I sure ain’t no pro, so I’m just askin’.
Is the skill of the break shot overrated?
Of course, the outcome of the break is important, but is the skill of breaking overhyped?
The rack will never be exactly the same twice in a row (gaps, alignment on table), and neither will the placement of the cue ball, the contact point of the cue/cue ball or cue ball/object ball, and table conditions is variable.
If anybody could shoot superhumanly perfect, and the balls are racked to superhuman perfection every time, they’d make the money ball on the break every time. Imperceivable differences in those things will result in very perceivable results, so I consider the results of a break to be relatively random. Anybody agree?
Ok, you managed to pull my first post out of me. I want to take a stab at this one in the context I believe you're after... There's three question marks in your post so you'll get three answers.
Just so you can equate my point of view on the matter... I am what's probably best described as a "local pro". Meaning I sit along side the best in my area, and even within that group, getting some of my cash in your pocket comes with some bragging rights. That said, I'm not a "state" (provincial) champ or anything of that magnitude.
Is the skill of the break shot overrated?
No, not at all. If anything, and as some of the replies within the thread have illustrated, it's under played. I found the listing of the various games and importance of the break in those games entertaining.
What stood out most was the opinion of the snooker break being nearly consequential. Which depending on the level of play is accurate to some degree. However (and more to your point I believe) I started out playing snooker and first right of "skill" passage was consistently nailing that standard break of clipping the wing ball, bringing the cue ball back four rails, and nesting behind the head strings colours. Now falling short on that break and leaving something long wasn't the end of the world, but if you nailed it, it set the tone for that frame. So in terms in consequence... meh. The skill involved in making that break correctly which is a basically a 30ft four rail safety. Well, enough said...lol
The break in rotation games has always been my short coming. ...and I truly believe it's what has prevented me from competing at a higher level. Lately when I "practice", I only go through the motions for regular in game shots, put real effort into racking
poorly and reviewing the outcome. Practicing "perfect" template type breaks is nearly pointless imo. A template break should be as routine as any other shot.
In 8-ball I use one of two breaks. Either balls out and straight into the head ball, or second ball cut. Which break I use is solely dependent on who I'm playing and the quality of racks I'm given. The "skill" here isn't the break itself. It's assessing your opponent. I find cut breaks tend to be more successful but are more likely to cluster, and will "side load" the balls if the rack is a slug. It really boils down to the other guy's table IQ.
Eventually you'll reach a level where you opponents can all run out from everywhere. This is the point when you need to seek out other advantages. Being able to control your break is one of them. This is a skill that needs to be learned just as any other.
Of course, the outcome of the break is important, but is the skill of breaking overhyped?
I was long winded in the first answer, so I'll dial this one back.... If you can agree that the outcome of the break is important, then wouldn't you also have to know that the ability to control that outcome is as well...?
The only real variable I see change in the game on the pro level, is the rules and methods used to prevent making those who have mastered the skill of breaking white wash tournaments. The 3 point rule, 9 on the spot, from the kitchen. Everything in an effort to shake up a tangible skill to equalize the game. In reality, these rules do nothing more than place handicaps on stronger players. No different than spotting games imo...
I consider the results of a break to be relatively random. Anybody agree?
Pulled you out of context a little, but I think I pasted the key point. I agree that bulk of the results of a break are indeed random. However the skill isn't to make all the balls in the first shot. The skill (for example) is knowing that when the 1 is landing above the side pocket during your break, you should focus on making the wing but still swing hard enough to get the 1 ball to opposite top corner for your opening shot.
To sum up... I believe there are several stages in player skill development. Everyone starts out being a potter. Then they build their cue ball control. That rolls into safety play. About here is when focus shifts towards the break and table IQ.
Although later in development. The break is just as important and probably one of the more difficult skills to build.
Sorry I was so long winded... Back to the bleachers I go :wink:
