What's the Break Rule Now?

[Mike the Beginner]

Hi--I'm a beginner, just took up the game in 2013.

So I'm watching the 2007 Mosconi Cup on YouTube, Johnny Archer against Tony Drago. At about 38 minutes in, give or take, Archer makes a full-force break, sinks a ball, and has to sit down--Drago then quickly runs out Archer's table. Apparently not enough balls crossed the head line, making it an illegal break, a rule put in place because Cory Deuel was too good at soft breaking?

What's the story on that, and what's the situation now, can anybody fill me in on the evolution of the rule? It seemed like a clear injustice to me...well, not injustice, maybe, but just an unfair, counterproductive rule. Drago just got Archer's table and runout when Archer made what would seem to be a perfectly good break.

Why should whoever makes the rules care how hard somebody breaks? And anyway Archer's break looked to be a full hit, maybe not the hardest break anybody ever made, but he hit it as hard as I can.

Thanks in advance,

Mike the Beginner

 

[justadub]

Others will answer better, and in more detail, but they fiddle with the break rules, especially in the short-race Mosconi Cup, to limit the break and runs.

Pro's have figured out the 9-ball break for some time.

The idea from that example was to make them hit it hard enough that at least 3 (or 4, I forget) balls had to get past the side pockets. With the softer breaks, the pro's will put either the 1 in the side or the wing ball in the corner, every time. Having to hit it hard enough that at least 3 or 4 balls pass the side pockets limits that ability.

They added a "break box" as well, and have shrunken it. Meaning they can't break from the rail, instead having to be closer to the spot.

And the rack is placed with the 9 on the spot, not the 1.

Worked well, this year. At least to me.....

 

[poolguy4u]

Hi--I'm a beginner, just took up the game in 2013.

So I'm watching the 2007 Mosconi Cup on YouTube, Johnny Archer against Tony Drago. At about 38 minutes in, give or take, Archer makes a full-force break, sinks a ball, and has to sit down--Drago then quickly runs out Archer's table. Apparently not enough balls crossed the head line, making it an illegal break, a rule put in place because Cory Deuel was too good at soft breaking?

What's the story on that, and what's the situation now, can anybody fill me in on the evolution of the rule? It seemed like a clear injustice to me...well, not injustice, maybe, but just an unfair, counterproductive rule. Drago just got Archer's table and runout when Archer made what would seem to be a perfectly good break.

Why should whoever makes the rules care how hard somebody breaks? And anyway Archer's break looked to be a full hit, maybe not the hardest break anybody ever made, but he hit it as hard as I can.

Thanks in advance,

Mike the Beginner

In the real world, none of those situations apply. The rules are break from behind the line, one ball racked in the front and just hit them. I believe 2, 3, or 4 balls have to hit a rail...any rail.

What you see in these tournaments are special rules for special players.:thumbup:

 

[CreeDo]

The rules were indeed put into place to discourage soft, controlled breaks with a predictable outcome.

The reasoning is that this is an event produced for TV, and boring breaks take some of the randomness and drama
out of it, which is not what matchroom wants. They want exciting hard smashes where anything can happen.
It also decreases the number of break and runs, almost guaranteeing both players get to the table.
This makes the short races to 5 a little more fair, and leads to kicking and intelligent push exchanges,
which is more fun for the viewers.

What they don't want is something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6H6OlaGA5eE
Where one guy calmly runs a rack every time he breaks, and the layouts look easy.

Evolution of the rules:
• Break from the box - this has been standard in most 9b tournaments for years.
By breaking from the far left or right it's easy to make a ball, hit square, and control the cue ball.
By forcing players to go no further than 1 diamond to the left or right of center...
they must cut the head ball, making it a little more challenging and adding randomness
to the cue ball's final resting place.

• Rack gradually moved north - This forces an even steeper cut on the 1, making controlling the cue ball tough.
I'd say 1999 is when they first started racking high,
and it kept creeping forward over the years until finally finally the 9 is fully on the spot in 2004.

1998 is the last year it was clearly racked normally, the line passes right through the middle of the 1.
Then it's a ball high in 1999, 1.5 balls high in 2000, (2001?), 2002.
Around 2003 it's 2 balls high, front of the 9 touches the line. 2004 the 9 is definitely on the line.

• Illegal break rule added - Not sure if 2007 was the first year or not.
This further discouraged soft controlled breaks. Moving the rack higher sort of backfired though.
The 1 in the side became a pretty easy ball to sink with the new higher rack placement.
And the rule resulted in players getting screwed occasionally, as you observed with Archer/Drago.

• 2013, Break box further shrunk force center breaks. Players could still technically try to soft break,
but they made a "gentleman's agreement" to just hit hard and square.
Illegal break rule was NOT in effect this year, since this solution seems to accomplish what matchroom wants.
A fun side effect is that the 2 in the back of the rack bounces to the foot rail, then nearly straight back up
into the 9 ball. This sends the 9 ball flying towards the side or corner pockets.

 

[Mike the Beginner]

The rules were indeed put into place to discourage soft, controlled breaks with a predictable outcome.[snip]

That was even more interesting than I thought it would be. Thanks CreeDo.

It interests me that various games have structural weaknesses that are often addressed by tinkering with the rules. Repeated fouls stopping the action at the end of basketball games is an example. The break is clearly the weakness in pool; it's too important to be so arbitrary. But there doesn't seem to be a good way around the problem except in 14.1 straight pool.

Mike