Thoughts on players who seemingly take Zero practice strokes, before shooting / final follow through?

I don't care for LD shafts as such but I am curious as to why one would shoot everything with the same "focal" length. Shots have too much range to confine yourself like that.
I'm not going to go into it again, I would suggest looking into pivot point for a shaft. The benefits are numerous. If you constantly change your bridge length even when forced not to, I would imagine you miss a lot of balls.

Actually I will. All shafts have a point on which they will hit the same point if lined up on a straight shot and rotated for any side spin while keeping the bridge stationary and rotating the back arm(hand) to appy side spin. Of course there are other variables, which can be mitigated in certain ways, but for arguments sake, let's just say that you can hit the point you're aiming at if you bridge at the point on your shaft (pivot point) that hits that point with side spin applied. All shafts have them. LD shafts have pp (pivot points) that are farther back.

Some people use this as an advantage when adjust for sidespin by using BHE (back hand english). That is to say, you aim every shot as though you're going to hit straight center ball and then, while maintaining that bridge position, you manipulate the cue so that it's pointing on the cue ball for the amount of side spin that you want.

There are things that come into play, like swerve (masse), so people that use BHE should raise their bridge for follow and lower their bridge for draw to best minimize this effect.

Now I use a different method for finding the pivot point than that of Dave or others suggest and it is for this reason. Well, first let me say how I find it. I setup various shots and shoot them with extreme sidespin usng bhe and adjust my bridge length until they consistently go in center pocket. It's easier on my table because of how tight the pockets are.

This method isn't best for finding the cue's natural pivot point as it is typically defined but it's better for using BHE because it takes the natural swerve, CIT and deflection that creates multiple variables into account and gives a more day to day usable PP.

There is a second type of PP for a cue and that is for FHE(front hand english). That is instead of rotating the rear arm and keeping the bridge stationary to put the amount of english you desire, you keep your back arm locked and slide the bridge hand (front hand) side to side to apply the english you desire.

It just so happens that they tend to be at the same place. what I mean by that is that if you are bridging for the PP for BHE, typically (if your arm is at 90 degrees at the tip contact with the cue ball) your grip hand will be at the correct point to rotate for FHE, but this should be verified prior to use because it's not always the case.

This definitely comes in handy when you can't bridge at the BHE PP because of an obstructing ball. You can bridge anywhere and slide your bridge for FHE and still effectively use side spin.

Now a quick list of benefits (these are mostly benefits of bridging at the cue's pivot point, not holding the butt for the FHE PP)

1) Stroke forgiveness
a). Since you shot doesn't know if you intended to rotate at contact, it doesn't care and the ball will often be potted successfully anyways.
b). You can use various methods of applying BHE, players in the past have successfully used swiping (twisting the cue sideways just before contact) although I wouldn't suggest it.
2) consistency
a). your body develops muscle memory, the more variables you introduce by varying bridge length, the longer it will take to develop said muscle memory and the more variables there are the more likely failure will occur.
3) BHE
a). The ability to easily adjust for squirt with any cue and use any side spin you want while still striking the ball where you want has so many advantages, it's hard to explain. It's ESPECIALLY important for shots in one pocket. Inside or outside to throw a bank to get out of the way is essential for high level one pocket.
b). being able to more accurately aim for CIT(collision induced throw). Sometimes you don't quite have an available angle because of a ball obstruction. With BHE there's no need to guess, you get to use spin to aim slightly off and throw the ball into the pocket. You still aim as though you were going to just shoot the ball regularly but the squirt sends the cue ball in at a different angle to avoid the obstruction, but the spin throws the ball in the pocket.

There's more but I don't feel like writing a book right now, especially when I started out the post saying I didn't want to answer it again at all...lol.

Thorpe blasts ‘one of the dumbest rules’ after becoming ineligible for USA Mosconi Cup team

Again, the best way for them to handle it is to specify participation requirements in his sponsorship contract, not to micromanage his event schedule.
However they opt to handle it surely would be their business. It’s just not a great look for him to be publicly saying he can’t afford to get to events and they’re his top sponsor.

Thorpe blasts ‘one of the dumbest rules’ after becoming ineligible for USA Mosconi Cup team

From my optics you’re sponsoring a player that says they can’t afford to get to events. And you’d want them to be seen out there using your equipment. And Billy’s brand merits are very tied to Mosconi Cup. Heck even if he went to Yuma, could he also afford to go to the Philippines Open? As a two way street it he’s staying home, what value is he to them and them to him? Doesn’t increase my outlook on them as a brand.
Again, the best way for them to handle it is to specify participation requirements in his sponsorship contract, not to micromanage his event schedule.

Thorpe blasts ‘one of the dumbest rules’ after becoming ineligible for USA Mosconi Cup team

Strongly disagree here. Sponsors give a name player a fixed sum and usually a certain amount of product which they can sell. They do not give them tournament participation costs.

Other than the matter of future contract negotiations with their sponsor, a player's participation decision, tournament by tournament, is an independent financial decision. That said, if a clause in his Meucci contract requires a pre-specified level of WNT participation, which is unlikely, then there is a possible breach of contract.

So no, it is not a sponsor's obligation to either pay a player's tournament participation costs or to monitor things like eligibility for invitational events. It is their option to do so if they are so inclined, but Meucii doesn't look bad here on any level.

From my optics you’re sponsoring a player that says they can’t afford to get to events. And you’d want them to be seen out there using your equipment. And Billy’s brand merits are very tied to Mosconi Cup. Heck even if he went to Yuma, could he also afford to go to the Philippines Open? As a two way street it he’s staying home, what value is he to them and them to him? Doesn’t increase my outlook on them as a brand.

Thorpe blasts ‘one of the dumbest rules’ after becoming ineligible for USA Mosconi Cup team

My 2 cents!

At the end of a 'Year/Season' the Very Top Pool player's ernings are most likely higher than The Very Top 3C players!

But, Year to year the 3C players have a More stable arrangement!

AI Overview



Top three-cushion billiards players generally have more stable, organized corporate sponsorships and higher baseline earnings from federations and Asian markets than most pocket pool players. [1, 2]

Three-Cushion Sponsorships
    • Stronger Corporate and Regional Backing: Three-cushion is massively popular in South Korea, Turkey, and parts of Western Europe. In South Korea especially, professional billiards is heavily supported by corporate conglomerates, dedicated TV/streaming networks (like SOOP/AfrecaTV), and prominent brands (such as Molinari, Longoni, and various Korean cue and table makers) that offer elite players predictable salaries and contracts. [1, 2, 3]
    • Centralized Organization: The Union Mondiale de Billard (UMB) and professional circuits provide a more structured tier of international events, making it easier for top-ranked carom players to secure long-term brand alignment. [1]

Pool Player Sponsorships
    • Fewer Guaranteed Salaries: Outside of a tiny handful of elite international stars (like Shane Van Boening or historical top earners), most professional pool players struggle to find full-time salaried sponsors. [1, 2]
    • Equipment-Heavy Deals: The majority of pool sponsorships consist of free or discounted gear (cues, cases, and chalk) rather than substantial cash stipends or salary support, forcing players to rely heavily on tournament winnings, coaching, or action gambling.

Thorpe blasts ‘one of the dumbest rules’ after becoming ineligible for USA Mosconi Cup team

Strongly disagree here. Sponsors give a name player a fixed sum and usually a certain amount of product which they can sell. They do not give them tournament participation costs.

Other than the matter of future contract negotiations with their sponsor, a player's participation decision, tournament by tournament, is an independent financial decision. That said, if a clause in his Meucci contract requires a pre-specified level of WNT participation, which is unlikely, then there is a possible breach of contract.

So no, it is not a sponsor's obligation to either pay a player's tournament participation costs or to monitor things like eligibility for invitational events. It is their option to do so if they are so inclined, but Meucii doesn't look bad here on any level.

May not be their obligation but pretty stupid not to get their player out there.

Lou Figueroa

Which Carbon Shaft: BeCue Prime II vs Viking Siege vs JFlowers S.M.O

Did anybody at Expo try these carbon fiber shafts 12.5mm:

  • BeCue Prime II
  • Viking Siege
  • JFlowers S.M.O
If so what is your opinion?

If you own any of these please post feedback, thanks!
I have been playing Becue for the last4 years, Becue builds shafts differently than any manufacturer I know of, instead of continuously building the new "best" shaft ever, they build different shafts for different types of hit, the first Prime shaft is very Muecci like, some consider it "whippy" I think it is very wood like shaft, the Engage shaft is a pure CF hit, very little if any feedback, if you like the majority of the well known shafts you will like the hit of this shaft, the Prime II is my favorite shaft, to me it has the best balance of feedback and CF hit, they all have LD and play great, the best shaft is the one that feels the best to you, Becue said it best, not everyone would like how one cue hits, they have taken the challenge to build cues that have several great hitting styles of cues and shafts

Filter

Back
Top