Run This (68)
- Thread starter CueAndMe
- Start date
Thanks, Danny! I'm having a hard time judging where balls are on screen shots, too, but it looks as if the tangent line of the 2 is where the cue ball will contact the second-row (from the bottom) full or possibly (fractionally) on the low side, making this a safe break shot to follow. Would that change your perception on the necessity to try and promote the 12 as potential break shot for a right-hander (shooting the combo the way I described what I'd do, it's a free option, even the end pattern remains the same). I didn't mention promoting a break ball because there's no need here, IMHO, even though I agree that since one has plenty of insurance, it's what I'd personally have chosen to do here anyhow, and that I might then change my mind as I'm a right-hander, too. I'm more curious about how much importance you attach to having a break ball on "your" side of the stack - I tend to work with what the table gives me and in choosing a break shot find its "height" and angle of impact (i.e. location and tangent line) more important than the side it is on. But of course I hear you: when there's choice… Just my two cents's worth, of course.
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________
„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
Last edited:
I put more stock in break ball being on rt handers' side then I used to, on the ten ft table I think it's more important than on the nine foot, I also think it's much more important to have quality top of the rack break shots when cloth is more worn. However I HAVE found myself burning too much energy trying to promote break shots on the rt handers side at times - so your question has plenty of merit. I do know that the break shot Darren hit on the two ball won't always work real well on older cloth and or humid equipment. I no longer polish object balls during a run, that being said I try to stay away from low stack break shots as the run continues. Obviously the 2 ball was the correct choice under those clean, polished, and brand new cloth conditions.
Thanks for you reply!
I was thinking of your mention of the 10-footer as the table of choice for professional Straight Pool earlier (here or elsewhere?), and I agree being able to comfortably reach and stroke the break shot is more of an issue there (having said, I haven't played on a 10-foot pool table in over 25 years - I wish I could, and in fact remember there are respects in which I believe it's easier, e.g. less congestion below the rack area etc., and that being short, I used to try to find more middle pocket break shots and end patterns etc.).
You've reminded me there's the video and that Darren did follow the break shot. I know I sometimes hit these with too much no English follow on raggedy tables, trying to make sure the stack isn't blocking me from available shots (in a worst case scenario all the way to the end rail), which is why on new cloth and with clean balls I'll shoot these more slowly with a touch of inside English, just hard enough to find centre table (learnt that from Allen Hopkins). But I'm not sure what you were referring to as different between old/used and new/clean for this type of shot was cue ball control, or rather the way the balls spread (or won't)?
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________
„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
Last edited:
When I looked at the line I saw the two was a good break shot - with cue ball going into what appeared to be middle of the stack. Then when the ref racked em up it looked like a low stack break shot? My point here David is that if under relatively new cloth conditions that break shot is fine, under worn cloth and rack has not been cleaned for a couple hrs. - the rack will be heavier ie the thirteen won't fly up table. Plus when object ball is close to the stack (as was the 2 ball) cue ball can wind up in the stack or scratching in the corner pocket. Other than the thirteen there are not many choices after the break - and he hit the two well yes? Darren makes it look easy, I was fortunate to win against him in the finals that year. But I have never run two hundred in competition. Mine was 199 - get my point. :smile: Congrats to Darren on being a straight potting champ.
Last edited:
LOL! Pretty sporty, that! :thumbup:
Thanks for your reply!
Watching the outcome on the video again, I'm realizing now we're referring to the same thing (if perhaps from a different perspective): the reason I sometimes hit break shots of the sort too hard is that on the worn and nowhere as clean material I'm used to, the 13 wouldn't only not go up-table as you've noticed, but possibly block (the path of) the cue ball from those balls near the foot corner pocket. In an ideal world, I'd have the courage to hit it at the speed where cue ball and 13 present a roughly straight-in shot into the middle, but trying to achieve this result, one may get nothing but an off-angle combination to the foot corner pocket, a scenario I've seen too often…
Basically, my "cowardly" approach is not to hit the break shot slower to avoid this, but harder, which may backfire as well. Which is why I like the Allen Hopkins way of shooting this: slower and with a trace of inside English, to go two rails towards center table. Takes a little guts to do this on unknown material (in tournament play), though…
(One of my 99 runs - one I'll never forget - ended precisely this way, though: that object ball nestled up against the cue ball center table, as the cue ball came off the second rail at a sharper angle.)
Thanks again!
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________
„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
Last edited:
JC
Coos Cues
Believe it or not, this is the first thing I saw, and exactly what I might have done when I was younger and in dead stroke. The reason I'd not even mentioned it is that he could easily get out of line (punching the cue ball sideways along the tangent line looks like the most natural thing to do on video - in reality, it's easy to hit the object ball too full and land short of one' target zone, not to mention hit it fractionally thinner than anticipated trying to guard against the former, especially given old and fragile nerves in play) and have to shoot the 7 from up there (it's basically the only "insurance" ball he's got - but of course, it won't cross a pro player's mind who's already been at the table all day - not to mention all week prior - that he/she could ever get out of line). Needless to say, if both the 13 and 14 passed the 12 into the corner, we'd not be leading this discussion.
Bottom line: up there but off angle is not where I'd want to be. Anyone else as old and cowardly as me? If not, more power to you!
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________
„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
This is what you get with a world class rotation player "slumming" to play 14.1. It was as plain as the nose on Appleton's face to shoot that 11 and float up above the 14. He has shot that exact shot thousands of times in rotation games. Little chance of him getting so far out of line as to ruin the run.
JC
