Inside English misses!

Colin:

What happened to all the videos you used to have on your site?

We miss you, bro.

Thanks Johnny,
The videos I made are still on youtube under my name, and linked to via Dr.Dave's post above. They're a bit outdated unfortunately, but still a useful introduction to BHE for the beginner.

Have been meaning to make a good video one day, when time and enthusiasm permits, now that I have nearly 10 years of BHE experience, giving me more insights into the variables.

SJD has a point btw. In most situations in current popular game formats, difficult shots are almost always avoided as safety allows lower risk options and there are often alternative routes. The best players I've known don't spend much time practicing inside english and use it sparingly.
 
I posed this question to Stevie Moore recently. "What percentage of shots do you and most professionals apply English to." Stevie told me point blank "none if I don't have to. "

The former premier player out of Taiwan, Yang Chin Shun, was said to have the best "vertical cueball" in the world. His patterns tend to center around stun shots, all variations of high/low ball stuns/draws/follows with no more than a quarter/half tip of english.

For these top pros...the cueball is the size of a beachball.
 
I posed this question to Stevie Moore recently. "What percentage of shots do you and most professionals apply English to." Stevie told me point blank "none if I don't have to. " Stevie said he only uses English when he inherits a tough shot from his opponent or got out of line. He said if you're smart and good enough to create the right angles, you rarely need English. What I should have clarified more carefully is what Stevie regarded as English. I'm not sure he regards 1/4 or 1/2 tip as English. It was clear he felt strongly about avoiding English of more than one tip.

I was watching an Alex vs Earl match earlier today I saw each of them miss a relatively easy shot in the first 3 games where they were clearly applying inside English. I think SJD is dead on with his assessment and he has the background and pedigree to know better than most. I agree that spin can make it easier to move the cb around the table but it also adds a variable to the aiming that will result in some misses. Referencing CJ is irrelevant as he is trying to sell dvd's. If you're buying into his TOI and zen stuff, having a rational conversation with you is impossible anyway.

So, Stevie said this about "english". Earl Strickland has said "learn how to spin the ball" and Efren Reyes in a TAR video (w/Shane van Boening): "learn the spins". You can see these videos on youtube. I respect Stevie but I would listen to the world's best pool players. And no player in our days plays at the level these two were playing in their prime. IMHO.....
 
So, Stevie said this about "english". Earl Strickland has said "learn how to spin the ball" and Efren Reyes in a TAR video (w/Shane van Boening): "learn the spins". You can see these videos on youtube. I respect Stevie but I would listen to the world's best pool players. And no player in our days plays at the level these two were playing in their prime. IMHO.....

Nice addition. Every extra club you have in your bag adds value.

Personally I love using inside english, but it's value is increased when I play multi-rail versions of the game.
 
View Post
The more I hear this "truth" being spouted, the more I am inclined to doubt it. You simply cannot, I repeat cannot play pool at its highest level without spinning the ball once in a while, and more often than most claim IMHO, and inside is a part of that. Watch Efren play in his prime, watch Earl play in his prime, and look at what the ball is doing. Don't listen to what people are saying, use your own powers of observation, just look. They use tremendous inside on some shots, less on other but always the amount needed. They don't place restrictions, they play the shot as it should be played. How are you ever going to get good without playing shots the right way? Some can maybe get away with leaving themselves long shots all the time, but the unfortunate ones who do not have perfect speed control (I count myself here) who do not excel on these shots, will eventually miss. As far as I know, without using backhand english (which also requires feel adjustments because of the balls curving path), there is no other way to learn how to use inside, other than to practice it.

Statistically in the rotation games and eight ball where the balls are being broken hard, shots are more likely to end up on the rail than not. Read the Beards first book for the explanation to this. When shots are on the rail, you will need english both outside and inside, to get the complete range of possible cueball movements, it's that simple. You can't avoid using inside english without seriously compromising your run out ability. The question is then, when you have a choice between an inside route and an outside route, which should be chosen? That is an individual choice, but I know that I want that choice to be dictated by the table layout and my own ability, rather than some restriction I have placed on myself, based on the advice of others. For various reasons, mostly because of the way I practice and aim I feel that outside english shots is not particularly easier to pocket than inside english shots with only a couple of exceptions, one being slow speed half ball shots, where throw is at its highest. It can also be because I play with the lowest deflecting shaft on the market, the Z2. If I played with my custom shaft, which has huge deflection, I would actually think outside is even more difficult than inside, because I don't use backhand english, and aiming hard outside shots would involve aiming far outside the object ball, while with inside I can at least aim at something, even if it is the "wrong" side of the ball.
 
Last edited:
So, Stevie said this about "english". Earl Strickland has said "learn how to spin the ball" and Efren Reyes in a TAR video (w/Shane van Boening): "learn the spins". You can see these videos on youtube. I respect Stevie but I would listen to the world's best pool players. And no player in our days plays at the level these two were playing in their prime. IMHO.....

You're welcome to listen to whomever you wish, I could care less. I simply shared what Stevie told me. Further, you, nor I, or anybody else here for that matter, is Earl or Shane. Stevie didn't say no professional players play with english, he said most don't. And once again, I interpreted what Stevie said as more towards more severe english and perhaps didn't consider 1/4 to 1/2 tip as english since we really don't hit perfect CCB anyway. I'll ask him for clarification the next time I speak with him.
 
What does what Earl and Efren do have anything to do with the vast majority of the rest of us? I've watched a ton of Earl's matches in the last month and seen him miss a ton of routine shots that I'd have never thought he would have missed either.

I think the other thing to consider is when that side spin is used. I don't have problems applying english when the OB is a diamond or two from the pocket and the CB is within 2 or 3 diamonds of the OB. On the other hand, I would only use side spin if I absolutely couldn't find any alternative in a make or break situation where you're talking about table length, or near table length tough shots.

I watch guys in Masters League, who think they're good, play with spin on almost every shot and inevitably dog a relatively easy shot they didn't have to apply spin to. In many cases, spin makes getting position even more difficult. You talk about speed control? Spin doesn't necessarily make speed control easier and in many cases, the added energy from the spin can cause you to over run your desired line if you're not careful.

You can believe whatever you wish, that's up to you. I've played enough with Stevie and watched him play tournament matches at table side to believe what he told me, at least speaking for himself.

The more I hear this "truth" being spouted, the more I am inclined to doubt it. You simply cannot, I repeat cannot play pool at its highest level without spinning the ball once in a while, and more often than most claim IMHO, and inside is a part of that. Watch Efren play in his prime, watch Earl play in his prime, and look at what the ball is doing. Don't listen to what people are saying, use your own powers of observation, just look. They use tremendous inside on some shots, less on other but always the amount needed. They don't place restrictions, they play the shot as it should be played. How are you ever going to get good without playing shots the right way? Some can maybe get away with leaving themselves long shots all the time, but the unfortunate ones who do not have perfect speed control (I count myself here) who do not excel on these shots, will eventually miss. As far as I know, without using backhand english (which also requires feel adjustments because of the balls curving path), there is no other way to learn how to use inside, other than to practice it.

Statistically in the rotation games and eight ball where the balls are being broken hard, shots are more likely to end up on the rail than not. Read the Beards first book for the explanation to this. When shots are on the rail, you will need english both outside and inside, to get the complete range of possible cueball movements, it's that simple. You can't avoid using inside english without seriously compromising your run out ability. The question is then, when you have a choice between an inside route and an outside route, which should be chosen? That is an individual choice, but I know that I want that choice to be dictated by the table layout and my own ability, rather than some restriction I have placed on myself, based on the advice of others. For various reasons, mostly because of the way I practice and aim I feel that outside english shots is not particularly easier to pocket than inside english shots with only a couple of exceptions, one being slow speed half ball shots, where throw is at its highest. It can also be because I play with the lowest deflecting shaft on the market, the Z2. If I played with my custom shaft, which has huge deflection, I would actually think outside is even more difficult than inside, because I don't use backhand english, and aiming hard outside shots would involve aiming far outside the object ball, while with inside I can at least aim at something, even if it is the "wrong" side of the ball.
 
What does what Earl and Efren do have anything to do with the vast majority of the rest of us? I've watched a ton of Earl's matches in the last month and seen him miss a ton of routine shots that I'd have never thought he would have missed either.

I think the other thing to consider is when that side spin is used. I don't have problems applying english when the OB is a diamond or two from the pocket and the CB is within 2 or 3 diamonds of the OB. On the other hand, I would only use side spin if I absolutely couldn't find any alternative in a make or break situation where you're talking about table length, or near table length tough shots.

I watch guys in Masters League, who think they're good, play with spin on almost every shot and inevitably dog a relatively easy shot they didn't have to apply spin to. In many cases, spin makes getting position even more difficult. You talk about speed control? Spin doesn't necessarily make speed control easier and in many cases, the added energy from the spin can cause you to over run your desired line if you're not careful.

You can believe whatever you wish, that's up to you. I've played enough with Stevie and watched him play tournament matches at table side to believe what he told me, at least speaking for himself.

But you would not watch Earl miss many of these shots in his prime, right ? Efren now misses shots that seem like a joke. In his prime he would never do that. These players have played the game in another level. And no player today is even close to this level. You are free to believe anything and have your own opinion. In my opinion you are wrong and I don't agree with this kind of "safe" thinking.
 
But you would not watch Earl miss many of these shots in his prime, right ? Efren now misses shots that seem like a joke. In his prime he would never do that. These players have played the game in another level. And no player today is even close to this level. You are free to believe anything and have your own opinion. In my opinion you are wrong and I don't agree with this kind of "safe" thinking.

Efren also went undefeated in the DCC 1P event last year with 3rd in the all-around, won the 9b and all-around in 2010, so if he's missing more now than he did before, he's certainly doing something more than just shooting at the pocket. I've always wished I could shoot as straight as some that I've seen, but my CB/strategy keeps me in the running. The pros get on the angles that make breakouts and leaves easier, but that doesn't mean they don't use english to get there. Control the CB and win the game.
 
The more I hear this "truth" being spouted, the more I am inclined to doubt it. You simply cannot, I repeat cannot play pool at its highest level without spinning the ball once in a while, and more often than most claim IMHO, and inside is a part of that. Watch Efren play in his prime, watch Earl play in his prime, and look at what the ball is doing. Don't listen to what people are saying, use your own powers of observation, just look. They use tremendous inside on some shots, less on other but always the amount needed. They don't place restrictions, they play the shot as it should be played. How are you ever going to get good without playing shots the right way? Some can maybe get away with leaving themselves long shots all the time, but the unfortunate ones who do not have perfect speed control (I count myself here) who do not excel on these shots, will eventually miss. As far as I know, without using backhand english (which also requires feel adjustments because of the balls curving path), there is no other way to learn how to use inside, other than to practice it.

Statistically in the rotation games and eight ball where the balls are being broken hard, shots are more likely to end up on the rail than not, specifically the long rails. Read the Beards first book for the explanation to this. The only exceptions are situations when the cloth is brand new and has not been broken in, and when it is completely worn out When shots are on the rail, you will need english both outside and inside, to get the complete range of possible cueball movements, it's that simple. You can't avoid using inside english without seriously compromising your run out ability. The question is then, when you have a choice between an inside route and an outside route, which should be chosen? That is an individual choice, but I know that I want that choice to be dictated by the table layout and my own ability, rather than some restriction I have placed on myself, based on the advice of others. For various reasons, mostly because of the way I practice and aim I feel that outside english shots is not particularly easier to pocket than inside english shots with only a couple of exceptions, one being slow speed half ball shots, where throw is at its highest. It can also be because I play with the lowest deflecting shaft on the market, the Z2. If I played with my custom shaft, which has huge deflection, I would actually think outside is even more difficult than inside, because I don't use backhand english, and aiming hard outside shots would involve aiming far outside the object ball, while with inside I can at least aim at something, even if it is the "wrong" side of the ball.

You simply cannot, i repeat, cannot play pool at the highest level without complete mastery of centre ball.
 
But you would not watch Earl miss many of these shots in his prime, right ? Efren now misses shots that seem like a joke. In his prime he would never do that. These players have played the game in another level. And no player today is even close to this level. You are free to believe anything and have your own opinion. In my opinion you are wrong and I don't agree with this kind of "safe" thinking.

As I stated, you are welcome to your opinion, I could care less.
 
You simply cannot, i repeat, cannot play pool at the highest level without complete mastery of centre ball.

This is 100% true because complete mastery of centre ball gives you the best reference point for using sidespin.

When I began playing pool I watched a lot of videos of Reyes and Bustamante. The videos were from back in the day when they had a very good overhead camera view of the table. I'd see them line up for a shot with extreme english and wonder "What the h&ll is he aiming at? His aim line is three inches away from the OB!" (I didn't know about CB deflection at the time). Efren would pocket the OB and then the CB would do something wildly unexpected (to me) off the rail.
 
Accelerating through the CB is a bogus myth. The CB only responds to the velocity of the cue, not it's acceleration.

Good to see you posting again Colin. :thumbup:

No doubt, accelerating through the CB is a bogus myth when taken literally and also perhaps "getting the cue stick through the cue ball", but both thoughts have a positive purpose and the thoughts alone can help some of the players to accomplish the goal of making the shot.

The CB responds to tip location, angle of insertion AND speed of the cue.

Slower speeds (sometimes the lack of attempting to accelerate the cue or simply decelerating, as opposed to, you meant to move the cue at a faster speed) when using English, can cause additional amounts of swerve not originally planned or accounted for thereby causing the cue ball to miss its mark.

There should be a list of pool myths but the list should contain a possible explanation of why they were used in the first place and maybe that would be handy to many players rather than simply dismissing them as bogus myths.

JoeyA
 
There should be a list of pool myths but the list should contain a possible explanation of why they were used in the first place and maybe that would be handy to many players rather than simply dismissing them as bogus myths.
Another excellent idea. When I get some time, I'll post the list (along with brief explanations) that I have in my article-idea folder for my upcoming BD Myth-Buster series.

Maybe you should start a new thread dedicated to this topic so we can see how many busted myths (and explanations) the forum can think of. I'll probably have at least 20 on my list.

Regards,
Dave
 
Good to see you posting again Colin. :thumbup:

No doubt, accelerating through the CB is a bogus myth when taken literally and also perhaps "getting the cue stick through the cue ball", but both thoughts have a positive purpose and the thoughts alone can help some of the players to accomplish the goal of making the shot.

The CB responds to tip location, angle of insertion AND speed of the cue.

Slower speeds (sometimes the lack of attempting to accelerate the cue or simply decelerating, as opposed to, you meant to move the cue at a faster speed) when using English, can cause additional amounts of swerve not originally planned or accounted for thereby causing the cue ball to miss its mark.

There should be a list of pool myths but the list should contain a possible explanation of why they were used in the first place and maybe that would be handy to many players rather than simply dismissing them as bogus myths.

JoeyA

Hi JoeyA,
I get your point. I think when 'accelerate' is used, it could be more accurately described as 'committing to the shot'. It's a common habit for players to pull up on shots they lack confidence on. Others tend to bash such shots out of panic. Of course, more consistency is gained with a smoother well paced stroke.
 
Good to see you posting again Colin. :thumbup:

No doubt, accelerating through the CB is a bogus myth when taken literally and also perhaps "getting the cue stick through the cue ball", but both thoughts have a positive purpose and the thoughts alone can help some of the players to accomplish the goal of making the shot.

The CB responds to tip location, angle of insertion AND speed of the cue.

Slower speeds (sometimes the lack of attempting to accelerate the cue or simply decelerating, as opposed to, you meant to move the cue at a faster speed) when using English, can cause additional amounts of swerve not originally planned or accounted for thereby causing the cue ball to miss its mark.

There should be a list of pool myths but the list should contain a possible explanation of why they were used in the first place and maybe that would be handy to many players rather than simply dismissing them as bogus myths.

JoeyA

Joey,

I agree with you here. The cue is either accelerating or decelerating & is rarely if ever moving at a constant velocity. Yes, the cue ball may only be reacting to the velocity at the time of the hit, but what does the shooter know about the velocity of the cue. For the shooter it's about the acceleration from the change of direction that is needed to get a certain result, which is the velocity of hit upon the CB. If one sets up the same on the cue ball & makes the same exact full length stroke then it is only by different accelerations can different velocities of actual hit be achieved.

Nomenclature. One statement is true & the 'same' statement is not. The question is from whose point of view is which statement true or false.

Tell a shooter to hit a cue ball at a certain velocity but don't hit it while accelerating. Instead I want you to hit it after you've reached peak velocity & hit it with that specific velocity while the cue is decelerating to that point. Can you imagine the look on the shooter's face?

The cue ball may only 'know' velocity but a shooter only knows acceleration... or deceleration. We don't talk to cue balls. Well...most of don't do it seriously. but I think you can get my point.

AND dare I say it...IMHO there is a difference if the cue ball is hit, with the same velocity by an accelerating cue or a decelerating cue as the velocity is either increasing during contact or decreasing during contact. Yes the difference is small but for the 2 thousandths of second for a soft or super soft tip the difference is there & at the slower speeds can imo be felt. Just the other day, while playing one pocket, I hit a shot & immediately said , 'Noooo! I hit it on the decell'. I had mistimed the stroke. I knew what I was expecting to feel & did NOT get that feel & immediately knew I had mishit it.

Naturally, ALL of the above are merely my takes & opinions

Best to Ya' Joey,
Rick
 
Last edited:
More on Acceleration

I recall a graph someone produced detailing acceleration during a shot.

From what I recall, the highest acceleration occurs at the start of the stroke and reduces significantly as the cue moves toward the CB. Upon impact, the cue decelerates significantly. This is to be expected due to the conservation of momentum law.

This probably isn't what most intuit regarding acceleration during the shot.
 
I recall a graph someone produced detailing acceleration during a shot.

From what I recall, the highest acceleration occurs at the start of the stroke and reduces significantly as the cue moves toward the CB. Upon impact, the cue decelerates significantly. This is to be expected due to the conservation of momentum law.

This probably isn't what most intuit regarding acceleration during the shot.

Colin,

I think your statements above could be misleading to many. It seems to imply that the cue starts to decelerate almost immediately after the initial acceleration.

Yes, from zero velocity to anything the initial change in velocity, acceleration, would be great & yes there can be a change or difference in the amount of acceleration but I believe to say that the cue is decelerating would be misleading. It is the rate of acceleration that is less. For instance, for the first 1/2 of the stroke before impact the acceleration might be 10 inches per 1/2 second & for the second 1/2 of the stroke before impact the acceleration might be 5 inches per 1/2 second. So the cue is still accelerating but at a slower rate. It would not be decelerating in the normal use of the term. It would merely be accelerating at a slower rate of acceleration until impact. Then upon impact it would decel significantly even to perhaps an extremely brief pause or stop before again accelerating a bit before resuming to decelerate to a stop in the finish of the stroke. I'm not sure about the extremely brief pause just after impact but from remembrance of my physics classes I would not be surprised if there was an actual extremely brief pause.

I am not saying that you intended to mislead anyone but your statement might be misleading to anyone that does not have a good understanding of the difference between a change in velocity, acceleration & a change of the rate of acceleration.

I hope you can see my point.
 
... Yes, from zero velocity to anything the initial change in velocity, acceleration, would be great & yes there can be a change or difference in the amount of acceleration but I believe to say that the cue is decelerating would be misleading. ...

True. Here's a little 3-miinute video from Dr. Dave (and Bob Jewett) that shows graphs of cue speed during 3 different types of stroke. Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity with respect to time, so wherever the speed curve on those graphs is upward sloping, acceleration is positive. Wherever the curve is flat, acceleration is zero. And wherever the speed curve is downward sloping, acceleration is negative (deceleration).

http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVB-40.htm

Not all strokes would be exactly like one of the 3 shown in the video, but many would show similar characteristics.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top