Question about intentional swerve

[Sloppy Pockets]

I forgot what I ate for dinner. Can't help ya'! :grin-square:

I caught Chris' comments. I remember trying to count frames with the baseball swing for mucho hours. Nearly impossible without the right equipment. You tube videos skip a lot of frames.

Best,
Mike

Hell, Mike, I skipped a lot of frames on purpose. Kinda hard to overlay 30 images and see anything about what's in any of them, never mind 300 or more from real slo-mo. Besides, it wouldn't have made a bit of difference in what I was trying to show.

I just did a quickie analysis here, just to show myself what was going on and to share it here. I didn't mean for it to stand up in a court of law or anything. lol.:wink:

I took about 10 screen captures, looked at them to confirm what I thought I saw in real time, and then chose the three that seemed most significant to demonstrate what I thought I saw. I've done this for years a lot with other activities I am interested in, almost always just as a learning experience, not to try to prove anything to anybody.

Take them as I offered them, as just a way to publicly share what Neil was talking about by using straightedges. I often use Post-Its for the same purpose because they have nice straight edges, stay put on the monitor, and are a lot faster than aligning multiple screen captures and overlaying them in layers in Photoshop. Pretty hard to share Post-Its on the net, though.

Here's a more complicated one I did on Cyclop CB rolloff that I never shared here. It was real tough because the camera was hand held, and the movement made aligning all of the frames a nightmare, but I think I got it good enough to show what was important. There are six images overlaid in the pic on the left, which is why all the CBs look so pale and blurry, but their relative positions at each point are unmistakeable. If I did that many overlays with the one I did above you wouldn't be able to see the lines I drew at all. So basically, it's all a trade off, but useful info nonetheless IMHO.

 

[Mikjary]

Hell, Mike, I skipped a lot of frames on purpose. Kinda hard to overlay 30 images and see anything about what's in any of them, never mind 300 or more from real slo-mo. Besides, it wouldn't have made a bit of difference in what I was trying to show.

I just did a quickie analysis here, just to show myself what was going on and to share it here. I didn't mean for it to stand up in a court of law or anything. lol.:wink:

I took about 10 screen captures, looked at them to confirm what I thought I saw in real time, and then chose the three that seemed most significant to demonstrate what I thought I saw. I've done this for years a lot with other activities I am interested in, almost always just as a learning experience, not to try to prove anything to anybody.

Take them as I offered them, as just a way to publicly share what Neil was talking about by using straightedges. I often use Post-Its for the same purpose because they have nice straight edges, stay put on the monitor, and are a lot faster than aligning multiple screen captures and overlaying them in layers in Photoshop. Pretty hard to share Post-Its on the net, though.

Here's a more complicated one I did on Cyclop CB rolloff that I never shared here. It was real tough because the camera was hand held, and the movement made aligning all of the frames a nightmare, but I think I got it good enough to show what was important. There are six images overlaid in the pic on the left, which is why all the CBs look so pale and blurry, but their relative positions at each point are unmistakeable. If I did that many overlays with the one I did above you wouldn't be able to see the lines I drew at all. So basically, it's all a trade off, but useful info nonetheless IMHO.

Those are high quality images. I can see them real well. That must've taken hours!

As far as the quality of the other images, I'm sure you spent quite a bit of time on them. I just couldn't make out much. You're more anal retentive than I am. I'd have thrown something at the wall trying to get that much out of nothing. :grin-square:

This thread has morphed from swerve, to swooping, to upstroking/cueing low, and now video 301. Who knew?

Best,
Mike

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Those are high quality images. I can see them real well. That must've taken hours!

As far as the quality of the other images, I'm sure you spent quite a bit of time on them. I just couldn't make out much. You're more anal retentive than I am. I'd have thrown something at the wall trying to get that much out of nothing. :grin-square:

This thread has morphed from swerve, to swooping, to upstroking/cueing low, and now video 301. Who knew?

Best,
Mike

No, they didn't take much time at all, maybe 1/2 an hour or so for each one of the CB rolloffs. The one I did earlier didn't take more than 10-15 minutes. Longest part was getting to the right spot in the video, then taking the screen captures, numbering them, converting them to jpeg format, and then saving them.

The rest was just a few tools and tricks in Photoshop my son taught me when he was studying design in college. I don't know much, really, but it's all second nature now, so it goes quickly. Of course, it helps to stay organized... but that's always been one of my strong suits.

 

[LAMas]

This thread has morphed from swerve, to swooping,
Best,
Mike

Mike,
I just saw this thread today.

I watched Dr. Dave's vid - very scientific.
Very constrained in the definition of Swoop.

Do you hold that swipe is different than the swoop that was demonstrated and "proven?"

I also watched your You tubes of Efren shots - educational.
I have watched him at the Hard Times and his stroke is very strange for he often starts with the tip at the bottom of the CB center and then it rises with his bridge vertically or diagonally depending on what he intends to do with the CB - he has to.

He often follows the CB as if he is pushing it along. The cue tip often ends up to the side of his stroke line and not straight down as would be expected with most shooters. I think he moves his bridge when it is closed and lets the cue move off of the V when it is open at impact.

Could these be a components of swipe?

Be well.

He sure moves the rock around the clock....errrr table,,,using what he calls "Spin.".

Be well.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Mike,
I just saw this thread today.

I watched Dr. Dave's vid - very scientific.
Very constrained in the definition of Swoop.

Do you hold that swipe is different than the swoop that was demonstrated and "proven?"

I also watched your You tubes of Efren shots - educational.
I have watched him at the Hard Times and his stroke is very strange for he often starts with the tip at the bottom of the CB center and then it rises with his bridge vertically or diagonally depending on what he intends to do with the CB - he has to.

He often follows the CB as if he is pushing it along. The cue tip often ends up to the side of his stroke line and not straight down as would be expected with most shooters. I think he moves his bridge when it is closed and lets the cue move off of the V when it is open at impact.

Could these be a components of swipe?

Be well.

He sure moves the rock around the clock....errrr table,,,using what he calls "Spin.".

Be well.

Hi Big E,

That was one of my critiques of Dr. Dave's 'experiment' & goes to what I advised before when he was asking for suggestions.

I suggested that he get someone that was familiar with & could execute a swoop/swipe stroke. Dave said that he threw out the whole first set of experiments with Mr. Gross because of extremes & lack of controls or something like that.

When I first saw the video my first thought was that the swipe/swoops were restricted.

Like Mike, I don't practice swiping & swooping & I don't intentionally shoot shots with them just for the sake of doing it but only when I feel that I need to do so.

When that happens it is a situation that goes beyond what I feel I can do with a more normal method or I don't want to jack up for some reason. That being the case, the method of the swipe or swoop needs to be maxed out.

It seems that some are talking about players swiping & swooping for shots that can be shot by normal means but the player has either consciously or subconsciously chosen to swipe or swoop. On those type shots I would not expect anything that could not be accomplish by more normal means except for possibly a spin to speed relation that might be different, that is a bit more spin to less speed.

I at times certainly notice that my cue leaves my open bridge & definitely does for the maxed out version as that is intentional. So, I would assume that I am doing one of those subconscious swipe/swoops. I say swipe/swoops because I would not limit them to just the vertical & horizontal directions alone but would include all the angles in between.

There is also a small type that I do where I intentionally & consciously 'flex' my bridge in the up & down direction. So I would not be surprised to find out that my bridge moves for the subconscious ones as it does for this shot & possibly the maxed out ones as well.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

PS I think someone, perhaps Renfro Chris said, that the pro players sometimes do not realize what they do for certain given shots as their focus is so totally fixed on getting the result of both pocketing the ball & putting the CB where they want or it HAS to go.

PSS That is why to me, in casual things like the TAR pre match stuff they miss certain things & have to shoot them again to execute them. It's a totally different level of focus & they do much extremely subconsciously to just get the job done. Doing it consciously is not as easy as when the subconscious is in control.

 

[dr_dave]

Rick,

One reason why I posted the video is to encourage others to use the same procedures to do similar tests. If you or others think other types of swoop or swipe techniques can be more effective, please put them to the test (and post a video if possible).

Dave Gross and I certainly don't claim to be master swoopers; although, I think the swoop strokes that appear in the later part of the video certainly have significant swiping motion (even if the cue isn't leaving the bridge).

Again, IMO, the main contribution of the video is the documentation of a fairly simple but careful experiment that can be duplicated by others.

Whoever is participating in this thread should give it a try. I look forward to seeing results from the master swoopers and "bridge-leaving swipers" out there. Talk is cheap (and "anecdotal"). Let's see some proof.

Regards,
Dave

Hi Big E,

That was one of my critiques of Dr. Dave's 'experiment' & goes to what I advised before when he was asking for suggestions.

I suggested that he get someone that was familiar with & could execute a swoop/swipe stroke. Dave said that he threw out the whole first set of experiments with Mr. Gross because of extremes & lack of controls or something like that.

When I first saw the video my first thought was that the swipe/swoops were restricted.

Like Mike, I don't practice swiping & swooping & I don't intentionally shoot shots with them just for the sake of doing it but only when I feel that I need to do so.

When that happens it is a situation that goes beyond what I feel I can do with a more normal method or I don't want to jack up for some reason. That being the case, the method of the swipe or swoop needs to be maxed out.

It seems that some are talking about players swiping & swooping for shots that can be shot by normal means but the player has either consciously or subconsciously chosen to swipe or swoop. On those type shots I would not expect anything that could not be accomplish by more normal means except for possibly a spin to speed relation that might be different, that is a bit more spin to less speed.

I at times certainly notice that my cue leaves my open bridge & definitely does for the maxed out version as that is intentional. So, I would assume that I am doing one of those subconscious swipe/swoops. I say swipe/swoops because I would not limit them to just the vertical & horizontal directions alone but would include all the angles in between.

There is also a small type that I do where I intentionally & consciously 'flex' my bridge in the up & down direction. So I would not be surprised to find out that my bridge moves for the subconscious ones as it does for this shot & possibly the maxed out ones as well.

 

[Neil]

Rick,

One reason why I posted the video is to encourage others to use the same procedures to do similar tests. If you or others think other types of swoop or swipe techniques can be more effective, please put them to the test (and post a video if possible).

Dave Gross and I certainly don't claim to be master swoopers; although, I think the swoop strokes that appear in the later part of the video certainly have significant swiping motion (even if the cue isn't leaving the bridge).

Again, IMO, the main contribution of the video is the documentation of a fairly simple but careful experiment that can be duplicated by others.

Whoever is participating in this thread should give it a try. I look forward to seeing results from the master swoopers and "bridge-leaving swipers" out there. Talk is cheap (and "anecdotal"). Let's see some proof.

Regards,
Dave

Personally, I really wish he would. I haven't seen anyone's cue leaving their bridge hand since my days playing in the bars. Would bring back some good memories.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Talk is cheap (and "anecdotal"). Let's see some proof.

lol - none of us will live long enough.

I hope swoopers never stop swooping - I want that advantage in case we ever play.

pj
chgo

 

[ENGLISH!]

Dave,

Please check your PMs & please see the two posts above.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Personally, I really wish he would. I haven't seen anyone's cue leaving their bridge hand since my days playing in the bars. Would bring back some good memories.

My cue leaves the "V" of my open bridge frequently (but doesn't usually leave my hand entirely). I think it's a natural occurrence for some shots (hard draw or follow, for instance) with an open bridge and a loose grip and I've just learned not to be bothered by it.

pj
chgo

 

[Mikjary]

Mike,
I just saw this thread today.

I watched Dr. Dave's vid - very scientific.
Very constrained in the definition of Swoop.

Do you hold that swipe is different than the swoop that was demonstrated and "proven?"

I also watched your You tubes of Efren shots - educational.
I have watched him at the Hard Times and his stroke is very strange for he often starts with the tip at the bottom of the CB center and then it rises with his bridge vertically or diagonally depending on what he intends to do with the CB - he has to.

He often follows the CB as if he is pushing it along. The cue tip often ends up to the side of his stroke line and not straight down as would be expected with most shooters. I think he moves his bridge when it is closed and lets the cue move off of the V when it is open at impact.

Could these be a components of swipe?

Be well.

He sure moves the rock around the clock....errrr table,,,using what he calls "Spin.".

Be well.

Big E,

I think the examples of swoop and Dave's findings are right in line with his controls and applications. He methodically tested and retested the swoop as well as he possibly could. Plainly, he drew the correct conclusions with the results he achieved.

I agreed with his findings and mentioned I would probably just validate them in my tests, too. I set up a few controls, not as strict as his, and shot some swoop shots. I had to refresh my stroke because I rarely use the swoop stroke or even BHE.

After hitting a few shots I gave it a go versus a straight stroke. I got the same results he did, and as expected. My question for him was, what about using a player that does swipe intentionally and knows the stroke? My point being, why have a shooter that isn't a dedicated "swiper" shooting the swoop? This control may have shown different results, maybe not. The next problem is finding the master swooper to do the swooping. :grin:

I have seen and played against top players that cued right side of the cue ball for left spin. I have experimented with this technique and can get no more than a half tip or so past center and have little consistency with it. It's a weak swipe and gives me, a non swiper, little advantage.

So, I was just adding a what if to the discussion. If the what ifs on this forum are never addressed within reason, we can't get past the debate and the usual suspects will argue with the other usual suspects. What ifs are what the experimentation is all about. Otherwise, we stay stuck in the moment and there'll never be new information.

Anyway, Efren has a BHE, FHE swipe going on. He's right handed and does this more on the left side than the right side of the cue ball. He's straighter when he cues with right spin. When he pins the cue ball, his finish to the stroke is fairly impressive. It's amazing how much he can do in such a short distance with a cue stick.

On follow shots, I've been trying to do the same thing. I address low, and bring the cue tip up on the last stroke. I make sure I move through the cue ball instead of moving up, off of the top of the cue ball. My stick finishes mostly level with the table.

I get less hop with the cue ball than when I address and cue straight high. You can check this out by lining up a few dimes in front of the cue ball. The cue ball hops, but not as far as with a traditional cueing set up. It takes a while to get the stroke, a lot of middle ball instead of follow, but it'll happen. Shane switched over after his trip over there. I'm still working on it and not sure if it's what I'll do in the future.

Thanks!

Best,
Mike

 

[dr_dave]

My cue leaves the "V" of my open bridge frequently (but doesn't usually leave my hand entirely). I think it's a natural occurrence for some shots (hard draw or follow, for instance) with an open bridge and a loose grip and I've just learned not to be bothered by it.

I've also noticed this on certain shots. It doesn't bother me either because I know for a fact that the cue is not leaving my bridge until the CB is already gone. Now, if one tightens the grip and either twists the wrist and/or drops or chicken-wings the elbow during the stroke into the ball, then the cue can leave the bridge before contact. That could be a serious problem.

For those interested, both good and bad examples of the cue leaving the bridge during a stroke are demonstrated in:

NV B.96 - Grip and bridge technique and advice

With a firm off-center hit, the cue can move quite a bit in the bridge; but fortunately, with good technique, this motion doesn't occur until the CB is already gone (so it has no effect on what the CB does). A super-slow-motion video showing this can be found at the 2:32 point point in part 2 of NV B.96. Here's a direct link to the pertinent point in the video.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Mikjary]

Hi Big E,

That was one of my critiques of Dr. Dave's 'experiment' & goes to what I advised before when he was asking for suggestions.

I suggested that he get someone that was familiar with & could execute a swoop/swipe stroke. Dave said that he threw out the whole first set of experiments with Mr. Gross because of extremes & lack of controls or something like that.

When I first saw the video my first thought was that the swipe/swoops were restricted.

Like Mike, I don't practice swiping & swooping & I don't intentionally shoot shots with them just for the sake of doing it but only when I feel that I need to do so.

When that happens it is a situation that goes beyond what I feel I can do with a more normal method or I don't want to jack up for some reason. That being the case, the method of the swipe or swoop needs to be maxed out.

It seems that some are talking about players swiping & swooping for shots that can be shot by normal means but the player has either consciously or subconsciously chosen to swipe or swoop. On those type shots I would not expect anything that could not be accomplish by more normal means except for possibly a spin to speed relation that might be different, that is a bit more spin to less speed.

I at times certainly notice that my cue leaves my open bridge & definitely does for the maxed out version as that is intentional. So, I would assume that I am doing one of those subconscious swipe/swoops. I say swipe/swoops because I would not limit them to just the vertical & horizontal directions alone but would include all the angles in between.

There is also a small type that I do where I intentionally & consciously 'flex' my bridge in the up & down direction. So I would not be surprised to find out that my bridge moves for the subconscious ones as it does for this shot & possibly the maxed out ones as well.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

PS I think it is like someone, perhaps Renfro Chris said, in that the pro players sometimes do not realize what they do for certain given shots as their focus is so totally fixed on getting the result of both pocketing the ball & putting the CB where they want or it HAS to go.

PSS That is why to me, in casual things like the TAR pre match stuff they miss certain things & have to shoot them again to execute them. It's a totally different level of focus & they do much extremely subconsciously to just get the job done. Doing it consciously is not as easy as when the subconscious is in control.

Rick,

How good's your swipe stroke? There's got to be a few on the forum that can pull it off. We'll have to ask them to put out a video and show us how good their swipe is first. :grin: If we approve them, then we'll have to get them to put out a test video for us.

Best,
Mike

 

[dr_dave]

Rick,

How good's your swipe stroke? There's got to be a few on the forum that can pull it off. We'll have to ask them to put out a video and show us how good their swipe is first. :grin: If we approve them, then we'll have to get them to put out a test video for us.

Best,
Mike

Geat idea Mike.

I am fairly confident that even a "master swooper" (even swooping from the other side of the ball) or a "master bridge-leaving swiper" would not be able to put more spin on the ball than what is possible with an equivalent straight stroke (which I think would also be more accurate and consistent for most people), but it would certainly be interesting to see somebody try. And it would also be interesting to see the attempts on video so the results can be verified and understood. In other words, it needs to be clear that the person is not "cheating" by hitting below center (by checking the tip contact point on the CB after each shot), or with an elevated cue (by checking the clearance between the cue and rail at CB contact), or with a downward swoop (which would be visually obvious). Each of those spin-effect-enhancing tricks (as demonstrated in my video) would also be possible with an equivalent change to a straight stroke (for example, elevating the cue instead of using a downward swoop).

Regards,
Dave

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

I am fairly confident that even a "master swooper" or a "master bridge-leaving swiper" would not be able to put more spin on the ball than what is possible with an equivalent straight stroke (which I think would also be more accurate and consistent for most people), but it would certainly be interesting to see somebody try.

We had a thread about this a couple years ago IIRC. I showed a pic of a Rempe CB that had a chalk mark where I hit it. It wasn't near the miscue limit, but the spin I got on the ball seemed more than I'd have gotten hitting it in the same place with a straight stroke (based on how it reacted off the rail).

More spin than is possible with a normal stroke at the miscue limit? No, not really, but more spin than I personally can get by hitting the ball in that same place with my normal stroke. Yes, I do believe so.

Of course, it took me many tries and a lot of badly hit balls to get that result, but I thought it was interesting at any rate. Do I think the technique is useful in any way? For me, not a chance. For a "master swooper"? I'll let that person be the judge.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Rick,

How good's your swipe stroke? There's got to be a few on the forum that can pull it off. We'll have to ask them to put out a video and show us how good their swipe is first. :grin: If we approve them, then we'll have to get them to put out a test video for us.

Best,
Mike

Hi Mike,

As I told Dr. Dave in the PM that I sent him, I in no way consider myself a 'master swiper'. I only shoot with that type stroke when I feel that I can not get the result that I want from other means.

I also said, that he may be correct in that there may not be an actual advantage to the stroke but I'm not going to tell my subconscious to stop using it when it wants to because of this test.

I don't actually do it the way you described as I don't cross the vertical line.

I think it's like I said a couple or more times. It's in the timing. The tip has to move 'laterally' as much as possible while it is in contact with the ball.

Since the cue is changing it's orientation (plane line) & is moving in an arc, its the lateral component of that arc that must be maximized to yield the most spin with the 'least' amount of speed or forward momentum.

Perhaps instead of saying 'least' it would be better to say 'less than a normal stroke for that same amount of spin'.

At least that's how I see it. But... as Dennis Miller often says, I could be wrong.

Best @ You & All,
Rick

 

[dr_dave]

We had a thread about this a couple years ago IIRC. I showed a pic of a Rempe CB that had a chalk mark where I hit it. It wasn't near the miscue limit, but the spin I got on the ball seemed more than I'd have gotten hitting it in the same place with a straight stroke (based on how it reacted off the rail).

More spin than is possible with a normal stroke at the miscue limit? No, not really, but more spin than I personally can get by hitting the ball in that same place with my normal stroke. Yes, I do believe so.

Of course, it took me many tries and a lot of badly hit balls to get that result, but I thought it was interesting at any rate. Do I think the technique is useful in any way? For me, not a chance. For a "master swooper"? I'll let that person be the judge.

I also describe and demonstrate this effect in my video. Here's the diagram from the video:

Again, depending on how fast the swoop motion is relative to the forward stroke speed, the swoop does create a different and larger effective tip offset from center for a given tip contact point on the CB. However, a straight stroke with the same tip offset as the effective tip offset of the swoop stroke will create the same amount of spin.

Unfortunately, as you and I have attested, it can be difficult for non "master swoopers" to be be consistent and accurate with the swoop speed and contact point, as compared to a straight stroke. That's why I executed so many shots before selecting the best few for the video.

Regards,
Dave

PS: For more info, see post 268.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

My take on most of this stuff is that the old players probably tried a lot of stuff they saw on their way to hitting their first million balls, and lost a lot of money in the learning process. Money's a powerful motivator. If something worked, they stuck with it and never gave it much thought beyond that. If it didn't work, it got lost early on.

Which is the way it should be. Peaking behind the physics curtain is just for funsies IMO. I can't see all the proselytizing that goes on, especially from lesser players to champs. If they ain't interested in the facts, so what? Their swoop will still beat my BHE every time.

 

[The Renfro]

My take on most of this stuff is that the old players probably tried a lot of stuff they saw on their way to hitting their first million balls, and lost a lot of money in the learning process. Money's a powerful motivator. If something worked, they stuck with it and never gave it much thought beyond that. If it didn't work, it got lost early on.

Which is the way it should be. Peaking behind the physics curtain is just for funsies IMO. I can't see all the proselytizing that goes on, especially from lesser players to champs. If they ain't interested in the facts, so what? Their swoop will still beat my BHE every time.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: Much Green to you sir!

 

[Neil]

My take on most of this stuff is that the old players probably tried a lot of stuff they saw on their way to hitting their first million balls, and lost a lot of money in the learning process. Money's a powerful motivator. If something worked, they stuck with it and never gave it much thought beyond that. If it didn't work, it got lost early on.

Which is the way it should be. Peaking behind the physics curtain is just for funsies IMO. I can't see all the proselytizing that goes on, especially from lesser players to champs. If they ain't interested in the facts, so what? Their swoop will still beat my BHE every time.

I don't recall anyone on here telling the champs how they should play.