Jumpers

[Shawn Armstrong]

What if one "regular" cue jumps better than most others?

I am not talking about a cue that was specifically built to jump better. I am talking about a cue that the cuemaker makes that is used as a normal cue but just happens to have excellent "jumpability".

There are such cues. If I put one famous brand in your hands and you had the ability to jump then you would feel great about the shots you could do. If I then put another famous brand in your hands you would be frustrated with your inability to make the cueball jump.

Why is it a bad thing to allow everyone to have the SAME equipment and make jumping balls truly a matter of skill?

That's what it is when you use a chalked leather tip.

Why don't you want the same thing for jumping?

You make our point for us in this post. Certain playing cues jump better than other cues. Low deflection shafts don't jump well. Higher deflection shafts with harder ferrules do. I think this is the great equalizer for all those that swear by the low deflection shaft. My high deflection shaft allows me to play shots that they can't - all for the tradeoff of having to learn to play english with it. I have used Brand X cue, and could really draw the ball very easily. I have used Brand Y cue, and it was really stiff, and could stun the ball better than any other cue I had played. Shorter cues, longer cues, etc..... Where does it end? Do I get to switch my playing cue for every shot?

You said earlier that the reason the jump cue was created was due to the Texas Express rules. You then say that kicking is easier to learn than jumping, with the multitude of instruction and videos out there. I would then ask, John, if kicking is just that easy, as you have mentioned, WHY IS THERE ANY NEED FOR A JUMP CUE? You haven't answered that one yet.

The game was doing just fine without it before Pat Fleming created the beast. But, according to you, kicking 4 rails to hit a ball is easier than pulling out the jump cue and shooting directly at the intended object ball.

And regarding your comment about the pro players acceptance of the jump cue - that's one of the most retarded defenses I have ever heard. Of course they are going to use the jump cue - it's allowed by the rules. If you've ever talked to Mika, or read his Facebook page or blog, you'd know that he hates the jump cue, but uses it. When the #1 player in the world would like to see the jumper banned, perhaps he isn't the only pro that feels this way.

 

[RRfireblade]

You then say that kicking is easier to learn than jumping, with the multitude of instruction and videos out there. I would then ask, John, if kicking is just that easy, as you have mentioned, WHY IS THERE ANY NEED FOR A JUMP CUE? You haven't answered that one yet.

I probably shouldn't get back in here , it's obvious its not going to go anywhere. But . . . just to show that middle ground exists , altho quite rare . . .

I think there are easy kicks and difficult kicks as well as easy jumps and difficult jumps. The risks or percentage determines which I'll play at the time. Sometimes a jump is a smarter shot than a kick , sometimes you can jump where there's no good line for a kick. Many times I jump cause I can easily make a ball whereas a kick would be a gamble. Sometimes the payoff for a kick is better than that of a jump. Obviously the possiblilties are endless. It's not that one is easy and the other is hard , it's what the best tool at the time and both take skill to get the most out of. I'll tell you this , having the jump as a possibility has forced better play , safety and otherwise. It's opened up some different strategies and dimensions to the game. How is that a bad thing ? Is the game all of a sudden "easier" if you can jump ? Of course not. Do you need an additional skill set ? Sure. Do you have to play smarter and tighter ? Sure. It's not a major change to the game in anyway. It's not going to invalidate world records or skew the history books.The will be no "BJC" and "AJC" notations needed. It's really just not that big of a deal.

IMO.

 

[JB Cases]

You make our point for us in this post. Certain playing cues jump better than other cues. Low deflection shafts don't jump well. Higher deflection shafts with harder ferrules do. I think this is the great equalizer for all those that swear by the low deflection shaft. My high deflection shaft allows me to play shots that they can't - all for the tradeoff of having to learn to play english with it. I have used Brand X cue, and could really draw the ball very easily. I have used Brand Y cue, and it was really stiff, and could stun the ball better than any other cue I had played. Shorter cues, longer cues, etc..... Where does it end? Do I get to switch my playing cue for every shot?

No. The rules state that you may bring three cues to the table. I suggest that those three cues be whatever ones give you the maximum range of shots possible. Whether you are skilled enough to execute those shots is another thing.

You said earlier that the reason the jump cue was created was due to the Texas Express rules. You then say that kicking is easier to learn than jumping, with the multitude of instruction and videos out there. I would then ask, John, if kicking is just that easy, as you have mentioned, WHY IS THERE ANY NEED FOR A JUMP CUE? You haven't answered that one yet.

The game was doing just fine without it before Pat Fleming created the beast. But, according to you, kicking 4 rails to hit a ball is easier than pulling out the jump cue and shooting directly at the intended object ball.

Ok, even though the answer is obvious and has been stated by me and many others many time I will go ahead an break it down for you,

Jumping and Kicking are two different aspects of the game. There are times when the kick is the right shot and times when the jump is the right shot. A good player must learn both disciplines to succeed and know when to choose a kick or a jump and how to execute either.

I did not say that the jump cue was "created" because of TE rules. I said that TE rules, i.e. one foul ball in hand rules made the jump cue a necessary part of the game due to the penalty for not making a legal shot.

Also, please don't put words in my mouth, I said no such thing like a four rail kick is easier than a jump shot. I have said and I repeat, (sigh) again, that jumping and kicking are two SEPARATE aspects of the game. I said that there is more published information about how to kick than there is on how to jump. That is true. And again, (sigh), any person can learn to kick in one hour. Can they learn all the nuance in that time? Of course not. Any person with a sufficient stroke can learn to jump in one hour. Can they learn all the nuance in that time, of course not.

I am surprised that such an accomplished player as yourself fails to acknowledge something that you must know to be true. Or did you somehow acquire mastery of all the possible jump shots simply by the act of holding a jump cue in your hand? If so then come and win my $10,000 with my simple challenge. I would highly suggest you augment your idea that the jump cue somehow confers magical ability with a little bit of practice before you try though.

And regarding your comment about the pro players acceptance of the jump cue - that's one of the most retarded defenses I have ever heard. Of course they are going to use the jump cue - it's allowed by the rules. If you've ever talked to Mika, or read his Facebook page or blog, you'd know that he hates the jump cue, but uses it. When the #1 player in the world would like to see the jumper banned, perhaps he isn't the only pro that feels this way.

I have never talked to Mika about how he feels about jump cues. In fact I don't go around polling the professional players that I know how they feel about any of the equipment that they use. Next time I see him I might broach the subject and perhaps we can have a discussion about it.

So you can resort to the name calling by labeling me retarded but the fact remains that any player is FREE to choose NOT TO USE a jump cue. Mika does not HAVE TO use a jump cue but he does because he knows that despite his personal feeling on the matter it's an effective tool. And in fact having a jump cue and being able to use it effectively has made Mika Immonen tens of thousands of dollars. I bet he wouldn't trade that prize money and prestige for a ban on the jump cue. I'll ask him just that next time I see him.

Regardless, the jump cue was invented by PROFESSIONAL players and is in use by professional players around the world.

According to you, who is not a professional player, the game was "doing fine" before the invention and acceptance of the jump cue. You however do not have to travel the world and depend on prize money for your income. So perhaps the PROFESSIONALS who invented the jump cue thought that they needed another tool to ply their trade. Perhaps it's not the place of the amateurs like yourself to tell the PROFESSIONALS what they need to play the game at the highest level.

It's quite simple Shawn. The professional players, specifically Hall of Famer and top notch player Pat Fleming, invented the jump cue and promoted it's use. Mike Sigel and Sammy Jones to name just two top pros made videos showing how to use a jump cue in the pre-phenolic tip era.

You, an unranked amateur, really have no place to decide what the proper course of pool should be.

When however you are able to influence the pool world then your opinion will matter. Right now it's nothing more than dislike couched in illogical reasoning.

 

[JB Cases]

BTW The speaker implys. The listener "infers".

Ok, you imply that jump cues should be banned because you state that the jump shot damages the table.

You offer no proof other than to say that anyone with common sense just knows it to be so.

Then when I counter with my experience and empirical evidence you infer that my motivation for defending the jump cue's use is purely motivated through profit of jump cue sales and therefore invalid.

So you offer no proof of your and will accept none?

And it is implies not implys as long as we are going to take this discussion to the point of correcting each other's grammar and syntax.

 

[JB Cases]

I probably shouldn't get back in here , it's obvious its not going to go anywhere. But . . . just to show that middle ground exists , altho quite rare . . .

I think there are easy kicks and difficult kicks as well as easy jumps and difficult jumps. The risks or percentage determines which I'll play at the time. Sometimes a jump is a smarter shot than a kick , sometimes you can jump where there's no good line for a kick. Many times I jump cause I can easily make a ball whereas a kick would be a gamble. Sometimes the payoff for a kick is better than that of a jump. Obviously the possiblilties are endless. It's not that one is easy and the other is hard , it's what the best tool at the time and both take skill to get the most out of. I'll tell you this , having the jump as a possibility has forced better play , safety and otherwise. It's opened up some different strategies and dimensions to the game. How is that a bad thing ? Is the game all of a sudden "easier" if you can jump ? Of course not. Do you need an additional skill set ? Sure. Do you have to play smarter and tighter ? Sure. It's not a major change to the game in anyway. It's not going to invalidate world records or skew the history books.The will be no "BJC" and "AJC" notations needed. It's really just not that big of a deal.

IMO.

It's not a big deal. There is no need to compare jumps to kicks and discuss which is harder.

I do have to disagree where you say that it's not a major change. Many championships have been decided on jump shots - most notably the Challenge of Champions final between Fong Pang Chao and Francisco Bustamante.

In the final game for $50,000 Bustamante plays a safety that allows Chao an easy jump shot to hit the ball and a good chance to make it. Chao does and runs out the two remaining balls to win. Allen Hopkins pointed out that Bustamante played the wrong safety. He showed the alternate safety that would have either cut off the jump shot or made it very low percentage to be productive with a jump shot.

There are numerous other examples in pro pool where the additional range of jump shots now available to professionals have been instrumental in the sets.

I say allow the jump cue or ban the jump shot entirely. Because if the jump shot is allowed then it must be allowed to have a cue that facilitates that shot as the natural evolution will be to make cues that do anyway.

 

[PaulieB]

The argument about allowing jump cues is about equivalent to the argument of allowing custom cues versus having to use the house cues provided. If you say bringing an extra piece of gear with you to give an advantage is bad, then put away your custom cue and use the curved sticks on the wall.

Regardless, the thing I can't stand, is when people go for the jump shot instead of the kick just because it's the flavor of the month. Worse yet, I actually had someone say to me that they wanted to go for the jump instead of the kick because they just got a new jump cue, even though the kick was the obvious choice. They actually made the jump shot... and the scratch, thank you very much!

 

[Fastolfe]

Ok, you imply that jump cues should be banned because you state that the jump shot damages the table. You offer no proof other than to say that anyone with common sense just knows it to be so.

If you want proof, go to any pool hall, pick any table and do a series of jumps from the same spot. After 10 minutes, the area of the cloth where you've made your jump shots will be dotted with white marks. That's assuming the owner of the place doesn't throw you before.

In our pool hall, we have a table reserved for exactly that: the cloth is so crappy the owner only gives the table to people he doesn't like, and to us for jump shot training. Even on that tired old cloth you can see the newer jump marks. The running joke is to look at the table for fresh marks and ask the barman who's been doing jumps recently.

Also, if you overdo the jumping, the cueball has a fair chance of bouncing all over the place and landing on the frame, with damages the wood. You may even scratch the cueball if it hits something hard outside the table.

Jump shots are useful to get out of a pickle. The two problems I have with them are:

- They take skill to do well. Unfortunately, skill can only comes from training, and that means having a table just for that because the wear and tear on the equipment is so much greater than normal shots.

- Every Tom, Dick and Harry who has a difficult shot and a jump cue cracks it out. It's not rare to see 2 or 3 jumps per set when it's allowed these days. Even on simple straight in shots that only require a semi-masse effect to curve around a problem ball. The truth is, jump shots should be exceptionally done, only when there's no option, again because of the toll it takes on the equipment.

Should jump shots be legal? yes definitely, they are a useful part of the game. Should they be allowed all the time? Heck no. Personally, I think the rules should allow jump cues (it's just tough to jump with a soft tip) but only allow one jump per set for instance. That way, it'd only reserved for true emergencies, and players who use it will make damn sure they master the technique beforehand, to avoid wasting their only jump shot.

 

[RRfireblade]

I'm not saying a jump can't have a major effect on winning a game , I'm saying it doesn't threaten the basic nature of the game as whole like some here would suggest. Its still the same game with the same challenges and skill. Perhaps maybe a couple more even.

 

[JB Cases]

I'm not saying a jump can't have a major effect on winning a game , I'm saying it doesn't threaten the basic nature of the game as whole like some here would suggest. Its still the same game with the same challenges and skill. Perhaps maybe a couple more even.

I fully agree.

 

[JB Cases]

If you want proof, go to any pool hall, pick any table and do a series of jumps from the same spot. After 10 minutes, the area of the cloth where you've made your jump shots will be dotted with white marks. That's assuming the owner of the place doesn't throw you before.

That proves nothing. Do the same thing with masse shots and breaks shots. The white marks are where the cloth has been compressed and the reason they are white is because the cloth is reflecting the light at a different angle. I can clean the table with a damp washcloth and in a few minutes you won't even know that they were there.

All this proves is that some people confuse a visible spot with damage.

Now having said that I don't condone any practice on public tables which has the tendency to mark up the table and make it harder to clean and less desirable to play on. This includes masse practice, break shot practice, trick shot practice, and jump shot practice even without a jump cue. If you want to practice those areas of the game intensely then get your own table OR wait until the room owner is going to recover the tables and arrange to practice them in the days before the tables are recovered.

In our pool hall, we have a table reserved for exactly that: the cloth is so crappy the owner only gives the table to people he doesn't like, and to us for jump shot training. Even on that tired old cloth you can see the newer jump marks. The running joke is to look at the table for fresh marks and ask the barman who's been doing jumps recently.

Great. That's good for you that you have a table to practice on.

Also, if you overdo the jumping, the cueball has a fair chance of bouncing all over the place and landing on the frame, with damages the wood. You may even scratch the cueball if it hits something hard outside the table.

You mean it's possible for people to not be able to master this shot simply by virtue of holding the cue in their hands? Are you suggesting that perhaps some amount of practice is required to be able to control the cue ball on the jump shot so as not to overdo it? Please don't tell Shawn this.

Jump shots are useful to get out of a pickle. The two problems I have with them are:

- They take skill to do well. Unfortunately, skill can only comes from training, and that means having a table just for that because the wear and tear on the equipment is so much greater than normal shots.

Good point. I would be in full favor of banning the jump shot and adding a rule that safeties must be called in rotation games.

- Every Tom, Dick and Harry who has a difficult shot and a jump cue cracks it out. It's not rare to see 2 or 3 jumps per set when it's allowed these days. Even on simple straight in shots that only require a semi-masse effect to curve around a problem ball. The truth is, jump shots should be exceptionally done, only when there's no option, again because of the toll it takes on the equipment.

I disagree with this. The shot and jump cue is part of the game and if the player wants to use then they should be allowed to as frequently as they please.

Should jump shots be legal? yes definitely, they are a useful part of the game. Should they be allowed all the time? Heck no. Personally, I think the rules should allow jump cues (it's just tough to jump with a soft tip) but only allow one jump per set for instance. That way, it'd only reserved for true emergencies, and players who use it will make damn sure they master the technique beforehand, to avoid wasting their only jump shot.

It's an interesting idea but again I think it would lead to arguments. Better to just ban the jump shot. That puts everyone on equal footing again.

 

[JB Cases]

The argument about allowing jump cues is about equivalent to the argument of allowing custom cues versus having to use the house cues provided. If you say bringing an extra piece of gear with you to give an advantage is bad, then put away your custom cue and use the curved sticks on the wall.

Regardless, the thing I can't stand, is when people go for the jump shot instead of the kick just because it's the flavor of the month. Worse yet, I actually had someone say to me that they wanted to go for the jump instead of the kick because they just got a new jump cue, even though the kick was the obvious choice. They actually made the jump shot... and the scratch, thank you very much!

This is what I have said all the time. If I am playing a guy who doesn't know when to choose the right shot then I am happy abut that. If someone gets a jump cue and neglects the rest of their game then great.

It's however human nature to want to play with the new toy, be it a jump cue or a kicking/banking system.

One of my friends is a member of a STRONG league team out of Dallas. When the Bunjee first came out they came over and told me this story about a match at the BCA Nationals in Vegas.

My friend said that one of their teammates had a combination and he got out his new Bunjee and prepared to jump HIS OWN BALL so he wouldn't have to shoot the combination. Fortunately he reconsidered and made the combo and ran out. But that illustrates how excited players get about having so many more shots in their arsenal when they have a jump cue.

Eventually that fades and most players settle down to using it when it's the right shot.

 

[justadub]

Here is your answer.

I'd like to see a rule stating one cue per player per match..

get rid of the gimmick sticks and the gimmick shots will go with them..

it'll never happen but it would be nice..

If that's what you want, play more APA! One cue only (other than a break cue) can't break down your regular cue for jumps. There you go. Problem solved.

{ducking} :wink:

 

[busby busybody]

Just prove it. The burden of proof is on the accuser not the accused.

The cloth is not being damaged. When the fibers are not broken then there is no damage. Compression does not equal breakage. Another material I deal with is foam rubber which compresses and bounces back with ease.

I am telling you that the cloth is not being damaged based 100% on my own real life, real world and EXTENSIVE experience with the subject matter.

You are telling me that the cloth is damaged because you think it is.

So until you can prove your assertions in the meaningful scientific way that you claim is the only acceptable proof I'd have to say that my experience, however tainted by the "sales" aspect of it trumps your theory.

It's really simple, you don't like jump cues and neither does Shawn. So get together and prove that they are damaging to the equipment. Show us all your experiments, complete with all the controls for variables and proper documentation.

IF you can, THEN you will be successful in getting jump cues banned and the problem is solved.

Until then however you will just have to accept that the majority of the pool world is perfectly ok with jump cues.

I couldn't post for a couple of days because I was laughing so hard over your comparing foam rubber to Simonis. That's a good one JB!!!!! Rubber and cloth? Apples and oranges? Pigs and chickens? I guess they're all the same in your world. I now realize attempting to have a rational disscussion with you on this issue is futile. You will always twist the arguement to suit your needs/ego and your own sense of deluded reality. Many points have been brought up by myself and others, and they are either dissmissed by you as invalid, or go unaddressed altogether. This isn't a murder trial JB. If I claim that I can fly, then you can ask me to prove that. If I claim that I can run the mile in two minutes flat, then you can ask me to prove that. You have made claims that you either can't or wont prove for obvious reasons. You're motivated by profits, plain and simple. Rubber and cloth? Oh, I feel another laughing jag coming on. Gotta go but thanks anyway, BB

 

[JCurry]

I destroyed the cloth on MY own table learning to jump. Why? Becuase I'm not going to do that to someone else's table and I REALLY wanted to learn how to jump. The damage came from the tip of my cue hitting the cloth, not the compression of the ball into the cloth. Sure, it leaves a little white spot sometimes, but that isn't damage, it's just cosmetic.

 

[JB Cases]

I couldn't post for a couple of days because I was laughing so hard over your comparing foam rubber to Simonis. That's a good one JB!!!!! Rubber and cloth? Apples and oranges? Pigs and chickens? I guess they're all the same in your world. I now realize attempting to have a rational disscussion with you on this issue is futile. You will always twist the arguement to suit your needs/ego and your own sense of deluded reality. Many points have been brought up by myself and others, and they are either dissmissed by you as invalid, or go unaddressed altogether. This isn't a murder trial JB. If I claim that I can fly, then you can ask me to prove that. If I claim that I can run the mile in two minutes flat, then you can ask me to prove that. You have made claims that you either can't or wont prove for obvious reasons. You're motivated by profits, plain and simple. Rubber and cloth? Oh, I feel another laughing jag coming on. Gotta go but thanks anyway, BB

Can't or won't prove?

Which ones have I made that I can't or won't prove?

The burden of proof is on the accuser not on the accused. You claim that damage occurs so prove it.

If you want to bet on your assertions then I will be happy to take your bet and prove that the act of making a cueball jump over another ball does not damage the cloth when performed according to the rules.

I will bet $10,000 against your claim.

If you want to put your money where your mouth is then we can structure a test that can be captured on video and witnessed by neutral parties.

That's profit motive enough for me to prove to you what I already know to be true based on my ten year's worth of expert experience with this subject.

I will be at the Super Billiards Expo in Valley Forge PA in March. Bet the 10k and I will even pay the rental on the table for the test. You can choose either of the premium cloths on the market Milliken Super Pro or Simonis to be installed on the table. I will have someone do 100 jump shots and then we will cut the cloth off the table and have it examined.

If even 1 fiber is torn or frayed then you win the bet.

So just step up. We are at the point in this discussion where the rubber meets the road and I think that you don't believe in your statements enough to take down the money.

 

[JB Cases]

I destroyed the cloth on MY own table learning to jump. Why? Becuase I'm not going to do that to someone else's table and I REALLY wanted to learn how to jump. The damage came from the tip of my cue hitting the cloth, not the compression of the ball into the cloth. Sure, it leaves a little white spot sometimes, but that isn't damage, it's just cosmetic.

This does happen when people aren't taught correctly. With a correct shot the tip doesn't contact the cloth ever.

I am sure that you have it down now though

 

[Underclocked]

Every room owner should have multiple jump-shot teachers at the ready in case someone wants to learn it properly. Or they could just go back to putting up signs that say "no jump shots".

But then we live in a modern age of change where conventional wisdom is regarded as extraneous garbage.

 

[JB Cases]

Every room owner should have multiple jump-shot teachers at the ready in case someone wants to learn it properly. Or they could just go back to putting up signs that say "no jump shots".

But then we live in a modern age of change where conventional wisdom is regarded as extraneous garbage.

Before jump cues the same thing applied. Jump shots and masse shots were always frowned upon by room owners but allowed if the players doing them were good players.

Since jump cues make it easier to jump then it's actually better than a nation of players practicing it with full sized cues.

 

[busby busybody]

Can't or won't prove?

Which ones have I made that I can't or won't prove?

The burden of proof is on the accuser not on the accused. You claim that damage occurs so prove it.

If you want to bet on your assertions then I will be happy to take your bet and prove that the act of making a cueball jump over another ball does not damage the cloth when performed according to the rules.

I will bet $10,000 against your claim.

If you want to put your money where your mouth is then we can structure a test that can be captured on video and witnessed by neutral parties.

That's profit motive enough for me to prove to you what I already know to be true based on my ten year's worth of expert experience with this subject.

I will be at the Super Billiards Expo in Valley Forge PA in March. Bet the 10k and I will even pay the rental on the table for the test. You can choose either of the premium cloths on the market Milliken Super Pro or Simonis to be installed on the table. I will have someone do 100 jump shots and then we will cut the cloth off the table and have it examined.

If even 1 fiber is torn or frayed then you win the bet.

So just step up. We are at the point in this discussion where the rubber meets the road and I think that you don't believe in your statements enough to take down the money.

At last! A rational, well concieved way to prove your claims. Sorry I can't take you up on your suggested bet though, for two reasons. 1. It's just a not very well concealed attempt at bullying me that I won't put up with. 2. I am just a poor dirt farmer from out west, and can't risk my seed money on that kind of thing. However I would be willing to accept the results of your proposed test as proof of your claims. Just do it with your own money. It should only cost you $800-$1000 dollars to have the table covered twice. Once for the test and once after. Then, if you are proven correct, you will enjoy some real satisfaction in victory, and as a bonus I will post a new thread with a very sincere and humble apology for any and all pain I may or may not have caused you during this discussion. I'll bump said post every day for a month just so everyone will be able to see how wrong I may have been. You do the same if I'm right. BB

 

[RRfireblade]

The only person that needs convincing is you. You really think JB gives a $1000 crap about your opinion? Now that is a good laugh.

All you have to is show some damaged cloth from a proper jump shot and you can shut him up.What's it take , 2 seconds to shoot a jump shot ?

But yet you refuse , hmmm.