High English Thoughts

[naji]

O

As far as the hammer hitting the nail, that is a bad analogy. The nail is being directed to a certain spot a number of feet down the board.The cb is.

I mean you look at the nail head when you hammer it down, so you hammer does not miss and hit your finger!! that really hurts!

 

[randyg]

I've been wondering about this recently. Naji may have figured out something that has helped his game. I know that conventional wisdom says that you are supposed to look at the object ball last and that's what I do on most shots but I've been tinkering around with looking at the cue ball last on particular shots and that definitely has some merit.

When you consider that there are several great players that look at the cue ball last (Souquet, Feijen) it becomes obvious that it can be done. The question becomes why don't more players do it? I think I may know the answer.

I think this may be an advanced technique as opposed to a banger technique. When we start out playing and we don't know how to properly line up our shots (both while standing and in the addressed position) we really need to know where the object ball is at. So 99% of us end up looking at the object ball last. If we didn't we would miss so many balls because we really weren't lined up properly. Looking at the object ball last gives our subconscious one last chance to correct our alignment errors.

However, after you play for years and you have both a very straight stroke and you are lining up your shots properly the game becomes all about where you hit the cue ball. So in this sense, looking at the cue ball last makes since to me. If you trust your alignment and you want a very precise hit on the cue ball than maybe you should try looking at the cue ball last.

I could be completely wrong on this but I really don't think this has been studied much. Really all we have is conventional wisdom and in this case it may be worth rethinking.

***Sorry this is way off topic***

(Souquet, Feijen) Actually, they look at the object ball last, it's just done during their delivery stroke. Very dangerous for an amatuer to do this.
randyg

 

[elvicash]

Really!!!!
That would be like looking at the steering wheel of your car when you are turning a corner!!!!!!!
randyg

I am afraid to say you have not reached that level yet. I will give you a year or so to reevaluate your response. If i look at your cue ball now after you shoot and miss using english 99% because your blue tip marks did not go where you have in mind; the only way to fix that is to look at that point on CB when you fire.
The other thing many people do not know, is once you done warm and aiming, nothing will change that unless 1-you move your bridge before shooting, or wrong unintentional english

Naji you might not know but Randy is world class instructor and the primary thing he teaches is a consistent stroke for tip delivery. I am pretty sure he is pretty good at delivering the tip and helping others do the same.

Anyway, here is my thought on why different heights of hit on the CB have different effects even if we agree we aren't over spinning the CB significantly (cause we aren't)

....
....
....

The variables in this game are endless. I have to hit the CB twice as high to force follow when my wife is yelling at me.

Two points I notice - you point out we cannot overspin the cue ball with high English and but then later in your post you use the term force follow. We have all used this term and after reading this thread (thanks for all the people adding to it) and thinking about it I would define force follow as

Force Follow - a naturally rolling cue ball moving at a speed such as that which is produced with a firm stroke. I have no idea how to numerate such a speed but it is definitely a ball moving quickly and naturally rolling that ball will have force follow on it. A ball rolling at lag speed is naturally rolling by the time it gets to the far end rail but I would not call that force follow.

 

[Mikjary]

I mean you look at the nail head when you hammer it down, so you hammer does not miss and hit your finger!! that really hurts!

Sure you do! And you don't look at the hammer head as it comes down on the nail. :wink: You look at your target/object ball/nail head.

Best,
Mike

 

[lfigueroa]

I've been wondering about this recently. Naji may have figured out something that has helped his game. I know that conventional wisdom says that you are supposed to look at the object ball last and that's what I do on most shots but I've been tinkering around with looking at the cue ball last on particular shots and that definitely has some merit.

When you consider that there are several great players that look at the cue ball last (Souquet, Feijen) it becomes obvious that it can be done. The question becomes why don't more players do it? I think I may know the answer.

I think this may be an advanced technique as opposed to a banger technique. When we start out playing and we don't know how to properly line up our shots (both while standing and in the addressed position) we really need to know where the object ball is at. So 99% of us end up looking at the object ball last. If we didn't we would miss so many balls because we really weren't lined up properly. Looking at the object ball last gives our subconscious one last chance to correct our alignment errors.

However, after you play for years and you have both a very straight stroke and you are lining up your shots properly the game becomes all about where you hit the cue ball. So in this sense, looking at the cue ball last makes since to me. If you trust your alignment and you want a very precise hit on the cue ball than maybe you should try looking at the cue ball last.

I could be completely wrong on this but I really don't think this has been studied much. Really all we have is conventional wisdom and in this case it may be worth rethinking.

***Sorry this is way off topic***

A little while back, a young fellow in St. Louis was saying, "John Schmidt looks at the CB last."

Later, a very accomplished player here asked me, "Do you think that's true? I think there may be some merit to that."

And I said, "Well, that goes against everything I've ever learned about the game, but I'll ask him at the Derby."

And so, I see John in the straight pool room earlier this year and say, "John, someone in St. Louis is saying you say you should look at the CB last."

And he says, "Lou, you are a good enough player to known better than that."

And I would like to think I am.

Lou Figueroa
some days

 

[dr_dave]

I understood the original poster's question and think its a good one. What he is saying is:

If we accept that there is no overspin as shown by the physics guys

-And-

That hitting the cue ball at 2/5 ths above center (70%) is the location when a rolling cue ball occurs (also as shown by the physics guys)

-Then-

Why do pros ever hit much higher above that? Are the statements above not true, and that is why the pros hit higher? Or would the pros get the exact same cue ball path if they hit at the 70% mark instead of much higher?

Good summary, and excellent questions.

First of all, it is in fact impractical to consistently get overspin on the CB into the OB, even for a pro. Proof (from Mike Page and me) can be found here:

normal roll, maximum offset, and overspin resource page​

Hitting at the immediate-roll height (.70 D) and the miscue limit (0.75 D) is really not very different. That's why is is so difficult to achieve overspin. For illustrations, see the following article:

“How High or Low Should You Hit the Cue Ball?” (Billiards Digest, September, 2011)​

Therefore, even the pros don't hit much (if at all) above the immediate-roll height. And it isn't necessary. For a rolling CB, you can get as much follow as you need simply by adding more speed. You don't need more spin (beyond the roll amount), and it is too risky and impractical to achieve more spin anyway.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

I don't accept that there is no overspin...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WIYecrJ5ec . What's that? Am I misunderstanding the OP here?

There are plenty of high-speed videos around that show both the smooth rolling prior to contact and the overspin after contact for shots like that.

The linked video is one such example.

I also suspect that the player in the clip greased the cue ball for better action.

I can assure you that the CB had no grease (or Silicone spray or anything else) on it when I filmed that clip; although, it sounds like you might be referring to a different video.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Is it possible that the pros really are hitting pretty close to 70% when it looks higher?

Yes ... very possible.

To get a tip contact point at 70%, the cue must be really up there.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Bob Jewett]

The linked video is one such example.

I can assure you that the CB had no grease (or Silicone spray or anything else) on it when I filmed that clip; although, it sounds like you might be referring to a different video.

Regards,
Dave

I was trying to refer to the Kamui demo video where the player loops the cue ball around a line of balls to get position. I think he used lots of follow and a little right english. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEXa9J4PqbU

 

[dr_dave]

I was trying to refer to the Kamui demo video where the player loops the cue ball around a line of balls to get position. I think he used lots of follow and a little right english. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEXa9J4PqbU

I agree with you. It looks like lots of follow (i.e., lots of cue speed with the tip contact point very close to the 70% height) with a tad of right (which might have been unintentional). It also seems to me (like you) that the cloth is very slick and/or the CB is greased up a little.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Tony_in_MD]

Same shot done by Efren. If this was noted before, sorry.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QazDf_xFMUo&feature=related

I have a question about high english

If with high english it is not possible to significantly overspin the cue ball with high english what is the use of ever hitting the cue ball higher than 2/5 above center (70% of cue ball height) according to physics this is where a perfect level collision of tip to CB is assured to give a rolling cue ball. On the other hand the teaching pro Mark Wilson has mentioned to me in the past that there is value at hitting the cue ball very high with a level cue he calls this pro grade high and the cue ball seems to be more empowered loaded up so to say.

If it is not possible to over spin the cue ball and perfectly rolling is the best that is actually accomplished why do the pro players who shot so straight and control the cue ball direction so well after hitting the object, they seem to pick exactly how high to hit the cue ball as if it really matters. Are they just picking how much roll vs slide is on the ball when cueing above center. If they hit the ball high or much at all above center and it is a distance beyond two or three diamonds to the cue ball wont the cue ball be naturally rolling when it arrives especially if they do not shoot hard say a normall pocket speed stroke or softer.

When great straight pool players break racks or significant clusters and hit the ball high and land full on cluster/rack the cue ball seems to takeoff with spin and fight its way through the cluster, especially when they have a thin hit on the break ball. Does this mean they just hit a very fast cue ball and that cue ball is naturally rolling with the table and it stops on impact and the rolling rotational spins then comes in effect.

I have seen the youtube demos and the Dr Dave site showing that naturally rolling is the effective forward spin limit coming off the tip. But it seem to me that there is more to this to understand high english.

We have all seen someone or perhaps ourselves hit it good when drawing the cue ball, is there really no such paralell with high english. It seems there is to me it is even a shot in the Kamui tip demo shot set I do not rember the number but there is a shot or two that are high ball dependant. Chime in with thought or videos/clips of good high english shots or control shots with high.

Here is the Kamui shot #9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEXa9J4PqbU

Is that a good stroke or just well hit at the right speed (maybe that is the same thing).

 

[LAMas]

A good player back in my day, used to break a 9 ball rack from the center of the table with high top - it hit the rack to break up the balls- then the CB would again travel forward back into the rack to further scatter the remaining balls left in the rack - impressive.:wink:

 

[dr_dave]

A good player back in my day, used to break a 9 ball rack from the center of the table with high top - it hit the rack to break up the balls- then the CB would again travel forward back into the rack to further scatter the remaining balls left in the rack - impressive.:wink:

... and generally ill advised.

Regards,
Dave

 

[naji]

I agree with you. It looks like lots of follow (i.e., lots of cue speed with the tip contact point very close to the 70% height) with a tad of right (which might have been unintentional). It also seems to me (like you) that the cloth is very slick and/or the CB is greased up a little.

Regards,
Dave

I tried a shot like that on my table, looks like just above center little left, if you notice the CB goes at approximately 80 degree off which suggests it is stunned with little follow, but more importantly see how his cue grip in the back, that is what does magic- (Neil last sentence for you)

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I think the shooter had a little right side spin on the cue ball to keep it away from the blocker balls. You don't need much off the tip due to the effective multiplication at impact with the object ball.

That makes sense. But I believe that you are referring to how the side would change its path off the rail, right?

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I mean you look at the nail head when you hammer it down, so you hammer does not miss and hit your finger!! that really hurts!

But to keep consistent with your analogy, you would suggest that you should look at the head of the hammer when you swing. The purpose for looking at the target is to allow the incredible, nearly miraculous unconscious systems in your brain to make micro adjustments that makes it all work. Try this simple test: Set up a medium difficulty cut shot. Shoot it a number of times with your eyes closed, and the same number of times looking at the OB. See which one comes out better. You probably should alternate, so you don't get bored and tired for one or the other.

Keep in mind that this is coming from a guy who does *not* look at the OB last. I am a weirdo and actually look at a spot between the two balls, with a peripheral awareness of the ob, and my attention mainly focused on the line from the bridge to the cueball. Still, there is a LOT to be said for looking at the OB last, and I try from time to time to make this transition. I sincerely doubt there is a very high level shooter that is the "freewheeler" type, (like Earl or Rodney, for example), who do not look at the OB last. Looking at the CB last is a LOT of mental work.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I tried a shot like that on my table, looks like just above center little left, if you notice the CB goes at approximately 80 degree off which suggests it is stunned with little follow, but more importantly see how his cue grip in the back, that is what does magic- (Neil last sentence for you)

It doesn't necessarily suggest that. If the cloth is very slippery, the cueball could move a considerable distance directly along the tangent line before bending forward. This is what happens here. The cueball contacts the rail *before* the follow "takes". Thus the follow bends the ball after it comes off the rail, not before. Mess around on a heated billiards table and you will see exactly what I mean.

KMRUNOUT

 

[naji]

It doesn't necessarily suggest that. If the cloth is very slippery, the cueball could move a considerable distance directly along the tangent line before bending forward. This is what happens here. The cueball contacts the rail *before* the follow "takes". Thus the follow bends the ball after it comes off the rail, not before. Mess around on a heated billiards table and you will see exactly what I mean.

KMRUNOUT

I give credit where do, you are probably correct, i will video tape my shot and get the blue mark off the CB to see where the exact english for that shot and see what happens, and will post results. Thanks.

 

[Neil]

...............

 

[naji]

If you watch the shot in stop action, you can easily see that the cb is airborne immediately. The cb is losing zero rotation on the way to the ball. In fact, it hits the ob while still in the air without having hit the table at all. Then caroms off the ob at the tangent line, still airborne, hits the rail, then finally hits the table half a diamond from the rail. THEN the forward spin starts to take and the cb slows down and curves. By the time it hits the side rail, you can see by the dots on the cb that there is no side spin on the cb.

And Naji, you still are totally missing the point. So what if his wrist turns? He's not a robot, he's a person. I never said a person might not need it to get extra speed, I said the SHOT does not need it to work. As humans, we have trouble getting the amount of speed needed for some shots to work. (most of us have that trouble). Bringing the wrist from backward to forward during the stroke can add a little more speed. But, your timing has to be correct or you are going to really botch the shot up.

Thanks Neil i might have on this shot; but even if his wrist turns, the shot will be made if the aim is correct, and holding cue at pivot point. i agree with you on timing; also i add follow through is a must to get speed of cue to max and perfect CB spin.