Who said you can't use your wrist with a pinned elbow stroke?
Anybody gave up the pendulum stroke for good?
- Thread starter demartini rocks
- Start date
Who said you can't use your wrist with a pinned elbow stroke?
He has some good info, and some myths in that video. The tip does not stay on the cb longer just because the shooter dropped his elbow. You don't need a long follow through to "get through the ball". Once your tip leaves the cb, you no longer have any affect on the cb no matter what you do.
Here's a video of Judd Trump. He doesn't have any problems using a pinned elbow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZA67elaLPI
I will see your Judd Trump and raise you a Ronnie O'Sullivan....
At 5:30....
https://youtu.be/MdWKB2UFsug
"You have to commit.you wanna keep the white on your tip as long as you can."
A number of pros believe things that just aren't true. You can't just change physics just because you think you can.
The debate is confusing because it deals with two questions, at least IMHO. One question is what stroke to teach a new player? The other is if a proven player who technically has a flawed stroke, from a pure fundamental point of view, should change to a pendulum stroke?
Were an engineer to design a robot to have a perfect pool stroke, they certainly wouldn't include a ball and socket joint to emulate the shoulder. It adds nothing and would increase the complexity and programming immensely. The simpler the design, the less moving parts, the better, more consistent and more reliable the machine would be.
By the same token, were I to instruct a new student of pool, I would absolutely teach the pendulum stroke. Teaching anything else involves too many moving parts and the need to attempt to explain timing. How do you teach timing? Or time, it is possible if not likely, the student will develop some of their own variations that are more comfortable for them. I seriously doubt, however, that a student who started with a perfect fundamental stroke that became proficient would vary much. Morra, Feijen and others obviously didn't need to change much.
As to the second question, I can't imagine trying to change all those other top pros to a perfect pendulum stroke no more than I would have tried to tell Trevino or Furyk they couldn't possibly win with their golf swings.
What about all those players in between? IMHO, a player at whatever level that is unhappy with their game and is willing to put in the time to improve would do well to consider learning the pendulum stroke. The debate will never end or be resolved. I'd like someone to explain how adding moving parts to the stroke that requires rather precise timing to work makes anything better.
Were an engineer to design a robot to have a perfect pool stroke, they certainly wouldn't include a ball and socket joint to emulate the shoulder. It adds nothing and would increase the complexity and programming immensely. The simpler the design, the less moving parts, the better, more consistent and more reliable the machine would be.
By the same token, were I to instruct a new student of pool, I would absolutely teach the pendulum stroke. Teaching anything else involves too many moving parts and the need to attempt to explain timing. How do you teach timing? Or time, it is possible if not likely, the student will develop some of their own variations that are more comfortable for them. I seriously doubt, however, that a student who started with a perfect fundamental stroke that became proficient would vary much. Morra, Feijen and others obviously didn't need to change much.
As to the second question, I can't imagine trying to change all those other top pros to a perfect pendulum stroke no more than I would have tried to tell Trevino or Furyk they couldn't possibly win with their golf swings.
What about all those players in between? IMHO, a player at whatever level that is unhappy with their game and is willing to put in the time to improve would do well to consider learning the pendulum stroke. The debate will never end or be resolved. I'd like someone to explain how adding moving parts to the stroke that requires rather precise timing to work makes anything better.
One of the bigger myths in pool. But just for the sake of argument, what would adding a microsecond of pool tip contact time provide in the way of benefit? Could the player feel something in that microsecond and make some kind of adjustment? Obviously not, that's preposterous. If my cue is moving in the proper direction and I contacted the CB where I wanted, I want the CB of my cue tip as quickly as possible the same as I want the CB of the object ball as quickly as possible to prevent CIT.
I tuned up my stroke in a bottle, much like many professional players did. Scott Lee tried to get me to adjust to a pendulumn stroke. Was extremely counterproductive for me. When I finally just decided to go back to my personal stroke mechanics and just practice more, I had some of my best results.
Some would say, "But think how much better you'd be if you had a proper pendulumn stroke?"
To that, I say that the year I just decided to ignore the pendulumn stroke and just play my own game, but practice more, I met Little Joe Villapando at Derby City, and he complemented me on my fundamentals, and told me he thought I was a pretty good player. And therein is the main difference. For those who don't know, Little Joe could flat out PLAY back in the day. As in, a legit monster who locked horns with many of the stars of the game, and best quite a few of them.
I specifically asked Joe about the elbow drop, and he said there is no one "correct" stroke, and that the elbow drop is a common thing seen with pros on power shots, so it is nothing to be scared of.
Little Joe has a proven track record of building extremely good players, as evidenced by the Benke family. The measure of a coach should be nothing more or less than the quality of the players the produce. So it goes in chess, so it goes in golf, so it goes in pool. So, with Little Joe, I trust what he has to say.
Not to beat up on Scott Lee, but if he can offer up some examples of national/state level champions he coached through their development period, then I would say his method is valid as well. I don't know if this is the case or not. I know that it didn't work for me, but I was already a serious player with an established stroke before we met, so it was my choice not to implement his suggested stroke changes, and that shouldn't be laid at his feet as something to criticize.
And to respond to some of Neil's comments... I really don't think anyone has said one should drop the elbow BEFORE contact. You keep bringing that up as sort of a straw man attack against elbow drop strokes. I think it is generally understood that one needs to keep the elbow still at least through contact. For me, the elbow drops comes after contact, and simply helps me to feel like I am keeping the cue on line all the way through the stroke. For me, it is more a feeling of the weight of the cue pulling my arm through the stroke than of my elbow drop driving the cue forward.
Just my two cents.
Short Bus Russ
Some would say, "But think how much better you'd be if you had a proper pendulumn stroke?"
To that, I say that the year I just decided to ignore the pendulumn stroke and just play my own game, but practice more, I met Little Joe Villapando at Derby City, and he complemented me on my fundamentals, and told me he thought I was a pretty good player. And therein is the main difference. For those who don't know, Little Joe could flat out PLAY back in the day. As in, a legit monster who locked horns with many of the stars of the game, and best quite a few of them.
I specifically asked Joe about the elbow drop, and he said there is no one "correct" stroke, and that the elbow drop is a common thing seen with pros on power shots, so it is nothing to be scared of.
Little Joe has a proven track record of building extremely good players, as evidenced by the Benke family. The measure of a coach should be nothing more or less than the quality of the players the produce. So it goes in chess, so it goes in golf, so it goes in pool. So, with Little Joe, I trust what he has to say.
Not to beat up on Scott Lee, but if he can offer up some examples of national/state level champions he coached through their development period, then I would say his method is valid as well. I don't know if this is the case or not. I know that it didn't work for me, but I was already a serious player with an established stroke before we met, so it was my choice not to implement his suggested stroke changes, and that shouldn't be laid at his feet as something to criticize.
And to respond to some of Neil's comments... I really don't think anyone has said one should drop the elbow BEFORE contact. You keep bringing that up as sort of a straw man attack against elbow drop strokes. I think it is generally understood that one needs to keep the elbow still at least through contact. For me, the elbow drops comes after contact, and simply helps me to feel like I am keeping the cue on line all the way through the stroke. For me, it is more a feeling of the weight of the cue pulling my arm through the stroke than of my elbow drop driving the cue forward.
Just my two cents.
Short Bus Russ
Last edited:
First, thank you for bringing Little Joe to my attention. I have never heard of him before but I'm always into learning about pool history and those who are part of it.
Second, that last two sentences are extremely profound with wisdom and insight. Well said. It is as if you are allowing the stroke to produce naturally and not artificially manipulating or muscling the stroke.
And I still believe if you muscle the stroke (which tends to happen on a pinned elbow), you punch the cue ball and there is a quicker release of the cue ball from the tip, this a loss of energy transfer.
When Barry Stark explains it here...
https://youtu.be/H5QrJGUocAo
I visualize the show motion leg of a field goal kicker/soccer player making contact with the ball, and upon follow through, the ball remains in contact with the foot longer if there is a profound follow through.
:33 sec part of this video....super slo motion of tip on contact, and that leather actually compresses and holds the ball transferring energy....
https://youtu.be/pZqkaJDaz2A
I agree with you on all but one part. and that is on where the confusion is. A surprising number of people still think that if one goes to an instructor know matter what your skill level, they are going to scrap everything you have and force a strict orthodox method on you. And that is all they know how to do.
They really have no idea what instructors actually do, but yet feel qualified to judge them.
This argument is gonna go on for another century.
Argue with Archer and Bustamante
https://youtu.be/n3nY89tBQyg?t=3474
Busti drops his elbow like hell.
Busti is an elbow criminal here
https://youtu.be/n3nY89tBQyg?t=3603
Argue with Archer and Bustamante
https://youtu.be/n3nY89tBQyg?t=3474
Busti drops his elbow like hell.
Busti is an elbow criminal here
https://youtu.be/n3nY89tBQyg?t=3603
Russ, some have not only said it but insist that is necessary and that most pros drop before contact.
For you that's fine. What happens after contact is immaterial to the shot. Just be aware that if things start going south to check if you started dropping sooner than at contact.
since what happens after contact can't affect the shot, the only reason to drop after is what you are comfortable with. And not dropping at all eliminates problems arising from dropping too soon.
So what if they do? No one is telling them that what they are doing doesn't work for them. And no proponent of a pinned elbow has ever said that one can't play near perfect pool dropping the elbow.
Do you realize that you are arguing against something you made up yourself?
I agree their stance is bunko if they are saying drop before contact, because timing has to be absolutely perfect, plus bridge length and grip point on butt has to be matched... Too many variables.
For me, the elbow drop is simply to prevent any tensing of the muscles that impedes a forward stroke. If the stroke continues in a straight line far past the CB contact point, then deceleration at the end of the stroke will only come into effect after the CB is on it's way to the target.
Short Bus Russ
Just so you are aware SPF. The F stands for finish. One always has to finish the stroke. But a long follow through is not necessary to accomplish that.
When you don't drop the elbow, the tip dips after contact.
The proponents of elbow drop ( whether they are right or not ) like their tip to go through the ball. This argument of the tip only makes contact with yay nanosecond or what is moot .
When the pitcher releases the ball, it's GONE. Yet , so many teach a smooth follow .
The same with the stroke . Some like to go through past the cue ball on a straight line . John Horfsall used to place TWO balls past the CB.
He wanted the TIP to go through that cb and through the two balls .
Sorry, if the proponents of the no-elbow drop are not arguing then there is no argument here then.
Leave the elbow droppers then.
Imo, as we age, most cannot see how close that tip is to the cueball .
If you don't drop your elbow or release the cue , you are more likely to hit that CB lower than intended .
When that wrist goes up when the forearm is past perpendicular to the floor, the tip will have to dip if your elbow is not dropped.
The follow through in and of itself serves no purpose. However, a complete follow through is like the result of an accelerating stroke. Or said differently, no or minimal follow through is likely the result of a decelerating stroke. Which is more desirable?
If you do things wrong, of course you get bad results. The same goes for dropping the elbow. And, it has been shown that in a pendulum stroke, the cue is level for about two inches.
No way.
The cue ball doesn't recognize the difference between a good stroke and a opoor stroke. The cue ball only knows how it got hit!
randyg