How important is the hop on Shane's break?

(((Satori))) said:

Another question. If the cueball is coming in at a slight angle (airborne) and it hits the 1 ball full from this angle, wouldnt that hit transfer the most power? It seems if the cueball was coming in at a slight angle and hit both the 1ball and slate at the same time then this would not generate as much power because that is not a true full hit (coming in from an angle).

Click to expand...

That's a good point, but I don't think it makes much difference at typical CB trajectory angles coming in. The downside of hitting the 1-ball at a downward angle is that it causes the 1-ball to bounce down into the slate, which will cause a loss of energy and cause the 1-ball to hop some (more lost energy). However, I think all of this is a moot point since the CB usually bounces before reaching the 1-ball, in which case the CB might be more likely to have an upward angle if it hits the 1-ball above the equator. With an upward angle, the higher the CB hits the 1 ball, the higher it will bounce, and the less energy it will deliver to the rack of balls. In this case, the best scenario is to the have the CB land as close as possible to the 1-ball, with as few bounces as possible (ideally, just the 1 bounce off the tip).

BTW, the CB will still hop if it hits the 1-ball just as it contacts the table (because it still has an upward or downward speed component, assuming it hops on the way to the 1 ball, as it the case with a fast-speed break).

Regards,
Dave

Patrick Johnson said:

I question the 5% guess, but if it isn't doing anything else for him, why lose any power?

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

OK, but it sounds like a reasonable guess, and anyway I seriously doubt that it's more than the amount these guys intentionally take off their break. As to why, I see three possibilities:

1. The hop is not intentional, and does not help the break, it just happens, and how it hops provides feedback as to how well the cue ball was struck.
2. The hop does something that benefits the break that SVB understands but we don't, e.g., it helps the cue ball squat in the middle.
3. SVB believes it helps his break, but it really doesn't.

ElCorazonFrio said:

The energy that is lost by the head ball being driven into the slate is minimal

Click to expand...

That's speculative - the fact that energy is lost that way compared to a non-hopping break is not.

Why don't you give us your estimate and tell us what it is based upon.

Click to expand...

An off center hit on the head ball is a definite loss of power into the rack. That there may be an offsetting advantage somewhere is only speculation - and reaching in my opinion.

All I said is that there is a chance that the cueball going aloft may give better breaks, all other things being equal...

Click to expand...

Except that all other things are not equal - power into the rack being the most obvious.

pj
chgo

BRussell said:

OK, but it sounds like a reasonable guess, and anyway I seriously doubt that it's more than the amount these guys intentionally take off their break.

Click to expand...

Taking speed off the break is done to accomplish a more accurate hit on the head ball. CB hop means that goal isn't being fully accomplished.

As to why, I see three possibilities:

1. The hop is not intentional, and does not help the break, it just happens, and how it hops provides feedback as to how well the cue ball was struck.
2. The hop does something that benefits the break that SVB understands but we don't, e.g., it helps the cue ball squat in the middle.
3. SVB believes it helps his break, but it really doesn't.

Click to expand...

OK, but only #2 favors a CB hop, and I'm not sacrificing power because some think Shane may know a secret that nobody else does.

pj
chgo

Patrick Johnson said:

It's a bad tradeoff - it robs the break of power at any speed, and you can prevent it without changing the speed (just change the distance a little).

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

If the speed you are aiming for is well within your range as I stipulated, you can just increase your speed slightly to compensate for the loss AND still avoid getting kicked around by getting the cue ball back down table. No bad tradeoff there.

Masayoshi said:

If the speed you are aiming for is well within your range as I stipulated, you can just increase your speed slightly to compensate for the loss AND still avoid getting kicked around by getting the cue ball back down table. No bad tradeoff there.

Click to expand...

You'd have to change the distance too or you'll change how the CB hits the headball, maybe exacerbating the loss of power rather than compensating for it.

And I'm skeptical about the supposed advantage of avoiding CB/OB collisions - I'd have to see some actual stats before putting much stock in that theory. At the very least it must be much harder to be consistent.

pj
chgo

Patrick Johnson said:

That's speculative - the fact that energy is lost that way compared to a non-hopping break is not.


An off center hit on the head ball is a definite loss of power into the rack. That there may be an offsetting advantage somewhere is only speculation - and reaching in my opinion.


Except that all other things are not equal - power into the rack being the most obvious.

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

The most energy that could be lost is the same amount of energy that drives the cueball up. Plain and simple. If you have a better way of estimating the energy lost, let's hear it.

The thing you are not considering is the fact tha almost all of the breaks that are widely accepted as being the best have a hop. I may be 'reaching', but I think there is something more to it than these guys just not knowing better.

You are showing yourself to be the worst kind of scientific investigator. You'd rather argue a point that you didn't think of because of your ineptitude and your insecurities than explore other possibilities. You have proven yourself inept by refusing to show me where my assumptions are wrong.

Instead you want to try to prove yourself right by only saying others are wrong.

And that is the difference. I've never said you were wrong, I've only said what my knowledge of physics, my training and my experiences tell me.

BRussell said:

It could be that a consistent hop is the feedback he uses to know that he struck it how he wanted - speed, aim, cue elevation - but the hop itself isn't what is causing his break to be so good. The hop itself is incidental. It's an effect rather than a cause of a good break.

Click to expand...

Exactly!
If someone here been reading old wisdom from Far East they probably noticed sometimes saying " Don't try fight against will of universe. Do as universe wants. But first try learn what is universe will."
Here universe is laws of physics and human trying get them working to him.
So if we break hard its almost impossible to keep it from bouncing. So don't try it then. Let cue ball bounce with control. A lot easier to do as break hard and not let it bounce. To not let it bounce one probably need to shoot it lower speed.
Not to mention as 1-ball gets free route to near corner pocket for position..

I sure hope SVB is reading this thread. He could learn a few things.

But I suspect he spends most of his AZB-time in the Aiming Forum.

bdorman said:

I sure hope SVB is reading this thread. He could learn a few things.

But I suspect he spends most of his AZB-time in the Aiming Forum.

Click to expand...

Ha!

I'm not trying to teach him anything, I find it fascinating to think about why it works.

ElCorazonFrio said:

It maybe robs the rack of 3-5% of the total power in the case of shane's break. I estimate that the speed he causes the cueball to move it would reach a height of 20-25 feet if thrown straight up. Given that his ball appears to pop ~6" off the table, that means that he is only 1/40th of the energy, so even if it were to pop 1ft, it would only be 5% of the energy that is lost to the hop.

Click to expand...

Those are actually some pretty good estimates. Let's use some real numbers and physics formulas.

Let's start with the kinematic formula relating final velocity (Vf), initial velocity (Vi), acceleration (a), and distance (d)...

Vf^2 = Vi^2 + 2*a*d

Looking only at the vertical dimension, we're trying for find the initial vertical velocity of the CB immediately after impact with the rack, given that the CB hops about 6 inches high (0.152 meters) and acceleration due to gravity is -9.8m/s^2. Solving for the initial vertical velocity yields...

Vi = 1.73m/s, or 3.87mph

How fast is Shane's break speed? Let's assume it's 25mph, which would make the energy "lost" due to the airborne CB roughly 2.4% (keeping in mind kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity.

Given a 20mph break, the energy lost would only increase to 3.7% (given the same vertical hop). For a 15mph break, the energy lost would be up to 6.7%.

Personally, I think the tradeoff is a good one, provided it hops back exactly like Shane's.

ElCorazonFrio said:

The most energy that could be lost is the same amount of energy that drives the cueball up. Plain and simple. If you have a better way of estimating the energy lost, let's hear it.

Click to expand...

Seeing Jim's calculation makes me think the amount of energy loss is in the range of your estimate, but I'm more interested in whether losing any is a desirable tradeoff for some reason. None of the proposed reasons I've heard so far are convincing to me.

The thing you are not considering is the fact tha almost all of the breaks that are widely accepted as being the best have a hop.

Click to expand...

I think they're widely accepted as being the best because they're powerful - which makes hopping the CB more likely. It's a side effect, not a cause of those good breaks.

I may be 'reaching', but I think there is something more to it than these guys just not knowing better.

Click to expand...

I'd have to see some benefit to think that, and I don't see it. I understand the idea that losing some energy to avoid some CB/OB collisions is a net benefit, but until it's quantified somehow I don't buy it because I've never found those occasional collisions to be a big problem.

You are showing yourself to be the worst kind of scientific investigator. You'd rather argue a point that you didn't think of because of your ineptitude and your insecurities than explore other possibilities. You have proven yourself inept by refusing to show me where my assumptions are wrong.

Instead you want to try to prove yourself right by only saying others are wrong.

And that is the difference. I've never said you were wrong, I've only said what my knowledge of physics, my training and my experiences tell me.

Click to expand...

I haven't said you're wrong any more than you've said I am. The real difference so far is that I haven't tried to insult you.

pj
chgo

Patrick Johnson said:

The real difference so far is that I haven't tried to insult you.

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

If you haven't tried to insult me, you've done a knock-up job regardless...I find dismissive behavior much more insulting than most things.

ElCorazonFrio said:

If you haven't tried to insult me, you've done a knock-up job regardless...I find dismissive behavior much more insulting than most things.

Click to expand...

I think you find it too easily and conveniently.

pj
chgo

To Patrick:

Show me one good pro level breaker whos cueball not jumping after break?

This thread is quite funny. People who are incapable of breaking like SVB commenting on why SVB breaks the way he does. Here's a hint, due to the speed at which a break is hit is what determines the second row balls being made. That can vary from any place on the table. The path the head ball takes, along with its speed is why you pop the cue ball. The hop is required to kill the energy the head ball gets off the break. If it didn't, you would never be able to control a shot on the one when making the second row balls in 10ball. The faster one breaks requires the cue ball to achieve a greater pop to kill the head balls speed.

Ever notice in the 2014 world 9 ball that SVB was bringing the 1 ball three rails for position? Probably didn't. Notice that he was breaking way softer than he does for 8/10 ball? Probably didn't either. How is it that when he breaks 10 ball the 1 ball will barely get the head rail, if at all. It's the pop.

But let's not confuse a pop being required to break well. One can never have a pop break and still be pro caliber. The second effect of the pop is the cue ball landing in such a manner/area that prevents it from being kicked away. With no pop the rack contains much more velocity causing potential problems with cue ball control. The loss of power from cue ball to rack transfer when popping is required. The path of everything is much more predictable. I can safely say that when one finds the right spot for 10ball breaking that they will make four balls regularly, if not more. The same cannot be said for 9ball. Speed plus the pop is what allows that. I find the break in 8/10 ball to be just as flawed as 9ball. But unlike 9ball, you cannot soft break 10ball to a win.

Power/Speed

Patrick Johnson said:

I question the 5% guess, but if it isn't doing anything else for him, why lose any power?

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

I do know that at The Galveston World Classic, the best breaks were around 20-21 mph and as the speeds increased above that mark, less balls were made on the break.

Just guessing, but since with even slower rates of speed the cue ball leaves the table airborne the secret seems to be to know where and how to make the cue ball drop on to the table for the best contact on the head ball so as to clear the object balls and transfer the best amount of energy.

More power/speed isn't the secret.

For some, reduced power/speed is a great thing.

JoeyA

There are optimum speeds for an object ball to travel that increases the chances of the OB being pocketed whether it be on the break or just shooting the object ball down the table and table conditions has a lot to do with how receptive the pockets are.

I've seen players CRUSH the break and not make any balls, so a reduction in speed for some, can be helpful. For those like me, I'm lucky if I ever hit 21 mph so I need all of the power and speed I can muster.

I'm headed back into the gym soon and will be working on increasing strength and speed.

Shane looks like he isn't using a lot of strength when he breaks and his forearm never seems to close as in a pendulum swing. He is all about timing, elbow drop and using shoulder muscles. I guess that's why he is in the gym on a regular basis. Practicing his break seems to be a way of life for him and that is why he is the best breaker in the world.


JoeyA

Patrick Johnson said:

I'd have to see some benefit to think that, and I don't see it. I understand the idea that losing some energy to avoid some CB/OB collisions is a net benefit, but until it's quantified somehow I don't buy it because I've never found those occasional collisions to be a big problem.

Click to expand...

I don't think avoiding CB/OB collisions is the biggest benefit to hopping the CB (it is a benefit, but IMO not the biggest). I think the main benefit to hopping is minimizing the CB movement due to any unintended forward roll or back spin after impact with the rack. The more the CB hops, the less of an effect any forward/backward spin has on the movement of the CB. If there is absolutely no vertical hop after impact, then the effects of any unintended spin on the CB get maximized.

Again, I think the tradeoff is a good one.

Hits 'em Hard said:

... I can safely say that when one finds the right spot for 10ball breaking that they will make four balls regularly, if not more. ...

Click to expand...

Who has ever done that -- regularly?

Let's look at Van Boening in the streamed 10-Ball matches I have watched recently.

2015 US Open 10-Ball Championship (7-footer) -- he made 4 balls 2 times in 42 breaks (5 matches). Never more than 4.

2015 Tiger Challenge against Dechaine (7-footer) -- he made 4 balls once in 17 breaks. Never more than 4.

2015 DCC Bigfoot event (10-footer) -- he never made more than 3 balls on 43 breaks (4 matches).

2014 CSI Invitational (9-footer) -- he never made more than 2 balls in 16 breaks (2 matches)

So, combined, that's 4 balls on the break 3 times in 118 breaks.

I could go on.