Should a pool player learn snooker fundamentals??

Landplayer

Registered
As a pool player, should he/she learn snooker fundamentals such as the stance, aiming, bridge, grip, cue action ......... to play pool??
 
Last edited:

greyghost

Coast to Coast
Silver Member
As a pool player, should he/she learn snooker fundamentals such as the stance, aiming, bridge, grip, cue action ...... to play pool??

many of the fundamentals are basically the same........but regardless its not going to hurt your game to learn some of the things they use in snooker

my stance comes straight out of snooker for what its worth
 

Desmondp

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It's a tough call but it has been proven that snooker fundamentals translate easily to pool but pool fundamentals do not translate at all to snooker. No one using pool fundamentals has had a lick of success at snooker but plenty from the snooker world have killed it in pool. Aside from Allison Fisher and Karen corr in the womens, Darren Appleton and Karl Boyes basically played both snooker and english 8ball before switching to american pool

You don't need snooker fundamentals to play great pool, look at many of the top pool players.

I think it takes a lot longer to master snooker fundamentals than traditional pool fundamentals. Just taking the open/closed bridge debate. A closed bridge is going to give a beginner more stroke power and make a draw shot easier, but the top snooker players using an open bridge have some of the most powerful draw shots in the world (some of the full snooker table length draw shots they do are amaxing) but you don't develop that much accurate cue power overnight.

Bottom line, use what is best for you
 

Landplayer

Registered
It's a tough call but it has been proven that snooker fundamentals translate easily to pool but pool fundamentals do not translate at all to snooker. No one using pool fundamentals has had a lick of success at snooker but plenty from the snooker world have killed it in pool. Aside from Allison Fisher and Karen corr in the womens, Darren Appleton and Karl Boyes basically played both snooker and english 8ball before switching to american pool

You don't need snooker fundamentals to play great pool, look at many of the top pool players.

I think it takes a lot longer to master snooker fundamentals than traditional pool fundamentals. Just taking the open/closed bridge debate. A closed bridge is going to give a beginner more stroke power and make a draw shot easier, but the top snooker players using an open bridge have some of the most powerful draw shots in the world (some of the full snooker table length draw shots they do are amaxing) but you don't develop that much accurate cue power overnight.

Bottom line, use what is best for you

and Tony Dargo too!
 

Cameron Smith

is kind of hungry...
Silver Member
They can certainly help. But it will benefit you most if you practice these mechanics on a snooker table.
 

timseal

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I learned snooker first, growing up in the UK. The two most obvious differences (in the fundamentals) are the closed bridge, and the stance. In snooker, the balls are slightly smaller and the table is a few inches higher. I think those are the main reasons for the bridge and stance evolving differently.

Yes, I play pool with an accent :)
 

Nick B

This is gonna hurt
Silver Member
I started out playing snooker and I feel it has helped me. Man Stephen looks good. Awkward but good. I think the different table height affected his stance a bit.

Nick
 

mosconiac

Job+Wife+Child=No Stroke
Silver Member
I believe the snooker stance would provide MANY benefits to your pool game...repeatability is a big one. The snooker stance puts you in such a position that it places your elbow, wrist, & cue in alignment & forces your body to remain still. The cue is forced to move along a straight line. Until you feel it, it's hard to fathom.

Unfortunately, I've discovered that it is not the perfect answer (for me) as I am taller than average (6'-4") and the pool table is lower than the snooker table. This forces me to bend over at an uncomfortable angle...so I'm trying to develop a hybrid.

A puzzle I haven't solved yet is why snooker players tend to step into position with the cue down & raise it up into position. Pool players tend to fall into position (sloppily I might add) with the cue already up & at their side. There must be something to that.

BTW, a snooker stance is HORRIBLE for the break. By definition the snooker stance locks you body into position, which counters the body movement needed to crush the rack. It's hard to transition between the two..."side-saddle", pool style for the break (for body transition) and then rigid snooker stance for shooting (for precision & repeatability).
 
Last edited:

mikepage

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I learned snooker first, growing up in the UK. The two most obvious differences (in the fundamentals) are the closed bridge, and the stance. In snooker, the balls are slightly smaller and the table is a few inches higher. I think those are the main reasons for the bridge and stance evolving differently.

Yes, I play pool with an accent :)

Here's another potential reason: When a pool player with a usual pool stance & bridge is faced with that "almost need a bridge" shot--where he's reaching, you'll notice the stance gets a little more square as the player leans far over the table, and you'll see an open bridge at the end of the stretched out arm.

So maybe the frequency of hard-to-reach shots, which depends on the table size, plays a role.
 

sfleinen

14.1 & One Pocket Addict
Gold Member
Silver Member
I believe the snooker stance would provide MANY benefits to your pool game...repeatability is a big one. The snooker stance puts you in such a position that it places your elbow, wrist, & cue in alignment & forces your body to remain still. The cue is forced to move along a straight line. Until you feel it, it's hard to fathom.

Unfortunately, I've discovered that it is not the perfect answer (for me) as I am taller than average (6'-4") and the pool table is lower than the snooker table. This forces me to bend over at an uncomfortable angle...so I'm trying to develop a hybrid.

A puzzle I haven't solved yet is why snooker players tend to step into position with the cue down & raise it up into position. Pool players tend to fall into position (sloppily I might add) with the cue already up & at their side. There must be something to that.

BTW, a snooker stance is HORRIBLE for the break. By definition the snooker stance locks you body into position, which counters the body movement needed to crush the rack. It's hard to transition between the two..."side-saddle", pool style for the break (for body transition) and then rigid snooker stance for shooting (for precision & repeatability).

This is probably the best post so far on this topic. Good job, mosconiac.

As some folks may know, I'm a big advocate of the snooker stance. Mosconiac nails it -- the snooker stance's main attributes are:

  1. Precision placement of key parts of the body, in relation to the shot; i.e:
    • placement of the feet
    • angling of as many joints of the body into the shot (ankles, knees, hips, shoulders, elbows -- especially those on the same side of the body as the arm delivering the cue)
    • wrist placement (straight with the forearm, not angled in any way/shape/fashion)
  2. Repeatability (the pre-shot routine to align those aforementioned parts of the body onto the line of the shot)
  3. Mechanically-sound, rigidness, maximum balance (I.e. no such thing as a "loosey-goosey" snooker stance. Pool stances, on the other hand, tend not to be mechanically sound, and often, without the shooter even realizing it, is compromised by the slightest movement of the cue itself as the cue's weight shifts to and fro. See this video.)
  4. 100% square-on perspective with the head and eyes, the way nature designed the human being as a "natural hunter". (That is, you don't see pictures or cave drawings of a human being hunting an animal with his/her head turned or cocked to the side in relation to the hunting implement. Rather, the head and eyes are ALWAYS square-on to the shot, to ensure focus, equidistant eyes for binocular accuracy, etc.) As an aside to this, this is also the reason why one doesn't see Perfect Aim type of "patch/repair/fix-up products" being offered in the snooker world. There is simply no need for them when the stance itself includes proper head/eye alignment, and diagnosis for the same.
Concerning the break, mosconiac is for the most part correct. Snooker players are certainly not known for powerful breaks (admittedly, their game doesn't need it, so a powerful break is never developed). I have found, however, there's a way to use the hips as a "twisting spring," with a lunging-forward motion, to add extra power to the break. The way this works, is that as I bring the cue back (for my break stroke), I twist/rotate my hips in the same backwards direction as the cue (i.e. I'm a right-hander, so I'm rotating my hips clockwise if viewed from above). I keep my shoulder planted, but as my forearm lifts upwards, the cue gets closer and closer to my shoulder joint. Then, as I release, I use a simultaneous lunging forward motion with my entire body (I basically "free fall" towards the table, with my bridge hand on the table being the only thing stopping me) and I unleash the tension in the "cocked spring" formed by my rotated hips. I'm basically snapping my hips counterclockwise (as viewed from above; remember, I'm a right-hander) as I'm falling forward into the table. The result I'm getting is a mid- to high-20s break. (I'm not a big guy compared to mosconiac -- I'm only 5'8" and 160lbs soaking wet.)

Although not as powerful as Evgeny Stalev's break, it resembles it with the conservation of movement. (I.e. you don't see Evgeny's body "going spastic" or flailing around as if parts and pieces like springs and cotter pins are flying apart, like one sees when viewing Jon Kucharo's break.)

Anyway, I hope this helps!
-Sean
 

timseal

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A puzzle I haven't solved yet is why snooker players tend to step into position with the cue down & raise it up into position. Pool players tend to fall into position (sloppily I might add) with the cue already up & at their side. There must be something to that.
One possible answer is because once the stance, bridge hand, head and back elbow are in position, the cue will just slot right in. If you put the cue in position first, you could adopt any old stance around it and think it's OK, because the cue is aiming correctly - your body might not be, though.

BTW, a snooker stance is HORRIBLE for the break.
For a hard break, yes, of course. When I break, I switch my brain over to cricket and hit a straight drive back past the bowler, all along the ground. Seems to work quite well.
 

sfleinen

14.1 & One Pocket Addict
Gold Member
Silver Member
One possible answer is because once the stance, bridge hand, head and back elbow are in position, the cue will just slot right in. If you put the cue in position first, you could adopt any old stance around it and think it's OK, because the cue is aiming correctly - your body might not be, though.


For a hard break, yes, of course. When I break, I switch my brain over to cricket and hit a straight drive back past the bowler, all along the ground. Seems to work quite well.

That is correct. The snooker stance, by design, puts your cue and cueing arm "on train tracks" so it doesn't waver side-to-side (or induce any kind of yaw). Once you've "set the train tracks" into the ground -- via the placement of the feet in the stance, and the aligning/locking of key joints of the body as mentioned previously -- the cue is slotted into place, and not easy to get off track.

Good post, Tim!
-Sean
 

Desmondp

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
the break is a totally different shot to either snooker or pool fundamentals

It should be learnt separately regardless of whether you play with pool or snooker fundamentals
 

Cameron Smith

is kind of hungry...
Silver Member
One possible answer is because once the stance, bridge hand, head and back elbow are in position, the cue will just slot right in. If you put the cue in position first, you could adopt any old stance around it and think it's OK, because the cue is aiming correctly - your body might not be, though.

Exactly right. A common suggestion from instruction books is to place your cue first and then form your stance around it. Sounds great in concept, but I think it's actually quite awkward in practice.
 

Nick B

This is gonna hurt
Silver Member
Another benefit is learning to correctly use a reach/bridge. Many pool players look completely out of place with this device. You'll never see a snooker guy play behind the back etc.

I can draw the ball about 8 feet with it. It can only help.

Nick
 

Snapshot9

son of 3 leg 1 eye dog ..
Silver Member
To answer the question

You can, but there is no real need to do so. Snooker players can adapt to playing pool after awhile, but they all approach Pool like Snooker, and have a certain style of Play when playing Pool that is easily recognizeable.
 
Top