Best break for One Pocket

[mr3cushion]

whitey
thanks for going to all the trouble of testing the methods and reporting the findings
it takes alot of work and sometimes goes unappreciated
i think everyone will find a way that suits their needs and works for them.
......
to answer a question you had in your post
although i never thought about it
i do think the squirt and swerve is causing the cue ball to go alittle left to right so the full in the face hit is actually thinner on the head ball
........
should we try discussing aiming systems next???.......:heh:heh:heh
ABSOLUTELY JUST KIDDING.

Aiming to contact the back of the head ball with, 4 or 8 O'clock English will most likely result in, 'splitting' the 1st & 2nd ball which is usually what is striven for on the break! For me, this means placing the CB only 1-2" from the long rail, just inside the kitchen.

 

[darmoose]

whitey
thanks for going to all the trouble of testing the methods and reporting the findings
it takes alot of work and sometimes goes unappreciated
i think everyone will find a way that suits their needs and works for them.
.......
to answer a question you had in your post
although i never thought about it
i do think the squirt and swerve is causing the cue ball to go alittle left to right so the full in the face hit is actually thinner on the head ball

Yes, Whitey, thank you. I have every confidence that your efforts were unbiased and honest efforts to determine something.
I am only saying that without direct feedback that verifies that you have done what you are claiming to do, let alone that what you are aiming to do is worthwhile for purposes of this discussion, there is little value over any other method, maybe less.

Whitey's results tell us very clearly that the hit that Pat is advocating is the fullest hit on the head ball of all he tested, and the corner ball "pops" out severely. The only thing I can make of that is perhaps Pat is actually hitting it a bit thinner than he thinks?

Simplicity matters, if not, PJ might as well say he aims to three rail the head ball into the side pocket. After his break, if he likes the results, he cannot know if his hit sent the head ball to the first diamond.

My claim is simply that whatever aiming point I am using that day (and I have used several) I, same as Whitey, can only assess it's value by the results of the break, and can get no information as to how I hit it from any place else. There is no direct feedback available other than the results of how the balls ended up., You go from there.

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Darmoose, in going through these posts, I did not notice you posting a breaking method. My first impression is you use a aiming point beyond the head ball. But is your method, to simply aim at the head ball to contact it at a certain spot? That is my method but I am going to work on aiming at a spot beyond the head ball, such as I have depicted, to see how that works.

As far as Larry's method, his is the easiest aiming point to contact, for when using inside spin and you stay down, you then can watch the cb traveling towards your target. In Larry's case the cue would cover the entire 2nd. ball. But if he is in fact getting a squirt then it would not cover the entire 2nd. ball, for it would be more to the outside and the inner part of the 2nd. ball would be apparent. Like a 3/4 hit on the 2nd. ball.

When using this inside spin you have to stay down and watch the hit, otherwise you are guessing.

I did notice in doing all these tests that when hitting the head ball thin it gave more of a scatter for I recon the 2nd ball gets contacted more solid. But, the corner ball moves out more and generally towards the foot rail, but I did not sell out. It seems like there is a very fine line between not selling out and selling out.

I am trying to learn as I am going through this, so I hope my statements and observations are correct. Whitey

 

[darmoose]

Darmoose, in going through these posts, I did not notice you posting a breaking method. My first impression is you use a aiming point beyond the head ball. But is your method, to simply aim at the head ball to contact it at a certain spot? That is my method but I am going to work on aiming at a spot beyond the head ball, such as I have depicted, to see how that works.

As far as Larry's method, his is the easiest aiming point to contact, for when using inside spin and you stay down, you then can watch the cb traveling towards your target. In Larry's case the cue would cover the entire 2nd. ball. But if he is in fact getting a squirt then it would not cover the entire 2nd. ball, for it would be more to the outside and the inner part of the 2nd. ball would be apparent. Like a 3/4 hit on the 2nd. ball.

When using this inside spin you have to stay down and watch the hit, otherwise you are guessing.

I did notice in doing all these tests that when hitting the head ball thin it gave more of a scatter for I recon the 2nd ball gets contacted more solid. But, the corner ball moves out more and generally towards the foot rail, but I did not sell out. It seems like there is a very fine line between not selling out and selling out.

I am trying to learn as I am going through this, so I hope my statements and observations are correct. Whitey

Whitey,

I am certainly no expert, however, I am breaking better in the last 6-12 months than I can recall previously.I posted that my break aim is same as Larry's. I don't have a lot of luck trying to apply a lot of english to this hit. i have found that my accuracy suffers, and all kinds of bad things happen too often. I concentrate on the aiming point and speed control with maybe a touch of inside. I guess I do hit it with a bit of 'high' too.

I aim initially at the C/L of the second ball, and guard against hitting too much head ball. My CB is placed at about one inch from the rail on the string (the most aggressive position). I also believe that if I quit on the stroke and hit it to slow, the CB may not clear the stack without a ticky. Sometimes the last ball comes out, but goes to the bottom rail without selling out. I honestly cannot remember the last time I sold out that corner ball.

When all works, maybe 8-9 outta 10, I get a pretty good spread, CB ends up about 2-2.5 diamonds up, but maybe 6-8 inches off the rail. I find this covers any balls on the bottom side of the stack, and the CB isn't high enough to allow a bank shot above the stack to his hole.

That's it. Thanks for asking.

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

It sure has been a good thread. There was some simple things I never dreamed of to help give a better break. It is great when members help their fellow members, and willing participate to increase the knowledge of the game. The main posts that really comes to mind, are those that used PJ's method, and it really worked for them. And Billy stating he was not happy with his break, and then tried PJ's and it worked for him, it just does not get any better than that. Thanks guys for making this a great thread.

Next I want to learn what are the main reasons that cb scratches in the opponents pocket? Listed in order of the main reason down to the lest reason. And does the opponent racking really effect this or not? For you can always inspect the rack! Whitey

 

[lll]

Thanks Darmoose for the reply. It sure has been a good thread. There was some simple things I never dreamed of to help give a better break. It is great when members help their fellow members, and willing participate to increase the knowledge of the game. The main posts that really comes to mind, are those that used PJ's method, and it really worked for them. And Billy stating he was not happy with his break, and then tried PJ's and it worked for him, it just does not get any better than that. Thanks guys for making this a great thread.

Next I want to learn what are the main reasons that cb scratches in the opponents pocket? Listed in order of the main reason down to the lest reason. And does the opponent racking really effect this or not? For you can always inspect the rack! Whitey

gaps in the rack
bad hit
jmho
icbw

 

[NH Steve]

Thank you guys for doing this. I can go through after and remove the blank posts that remain after deletion, so the thread is easier to follow. Good stuff in here!!

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Johnny Willis,
I recon this standard break is the best break, but there are alternative breaks. Some adv. OP instructional videos have them.

A friend of mine just sent me a video of him doing a side cushion break, and stated; "this is easy"! So I started working on it a little this morning.
To start I mark the cb location, which is whole cue ball behind the line and further off the rail so I can stroke it easier. Then I mark the side rail with blue masking tape that I am shooting into to come off and into the stack.

So far I have discovered I need to use reverse english to straighten out the cb coming off the rail and make it come into the rack of balls more perpendicular. This helps to hold the cb there. Whitey

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I don't doubt that Pat is right that cutting the head ball to the first diamond results in a proper hit for the break shot. But, since the head ball will never go towards the first diamond, therefore you are denied any direct feedback, how can you know if you hit it properly?

You can know that you liked the break or you didn't, but you cannot know if the head ball was going at the first diamond.

Knowing I like the break more consistently than with other methods is all I need to know.

pj
chgo

 

[darmoose]

I can only assess it's value by the results of the break, and can get no information as to how I hit it from any place else. There is no direct feedback available other than the results of how the balls ended up., You go from there.

Knowing I like the break more consistently than with other methods is all I need to know.

pj
chgo

PJ

Glad we agree. Thanks.

 

[Tennessee Joe6]

With the high caliber of players on this forum I hesitated to post this, however the OP seemed to want a beginners perspective. I have watched some of the best players failing to inspect the rack before breaking and thus sending balls to the opponents pocket. The single most important item in breaking is that you must not sell out balls to your opponents pocket. So this may be a good starting point before you worry about where to hit the rack. INSPECT THE RACK FOR GAPS.

Of course this is not a cure-all but it works for me...most of the time. Lol. Assume you are breaking from the right, your pocket on the left, and using the standard break. Make sure there is no gap between the 13 and 2 balls. If there is a gap and the 13 is touching the 15, the energy will push the 14 and 11 to your opponents pocket. The cue ball often collides with the 14 resulting with a scratch. It is important that all the balls between the 1 and 7 are touching but most important that there is no gap between the 13 and 2.

Placing the cue ball close to the long rail is the most aggressive break but can also be the most risky so experiment with various distances from the rail. I cue with 7 or 8 o'clock English, aiming to cut the 1 ball to the SECOND diamond on the long rail. This is the aim used in the three ball break described in an earlier post.

I welcome suggestions.

 

[darmoose]

With the high caliber of players on this forum I hesitated to post this, however the OP seemed to want a beginners perspective. I have watched some of the best players failing to inspect the rack before breaking and thus sending balls to the opponents pocket. The single most important item in breaking is that you must not sell out balls to your opponents pocket. So this may be a good starting point before you worry about where to hit the rack. INSPECT THE RACK FOR GAPS.

Of course this is not a cure-all but it works for me...most of the time. Lol. Assume you are breaking from the right, your pocket on the left, and using the standard break. Make sure there is no gap between the 13 and 2 balls. If there is a gap and the 13 is touching the 15, the energy will push the 14 and 11 to your opponents pocket. The cue ball often collides with the 14 resulting with a scratch. It is important that all the balls between the 1 and 7 are touching but most important that there is no gap between the 13 and 2.

Placing the cue ball close to the long rail is the most aggressive break but can also be the most risky so experiment with various distances from the rail. I cue with 7 or 8 o'clock English, aiming to cut the 1 ball to the SECOND diamond on the long rail. This is the aim used in the three ball break described in an earlier post.

I welcome suggestions.

Hello Joe & welcome.

You should never demur from expressing your thoughts and opinions here, for sticking one's foot in one's mouth is the backbone of what makes this forum interesting and educational, and we all do it from time to time. This thread is a perfect example.:frus

Referring to your example, what I have witnessed most often is players paying attention to the balls, 1 thru 14 to make sure there are no gaps. The idea being that if all those balls are frozen, no ball can beat the 9 ball to the 14 forcing the 14 downward to the bottom rail.

Assuming your hypothesis were correct though, wouldn't a gap between the 3 and 13 balls or between the balls 2 and 7 in that row have the same affect that you are identifying?

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Tjoe6, very informative excellent post. It in part answers my question I put out there on post # 105. What is the main causes of the cue ball scratching on the break? Thanks, Whitey

 

[androd]

It in part answers my question I put out there on post # 105. What is the main causes of the cue ball scratching on the break? Thanks, Whitey

The answer, I'm sure only for me, is I scratch or drive the opponent's corner ball out. When I hit too much of the second Ball.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

PJ maybe is expecting to hit the head ball thinner than the actual aiming point, because of the cb squirt.

I aim to cut the head ball toward the first diamond, taking squirt/swerve into account as usual when aiming a cut shot. In other words, I intend to hit the head ball on that contact point, not thinner.

pj
chgo

 

[Tennessee Joe6]

My post # 111 was only meant to be a starting point for someone learning the break. And as I had hoped your comments/suggestions are greatly appreciated. Maybe this should have been a separate thread.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I went back through all the posts, for Larry's comment on aiming at the 2nd ball to hit it in the face, I had missed.

First off we have not set a start standard of where the cb is placed, to set a standard for all these different aiming methods, will give us a starting point. I set the cb @ headstring with edge of the cb 4" from the cushion on a 5x10, this is probably 3-3-1/2" on a 4-1/2 x 9 table.

That's pretty close to where I break from too.

On Steve's post #2 there is a very nice diagram representing the hit with colors representing the different hits. Well the desired hit on the head ball is near a 90 degree cut, this flies directly in the face of what PJ is suggesting to contact the head ball to hit the first diamond. No comparison whatsoever.

The "90 degree cut" is really a cut toward the 2nd diamond (more like a 67 degree cut when shooting from near the side rail, but who's counting? ). More importantly, it's also a simultaneous hit of the head ball and the second ball. I believe this is too thin on the head ball / too full on the second ball - for the simple reason that every successful break I've ever made produced a distinct click-click sound, clearly hitting the head ball first.

On Billy's post # 75 if states; he uses PJ method as a reference point to contact the head ball which allows for the squirt which ends up hitting the head ball where he actually wants it, a thinner hit than what PJ is proposing and more inline with Steve's post #2. Backed up with discussions on aiming / squirt with Doc. Correct me if I am wrong!

I think Dr. Bill said he aims fuller than my intended contact point so the expected squirt gives him the hit on that contact point, not thinner. In fact, this is the reason for aiming it like a "normal" shot - I'm practiced at compensating for squirt/swerve that way. Aiming "mechanically" at some visible point (like between balls farther back in the pack) is less precise for me in that regard.

I am at a loss with PJ's method for he does say to aim to contact the head ball to hit the 1st. diamond but does not say in using inside english it then will hit the head ball thinner

I aim to hit the contact point including compensating for squirt.

I applaud your scientific approach to this, Whitey - but I think more control is needed in your testing setups to get the most meaningful results. For instance, freezing a CB to the intended contact point and then hitting that CB with your stick doesn't simulate an actual break from a distance.

There are really two questions:

1. What's the best point on the head ball to hit?

2. What's the best way to hit it?

The answer to both might change depending on where you break from.

pj
chgo

 

[Tennessee Joe6]

Hello Joe & welcome.


Referring to your example, what I have witnessed most often is players paying attention to the balls, 1 thru 14 to make sure there are no gaps. The idea being that if all those balls are frozen, no ball can beat the 9 ball to the 14 forcing the 14 downward to the bottom rail.

Assuming your hypothesis were correct though, wouldn't a gap between the 3 and 13 balls or between the balls 2 and 7 in that row have the same affect that you are identifying?

I agree with your hypothesis but to a lesser extent. The key to my example is that the 15 ball receives more energy to exert against the lower two rows sending the 11 and 14 to the opponents pocket. But various conditions such as cloth, humidity, dirty balls, etc. give cause for experimentation.

 

[Tennessee Joe6]

That's pretty close to where I break from too.


The "90 degree cut" is really a cut toward the 2nd diamond (more like a 67 degree cut when shooting from near the side rail, but who's counting? ). More importantly, it's also a simultaneous hit of the head ball and the second ball. I believe this is too thin on the head ball / too full on the second ball - for the simple reason that every successful break I've ever made produced a distinct click-click sound, clearly hitting the head ball first.


I think Dr. Bill said he aims fuller than my intended contact point so the expected squirt gives him the hit on that contact point, not thinner. In fact, this is the reason for aiming it like a "normal" shot - I'm practiced at compensating for squirt/swerve that way. Aiming "mechanically" at some visible point (like between balls farther back in the pack) is less precise for me in that regard.


I aim to hit the contact point including compensating for squirt.

I applaud your scientific approach to this, Whitey - but I think more control is needed in your testing setups to get the most meaningful results. For instance, freezing a CB to the intended contact point and then hitting that CB with your stick doesn't simulate an actual break from a distance.

There are really two questions:

1. What's the best point on the head ball to hit?

2. What's the best way to hit it?

The answer to both might change depending on where you break from.

pj
chgo

Try breaking with only three balls and aiming the head ball to the second diamond. After several tries you should see the corner ball going to your pocket frequently. Now try it with a full rack. Of course if you're playing re-rack if a ball is made on the break, it is a moot point.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

PJ,
Your putting untruth words in my mouth. I never did this test scenario's from up close to the stack, they were always from behind the line. Your also putting words in Dr. Bill's mouth, he never said that!

My bad - I misread that part. But even freezing a ball to the intended contact point and hitting it from a distance is different from hitting that contact point with a rolling, spinning CB.

How dare you imply that my tests on contacting the head ball at different thickness were not sound.

Chill dude. It wasn't intended as an insult. I do question whether they're sound - that's not a "hostile challenge"; it's how science is done.

Please be careful in how you use your words, for I am pretty much done with being nice and giving any benefit of the doubt, anymore.

I don't know what you're exercised about. If you can't stand to have your assertions questioned, maybe scientific tests aren't your cup of tea.

pj
chgo