Jumping in the game of pool - yes or no?

[Pete]

Jump cues should be banned.

Jump with your playing cue, if you can.

I see idiots every week trying to jump balls and stabbing into the cloth. If I owned a pool hall, nobody would be using a jump cue or they'd be thrown out.

I respect your conviction sir. Sadly with the lack of rooms out there, and the fact that the business of owning a room is so financially difficult, it is hard to turn down any business you can get.

I believe that is why most rooms can't afford to be so picky with their clientele.

I also believe (but may be wrong) that jump cues are easier on the tables/balls than full length cues (mAny due to poor technic)...

 

[MeeLosh]

There is no compelling reason in my mind to allow jump shots. And that includes full length cues. Someone arbitrarily decided that since you're not scooping it it's a legal hit therefore it's all good. And others believed it and here we are. The logic of this totally escapes me. You're hooked? Find a kick or go home.

Now everyone has their silly little short sticks whether they can control them or not. There is nothing good that happens to equipment when jump shots are used. Bad things happen. People who claim otherwise are wrong.

Pool is a two dimensional game. Whoever thought it would be a good idea to allow it to go air born is an idiot. Want 3D? Take up golf. I would gladly burn my jump stick if it was universally outlawed. That would be a great day for pool.

JC

This echos most of my sentiment on the subject. Especially this one-liner:
"Pool is a two dimensional game."

 

[MattPoland]

This echos most of my sentiment on the subject. Especially this one-liner:

"Pool is a two dimensional game."

Then how will I put draw on the ball?

(Just kidding around, I get your sentiment)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[RakRunr]

I think one cue for the entire match, except the break, is fair.

I don't understand this line of reasoning. If you want to outlaw the jump cue as a specialty piece of equipment, then why are you OK making an exception for break cues? Both cues are designed to execute a specific shot. They both have unique properties for that shot that make it more effective. Those same properties also make the cue ineffective for normal play, and no one would consider playing "regular" shots with them. By outlawing one and allowing the other you are "picking your poison".

If you outlaw the jump SHOT, then jump cues would go away naturally. If the SHOT remains legal, however, then you either have to let the jump cue remain or implement a single cue rule (no break or masse cues allowed either). I want to be clear, I'm not defending the jump shot nor jump cues, per se, but I think we do have to apply the same rationale to the rest of the game and not just the parts we don't like. If you really disagree with jump cues on principle, then I think you have to stop using your break cue as well.

Out of curiosity, what is your issue with the Jump Bridge? Are you referring to a specific design? If it is the Jump Caddy design, that's actually a really nice bridge head design regardless of jumping.

 

[ceebee]

I think Jumps Shots should go away. Pool was designed to be a 2 dimensional game. Thus, the flat surface we play on. 2 Shot Push Out could be brought back, as a means to deal with being hooked.

 

[HawaiianEye]

I think Jumps Shots should go away. Pool was designed to be a 2 dimensional game. Thus, the flat surface we play on. 2 Shot Push Out could be brought back, as a means to deal with being hooked.

EXACTLY!

Next thing you know, somebody will design some little ramps and tracks that will allow you to go over and around balls like a little electric train choo-choo set.

To answer another poster above, break cues should be allowed, but just for breaking and not for jumping. Using a break cue means less wear and tear on your normal playing cue and prevents you from losing the tip off your playing cue, should you decide to break them like King Kong.

 

[RakRunr]

I understand the value of the break cue in preserving your playing cue tip, but that is beside the point. The point is that there is a group of people want to outlaw the jump cue because it makes the shot easier. The reason it makes the shot easier is because it is purposefully designed to do so, allowing you to achieve better results for a specific shot.

Break cues are also designed for a single purpose, and it isn't to prevent damage to your playing cue's tip: it's to achieve better results for a specific shot.

My conclusion is simple: if you are anti jump CUE, then you should be anti break cue as well.

If you are anti jump SHOT, then that would be a different discussion. Again, I would be OK if the jump shot was outlawed, but that seems completely unrealistic at this point.

 

[HawaiianEye]

I understand the value of the break cue in preserving your playing cue tip, but that is beside the point. The point is that there is a group of people want to outlaw the jump cue because it makes the shot easier. The reason it makes the shot easier is because it is purposefully designed to do so, allowing you to achieve better results for a specific shot.

Break cues are also designed for a single purpose, and it isn't to prevent damage to your playing cue's tip: it's to achieve better results for a specific shot.

My conclusion is simple: if you are anti jump CUE, then you should be anti break cue as well.

If you are anti jump SHOT, then that would be a different discussion. Again, I would be OK if the jump shot was outlawed, but that seems completely unrealistic at this point.

There are "break" cues that are designed only for breaking and there are cues that are used for "breaking" that are just normal cues that you only use for breaking and don't generall play with.

In my case, I use a cheap Players cue with a standard LePro tip on it. I don't need the power of a special break cue, nor the generally harder tip. I want the somewhat similar feel and reaction from my breaking cue as I do from the cue I use to play with. I am looking to control the cue ball on the break more than trying to shatter the balls.

FWIW, up until a couple years ago, I ALWAYS used my playing cue to break with. I have broken with my custom cues for years and years and years and have yet to lose a tip, but some people don't have the same track record. I break with my Becue playing cue a lot of the time, but I don't "smash" them with it because it doesn't have a ferrule and it is relatively small at the tip...only 12mm.

 

[RakRunr]

I'll concede that not everyone uses an actual Break cue for the act of breaking - without the harder tip, different shaft, etc., at a certain point you aren't doing anything more than a regular shot. In that case you aren't really producing a "break shot" in the sense that you are not doing anything that a playing cue could not perform. From that perspective, outlawing a Break cue would not have any effect on your game (although I understand why having two cues instead of one could make a difference).

Why don't we have special cues/shafts/tips for draw and for follow? I mean, of course you *could*, but I've never seen anyone do that. We could all look like golfers and require caddies if we try harder

 

[Straightpool_99]

I don't understand this line of reasoning. If you want to outlaw the jump cue as a specialty piece of equipment, then why are you OK making an exception for break cues? Both cues are designed to execute a specific shot. They both have unique properties for that shot that make it more effective. Those same properties also make the cue ineffective for normal play, and no one would consider playing "regular" shots with them. By outlawing one and allowing the other you are "picking your poison".

If you outlaw the jump SHOT, then jump cues would go away naturally. If the SHOT remains legal, however, then you either have to let the jump cue remain or implement a single cue rule (no break or masse cues allowed either). I want to be clear, I'm not defending the jump shot nor jump cues, per se, but I think we do have to apply the same rationale to the rest of the game and not just the parts we don't like. If you really disagree with jump cues on principle, then I think you have to stop using your break cue as well.

Out of curiosity, what is your issue with the Jump Bridge? Are you referring to a specific design? If it is the Jump Caddy design, that's actually a really nice bridge head design regardless of jumping.

Before I say anything else, I'd like to make it absolutely clear that I'm not considering myself the worlds greatest authority on this or any other pool related subject. At this point I'm more of a pool fan than a player. I love this game, and I want to protect it and advance it to the best of my ability.

That being said, your "logic" makes no sense. Every part of a cue is made to make the game simpler, but if we were to follow your logic we couldn't outlaw ANY modification to a cue. So I could have a 9 foot long telescopic cue, with a g10 tip and a targeting computer and it would have to be allowed because break cues are allowed? That's nonsense. Personally I wouldn't mind if break cues were outlawed, but I think the power break is a skill shot that should be preserved and encouraged. I want this game to be skilled. That is my motivation.

Yes, breakcues CLAIM to make the break simpler, but the difference is far from dramatic, much less than what marketing will have you believe. Many players would be better off breaking with their player IMO. Though for some players that have a thunderous break, they probably should protect their playing tip by using a dedicated break cue. Just to be clear, the break cue would only be allowed to be used on the break shot.

A jump cue makes A HUGE DIFFERENCE in the game. It makes shot that would be tough to hit with a normal cue HANGERS that a C player could make one handed. I can teach ANYONE of even the most moderate ability to hit and make simple jump shots in 5 minutes. Again, I'm not Gods gift to pool or pool teaching, but the cue just completely takes the skill out of the shot, when compared to the playing cues most popular today. With a normal cue, I'd probably need a week with some players and there is actually no guarantee they'd ever get proficient if the talent wasn't there. Even so, they'd need to practise regularly, and still would be underdogs on shots that anyone would make easily with a jump cue. You need a lot more speed on the ball to make a jump shot with a normal playing cue, which makes the shot much harder to control. A full cue, full ball jump shot with control is an awesome shot to behold and is rarely seen even with top players. It is fairly limited in it's use, as far as distance to the blocker ball, what you can do with the cueball etc. The jump cue removes many of these difficulties, and makes it basically just another shot with very little added difficulty, making it much more prevalent, thus impacting the dynamic of the game more.

 

[JC]

Break cues are also designed for a single purpose, and it isn't to prevent damage to your playing cue's tip: it's to achieve better results for a specific shot.

They are designed to make a lot of noise and have very little to do with breaking racks of balls effectively. As I recall "HE MAN" had one back in the original cartoon.

JC

 

[philly]

They are designed to make a lot of noise and have very little to do with breaking racks of balls effectively. As I recall "HE MAN" had one back in the original cartoon.

JC

Thumbs up JC. You don't have to smash the rack to make a ball on the break. Control of the cue ball on the break is as important as controlling the cue ball on any other shot if you want to continue to have control of the table.

I have been breaking with my player for that reason and I hit the rack no harder than I would with a strong force follow or a heavy draw shot.

 

[RakRunr]

Just a few comments, but TLDR; we'll just have to disagree and I'm OK with that

That being said, your "logic" makes no sense. Every part of a cue is made to make the game simpler, but if we were to follow your logic we couldn't outlaw ANY modification to a cue. So I could have a 9 foot long telescopic cue, with a g10 tip and a targeting computer and it would have to be allowed because break cues are allowed? That's nonsense. Personally I wouldn't mind if break cues were outlawed, but I think the power break is a skill shot that should be preserved and encouraged. I want this game to be skilled. That is my motivation.

I never said we couldn't outlaw all modifications, I was simply drawing parallels between the jump cue and the break cue. I think setting standards is fine - in fact, we already have one related to this conversation - a cue must be at least 40" long. So another way to effectively ban jump cues would be to make the minimum length 58" and/or require a cue to weigh at least 17 oz. I would not object to any of these changes.

I'm pretty confident in my logic as it pertains to this discussion:
1) Both cue types are designed for a specific, legal, shot.
2) Both cue types have properties unique to improving the result of that shot.
3) Neither cue type is intended for "normal" shots.

The parallels are pretty solid, so I would classify both items as "Specialty cues." Masse cues would qualify as well.

Yes, breakcues CLAIM to make the break simpler, but the difference is far from dramatic, much less than what marketing will have you believe. Many players would be better off breaking with their player IMO. Though for some players that have a thunderous break, they probably should protect their playing tip by using a dedicated break cue. Just to be clear, the break cue would only be allowed to be used on the break shot.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but the ease of the shot is not part of my analysis, merely the intent and usage of the specialty cue.

A jump cue makes A HUGE DIFFERENCE in the game. It makes shot that would be tough to hit with a normal cue HANGERS that a C player could make one handed. I can teach ANYONE of even the most moderate ability to hit and make simple jump shots in 5 minutes. Again, I'm not Gods gift to pool or pool teaching, but the cue just completely takes the skill out of the shot, when compared to the playing cues most popular today. With a normal cue, I'd probably need a week with some players and there is actually no guarantee they'd ever get proficient if the talent wasn't there. Even so, they'd need to practise regularly, and still would be underdogs on shots that anyone would make easily with a jump cue. You need a lot more speed on the ball to make a jump shot with a normal playing cue, which makes the shot much harder to control. A full cue, full ball jump shot with control is an awesome shot to behold and is rarely seen even with top players. It is fairly limited in it's use, as far as distance to the blocker ball, what you can do with the cueball etc. The jump cue removes many of these difficulties, and makes it basically just another shot with very little added difficulty, making it much more prevalent, thus impacting the dynamic of the game more.

This is where we'll have to disagree the most. While I agree that the jump cue makes a jump easier to execute, to translate that into being "hangers" is a gross misrepresentation. Jumping is certainly a skill that requires technique and practice to execute effectively and consistently. (This has been discussed ad nauseam on the forums.) If you can teach someone to do that in 5 minutes then you are certainly underrating your ability as a teacher. And again, the ease of the shot is not a factor in my analysis.

Again, purely from a functional standpoint, break and jump (and masse) cues should be classified in the same category. As such, it logically follow that if you support outlawing one you should, by necessity, support outlawing the other.

 

[buckshotshoey]

Thumbs up JC. You don't have to smash the rack to make a ball on the break. Control of the cue ball on the break is as important as controlling the cue ball on any other shot if you want to continue to have control of the table.

I have been breaking with my player for that reason and I hit the rack no harder than I would with a strong force follow or a heavy draw shot.

Isn't that what Cory Deuel was doing? And wasn't he chastised and roasted.... even by many on this site?

The fact is there will always be somebody butthurt about some aspect of the game that they don't agree with.

And for some to say a jump shot takes no skill is ridiculous. Even if you happen to make a ball on a jump, maintaining position is super hard. To be frank, it takes no more skill to get a legal hit with a one rail kick then to get a legal hit with a jump shot. You want to talk about skill? Then play a safe that takes the jump shot out of the equation. Now that is an accomplished safe shot.

Using some of the "logic" posted here, you might as well make this shot illegal too...

http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/new/NVA-16.htm

 

[philly]

Isn't that what Cory Deuel was doing? And wasn't he chastised and roasted.... even by many on this site?

The fact is there will always be somebody butthurt about some aspect of the game that they don't agree with.

And for some to say a jump shot takes no skill is ridiculous. Even if you happen to make a ball on a jump, maintaining position is super hard. To be frank, it takes no more skill to get a legal hit with a one rail kick then to get a legal hit with a jump shot. You want to talk about skill? Then play a safe that takes the jump shot out of the equation. Now that is an accomplished safe shot.

Using some of the "logic" posted here, you might as well make this shot illegal too...

http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/new/NVA-16.htm

A lock up safety is always the objective. Three times in a row if possible in a game of 9 ball.

Agreed it's super hard to be skilled at jumping. I never said it was easy. As a matter of fact I said only 5% of players who jump are accomplished at it. I like playing guys who default to their jump stick automatically. I get a lot of ball in hands that way.

There is a purity in kicking. When kicking correctly you can play kick safes by using the correct speed on the cue ball. That in and of itself is real skill.

The older I get the more old school I become so jump away bro.

 

[JC]

Isn't that what Cory Deuel was doing? And wasn't he chastised and roasted.... even by many on this site?

The fact is there will always be somebody butthurt about some aspect of the game that they don't agree with.

And for some to say a jump shot takes no skill is ridiculous. Even if you happen to make a ball on a jump, maintaining position is super hard. To be frank, it takes no more skill to get a legal hit with a one rail kick then to get a legal hit with a jump shot. You want to talk about skill? Then play a safe that takes the jump shot out of the equation. Now that is an accomplished safe shot.

Using some of the "logic" posted here, you might as well make this shot illegal too...

http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/new/NVA-16.htm

It's you're "logic" that's off the rail and besides you're the only poster I've seen in this thread that could be reasonably described as "butt hurt". Although the written word doesn't always accurately display one's mood.

Corey broke much softer than what Philly described. Much much softer.

The majority of jump shot's I've seen have been to get lower level players out of self induced hooks so playing a tighter safety doesn't always apply. These same players aren't all that good at jumping.

Jump at a ball near a pocket and yes, it's a low skill endeaver. Again most jumpers who are tearing up the equipment don't care about position. That's usually why they're jumping in the first place. Out comes their cute little stick and BAM pool just became an ugly game.

And also Dr. Dave's shot could go away too. That shot was wide open for a long kick off the end rail. A way better option.

JC

 

[justadub]

I'm kind of ambivalent about the whole thing, since I primarily play in APA and only full length cues are allowed for jumping. I'm ok with that.

 

[Swighey]

Isn't that what Cory Deuel was doing? And wasn't he chastised and roasted.... even by many on this site?

The fact is there will always be somebody butthurt about some aspect of the game that they don't agree with.

And for some to say a jump shot takes no skill is ridiculous. Even if you happen to make a ball on a jump, maintaining position is super hard. To be frank, it takes no more skill to get a legal hit with a one rail kick then to get a legal hit with a jump shot. You want to talk about skill? Then play a safe that takes the jump shot out of the equation. Now that is an accomplished safe shot.

Using some of the "logic" posted here, you might as well make this shot illegal too...

http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/new/NVA-16.htm

Nah, we are talking about a shot that was illegal (the jump shot) that was made legal. The difficulty of execution is irrelevant (and methinks kicking is usually more difficult otherwise why would anyone jump rather than kick)

 

[buckshotshoey]

It's you're "logic" that's off the rail and besides you're the only poster I've seen in this thread that could be reasonably described as "butt hurt". Although the written word doesn't always accurately display one's mood.

Corey broke much softer than what Philly described. Much much softer.

The majority of jump shot's I've seen have been to get lower level players out of self induced hooks so playing a tighter safety doesn't always apply. These same players aren't all that good at jumping.

Jump at a ball near a pocket and yes, it's a low skill endeaver. Again most jumpers who are tearing up the equipment don't care about position. That's usually why they're jumping in the first place. Out comes their cute little stick and BAM pool just became an ugly game.

And also Dr. Dave's shot could go away too. That shot was wide open for a long kick off the end rail. A way better option.

JC

This is typical of your type of post. I'm not butthurt about anything. I simply stated that a one rail kick is just as easy as a simple jump shot. I didn't mean to sound like I disagreed with Philly. I used it as a general statement about some of the reasoning used against jump shots. There is no way you can say Cory was breaking softer then what Philly described. I would call his soft break "a strong force follow". And guess what? I don't see anything wrong with Cory's soft break either.

"Jump at a ball near a pocket and yes, it's a low skill endeaver.". Guess what? I can argue a kick shot with a ball near the pocket is just as low skilled. Ugly? I don't see a well executed jump shot that way. I see it as artistic. And the Dr Dave shot is harder to accomplish then the kick off the long rail. It sounds to me you want to regulate every shot in the game. And you are calling me butthurt? You are only saying that because you don't agree with me. I NEVER called any one particular person butthurt....until now..... And it's you!

 

[buckshotshoey]

Nah, we are talking about a shot that was illegal (the jump shot) that was made legal. The difficulty of execution is irrelevant (and methinks kicking is usually more difficult otherwise why would anyone jump rather than kick)

I'll give you that. But it was something that was made legal a long time ago. But I disagree with you on Dr Daves shot. That is much harder to accomplish routinely then the kick in that circumstance. One usually will jump when the kick shot is taken away. I myself will usually choose the kick over the jump shot. It leaves fewer chances for something to go wrong.... like a scratch. I'm am saying the kick is no harder to execute then a jump shot