Corey soft breaking in 10 ball...

[Blackjack]

blackjack,
thanks for that set of rules for the tour. Do you know if other tours or organizations have differing rules as to the placement of the balls? Having played some golf with and getting to know Corey, he is very adament on figuring out the best way to get the same patterns each and every time. He told me that he literally broke thousands and thousands of times figuring out that 9 ball break. Amazing stuff.

I'm not sure of the other rules - but, I have personally sat there and watched Corey play with the break before the match starts, and I have watched him at Capone's playing around trying to manipulate the balls out of the stack. He is by far and away the most creative player in the game - and if he is always trying to find another way to win.

FWIW, Even if he isn't successful with the soft break every single time, I do know that when he uses that soft break as a weapon, he is successful at getting into the heads of ALL of his opponent's. That's smart. That makes him a winner.

 

[Johnnyt]

That darn Corey has gone and ruined 10-ball now. I guess we need to play 11-ball now. Johnnyt

 

[corvette1340]

I'm not sure of the other rules - but, I have personally sat there and watched Corey play with the break before the match starts, and I have watched him at Capone's playing around trying to manipulate the balls out of the stack. He is by far and away the most creative player in the game - and if he is always trying to find another way to win.

FWIW, Even if he isn't successful with the soft break every single time, I do know that when he uses that soft break as a weapon, he is successful at getting into the heads of ALL of his opponent's. That's smart. That makes him a winner.

yeah, it always makes me laugh when you see people with big breaks like Larry get frustrated or say things about the soft break. Some of them say it is so easy, but then if it's so easy why aren't they doing it?

 

[corvette1340]

That darn Corey has gone and ruined 10-ball now. I guess we need to play 11-ball now. Johnnyt

lol, organizations are going to have to adopt the "Corey" rule and implement a speed gun on all tournament tables.

 

[Blackjack]

yeah, it always makes me laugh when you see people with big breaks like Larry get frustrated or say things about the soft break. Some of them say it is so easy, but then if it's so easy why aren't they doing it?

Exactly. He takes the rulebook and pushes it to the limit, while at the same time frustrating his opponent by getting great results. Every now and again nothing works for Corey off the break and he pays the price, but he always has a game plan, no matter what game he is playing or who he is up against. He's a tough draw, and sitting in the chair is quite a learning experience when you see his mastery of all elements of the game. Instead of pointing fingers or saying that its unfair, I choose to admire his ability to think outside the box better than anybody else.

Like Corey says, "Whatever works."

 

[Jerry Forsyth]

Corey's Break

I was there filming the matches for AZBtv. In my opinion (note that word 'opinion') it was not Corey's break that was winning the matches, it was the psyche that the break and Corey's attitude put on his opponents that won him the day. Had Corey's opponents resolved to shove this style of play down Corey's throat they might have been able to do just that and win. But they got flustered, got taken out of their playing style, and could not adjust. In the final match Nevel raked the table and conceded at least three times. Once there were three or four balls left on the table and the last time there were either seven or eight balls still topside. Corey made Nevel grow weary of playing a chess game instead of a fast and loose shootout and Nevel could never adjust.

Frankly, at least against Nevel, Corey's break was not working as planned. He never made the one ball that I remember, but Nevel only half-heartedly tried to make a good hit and kept handing the table back over to Corey. Corey did not win this match so much as Nevel lost it. (I am sure you know what I mean.)

Corey plays a safety break. If the one ball does not go in the side pocket then he leaves the opponent safe. If it does go then he has a shot on the two. But the difficulty of making that one in the side will prevent this from becoming a popular break shot. If the rules insisted on the balls being racked at random and the two was not allowed on the corner each time then this break becomes (IMHO) obsolete. Also, Corey was just barely driving the required four balls to the rail. In fact, I only counted three hitting at least once, but could be wrong. We will have this match up on AZBtv in a few days and you can count the balls hitting the rail for yourself.

I certainly hope this style of break proves unreliable and fades away. If you really want to see this game disappear forever from television, this soft break would be a key factor in doing that. As another poster said, as intelligent a player as Corey is, he is also absolutely the most boring to watch because he is playing the same rack over and over again. The balls break apart into a very predictable pattern time and again.

 

[kobyp]

Exactly. He takes the rulebook and pushes it to the limit, while at the same time frustrating his opponent by getting great results. Every now and again nothing works for Corey off the break and he pays the price, but he always has a game plan, no matter what game he is playing or who he is up against. He's a tough draw, and sitting in the chair is quite a learning experience when you see his mastery of all elements of the game. Instead of pointing fingers or saying that its unfair, I choose to admire his ability to think outside the box better than anybody else.

Like Corey says, "Whatever works."

I agree.

Didn't they change a rule in 9ball to where so many balls had to pass by the side pocket for it to be considered a legal break?

 

[JAM]

I hate that Active-X screen that pops up every time I click on this thread. GEESH, that is annoying.

There was controversy at this year's WPC in Philippines due to the bird break, soft break, whatever you want to call it.

As such, they have changed the rules for next year's WPC because of the "soft break."

IMHO, if 9-ball has a STRICT way to rack the balls, I think the same should apply to 10-ball. In other words, the competitor should not be able to place the 2-ball wherever he wants to in the race.

That said, I see nothing wrong with Corey attempting to develop a breaking strategy to win. In fact, I commend him for it, as long as it is a LEGAL break with four balls hitting the rail, as was mentioned by another poster.

At the U.S. Open, the rule for 9-ball is that three balls must pass the side pocket (I think it's three) in order for it to be a legal break. Otherwise, it is considered a foul.

In most "professional" tournaments, the balls MUST be racked in a precise order, not willy nilly and left up to the player.

In bowling, the competitors are not allowed to rack their own pins.

As long as players continue to rack their own balls in pool, there will be these kinds of problems.

JAM

 

[Hail Mary Shot]

lol, organizations are going to have to adopt the "Corey" rule and implement a speed gun on all tournament tables.

just what I had in mind in the past. speed gun, no matter how ridiculous it may sound. but hey, the softbreak is ridiculous as well. so that evens things up. any breakshot below the minimum kph, is considered a foul! is 20mph enough?

 

[corvette1340]

I hate that Active-X screen that pops up every time I click on this thread. GEESH, that is annoying.

There was controversy at this year's WPC in Philippines due to the bird break, soft break, whatever you want to call it.

As such, they have changed the rules for next year's WPC because of the "soft break."

IMHO, if 9-ball has a STRICT way to rack the balls, I think the same should apply to 10-ball. In other words, the competitor should not be able to place the 2-ball wherever he wants to in the race.

That said, I see nothing wrong with Corey attempting to develop a breaking strategy to win. In fact, I commend him for it, as long as it is a LEGAL break with four balls hitting the rail, as was mentioned by another poster.

At the U.S. Open, the rule for 9-ball is that three balls must pass the side pocket (I think it's three) in order for it to be a legal break. Otherwise, it is considered a foul.

In most "professional" tournaments, the balls MUST be racked in a precise order, not willy nilly and left up to the player.

In bowling, the competitors are not allowed to rack their own pins.

As long as players continue to rack their own balls in pool, there will be these kinds of problems.

JAM

as blackjack stated in a previous post, the two ball HAS to be placed on the corner of the rack as the Seminole Florida Tour rules state. Corey wasn't just placing the two there every time for his own racks. I agree that he takes the set of rules for each tour and tournament and figures out the best approach to win with each different situation. This is what makes him a champion.

 

[JAM]

just what I had in mind in the past. speed gun, no matter how ridiculous it may sound. but hey, the softbreak is ridiculous as well. so that evens things up. any breakshot below the minimum kph, is considered a foul! is 20mph enough?

It has to be lower than 20 MPH for sure. MANY players only break at 15, 16, and 17 MPH.

JAM

 

[cubc]

Most everyone here would love to know they came up with a smart out of the box way to play the game that rules had to specifically be made to stop what they created.

I would

 

[kobyp]

good point...

 

[worriedbeef]

I was there filming the matches for AZBtv. In my opinion (note that word 'opinion') it was not Corey's break that was winning the matches, it was the psyche that the break and Corey's attitude put on his opponents that won him the day. Had Corey's opponents resolved to shove this style of play down Corey's throat they might have been able to do just that and win. But they got flustered, got taken out of their playing style, and could not adjust. In the final match Nevel raked the table and conceded at least three times. Once there were three or four balls left on the table and the last time there were either seven or eight balls still topside. Corey made Nevel grow weary of playing a chess game instead of a fast and loose shootout and Nevel could never adjust.

Frankly, at least against Nevel, Corey's break was not working as planned. He never made the one ball that I remember, but Nevel only half-heartedly tried to make a good hit and kept handing the table back over to Corey. Corey did not win this match so much as Nevel lost it. (I am sure you know what I mean.)

Corey plays a safety break. If the one ball does not go in the side pocket then he leaves the opponent safe. If it does go then he has a shot on the two. But the difficulty of making that one in the side will prevent this from becoming a popular break shot. If the rules insisted on the balls being racked at random and the two was not allowed on the corner each time then this break becomes (IMHO) obsolete. Also, Corey was just barely driving the required four balls to the rail. In fact, I only counted three hitting at least once, but could be wrong. We will have this match up on AZBtv in a few days and you can count the balls hitting the rail for yourself.

I certainly hope this style of break proves unreliable and fades away. If you really want to see this game disappear forever from television, this soft break would be a key factor in doing that. As another poster said, as intelligent a player as Corey is, he is also absolutely the most boring to watch because he is playing the same rack over and over again. The balls break apart into a very predictable pattern time and again.

very good post and nice observation with the mental aspect being what won corey the game, not the actual break per se.

like i said before (or not can't remember if i posted it) the soft break may be effective occasionally, but most of the time it wont be i don't think. unlike nine ball where the soft/cut break will be more effective most of the time. so i don't think some new big flaw has been discovered in ten ball now and we're all gonna have to change to eleven ball now lol.

and finally just to say i don't like the soft break to be honest. it's not in the spirit of the game and what rotation games are supposed to be about.

and like jerry said it's a huge turn off for viewers - it's not exciting to watch. people want to see a big crushing break and a run out generally.

 

[corvette1340]

very good post and nice observation with the mental aspect being what won corey the game, not the actual break per se.

like i said before (or not can't remember if i posted it) the soft break may be effective occasionally, but most of the time it wont be i don't think. unlike nine ball where the soft/cut break will be more effective most of the time. so i don't think some new big flaw has been discovered in ten ball now and we're all gonna have to change to eleven ball now lol.

and finally just to say i don't like the soft break to be honest. it's not in the spirit of the game and what rotation games are supposed to be about.

and like jerry said it's a huge turn off for viewers - it's not exciting to watch. people want to see a big crushing break and a run out generally.

I agree that the loud and hard break is more exciting for the viewer, but the player doesn't get any more money for breaking hard. Until pool is widely viewed by a large number of spectators, which may be never, I think it is just smart for the player to use what works best. The prize money in pool is small and players are gonna do what it takes to give themselves the best chance to win it. If that is a boring soft break then more power to those that utilize it.

 

[Cuebacca]

In bowling, the competitors are not allowed to rack their own pins.

As long as players continue to rack their own balls in pool, there will be these kinds of problems.

JAM

What is the alternative though? Rack-for-each-other doesn't really make any sense. It is kind of like swapping quarterbacks. Your quarterback plays for my team and mine plays for yours. Oops, incomplete. Oops, interception. Oops, I got sacked. My bad.

The main reason why all these problems weren't addressed years ago is because we are finally discovering what happens on the break when the balls are actually racked tight. JMO. I understand wanting to come up with something to reduce the advantage of breaking, and to make the game more interesting, but taking away tight racks is not the solution, IMHO.

 

[JAM]

What is the alternative though? Rack-for-each-other doesn't really make any sense. It is kind of like swapping quarterbacks. Your quarterback plays for my team and mine plays for yours. Oops, incomplete. Oops, interception. Oops, I got sacked. My bad.

The main reason why all these problems weren't addressed years ago is because we are finally discovering what happens on the break when the balls are actually racked tight. JMO. I understand wanting to come up with something to reduce the advantage of breaking, and to make the game more interesting, but taking away tight racks is not the solution, IMHO.

I think a tight rack is the way it is supposed to be, at least I had thought so.

For a player to manipulate the rack with cracks in it, to help him break balls better, is no different than playing poker with a marked deck. There are players today who rack their own balls and cheat. People look the other way and say it is the opponent's duty to ask for a re-rack. Otherwise, in their view, the rigged rack is fair. I disagree.

Personally, I think neither player -- the breaker or the racker -- should rack the balls.

I believe there should be NEUTRAL rackers. Then the rack riggers wouldn't be able to cheat.

Rack rigging is quite different than breaking strategies that Corey has employed. Breaking strategies are to be commended, kind of like a good stroke in golf. Rack riggers, on the other hand, are cheaters. Yet, this seems to be pool's dirty little secret, and everybody looks the other way as if it is not happening.

The only way to cure it is to have NEUTRAL rackers.

JAM

 

[NoBull9]

Bud Green I know my typing skills suck!Sorry missed that class.But if you would like to slap me I'll be glad to Pm you my address.
Black Jack your diagram is nice but wrong.Corey was leaving the cue ball on the foot rail behind the stack.And was not attempting to hold the cue ball the way your diagram shows.The two ball was hanging around the corner pocket.Three up the table one by the side pocket.And he was breaking from the other side of the table foot or so off the side rail.

 

[frankwhite]

It has to be lower than 20 MPH for sure. MANY players only break at 15, 16, and 17 MPH.

JAM

In my opinion(only mine) I think this is all BS. You should be able to break how ever you wish. Both players have the opportunity to break as they wish. Someone like Corey is so great for this game, dont think many people understand the effort he takes to come up with new shot(ect.) selections which many of us learn off of. I bless him for all I learned off of him when he is around. Just my input.
Frankie....

 

[Southpaw]

I was there filming the matches for AZBtv. In my opinion (note that word 'opinion') it was not Corey's break that was winning the matches, it was the psyche that the break and Corey's attitude put on his opponents that won him the day. Had Corey's opponents resolved to shove this style of play down Corey's throat they might have been able to do just that and win. But they got flustered, got taken out of their playing style, and could not adjust. In the final match Nevel raked the table and conceded at least three times. Once there were three or four balls left on the table and the last time there were either seven or eight balls still topside. Corey made Nevel grow weary of playing a chess game instead of a fast and loose shootout and Nevel could never adjust.

Frankly, at least against Nevel, Corey's break was not working as planned. He never made the one ball that I remember, but Nevel only half-heartedly tried to make a good hit and kept handing the table back over to Corey. Corey did not win this match so much as Nevel lost it. (I am sure you know what I mean.)

Corey plays a safety break. If the one ball does not go in the side pocket then he leaves the opponent safe. If it does go then he has a shot on the two. But the difficulty of making that one in the side will prevent this from becoming a popular break shot. If the rules insisted on the balls being racked at random and the two was not allowed on the corner each time then this break becomes (IMHO) obsolete. Also, Corey was just barely driving the required four balls to the rail. In fact, I only counted three hitting at least once, but could be wrong. We will have this match up on AZBtv in a few days and you can count the balls hitting the rail for yourself.

I certainly hope this style of break proves unreliable and fades away. If you really want to see this game disappear forever from television, this soft break would be a key factor in doing that. As another poster said, as intelligent a player as Corey is, he is also absolutely the most boring to watch because he is playing the same rack over and over again. The balls break apart into a very predictable pattern time and again.

I agree with this 100%. Corey knows that he isnt gonna put any racks together this way, but he also knows that this type of break will get into his opponents head b/c they are gonna have a tough time out moving him. A player like Larry Nevel is an ideal mark for this strategy. Larry likes to shoot. As long as Corey isnt breaking any rules, then do what you have to do to win. JMO.

Southpaw