood said:
Can’t say I’m worried about. My resting heart rate right now is like 50 bpm. Rules get tweaked all the time in sports. NFL is constantly changing rules.
Click to expand...
Nobody is running out sets from the first game.

Everyone eventually gets a turn.

If they can't hang with the big dogs, maybe they should practice more or avoid tournaments where the big dogs are.
 
You're not alone, I wondered this for a while as well. Seems like an obvious solution and seems like the vast majority of viewers would not care.
 
mnorwood said:
Everybody knows why the WNT have the break set up the way they do. However players figured it out and now the 1 still ends up in the side. So if you really wanted to eliminate that from the game why not require players to break from the head spot? Or would they just figure that out too and they find a way to always make a ball?
Click to expand...
Danny D suggested this a long time ago. Not sure if it's ever been tried but I like the concept.

I don't think today's break rules are great by any means but it does provide some solid variance in layouts and the cueballs final resting spot so it's good in that sense.

I'd like to see what happens if the 1 in the side is outlawed! lol

People didn't like that the corner ball was dead but now with templates and 9 on the spot the 1 in the side is pretty close to dead too. But again, the varied layouts is a pretty solid outcome.

Templates are going nowhere but they have a lot to do with the consistency people make the 1 in the side.
 
mnorwood said:
Everybody knows why the WNT have the break set up the way they do. However players figured it out and now the 1 still ends up in the side. So if you really wanted to eliminate that from the game why not require players to break from the head spot? Or would they just figure that out too and they find a way to always make a ball?
Click to expand...
So it's not about eliminating it. With the break box and the nine on the spot, it creates more variables. You can't just hit the right spot and make the one every time. You have to hit the right spot AND hit it at the right speed. It ends up making it a lot more of a skillful shot and that's why you see even top players having difficulty maintaining it consistently.

IMO, this is the best break for 9 ball. It doesn't completely eliminate the ability to run multiple racks, but it requires massive skill to do it.
 
Jaden said:
So it's not about eliminating it. With the break box and the nine on the spot, it creates more variables. You can't just hit the right spot and make the one every time. You have to hit the right spot AND hit it at the right speed. It ends up making it a lot more of a skillful shot and that's why you see even top players having difficulty maintaining it consistently.

IMO, this is the best break for 9 ball. It doesn't completely eliminate the ability to run multiple racks, but it requires massive skill to do it.
Click to expand...

exactly. goal isn't to eliminate wet breaks, but to eliminate predictable after-the-break situations
 
mnorwood said:
Everybody knows why the WNT have the break set up the way they do. However players figured it out and now the 1 still ends up in the side. So if you really wanted to eliminate that from the game why not require players to break from the head spot? Or would they just figure that out too and they find a way to always make a ball?
Click to expand...
Because one on the spot, breaking from the headspot, there is a higher probability of making the 9 on the snap than breaking at many other points.
A guy at my local club does this whenever he is on the hill. Puts his cue on the table, puts his hands together and bows. Points at a pocket. Absolutely hilarious to watch. Hits it with some side, the ball at the bottom of the pack comes off the bottom rail and back into the 9 (they changed the breaking rules in Duya I believe, as someone made 4 or 5 in a game using this method lol)
 
It is funny the people that point at the 1 going in the side and saying “see, they figured it out”.

The 1 going in the side was the intent and design of the break from the start. “figuring it out” would be also controlling the cueball and 2-ball to a repeatable location. It’s about ensuring a minimum amount of randomness and luck is still a factor in the layout after the break. The players are in the verge of “figuring that out” but so far it has been sufficient.
 
MattPoland said:
It is funny the people that point at the 1 going in the side and saying “see, they figured it out”.

The 1 going in the side was the intent and design of the break from the start. “figuring it out” would be also controlling the cueball and 2-ball to a repeatable location. It’s about ensuring a minimum amount of randomness and luck is still a factor in the layout after the break. The players are in the verge of “figuring that out” but so far it has been sufficient.
Click to expand...

you gotta wonder if they hit the rack differently depending on where the 2 ball is 🤔
 
qolbrand said:
you gotta wonder if they hit the rack differently depending on where the 2 ball is 🤔
Click to expand...
I feel like I've seen that starting to emerge. WNT only racks the balls in one of the three wing spots (left, bottom, or right).

And honestly the left and right are mirrors of each other so in theory you could just break from the other side to get the same result. So then that just leaves having a different break for the 2 at the bottom. Whatever leads the 1 in the side, cueball back and forth safely, and the 2 ball tracking on a predictable path. Something when struck correctly has everything following predictable paths. When struck mostly right has some odd collisions but is still likely to be okay.

Not that it's that simple. But we are talking about 128+ elite world class pros. This is their day job. That break is the most important shot of the game. Some of your Fedors and Fillers really ought to be at that level. I've heard Jayson talk about the Capito soft break situation. The 2 ball is supposed to go here, here, and then roll around here on that break. Which kinda shows that cat is out of the bag.
 
MattPoland said:
I feel like I've seen that starting to emerge. WNT only racks the balls in one of the three wing spots (left, bottom, or right).

And honestly the left and right are mirrors of each other so in theory you could just break from the other side to get the same result. So then that just leaves having a different break for the 2 at the bottom. Whatever leads the 1 in the side, cueball back and forth safely, and the 2 ball tracking on a predictable path. Something when struck correctly has everything following predictable paths. When struck mostly right has some odd collisions but is still likely to be okay.

Not that it's that simple. But we are talking about 128+ elite world class pros. This is their day job. That break is the most important shot of the game. Some of your Fedors and Fillers really ought to be at that level. I've heard Jayson talk about the Capito soft break situation. The 2 ball is supposed to go here, here, and then roll around here on that break. Which kinda shows that cat is out of the bag.
Click to expand...

i didnt know that about the three positions for the 2, thanks
 
there was never a problem with the break rules.

however with new technology in the racks and racking, the break has changed to be a controlled shot for a certain ball, and a position one. instead of a power break and hold the cue ball someplace in the middle of the table.

so for the super pro players the game has changed dramatically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top