Pool Myths Explained

I've spoken to BCA Hall of Famers, such as Hopkins and Fleming. They each ran over 100 balls after having played pool for only about one year, without ever having taken a single lesson!

Well they had to learn the concept of a break ball and possible positions from someone. They had to learn the rules from someone. To say they ran over 100 without taking a lesson is to mislead the reader. They may have never received coaching aided lessons, but someone had to explain things to them. They learned the same way I did, a few words to lead them on a correct path. Also ask them if they had a clue about the patterns they were playing. And ask them also if it was one year after they first picked up a pool cue and shot a game, or one year after they got hooked into playing. I first played over twenty years ago, but got fully hooked only 7 years ago.
 
Well they had to learn the concept of a break ball and possible positions from someone. They had to learn the rules from someone. To say they ran over 100 without taking a lesson is to mislead the reader. They may have never received coaching aided lessons, but someone had to explain things to them. They learned the same way I did, a few words to lead them on a correct path. Also ask them if they had a clue about the patterns they were playing. And ask them also if it was one year after they first picked up a pool cue and shot a game, or one year after they got hooked into playing. I first played over twenty years ago, but got fully hooked only 7 years ago.

Pat Fleming said he ran a rack the first time he picked up a cue and 50 balls within a few months. Hopkins said he also ran 50 balls within a few months and then broke through the 100 mark shortly thereafter. Earl said "nobody taught me anything" and he was running racks very shortly after he took the game up seriously. Yes, they probably were shown a few things and given advice, pointers, etc., but that's true for everyone who plays any sport. We don't live in a vacuum.

My point is, either you have the natural ability and affinity for pool or you don't. No amount of coaching or practice will make me a 100 ball runner. I've studied the game and taken straight pool lessons from Ray Martin. My high run is 68 and I've been playing pool (off and on) for over 50 years. I just don't have that natural ability.
 
Is this thread broken? I keep getting notifications that new posts are available, but I can't view them.
 
It says there's 29 pages, but every time I click on 29, it takes me right back to 28.
Ditto for me. Maybe it will fix itself once page 28 gets full ... and maybe it will cause a thermonuclear explosion ... but maybe that is a myth.
 
Here is what the top of page 28 looks like:


Pool Myths Explained - Page 28 - AzBilliards.jpg
 
I have clearly stated, several times, the issue with poor cueing being the primary cause of bad contacts is a pro snooker issue, and not applicable to hacks on beer stained pool tables.

Got it?

Watching the finals of the UK Championship today, and it made me think of this thread.

If you've been watching, then you'll note that their has been an absurdly high number of kicks. I guess Ronnie and Trump just aren't cueing the ball that well today.

Or...and hear me out on this.

You're wrong. :p
 
Watching the finals of the UK Championship today, and it made me think of this thread.

If you've been watching, then you'll note that their has been an absurdly high number of kicks. I guess Ronnie and Trump just aren't cueing the ball that well today.

Or...and hear me out on this.

You're wrong. :p

Just like ronnie himself, hendry and a host of other top pros? :rolleyes:

There were many kicks in this tournament. The potential reasons for these are explained in other posts in this thread. There were also many bad contacts, primary reason being poor cueing. I am sorry you don't understand the difference.

How many bad contacts did judd get when he got on his roll? It's all in the cueing. A mere american is not going to understand this, i fear. ;)
 
Just like ronnie himself, hendry and a host of other top pros? :rolleyes:

There were many kicks in this tournament. The potential reasons for these are explained in other posts in this thread. There were also many bad contacts, primary reason being poor cueing. I am sorry you don't understand the difference.

How many bad contacts did judd get when he got on his roll? It's all in the cueing. A mere american is not going to understand this, i fear. ;)

I guess I don't understand the difference. Please enlighten me on your definition of a bad contact.

What's being contacted? Is it the cue ball to object ball? Is it the tip of the cue to the cue ball?

Or is there another type of contact that I'm not aware of?

Please...explain.
 
I guess I don't understand the difference. Please enlighten me on your definition of a bad contact.

What's being contacted? Is it the cue ball to object ball? Is it the tip of the cue to the cue ball?

Or is there another type of contact that I'm not aware of?

Please...explain.

1. Reread the thread.

2. Learn how to cue.
 
The confusion stems from how you define 'kick'. Convention wisdom in snooker had it that 'kick' meant chalk, leading to excessive and obsessive cleaning of the CB. Kicks continued, happened more often in fact. The more chalk was targeted as the cause, the worse the problem became. So people started to think differently. Chalk has to my knowledge remained virtually the only thing that has stayed the same since snooker popularised - tables, cloth, balls, venues etc, have all changed. So why are there more 'kicks' today than there were in the past?

Hence broadening the term to'bad contact'. Broadly, this is where the player feels the reaction of CB leaving the OB is not as he was expecting, robbing him of anticipated position. There are probably many causes for a 'bad contact', with poor cueing prime suspect. Other factors will include balls (older super crystalates kicked far less than todays balls), super fine shaved cloths, heated tables, climate control etc.

One thing is clear: the only professional cue sport no longer obsesses over chalk, and TFFT.

That's a kick/skid.
 
That's a kick/skid.

Sigh.

Perhaps you can answer me this. There are thousands of long range, slowly struck safety shots in a snooker championships. How many of these produce a noticable kick? Very, very few. Those are caused by chalk/hairs/fluff/whatever.

Now, think about how many bad contacts there are with short range shots around the black spot, where the player feels position has been compromised through the reaction of the balls upon contact. Very, very many. They are caused by poor cueing.

Kicks through chalk alone should be consistent whatever the shot, yet this is clearly not the case.

The conclusion is clear: strike the CB cleanly and you'll have nothing to worry about.
 
Back
Top