Soft Break?
- Thread starter poolchady
- Start date
If any of you would like to play the ghost from Alcano's positions after the break I will be more than happy to bet you don't get out every time. He figured out the best break and was able to execute it almost perfectly every time. Then he proceeded to run racks or play jam up safeties in very creative and skillful ways.
Who cares if it's a soft break or not? I mean really. Most of you think the hard break is some sort of cardinal rule or something for 9-ball. I was playing soft breaks 20 years ago in Oklahoma City when an old guy from Trueloves showed it to me. Corey Duell popularized it because he was the first pro to work on it enough to perfect it and the first pro brave enough to use it in competition.
I think it is closed minded to stick with the hard break if it isn't working for you. Wu lost for the same reason Souquet did, they refused to study and implement the same break that Alcano was using. Period. End of Story.
The game is simple, hit the lowest numbered ball first, shoot them in order and keep shooting until they are all gone or until the nine is made on a legal shot. Telling a player that he MUST break hard is the same as telling a player he MUST bank every other ball. The game exists outside of the fan's idea of what is exciting or what isn't and when you try and doctor it up you end up with false results. I.e telling the players to break hard rewards the guys who can hit the balls harder and punishes the ones who can't. Every pro can hit the rack at 15mph, not every one of them can hit it at 30mph. If pool is supposed to be a game of finesse then allow the professionals to hit the rack with whatever speed they feel comfortable doing it at. Obviously success will determine how much any particular style is adopted.
It will be a travesty if they make some rule that is intended to force a harder break.
If anything just rack the balls randomly with the nine in the middle. Put the one in different spots. Before the match begins have the spot for one randomly selected for all the racks and rack them that way. That takes away the standard patterns and will force some truly creative breaks. I mean, why should the one be up front all the time anyway? Or rack the one in different spots but allow the breaker to hit any ball they chose on the break and respot what ever falls if they chose not to hit the one, or don't respot and just let them play the rack out as they lay after the break.
There can be other solutions applied IF the break truly does become so standardized that the game becomes too easy. One of them should NOT be to tell the players they have to hit the balls a certain speed.
Who cares if it's a soft break or not? I mean really. Most of you think the hard break is some sort of cardinal rule or something for 9-ball. I was playing soft breaks 20 years ago in Oklahoma City when an old guy from Trueloves showed it to me. Corey Duell popularized it because he was the first pro to work on it enough to perfect it and the first pro brave enough to use it in competition.
I think it is closed minded to stick with the hard break if it isn't working for you. Wu lost for the same reason Souquet did, they refused to study and implement the same break that Alcano was using. Period. End of Story.
The game is simple, hit the lowest numbered ball first, shoot them in order and keep shooting until they are all gone or until the nine is made on a legal shot. Telling a player that he MUST break hard is the same as telling a player he MUST bank every other ball. The game exists outside of the fan's idea of what is exciting or what isn't and when you try and doctor it up you end up with false results. I.e telling the players to break hard rewards the guys who can hit the balls harder and punishes the ones who can't. Every pro can hit the rack at 15mph, not every one of them can hit it at 30mph. If pool is supposed to be a game of finesse then allow the professionals to hit the rack with whatever speed they feel comfortable doing it at. Obviously success will determine how much any particular style is adopted.
It will be a travesty if they make some rule that is intended to force a harder break.
If anything just rack the balls randomly with the nine in the middle. Put the one in different spots. Before the match begins have the spot for one randomly selected for all the racks and rack them that way. That takes away the standard patterns and will force some truly creative breaks. I mean, why should the one be up front all the time anyway? Or rack the one in different spots but allow the breaker to hit any ball they chose on the break and respot what ever falls if they chose not to hit the one, or don't respot and just let them play the rack out as they lay after the break.
There can be other solutions applied IF the break truly does become so standardized that the game becomes too easy. One of them should NOT be to tell the players they have to hit the balls a certain speed.
Ronnie wasn't the first. I'm not sure if Corey Dueul invented the soft break, but he sure made it popular. Depending on his desired position for the lowest ball on the table, Corey will play stop, follow, or draw when soft-breaking.gopi-1 said:
Ralf lost the 2001 WPC in almost the exact same manner (but it was winners break format) to a soft-breaking Mika Immonen. I believe the score in that final was 17-10.
-djb
Soft Break ...
We have a good player here that uses it sometimes, and when it works (on Bar Tables), he gets many run outs, but when it isn't (which is at least half the time or more), he leaves a run out almost everytime.
Now when starts using it, and I get 2-3 games up on him because it isn't working, he immediately goes back to hard breaking, which is usually too late for him to win the set.
Why it seems so great sometimes, is its advantage to have a 1 ball shot a greater percentage of the time, therefore giving you that chance to run out.
There are times that are right to try it, and times it is not right, depending on the speed of your opponent and where you are in your set (match), and you had better know them, or you will end up losing.
We have a good player here that uses it sometimes, and when it works (on Bar Tables), he gets many run outs, but when it isn't (which is at least half the time or more), he leaves a run out almost everytime.
Now when starts using it, and I get 2-3 games up on him because it isn't working, he immediately goes back to hard breaking, which is usually too late for him to win the set.
Why it seems so great sometimes, is its advantage to have a 1 ball shot a greater percentage of the time, therefore giving you that chance to run out.
There are times that are right to try it, and times it is not right, depending on the speed of your opponent and where you are in your set (match), and you had better know them, or you will end up losing.
Soft Break ...
We have a good player here that uses it sometimes, and when it works (on Bar Tables), he gets many run outs, but when it isn't (which is at least half the time or more), he leaves a run out almost everytime.
Now when starts using it, and I get 2-3 games up on him because it isn't working, he immediately goes back to hard breaking, which is usually too late for him to win the set.
Why it seems so great sometimes, is its advantage to have a 1 ball shot a greater percentage of the time, therefore giving you that chance to run out.
There are times that are right to try it, and times it is not right, depending on the speed of your opponent and where you are in your set (match), and you had better know them, or you will end up losing.
Besides, something noone has mentioned, hard breaking relieves tension to a degree, allowing yourself to settle down at times.
We have a good player here that uses it sometimes, and when it works (on Bar Tables), he gets many run outs, but when it isn't (which is at least half the time or more), he leaves a run out almost everytime.
Now when starts using it, and I get 2-3 games up on him because it isn't working, he immediately goes back to hard breaking, which is usually too late for him to win the set.
Why it seems so great sometimes, is its advantage to have a 1 ball shot a greater percentage of the time, therefore giving you that chance to run out.
There are times that are right to try it, and times it is not right, depending on the speed of your opponent and where you are in your set (match), and you had better know them, or you will end up losing.
Besides, something noone has mentioned, hard breaking relieves tension to a degree, allowing yourself to settle down at times.
Alcano's soft breaks in the final match
http://onthehill2006.seesaa.net/article/27332938.html
http://onthehill2006.seesaa.net/article/27332938.html
I just tried that soft-break 10 times and got a good shot on the 1-ball 7 out of 10 attempts. Made the wing ball every time.
I tended to overdraw the shot a little and to bring it back a bit too straight on some attempts, but I've never had such good breaking results from the power 9-ball break. That said, I rarely play 9-ball games, but with the success rate on this break I might start to
Colin
I tended to overdraw the shot a little and to bring it back a bit too straight on some attempts, but I've never had such good breaking results from the power 9-ball break. That said, I rarely play 9-ball games, but with the success rate on this break I might start to
Colin
DoomCue said:
In 2001 WPC, the referee used the machine to position balls. Not only Mika Immonen, but also Ralf Souquet himself, the semifinalists Lai & Martel and many players used soft-breaking that year. It made the games unfair and boring, and then WPC and most tours didn't apply the machine any more.
Last edited:
Fantastic pics!!!liany2357 said:
He made 6 Break and Runs from 14 breaks = 42.9%
During much of the tournament it seemed on the TV tables that 20% BRO was difficult to achieve.
Just the fact he had a decent shot on the 1-ball allowed Ronnie to start off each frame with a big advantage.
Ralf made 3 or 4 break and runs I think, but he had several racks that put him in trouble right from the start.
Colin
kaduku
Member
People throughout the forums have been saying that the tables have been breaking easy and as a result Ronnie would use his soft-break. When I lived in the Philippines and attended various televised events such as the San Miguel 9-Ball Tour I remember that the officials would "condition" the t.v. table before the event started. Meaning that they would rack the 9 balls and "knock-in" the balls so that there would be a dent in the cloth and to make sure all the balls were touching with every rack. I don't know if they did this before the WPC, but I'm just saying it might be the reason the tables were breaking well with the wing-ball going in at a higher percentage.
In the first place ...
Tables that have 3 or more months wear on them don't break near as easy as those were breaking, so you players might consider that before you all swith to soft breaking ... lol
And if I am racking, that soft break won't be working either ... lol
I was disappointed though to see many times the ref racking the balls with the 2 and 3 balls being wing balls. I am still for racking the balls in a set sequence to make it COMPLETELY FAIR to both players.
One player getting 1 sequence, then the other getting a different sequence (because of random racking) is not fair, IMO. We all know that just having 2 balls switched can mean the difference whether a player will be able to run out or not.
Tables that have 3 or more months wear on them don't break near as easy as those were breaking, so you players might consider that before you all swith to soft breaking ... lol
And if I am racking, that soft break won't be working either ... lol
I was disappointed though to see many times the ref racking the balls with the 2 and 3 balls being wing balls. I am still for racking the balls in a set sequence to make it COMPLETELY FAIR to both players.
One player getting 1 sequence, then the other getting a different sequence (because of random racking) is not fair, IMO. We all know that just having 2 balls switched can mean the difference whether a player will be able to run out or not.
Last edited:
They do this at a lot of pro events. They also use new balls which are much more uniform in size. Even without the Sardo, it's easily possible to make a "perfect" rack every time. If you rack the one ball on the spot, this can lead to a dead wing ball every time if you break from the side rail, pretty much independent of the speed you hit it. That particular soft break really only works for tournament conditions. It's genius to play the cut angle to bring the 1 short of the side then draw around for position on it.
Excellent post Roadie.