U S Open break box question

[MD1108]

Can someone explain the new "small" break box at this years U S Open. I am familiar with the traditional box size, but Jay stated the rules will feature a 9" box for this event. My question is where is that in correlation to the head string? If anyone could post a picture or diagram that would be very appreciated. Also, did the rules for this years event establish if three balls must pass the centerline or the head string? Apologies if I missed these answers in another thread. Thanks for the help.

 

[AtLarge]

Can someone explain the new "small" break box at this years U S Open. I am familiar with the traditional box size, but Jay stated the rules will feature a 9" box for this event. My question is where is that in correlation to the head string? If anyone could post a picture or diagram that would be very appreciated. Also, did the rules for this years event establish if three balls must pass the centerline or the head string? Apologies if I missed these answers in another thread. Thanks for the help.

Just saying 9" is a bit ambiguous because it could be 9" to either side of center (18" wide in total) or 4½" to either side of center (9" wide in total). I imagine it is the former. If that is so, the box would be a rectangle 18" wide (9" each side of the long string) extending from head string to head rail.

As to whether there will be any requirement intended to prevent soft breaks, I have seen no statement yet about that.

 

[sjm]

I believe it's going to be the same break box used in the last Mosconi Cup in Vegas, which is 4 1/2 inches to either side of the spot (or directly behind this area), The illegal break rule will not be in use, but Jay announced that soft breaking will be forbidden and overseen by a group of tournament officials.

 

[itsfroze]

I believe it's going to be the same break box used in the last Mosconi Cup in Vegas, which is 4 1/2 inches to either side of the spot (or directly behind this area), The illegal break rule will not be in use, but Jay announced that soft breaking will be forbidden and overseen by a group of tournament officials.

What's the penalty for soft breaking, if there isn't one then what's the point. Didn't I read that Mika was soft breaking last year when there also was no soft breaking allowed, and no one stopped him ? There needs to be a penalty. Do three balls go past the center when soft breaking, if not then that would be a good rule. The head string I don't like as we have just seen in a tournament.

 

[sjm]

What's the penalty for soft breaking, if there isn't one then what's the point. Didn't I read that Mika was soft breaking last year when there also was no soft breaking allowed, and no one stopped him ? There needs to be a penalty. Do three balls go past the center when soft breaking, if not then that would be a good rule. The head string I don't like as we have just seen in a tournament.

I don't know the answer to this. Agreed that there must be a penalty.

 

[StraightPoolIU]

On the official US Open facebook page I thought I saw it posted earlier this evening that 3 balls must pass the side pockets.

 

[RobertaAgnor]

On the official US Open facebook page I thought I saw it posted earlier this evening that 3 balls must pass the side pockets.

That's correct. :smile:

 

[sjm]

On the official US Open facebook page I thought I saw it posted earlier this evening that 3 balls must pass the side pockets.

I'm very pleased with this. There won't be many illegal breaks, and certainly very few among the best breakers.

 

[macguy]

What's the penalty for soft breaking, if there isn't one then what's the point. Didn't I read that Mika was soft breaking last year when there also was no soft breaking allowed, and no one stopped him ? There needs to be a penalty. Do three balls go past the center when soft breaking, if not then that would be a good rule. The head string I don't like as we have just seen in a tournament.

I think it would be good if you fail to make a legal break, the other player takes over the table as it lays or they can choose to rebreak themselves.

 

[AtLarge]

I believe it's going to be the same break box used in the last Mosconi Cup in Vegas, which is 4 1/2 inches to either side of the spot (or directly behind this area), The illegal break rule will not be in use, but Jay announced that soft breaking will be forbidden and overseen by a group of tournament officials.

Stu -- I tried very carefully last year to estimate the width of the break box as best I could from the stream. It appeared to me to be about a foot wide, not 9". I think if you will review some of the matches on YouTube you will see that. For example, look at the overhead view of the table at the 5:00 mark of this match: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SXTQyPEqLs. You can see the breaking marks on the headstring at the edge of the breaking box. Or look at Shane's break at 5:43. The ball is about a half a diamond from center table.

So I'd call that about a foot wide. And I think even at that width that it had some unfortunate results. Excluding Shane from the calculation, the breaker in the 2013 Mosconi Cup made a ball without fouling, i.e., stayed at the table, on only 29% of the breaks. Including Shane, it was 33%. What's your opinion of that -- good or bad that the breaker stays at the table only one-third of the time? Also, break-and-run games almost disappeared. Not counting 9-balls made on the break, only 5% of the games were run out from the break. The break in that Cup actually became just a search for how to make the 2-ball bound off the foot rail and kick the 9-ball into a side pocket or a head pocket. Do you consider those breaking results desirable for the U.S. Open going forward?

So when we hear about a 9" break box, my hope is that it means 9" to either side of center, not 4½" to either side (which, as I said, would be even smaller than at the Mosconi Cup).

 

[Petros Andrikop]

These are the changes they announced:

"The 9-ball will be racked on the spot
Break box as usual
3 balls must go past the side pocket"

I hope the second phrase means they are going to use a "big" box and not a "small" one finally, that along with a distinct rule about soft breaking will make things much better.

 

[AtLarge]

On the official US Open facebook page I thought I saw it posted earlier this evening that 3 balls must pass the side pockets.

It has been the rule for the past 3 years (perhaps inconsistently enforced) that at least 3 balls must pass mid-table or be pocketed.

 

[AtLarge]

I think they need something objective, not subjective.

 

[victorl]

So with this rule, if a ball catches the side pocket point and rebounds back down table, does that still count as a ball having passed the side pocket?

 

[AtLarge]

These are the changes they announced:

"The 9-ball will be racked on the spot
Break box as usual
3 balls must go past the side pocket"

I hope the second phrase means they are going to use a "big" box and not a "small" one finally, that along with a distinct rule about soft breaking will make things much better.

Ah, that will be fine. No tiny break box, and the same sort of no-soft-break rule as in recent years (do they mean past mid-table or all the way past the pockets?).

Edit -- Sorry; my posts #12 and #13 were before I read #11.

 

[itsfroze]

Ah, that will be fine. No tiny break box, and the same sort of no-soft-break rule as in recent years (do they mean past mid-table or all the way past the pockets?).

Edit -- Sorry; my posts #12 and #13 were before I read #11.

In the past, past mid table meant if you hit the far point and the ball came back toward
the foot end of the table it was counted as one of three balls past mid table.
Balls only have to go past mid table, not stay past mid table.

 

[sjm]

Stu -- I tried very carefully last year to estimate the width of the break box as best I could from the stream. It appeared to me to be about a foot wide, not 9". I think if you will review some of the matches on YouTube you will see that. For example, look at the overhead view of the table at the 5:00 mark of this match: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SXTQyPEqLs. You can see the breaking marks on the headstring at the edge of the breaking box. Or look at Shane's break at 5:43. The ball is about a half a diamond from center table.

So I'd call that about a foot wide. And I think even at that width that it had some unfortunate results. Excluding Shane from the calculation, the breaker in the 2013 Mosconi Cup made a ball without fouling, i.e., stayed at the table, on only 29% of the breaks. Including Shane, it was 33%. What's your opinion of that -- good or bad that the breaker stays at the table only one-third of the time? Also, break-and-run games almost disappeared. Not counting 9-balls made on the break, only 5% of the games were run out from the break. The break in that Cup actually became just a search for how to make the 2-ball bound off the foot rail and kick the 9-ball into a side pocket or a head pocket. Do you consider those breaking results desirable for the U.S. Open going forward?

So when we hear about a 9" break box, my hope is that it means 9" to either side of center, not 4½" to either side (which, as I said, would be even smaller than at the Mosconi Cup).

Thanks for the info. I'm looking forward to your stats during the upcoming event.

Yeah, 33% is a bit low for my taste (I'd like it right at 50%), although the cost of a dry break is, based on the nine-on-the-spot events I've watched, less with the balls racked this way. The play at the last Mosconi Cup was some of the most interesting I've ever seen. Here's what I posted about the Mosconi break just a few days after the 2013 Mosconi event:

...I loved it because it ensured that both teams got plenty of chances. It did bring defense, kicking and two way shots into play a lot, and placed a big premium on superior tactical play. In regular tournament play, weaknesses can sometimes be camouflaged by a strong break, but in this format you have to use all your skills. It's a much stiffer test than when the one is on the spot...

Here's what Jay Helfert posted in the same thread, citing my post above:

Tap Tap, right on as usual. One other important factor in negating a breaking contest was racking the balls with the nine on the spot. This way the corner ball didn't always go in and the one was not wired in the side. Like Stu said, they had to play pool here to win games the reality was Team Europe outplayed Team USA in many racks, especially the key ones.

Noted racking guru Joe Tucker, in the same thread, had this to say:

Best 9 ball break format I have ever seen.... I think Matchroom may have not only saved 9 ball but made it better. First 9 ball tournament I've seen where the rack wasn't the biggest factor.

Now let's not be delusional, it's obviously a matter of opinion whether this is the kind of pool that should decide who is the best, but at least a few of us like watching this type of pool because it ensures that all of ones skills will often be put to the test.

Many say that the break and run is what pool is all about, but that's like saying that birdies are what golf is all about. The US Golf Association sees it fit to make birdies much more scarce in its national championship by narrowing the fairways and lengthening the rough, making it a tougher and more comprehensive test of all-around golfing skills. I think the nine-on-the-spot with a break box has the same effect in pool, making it ideal for a national championship.

Then again, I'm a diehard fan and I'm gonna love the US Open no matter how they set it up. Let the games begin!

 

[itsfroze]

Why isn't the size of the break box known to everyone by now.
The Open starts in 3 days, is it a secret. WOW

 

[Johnnyt]

I hope the break box is about 5"X5" in the middle, just behind the line. Johnnyt

 

[Petros Andrikop]

I still can't figure why tougher golf rules are compared to break elimination in 9ball, and why team events on shot clock are compared to singles events without any shot clock.
As far as the "breaking contest" theory, that is simply a false theory. No player breaks better than another player because of "luck".
So what do we want? Instead of bringing up the one that doesn't break as good, we try to bring down the one that breaks better...
And we think that this false road may "save" 9ball?...
It may save something, for some time, and it sure won't be 9ball, but something like 9ball.
After that it won't matter anymore, after the last generation of top players that is able to keep up today in these 9ball like events moves away (and these are mostly players that grew up in the old times), interest in 9ball will decline more and more since it won't be rewarding for the players trying to keep up in conditions where anybody can beat anybody since the break won't matter at all any more.
There are always other games if the pool world has decided that the 9ball break skill is to be punished forever, like 10ball.
But there will always be one best ambassador of pool after the straight pool era, and that is 9ball.
If 9ball is completely turned into something less of what it is, that is bad for the game and it has to stop.