lenght of bridge

JoeyInCali said:
Would the length of their forearm have anything to do with proper bridge length , Scott ?
Click to expand...

Think about the Monk with those long arms of his--he needs to adjust somehow or there are potential issues. I've had students who are 4' 10" and likewise they just can't put a good stroke on the ball with a 14-inch bridge length unless they have a sizable cue extension.
 
BilliardsAbout said:
Think about the Monk with those long arms of his--he needs to adjust somehow or there are potential issues. I've had students who are 4' 10" and likewise they just can't put a good stroke on the ball with a 14-inch bridge length unless they have a sizable cue extension.
Click to expand...

Matt,

Why would a 4'10" person need an extension for a normal stance shot? I would doubt that they could even reach the extension while using just a 14" bridge unless their shooting arm was fully extended. I'm 5' 9" & use a bridge length much longer than 14" at times & never need an extension for a normal stance shot. I just can't picture this. I would think elevator shoes might be more beneficial to help prevent a side arm stroke.:wink:

Regards &
 
I have been following this thread, and would like to get some consensus via asking some questions (that might be considered rhetoric).

Bridge length, as I have been taught is the distance from the thumb knuckle on the bridge hand to the contact edge of the cueball (i.e. where the tip hits that ball). Is this a universally accepted way to define bridge length? Ultimately it doesn't matter, except to make sure when the reference of 12" bridge - everyone agrees.

Stroke length is defined as the distance the tip travels after contacting the cueball?
Again this distance doesn't matter except to ensure a common reference point.

Another question, regardless of type of stroke (pendulum or piston) it is desirable to have the hand perpendicular to the elbow?

If using a pendulum stroke, the range of mother of our FULL swing is constant? If using a piston stroke, the range of motion varies proportionally to how much the shoulder drops?

Why, these questions? Well - to first off make sure terminology clear.

If my "assumptions" are universally accepted then there should be some reasonable deductions made about the bridge length and stroke length.

Pendulum: stroke length is a function of forearm length because after the cueball is struck (hand directly below the elbow) the distance of the arc the arm must travel is based on the radius defined as the forearm.

Piston stroke: stroke length is the pendulum stroke length PLUS another arc created by the amount of the should drop which can vary significantly.

Notice, I didn't mention bridge length in either of these, because the bridge is meant to stabilize the body and is dictated moreso by body than the cue. The cradle location IS directly affected by bridge length.

There are exceptions for special scenarios, of course - but I hope we are talking about routine shots.
 
There are a lot of things to consider when choosing a bridge length. There isn’t a one length fits all solution. It comes down to tradeoffs between accuracy, power, and necessity.

A shorter bridge helps with accuracy when things aren’t going well with one's stroke. The better one's stroke, the longer bridge length they can use accurately. The downside of shorter bridge is that it can promote a jerky or punch stroke.

A longer bridge helps with power. It provides more room to smoothly accelerate the cue to speed. The downside is that accuracy suffers with a poor stroke.

Often the player will have to adjust the bridge length shorter or longer if balls are in the way. A rail bridge will limit the length also.

The player needs to know how well their stroke performs and how long of a bridge they can use and maintain accuracy. Often, the shot will force the player to make compromises between accuracy and power based on the needs of the shot.
 
ENGLISH! said:
Matt,

Why would a 4'10" person need an extension for a normal stance shot? I would doubt that they could even reach the extension while using just a 14" bridge unless their shooting arm was fully extended. I'm 5' 9" & use a bridge length much longer than 14" at times & never need an extension for a normal stance shot. I just can't picture this. I would think elevator shoes might be more beneficial to help prevent a side arm stroke.:wink:

Regards &
Click to expand...

My bad... I meant very short bridge, not very long. Sorry, buddy.
 
Mark Avlon said:
There are a lot of things to consider when choosing a bridge length. There isn’t a one length fits all solution. It comes down to tradeoffs between accuracy, power, and necessity.

A shorter bridge helps with accuracy when things aren’t going well with one's stroke. The better one's stroke, the longer bridge length they can use accurately. The downside of shorter bridge is that it can promote a jerky or punch stroke.

A longer bridge helps with power. It provides more room to smoothly accelerate the cue to speed. The downside is that accuracy suffers with a poor stroke.

Often the player will have to adjust the bridge length shorter or longer if balls are in the way. A rail bridge will limit the length also.

The player needs to know how well their stroke performs and how long of a bridge they can use and maintain accuracy. Often, the shot will force the player to make compromises between accuracy and power based on the needs of the shot.
Click to expand...

Well said. That's my contention, weaker players with stroke and accuracy issues need a more compact stance and bridge IMHO.
 
I guess I'm all screwed up. My bridge length is 8 inches and doesn't vary at all for SOP shots. I get all the power I need for any achievable shot upto 8 rails in 3C. Why should I mess with bridge length except for very special situations ie tiny delicate shots. Seems to add a whole new area for error. Just asking
 
3kushn said:
I guess I'm all screwed up. My bridge length is 8 inches and doesn't vary at all for SOP shots. I get all the power I need for any achievable shot upto 8 rails in 3C. Why should I mess with bridge length except for very special situations ie tiny delicate shots. Seems to add a whole new area for error. Just asking
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more! Get consistent with a stance and bridge and build muscle memory. Learn it right the first time!

Do they teach a certain golf swing based on ability level? I honestly wouldn't know, but from what I have heard friends talk about, the better someone gets, they just become more efficient and use a different club.
 
BilliardsAbout said:
Sorry, semi-pro.

1) because we can successfully - you start brand new players who've never cued at a 12-14" bridge? - no you don't, no way.

2) to have a longer "sight" for aiming certain shots - you went on to post that you agreed with this point in principle - long bridge, better sighting (sounds like a Papa John's ad)

3) sometimes because we're too lazy to reach for a mechanical bridge or stance accurately - okay, pros are disclipined in this area not to be lazy

And, I will continue to contend that the average casual player or even reader of this forum likely has too long a bridge - and feel free to address the heart of the question that you raised yourself - WHY players used shorter bridges years ago - it's not just because they all stood upright - some of the oldie goldies got way the heck down there.

You're reminding me of the golf pro who says, "Watch and learn how to drive" and hits one 300 yards down the middle and now says, "You do it." You know it takes time and discipline for newer or less skilled players to lengthen their bridge more and more to break faster and more accurately. It takes a long time in some cases. But I guess everyone should use foot-long bridges in pool for most open shots because you or I might... the average player doesn't need to see better but stroke better - once they get their cue ball rolling straighter than can get lower and make a longer bridge (maybe) to do what you said.

I know I'm fighting against the current wave of reasoning among teachers. But everyone who is about a 7 APA or less whose bridge I've shortened has pocketed more balls immediately. Think about the angles a bit also - is it simpler to get the head and eyes closer to the ball with a longer or shorter bridge? We both know the shorter bridge (assumed at the table in a proper manner) brings their whole person a little closer to the action.

I doubt I'll reply to you on this again and sorry you hurt your head on your monitor. Maybe ask questions instead of assuming I'm wrong about everything and give me a chance to post further details...
Click to expand...

So now you're not a pro, even though you referred to yourself as a pro. Now you're a semi-pro. This is what you always do, Matt. You back-peddle and clarify and re clarify your positions. You've made at least three additional posts re clarifying your stand on bridge length.

Get Donny Lutz on here to tell us you're a semi-pro player to verify your statement. He knows your game, right? I know Donny to be a reputable guy and I wouldn't expect him to lie.
 
Last edited:
3kushn said:
I guess I'm all screwed up. My bridge length is 8 inches and doesn't vary at all for SOP shots. I get all the power I need for any achievable shot upto 8 rails in 3C. Why should I mess with bridge length except for very special situations ie tiny delicate shots. Seems to add a whole new area for error. Just asking
Click to expand...

I’m not suggesting the bridge length changes for every shot, but there are times that the table will force you to make adjustments.

Players with a solid stroke should choose a length that they are comfortable with and works well for them, and be consistent with that length.

For players whose stroke isn’t solid, a shorter bridge will help them. Understanding the tradeoffs will help them avoid the issues from too short a bridge, and too long of a bridge.
 
FranCrimi said:
So now you're not a pro, even though you referred to yourself as a pro. Now you're a semi-pro. This is what you always do, Matt. You back-peddle and clarify and re clarify your positions. You've made at least three additional posts re clarifying your stand on bridge length.

Get Donny Lutz on here to tell us you're a semi-pro player to verify your statement. He knows your game, right? I know Donny to be a reputable guy and I wouldn't expect him to lie.
Click to expand...

Hi Fran,

I had a snippy post on here that I'm editing to remove the snippiness. If two people are having a civil debate and either one of them gets angry, they both lose IMO.

Donny is a reputable person as you wrote. He is very kind and a man of integrity like very few people I know. He and I are both posting at AZ less frequently these days and both of us find all the bickering distasteful, as I'm sure you do as well.

Again, I invite you to talk with me offline by phone or by PM to end this and so you can see I'm not a bad person. I have tried mainly to do two things 1) respond to clarify when challenged on a teaching point 2) respond respectfully and courteously.

I'm comfortable with your saying I'm incorrect on a teaching matter. I also want you to know I hear loud and clear that not just you but others have found my writing ambiguous and unclear, and I'm staying on the forums in part as an exercise in writing with heightened clarity. What makes me uncomfortable is when people use personal attacks in addition to responding to instruction.

Thank you.

PS. I will continue to refer to myself as a pro teacher. I'm not a playing pro but a professional teacher who is paid to give lessons and who works hard for that pay and has given lessons to playing professionals as well. You took exception with the word "we" and I should have written "we better players" or "we expert players" or whatever.
 
Last edited:
BilliardsAbout said:
My bad... I meant very short bridge, not very long. Sorry, buddy.
Click to expand...

Matt,

Am I missing something or have you left something out initially? If the 4'10" person shortens their bridge to less than 14" would they not have more butt end available & therefore have even less need for an extension?

I just want to give you the opportunity to clarify as both statements don't make sense to me unless perhaps you are talking about a shaft extension vs. a butt extension.

Sorry for the aggrevation but both of your statements were confusing to me.

Regards to You &
 
I've had shorter stature students that I've encouraged to try a longer bridge, and others, a shorter bridge. As has been discussed it all depends on a variety of factors.

I've had students who are short of stature and have short arms and shots you and for shots you or I would find easy to reach they would need a quite long bridge from hand to cue ball or else a mechanical bridge of some type.
 
I have yet to read a comment of intentional or unintentional use of BACK HAND ENGLISH and its effects in determining bridge length. I use the pivot point of a shaft to determine bridge length on normal shots however for certain shots, ie. the break, masse, etc., it may vary.

I think using normal deflection versus low deflection shafts would be a major factor in determining bridge length. What are your thoughts???
 
That's a good question. For me, a BHE pivot point is less crucial to finding an optimal bridge length to match deflection than it is for a player who aims using CTE.
 
3kushn said:
I guess I'm all screwed up. My bridge length is 8 inches and doesn't vary at all for SOP shots. I get all the power I need for any achievable shot upto 8 rails in 3C. Why should I mess with bridge length except for very special situations ie tiny delicate shots. Seems to add a whole new area for error. Just asking
Click to expand...

That's a reasonable question. Some players could not do as well as you and would need a longer bridge to go eight rails with the larger balls.

Your question underscores my point as well, that a lot of people are saying (not just teachers, mind, but pool players dispensing advice to their fellow players) to go much longer than 8" because it's in fashion/pros do it.

I've worked and played with some very good players and some very bad players. It just tears me up to see some banger with a very long bridge so he can hit the balls as hard as possible for no good reason.
 
Tennesseejoe said:
I have yet to read a comment of intentional or unintentional use of BACK HAND ENGLISH and its effects in determining bridge length. I use the pivot point of a shaft to determine bridge length on normal shots however for certain shots, ie. the break, masse, etc., it may vary.

I think using normal deflection versus low deflection shafts would be a major factor in determining bridge length. What are your thoughts???
Click to expand...

Mr. Joe,

I have been using all types of english rather well for 46 years without making a conscious effort to do as you say, but I would say yes. If one determines one's shaft's pivot point, and if one can comfortably do so then one should shoot using that length bridge whenever possible, not only for back hand english but for intended center cue ball hits as well, as that might save a shot that is mis hit off center.

Best Regards to You &
 
BilliardsAbout said:
Hi Fran,

Your accusations are not a reply to my three statements on bridge length that came in response to your prior round of accusations.

Why not verify in person? I'm even worse than you say. I'm sure your lessons will benefit me greatly. What do you charge for one-on-one instruction, please?
Click to expand...


You keep re clarifying and re stating your position so much that I really have no idea what you are talking about half the time. I suggested this before and I will suggest it again. Learn how to play and you won't have to keep changing your story. You're a pro player. No, you changed your mind. You're a semi-pro player. Who says stuff like that??
 
BilliardsAbout said:
Hi Fran,

I had a snippy post on here that I'm editing to remove the snippiness. If two people are having a civil debate and either one of them gets angry, they both lose IMO.

Donny is a reputable person as you wrote. He is very kind and a man of integrity like very few people I know. He and I are both posting at AZ less frequently these days and both of us find all the bickering distasteful, as I'm sure you do as well.

Again, I invite you to talk with me offline by phone or by PM to end this and so you can see I'm not a bad person. I have tried mainly to do two things 1) respond to clarify when challenged on a teaching point 2) respond respectfully and courteously.

I'm comfortable with your saying I'm incorrect on a teaching matter. I also want you to know I hear loud and clear that not just you but others have found my writing ambiguous and unclear, and I'm staying on the forums in part as an exercise in writing with heightened clarity. What makes me uncomfortable is when people use personal attacks in addition to responding to instruction.

Thank you.

PS. I will continue to refer to myself as a pro teacher. I'm not a playing pro but a professional teacher who is paid to give lessons and who works hard for that pay and has given lessons to playing professionals as well. You took exception with the word "we" and I should have written "we better players" or "we expert players" or whatever.
Click to expand...


There it is. The clarification.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top