If Xiaoting Pan had Shane Van Boening or Charlie Bryant breaking for her would she be able to compete at 9 Ball with the top men pros and if no they why?
I doubt it and here is why. I don't think she shoots as well as Chris Bartrum and he is not good enough to compete with the top men, he gets spotted by them. When you are talking about the "top men" you are talking about Souquet, Wu, Orcullo, Bustamante, Appleton, SVB, Alex, Yang, Chang, Corteza, and a few select others.
Not only does Pan not shoot as well as those guys, neither anymore does Johnny Archer or any other male pro in the USA besides SVB. You said Charlie Bryant could break for her, well Bryant himself cannot compete at the top of the mens tour so by default you are assuming that Pan actually "shoots" ALOT better then Bryant since he is not even close and you are asking if she could be at the elite level of the men that only one man in the entire USA can actually manage to get to these days.
Now does that mean Pan can never win a match against the above people with a designated breaker? Of course not, our game is such that upsets and people of lesser skill beating players of more skill is a common occurance. Bartrum gets spotted in big money matches, but in race lengths such as are played in the US-Open 9-ball he has a chance to beat anyone in the world and has proven that by getting really deep in the event one year and beating more then 1 world class elite player on route to that finish. But can Bartrum do it on a regular basis? He once came in deep in the event, world class elite players WIN that event, some multiple times in a row, and that deep finish is not a surprise, that is their norm and it does not surprise people to see one of those guys there in the final 6 or final 4 of an event like that. It surprised us to see Putnam there, and it proves the point that skill is not always the primary factor in matches being won in this sport.
The skill gap was shown clearly by TAR when Alex and SVB competed on the TAR table in 10-ball, a brutally tough table that they adjusted to quickly and shot remarkably well on for almost the whole match. SVB ran 2 6 packs and a 7 pack on that table in that match and he HAD to because Alex was shooting awesome. Raj and Oscar then went onto that table and they chopped up for 2 days straight in a brutally played match where I doubt either player were within 0.100 accustat of either SVB or Alex.
After that TAR match RAJ then went on to play in a tournament heavy with top pro level players the very next week played on normal cut diamonds with what is atm "standard" pro level conditions (read too easy) and he got into the finals. The tables having easy enough pockets blurred the lines of the true skill, the tight positional control and potting ability that the TAR table required was not required in that event and as such a big break and some sloppy but "good enough" play could get you through racks, through the short matches, and through opponents.
Also John Schmidt once mentioned that to nullify the break a little it might be good to have a rule where if you make a ball off the break in 9 or 10 ball your opponent has to push out every time. It would slow the game down but would also even out the field a little.
You don't need to fix the break, you need to fix the game. Do what I have mentioned constantly on here and put the pro events on the new upcomming 10-foot Diamond tables with 4 1/8 inch pockets and make the game 8-ball. Make the tournaments single elimination race to 13, alternate break, win by 2.
On conditions like that in the game of 8-ball the break can be a tool (and it should be, just like a good serve in tennis or a good drive in golf) but the break would not be the ultimate deciding factor as exceptional shooting skill would be a hugely important to actually getting out. Strategy, cueball control, potting ability, banking, all of these skill sets would see their imprtance ramp up hugely when compared to the break.
While a good break would still be useful it would not be the critical decider it is now and the disparity in breaking ability would be marginalized. Pool on a table like that would be akin to a golf course where a guy like Corey Pavin or Mike Weir have a chance, a course that rewards accurate shooting and clutch putting and limits the advantages of a huge drive. In alot of ways it would be like the Augusta of pool conditions.
