Open or Closed?

JoeW

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Here are a couple of thoughts that might be of use to some people. I have small hands and with a closed bridge the cue rides against the padded part of my first finger. This too often leads to cue stick side movement when I use a more powerful stroke.

With an open bridge the cue stick is in a relatively more fixed position and rides closer to the bone where it is less likely to have side sway. Teaching myself to use a more powerful stroke with an open bridge requires me to pay more attention to a better stroke because I cannot depend on the first finger to lock the cue stick. I have learned that it does not lock it like I thought it did anyway so I am better off with an open bridge whenever I can use it.

I place my chin as close to the cue stick as I reasonably can because this allows me to check to see that my eyes are in the same place for each shot. Wrong eye placement relative to the cue stick is my single biggest reason for missing shots.

Placing the cue tip on the cloth at the beginning of each shot helps me to insure that I have found the center of the cue ball for each shot. When I can use them, physical indicators are better tham visualized indicators. Seeing the cue on the vertical center and feeling that the chin is directly over the cue are relatively better methods for me.
 

eastcoast_chris

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Open bridge 99% of the time, but I came from snooker and play with my chin on or near the cue for most shots.

Also, i have thick fingers and a closed bridge doesn't glide smoothly for me.

I've seen that many people that play really well and use a closed bridge often have thin long fingers... probably feels very comfortable for them... not so much for me.
 

C.Milian

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Open bridge 99% of the time, but I came from snooker and play with my chin on or near the cue for most shots.

Also, i have thick fingers and a closed bridge doesn't glide smoothly for me.

I've seen that many people that play really well and use a closed bridge often have thin long fingers... probably feels very comfortable for them... not so much for me.

99%? When do you use a closed bridge?
 

Kickin' Chicken

Kick Shot Aficionado
Gold Member
Silver Member
I guess the issue is psychosomatic -- "having a clear unobstructed 'sightline down the cue'" probably provides some sort of "mental checkbox" that enables the player to move on. That is, even though, they don't even use that "clear unobstructed sightline."


If you're sighting/aiming correctly, at best, it's a "technical but non-practical" myth (i.e. a "mental checkbox" thing that's still propagated by the jaded schools of thought). At worst, it's tomfoolery.

-Sean

Is it "psychosomatic"?

Here's another analogy though, I must say, I loved the invisible cue one by Chinchilla. :thumbup:

Over July 4th holiday I went to a beachfront villa on beautiful Cape Ann on MA's rocky coast. There were seals and waves crashing not too far from our room.

As I sat on the outside deck, I thought to myself, 'what a spectacular view but for the safety rail' that when you were sitting, was well above the water, the rocks and the seals.

Despite the rail not directly blocking what I wanted to view, it was still perceived by me to be an obstruction. By day three I was ready to take a torch to it. :eek:

I understand perfectly that it's impossible, for a multitude of reasons as were so eloquently pointed out by Sean and others (not the least of which are the location of our eyes in our heads relative to a cue and table configurations), for us to actually be blocked from seeing what is needed to make a shot while using a closed bridge.

However, I maintain that it can be a distraction having the straight line that is the shaft interrupted with an index finger wrapped around it. That's not to say we as players can't do well in spite of that but it's a visual distraction, nevertheless.

Just like I was able to see the water, the rocks and the seals. The visual experience would have been enhanced, though, without the rail.

You can tell me all you want how we aren't supposed to be looking at our shafts but to that, I will refer to the wonderful analogy by Chinchilla. In fact, I'll go one better and say you can not only have the tip but the ferrule, too, but the shaft remains invisible. I do not believe anyone could shoot well in that scenario even though we are only supposed to be looking at the tip, the cueball, and the object ball.

I maintain that being able to see down the shaft is a huge aid in orienting oneself for the shot.

Peripheral vision is an extremely powerful tool, IMO, and what is processed in our periphery completes a picture in a very meaningful way.

Best,
Brian kc
 
Last edited:

C.Milian

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Is it "psychosomatic"?

Here's another analogy though, I must say, I loved the invisible cue one by Chinchilla. :thumbup:

Over July 4th holiday I went to a beachfront villa on beautiful Cape Ann on MA's rocky coast. There were seals and waves crashing not too far from our room.

As I sat on the outside deck, I thought to myself, 'what a spectacular view but for the safety rail' that when you were sitting, was well above the water, the rocks and the seals.

Despite the rail not directly blocking what I wanted to view, it was still perceived by me to be an obstruction. By day three I was ready to take a torch to it. :eek:

I understand perfectly that it's impossible, for a multitude of reasons as were so eloquently pointed out by Sean and others (not the least of which are the location of our eyes in our heads relative to a cue and table configurations), for us to actually be blocked from seeing what is needed to make a shot while using a closed bridge.

However, I maintain that it can be a distraction having the straight line that is the shaft interrupted with an index finger wrapped around it. That's not to say we as players can't do well in spite of that but it's a visual distraction, nevertheless.

Just like I was able to see the water, the rocks and the seals. The visual experience would have been enhanced, though, without the rail.

You can tell me all you want how we aren't supposed to be looking at our shafts but to that, I will refer to the wonderful analogy by Chinchilla. In fact, I'll go one better and say you can not only have the tip but the ferrule, too, but the shaft remains invisible. I do not believe anyone could shoot well in that scenario even though we are only supposed to be looking at the tip, the cueball, and the object ball.

I maintain that being able to see down the shaft is a huge aid in orienting oneself for the shot.

Peripheral vision is an extremely powerful tool, IMO, and what is processed in our periphery completes the picture in a very meaningful way.

Best,
Brian kc

The imagination is a very powerful tool. The reason a lot of people miss by a half ball or more is because they are using the wrong variables to gauge distance. Then factor in objects at a top distance...it's not a human quality. I think the birds have this down pat, except chicken birds. J/k.

I hope you get it, cuz when I got it, it was big.
 

sfleinen

14.1 & One Pocket Addict
Gold Member
Silver Member
Brian:

Great post! I like your safety-rail-annoyance-when-viewing-the-seaside-vista analogy!

I guess one of the techniques I learned when honing my fundamentals and aiming, was which sources of information to pay attention to, and which ones to discard. While I did mention that the finger looping over the shaft in a closed bridge was (and always is) in my peripheral vision, I *never* said that I discard that information. What my mind *does* do with it, is to "fix" it -- and that was my intent with "a motion picture's 24 frames per second" and "my mind melding the dashed parts of the road's lane divider line into a continuous line" analogies. I *do* see the shaft in my peripheral vision, except that I don't see it as a "two piece" or "broken" or "interrupted" shaft. I see it as one piece -- fused together by my mind's same abilities to "fuse" 24 frames per second into what looks like smooth motion, and a continuous line fused together from a series of dashes. Same concept. You know the phrase, "talk to the hand"? Well, I ignore the hand. :p :D

I like to think that my ability to "ignore" the interruption in my cue shaft's contiguity (if that's a word?) is actually a boon. I can concentrate on the shot, and not be sidetracked, annoyed, distracted, et al., by a finger looping over the shaft. And it's nothing that I consciously do. It just happens.

So, to sum up, I never said peripheral vision (or the information that it presents to you) was "unimportant". What I do want to get across, is that the mind has the natural ability to "fix" pictures it's not concentrated upon. If you *look* at that finger, or let it make itself known to you, of course you're going to be cognizant of it, and by way of extension let it bother you. Let me give you an example. Walk up close to Claude Monet's "Impression" or "Rouen Cathedral" paintings, and what do you see? Blotches of color -- and annoying ones at that! Take 15 steps back and look at these paintings again. Now what do you see? That's my point. It's the mind's ability to tune-out and blend together images to make a cohesive picture, sans those "up-close detail annoyances."

So yes, I do think it's psychosomatic. I don't mean that as a slight, of course, but rather as a "Whoomp! There it is..." observation.

And if anyone reading takes nothing else from my posts, it is this: I'm not disrespecting those folks that choose to use an open bridge. It is a choice, afterall, and there are good reasons for the choice. (Heck, I use it myself fairly often -- about 30% of the time. Sometimes I don't even know I'm using it, because my bridge hand is on the table bed up against a cushion, and a closed bridge would be cramped in those quarters so out comes the open bridge -- automatically.) No, the only thing I wanted to point out was the fallacy of the "clear unobstructed sightline" thing -- especially with everyone's "mental blending" abilities described above and in previous posts. However, in the end, if *that* is what you want to believe (and maintain, even after this discussion), and it "checks the box" in your mind to help you move on to focusing on the shot, then all the more power to you. Whatever helps you make the shot -- that is the crucial thing.

P.S.: I enjoyed this debate, Brian, Pushout, The Chinchilla, et al. There's nothing like civil, intelligent, respectful debate!

Thank you,
-Sean

Is it "psychosomatic"?

Here's another analogy though, I must say, I loved the invisible cue one by Chinchilla. :thumbup:

Over July 4th holiday I went to a beachfront villa on beautiful Cape Ann on MA's rocky coast. There were seals and waves crashing not too far from our room.

As I sat on the outside deck, I thought to myself, 'what a spectacular view but for the safety rail' that when you were sitting, was well above the water, the rocks and the seals.

Despite the rail not directly blocking what I wanted to view, it was still perceived by me to be an obstruction. By day three I was ready to take a torch to it. :eek:

I understand perfectly that it's impossible, for a multitude of reasons as were so eloquently pointed out by Sean and others (not the least of which are the location of our eyes in our heads relative to a cue and table configurations), for us to actually be blocked from seeing what is needed to make a shot while using a closed bridge.

However, I maintain that it can be a distraction having the straight line that is the shaft interrupted with an index finger wrapped around it. That's not to say we as players can't do well in spite of that but it's a visual distraction, nevertheless.

Just like I was able to see the water, the rocks and the seals. The visual experience would have been enhanced, though, without the rail.

You can tell me all you want how we aren't supposed to be looking at our shafts but to that, I will refer to the wonderful analogy by Chinchilla. In fact, I'll go one better and say you can not only have the tip but the ferrule, too, but the shaft remains invisible. I do not believe anyone could shoot well in that scenario even though we are only supposed to be looking at the tip, the cueball, and the object ball.

I maintain that being able to see down the shaft is a huge aid in orienting oneself for the shot.

Peripheral vision is an extremely powerful tool, IMO, and what is processed in our periphery completes a picture in a very meaningful way.

Best,
Brian kc
 

walrus_3d

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
P.S.: I enjoyed this debate, Brian, Pushout, The Chinchilla, et al. There's nothing like civil, intelligent, respectful debate!

Thank you,
-Sean

Well, Sean, I think you're a stupid poopy head. :thumbup:

In all seriousness, everybody's right in this debate. If you use an open bridge, you can use the line down the cue as a visual marker. If you use a closed bridge, you just have to use different markers, or process those markers a different way.

Personally, I prefer the open bridge because of where the cue hits my thumb. Open, it slides along the side of my thumb, where the skin is fairly tight, smooth, and doesn't catch anything. With my closed bridge, the thumb turns in slightly and I end up running against the pad of the thumb (a little bit) rather than the side. That and the finger over the top creates more friction with the cue, so if I've got dings or dirt (or chalk or powder) on the shaft, I notice it, get distracted, and tend to miss all but the short straight shots.

Recently I stopped bridging up on the rail for certain shots, and now have the cue on the rail with my index finger over it. That works. I'm still only contacting the sides of the cue instead of actually setting my finger down on the cue. I choose my bridge based on getting the least amount of skin in contact with the stick.

You're not really a poopy head, I just thought it'd be a good segue into more intelligent debate. :thumbup:
 

sfleinen

14.1 & One Pocket Addict
Gold Member
Silver Member
Well, Sean, I think you're a stupid poopy head. :thumbup:

[...]

You're not really a poopy head, I just thought it'd be a good segue into more intelligent debate. :thumbup:

Well for me, stupid poopy head is a step up in the world, so I'll look at it as a compliment, and yes, an opportunity for me to "reach up" into more intelligent debate! I must be careful not to strain myself, though. I might break something... :p :D

-Sean
 

Kickin' Chicken

Kick Shot Aficionado
Gold Member
Silver Member
The plot thickens... ;)

Found this thread from 2010 asking the very same question, open or closed?

See the answers given by two prominent az member/instructors regarding sightlines and rifles, posts #2 and #29.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=202864&highlight=giraffe

Also, may I introduce you to my good friend, Buddy "The Rifleman" Hall. :p :grin: :smile:

Just messin' with ya', poopy head. :p

Best,
Brian kc
 

DogsPlayingPool

"What's in your wallet?"
Silver Member
I'm thinking the use of the open bridge in snooker has less to do with uninterrupted sight lines as it does with being appropriate for the more conical taper of a snooker cue.
 

RickVaughn

Registered
You'll have to figure out your own style and what's comfortable for you. There's some guy on the internet who breaks like an absolute monster with an open bridge, I just miscue lol. For me, I use both bridges depending on the situation and sometimes just randomly. I think it's crucial to know both bridges and be comfortable using them. I use closed for heavy follow and draw because I like the stability. Open is good for when you have to reach, bridge on the cushions, and shoot over obstacles.
 

Pushout

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
You'll have to figure out your own style and what's comfortable for you. There's some guy on the internet who breaks like an absolute monster with an open bridge, I just miscue lol. For me, I use both bridges depending on the situation and sometimes just randomly. I think it's crucial to know both bridges and be comfortable using them. I use closed for heavy follow and draw because I like the stability. Open is good for when you have to reach, bridge on the cushions, and shoot over obstacles.

I've used an open bridge whenever necessary, as you describe. With my short, pudgy fingers, I've always had some trouble with the closed bridge at different times in my life. I've never been comfortable with using an open bridge all the time. I think I use it from time to time on very short shots where I have to move the cue ball a short distance to the next position. I've often wondered to an extent, if my stroke stays straight all the time using either.
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
The plot thickens... ;)

Found this thread from 2010 asking the very same question, open or closed?

See the answers given by two prominent az member/instructors regarding sightlines and rifles, posts #2 and #29.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=202864&highlight=giraffe

Also, may I introduce you to my good friend, Buddy "The Rifleman" Hall. :p :grin: :smile:


KC....don't wanna pull a 'Tolstoy' on you guys...I could wear out a key
board on this subject.
I will say this....unlike shooting a gun, there are more targets to consider
at pool...the cue hits the cue-ball, the cue-ball hits an object-ball, and
the object-ball hopefully hits a pocket.And you have cue-cloth-english-
humidity-non standard conditions-tip shape and hardness and many other
things to consider.
So, if you're LINING UP, you're not understanding the complexity of the
situation.
To me,aiming is understanding.
One needs basics to start with, but you gotta move on.

When I'm betting all my cash at 1-hole and I'm jacked over a ball, with
one foot on the floor and one knee on the table, and I gotta hit with low
right and draw the ball out of a kiss......thinking about how to line up and
what a proper stance is...will have you dumpster-diving for your next meal.

...gotta feeling some day you and Sean and I will be discussing this at
a table....regards to you and Sean
 

sfleinen

14.1 & One Pocket Addict
Gold Member
Silver Member
I'm thinking the use of the open bridge in snooker has less to do with uninterrupted sight lines as it does with being appropriate for the more conical taper of a snooker cue.

And I would tend to agree. I have a set of old snooker coaching DVDs, that feature such snooker teaching luminaries as Del Hill, Terry Griffiths, Dennis Taylor, etc.

In particular, Dennis goes into how the open bridge is able to accommodate the rise (in the cue's centerline) that occurs as the cue travels through the bridge. When traveling in that "V" channel, the centerline of the cue "rises" in proportion to the taper. Dennis explains how with normal closed finger-loop bridges, the conical taper of the snooker cue wedges or jams inside the loop, unless the player compromises the stability of the closed loop itself.

However (and you knew there was one, right, Brian? ;) ), the closed bridge construction of those pros that use a closed bridge, isn't the finger loop of old. (I.e. it's not the "fleshy pad of the index finger's tip pressing upon the tip of the thumb," or the "tip of the index finger squeezed between the thumb and side of the middle finger's knuckle" or any variation of that looped finger bridge construction.) It's actually the "index finger pressing down upon the middle finger" style closed bridge, sometimes referred to as "the closed bridge the Filipinos use." Alex Pagulayan is a good example of a snooker player that uses this closed bridge even in the game of snooker. And it works, even with conical tapered shafts, because of how Alex orients it: with the "V" channel straight up and down, and not laying on its side. (Take a look at those photos you posted, Brian -- you'll see how he orients this "index finger pressing down upon the middle finger" bridge.) So the "rise" that occurs with a conical taper is straight up and down, not skewed to the side if the "V" channel were laying on its side like this ">" or this "<" (i.e. bridges formed with the left and right hands, respectively).

With this style bridge, not only do you get a closed bridge that accommodates a conically-tapered shaft, but it also places the shaft against bony portions of the fingers, not any of the pads. Any flesh that is in contact with the shaft is held extremely taught by the natural downward pressure that the index finger is providing on top of the middle finger. (This addresses the point that JoeW brings up about the fleshy pads of his fingers providing "give," that inadvertently introduce yaw or other errors when a power stroke is used.)

I really do think the main advantage of the open bridge is its simplicity -- it naturally forms the "V" channel straight up and down, and no worries of having to "orient it" or "right it" from an otherwise laying-down position. In fact, one of the troubleshooting techniques I'll personally go through, when I'm not performing my best at the table, is to quickly switch to an open bridge, to make sure no yaw or other errors are being introduced by my closed bridge.

Like many have been saying, it's good to be able to shoot with both, because you WILL NEED both, guaranteed.

You guys can keep on with the "clear unobstructed sightline" stuff related to shooting a rifle (which I'll stand fast in my position that it has nothing to do with, because you're not sighting through the sightline but rather above it). But there are other virtues of the open bridge that are the real McCoy. Not a laboratory, "well, on paper this should 'technically' be correct" reason.

-Sean <-- Eeyore says "a poopy head is not really a head; it's just a little bit extra at the top. :p
 

C.Milian

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
You guys just might come up with the holy grail and put every instructor on the streets. j/k. However, if you get the right guys on here and you ask the right questions, you may let the cat out the bag.

Here's the thing....if you're still focusing on making balls, then visual aids will help.....like, imagining that your cue is like a riffle front end (which it is not):boring2::boring2::boring2:
 

sfleinen

14.1 & One Pocket Addict
Gold Member
Silver Member
KC....don't wanna pull a 'Tolstoy' on you guys...I could wear out a key
board on this subject.
I will say this....unlike shooting a gun, there are more targets to consider
at pool...the cue hits the cue-ball, the cue-ball hits an object-ball, and
the object-ball hopefully hits a pocket.And you have cue-cloth-english-
humidity-non standard conditions-tip shape and hardness and many other
things to consider.
So, if you're LINING UP, you're not understanding the complexity of the
situation.
To me,aiming is understanding.
One needs basics to start with, but you gotta move on.

pt:

Abso-correct-a-mundo. Lots of folks seem to be mired in technical "check box" details, like a shopping list. When in reality, those should be muscle memories, and your focus should be on the shot! If you're even having passing thoughts about your fundamentals or what-not, it *will* catch up with you -- if not now, then on a subsequent shot.

Ya gotta get past the basics!

When I'm betting all my cash at 1-hole and I'm jacked over a ball, withone foot on the floor and one knee on the table, and I gotta hit with low right and draw the ball out of a kiss......thinking about how to line up and what a proper stance is...will have you dumpster-diving for your next meal.

You bet! Whereas some people "bring forward" their shopping list of fundamentals checks on tough shots, that stuff, for me, goes w-a-y into the background. It disappears. You *have* be at a point where you can rely upon your fundamentals being second nature, that your muscle memories will bring them forward without your conscious mind's intervention. If you're thinking about that stuff *now* -- when you're faced with "the" money shot -- you're going to f*** it up!

...gotta feeling some day you and Sean and I will be discussing this at a table....regards to you and Sean

Yeppers, I have that feeling too, pt. And speaking for myself, I'd look forward to it. We should make that happen!

Return regards and a tip o' the hat to you and Brian as well!
-Sean
 

sfleinen

14.1 & One Pocket Addict
Gold Member
Silver Member
You guys just might come up with the holy grail and put every instructor on the streets. j/k. However, if you get the right guys on here and you ask the right questions, you may let the cat out the bag.

Here's the thing....if you're still focusing on making balls, then visual aids will help.....like, imagining that your cue is like a riffle front end (which it is not):boring2::boring2::boring2:

C.Milian:

I neglected to include you in my thanks for bringing civility, intelligence, and respect into this thread. But you're definitely one of the people keeping it on track, and I thank you. (You can imagine how this thread could spiral out of control with zealots from either side of the open/closed bridge topic.)

As for the discussion and holy grail thing, actually, there might be some truth to the "cat out of the bag" thing. Some really good information is coming out from a number of folks, IMHO. I myself am sharing my observations about the "V" channel thing, which had its catalyst when I was sitting outside on the back patio one day, and looked down at my left hand as it was resting on the patio chair's armrest. I was pencil sketching the scenery out there that day, and suddenly had this revelation about hand bridges and pool. (Don't ask -- I have no idea why I went from nature/scenery to pool hand bridges.) I sketched a lot of notes and drawings at that moment, and still have them. I shared some of those revelations here. I do hope they're useful!

-Sean
 

DogsPlayingPool

"What's in your wallet?"
Silver Member
I myself am sharing my observations about the "V" channel thing, which had its catalyst when I was sitting outside on the back patio one day, and looked down at my left hand as it was resting on the patio chair's armrest. I was pencil sketching the scenery out there that day, and suddenly had this revelation about hand bridges and pool. (Don't ask -- I have no idea why I went from nature/scenery to pool hand bridges.) I sketched a lot of notes and drawings at that moment, and still have them. I shared some of those revelations here. I do hope they're useful!

-Sean

You probably saw the "V" bridge in a cloud. ;)
 

John Brumback

New member
Silver Member
Is it "psychosomatic"?

Here's another analogy though, I must say, I loved the invisible cue one by Chinchilla. :thumbup:

Over July 4th holiday I went to a beachfront villa on beautiful Cape Ann on MA's rocky coast. There were seals and waves crashing not too far from our room.

As I sat on the outside deck, I thought to myself, 'what a spectacular view but for the safety rail' that when you were sitting, was well above the water, the rocks and the seals.

Despite the rail not directly blocking what I wanted to view, it was still perceived by me to be an obstruction. By day three I was ready to take a torch to it. :eek:

I understand perfectly that it's impossible, for a multitude of reasons as were so eloquently pointed out by Sean and others (not the least of which are the location of our eyes in our heads relative to a cue and table configurations), for us to actually be blocked from seeing what is needed to make a shot while using a closed bridge.

However, I maintain that it can be a distraction having the straight line that is the shaft interrupted with an index finger wrapped around it. That's not to say we as players can't do well in spite of that but it's a visual distraction, nevertheless.

Just like I was able to see the water, the rocks and the seals. The visual experience would have been enhanced, though, without the rail.

You can tell me all you want how we aren't supposed to be looking at our shafts but to that, I will refer to the wonderful analogy by Chinchilla. In fact, I'll go one better and say you can not only have the tip but the ferrule, too, but the shaft remains invisible. I do not believe anyone could shoot well in that scenario even though we are only supposed to be looking at the tip, the cueball, and the object ball.

I maintain that being able to see down the shaft is a huge aid in orienting oneself for the shot.

Peripheral vision is an extremely powerful tool, IMO, and what is processed in our periphery completes a picture in a very meaningful way.

Best,
Brian kc

Yes Brian,I like this too.I teach an open bridge alot.I don't think I have ever had to tell someone that they don't use a closed bridge enough.
And I teach them that can and will see the shot easier and better.
I came up with this sayin "some people are to smart to learn"
I think that alot of that pertains here.Oh well,If they hit, oh about 10 million balls they might get It.haha John B.
 

C.Milian

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yes Brian,I like this too.I teach an open bridge alot.I don't think I have ever had to tell someone that they don't use a closed bridge enough.
And I teach them that can and will see the shot easier and better.
I came up with this sayin "some people are to smart to learn"
I think that alot of that pertains here.Oh well,If they hit, oh about 10 million balls they might get It.haha John B.

Are you the same J.Brumbeck that plays champion speed?
 
Top