Earl's comments about fans and the game.

I don't see anything at all wrong with a soft break. The official rule has always been 4 numbered balls must hit a rail. This is so someone doesn't bunt the rack and try to get you on 3 fouls off the break. The rule about the number of balls past the side pocket all started when Corey spent YEARS perfecting breaking and racking. Corey created an offensive weapon with the soft break.

Players complained because they didn't know how to do the same.

Reading a rack is a SKILL
Racking tight is a SKILL (see if a D player can rack tight)
Breaking softly is a SKILL
Knowing 20 different break techniques, to include soft breaking, is a SKILL
Knowing how to adjust the break to match table conditions is a SKILL

Why are so many people complaining about taking this highly skillful part of the game away, and making it so you have to slam the balls?
 
How about racking the nine on the spot, and breaking out of the box??? That should eliminate any problems.
 
Ok Jay

Racking the 9 on the spot is still a problem as now the one in the side becomes the wing ball once we understand a little about the rack. I worked hard at learning how to break hard and park whitey, I promise it takes more skill and is more appealing to the fans to see an explosive break. We have learned through the yrs. that the softer we hit the nine ball rack the easier it is to make the corner ball. Ten ball is still my answer to the wing ball problem of todays 9 ball.
 
TimKrazyMon said:
Earl obviously hasn't had his joint today. Anyone care to help a brotha out?
Click to expand...



Come on, that shit really isn't necessary, Earl is making a valid point. When it comes to knowledge of the game and weakness within it's current rules Earl is as qualified as anyone to make the statement he made.

JIMO
 
Ol Earl, People love him or hate him. He is my favorite player, I does not
matter to me what he says to who. He PAYS for his remarks and always has
 
the guy's a cry baby. that's all there is to it. no matter what it'll always be someone else's fault in his mind.
 
Danny Harriman said:
Racking the 9 on the spot is still a problem as now the one in the side becomes the wing ball once we understand a little about the rack. I worked hard at learning how to break hard and park whitey, I promise it takes more skill and is more appealing to the fans to see an explosive break. We have learned through the yrs. that the softer we hit the nine ball rack the easier it is to make the corner ball. Ten ball is still my answer to the wing ball problem of todays 9 ball.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, but they already have another tournament called the US Open 10 Ball which would make it hard to do as you say. Barry has been having the tournament for around 30 years but you can't tell the other promoter to change the name of his tournament because they want to change the game in Barry's tournament to 10 ball or expect Barry to give up the tradition he's worked so hard at for so long. That's just not feasible. I think they could come up with a break format that does not give a "wingball" situation either by moving the spot and/or using a break box. For that matter they could require the breaker to break from the head spot which would change things IMHO. But I don't think the game should be changed at the US Open Nine Ball Tournament to accommodate this situation and 10 Ft tables is really out of the question. Players have to practice before hand. Poolrooms are struggling enough these days, they can't be expected to change over to 10 ft tables just to accommodate tournament play. It would make it just that much tougher for the pool rooms to stay afloat! That's just not realistic! Any pool room that still has a 10 ft table I'll bet it's the least used table in the poolroom.
 
10 Ball is definately the answer. I say 9 Ball amateur events and 10 Ball Professional events.
 
Earls comments

KMRUNOUT said:
I agree. I think the soft break is a particular technique that is the right tool for certain situations. However, I also know where Earl is coming from. There is a certain excitement about a huge break to start the game. It is great to watch for fans too, especially the more casual fans. Imagine that all golf course holes were shortened by 100 yards and they removed woods from the game (the clubs, not the guy lol). The first thing that attracted me to golf was the ability to blast a ball 250 yards...taking that away would diminish the game in my estimation. I guess maybe Earl is feeling something like this. I think both sides are valid...and in my opinion it takes a LOT more skill to be able to break hard with control than to break soft. Not saying there isn't skill involved in breaking soft, there definitely is...its just easier to learn how to do it from a physical standpoint.

And I shudder to think about the tables that are so slow you can't get 3 balls up table :eek:. I hope for your sake it is just terrible racking and not cloth that is so slow!

In any case, my observations on this matter...

KMRUNOUT
Click to expand...

I remember a tournament last year and Van Boening didn't get 3 past the side several games. I think they should be able to break however they want . If Corey is willing to spend hours figuring out an edge breaking then they just need to practice also. It would heighten the game even more imo.
 
Earl has always been a fan of a hard break. I seen him at a tournament getting ready for a match. He asked the person that he was scheduled to play if he planned on breaking hard. The guy said he did and Earl shook his hand and said he would do the same. Made a few comments about the soft break and then started talking to the crowd.

Earl just wants good pool even if it doesn't benefit him. :winknudge:
 
Earl is always like this. If you say one thing to him then he will ignore what you said and launch into a rant about what he thinks is wrong with the game. He definitely has firm opinions on that. And who is to say that he isn't right? If the game required a person to break above a certain MPH then theoretically the biggest breakers would have an advantage.

But it doesn't. Don't blame the fans for the way the game is. Are they supposed to boo people who don't break hard? Should they also boo people who duck instead of taking a difficult shot?

Earl just lives in the past where people didn't know any better and everyone thought that breaking hard was the only way to play. In 1986 at Jamacia Joe's poolroom one of the housemen, Biker Johnny, taught me how to soft break. He was ahead of the curve on the reasoning. His reasoning was that it's better to control the break and if you can make a ball and keep control of the table then why not.

Years later Corey Duell brought the soft break to the professional game and big breaking guys like Earl couldn't stand it.

It is what it is. No one ever said that breaking hard is how nine ball is supposed to be played. People just did it because it seemed to be more effective. And perhaps it was when nine ball was played on the slow nap non-worsted cloth. But with the modern game played on slick cloth (which Earl also hates), the soft break is effective.

Why make players suffer just because some people want some aesthicly pleasing? In tennis a player can serve underhanded and just lob the ball into the opponent's court. There is no rule that says that they MUST hit the ball as hard as they can. They do hit the ball hard because that's more effective than simply lobbing the serve.

Let the pros break how they want to break. Make them play ten ball instead of nine ball. Problem solved, no more soft breaking.
 
iusedtoberich said:
I don't see anything at all wrong with a soft break. The official rule has always been 4 numbered balls must hit a rail. This is so someone doesn't bunt the rack and try to get you on 3 fouls off the break. The rule about the number of balls past the side pocket all started when Corey spent YEARS perfecting breaking and racking. Corey created an offensive weapon with the soft break.

Players complained because they didn't know how to do the same.

Reading a rack is a SKILL
Racking tight is a SKILL (see if a D player can rack tight)
Breaking softly is a SKILL
Knowing 20 different break techniques, to include soft breaking, is a SKILL
Knowing how to adjust the break to match table conditions is a SKILL

Why are so many people complaining about taking this highly skillful part of the game away, and making it so you have to slam the balls?
Click to expand...

Actually the rule was not always that four balls had to hit a rail. That rule and rules like it which say four balls have to go past the side pockets were put in effect to try and enforce a hard break.

Otherwise I agree with everything you have said.
 
Well I'm sure a lot of people forget when Buddy, Alan Hopkins Nick V.got upset when J. Archer perfected his break and was making the 1 ball up corner or leaving a easy shot for it and running out. Buddy told me that they needed to change it because you couldn't beat J.A. that way. well they put him in the so called kitchen, slow him down but he found a way to beat all the girly breakers with a mans break.Corey stoled A. Fisher's break and made it work for him..point is play straight pool or one pocket if you want to break like a ......... Oh and for you guys out there, MAN UP!, if you can't break more then 10 mph. play with Barbie dolls...jmo
 
jrackman said:
Well I'm sure a lot of people forget when Buddy, Alan Hopkins Nick V.got upset when J. Archer perfected his break and was making the 1 ball up corner or leaving a easy shot for it and running out. Buddy told me that they needed to change it because you couldn't beat J.A. that way. well they put him in the so called kitchen, slow him down but he found a way to beat all the girly breakers with a mans break.Corey stoled A. Fisher's break and made it work for him..point is play straight pool or one pocket if you want to break like a ......... Oh and for you guys out there, MAN UP!, if you can't break more then 10 mph. play with Barbie dolls...jmo
Click to expand...

That's quite funny. I don't remember everyone upset about Johnny's break. The Taiwanese and the Chinese however know how to break hard and make the one in the side on purpose very often.

However here is a video where my horse loses against another player's girly break, the breaker makes five balls on the break and runs out - I think everyone would love to have this girly break - I wish I did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmqWPXg1dcc
 
tell me how radical is this:

what if there were x number of designated spots that each player had to break from. if the race was 7, have 7 different spots ranging from the side to the center to the other side. Have the referee place the cue ball. This wouldn't totally prevent soft breaking, but would simply encourage/allow (maybe force) the players to increase their repetoire of break shots.

there are varying methods of breaking, it's something we could embrace. idk, just a thought. go ahead and let me have it guys, lol.
 

Attachments

  • break spots.jpg
    break spots.jpg
    16 KB · Views: 296
Last edited:
Youngstownkid,

That's not a completely 'out of whack' thought...

In a race to 9, maybe the breaker gets to choose the last two break positions ? Or thier opponent chooses the last two for them ?

A race to 13 ? 1 thru 7, then backwards down to 1 ?

It will be interesting to see what others have to say...
 
youngstownkid said:
tell me how radical is this:

what if there were x number of designated spots that each player had to break from. if the race was 7, have 7 different spots ranging from the side to the center to the other side. Have the referee place the cue ball. This wouldn't totally prevent soft breaking, but would simply encourage/allow (maybe force) the players to increase their repetoire of break shots.

there are varying methods of breaking, it's something we could embrace. idk, just a thought. go ahead and let me have it guys, lol.
Click to expand...

I've heard crazier ideas. Only problem for me would be that if I get in the zone or really concentrating in a match, I would probably inadvertently break from the same spot (or not the correct spot) by mistake. Each match would almost need a referee for only the purpose of being sure players broke from the correct position each game.

Mike
 
Mike Templeton said:
I've heard crazier ideas. Only problem for me would be that if I get in the zone or really concentrating in a match, I would probably inadvertently break from the same spot (or not the correct spot) by mistake. Each match would almost need a referee for only the purpose of being sure players broke from the correct position each game.

Mike
Click to expand...

Agreed- youngstown's idea is fine in theory, but I am not smart enough to conform.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top