Centerball...haters gonna hate

[His Boy Elroy]

There's no question that those things "burden" one's ability to be accurate - and there's no question that many overuse side spin. It's necessary for good play, but its side effects are a necessary evil to be wary of.

pj
chgo

If one cannot control the degree of side spin one is using, then deflection, swerve, and throw can certainly be considered a burden to one's game. In this case, one should practice until they"re able to apply the correct degree of side spin. They'll no longer be wary.

 

[ENGLISH!]

I am doing well.

Do you know which drill I am talking about? I guess I should try to explain it huh.:smile:

Its a corner pocket... One rail for shape drill.

Place an object ball one diamond up on the side rail and one diamond out on the end rail... both balls are about 1/2 inch away from touching the rail.

Now with ball in hand shoot one of the object balls in the corner and play one rail shape for shooting the next in the same corner. Everytime you make a ball replace it and continue to go back and forth until you make it through a couple of racks.


Anyone who does this will for sure see how much easier it is to control the line by using the horizontal axis on this type of shot.

No, I was not familiar with that specifically, but I knew what you meant. I have only recently started uses equator side spin since I've been playing some one pocket. Before that I have always used a combination spin, hitting in the quadrants.

Some should try to draw the ball 'straight' back from a straight in shot into a corner pocket from two diamonds or less on the side rail & get all the way up table without putting any side on it too.

Like so many here say, one does not know what they don't know.

You Stay & Shoot Well.

 

[ENGLISH!]

If one cannot control the degree of side spin one is using, then deflection, swerve, and throw can certainly be considered a burden to one's game. In this case, one should practice until they"re able to apply the correct degree of side spin. They'll no longer be wary.

Hi Tim,

How have you been?

Some have been afraid of english their whole lives. Some maybe because they were told to be wary of it. Some I guess just might have been afraid to look a bit 'foolish' once in a while until they could learn how to use. Who Knows?

Best 2 Ya.

 

[midnightpulp]

At the highest levels of play, two examples to study would be Allison Fisher and Buddy Hall, they are using mostly center ball, so did Mosconi and Greenleaf, who call this the golden angle, where you played to a little angle to angle, then you could slide from shot to shot, using no English, and eliminate throw and deflection. That is pool, played at the highest level, keeping it simple. KISS.

Stupid is watching Keith McCreedy years ago, juicing and dancing the cue ball all over the place, which is cool and impressive, but what did he ever win, or do, other than get drunk and lose? Earl has become too aggressive with English, shooting too hard, and now he cant beat a rug.

Beat everyone for real money while the "World Champs" were struggling to pay the rent.

 

[anbukev]

Here's Ronnie O'Sullivan's fastest 147 with his TIP placement shown:

https://youtu.be/Lln_8KJPNAQ

It's quite interesting to see his tip placement for every shot.

 

[Colin Colenso]

This is the same stuff CJ Wiley was promoting here, and even though they're both great players, they're both wrong about this. The reason is that there's simply no difference in the amount or kind of error you get from avoiding centerball.

Whether you try to hit center ball or one side of center, if you miss your tip target by 1mm to the left (for instance), your CB will go offline by the same amount and in the same direction either way. Not only that, but the CB's action off the first rail will also be off by the same amount and in the same direction.

I know it's counterintuitive, but it simply doesn't do anything.

pj
chgo

I agree in a general sense PJ, but there are zones where cueing errors of even 5mm make almost no difference to either the pot direction or the CB position.

An example would be cutting 3/4 ball into a corner pocket with inside english firm to run the CB 3 rails usually through the center of the table or thereabouts.

Throw is almost the same for 1/2 tip to 1.5 tips of spin and squirt may not differ significantly if the player is bridging near to the cue's pivot point, and the line of travel for the CB on that shot differs little going 2 or 3 rails. The first 2 rails tend to cancel out the initial rail difference.

That said, these equivalents made to favoring slicing to halve the error on a fairway are specious imho.

Cheers,
Colin

 

[Colin Colenso]

Snooker players are the greatest potter of the ball, and play on 6x12, and they live, using center ball. The problem with using English, is the throw, making the pot more difficult. Center ball, less throw, the pot is easier to make, as long as you account for the cling in a cut shot.

As long as you maintain, playing angle to angle, it works fine. But get out of line, then you have to use English to get back in line. So both methods must be used, and perfected. English and Women are the same, cant live with them, cant live, without them. :wink:

I watch a lot of snooker on my big screen and I've observed quite a few of the top end players swiping to about 1/8th to 1/4 tip offset to the outside, perhaps intuitively, when playing the softer stun cuts shots from about 10 degree to 30 degree cut angle, which are common angles in snooker play.

The center ball soft stun is a terror zone for throw and kicks. A touch or more of outside makes a lot of sense for these shots.

In this video testing throw variations I made some years ago, the CB soft stun shot throws about 6 inches thick over 7 feet of travel at near 1/2 ball hit. This variation may reduce with waxed or super clean new balls, but the throw is a big challenge on stun shots if no english is used. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-xtzn4vbiQ

Colin

 

[M.G.]

Thank you very much for the tip placement video, didn't watch that already :thumbup:

I'd like to add that in other Billiard disciplines "pure center ball" (as in a stunned type of shot that will later go into rolling) is not the norm.
Carom usually uses "slow rolling ball" (the ball rolls instantly, not after a while after the stroke) which makes shots much more precise in my opinion; they also use follow first to straighten a ball's line instead of using a left or right (countering the tangent line) English to accomplish the same.

They promote using as little left / right English as possible due the additional effects induced which enforces the point the thread makes; also they think about balls as "areas" not individual "points on the table". E.g. a "bigger ball" is one that lies close to the cushion because a lot of different hits "in this area" will result in the ball being hit.

Still it's customary to use English for double cushion in the corner shots (so the ball will return up table) to straighten the hits on the cushions.

All worth considering I think and "the less you do the less can go wrong" is a rather valid principle.

Cheers,
M

 

[JasBy]

I am curious - has anyone ever done an experiment comparing distance of off center the cue ball has hit vs. deflection created? (calling Dr. Dave)

The reason I ask is this - if it is a linear relation ship i.e. for every x distance you hit off the center line you get some multiple of x in deflection then TOI is a total fallacy. The reason being the same miss from the aiming point creates the same amount of deflection - so if you are aiming for x amount of deflection inside, and you hit it toward the center, the resulting lack of deflection decreases your chance of making the ball the same as missing without TOI.
However, if deflection is not a linear relationship, i.e. 2 mm of offset does not produce twice the deflection of 1mm, then TOI does create an advantage, as you are minimizing deflection on one side while staying the same on the other, resulting in a total reduction in error possibility.

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

I am curious - has anyone ever done an experiment comparing distance of off center the cue ball has hit vs. deflection created? (calling Dr. Dave)

The reason I ask is this - if it is a linear relation ship i.e. for every x distance you hit off the center line you get some multiple of x in deflection then TOI is a total fallacy. The reason being the same miss from the aiming point creates the same amount of deflection - so if you are aiming for x amount of deflection inside, and you hit it toward the center, the resulting lack of deflection decreases your chance of making the ball the same as missing without TOI.
However, if deflection is not a linear relationship, i.e. 2 mm of offset does not produce twice the deflection of 1mm, then TOI does create an advantage, as you are minimizing deflection on one side while staying the same on the other, resulting in a total reduction in error possibility.

Because the cueball is round, the deflection is not a linear relationship to distance from center.

 

[Neil]

I am curious - has anyone ever done an experiment comparing distance of off center the cue ball has hit vs. deflection created? (calling Dr. Dave)

The reason I ask is this - if it is a linear relation ship i.e. for every x distance you hit off the center line you get some multiple of x in deflection then TOI is a total fallacy. The reason being the same miss from the aiming point creates the same amount of deflection - so if you are aiming for x amount of deflection inside, and you hit it toward the center, the resulting lack of deflection decreases your chance of making the ball the same as missing without TOI.
However, if deflection is not a linear relationship, i.e. 2 mm of offset does not produce twice the deflection of 1mm, then TOI does create an advantage, as you are minimizing deflection on one side while staying the same on the other, resulting in a total reduction in error possibility.

Deflection (actually we are talking about squirt here) is linear per cue. That is, the farther from center, the more squirt you get. However, how much squirt one gets depends on the end mass of the cue. The more end mass, the more squirt.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Because the cueball is round, the deflection is not a linear relationship to distance from center.

The fact of "pivot points" tells you this isn't true. A shaft's pivot point means the amount of squirt (CB deflection) is about linear with the amount of tip offset.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

With TOI you have at least 3 locations to hit & still pocket the ball. You can hit with the intended touch of inside. You can miss & hit with more than the intended touch of inside. You can miss on the other side of the intended touch of inside & hit center. With all 3 the ball pockets

Which is exactly what happens with a centerball hit. You can miss on either side or hit centerball as intended - with all 3 the ball pockets. In fact it's easier with centerball (of course) because you don't introduce squirt into the equation.

With an intended center hit you only have two locations because if you miss the CB center to the outside the ball will not pocket.

This is the nonsense part. With centerball you don't need to cheat the pocket to correct for squirt so you aim at center pocket, not to one side of the pocket like with TOI.

This has been pointed out to you many times and you simply don't seem able to comprehend it. Maybe you should take the time to do that before trying to advise developing players.

pj
chgo

 

[ENGLISH!]

Which is exactly what happens with a centerball hit. You can miss on either side or hit centerball as intended - with all 3 the ball pockets. In fact it's easier with centerball (of course) because you don't introduce squirt into the equation.


This is the nonsense part. With centerball you don't need to cheat the pocket to correct for squirt so you aim at center pocket, not to one side of the pocket like with TOI.

This has been pointed out to you many times and you simply don't seem able to comprehend it. Maybe you should take the time to do that before trying to advise developing players.

pj
chgo

Like I've said, I'm NOT going to try to convince you. It is YOU that seems to not comprehend or has an ulterior motive.

But, as you so often do... you 'quote' out of context & then make what appears to be a valid statement, point or argument. And you make truthful statements that do NOT apply to the parameters in full context. To me...that shows that you are disingenuous.

I posted that for anyone interested. They can read it in it's entire context & then experiment on their own to see if it's for them or not. That is ALL up to them. Many that have done so have found success with it & are happy that they did. If CJ were still posting he could give you the numbers.

This is not advice. It's just an example put out for thought & experimentation if one so wishes & then one can make their own determination as is stated in my sig line & always has been.

Like CJ always said, If it's not now for you then put it on a shelve or in draw as you may want to pull it back out at some time in the future.

I thought you were putting me on ignore. Please do?

PS If one is thinking about squirt & swerve when shooting shots they are making a mistake IMO. That is NOT how athletes play. They do not think about the science that will occur, they just throw the curve ball as they know how to do it. They do NOT employ scientific formulas. Now bookworms may not work that way.

 

[Drop The Rock]

Like I've said, I'm NOT going to try to convince you. It is YOU that seems to not comprehend or has an ulterior motive.

But, as you so often do... you 'quote' out of context & then make what appears to be a valid statement, point or argument. And you make truthful statements that do NOT apply to the parameters in full context. To me...that shows that you are disingenuous.

I posted that for anyone interested. They can read it in it's entire context & then experiment on their own to see if it's for them or not. That is ALL up to them. Many that have done so have found success with it & are happy that they did. If CJ were still posting he could give you the numbers.

This is not advice. It's just an example put out for thought & experimentation if one so wishes & then one can make their own determination as is stated in my sig line & always has been.

Like CJ always said, If it's not now for you then put it on a shelve or in draw as you may want to pull it back out at some time in the future.

I thought you were putting me on ignore. Please do?

PS If one is thinking about squirt & swerve when shooting shots they are making a mistake IMO. That is NOT how athletes play. They do not think about the science that will occur, they just throw the curve ball as they know how to do it. They do NOT employ scientific formulas. Now bookworms may not work that way.

I do very much agree with this and honestly I don't think one way other the other is technically right or wrong or better. From the fundamentals I was taught, my go to is center and it feels much more natural. I actually payed the one day pass on CJs website because I cant have an valid opinion on something until I have done my research. I may not particularly like CJ and I do think he is full of shit in regards to many things I have heard him say running 27 racks in a row or beating the 10 ball ghost in a race to 10 in 45 minutes on a 10 ft table.

However, what his systems are based around can work because essentially its the same thing. That being said, for me its over complicating things. For somebody who is struggling with a traditional method, I say try whatever works for you.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Like I've said, I'm NOT going to try to convince you. It is YOU that seems to not comprehend or has an ulterior motive.

lol - What do you imagine my "ulterior motive" might be?

But, as you so often do... you 'quote' out of context & then make what appears to be a valid statement, point or argument. And you make truthful statements that do NOT apply to the parameters in full context. To me...that shows that you are disingenuous.

To me that shows you don't understand what's been explained to you (many times), so you get defensive and toss around dumb accusations. Do you think that persuades readers - or makes them wonder if you really know what you're saying?

pj
chgo

 

[ENGLISH!]

I do very much agree with this and honestly I don't think one way other the other is technically right or wrong or better. From the fundamentals I was taught, my go to is center and it feels much more natural. I actually payed the one day pass on CJs website because I cant have an valid opinion on something until I have done my research. I may not particularly like CJ and I do think he is full of shit in regards to many things I have heard him say running 27 racks in a row or beating the 10 ball ghost in a race to 10 in 45 minutes on a 10 ft table.

However, what his systems are based around can work because essentially its the same thing. That being said, for me its over complicating things. For somebody who is struggling with a traditional method, I say try whatever works for you.

We come from different starting points on the journey. I started using english when I was 13 only a few weeks after being introduced to the game. I'll be 62 later this week. I use either some form of english or TOI on nearly every shot unless the shot & shape can not be done with english & the shot 'requires' staying on the center vertical line.

As a 13 year old I was not afraid. I later took Physics in H.S. & College. I think I am thankful I learned to use english before I learned physics. However I still play the game & do not Physics Text Book the game.

I've said it before but if I had to stay on the center line I would probably quit the game. I often wonder when I hear people that are so frustrated that they are considering quitting the game & they do not use english.

I think you are somewhat correct about the misunderstanding of what individuals 'mean' to say. That said, language is all that we have & especially in a text only format. Just like in pool, some are better than others when it comes to using the 'English' language.

When I say that I use english on nearly every shot, some might think that I am hitting at 3:00 & 9:00 on all of those shots & that could not be further from the truth. In fact, I almost never hit at those locations, but am doing so more now that I am playing some one pocket.

Best Wishes.

 

[Drop The Rock]

We come from different starting points on the journey. I started using english when I was 13 only a few weeks after being introduced to the game. I'll be 62 later this week. I use either some form of english or TOI on nearly every shot unless the shot & shape can not be done with english & the shot 'requires' staying on the center vertical line.

As a 13 year old I was not afraid. I later took Physics in H.S. & College. I think I am thankful I learned to use english before I learned physics. However I still play the game & do not Physics Text Book the game.

I've said it before but if I had to stay on the center line I would probably quit the game. I often wonder when I hear people that are so frustrated that they are considering quitting the game & they do not use english.

I think you are somewhat correct about the misunderstanding of what individuals 'mean' to say. That said, language is all that we have & especially in a text only format. Just like in pool, some are better than others when it comes to using the 'English' language.

When I say that I use english on nearly every shot, some might think that I am hitting at 3:00 & 9:00 on all of those shots & that could not be further from the truth. In fact, I almost never hit at those locations, but am doing so more now that I am playing some one pocket.

Best Wishes.

You are right that there are simply certain shots that are easier with english it terms of shape. Holding the cueball with inside draw is one of my favorite shots for pure shooting purposes though I try and use center

 

[ENGLISH!]

I fully understand the 'arguments' against TOI. I do not agree with them.

I'm not making up any 'dumb' accusations to persuade anyone regarding TOI.

If anyone thinks that I don't know about what I put out & offered for their consideration & determinations. That's fine with me.

They should just put it aside as others have done. One may want to pull it back up at sometime in the future.

I think Randy G came back from a meeting with CJ a year or so ago & said that it was a good viable method, but I could be wrong about that.

Every individual can make their own determination as to whether or not they want to give it a try or not.

They can also make their own determination as to whether or not they ultimately want to utilize it.

I did both of those in the affirmative & that is why I pass it on for consideration.

As is 'said' in my sig line, everyone should make their own determinations. That way each individual can be responsible for their own game, as they should be, & can not later on blame someone else.

 

[His Boy Elroy]

Hi Tim,

How have you been?

Some have been afraid of english their whole lives. Some maybe because they were told to be wary of it. Some I guess just might have been afraid to look a bit 'foolish' once in a while until they could learn how to use. Who Knows?

Best 2 Ya.

Hey Rick,
I'm still managing to chug along. "Who knows" is so right!