I doubt that it ups anybody's game compared with how they'd play if taught a working straight stroke.
pj
chgo
why did jose hit the 9 this way?
- Thread starter evergruven
- Start date
pj
chgo
After this, I'm closed for discussion. In order to engage in a back and forth with someone both parties have to be capable of reading and understanding what the other says and then replying in a logical manner.
It appears that this is something you somehow can't comprehend. Every reply you've given to the people questioning your premises (PJ, Bob Jewett and myself) has had nothing to do with what we actually said.
Instead you're off on another tangent, totally unrelated to any points we've attempted to convey.
Case in point is my opening sentence in this post. We'll see if you've listened.
Yeah, I know pj. Just trying to be a little kind and/or diplomatic. Why, I have no idea. Must be mellowing out in my old age.
Back to the OP. Someone mentioned camera angle on the video. That's a good point because I've seen Jose play many times and if he was using left he'd be addressing the CB on the left. So if it appeared as center ball or slightly right on the video it was probably due to the camera angle.
If nothing else maybe a few people saw Parica for the first time. Not that much quality video of him out there, although there is some. I'd suggest people search it out and take a look. This guy had one of the sweetest strokes you'll ever see.
By the way, talking about this has made me think of one possible reason that swooping might make squirt compensation seem a little easier, at least at first.
When the player's bridge length is longer than the cue's squirt pivot length (a relatively high squirt cue), then to apply side spin with the cue angled at the correct squirt adjustment angle the bridge must move slightly sideways - or the tip must swoop a little.
I think learning straight-stroke squirt corrections (with the bridge placed as needed) is the right solution, but I can see this one reason swooping might seem to work.
pj
chgo
When the player's bridge length is longer than the cue's squirt pivot length (a relatively high squirt cue), then to apply side spin with the cue angled at the correct squirt adjustment angle the bridge must move slightly sideways - or the tip must swoop a little.
I think learning straight-stroke squirt corrections (with the bridge placed as needed) is the right solution, but I can see this one reason swooping might seem to work.
pj
chgo
Many of the pros who learned back in the 80's use that method. I know Earl used to play that way and I think he still does. Tony Robles told me about it in the 80's but I had already learned the technique from Dalton Leong. It was popular among the 9 ball road players of that time.
Even some of the 14.1 players were experimenting with it. If my memory serves me correctly, guys like Ray Martin, Jack Colavita and Pat Fleming all used that technique, at least for some time.
I believe the technique resurfaced again over the last few years. Someone told me about it as if it were a brand new discovery. I laughed.
That's the first thing I said about swooping. It was believed at the time that it caused less cb squirt.
Yep, that's what it would look like. Without the swoop the cue angle would be too small at contact, undercorrecting for squirt - swooping would angle the cue more correctly for that amount of squirt, making it look like less. The same thing is usually accomplished with a straight stroke angled a little more (by shortening the bridge or moving it a little sideways).
pj
chgo
Last edited:
I'd expect it to be a fading technique with the trend toward low-squirt shafts - with lower squirt cues (and average bridge lengths) swooping does the opposite of what's needed for squirt correction.
pj
chgo
You may have missed where otherwise good players struggled with offset methods for decades.
I've replied to you and to all others logically, and patiently. You called an aspect of my teaching "ridiculous" and said above I'm incapable of understanding, and I'm continuing to be logical with you, yet patient.
For example, I did note you said something like "I've swooped 50 years but it introduces variables, so folks shouldn't do it" so my question to you was both respectful and on target. I can rephrase: "Why boast that you've done a technique for decades that you dislike?"
Your logic is impeccable.
Remember, you're in a poolroom. :smile::smile:
Coincidentally, Dr. Dave just posted a new video called "Top 10 Billiards Myths Debunked" - swoop-enhanced sidespin is #4.
pj <- I swear I didn't put him up to it
chgo
pj <- I swear I didn't put him up to it
chgo
Last edited:
In '07 at Derby City i made a point of watching ER as much as possible. I noticed two things: on most soft-to-medium spin shots he used a parallel-shift. On some harder/higher-speed spinners he would sometimes use BHE. I never once noticed him swooping in towards the cue-ball. I would say he used parallel-shift 70-75% of the time. Busti plays a lot the same as ER on spinners.
Wow. After shooting just a couple of swoop strokes Dave understands the stroke completely and why so many players may have 'mistakenly' used it for a few decades. That's amazing!
As for that miscue --- I'm not surprised that he brought it up. That's what would happen to someone like Dave who never spent a decent amount of time trying to learn the stroke.
That reminds me of the endless elbow-drop discussions here and all the debunkers who never took the time to actually experiment with it and find out when it helps to use it.
Last edited:
Updated the illustrations as below:
Last edited:
Let's put my post up here so we're clear on what we're talking about.
"After this, I'm closed for discussion. In order to engage in a back and forth with someone both parties have to be capable of reading and understanding what the other says and then replying in a logical manner.
It appears that this is something you somehow can't comprehend."
In the 1st few sentences (above) I basically say that discussion is pointless due to certain factors. I then continue (below) by giving a verifiable reason for my position.
" Every reply you've given to the people questioning your premises (PJ, Bob Jewett and myself) has had nothing to do with what we actually said.
Instead you're off on another tangent, totally unrelated to any points we've attempted to convey.
Case in point is my opening sentence in this post. We'll see if you've listened."
For a very simple, clear cut example I'd refer you to the posts between you and Mr. Jewett. They are good examples primarily because whenever he questions your premises (on this thread and many others) he almost always does so by asking you a direct question which you invariably fail to answer. He then asks the question again, and again you don't answer. And so on.
The latest in this thread is post 37 where he asks (3 specific questions) and you're off on a tangent (carabao, countless pros, top 50) instead of answering his questions.
His questions arise from previous statements you've made so it logically follows that you might want to answer the question as a means of defending your position.
There are beginner and intermediate players reading this stuff who are trying to learn and we should be very careful to give them the best info possible.
This thread has gotten way off topic as many on here tend to and I'm as much to blame as anyone but when I see (IMO) bad advice being given I'm gonna say something.
More examples:
In post #56 you imply that a swoop stroke causes the side of the tip (instead of the center of the tip) to contact the CB. For heavens sake, look at your own diagrams.
Whenever a tip contacts the outer edge of a CB it always strikes it with the edge as opposed to the middle. It has to because the ball is round. How it got to that point is irrelevant.
I'm questioning your statement and giving reasons why. Would you like to reply?
In post #26 ( despite my lame attempt at humor... the figure 8 stroke) I asked one specific question (why do you say parallel english is not true english) which you never answered. In another post you called it false english. Why?
I then gave my opinion on what factors govern the application of english. You had no reply.
I then gave 2 specific reasons why I would not recommend it. I never boasted about anything or said I dislike it. Perhaps the reason I say to avoid it, is just maybe, I've learned something in 50 years.
I didn't call your teaching methods ridiculous. I was referring to your contention that swooping generates more english while also decreasing the chance of miscue.
I still think it's ridiculous. The overwhelming majority of miscues are stroke related, period. It's my position that a poor stroke is much more likely to occur when using a swoop stroke (due to more variables) than during a straight one.
By the way, in case you haven't checked back I asked you direct questions in this https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=496308&page=2 thread also. Hope you get a chance to reply.
My issue is primarily that people ask you direct questions and you never answer them.
I answer some questions and ignore other questions, something I have in common with everyone. Sometimes a direct answer is best, but sometimes answering a question with a question can really help the other person.
There are good threads at AZ regarding "parallel english" and difflection, PJ explains it well, and there are also long discussions at AZ where people pick apart what they think Greenleaf did or didn’t do, but I can’t force someone to see something they don’t want to see.
You wrote, “How it [the cue tip] got to that point is irrelevant.” It is not. Direction of stroke influences the cue ball. For example, a pivot stroke and an offset stroke cause the same section of cue tip to strike the same point on the cue ball, one parallel to the shot line, one diagonal to the shot line, for different cue ball action.
Regarding #56, swoop indeed causes the side of the tip to meet the cue ball, because the cue tip’s center starts pointed at dead center cue ball! But my point was a wrist twist is more efficient than an arm lunge in a swoop when doing so.
I appreciate your concern for newer players, that you feel swoops can cause more miscues—but I school both newer and longtime players who’ve struggled with english for a long time, and I’m good at teaching a swoop stroke. I use an incredibly simple technique to do so.
I checked that other thread yesterday but didn't see your questions. I replied today to them. Thank you for prompting me.
Last edited:
I don't know if this is what Matt means, but there's really no such technique as "parallel english" because you can't make shots with it. For the vast majority of sidespin shots the cue has to be angled across the shot line, not parallel with it, or the shot will miss because of squirt/swerve.
Some people say "parallel english" to mean they just apply sidespin by feel, without thinking about how the cue is angled. To them it might seem like it's parallel, but if they're making shots it mostly isn't.
Is the bridge hand on the shot line or beside it?
pj
chgo