Pattern Racking 9-Ball With Soft Breaking Video

BeiberLvr said:
I agree. So you could also use the top 8 from international events as well.

After all, how many times have you seen an absolute rank amateur in the quarterfinals of a major event?
Click to expand...

If races were to 21 and single elimination, with a match time limit of 3 hours, I doubt amateurs would even waste their entry fee, which equates to about 90 percent of the field. If skill level requirements was the basis of choosing players, there'd never be an amateur playing with the top pros.
 
realkingcobra said:
That's been my point for years too. The Professional player shouldn't ever have to compete against amature players. They should be in a division all by themselves like ALL other professional sports figures are. And if the do in fact ever play against NON-PROS' it should be called an exhibition!
Click to expand...

While I agree that no amateurs should not be in a pro tournament unless through qualifier or exemption, those are pro tournaments. The US Open should NOT be a pro tournament, though I think that entrants should have to win or place high in some regional qualifying tournament, not just walk on (unless entrant numbers are really crappy?)

The golf US Open is ran and sanctioned by the USGA, not the PGA. The bowling US Open is ran by the USBC, not the PBA. The US Opens are technically amateur events that pros are allowed to enter, not the other way around. Hence the word "Open."
 
Cornerman said:
This year's CSI 9-ball Challengd will be a nice update as Corey even hits this soft break even better, and he shows that he can use pretty much any pattern including "numerical order" pattern.

Freddie
Click to expand...

The CSI 9-ball challenge has been uploaded to YouTube, and should be a nice update to the Corey soft break.

Corey vs Jesse
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A9fmzQ0dg6I&t=10m15s

Corey vs Shane McMinn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DvEf6reGFE

Warning: apparently some of the commentary is the worst ever, according to the comments.

Freddie
 
What we seem to be discussing is really 2 different problems.

1. When the rack is GOOD, making a ball on the break is more or less automatic,
then players will figure out a way to control the 1 ball, whose position never changes.
If they can get an easy controlled shot to start, the top pros can make short work of the rest.

2. If we allow pattern racks, we get some simple runouts and some early 9b combos.

Solutions I don't like:

• The solution to #1 is NOT to go back to random, shitty racks (in other words,
getting rid of magic rack) that make it 50/50 to sink a ball regardless of breaking skill.
That's unfair to the players, even if it adds entertainment value.

The players in the old days could accept a random break outcome,
but now that this generation understands it doesn't HAVE to be random,
you can't put the genie back in the bottle and expect them to accept
that their paycheck might ride on a random 1mm gap.

Traditional triangles and less-than-perfect racks also lead to super slow,
careful racking (boooooring) and lots of arguments.
We have players quitting midmatch, getting into squabbles, even getting kicked off tour (dechaine).

There's nothing good about any of that.

• The solution to #2 is not a set pattern.
Good players will figure out how to manipulate this, and it doesn't
solve the problem of being able to control the 1 ball to ensure an easy start.
Corey illustrated this in his match after getting called out for pattern racking.
He still ran out, it was just more work.

You don't solve pattern racking with patterns, you solve it by educating refs and
enforcing existing rules. The ref should jump on corey the instant he sees
1,2,3 at the top, or 1,2,4 with the 3 on the wing, etc. ... it shouldn't require
his opponent to kick up a fuss.

Solutions that actually work:

• The MC already solved this one.
9 on the spot ensures making a ball takes some skill and a firm hit.
And since the ball that goes in is the 1, there's no guarantee of an easy shot afterwards.
This gives you the excitement of a tough opening shot and tactical battle after the break.

• Neutral racker - again, mosconi cup. Players are still making a ball 75% of the time, so we know
rack-your-own is unnecessary to get proper, fair racks. You don't need to be a pool genius
to give a good rack. And you probably don't need to get paid thousands either,
despite the cries of "who's going to pay all these rackers? There's no money for that!!"

• Instead of a set pattern, how about we simply forbid certain balls in certain positions?
i.e. the 2 can't be in the 2nd row, maybe the 3 has to be in the back. Though if you solve
the first problem of soft breaking (by racking high) the pattern problem almost
takes care of itself... no more 4mph breaks with the 1 hanging in the side and 2 on the same rail.

• Why don't we remove the sacrosanct rule of "1 must be at the top" and just let it be random?
No more controlling the 1.
 
It doesn't matter which order the balls are in, the pros will figger out a break angle and speed dthat gets them what they want more or less. Maybe in the future someone can invent number balls from 2 through 8 that only show their numbers after the break....

I'm pretty sure they have a break strategy regardless of the wing balls or rear balls or whatever. Would be naive to think otherwise.
 
louieatienza said:
It doesn't matter which order the balls are in, the pros will figger out a break angle and speed dthat gets them what they want more or less. Maybe in the future someone can invent number balls from 2 through 8 that only show their numbers after the break....

I'm pretty sure they have a break strategy regardless of the wing balls or rear balls or whatever. Would be naive to think otherwise.
Click to expand...

Maybe someone can confirm but I'm pretty sure the breaker wins more often when the wing ball goes on the break
 
louieatienza said:
While I agree that no amateurs should not be in a pro tournament unless through qualifier or exemption, those are pro tournaments. The US Open should NOT be a pro tournament, though I think that entrants should have to win or place high in some regional qualifying tournament, not just walk on (unless entrant numbers are really crappy?)

The golf US Open is ran and sanctioned by the USGA, not the PGA. The bowling US Open is ran by the USBC, not the PBA. The US Opens are technically amateur events that pros are allowed to enter, not the other way around. Hence the word "Open."
Click to expand...

Now based on what you just posted, name some events that are Pro's ONLY, not including qualifiers....just PRO'S only?
 
louieatienza said:
It doesn't matter which order the balls are in, the pros will figger out a break angle and speed dthat gets them what they want more or less. Maybe in the future someone can invent number balls from 2 through 8 that only show their numbers after the break....

I'm pretty sure they have a break strategy regardless of the wing balls or rear balls or whatever. Would be naive to think otherwise.
Click to expand...

I think you missed my explanation about how pattern racking works. Having a shot on the one ball after the break means nothing if then2 ball is tied up and unplayable....that means no break and run.
 
BeiberLvr said:
Maybe someone can confirm but I'm pretty sure the breaker wins more often when the wing ball goes on the break
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you're still talking about pattern racking again where the first key balls are left open, but I'm sure if you check atlarges' statistics you'll find that only a couple of players in this country can br3ak and run about 50% of the time....sometimes.
 
Darren Appleton said mayje year ago Nine Ball need 9-on spot, 2 on lowest ball on break.
It gives most random placement on 2 ball after break. I play against ghost
always 2 ball lowest and confirm it is best for random layouts after the break. I believe it is common rule all over Europe too. At least Finland have it 99percent of time.
Add kitchen rule like mosconi or WCOP and it fixes pattern racking best way IMO.
 
realkingcobra said:
I think you missed my explanation about how pattern racking works. Having a shot on the one ball after the break means nothing if then2 ball is tied up and unplayable....that means no break and run.
Click to expand...

There's nothing I missed. I've seen quite a few different patterns. Wherever you place the 2, you'll have a shot a good percentage of the time at running out if you soft-break. If you have it right behind the 1, you would just break on the same side as the 2 ball, have the shot at the 1 in the side or top pocket, and possibly have a chance at the 2-9 combo (I think your opponent would cry though if you did this). If the 2 is the wing ball, you shoot on that side and it goes in the corner with regularity; then you make a judgment based on where the 3 is in the rack. If the 2 in front of the rear ball, you break on that side, and you have a shot at it in the lower corner pocket. And if the 2 is the back ball you'll bank it up the table and have a shot at it after the 1. You could then adjust the speed and hit depending on where the other balls are on the rack. Barring any unlucky clusters, your worst shot will be going up the table, then back down, then back up again. Elite players do this, even with 8 balls on the table, and many good players do this as well.

You won't do it every time, but I'm sure anyone who practices this will do it with enough regularity for some relatively easy runs. And if it doesn't go as planned all the elite players are great shotmakers and safe players.
 
louieatienza said:
There's nothing I missed. I've seen quite a few different patterns. Wherever you place the 2, you'll have a shot a good percentage of the time at running out if you soft-break. If you have it right behind the 1, you would just break on the same side as the 2 ball, have the shot at the 1 in the side or top pocket, and possibly have a chance at the 2-9 combo (I think your opponent would cry though if you did this). If the 2 is the wing ball, you shoot on that side and it goes in the corner with regularity; then you make a judgment based on where the 3 is in the rack. If the 2 in front of the rear ball, you break on that side, and you have a shot at it in the lower corner pocket. And if the 2 is the back ball you'll bank it up the table and have a shot at it after the 1. You could then adjust the speed and hit depending on where the other balls are on the rack. Barring any unlucky clusters, your worst shot will be going up the table, then back down, then back up again. Elite players do this, even with 8 balls on the table, and many good players do this as well.

You won't do it every time, but I'm sure anyone who practices this will do it with enough regularity for some relatively easy runs. And if it doesn't go as planned all the elite players are great shotmakers and safe players.
Click to expand...

I would like to see video when someone controls 2 ball when it is lowest ball... I am pretty good breaker when I am on... I can´t do it.
 
louieatienza said:
There's nothing I missed. I've seen quite a few different patterns. Wherever you place the 2, you'll have a shot a good percentage of the time at running out if you soft-break. If you have it right behind the 1, you would just break on the same side as the 2 ball, have the shot at the 1 in the side or top pocket, and possibly have a chance at the 2-9 combo (I think your opponent would cry though if you did this). If the 2 is the wing ball, you shoot on that side and it goes in the corner with regularity; then you make a judgment based on where the 3 is in the rack. If the 2 in front of the rear ball, you break on that side, and you have a shot at it in the lower corner pocket. And if the 2 is the back ball you'll bank it up the table and have a shot at it after the 1. You could then adjust the speed and hit depending on where the other balls are on the rack. Barring any unlucky clusters, your worst shot will be going up the table, then back down, then back up again. Elite players do this, even with 8 balls on the table, and many good players do this as well.

You won't do it every time, but I'm sure anyone who practices this will do it with enough regularity for some relatively easy runs. And if it doesn't go as planned all the elite players are great shotmakers and safe players.
Click to expand...


I thought I'd give it a try on my 10 foot brunswick. It must be super easy on a 7 footer. LOL

Here is 3 consecutive racks, Corey Duel soft break with the 2 ball behind the 1 ball for a consistent 2 ball run out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrTfy33fkCw&feature=youtu.be
 
Poolmanis said:
I would like to see video when someone controls 2 ball when it is lowest ball... I am pretty good breaker when I am on... I can´t do it.
Click to expand...

If you soft-break with the 2 on the bottom, it will tend to stay on the side you broke from, whether it be by the corner (because it got clipped by the opposite wing ball banking across or whatever), or back up table. So as long as you keep the cue ball in the center more or less, you have a shot at the 1 in the side or top corner (provided it does not go in), leaving a pretty easy setup for the 2, since there are no balls in the top half to get in the way.

I actually never really knew about soft-breaking and pattern-racking since I stopped playing 7 years ago (and haven't played competitively in about 15), but I went to the local pool hall a couple times, and was able to get consistent results. Good video with Dennis Orcollo running a 6-pack with the 2 in back.
 
Last edited:
Side Pocket said:
I thought I'd give it a try on my 10 foot brunswick. It must be super easy on a 7 footer. LOL

Here is 3 consecutive racks, Corey Duel soft break with the 2 ball behind the 1 ball for a consistent 2 ball run out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrTfy33fkCw&feature=youtu.be
Click to expand...

I usually don't play on a bar table, but I think it may be harder with the smaller table giving more possibility for the 2 to kiss out...

BTW - 2 consecutive jump-combo shots with the cue ball 2" away from the 6! Nice....
 
Last edited:
louieatienza said:
I usually don't play on a bar table, but I think it may be harder with the smaller table giving more possibility for the 2 to kiss out...

BTW - 2 consecutive jump-combo shots with the cue ball 2" away from the 6! Nice....
Click to expand...

Jump cues are becoming more and more banned in tournaments.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top