Thin cut vs. shallow angle breaks

C

CueAndMe

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What's your take on this: Here's an observation that's escaped me for many years:
I've always avoided setting up for steeply angled break shots out of fear of aiming thin cut shots. But I realized something recently that makes me think I was wrong to play this way. First, the obvious, with the same stroke you get a greater spread of balls going in from a steeper angle. But there's more.

When you go in steeply, most of the power from the stroke is going into the rack rather than into the object ball. Sounds obvious, but what isn't so obvious is that this means the object ball is going towards the pocket with low speed and therefore has less chance of jarring out.

So I think this allow you a choice. You can either make the steeper cut easier to pocket by hitting it more softly to yield a similar spread to the shallow shot. Or you can hit at the same speed as the shallow shot and spread more balls. Either way, the steeply cut object ball has a lower chance of rattling in the pocket.

Jeff
 
good thoughts, but there is always the fact that when the object ball is traveling slowly it also has the chance to get kicked on its way to the pocket by a ball coming out of the rack. Also on some steep angle breakers its hard to get the cue ball from colliding with the object ball after hitting the rack.

Lately I have been watching Oliver Ortman, and Niels Fiejen. These 2 guys get almost perfect every time on those high breakers with low attack angle, and they POUND it!
 
Gerry said:
good thoughts, but there is always the fact that when the object ball is traveling slowly it also has the chance to get kicked on its way to the pocket by a ball coming out of the rack. Also on some steep angle breakers its hard to get the cue ball from colliding with the object ball after hitting the rack.

Lately I have been watching Oliver Ortman, and Niels Fiejen. These 2 guys get almost perfect every time on those high breakers with low attack angle, and they POUND it!
Click to expand...

I see your points. Thanks. To clarify, I'm not suggesting the kind of steep angle break shots that are ultra thin cuts on the object ball, just the ones that allow you to use high english. The ones that have the cueball closer to the side rail than the object ball. Usually a half ball hit or beyond, I think.

Jeff
 
I like the OFF THE RAIL thin break shots with ONE exception. Controlling the cue ball after it contacts the rack can be a real challenge. Several times it has hit the side of the rack and wound up in the opposite side pocket. On run of 56 comes to mind that ended that way. It is a bad feeling watching the run end when yo have successfully spread the rack and made the break shot. I do feel that there are times when the only real break ball is very near but NOT on the rail and that is when I use them with outside english to increase the odds of potting the breakball and getting the cue away from the stack. If the break ball is to go in the upper left pocket I use low left english and low right for the other side. That way the object ball is spinning into the pocket and the low will get the cue away from the rack and hopefully away from the opposite side pocket.

Hope this helps.

Scott
 
scott said:
I like the OFF THE RAIL thin break shots with ONE exception. Controlling the cue ball after it contacts the rack can be a real challenge. Several times it has hit the side of the rack and wound up in the opposite side pocket. On run of 56 comes to mind that ended that way. It is a bad feeling watching the run end when yo have successfully spread the rack and made the break shot. I do feel that there are times when the only real break ball is very near but NOT on the rail and that is when I use them with outside english to increase the odds of potting the breakball and getting the cue away from the stack. If the break ball is to go in the upper left pocket I use low left english and low right for the other side. That way the object ball is spinning into the pocket and the low will get the cue away from the rack and hopefully away from the opposite side pocket.

Hope this helps.

Scott
Click to expand...

I think we may be thinking about 2 different shots. Are you referring to the one above or below the rack in the following picture? I'm talking about the shot on the 1-ball, not the A-B shot off of the rail.
Thanks,
Jeff

CueTable Help

 
Jeff,

I don't think the "less rattles" philosophy is valid enough to warrant changing your game for it. While I believe that large-angle breakshots are superior, it is purely because of the spread they create.

A general rule I use is that if I've played a really tight end-pattern and am going to end up close to my breakball, I will give myself a wide angle. If I feel I won't be able to get too close to my breakball, I'll go a little more shallow.

Of prime concern on a breakshot is making the ball; next comes the expected yield of the shot.

Are you playing on super-tight equipment by any chance? I am struggling to understand why rattling balls (i.e., not purely missing them) is a significant factor for you.

- Steve
 
Steve Lipsky said:
Jeff,
A general rule I use is that if I've played a really tight end-pattern and am going to end up close to my breakball, I will give myself a wide angle. If I feel I won't be able to get too close to my breakball, I'll go a little more shallow.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. I'll try that. Thanks.
Are you playing on super-tight equipment by any chance? I am struggling to understand why rattling balls (i.e., not purely missing them) is a significant factor for you.
Click to expand...

I play mostly on 4.5 inch pockets, but occasionally on bigger.
This theory was meant to extend to everyone and all pocket sizes. I wasn't really looking at my game specifically, but at a new way to look at break shot angles and their odds of success.

What I'm suggesting is that the slower the object ball moves, the more pocket width it has available. So, the higher difficulty of aiming a severe cut comes with an offset of a bigger pocket.

I'm also suggesting that a soft to medium hit on a steep angle break shot would give good spread results, as well as allow for the ball to be made very easily because it's rolling slowly to a big pocket. Maybe hit this with draw or side spin or both. I know it's common to hit a steep angle break with topspin, but if you're not hitting it hard maybe draw would be better to get it away from the rack.

Jeff
 
Steve Lipsky said:
... While I believe that large-angle breakshots are superior, it is purely because of the spread they create.
...
Click to expand...
Another general consideration is that usually they don't have the straight-into-the-same-pocket scratches that some fuller break shots have.
 
I would try to get the cue to hit the stack just above the three so it would not freeze against the stack or get caught up in the cluster. On your illustration I would incorporate a bit of draw into the shot with outside english. The draw would help to cue head closer to the center of the table and I would use a medium speed of stroke on the shot to ensure the breakball went and the cue had enough juice to get away from the stack via avoiding a direct hit on a ball in the stack. If I got 4-5 balls away fromthe stack and could start to set up a second break shot I would condider this a success in that the odds of scratching from turning the cue loose while at the same time having some object balls to work with mission accomplished. Bottom line is I'll use these shots if they are no more than 3/8" off the rail but they are not ever my preferred break shot. If they are much further off the rail it gets real dangerous.

Scott
 
Scott, maybe I wasn't clear in my original post. I'm referring to the steep angle of "A" as opposed to the shallower angle of "B" on the table below. But I understand what you're saying about the rail break shot. Thanks.
Jeff

CueTable Help



scott said:
I would try to get the cue to hit the stack just above the three so it would not freeze against the stack or get caught up in the cluster. On your illustration I would incorporate a bit of draw into the shot with outside english. The draw would help to cue head closer to the center of the table and I would use a medium speed of stroke on the shot to ensure the breakball went and the cue had enough juice to get away from the stack via avoiding a direct hit on a ball in the stack. If I got 4-5 balls away fromthe stack and could start to set up a second break shot I would condider this a success in that the odds of scratching from turning the cue loose while at the same time having some object balls to work with mission accomplished. Bottom line is I'll use these shots if they are no more than 3/8" off the rail but they are not ever my preferred break shot. If they are much further off the rail it gets real dangerous.

Scott
Click to expand...
 
bluepepper said:
Scott, maybe I wasn't clear in my original post. I'm referring to the steep angle of "A" as opposed to the shallower angle of "B" on the table below. But I understand what you're saying about the rail break shot. Thanks.
Jeff

CueTable Help

Click to expand...


In this example, I like a spot right in between what you have illustrated. Usually when the object ball and cue ball are parallel to the side rail, although if I had to choose between only the two shown I'd opt for the steeper angle all the time.

I have a bad habit of unconsciously over powering or over hitting a lesser angle break because of some latent fear of getting glued to the rack or left safe or applying too much draw and being left on the end rail.
 
bluepepper said:
What's your take on this: Here's an observation that's escaped me for many years:
I've always avoided setting up for steeply angled break shots out of fear of aiming thin cut shots. But I realized something recently that makes me think I was wrong to play this way. First, the obvious, with the same stroke you get a greater spread of balls going in from a steeper angle. But there's more.

When you go in steeply, most of the power from the stroke is going into the rack rather than into the object ball. Sounds obvious, but what isn't so obvious is that this means the object ball is going towards the pocket with low speed and therefore has less chance of jarring out.

So I think this allow you a choice. You can either make the steeper cut easier to pocket by hitting it more softly to yield a similar spread to the shallow shot. Or you can hit at the same speed as the shallow shot and spread more balls. Either way, the steeply cut object ball has a lower chance of rattling in the pocket.

Jeff
Click to expand...

Jeff,
If you haven't already viewed it; you should definitely obtain the Accu-Stats player review match of Pat Fleming (as the PLAYER) playing 14.1 (I forget the opponent, but it is his only tape with him as the player doing the reviewing).

On this tape, your subject is discussed extensively; Pat is the biggest proponent of thin cut break shots in the history of the world (he likes them as close to "89 degrees" as he can get - it's wacky). Definitely a "must have" tape for any serious student of 14.1.
 
Williebetmore said:
Jeff,
If you haven't already viewed it; you should definitely obtain the Accu-Stats player review match of Pat Fleming (as the PLAYER) playing 14.1 (I forget the opponent, but it is his only tape with him as the player doing the reviewing).

On this tape, your subject is discussed extensively; Pat is the biggest proponent of thin cut break shots in the history of the world (he likes them as close to "89 degrees" as he can get - it's wacky). Definitely a "must have" tape for any serious student of 14.1.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I may hold off on buying another straight pool video for a while, but it's good to know. Those really thin cuts are a bit scary, but I'm sure he has his reasons. Maybe it has to do with staring the rack in the face when ready to shoot.
Jeff
 
3andstop said:
In this example, I like a spot right in between what you have illustrated. Usually when the object ball and cue ball are parallel to the side rail, although if I had to choose between only the two shown I'd opt for the steeper angle all the time.

I have a bad habit of unconsciously over powering or over hitting a lesser angle break because of some latent fear of getting glued to the rack or left safe or applying too much draw and being left on the end rail.
Click to expand...

The draw shots off of the rack always seem to keep me guessing. I really like what Ralf Souquet does before each break shot. He looks at exactly where the cueball is going to strike the balls in the rack. If it's going to hit a bottom round of a ball I suppose it calls for a big draw. Top round and little draw. I'm going to start trying this.

Jeff
 
Williebetmore said:
Jeff,
If you haven't already viewed it; you should definitely obtain the Accu-Stats player review match of Pat Fleming (as the PLAYER) playing 14.1 (I forget the opponent, but it is his only tape with him as the player doing the reviewing).

On this tape, your subject is discussed extensively; Pat is the biggest proponent of thin cut break shots in the history of the world (he likes them as close to "89 degrees" as he can get - it's wacky). Definitely a "must have" tape for any serious student of 14.1.
Click to expand...

Pat Fleming vs Grady Mathews. I forget what year.
steven
 
bluepepper said:
I think we may be thinking about 2 different shots. Are you referring to the one above or below the rack in the following picture? I'm talking about the shot on the 1-ball, not the A-B shot off of the rail.
Thanks,
Jeff

CueTable Help

Click to expand...

Jeff

You are correct as I thought you were referring to the one ball . I had the same problem when I started 14.1 as on one here in Houston plays it and I had to learn via Capellie's book and my numerous mistakes. If you can see the stack and it is "sharking" you then yur not completely focused on the break shot. Two things really helped me. The first is do not pull the trigger until the stack is not in sight ie you are not even thinking about it. When you get focused on the breakball the stack will seam to disappear and you are soley looking at the spot you want to hit on the break ball. Also I would respectfully suggest you determine what draw you need to put on the cue to hit a ball in the stack sqaure in the middle as I feel it is not how hard you hit the stack but rather how solid you hit a ball in the stack. If you hit between two balls then the stack will not separate near as well as if you hit a ball in it direct. I always used draw to try to get the cue back in the middle of the table and did not blast the balls as hard as I could. I feel there are too many things that can go wrong during the break and as a result I always believe one should never hit a break shot any harder than they can control the cue ball no matter what the game.

One drill I used to determine if I was consentrating only on the object ball was to place a piece of chalk very near my face on a rail. I would look at the object ball until the chalk disappeared and then and only then was I focused on the task at hand. When the chalk disappears you are lookiing only at the spot you want to hit ont he object ball and nothing else. Give it a try and let me know if you feel it works in determining whe nyou are focused soley on the spot to hit with the cue ball.

Scott
 
scott said:
Jeff
One drill I used to determine if I was consentrating only on the object ball was to place a piece of chalk very near my face on a rail. I would look at the object ball until the chalk disappeared and then and only then was I focused on the task at hand. When the chalk disappears you are lookiing only at the spot you want to hit ont he object ball and nothing else. Give it a try and let me know if you feel it works in determining whe nyou are focused soley on the spot to hit with the cue ball.

Scott
Click to expand...

Scott, thanks for the drill. I'll give it a try.
Jeff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top