Stroking thru the Cue Ball

BC21 said:

I believe what he is referring to as a "push" is what pool players refer to as "follow through'.

Click to expand...

I don't know why but my instinct is cringing at the advice i see in that snooker coach video and the talk of pushing etc etc.

In the snooker world, a lot of emphasis goes into level cueing and I don't agree with that either. In f'king perfect conditions for world title matches, "kicks" or what we call "cling" occurs A LOT, so, im not exactly sure if it is due to these supposed ideal mechanics or i theorize it might have to do with a common fractional type aiming many of them do, and I don't care for that either because it's very possible it delivers too much of a thick and thin bias that has to be rolled or stunned to compensate, but that's my thoughts and I'm not exactly sure, but they experience an awful lot of cling for a reason.

I do not and I repeat, DO NOT like this mindset of pushing because it opens the door to steering balls in the hole.

Follow through is another misnomer I can't stand.

Follow through is a bi-product of mechanical set up and muscle contraction. We are human, therefore, our delivery is congruent with a particular effect of delivery but "ideal" is only because of the human element.

In other words, if I built a machine that stroked a stick, I don't see why I couldn't design it to have zero backswing and only one inch of stroke let's say, maybe physics requires 2" or something, but my point is, the cb doesn't care or know how it's being struck and I don't see why a 2" delivery couldn't achieve anything less than what we humans have to do with obviously more than a 2" stroke because bottom line, we aren't a machine that could hit a cb 30 mph with a zero back swing/2" forward stroke.

Therefore, bruce lee and his 1" punch is full of shyte and a few months of jui jitsu training...... I would boa constrict that little man into a pretzel and he's more than welcome to use that one inch punch all day as I choke him into dream land.

Willie hoppie stressed using a closed bridge and sqweezing the shaft just enough to feel some resistance. I suggest trying that instead of "pushing" and post your results if anyone cares for my claims.

Another very important thing is willie mosconi said you should strive to hit the cb easier and easier. What he means by this is THIS and this is just about the most important concept in pool I can think of IMO:

FACT: just like in golf, when a cb is truly struck down the vertical center of the shot line, speed control itself becomes finite.

A well struck shot down the line takes much less delivery velocity than a off center vertical hit. This is why alignment and stroke is important or else, anything less, and this is simply unarguable, is a funky mojo put on the cb. It's a twist shot, a knuckle ball.....a funky hit.

Enjoy.

Thanks and good luck.

paultex said:

I don't know why but my instinct is cringing at the advice i see in that snooker coach video and the talk of pushing etc etc.

In the snooker world, a lot of emphasis goes into level cueing and I don't agree with that either. In f'king perfect conditions for world title matches, "kicks" or what we call "cling" occurs A LOT, so, im not exactly sure if it is due to these supposed ideal mechanics or i theorize it might have to do with a common fractional type aiming many of them do, and I don't care for that either because it's very possible it delivers too much of a thick and thin bias that has to be rolled or stunned to compensate, but that's my thoughts and I'm not exactly sure, but they experience an awful lot of cling for a reason.

I do not and I repeat, DO NOT like this mindset of pushing because it opens the door to steering balls in the hole.

Follow through is another misnomer I can't stand.

Follow through is a bi-product of mechanical set up and muscle contraction. We are human, therefore, our delivery is congruent with a particular effect of delivery but "ideal" is only because of the human element.

In other words, if I built a machine that stroked a stick, I don't see why I couldn't design it to have zero backswing and only one inch of stroke let's say, maybe physics requires 2" or something, but my point is, the cb doesn't care or know how it's being struck and I don't see why a 2" delivery couldn't achieve anything less than what we humans have to do with obviously more than a 2" stroke because bottom line, we aren't a machine that could hit a cb 30 mph with a zero back swing/2" forward stroke.

Therefore, bruce lee and his 1" punch is full of shyte and a few months of jui jitsu training...... I would boa constrict that little man into a pretzel and he's more than welcome to use that one inch punch all day as I choke him into dream land.

Willie hoppie stressed using a closed bridge and sqweezing the shaft just enough to feel some resistance. I suggest trying that instead of "pushing" and post your results if anyone cares for my claims.

Another very important thing is willie mosconi said you should strive to hit the cb easier and easier. What he means by this is THIS and this is just about the most important concept in pool I can think of IMO:

FACT: just like in golf, when a cb is truly struck down the vertical center of the shot line, speed control itself becomes finite.

A well struck shot down the line takes much less delivery velocity than a off center vertical hit. This is why alignment and stroke is important or else, anything less, and this is simply unarguable, is a funky mojo put on the cb. It's a twist shot, a knuckle ball.....a funky hit.

Enjoy.

Thanks and good luck.

Click to expand...

Level cueing is important, because the more you elevate your cue, the more the cueball jumps, especially when you shoot hard, and the more risk there is of you swerving the ball out of the hole. There is no mystery to this, they're well known matters of physics. The cueball jump in relation to speed control is often overlooked and is a frequent cause of missed position and lack of consistency. With the lighter balls and heavier slate (relatively) used in snooker, the cueball will jump more than in pool to start with. Jumping balls on a snooker table is a complete joke, and is extremely easy, even with a full cue and elkmaster tip (of course it's illegal, but fun to try in practise). On a carom table it's almost impossibly difficult in comparison. Ball weight matters.

Snooker pros get a lot of kicks, because they play on ultra fine (double shorn) cloth with a heated, extremely thick slate underneath, tighter pockets than you will ever see outside of Chinese 8 ball, and steel cushions! You simply have to roll a lot of shots in order to run the numbers these guys are on that equipment.

Your points about machines are completely moot, as they do not apply to anything we do as human beings, which is why the pushing advice is being given in the first place. I was taught a specialty stroke by a carom player, to get huge power with little follow through. Basically it's a stroke where you use only your wrist. This is the correct way to shoot the shots where you can't follow through, because the muscle interference in the stroke is minimal and your entire stance is motionless throughout. Still, it's not an easy shot to control by any means, and I'd never try to shoot all my shots that way.

So many people have ZERO clue as to how a perfect stroke actually works and why they are being told to accellerate the cue through the ball. The most difficult thing to do is to make a perfect transition from back to forward stroke, without disturbing your cue alignment. Tons of players are thrusting their cues back and forth at 100 miles an hour and never learn how to stroke the ball correctly with good speed control.

When you slowly accellerate the cue, you do not get the "jerk" that brings your cue off line. You also get a very powerful tool to control your speed. If your accelleration is close to constant, you can easily control your speed by varying the length of your backswing. If you vary how you accellerate your cue, speed control becomes much more difficult.

Following through is important for many reasons. Mostly, it's easier to aim at a target that way, and speed control is also improved. If you intentionally DON'T follow through you will have problems because the muscles that stop your cue will have to start contracting before the cue reaches the ball, with very bad consequences for your accuracy in direction as well as speed. Following through helps you stay down, helps you pocket ballls and helps you play position. It's hard to imagine one piece of advice in pool that could be more useful.

Your points about Bruce Lee are laughable. You couldn't get anywhere close to him without getting punched out, and he was a mixed martial artist before anyone else was. Good luck fighting him, you'd need it. His one inch punch was just a show thing, and the usefulness is questionable, that is true, but the man had legendary punching power as well as jiu-jitsu skills.

Your point about speed control being "finite" I did not understand. Any shot can be hit with an infinite number of speeds, between the hardest it could possibly be hit, and the slowest. The maximum travel of the cueball is hard to calculate even with center ball, and depends on angle, cloth and cushion speed, slate thickness and lots of other things. Not only that but quite frequently a sidespin stroke will be easier to control at higher speeds because after a couple of rails the spin reverses and kills the ball. Not to mention that you can intentionall kill any shot with sidespin to begin with. You get the maximum amount of force into the cueball at exact center ball striking, yet that stroke is quite rarely used, because it is a very unnatural, hard to control stroke with very low versatility. It's a good drill stroke and that's just about it except in the rare cases where you get a stun-run through that is perfectly lined up to use center. Even my stun-run throughs are hit with mostly below center or even slightly above. Exact center is very rare.

You hear of people using center to shoot their long follow shots for some of the same reasons you give. I've tried it, and I don't really see the value, unless we are talking about stun-run through. If I'm rolling the ball naturally anyway, I'd much rather hit it with a normal, follow stroke, to get maximum consistency compared to the shorter shots, other than some theoretical advantage of getting the most power into the ball with the less amount of effort. If we are talking about dragging the ball, we use much below center to get the maximum amount of "brake". So on really long "slow" shots I either stun-run or drag. Never "center roll". If the equipment is good and I feel confident I roll with above center.

paultex said:

I don't know why but my instinct is cringing at the advice i see in that snooker coach video and the talk of pushing etc etc.

In the snooker world, a lot of emphasis goes into level cueing and I don't agree with that either. In f'king perfect conditions for world title matches, "kicks" or what we call "cling" occurs A LOT, so, im not exactly sure if it is due to these supposed ideal mechanics or i theorize it might have to do with a common fractional type aiming many of them do, and I don't care for that either because it's very possible it delivers too much of a thick and thin bias that has to be rolled or stunned to compensate, but that's my thoughts and I'm not exactly sure, but they experience an awful lot of cling for a reason.

I do not and I repeat, DO NOT like this mindset of pushing because it opens the door to steering balls in the hole.

Follow through is another misnomer I can't stand.

Follow through is a bi-product of mechanical set up and muscle contraction. We are human, therefore, our delivery is congruent with a particular effect of delivery but "ideal" is only because of the human element.

In other words, if I built a machine that stroked a stick, I don't see why I couldn't design it to have zero backswing and only one inch of stroke let's say, maybe physics requires 2" or something, but my point is, the cb doesn't care or know how it's being struck and I don't see why a 2" delivery couldn't achieve anything less than what we humans have to do with obviously more than a 2" stroke because bottom line, we aren't a machine that could hit a cb 30 mph with a zero back swing/2" forward stroke.

Therefore, bruce lee and his 1" punch is full of shyte and a few months of jui jitsu training...... I would boa constrict that little man into a pretzel and he's more than welcome to use that one inch punch all day as I choke him into dream land.

Willie hoppie stressed using a closed bridge and sqweezing the shaft just enough to feel some resistance. I suggest trying that instead of "pushing" and post your results if anyone cares for my claims.

Another very important thing is willie mosconi said you should strive to hit the cb easier and easier. What he means by this is THIS and this is just about the most important concept in pool I can think of IMO:

FACT: just like in golf, when a cb is truly struck down the vertical center of the shot line, speed control itself becomes finite.

A well struck shot down the line takes much less delivery velocity than a off center vertical hit. This is why alignment and stroke is important or else, anything less, and this is simply unarguable, is a funky mojo put on the cb. It's a twist shot, a knuckle ball.....a funky hit.

Enjoy.

Thanks and good luck.

Click to expand...

Fractional aiming is just a means of sending the CB to the appropriate location needed to pocket the OB. Regardless of what aiming method a player uses for cut shots, the end result always creates a fractional relationship when the CB collides with the OB. This is no different in snooker than it is in pool, so all fractional hits would have similar results in both games.

However, snooker balls are about 15 to 20 percent lighter than pool balls, and this is probably why collision-induced throw happens more often in snooker.

The reason there's more CIT with lighter balls is because weight is a factor in determining sliding friction. (Sliding Friction = Coefficient of Friction X weight) So if the snooker balls are made of the same material as pool balls, we can say they have the same Coefficient of Friction. Now, assuming the cloth is the same on both tables, the lighter snooker OB will have lower sliding friction between the base of the ball and the cloth when struck by the snooker CB. Less friction makes it more prone to sliding action when compared to slightly heavier pool balls that have more friction pushing against the sliding action.

UPDATE: Having just read Straightpool_99's post about the slicker cloth, that reduces the sliding friction of the snooker balls even more. So slick cloth and lighter ball weight give you a better chance for skids/kicks in snooker.

Straightpool_99 said:

Level cueing is important, because the more you elevate your cue, the more the cueball jumps, especially when you shoot hard, and the more risk there is of you swerving the ball out of the hole. There is no mystery to this, they're well known matters of physics. The cueball jump in relation to speed control is often overlooked and is a frequent cause of missed position and lack of consistency. With the lighter balls and heavier slate (relatively) used in snooker, the cueball will jump more than in pool to start with. Jumping balls on a snooker table is a complete joke, and is extremely easy, even with a full cue and elkmaster tip (of course it's illegal, but fun to try in practise). On a carom table it's almost impossibly difficult in comparison. Ball weight matters.

Snooker pros get a lot of kicks, because they play on ultra fine (double shorn) cloth with a heated, extremely thick slate underneath, tighter pockets than you will ever see outside of Chinese 8 ball, and steel cushions! You simply have to roll a lot of shots in order to run the numbers these guys are on that equipment.

Your points about machines are completely moot, as they do not apply to anything we do as human beings, which is why the pushing advice is being given in the first place. I was taught a specialty stroke by a carom player, to get huge power with little follow through. Basically it's a stroke where you use only your wrist. This is the correct way to shoot the shots where you can't follow through, because the muscle interference in the stroke is minimal and your entire stance is motionless throughout. Still, it's not an easy shot to control by any means, and I'd never try to shoot all my shots that way.

So many people have ZERO clue as to how a perfect stroke actually works and why they are being told to accellerate the cue through the ball. The most difficult thing to do is to make a perfect transition from back to forward stroke, without disturbing your cue alignment. Tons of players are thrusting their cues back and forth at 100 miles an hour and never learn how to stroke the ball correctly with good speed control.

When you slowly accellerate the cue, you do not get the "jerk" that brings your cue off line. You also get a very powerful tool to control your speed. If your accelleration is close to constant, you can easily control your speed by varying the length of your backswing. If you vary how you accellerate your cue, speed control becomes much more difficult.

Following through is important for many reasons. Mostly, it's easier to aim at a target that way, and speed control is also improved. If you intentionally DON'T follow through you will have problems because the muscles that stop your cue will have to start contracting before the cue reaches the ball, with very bad consequences for your accuracy in direction as well as speed. Following through helps you stay down, helps you pocket ballls and helps you play position. It's hard to imagine one piece of advice in pool that could be more useful.

Your points about Bruce Lee are laughable. You couldn't get anywhere close to him without getting punched out, and he was a mixed martial artist before anyone else was. Good luck fighting him, you'd need it. His one inch punch was just a show thing, and the usefulness is questionable, that is true, but the man had legendary punching power!

Your point about speed control being "finite" I did not understand. Any shot can be hit with an infinite number of speeds, between the hardest it could possibly be hit, and the slowest. The maximum travel of the cueball is hard to calculate even with center ball, and depends on angle, cloth and cushion speed, slate thickness and lots of other things. Not only that but quite frequently a sidespin stroke will be easier to control at higher speeds because after a couple of rails the spin reverses and kills the ball. Not to mention that you can intentionall kill any shot with sidespin to begin with. You get the maximum amount of force into the cueball at exact center ball striking, yet that stroke is quite rarely used, because it is a very unnatural, hard to control stroke with very low versatility. It's a good drill stroke and that's just about it except in the rare cases where you get a stun-run through that is perfectly lined up to use center. Even my stun-run throughs are hit with mostly below center or even slightly above. Exact center is very rare.

You hear of people using center to shoot their long follow shots for some of the same reasons you give. I've tried it, and I don't really see the value, unless we are talking about stun-run through. If I'm rolling the ball naturally anyway, I'd much rather hit it with a normal, follow stroke, to get maximum consistency compared to the shorter shots, other than some theoretical advantage of getting the most power into the ball with the less amount of effort. If we are talking about dragging the ball, we use much below center to get the maximum amount of "brake". So on really long "slow" shots I either stun-run or drag. Never "center roll". If the equipment is good and I feel confident I roll with above center.

Click to expand...

You make some excellent points and I'm not expert on stroke yet, but I'm learning and discovering and I have now found it is the key to my particular system. I have many different alignments that set up the stroke and not the other way around because my body composition has some very interesting flaws or perhaps a advantage, in which I get spring effects in the elbow that inherently wants to chicken wing "in" and that gives too much left stroke bias. The problem is my dominant eye makes it hard not to align myself to naturally get the elbow down the line but here's the real killer, the elbow sometimes pops out away from my body on certain alignments, where just before tip contacts the cb......BOING, like a mouse trap and throws the cb way off line. This is just some of the problems and I thought it was due to visual cross fire and my mind to arm muscles couldn't make up its mind, but my issue is purely mechanical and I have been rectifying it now tremendously.

Ok, I figured there may be other reasons for the snooker kicks and im well aware of cb flight from the table, but a truly straight trajectory I believe can override a lot of problems but offcenter hits with a level cue does decrease the twist effect and for the record, I think all stroke angles should be attained, so I'll just concede to being wrong about too much emphasis on the snooker world taking too much importance in it for now.

I'm going to read your post a few more times and thanks for the content, it's well done.

What I meant about finite was if the stroke line is truly down the shot line, there is a bottom line amount of energy the cb needs to achieve the desired result. I play a lot of snooker in my training and there's no doubt that when you are aligned correctly, you don't have to stroke too hard to get the cb around the table on club style cloth I play on.

So when someone says they are going to work on speed control, that's fine and dandy, but if some of your shots are unknowingly set up to twist the cb while thinking you're rolling or delivering down the line, it will have inconsistent results unless you line up the same way and that would take an incredible awareness just as difficult as good awareness for correct alignment.

I've medium stroked some snooker shots expecting to go a few feet around two rails and go 3 feet past it and a very good semi legendary player i was playing noted that one particular shot days later when we had a discussion of what im mentioning right now.

He was in total agreement about the importance and efficiency and consistency of getting lined up properly which he admits is not easy to do and is a huge advocate of mosconi, saying he had the ability to find the perfect alignment for any shot on the table.

Any way, thanks.

Ps, do you know where I can find this bruce lee person, if so, bring him to me......IMEDIATELY.

BC21 said:

Fractional aiming is just a means of sending the CB to the appropriate location needed to pocket the OB. Regardless of what aiming method a player uses for cut shots, the end result always creates a fractional relationship when the CB collides with the OB. This is no different in snooker than it is in pool, so all fractional hits would have similar results in both games.

However, snooker balls are about 15 to 20 percent lighter than pool balls, and this is probably why collision-induced throw happens more often in snooker.

The reason there's more CIT with lighter balls is because weight is a factor in determining sliding friction. (Sliding Friction = Coefficient of Friction X weight) So if the snooker balls are made of the same material as pool balls, we can say they have the same Coefficient of Friction. Now, assuming the cloth is the same on both tables, the lighter snooker OB will have lower sliding friction between the base of the ball and the cloth when struck by the snooker CB. Less friction makes it more prone to sliding action when compared to slightly heavier pool balls that have more friction pushing against the sliding action.

UPDATE: Having just read Straightpool_99's post about the slicker cloth, that reduces the sliding friction of the snooker balls even more. So slick cloth and lighter ball weight give you a better chance for skids/kicks in snooker.

Click to expand...

Ok but I haven't got a klunk in months and months on the snooker table nor regular 9 footer. I also play with the English smaller balls and a 12mm stick but it does have the spongey club type cloth and it slow as a rug but not shiny. It's a English style table and not a American one that is slightly different from what I understand.

paultex said:

Ok but I haven't got a klunk in months and months on the snooker table nor regular 9 footer. I also play with the English smaller balls and a 12mm stick but it does have the spongey club type cloth and it slow as a rug but not shiny. It's a English style table and not a American one that is slightly different from what I understand.

Click to expand...

I hear ya.....most klunks/skids are due to chalk spots on the CB or OB, or slight imperfections (scratches/nicks).

BC21 said:

I hear ya.....most klunks/skids are due to chalk spots on the CB or OB, or slight imperfections (scratches/nicks).

Click to expand...

yeah and the clunks i admit do happen more often down by the black spot where chalk keeps getting laid down on the felt with most of the action occurring there.

What i meant to say about that snooker shot i mentioned but wasnt clear, the guy i was playing noted how far the cb went past position with such a easy stroke and i'll admit it was simply a pure shot/stroke that i do not hit often enough.

What probably happened is the cb hugged the cloth quicker instead of going airborne and most shots believe it or not, go airborne, especially with high english.

I would imagine it takes a level stroke or level contact which would require timing or perhaps a shorter or longer bridge length, considering i dont stroke as level as a snooker player but i do shoot more level than average because i stand more upright.....but all these things im saying is just specifics that i do not have a complete awareness or control of yet.

A good player told me the other week that most people do not understand high english and i agree with him. I havent even begun to address this part of the cueball yet.

paultex said:

You make some excellent points and I'm not expert on stroke yet, but I'm learning and discovering and I have now found it is the key to my particular system. I have many different alignments that set up the stroke and not the other way around because my body composition has some very interesting flaws or perhaps a advantage, in which I get spring effects in the elbow that inherently wants to chicken wing "in" and that gives too much left stroke bias. The problem is my dominant eye makes it hard not to align myself to naturally get the elbow down the line but here's the real killer, the elbow sometimes pops out away from my body on certain alignments, where just before tip contacts the cb......BOING, like a mouse trap and throws the cb way off line. This is just some of the problems and I thought it was due to visual cross fire and my mind to arm muscles couldn't make up its mind, but my issue is purely mechanical and I have been rectifying it now tremendously.

Ok, I figured there may be other reasons for the snooker kicks and im well aware of cb flight from the table, but a truly straight trajectory I believe can override a lot of problems but offcenter hits with a level cue does decrease the twist effect and for the record, I think all stroke angles should be attained, so I'll just concede to being wrong about too much emphasis on the snooker world taking too much importance in it for now.

I'm going to read your post a few more times and thanks for the content, it's well done.

What I meant about finite was if the stroke line is truly down the shot line, there is a bottom line amount of energy the cb needs to achieve the desired result. I play a lot of snooker in my training and there's no doubt that when you are aligned correctly, you don't have to stroke too hard to get the cb around the table on club style cloth I play on.

So when someone says they are going to work on speed control, that's fine and dandy, but if some of your shots are unknowingly set up to twist the cb while thinking you're rolling or delivering down the line, it will have inconsistent results unless you line up the same way and that would take an incredible awareness just as difficult as good awareness for correct alignment.

I've medium stroked some snooker shots expecting to go a few feet around two rails and go 3 feet past it and a very good semi legendary player i was playing noted that one particular shot days later when we had a discussion of what im mentioning right now.

He was in total agreement about the importance and efficiency and consistency of getting lined up properly which he admits is not easy to do and is a huge advocate of mosconi, saying he had the ability to find the perfect alignment for any shot on the table.

Any way, thanks.

Ps, do you know where I can find this bruce lee person, if so, bring him to me......IMEDIATELY.

Click to expand...

If you have a lot of tension in your elbow, and especially have problems with it moving, I'd suggest trying an extended rear pause in your stroke. On the delivery stroke, pull the cue back slowly. Pause at the rear for a couple of seconds (this is longer than you'll need to do later), then accellerate forward (genlty and gradually until you hit the ball. It won't really fix anything immidiately, but it will help you understand exactly what is happening. With some work you can use that pause to relax your arm, so as to remove the problem or figure out if you are misalligned somehow. If that is the case you will feel your body wanting to move some way or other before the forward swing. This is very bad, it indicates that you are off in your alignment and possibly off balance as well! For example you may feel like you are "falling" to your right. If you are a right hander, it means that your right (back) foot is incorrectly placed and your stance is weak (for example). You will often feel a subtle urge to adjust your stance, during this pause. This is your subconscious alerting you that you are misalligned. This is why the pause has to be extended at first. With a normal pace, you will not easily notice this.

To me it sounds like you are using your backswing to "load up" your muscles, you are "jerking" your backstroke. It can lead to throwing your forward stroke off line. Slow backstroke + extended pause. Try it, and see if that fixes it.
Watch this stroke for inspiration:
https://youtu.be/73Vd6SnP7A8?t=48

Straightpool_99 said:

If you have a lot of tension in your elbow, and especially have problems with it moving, I'd suggest trying an extended rear pause in your stroke. On the delivery stroke, pull the cue back slowly. Pause at the rear for a couple of seconds (this is longer than you'll need to do later), then accellerate forward (genlty and gradually until you hit the ball. It won't really fix anything immidiately, but it will help you understand exactly what is happening. With some work you can use that pause to relax your arm, so as to remove the problem or figure out if you are misalligned somehow. If that is the case you will feel your body wanting to move some way or other before the forward swing. This is very bad, it indicates that you are off in your alignment and possibly off balance as well! For example you may feel like you are "falling" to your right. If you are a right hander, it means that your right (back) foot is incorrectly placed and your stance is weak (for example). You will often feel a subtle urge to adjust your stance, during this pause. This is your subconscious alerting you that you are misalligned. This is why the pause has to be extended at first. With a normal pace, you will not easily notice this.

To me it sounds like you are using your backswing to "load up" your muscles, you are "jerking" your backstroke. It can lead to throwing your forward stroke off line. Slow backstroke + extended pause. Try it, and see if that fixes it.
Watch this stroke for inspiration:
https://youtu.be/73Vd6SnP7A8?t=48

Click to expand...

I've went deeper into the problem and some people just have different body structures that allow some people certain physical characteristics in kinesiology than others.

Guys like Ronnie o sullivan or carlo beado can stand a certain way and get their shoulders more square to the shot line. I've noticed this produces more of a piston stroke, rather than a high elbow. If I were to stand like carlo and try to square my shoulders up, I have to contort in such a way that I have no choice but to bend both legs or else I'll twist my lower spine into the hospital.

What I have done is develop numberous stances to align to shots because I don't aim. For my elbow to be in line with the stick, feels like my elbow is going to touch my ear if you know what I mean. I look back and it's no where out to the right of the shotline, but right down the line. I have forced it out there now so much, that my rear shoulder muscle is much more developed looking than my left rear shoulder.

If I didn't force it out, it wants to spring back in, thus why I force it and it feels much more comfortable now but it was such hard physical work, sometimes I left the hall damn bear passed out on my feet.

Yes, jerking the stroke forward was what I used to do but not no more. I am now working on just what you said about backstroke and I will take your advice on smooth increasing acceleration in the forward stroke because I know for a fact the mind/muscle link can develop this necessary fluidity rather quickly. I practice so much, im sure I can develop it within a week or so.

What I have done and still doing with alignment development is something I noticed with a willie hoppie video and I'll save that for another time because I need to get back to my table heroin because im gettin the shakes.

Thanks and you're right about the swaying effect of being out of line and bad feet position. The ideal stance for me is just that with my shoulders down the shot line but I could never find a solid stance for it without shifting the hips out of wack and my hips totally effect my elbow position. Sounds like a curse but I think this has all worked out to my advantage.

This kinda gets into how I like to explain a good stroke being made up of 3 parts.

The first 1/3 is like a walking start in a race

The second part the stride opens up

Third is just prior to contact to finish and your top head speed for that particular shot.

Like think how rough a drag car is off the dump.

Now take the same car and go to a long long straight away, rolling start and slowly building to top speed.

Car handles better and can go faster safer.

We try and generate too much hp from the drop of the gate when there’s plenty of torque to do the job from the midrange. It doesn’t even have to be a hard fast shot for that it happens at lower speeds too.

Just how I always looked at it




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk