is the break the most difficult shot in pool?

[Black-Balled]

My break sucks and it is why I lose most of the time. For the life of me I can't figure out how to consistently make balls on the break. So yeah, I would say, in my game it is the most important shot.

You know, on some tables I find that reducing speed and jacking butt end of cue up...with cb close to side rail, the balls break better.

Kind of press the cb into bed upon striking it, ya know?

It causes the cb to hit the 1 on a different vertical point.

Free advice: worth every penny.

 

[Bob Jewett]

My break sucks and it is why I lose most of the time. For the life of me I can't figure out how to consistently make balls on the break. ...

Do you rack for yourself?

 

[sjm]

Pretty difficult question posed in this thread. I don't think that the break is the most difficult shot, but it might be the most important, as you'll have to hit the break in about half of the racks you ever play. No other shot comes up with such frequency. You can't get by without a solid break, and nearly all of the 100 best players in the world have one. Yes, a few of them stand out from the others, and this thread is not about who they are. What we've seen, though, is that you can win tournaments without a great break as long as you have a solid break.

So yes, I think the break is critical. So, of course, is ball pocketing.

That said, though, I think that one reason the importance of the break is overestimated is in the way both players and commentators tend to evaluate the matches they contest or analyze. Players often talk about losing because they didn't break better or because they missed more than they should have, but how often do you hear them say any of these?

1) I lost because I played bad safeties
2) I lost because I made some poor tactical choices
3) I lost because I played some bad position angles
4) I lost because I overlooked some two way shot opportunities
5) I lost because my kicking and/or jumping was poor
6) I lost because my speed control was poor
7) I lost because I made a couple of ill advised shots/decisions in the push-out(s)

I've been talking to pro players after their matches for 40 years, and I'm hard pressed to remember any pro ever making this kind of comment about why they lost. There's a simple reason for this - nobody wants to believe or suggest that a player mismanaged the tactical part of the game, and sometimes, they don't even realize it.

Guess what I'm saying is that there is far more to winning than breaking and pocketing, and yet both pros and commentators rarely offer other explanations for failure to succeed.

So, yes, work hard on your break but commit yourself to being a truly complete player, because if you are like most, you are mistaken in your belief that only your break is holding you back. Good luck with your game.

 

[evergruven]

@jimmy- thanks pal :thumbup:
@bic- so much of pool is mental, isn't it? you also bring up a great point about letting the other guy break potentially being an advantage.
@derek- what you said about the broken ribs/shane is funny, and knowing shane's break, probably wise! there is definitely luck involved in pool, but the more we practice/play, the luckier we get?!
@pat- skill-wise, I agree there are tougher shots out there to hit, but what seems to increase the difficulty of the break is how often it's hit, and how potentially critical that shot is to the outcome of the game. other posters have intelligently pointed out that lesser players might not need to worry as much about making balls, getting a good shot, squatting the cue ball, etc., but at the highest level we've seen matches decided by the break, haven't we? even if breakers only have a slight advantage winning games, couldn't that still decide the outcome of a match? ps shout to atlarge for all the stat-posting- if you see this, weigh in?
@bob- you're right, my og post did not refer to 14.1 or one-pocket. I will have to look this schofield chap up- sounds interesting. I also didn't know that phenolic tips damaged the cue ball, but have read that balls can lose mass after being hit so much. same with cue balls or do they crack or ?
@luxury- I think there's truth in what you say..the break is more of a physical shot, and efren, while so collected athletically just about everywhere else, just doesn't look like he enjoys hitting it. sometimes I watch him and it almost looks like he resents having to break, and that he'd rather just start with the balls open. I don't know, but it's interesting to think about.
@mitch- agree that a z shot in traffic requires a lot, but how often do you have to hit that one?
what @black said...
@sjm and @jrc- without question, breaking is only part of the game, and a good player should be familiar with all the techniques you all mentioned. @sjm in tennis, players interviewed after they've won or lost a match, will usually point out what worked and what didn't, i.e. serve, return, forehand, backhand, court surface, weather, critical points, etc.
of course pool is different, but what you say is interesting. personally, I would love to hear more from pool players, but they certainly aren't given near as grand a platform as tennis players are.
not sure if "good luck with your game" was meant for me, but I'll take it so thanks

 

[CGM]

Do you rack for yourself?

Yes, even when I rack for myself I find it difficult to consistently make balls on the break. I'm a little better with a template rack but, overall, I have a very poor percentage of remaining at the table when I break.

 

[Derek7646]

The most important aspect of the break is hit it square (assuming you aren't cut breaking).

For the safest 9 ball break for me using a template rack, i break 1 ball from the left rail as a right hander and hit it as hard as i can without jumping up/pulling the cue off line and without dropping my elbow. Only hit the break as hard as you can control and work your way up to hitting the rack square and getting that little cueball pop up to have it sit in the middle of the table and have the 1 come down to the side rail, that will increase your odds.

As for 8 ball, same goes for hitting hit square but you want more power, as you need more energy to spread the balls and hopefully make one. I use a lot of wrist snap and a very controlled take away to ensure i am on the proper target line to the middle of the head ball and then you just crank it forward, down that same line for that cue ball pop up.

That's how i do it, anyway. Got a few lessons from an open player and a little break lesson from bustamante and they generally believe the same things, for the 9ball break at least. My 8 ball break is more like a watered down, way less effective Shane Van Boening break.

 

[jay helfert]

Bottom line, the break shot is the most important shot to master in the game of 9-Ball or Ten Ball (or One Pocket) when played between pro level players. As far as I'm concerned a pro player should be practicing the break on the table before a match, more than any other shot, just to see how the table is breaking.

 

[Derek7646]

Bottom line, the break shot is the most important shot to master in the game of 9-Ball or Ten Ball (or One Pocket) when played between pro level players. As far as I'm concerned a pro player should be practicing the break on the table before a match, more than any other shot, just to see how the table is breaking.

Agreed. Shane Van Boening wouldn't string 5-10 racks together if he wasn't a consistently great breaker, nor would anyone ever. You can be capable of running every reasonable rack there is but have zero break and runs if you don't break well.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Bottom line, the break shot is the most important shot to master in the game of 9-Ball or Ten Ball (or One Pocket) when played between pro level players.

Even though barely more than half of pro breakers win the game they broke? (Pat Fleming counted less than half not long ago.)

pj
chgo

 

[Derek7646]

I bet people with a bad break have a far lower win rating of their breaks than people like Shane, Jayson Shaw and other great breakers do. Not every good break is going to result in a runout, as people aren't perfect (sorry Shane). Sometimes the perfect 9ball break that makes 3 balls, hangs the 1 and makes the 9 ball end up with the cue ball stopping mid table perfectly and getting scooted in the side pocket by a rogue 6 ball. Breaking is a game of statistically doing the best you can do and hoping to not get unlucky. If you break poorly, your chances of shenanigans ensuing and/or you not making a ball goes up greatly. So yes, the break is one of, if not the most important shot in pool, objectively speaking.

Patrick, i don't know why you so adamnatly disagree, can you share with us what you think is the most important shot or why you think the break isn't an advantage even though its proven that it is? (Please don't say the 9 ball, as that would just be silly.) If you average Shane van boenings win % from his break with an awful breaker, you're probably going to get a very low % of getting out from your break. If you take the best five breakers and average them together, i would be interested to see what their win % is from the break, as i know for a fact that i have seen Shane and Jayson Shaw run five-ten packs on people in tournaments when their break is working.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Patrick, i don't know why you so adamnatly disagree

I've said why - breakers don't win significantly more than non-breakers.

...can you share with us ... why you think the break isn't an advantage even though its proven that it is?

What proof?

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Maybe Schofield's rules will catch on and then we can talk about real skill on the break shot and everyone can throw away those stupid break cues with the phenolic tips that damage the cue ball.

What he said.

pj
chgo

View attachment 785

 

[Derek7646]

https://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/break_stats.html

Players winning from breaking is one thing and breaking and running is something that you cannot get without breaking successfully, ie: making a ball and having some sort of shot on the 1.

So that is a clear advantage, as pros in tournaments win more often than not when they break and occasionally, they break and run without their opponent even getting a shot. How would that not be an advantage? Also, many tournaments and leagues allow the 8/9 to be potted on the break, sometimes in certain pockets, resulting in a win. So i see two ways to win from the break; breaking and running or making the 8 or 9 on the break. How many ways can you win sitting down in the chair watching your opponent break? If you get lucky or if the breaker has a terrible break, you may get a handout of an open rack, which is a small % chance, or you may get a bad push shot or a safety against you, if you're playing someone who knows what they were doing.

I don't know about you but i would take option 1 - breaking.

 

[Bob Jewett]

https://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/break_stats.html
... So that is a clear advantage, as pros in tournaments win more often than not when they break ...

I think the data on Dr. Dave's site do not necessarily show this. If the match is winner breaks and there is a serious mismatch between the players, there will be a lot of won-from-break racks simply because the weaker player cannot run three balls. I think it is almost fair to look at all the games where a particular player broke and look at the won-from-break percentage for each player, but you still have a problem of the strength of the opponents.

Against typical league players I might have a great won-from-break percentage but against a field of 750-and-up players I would not do so well.

 

[Black-Balled]

Dont you ever run that hustle off, fella.

Dont...never.

I think the data on Dr. Dave's site do not necessarily show this. If the match is winner breaks and there is a serious mismatch between the players, there will be a lot of won-from-break racks simply because the weaker player cannot run three balls. I think it is almost fair to look at all the games where a particular player broke and look at the won-from-break percentage for each player, but you still have a problem of the strength of the opponents.

Against typical league players I might have a great won-from-break percentage but against a field of 750-and-up players I would not do so well.

 

[jay helfert]

Even though barely more than half of pro breakers win the game they broke? (Pat Fleming counted less than half not long ago.)

pj
chgo

YES, even though! Like I said (and you failed to quote) that a player should practice the break on the table he will be playing on prior to the match. That's more important than just hitting balls, and I see few players doing that. Every table breaks a little differently!

 

[Luxury]

I’m guessing the fact that Pat Fleming counted a very slight edge to the non-breaker it was because there was so many players that don’t practice their break enough and they try to break hard and scratch which is an instant lost usually


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pt109]

I’m guessing the fact that Pat Fleming counted a very slight edge to the non-breaker it was because there was so many players that don’t practice their break enough and they try to break hard and scratch which is an instant lost usually


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very good point, Lux....I’m thinking that the break would’ve been an advantage for the
ones who were playing well enough to be in the money.

When I was younger, the current knowledge was that the break and the 8 were equal...
...I wasn’t going for it....many guys who were willing to play me even....I would offer them
the 8 If Incould keep the break.....I did pretty good.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Very good point, Lux....I’m thinking that the break would’ve been an advantage for the
ones who were playing well enough to be in the money.

When I was younger, the current knowledge was that the break and the 8 were equal...
...I wasn’t going for it....many guys who were willing to play me even....I would offer them
the 8 If Incould keep the break.....I did pretty good.

One interesting item from the compiled data on Dr. Dave's website (link above) is that the Derby City Bigfoot 10-ball shows basically no advantage to the breaker. The "wins-from-break" percentage has ranged from 50% to 53%. In 2017 when the breakers had the highest rate of ball-on-legal-break, the "wins-from-break" was only 51%. It was "winner breaks" until 2018 when it switched to alternate.

Most of the players in the Bigfoot shoot OK. It looks like the 10-foot table is a challenge.

 

[Luxury]

One interesting item from the compiled data on Dr. Dave's website (link above) is that the Derby City Bigfoot 10-ball shows basically no advantage to the breaker. The "wins-from-break" percentage has ranged from 50% to 53%. In 2017 when the breakers had the highest rate of ball-on-legal-break, the "wins-from-break" was only 51%. It was "winner breaks" until 2018 when it switched to alternate.



Most of the players in the Bigfoot shoot OK. It looks like the 10-foot table is a challenge.

I was watching the Clash of the champions match between John Morra and SVB Today and noticing how easy it was for them to park the cue ball on a 7 foot table on the break. The breaker definitely had the advantage. I think the bigger the table the harder it is to control the cue ball (distance kills) and obviously harder to run out giving the non-breaker a chance


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk