Last edited:
Viability of English and Low Squirt Shafts
- Thread starter ndakotan
- Start date
plfrg, i agree with what you saying 100%, except where you say unconsciously adjusting no good player or pro do anything without knowing exactly what is happening before they bend, especially of longer range shots, they run their check list before they go down, like i do, some pros do it quick, some slow.
only time it is hard to be parallel is when you have to put max english near miscue point of which is not frequent with top players. Or purposely want to make use of the CB deflection for hard cut by pivoting short of the pivot point.
I agreed with you on earlier post, but what you saying in RED above is not 100% correct, you need every bit of information to master pool, weather instructor, student or a pro. The goal is to maintain consistency of pocketing balls every possible way just like pool room talk. Sure positioning or patterns play will only come from playing & practice.
An intelligent player will use this site to their advantage.
I would think it can and does reduce/eliminate/reverse squirt. If you supply the sideways motion of the tip (endmass) prior to contact, the cueball doesn't have to do it. As it begins to rotate, it'll just "catch up" to the tip rather than having to push it aside.
But, I don't see this happening unless you're striking fairly close to center. The ball rotates too fast, otherwise. As you move farther away from center, your stroke has to become mostly swoop, with little forward motion, to have any significant squirt reduction.
I'm certainly not recommending any of this. The swoop introduces major problems with just striking the cueball where you intend.
Jim
It may be just as easy as pivoting when you've practiced it enough, but why would I want to spend the time on something that limits CB control?
Controlling swerve vs. controlling the CB means different choices for tip offset, butt elevation and speed. If they're different then there's obviously a tradeoff, and the trade is obviously more swerve control for less CB control. I think that's inescapable. So what's the benefit that's worth giving up some CB control?
pj <- assuming it's equally easy, which I'm not convinced of
chgo
I don't buy this view of the tip/ball interaction, Jim. The "swooped" tip hits the CB at an angle that can be duplicated with a straight stroke at the same angle. How can one avoid squirt if the other can't? Are you claiming the CB goes parallel to that angle of attack if it's achieved by swooping? If it doesn't go parallel, what makes it deviate?
pj
chgo
Not sure I agree with this. I think many very high level people don't get into the weeds on issues like this. They don't confuse themselves with details that are not important to winning in pool.
Many of them have mastered making balls long ago. Do they try to consciously guess how much squirt or deflection they need to account for an a specific shot? I doubt it. I didn't get the sense they were woofing me when I was speaking to a few of them about these issues.
As far as a shot routine goes, I do use one and believe it's essential. I think that more than a few pros shot routines don't resemble anything close to the step by step process than many try to teach.
Most things I say aren't 100% correct. However, on this issue I would disagree. You don't need every bit of information to master pool. You need the right information and your training needs to focus on core issues that are needed to win. Getting into the weeds on aiming systems, LD shafts, english, etc is not productive training.
My guess is those players at high levels that cloud their thought processes with all of this stuff are pretty rare.
Maybe i did not make myself clear, on shots that require english, and a bit of a long range they require good attention to details.
SVB lost Japan tourney because of a jacked up cue shot, and OB is only a foot away from pocket, had he gave it thought he probably would have made it to finals.
Sure easy no english shots just aim and fire, although they are conscious of CB condition at contact.
Curious what is your level, are you an A, A-, A++??
You are absolutely correct...
I think a lot of stagnation occurs due to people starting to play at a high level and then they become afraid to learn something new out of fear that it will screw up their game. The truth is that learning something new almost invariably screws up your game temporarily, but unless you are in the TARpit with Shane holding your own, you should be willing to try new things and upset your game temporarily in order to improve and find what information and techniques will improve your game from where it is.
No matter how good you are, learning new information and figuring out which techniques work for you best are necessary unless you are completely happy where you are.
And like I said, unless you are holding your own against Shane et al... in the TARpit, then you shouldn't be happy where you are...
Jaden
I think a lot of stagnation occurs due to people starting to play at a high level and then they become afraid to learn something new out of fear that it will screw up their game. The truth is that learning something new almost invariably screws up your game temporarily, but unless you are in the TARpit with Shane holding your own, you should be willing to try new things and upset your game temporarily in order to improve and find what information and techniques will improve your game from where it is.
No matter how good you are, learning new information and figuring out which techniques work for you best are necessary unless you are completely happy where you are.
And like I said, unless you are holding your own against Shane et al... in the TARpit, then you shouldn't be happy where you are...
Jaden
actually I can visualize how this would be possible...
It would have to do with angular momentum where the mass of the cue is not relational to the angle of impact.
If you are swooping the impact angle will be variable in relation to a direct line at the same angle, so swooping could potentially reduce the effective mass at the point of impact.
Jaden
It would have to do with angular momentum where the mass of the cue is not relational to the angle of impact.
If you are swooping the impact angle will be variable in relation to a direct line at the same angle, so swooping could potentially reduce the effective mass at the point of impact.
Jaden
I don't know what the parts in blue mean. I'm guessing you're talking about the stick (when swooping) not being parallel with the tip's angle of impact, which might have some bearing on the amount of "involved endmass". If that's what you mean, then it may be true, but I can't guess what impact it would have on the shot - maybe it increases endmass and squirt. Anyway, I suspect any effect like that would be small.
pj
chgo
Pat, I'm not sure this will convince you, but imagine the long axis of the cue lined up with the CB's center at the moment of impact. However, the tip end of the shaft happens to be moving (swooping) to the right, say, as opposed to a straight-line motion from a normal stroke. It seems pretty clear that you're going to induce some right english from the friction between the ball and tip. In addition, the ball will be driven to the right slightly (the net force must be pointing to the right of center for the right english to be induced), so "squirt" will be in the opposite direction from normal. It's somewhat analogous to spin-induced throw between a CB-OB.
If contact is made ever so slightly to the right of CB center, instead of exactly at center, the situation/interaction won't immediately and abruptly change such that the cueball will now go left. As you move farther from center, however, eventually the swooping action won't be able to keep up with the induced spin, and the cueball will deflect left (i.e., the CB will have to do some pushing of the tip sideways).
Does that seem plausible to you?
Jim
Want to share my experiment..........
Hope things are going well in the north country.
I wanted to share what I'm doing right now.
I tried a shaft about 5 months ago. I havn't been totally happy with some things that I just can't do with my LD shaft.
1. Soft spin on a 1/4 ball cut coming off the rail. Outside english on this shot way inconsistent. cb would flatten out allot for no reason.
2. Shooting at the OB on a shoft shot the CB would curve too much with the LD shaft. Hard to control and predict.
3. Putting inside English on a shot that I wanted to come 3 rails around the table was difficult with cb trying to go too straight.
His name is Mitchell thomas and he made me a laminated shaft. I liked the way it played and thought it was the same as the predator 314 but it was not. I was getting just a little bit of deflection. At first i thought this is no good. But then I started to realize that these things that I was having trouble with the other shaft were gone with this one.
By giving up just a little bit of deflection, not much, this shaft plays like it should or like the old maple shaft did for the most part.
I get that little touchy feely spin and the ball does not curve uncontrolably. I can I can curve around balls and not worry about it curving into the ball I'm going around.
I can shoot a long shot with left English and not worry if it is going to curve an inch or maybe 2 on the way down. Easy to predict.
My draw shots are also easy to predict the length better.
I get some deflection but the other simple thing that I can do well now more than make up for it.
This is still an experiment in the making but I am liking what I see.
I put this shaft on without hardly any practice and played very well in a whole tournament.
I'm starting to think that a happy median might be better than stiffer than a board. At least it is seeming this way.
Now I have to find out if this guy is making the shafts like this on purpose or it's an accident?
Can he make them to all play exactly like this or is it a one time fluke?
If he can consistently make these the same I think he really has something here.
Anyway. Just wanted to share this with you my friend.
Hope things are going well in the north country.
I wanted to share what I'm doing right now.
I tried a shaft about 5 months ago. I havn't been totally happy with some things that I just can't do with my LD shaft.
1. Soft spin on a 1/4 ball cut coming off the rail. Outside english on this shot way inconsistent. cb would flatten out allot for no reason.
2. Shooting at the OB on a shoft shot the CB would curve too much with the LD shaft. Hard to control and predict.
3. Putting inside English on a shot that I wanted to come 3 rails around the table was difficult with cb trying to go too straight.
His name is Mitchell thomas and he made me a laminated shaft. I liked the way it played and thought it was the same as the predator 314 but it was not. I was getting just a little bit of deflection. At first i thought this is no good. But then I started to realize that these things that I was having trouble with the other shaft were gone with this one.
By giving up just a little bit of deflection, not much, this shaft plays like it should or like the old maple shaft did for the most part.
I get that little touchy feely spin and the ball does not curve uncontrolably. I can I can curve around balls and not worry about it curving into the ball I'm going around.
I can shoot a long shot with left English and not worry if it is going to curve an inch or maybe 2 on the way down. Easy to predict.
My draw shots are also easy to predict the length better.
I get some deflection but the other simple thing that I can do well now more than make up for it.
This is still an experiment in the making but I am liking what I see.
I put this shaft on without hardly any practice and played very well in a whole tournament.
I'm starting to think that a happy median might be better than stiffer than a board. At least it is seeming this way.
Now I have to find out if this guy is making the shafts like this on purpose or it's an accident?
Can he make them to all play exactly like this or is it a one time fluke?
If he can consistently make these the same I think he really has something here.
Anyway. Just wanted to share this with you my friend.
I didn't see SVB play, but you may have meant that if he followed his normal shot routine as apposed to taking the shot for granted he would have made it to the finals. I think we get mentally exhausted sometimes and even the best players make mental mistakes.
For me personally, I ingrain proper technique and a shot routine and strive to not allow any conscious control or extra thoughts at the table. The shot routine is my program and when/if any extraneous thoughts occur, I refer to them as 'reset signals'. I essential reset from the shot and get back into my subconscious shot routine that is essential for performing under pressure.
I play in the open A BCA division and like many players with a full time job my game can swing significantly depending on how much time I have been playing. Last week I ran out 3 out of 4 times (BCA 8 ball). The fourth time I ran the table but screwed up position on the 8. The week before I felt like I could barely make a ball.
Lately I've been driving myself crazy with one pocket. It's a great game that can quickly show you how weak you are at controlling CB position. I'm looking for a cure to help me stop playing the game.
Thanks plfrg for sharing your level, i expected to be there from the way you have been commenting. One advise i give you coming from more than 30 years experience, do not shoot 8 ball or one pocket until you master 9 or 10 ball. Do not do like i did exactly 8 ball and then one pocket, only last year or so i started 9 ball practicing what i difference, that will teach you not to take things for granted.
A low-tech way to test this:
- use a marked cue ball and check chalk marks
- hit the same spot on the cue ball both ways
- only count shots that hit the same rail target/rebound distance
- compare angle off rail
pj
chgo
Not sure if Joe Tucker still posts on here but, seem to recall his favoring BHE over parallel pivot
Last edited:
The cue ball isn't rotating until after the tip strikes it, and the rotation starts taking affect largely after the ball leaves the tip, so I don't see how "the rotating cue ball always pushes the tip sideways."
I didn't ask for a definition of squirt. I already know what it is. I think your understanding of how, and when, squirt takes place may be a little deficient. Friction between the cloth and the ball is the major factor in determining how much squirt is involved in a shot. If you minimize friction, you'll minimize squirt.
Roger