For most shots with a comfortable, regular length bridge I use a standard eye pattern, shifting focus to the object ball for the final back/forward stroke. This works well for me. However, on a tight shot with a short or jack-up bridge I do a lot better focusing on the contact point on the cue ball. Is this 'normal' or would you consider this adjusting for stroke flaw? For instance, a long, straight diagonal shot with the object ball in the center of the table and the cue ball in the mouth of a corner pocket, focusing on the object ball just doesn't make it. Focusing on the cue ball and stroking straight through the contact point works well.
Eye Pattern with Short Bridge
- Thread starter slach
- Start date
I'm with you on the short, jacked-up bridge shots. But that's because you can see both balls because they're close. You lost me on the long straight-in shots. I'm not sure why you would think that it's better to look at the cb last on those.
Maybe Scott Lee can shed some light on this. If I can recall, I believe he was once a strong advocate of looking at the cb last, and then at some point changed his opinion.
Warning: I'm not an instructor......
I always look at the cueball last. Never knew any different till I got on this board. So, just letting you know that you wouldn't be alone by doing that.
I honestly don't think I can even say any more about it, as it would cause a huge flame war on here. Hopefully, the instructors will give you their take on it. I'm sure if you used the "Search" function, one could find several threads where this has been aired out.
Carry on.
I always look at the cueball last. Never knew any different till I got on this board. So, just letting you know that you wouldn't be alone by doing that.
I honestly don't think I can even say any more about it, as it would cause a huge flame war on here. Hopefully, the instructors will give you their take on it. I'm sure if you used the "Search" function, one could find several threads where this has been aired out.
Carry on.
I'm "hearing" some stroke flaws, probably derived from stance flaws. How do you make a short bridge for that in-pocket shot?
One of the best ways begins by getting a lot closer with your feet to start. If you stand the regular distance from the table then scrunch your arm havoc ensues.
Pardoxically, for a lot of amateurs they need to stand closer to the table when the cue ball is near the cushion. Try it and see. And yes, look at the object ball on these shots.
One of the best ways begins by getting a lot closer with your feet to start. If you stand the regular distance from the table then scrunch your arm havoc ensues.
Pardoxically, for a lot of amateurs they need to stand closer to the table when the cue ball is near the cushion. Try it and see. And yes, look at the object ball on these shots.
I learned 40 years ago to look at the OB last. I also spent a decade teaching and playing looking at the CB last (based on some things Jack White taught me). In the long run it probably doesn't make a gigantic difference, since for most of us it is a momentary shift. That said, after doing more research, and talking to opthamologists and neurologists, I have spent the past decade teaching and playing looking at the OB last, for most shots. The exceptions are: break, jump, kick and masse'. Your cue goes where your eyes go...look at the OB last, and it should be done BEFORE the cuestick moves forward on the last stroke. Most of us are more comfortable making the shift from CB to OB before starting the final backswing.
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Yes, he did. But, because of an eye problem I have, it's very uncomfortable for me to do so.
Well said.
M4verick...Here ya go:
Start your 'aiming' in the standing up position, and make your shooting decisions. Step into the shot line, get your stance set, and put your bridge hand on the table (while doing all of this your eyes go back and forth all you want). When your bridge and stance are set, and aiming is complete, focus for a second or two on the CB. Then focus a second or two on the OB (cue is dead still, with tip near the CB, while this happens). Look at CB and do your warmups/practice swings. Stop your tip at the CB. If you decide to "go", look up at the OB and stay there. Pull your cuestick back slowly, and accelerate through the CB, keeping your eyes on the OB. Some people may wish to shift their eyes to the OB at the end of the final backswing. Either way, your eyes should be on the OB before the cue moves forwards. Exceptions are the break, a kick, a jump, or a masse' (eyes on CB for these four shots).
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Start your 'aiming' in the standing up position, and make your shooting decisions. Step into the shot line, get your stance set, and put your bridge hand on the table (while doing all of this your eyes go back and forth all you want). When your bridge and stance are set, and aiming is complete, focus for a second or two on the CB. Then focus a second or two on the OB (cue is dead still, with tip near the CB, while this happens). Look at CB and do your warmups/practice swings. Stop your tip at the CB. If you decide to "go", look up at the OB and stay there. Pull your cuestick back slowly, and accelerate through the CB, keeping your eyes on the OB. Some people may wish to shift their eyes to the OB at the end of the final backswing. Either way, your eyes should be on the OB before the cue moves forwards. Exceptions are the break, a kick, a jump, or a masse' (eyes on CB for these four shots).
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Last edited:
Scott -- for someone whose normal mode is OB last, what is your reason for including kick shots in the list of exceptions? I'm thinking of just normal kick shots where you want to hit a precise spot on the first cushion. Is it because you feel precision in applying the correct amount of english is more important in these shots than in regular shots directly at an OB or, stated differently, that precision in applying english for a kick is more important than precision in the hit on the first cushion?
Last edited:
Ok, I can't stand it anymore. I gotta stir the pot.
I don't understand why it's "common knowledge" to look at the OB last......except for kicks. Except for masse shots. Except for jump shots. Except when on the rail. Except for jacked up on the rail shots. Except when jacked up over a ball. Except for the break.
Everyone has these analogies about throwing a football at a target. You look at the target right? You don't look at the football.
Well, I DO look at my target. My target is the cueball. And the "football" in my hand is the cue stick. Just like I look at the golf ball when my club strikes it. I don't look at the hole. Or the place on the fairway I want the ball to land.
If I decide in my shot evaluation where I need to hit the OB to pocket it.....and then I get my body in line for that......when I slide down into the shot.....after a few looks back and forth from the OB to the CB for verification.......well, the OB melts away for me after that. At that point, I'm stroking thru the CB and caroming it off an object.
I even get into arguments with friends that say I need to trust my stroke. They go on to state that they trust theirs and that they could hit the cueball where they want to with their eyes closed, once they're set up. Well, if that's true, then why the hell are they looking at the OB? They don't need to, right? Might as well close your eyes all the time and give them a rest. If it's to see where the cueball goes after contact, well, you'll see that using my method as well. I tend to shoot softer than most people I know, so I have plenty of time to finish my shot and look up to see what's happening. And if a person would argue that I wouldn't be able to see on CB struck hard.....my response would be that a ball hit with some pop needs an even MORE precise focus/stroke thru the CB.
I just had to get that off my chest. It's been freaking killing me.
I know I'm going to be torched on here, but fwiw, sometimes I feel like I'm arguing with people who say the Earth is flat, simply because it was how they were taught and everyone else says so.
The concession I will give is that if you picked up a cue and started playing by looking at the CB last and it's ingrained in you......keep doing what you're doing.
There's more than one way to skin a cat in this game.
Flame away.
I don't understand why it's "common knowledge" to look at the OB last......except for kicks. Except for masse shots. Except for jump shots. Except when on the rail. Except for jacked up on the rail shots. Except when jacked up over a ball. Except for the break.
Everyone has these analogies about throwing a football at a target. You look at the target right? You don't look at the football.
Well, I DO look at my target. My target is the cueball. And the "football" in my hand is the cue stick. Just like I look at the golf ball when my club strikes it. I don't look at the hole. Or the place on the fairway I want the ball to land.
If I decide in my shot evaluation where I need to hit the OB to pocket it.....and then I get my body in line for that......when I slide down into the shot.....after a few looks back and forth from the OB to the CB for verification.......well, the OB melts away for me after that. At that point, I'm stroking thru the CB and caroming it off an object.
I even get into arguments with friends that say I need to trust my stroke. They go on to state that they trust theirs and that they could hit the cueball where they want to with their eyes closed, once they're set up. Well, if that's true, then why the hell are they looking at the OB? They don't need to, right? Might as well close your eyes all the time and give them a rest. If it's to see where the cueball goes after contact, well, you'll see that using my method as well. I tend to shoot softer than most people I know, so I have plenty of time to finish my shot and look up to see what's happening. And if a person would argue that I wouldn't be able to see on CB struck hard.....my response would be that a ball hit with some pop needs an even MORE precise focus/stroke thru the CB.
I just had to get that off my chest. It's been freaking killing me.
I know I'm going to be torched on here, but fwiw, sometimes I feel like I'm arguing with people who say the Earth is flat, simply because it was how they were taught and everyone else says so.
The concession I will give is that if you picked up a cue and started playing by looking at the CB last and it's ingrained in you......keep doing what you're doing.
There's more than one way to skin a cat in this game.
Flame away.
Last edited:
Easy there buddy; I don't think you will be attacked here, you can look at the CB last if you want to, most people do better with looking at the OB last though; it probably isn't something earthshaking anyway. I teach OB last, but it isn't the end of the world.
Sorry, John. I guess I'm feeling defensive today, due to the fact that I've been browbeat on this subject in the past, particularly offline.
It's to the point where I don't like to even mention it, for fear of a prolonged argument, but I guess I'm having a bad day.
Didn't mean to take it out on anyone here.
Again, my disclaimer: I'm not an instructor.
It's to the point where I don't like to even mention it, for fear of a prolonged argument, but I guess I'm having a bad day.
Didn't mean to take it out on anyone here.
Again, my disclaimer: I'm not an instructor.
It can be done either way, although I think it's safe to say that the majority of good players look at the OB last. Here's something I posted in the past about this that may be of interest:
For one large set of sports actions, let's call it Category I, the competitor is holding or is attached to a piece of equipment and desires to direct that piece of equipment elsewhere:
For another large set of sports actions, let's call it Category II, the competitor holds one piece of equipment and desires to hit another piece of equipment and direct that second piece of equipment to a desired target or with a certain degree of accuracy:
So how about pool/billiards? Isn't it logically a Category II action? We hold one piece of equipment (the cue stick), desiring to strike a second piece of equipment (the cue ball), and send that second piece of equipment to a desired target (a proper hit on the object ball or rail). We are throwing the cue stick in an underhand motion at the cue ball. So "cue ball last" is appropriate, right?
But I am quite sure that the majority (but by no means all) of the top pool players look at the object ball last. If my analogies above are correct, why does "OB last" work so well for so many players? I believe it is because the cue ball is at rest and we can place our cue stick and bridge hand precisely behind it and thereby treat the combination of cue stick and cue ball as almost one piece of equipment instead of two. Then the cuing action becomes similar to a Category I action -- we are throwing the cue stick/ball at the object ball. So "object ball last" works just fine if the cue stick is always precisely delivered to the cue ball.
So either way -- CB last or OB last -- can work well in pool. I believe analogies with other sports argue more closely for CB last (my Category II above), but just a slightly different way of viewing what's happening can create a good Category I argument.
- Throwing a baseball;
- Throwing a football;
- Throwing/shooting a basketball;
- Throwing a dart;
- Rolling a bowling ball;
- Shooting an arrow;
- Shooting a gun;
- Driving a race car;
- Riding a race horse.
For another large set of sports actions, let's call it Category II, the competitor holds one piece of equipment and desires to hit another piece of equipment and direct that second piece of equipment to a desired target or with a certain degree of accuracy:
- Hitting a baseball;
- Kicking a football;
- Hitting a tennis ball;
- Hitting a golf ball;
- Hitting a ping pong ball;
- Hitting a badminton shuttlecock;
- Striking a volley ball.
So how about pool/billiards? Isn't it logically a Category II action? We hold one piece of equipment (the cue stick), desiring to strike a second piece of equipment (the cue ball), and send that second piece of equipment to a desired target (a proper hit on the object ball or rail). We are throwing the cue stick in an underhand motion at the cue ball. So "cue ball last" is appropriate, right?
But I am quite sure that the majority (but by no means all) of the top pool players look at the object ball last. If my analogies above are correct, why does "OB last" work so well for so many players? I believe it is because the cue ball is at rest and we can place our cue stick and bridge hand precisely behind it and thereby treat the combination of cue stick and cue ball as almost one piece of equipment instead of two. Then the cuing action becomes similar to a Category I action -- we are throwing the cue stick/ball at the object ball. So "object ball last" works just fine if the cue stick is always precisely delivered to the cue ball.
So either way -- CB last or OB last -- can work well in pool. I believe analogies with other sports argue more closely for CB last (my Category II above), but just a slightly different way of viewing what's happening can create a good Category I argument.
I saw where you had posted that in the past, AtLarge. I really like it. Thanks.
I am sorry if you feel you are going to be flamed for giving your opinion. I believe that this section of the forum is more tolerant of differences than others.
If this eye pattern is working for you, that is all that matters. If you think that there are some inconsistencies in your game, that may be related to this, then you are free to change it.
It is your choice to make.
If this eye pattern is working for you, that is all that matters. If you think that there are some inconsistencies in your game, that may be related to this, then you are free to change it.
It is your choice to make.