Magictrat007 said:

People in my city really like it so I think it could take off but time will tell. A lot of people are saying they like it more than APA and a lot of people in APA are saying they’re going to UPL. and I don’t plan either one so my opinion is unbiased.

Click to expand...

I played in 2 sessions.

Slop anything including the 8 ball bites, but as you saw with the GN finals, at the level it takes to get to the finals, slop doesn't rear its head.

Bump

iusedtoberich said:

Agree, from the few racks I watched a couple days ago. Much better than before. I wonder if Pat talked to him. In either case, he is doing great.

Click to expand...

You know doesn't exactly sound like Sigel. Like the tape is running fast. Also the dialog and brash tone is down - like he just woke up or something.

HawaiianEye said:

When I break a rack of 9-ball, I analyze the entire table before I shoot the first ball.

At the beginning, I look to see where the 9-ball will go from its current position and where the ball before the 9 is and how I will get from that ball to the 9.

Then I map everything backwards.

If there are balls that need to be broken out, I work that into the positioning so that I will know what I intend to do before I shoot the first shot.

If I know I can't run them, I plan everything to get to the best possible safety that will give me BIH at the most opportune time.

I look for safeties that will allow me to break out clusters while locking up my opponent at the same time so that I will have a better table layout when I get BIH.

Click to expand...

Yours is the ultimate pro strategy.

What I am alluding to is the actual mechanics involved. For instance, the cue ball path is determined by the point of contact between the cue tip and the cue ball, and the contact point of the cue ball on the object ball. And the forces exerted at these points. And the cue stick alignment. And so on and so on. Effectively all these many shot criteria are predetermined just because you decided your final cue ball resting position.

Now, since you know all these things, you must bring everything into alignment and conform to these confinements. For instance, you must align the cue stick accordingly. So you must know how to make the alignment happen. You must know how to look and see with your eyes and how to use your body to bring the cue stick into conformity with the shot line. But you must already have determined the shot line knowing where the contact points are and where you must send the cue ball, for starters.

Have you ever heard that song: Your foot bone is connected to the ankle bone. The ankle bone is connected to the leg bone. The leg bone is connected to the knee bone. The knee bone is connected to the thigh bone. Etc. Etc.

This is how the shot is constructed with interconnected constrained pieces. Conceptually, once you determine the final resting place of the cue ball, your shot solution instantly comes into being. You must be able to see it. And you must be able to conform your body to this "conceptual shape." You don't have to think about it. You must desire and intend to seize control of the shot.

It's more than a philosophy. The shot is welcoming you with open arms ready to embrace you. Accept, adapt and willfully conform, becoming the shot . Don't fight it or you will miss the shot.

skogstokig said:

sigel is actually quite good in comms so far. talks about the game, acknowledges the players.. what happened to him?

Click to expand...

Agree, from the few racks I watched a couple days ago. Much better than before. I wonder if Pat talked to him. In either case, he is doing great.

Flakeandrun said:

Will Oi ever win anything?

Click to expand...

Still unknown. Well there was one Euro thing. The invincible warrior thing just doesn't work when there's too much resistance.

Vince_Former_BB said:

"How does the cue ball react to the impact of a tip attached to a low deflection shaft and ferrule?" I however do not have access to six different low deflection shafts worth thousands of dollars to run tests on

Click to expand...

If you are interested in low deflection, sooner or later, you will have to buy or borrow two or three low-deflection shafts to determine how good your shafts are. Or let others test for you. Dr Dave's tests will give you a good estimate of the deflection properties of the three shafts. Do the replications and follow the instructions he provides. Post results on the sometime snakepit, AZBilliards.

Later, get witnesses to your tests. Later, get others to conduct and repeat your tests. Rock on. Interesting.

People in my city really like it so I think it could take off but time will tell. A lot of people are saying they like it more than APA and a lot of people in APA are saying they’re going to UPL. and I don’t plan either one so my opinion is unbiased.

Will Oi ever win anything?

Updated with Mezz shaft.

I’m only selling this guy locally in Los Angeles now.

jjohnson said:

You most nearly hit upon what I am thinking. First off, I am right-handed. And my dominant eye is the right. But when I get down into my stance, I feel like I have a tendency to lean right. This throws everything off. It seems like my body never really gets over the shot and settles in. It is not hard to imagine that this adds a persistent force that has a tendency to push against the shot alignment. You can never relax. You have to always deal with it, even subconsciously. I saw a really good pool player that is right-handed and is left eye dominant. His body, especially his head and eye and shoulder, is automatically over the shot and cue stick on every shot. I would think a left-handed shooter with right eye dominant would benefit for the same reason. Sort of a crisscross stabilizing structure that also naturally levels the shoulders, as well. I fear that when I try this dominant left eye / right-hand shooting technique for the first time in a couple of days, I may find I've in effect killed my game right from the start. Heartbreaking.

Click to expand...

I am not sure which eye Shaw is dominant with, but he has an elongated arm and a contortion to his stance. That is kind of how I feel when playing left handed, though on observation, my body looks almost the same as right handed. It's why I think part of it is mental/familiarity.

It's not the end of the world, just take little steps to work on. I think sometimes we overthink things, and it distracts from the primary objective of putting the ball in the hole. No one is perfect. What is perfect? We can learn to adjust what we have into something better

jjohnson said:

Similar to Schrodinger's Cat, as you stand before the pool table, no one knows for certain what the next shot will be.
But once you decide where you want the cue ball to end up after the shot, the entire shot is precisely defined.
Your decision includes the cue ball, the object ball, the pocket, and the path of the cue ball.
These four parameters are part and parcel to the shot. They cannot be separated. They are essential parts of the whole shot.

Here's proof. Break a rack of 9-ball. Take ball in hand. Before you set the cue ball where you want it, decide where you want the cue ball to end up after you shoot the shot. Now place the cue ball on the table. You see, you just decided the current cue ball position, what object ball you intend to shoot, the path of the cue ball, and where you want the cue ball to end up.

This means that once you decide the shot, you have nothing more to decide. Nothing more to think about. Nothing more to say.
From where you've ended up placing your feet having arrived at the table, to the final moment you release the cue ball to make the shot,
every detail of the shot is predetermined.

You just need to do it.
Execute the the entire shot from beginning to end.

What's the problem?

Click to expand...

Well people who know this, already know this and probably have it pared down to automatic. Main issue I see is the 95% who don't know this, may try to follow that undefined advice.

jlrowe said:

Yep, lucky to find one the first year he started making cues full time. He still used the 5/16x18 pin. got a really forward balance. its a pretty plain one but has some crazy birdseye.

Click to expand...

Mine was an ebony 4-point with four veneers. It looked exactly like a Balabushka.

I had him make me another cue in 1981. It was a Merry Widow with a black leather wrap.

I don't have either of them now.

I wish I could find the first one and get it back. I sold it to a young Air Force guy in the Philippines. He was from Texas and he bugged the hell out of me to sell it to him after I bought the second cue.

[emoji266][emoji266]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[emoji249][emoji249]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk