Spin applied during contact
- Thread starter Player
- Start date
Actually the contact time is 4x as much. The ping pong ball compresses way more than a pool ball.
randyg
Hit the cue ball off center and you will apply spin - or any other round ball.
The swipe stroke is just as effective as body english.
Yet, you are the one that constantly states that you don't need to go to a table to figure things out. The explanation should be enough, according to you. You demand explanations with CTE, but yet refuse to ever give any even when so many are asking for just ONE example from you.
Or is it simply that you feel the need to agree with someone you like, but have no idea whatsoever on what you are actually agreeing to? ;;
The statement the swipe is hitting center ball is a misnomer, you are essentially hitting max english as if you were perpendicular the line of the shot. You have to make contact with the opposite side of the cue ball in order to apply desired english.
The only shot I have witnessed was where someone was advocating this technique for a 90 deg. rail first on a frozen ball (impossible cut lol). Meanwhile he swiped across the cueball and missed the shot pretty badly. I just got down and almost fired it in so you be the judge. This guy also had way more table time and experience than me and was a better player.
The only shot I have witnessed was where someone was advocating this technique for a 90 deg. rail first on a frozen ball (impossible cut lol). Meanwhile he swiped across the cueball and missed the shot pretty badly. I just got down and almost fired it in so you be the judge. This guy also had way more table time and experience than me and was a better player.
You show that you do not even know the difference between a matter of the mind & a matter of physical activity.
The comparison of an Aiming Method & a 'specialty stroke' are in no way similar.
You constantly make SENSELESS analogies.
You've become nothing but a stalking troll.
Why don't you instead make 'productive' use of your time & go wipe out ALL of your posts since the last time that you put in ALL of that time & effort to wipe out ALL of your posts & show everyone just how 'rational' you can be.
Last edited:
Based on a limited amount of experimentation, I believe it can. I explained what I tried, and gave the results here a couple of years ago. My posts begin at #33 on page 3 in the thread, but the photo I took of the Rempe training ball I used is on post #43.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=322047&highlight=swoop+stroke&page=3
I have not worked on this technique anymore since then. For one, it is highly inconsistent, at least for me. Also, in the last two years I have made good strides in improving my stroke, and I can now get all the spin I want without miscuing all the time. Still, what I found back then is that I could get a significant amount more spin at the same offset as a straight stroke, but only when the planets all aligned for me. Most of the time, I just blew the shot badly.
You know Rick, even with erasing 9,000 posts, I still have more actual content on here than you do with all your posts.
What you said in that post #33 was rather well said.
Sorry Rick, but from my perspective you are say this:
You: There is a specialty stroke technique that has advantages over a normal stroke.
Us: What are the advantages? Do you have proof?
You: Go experiment.
You/Renfro: .001 to .002 seconds is a significant difference to the human body and brain.
Us: That doesn't make sense since the human brain let alone body can't react, process or do much of anything that fast.
You: Yes it does and you just don't understand. Physics.
Us: Well yes exactly! That's what we keep referencing. Does the specialty stroke do..
You: This is a part of physics only I and one other person believe in or understand.
Us: But actual scientists have..
You: Nope they have not properly experiment.
Us: Can you at least give some proof or experiment results?
You: No go experiment yourself "Have fun."
Our conclusion: Whether we have or have not experimented ourselves is irrelevant if we don't come to the same conclusion as you. You are basically asking for an opinion as a result of experimentation when you haven't given us an example of your experimentation to base off of. It wouldn't matter either because if we came to a different conclusion or reinforced our previous statements we would be wrong by default in your eyes.
Our experience on the table won't matter, our educational background won't matter. We will always be wrong and you will always be right, because anyone who takes a scientific or analytical approach to pool probably doesn't play well and has no feel for the game.
Its like a Scientologist telling a Buddhist he doesn't know anything about spirituality.
You: There is a specialty stroke technique that has advantages over a normal stroke.
Us: What are the advantages? Do you have proof?
You: Go experiment.
You/Renfro: .001 to .002 seconds is a significant difference to the human body and brain.
Us: That doesn't make sense since the human brain let alone body can't react, process or do much of anything that fast.
You: Yes it does and you just don't understand. Physics.
Us: Well yes exactly! That's what we keep referencing. Does the specialty stroke do..
You: This is a part of physics only I and one other person believe in or understand.
Us: But actual scientists have..
You: Nope they have not properly experiment.
Us: Can you at least give some proof or experiment results?
You: No go experiment yourself "Have fun."
Our conclusion: Whether we have or have not experimented ourselves is irrelevant if we don't come to the same conclusion as you. You are basically asking for an opinion as a result of experimentation when you haven't given us an example of your experimentation to base off of. It wouldn't matter either because if we came to a different conclusion or reinforced our previous statements we would be wrong by default in your eyes.
Our experience on the table won't matter, our educational background won't matter. We will always be wrong and you will always be right, because anyone who takes a scientific or analytical approach to pool probably doesn't play well and has no feel for the game.
Its like a Scientologist telling a Buddhist he doesn't know anything about spirituality.
You know Rick, even with erasing 9,000 posts, I still have more actual content on here than you do with all your posts.
What rational individual takes the time & effort to personally go back & individually 'erase' 9,000 of their own posts so that they can punish the members of the forum for not taking him seriously?
I'll leave it to the majority of the readership to make that determination.
In case you or another has not noticed....
I'm the one making the EVEN numbered posts, which means that I am responding & have NOT initiated anything.
The stalker is the one doing the initiating.
I read it, understand it, and also understand why you and others feel the way you do.
Let me explain a couple of things about the swoop stroke.
1. As you found out, it is extremely unreliable and a terrible way to try and utilize english.
2. You really can't go by the contact point (chalk mark) on the cb when using the swoop stroke. The reason you can't, is because center cb is determined by the angle of attack of the cue. When swooping, that angle can change a fair amount. Hence, where center cb is will also change a fair amount. So, the first thing when checking chalk marks is that you have to figure out just where center cb actually was relative to the cues angle of approach.
3. Because of #2, one can easily think they are getting more spin using a swoop stroke, or, as you did, think they hit a couple attempts good and got more spin than they were getting because from their vantage point, they didn't hit very far off center cb. In reality, that actually is not known until one knows where center cb was for the actual shot. Some want to still consider center cb from their viewpoint looking at the cb. That is only true when using a straight stroke. As soon as you start swooping the cue, ccb is constantly changing.
You are just like another that puts your words into the mouths of others to create a misrepresentation of the actual matters at hand.
You now prove that that earlier 'please' was false & it was the 'command' that was sincere.
You're reading of the other thread in the instructors forum & the words of a former Top 10 Female Professional Player & a Master Instructor of the BCA & now PBIA & someone that sees Earl Strickland in the same pool hall on a regular if not daily basis...
gave you no reason to even open your mind to the posibility & give it any consideration or experimentation.
That's fine.
You should make ALL of your own determinations, just as each & everyone else should also do.
No one is trying to force anyone to use it, try to use it, practice it, or even experiment with it.
Anyone can dismiss it at will.
StraightPool99 was certainly correct.
Last edited:
Ahh... No it is not always hit center, nor is a tennis ball both of which use a lot of top spin or even slightly top/side to keep it in play.
In addition, I would say the rubber surface of a ping pong paddle allows for not only more contact time but also more contact surface thus giving even more spin with the shot as a result of the additional surface space and surface tension.
Soft tip vs Hard tip.
Ping pong is a much different beast. First what do you mean by the center of the ball in reference to ping pong? Balls are spherically symmetrical (in three dimensions), a cue ball has a couple of natural symmetry breakers, 1) it is on a flat surface, 2) It has a direction parallel to that surface (though not always). A ping pong ball has neither of these things. It has curved trajectory on approach and another curved trajectory after being struck. The paddle contacts it normal to neither of those, and with a lot of variation depending on what is desired. And the paddle is moving in a altogether different direction.
see: http://protabletennis.net/content/mechanics-table-tennis
Thank You Kindly.
Well, I already admitted that.
Yes, I understand that. However, if I changed the angle of the cue that much at contact, the CB would not go in the direction I was aiming it - directly across and into the diamond on the other long rail.
I got enough spin to open the angle coming off the rail more than I could with my regular stroke. That's really all I was curious about.
BTW I am really envious of you. I see that your name is now first, in a very large font, and blue to boot. I'm at the tail end of the ENGLISH! hate list. I must not be trying hard enough.
Aah, all you have to do is present some facts to him. Seems to make him blow a gasket or something.
