Question about intentional swerve

[Neil]

This diagram of JAL's, courtesy of the Doctor, is almost correct if used as a side view. The cue shaft should have a slight downward trajectory and not appear to be level with the playing surface.

Cueing, by stroking through the cue ball above center, will cause a small hop and loss of grip with the table causing it to move farther along the tangent line before it regains friction with the table cloth. The upstroke is used to lessen the effects of the ball leaving the playing surface by not exerting as much force directed into the table, but rather more parallel with it by directing the force closer to the same plane as the table bed.

There are several plusses besides the obvious one of lessening the cue ball deflection, when needed, in tight traffic. I find predicting the cue ball path because of this limited movement a personal advantage, as I'm sure others would agree.

The faster cloth requires better speed control with pocket speed on many shots a premium. Friction and cut induced throw is a problem when the cue ball can't travel long distances for position. The up stroke helps this by eliminating the cling from a rolling cue ball due to the small increase in top spin. You can cut the balls slightly thinner and hit the ball softer avoiding a portion of the CIT.

You don't approach forward roll with the cue ball until you cut the ball, is a gauge I use. At first I thought the extra forward spin from my stroke would move the cue ball forward even farther than slow rolling it. With a slightly thicker hit on the object ball, I offset the spin and get a slower moving cue ball.

If this makes sense, there's more.

Best,
Mike

Since you don't want to hear anything from me, just ask Dr. Dave what he thinks about what you wrote above.

 

[dr_dave]

I propose the following test:

Setup a straight shot aimed at a ball frozen to a rail like in Diagram 3 of "HAPS - Part II: BHE and FHE" (BD, December, 2014). Then, using fixed CB and bridge positions, aim to hit the CB directly into the frozen ball with near maximum english (on the horizontal centerline of the CB) with the same speed and with the cue at the same near-level elevation and tip position for each shot. Try multiple attempts using both a straight stroke with pre-stroke BHE, and a swoop stroke (starting with a center-ball alignment and using BHE during the stroke instead). Faster speed is preferable to minimize swerve effects and to help reduce possible variability from one shot to the next. Although, if using a video camera, the shot speeds can be checked later (by looking at the time between the hits of the CB and OB), and shots that aren't close enough to the same speed can be thrown out. If this is being done, any consistent shot speed can be used

If desired, adjust the bridge length so the pre-stroke BHE aim adjustment is as good as possible in compensating for net CB deflection (the combined effects of squirt and swerve), resulting in a square hit on the frozen ball.

Does the CB head in the same direction with both the BHE and swoop strokes? If not, make adjustments in the aims so the CB heads in the same direction for both stroke types. Then remove the frozen ball, and hit the same strokes into the rail. Does the CB come off the cushion at different angles due to spin differences between the different stroke types?

Honestly, I haven't done a set of experiments this complete or careful before, but I intend to. I will post a video online when I can find the time to do the tests and video editing, but I also encourage the swoopers out there to give it a try and report back what they find. I think the test and results could help resolve many of the apparent disagreements in this thread and help improve everybody's understanding of the effects involved.

Does everybody think this is a fair experiment to characterize the effects of stroke swoop (BHE during the stroke)?

Has anybody tried it yet? Does anybody plan to try it?

Does anybody (especially the swoop proponents out there) have any suggestions on how to make the experiment more meaningful or complete?

Thank you in advance for your input.

I'll probably try to do the experiment (with any meaningful and helpful changes suggested here) this weekend.

Best regards,
Dave

 

[ENGLISH!]

Really, you want to play that stupid game again? Think about it first Rick. You really want be to tear your post apart? Not that I need to, you did a fine job of it yourself when you posted it. What happened to you wanting to be civil and discuss things? All you are doing now is trolling.

You inferred that I provided no proof but when I ask for your proof you divert attention to you not answering the question.

You're a one way street kind of guy that has a H word attached to them.

As I've said, you're good at what you do.

May God Bless & Help You, Neil.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Does everybody think this is a fair experiment to characterize the effects of stroke swoop (BHE during the stroke)?

Has anybody tried it yet? Does anybody plan to try it?

Does anybody (especially the swoop proponents out there) have any suggestions on how to make the experiment more meaningful or complete?

Thank you in advance for your input.

I'll probably try to do the experiment (with any meaningful and helpful changes suggested here) this weekend.

Best regards,
Dave

Dave,

I'd suggest you get a successful 'swooper' or 'swiper' to shoot those shots. Otherwise, I think any conclusion would not be well founded.

Execution is 9/10 of the 'law'.:wink:

Best 2 Ya,
Rick

 

[SmoothStroke]

Good luck with the experiments, I would like to see the results.

Swoop to swerve to masse , judging distance is a very important factor, along with the cloth,balls,humidity,dryness,tip,shaft,technique, etc.

You may have to elevate slightly with short spin or long spin, or max out to masse, and anywhere in between.
Knowing your capabilities and equipment is what matters here.
And don't drop your elbow

 

[dr_dave]

Dave,

I'd suggest you get a successful 'swooper' or 'swiper' to shoot those shots. Otherwise, I think any conclusion would not be well founded.

Execution is 9/10 of the 'law'.:wink:

Best 2 Ya,
Rick

Excellent suggestion.

I'll try to find and recruit a local master swooper to help me with the experiment.

Do you also plan to try out the test? Do you consider yourself a good swoop executer, or do you know any people in your area who are?

Thanks
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Good luck with the experiments, I would like to see the results.

Swoop to swerve to masse , judging distance is a very important factor, along with the cloth,balls,humidity,dryness,tip,shaft,technique, etc.

You may have to elevate slightly with short spin or long spin, or max out to masse, and anywhere in between.
Knowing your capabilities and equipment is what matters here.
And don't drop your elbow

I don't plan to do any masse or up-stroke tests in this experiment ... only near-level-cue sidespin shots.

Although, I suspect the results and conclusions might apply to other types of shots also.

Regards,
Dave

 

[cookie man]

Does anybody have any concerns or recommendations for improvement with the proposed experiment? I would appreciate any input before I dedicate time to it.

Thanks,
Dave

Why would you limit the swoop strokes starting point at center CB. Most are started on the opposite side of the swoop. Line up left and swoop right and vice versa.

 

[dr_dave]

Why would you limit the swoop strokes starting point at center CB. Most are started on the opposite side of the swoop. Line up left and swoop right and vice versa.

I don't think that what you describe is a common way to swoop. It might cause you to hit the wrong side of the ball if your swoop timing is off a bit. What do others think?

Thanks
Dave

 

[Patrick Johnson]

At 4:00 in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tihmp1-T2Ko you will see one benefit of an upstroke. Too bad cameramen never show the strokes but I don't know how else he got out of the kiss with such a thick hit.

The shot in the video actually isn't such a thick hit. Here's the setup (on a pool table, but the angles are same) showing the positions of the balls before the shot and the paths of the white and yellow (copied from the video).

That cut angle is, say, 55 degrees (about 1/5 ball hit). With that cut and with just normal rolling follow, the white moves more than 50% faster than the yellow after contact.* I don't think there's much wonder that the white outpaces the yellow - no extraordinary cueing needed.

But it's an interesting topic anyway.

pj
chgo

*(Assume for convenience that the running sidespin just compensates for the rail's slowing effect.)

View attachment 86130

 

[ENGLISH!]

Excellent suggestion.

I'll try to find and recruit a local master swooper to help me with the experiment.

Do you also plan to try out the test? Do you consider yourself a good swoop executer, or do you know any people in your area who are?

Thanks
Dave

No Dave. I don't intend to do the test.

There are a couple of old one pocket players that come to mind that do what I would call mini swoops.

I'm a pretty good swooper for certain shots that I think work better or that I feel I can execute better with it but I think that is part of what the issue is.

There are not that many such shots that come up in the course of a day or a even a week or even more time than that.

So...one does not go around practicing them. BUT... when that particular shot does come up, a player will use what he 'feels' will get the job done & if he or she 'feels' that a normal type stroke won't get the desired result of pocketing the ball & get position or a safety then a player will NOT use a normal stroke. Swooping &/or swiping is in my tool box.

Good Luck with 'The Test' & Best 2 You,
Rick

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I don't plan to do any masse or up-stroke tests in this experiment ... only near-level-cue sidespin shots.

Although, I suspect the results and conclusions might apply to other types of shots also.

Regards,
Dave

I can't imagine that sideswiping has much, if any, practical effect - and upswiping must be physically restricted to a fraction of that. If there's any significant effect it has to be negative.

pj
chgo

 

[3kushn]

Wish it were that simple Pat. I really believe your paths are incorrect. What you're showing is the hit pushed the yellow out of the way. This is not how that shot was made. I saw a much thicker hit but never the less it would take a much thinner hit than you describe IMO to pass the kiss solely on a thin hit and speed difference you describe. Like paper thin. Yes paper thin also makes this shot but how reliable is that hit? The cueing being argued allows slightly more error.

Did you actually shoot the shot? It needs to be played to understand.


Maybe I'm not interpreting your comments/diagram correctly.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Why would you limit the swoop strokes starting point at center CB. Most are started on the opposite side of the swoop. Line up left and swoop right and vice versa.

That's a good point. I don't do it that way but I've seen those old one pocket guys do it that way.

 

[ENGLISH!]

I don't think that what you describe is a common way to swoop. It might cause you to hit the wrong side of the ball if your swoop timing is off a bit. What do others think?

Thanks
Dave

Dave,

I just replied to cookie that I think he has a good point. I don't do it that way but I've seen those old one pocket guys do it that way.

B,
Rick

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Wish it were that simple Pat. I really believe your paths are incorrect. What you're showing is the hit pushed the yellow out of the way. This is not how that shot was made. I saw a much thicker hit but never the less it would take a much thinner hit than you describe IMO to pass the kiss solely on a thin hit and speed difference you describe. Like paper thin. Yes paper thin also makes this shot but how reliable is that hit? The cueing being argued allows slightly more error.

Did you actually shoot the shot? It needs to be played to understand.


Maybe I'm not interpreting your comments/diagram correctly.

I think you're reading me right, but I'm pretty sure that the yellow is well out of the white's path before the white hits the first rail. You can see that moment in the video frame below.

Still, the question of whether an upswipe stroke would be effective if needed for a shot like this is an interesting one.

pj
chgo

View attachment 89579

 

[ENGLISH!]

Wish it were that simple Pat. I really believe your paths are incorrect. What you're showing is the hit pushed the yellow out of the way. This is not how that shot was made. I saw a much thicker hit but never the less it would take a much thinner hit than you describe IMO to pass the kiss solely on a thin hit and speed difference you describe. Like paper thin. Yes paper thin also makes this shot but how reliable is that hit? The cueing being argued allows slightly more error.

Did you actually shoot the shot? It needs to be played to understand.


Maybe I'm not interpreting your comments/diagram correctly.

Not really. I understand perfectly but I've been playing a long time & I know how many times I've messed up a similar shot (in pool) & got the kiss.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I think he got banned

It may also be that the 100% side swipe is miscuing but it sounds and feels completely different as the tip doesn't double hit the ball and/or vibration not noticeable.

I just hacked a cue with tip at about 40 degrees, so I could shape a wider area around the miscue zone. It made no difference to how much offset I could achieve.

Interesting. Thanks for trying that.

pj
chgo

 

[CJ Wiley]

The reaction of the cue ball is much more distinct, precise and therefore consistent.

Lol

americans!!

Please tell me they don't "swoop" or "swipe" in snooker. LoL

Most of these are used by players that aren't accelerating at the moment of impact. Accelerating at contact is very difficult to do - the champion level players are the ones that do it consistently.

The reaction of the cue ball is much more distinct, precise and therefore consistent.

 

[The Renfro]

I can't imagine that sideswiping has much, if any, practical effect - and upswiping must be physically restricted to a fraction of that. If there's any significant effect it has to be negative.

pj
chgo

This is one of the main problems I have with many of the things professed as fact when they are only looked at in a vacuum... I have no clue as to what the sideswiping would be but if you are talking about swooping there is too much evidence of even Mosconi using it to dismiss it as it having no usefulness.. . Same thing with the upstroke... I know too many players that use it and have seen it used too many times by actual players.. Granted none of them use a pure pendulum so it may not be evidenced as you are used to seeing the elbow and shoulder drop..... If the cueing is not on a striaght path thru the cueball and the tip is loading and unloading then there is going to be some differences in resulting cueball paths than seen when the tip was on a straight line....

Back to the OP and swerve question and the statements about elevation impacting when and how much swerve to expect.. And the resultant level stroke discussion

I went to the pool hall earlier tonight with a better plan of testing/showing no swerve with a level horizontal spin.. The video on Dr. Daves site was defintiely stroke driven... http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/new/NVB-1.htm...

I really hadn't considered level because I am always setting up with fairly steep cueing angles and altering my atttack thru the cueball.. Not your classic pendulum or even classic piston... . I was taught to go up thru the cueball playing barbox 8ball with the big ball... The technique was called "getting it up out of the mud" and was the only efffective way I could draw the mud ball around the table in the beginning.. I have no doubts that there are better stroke techniques out there but I am too long in the tooth to change now and I am ok never looking like I have a great stroke to onlookers...

In spite of my preconceptions or lack there of on swerve and a level cue.. I am now buying it.. A parallel hit on the horizontal axis will not swerve.... The results were exactly as Dr Dave said they would be on this one...

Regardless of the amount of RPMS I had on the ball there was never a swerve component to the path of the ball even as the spin wore off to roll... I will take my camera tomorrow night and mark a straight line and post the video.....

I may take some videos of the upstroke in use as well but that will be signifcantly harder as I still have not purchased a tripod for my new camera or iphone.....


Chris