IS THE GOAL TO NOT SLOW DOWN AT CONTACT

[bbb]

you always hear to "accelerate" thru the cueball
but would maintaining constant speed be ok too?
i understand you do not want to de-accelarate approaching the cueball
i understand finishing past the the area that was occupied by the cue ball ie "following thru" is important
but does the cue stick have to going faster and faster (accelerate) as it approaches the cueball?
its been slow on the forum so i thought i would ask a question to get you thinking and look forward to your answers
personally i think the answer is yes

IS THE GOAL TO NOT SLOW DOWN AT CONTACT?​

 

[Patrick Johnson]

you always hear to "accelerate" thru the cueball
but would maintaining constant speed be ok too?
i understand you do not want to de-accelarate approaching the cueball
i understand finishing past the the area that was occupied by the cue ball ie "following thru" is important
but does the cue stick have to going faster and faster (accelerate) as it approaches the cueball?
its been slow on the forum so i thought i would ask a question to get you thinking and look forward to your answers
personally i think the answer is yes

IS THE GOAL TO NOT SLOW DOWN AT CONTACT?​

The only thing that matters is hitting the CB accurately and at the proper speed. "Accelerate through the CB" just means don't "brake" your stroke, pulling the tip offline and/or hitting with the wrong speed.

pj
chgo

 

[The_JV]

If you're accelerating then you can't be near the point of decelerating.

Decelerating = bad
Anything else other than 'decelerating' = not as bad

If you can somehow determine and control a constant rate of velocity through the CB, then have at it.

 

[straightline]

Technically, a decelerating cue is a requirement of proper striking. I drop test my cues (vertically onto the tip lol) to ballpark their hit. Ideally they should bounce perfectly vertical. If they don't, that same distortion will find its way into the shot. If you accelerate through the ball, more distortion will be imparted to the shot because the back end will be anchored to your back hand and that's if you have a perfect stroke. I think it best to have a tensionless stroke that simply puts the ball in motion. Follow through will be natural and not subject to human frailty.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... If you can somehow determine and control a constant rate of velocity through the CB, then have at it.

A pool stroke has by its nature a smooth top on its speed/time profile. If you can arrange to hit the ball at close to peak speed, speed control is not very sensitive to the exact time of contact. If you have either significant deceleration or acceleration at the time of contact, the resulting cue ball speed is more dependent on the exact time of contact.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

A pool stroke has by its nature a smooth top on its speed/time profile.

And it typically occurs near the bottom of the stroke in the level part of its arc, so there's a wide sweet spot for both speed and accuracy.

pj
chgo

 

[FranCrimi]

A pool stroke has by its nature a smooth top on its speed/time profile. If you can arrange to hit the ball at close to peak speed, speed control is not very sensitive to the exact time of contact. If you have either significant deceleration or acceleration at the time of contact, the resulting cue ball speed is more dependent on the exact time of contact.

I don't follow what this means. What does "a smooth top on it's speed/time profile" mean? What does your 2nd sentence mean? And What does the third sentence mean?

 

[Imac007]

you always hear to "accelerate" thru the cueball
but would maintaining constant speed be ok too?
i understand you do not want to de-accelarate approaching the cueball
i understand finishing past the the area that was occupied by the cue ball ie "following thru" is important
but does the cue stick have to going faster and faster (accelerate) as it approaches the cueball?
its been slow on the forum so i thought i would ask a question to get you thinking and look forward to your answers
personally i think the answer is yes

IS THE GOAL TO NOT SLOW DOWN AT CONTACT?​

As PJ has succinctly put in this forum, the cue always decelerates on impact.
The point is likely to allow the cue to maintain as much momentum as is needed, to impart to both balls, to execute both the pot and desired position.
Although ROS and Stephen Lee both make a case for using a mostly consistent cue speed, varying height of contact and applying calculated grip pressure squeeze dynamics during shot execution, to modulate speed and cue ball track direction.
CJ Wiley proposes a similar dynamic, consistent stroke speed, but proposes calculated position that allows for the pace consistency.
Annika Sörenstam, a candidate for goat in women’s professional golf once made a point in a women’s golf clinic.
She stood with various stances and used various clubs to hit the ball about 80 yards.
The point she made was that it is the action of the club through impact to produce a particular shot that matters.
Doing what needs to be done to fulfill a functional intent, is the underlying principle.
If not slowing down at contact gives you the result you are after, go for it.
It is likely just one of the ways to do that.
Universal takes on unique individuals shots, don’t recognize differences that make a difference.
As a rule of thumb it works until it doesn’t.
Learning to see the shot for what it is, should be the larger goal.

 

[One Pocket John]

you always hear to "accelerate" thru the cueball
but would maintaining constant speed be ok too?
i understand you do not want to de-accelarate approaching the cueball
i understand finishing past the the area that was occupied by the cue ball ie "following thru" is important
but does the cue stick have to going faster and faster (accelerate) as it approaches the cueball?
its been slow on the forum so i thought i would ask a question to get you thinking and look forward to your answers
personally i think the answer is yes

IS THE GOAL TO NOT SLOW DOWN AT CONTACT?​

Something to keep in mind is that your stick weight is 3 or 4 times more than the weight of the cue ball. When the cue ball is struck the cue stick will stop for an instant and then continue it's forward motion until the cue naturally slows down or you purposely stop it's forward motion.
I never think about accelerating thru the cue ball, I just let the cue do it's thing.

John

 

[The_JV]

A pool stroke has by its nature a smooth top on its speed/time profile. If you can arrange to hit the ball at close to peak speed, speed control is not very sensitive to the exact time of contact. If you have either significant deceleration or acceleration at the time of contact, the resulting cue ball speed is more dependent on the exact time of contact.

And it typically occurs near the bottom of the stroke in the level part of its arc, so there's a wide sweet spot for both speed and accuracy.

Well then here's the challenge that will never be attempted. Put an accelerometer on your cue and see whether or not you have the ability to A:control the amount of velocity, and B:maintain that rate longer than a few instances of the accel jerk* before striking the CB.

With how brief 'jerk' is within the motion profile. Maintaining a constantly velocity should be a breeze for those would think they can do so without dropping velocity.

*jerk: jerk is the rate at which an object's acceleration/deceleration changes with respect to time

Edit:
I'm not saying that maintaining a steady velocity prior to striking the CB is impossible. I'm saying it's a fool's errand. The concept of accelerating through the CB is no different than playing every shot with a minute amount of siding. Rather than roll the dice on correct execution (no decel or random off center siding), play with a known margin against potential error.

 

[slach]

If you're interested in the acceleration of your stroke you can use the QMD3 digital stroke trainer. Here's an example of the QMD3 velocity chart for a shot. Notice that the velocity just starting to level off as the tip approaches the cue, this is a typical shot with slight acceleration thru the cue ball.

 

[FranCrimi]

If you're interested in the acceleration of your stroke you can use the QMD3 digital stroke trainer. Here's an example of the QMD3 velocity chart for a shot. Notice that the velocity just starting to level off as the tip approaches the cue, this is a typical shot with slight acceleration thru the cue ball.
View attachment 595449

If there's acceleration through the cue ball, then wouldn't that be a second stroke?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I'm not saying that maintaining a steady velocity prior to striking the CB is impossible. I'm saying it's a fool's errand.

It's not an errand at all; it's what happens naturally with a normally accelerating stroke.

The concept of accelerating through the CB is no different than playing every shot with a minute amount of siding.

Except that one makes sense (hint: not CJ's nonsense).

pj
chgo

 

[The_JV]

It's not an errand at all; it's what happens naturally with a normally accelerating stroke.

If you purposely attempt to create a steady velocity through the CB then it's a fool's errand. Accelerating doesn't equate to a constant velocity.

Except that one makes sense (hint: not CJ's nonsense).

lol... I don't buy into CJ's psychedelic sales pitch, but I do pay attention to cueist's with real world titles (and also multiple). Fairly certain I read somewhere that O'Sullivan states he cues with an off center CB strike on everything, to prevent the potential random outcomes of missing dead CB strikes. When O'Sullivan comments on how he does what he does, then I take it seriously.

 

[FranCrimi]

p

If you purposely attempt to create a steady velocity through the CB then it's a fool's errand. Accelerating doesn't equate to a constant velocity.

lol... I don't buy into CJ's psychedelic sales pitch, but I do pay attention to cueist's with real world titles (and also multiple). Fairly certain I read somewhere that O'Sullivan states he cues with an off center CB strike on everything, to prevent the potential random outcomes of missing dead CB strikes. When O'Sullivan comments on how he does what he does, then I take it seriously.

I'm not saying O'Sullivan is wrong. I do basically play most shots off-center. But I never rationalized that it was because it was better to choose a side. It felt right to shoot those shots that way to me. I often wonder if players rationalize after the fact.

Also, I found that when it comes to taking advice from anyone, including world champions --- people change their minds. I recall a top level player who swore by a particular aiming system and talked about it all the time to whoever would listen. I thought that maybe it was because he was in a slump and looking for a way to find his game back. Turns out, that's exactly what it was, and a year later he was back to feeling his shots and the aiming system was out the window. But unfortunately, he left behind all his followers who stubbornly stuck with an aiming system that might not have been the best for them, not realizing that the pro who endorsed it had stopped using it months before.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

If you purposely attempt to create a steady velocity through the CB then it's a fool's errand. Accelerating doesn't equate to a constant velocity.

It does for a short span before and after peak velocity - that's Bob's "smooth top" on the velocity curve.

I read somewhere that O'Sullivan states he cues with an off center CB strike on everything, to prevent the potential random outcomes of missing dead CB strikes.

The outcomes are no less random when restricted to one side of center, no matter who says so.

pj
chgo

 

[BC21]

I don't follow what this means. What does "a smooth top on it's speed/time profile" mean? What does your 2nd sentence mean? And What does the third sentence mean?

Bob can correct me if I'm wrong here, but here's a quick diagram that I think shows what he is saying. This is not an actual stroke graph, but just a quick illustration. If the point of impact occurs anywhere in the green, which is on the top or near peak speed of the speed/time graph/profile, then the exact speed of the cue at impact will not make much difference in the resulting speed of the cb. If impact occurs anywhere out of the green then the cb will get less than intended or desired speed.

 

[FranCrimi]

Bob can correct me if I'm wrong here, but here's a quick diagram that I think shows what he is saying. This is not an actual stroke graph, but just a quick illustration. If the point of impact occurs anywhere in the green, which is on the top or near peak speed of the speed/time graph/profile, then the exact speed of the cue at impact will not make much difference in the resulting speed of the cb. If impact occurs anywhere out of the green then the cb will get less than intended or desired speed.

Thanks. That helps a lot.

 

[Island Drive]

you always hear to "accelerate" thru the cueball
but would maintaining constant speed be ok too?
i understand you do not want to de-accelarate approaching the cueball
i understand finishing past the the area that was occupied by the cue ball ie "following thru" is important
but does the cue stick have to going faster and faster (accelerate) as it approaches the cueball?
its been slow on the forum so i thought i would ask a question to get you thinking and look forward to your answers
personally i think the answer is yes

IS THE GOAL TO NOT SLOW DOWN AT CONTACT?​

The ''throwing motion'' of the final swing to hit the cue ball, is similar to a pitcher in baseball, as he transitions from backward to the forward movement of the throw.
Accelerate thru the shot, beginning at the top of your swing/and then transition to striking the cue ball.
Look at many videos of the top players, they all have different hesitation/pause/mechanics at their transition from warm up to hittin' the cue ball.
Shane has a mini one, but look at all top players backswings, as they transition from the top of their swing to their forward movement of the cue stick.
I'd go to a pro event and record just the handle hand during shot execution. From that you'll understand much better. They all have that transition point, but Don't watch Allen Hopkins, he's a one of a kind, as is Cornbread Reds with his slip stroke.

 

[The_JV]

It does for a short span before and after peak velocity - that's Bob's "smooth top" on the velocity curve.

Your responses to me on this have been curious. Perhaps you need to reacquaint yourself with the definition of acceleration.

Nevertheless, you're right. I'm not interested enough to continue swinging at this particular horse.

The outcomes are no less random when restricted to one side of center, no matter who says so.

I disagree, but don't follow the practice myself and again don't care enough to argue. Maybe take it up with Ronnie.