Is Delivery Part of Fundamentals?

[Cue Strokers Arabia]

Greeting and merry xmass,

I know the title question might seem obvious, however, I would like to put my questions as follows:

1- Is the final delivery part of the fundamentals? or
2- Are fundamentals i.e. stance, grip, bridge etc. exist to help produce the delivery (as a final product)?


I hope the above is clear, let me hear your thoughts


Sam

 

[Bob Jewett]

Everything in the shot sequence is included in fundamentals. A swerving final stroke is a common example of bad fundamentals.

 

[Cue Strokers Arabia]

Everything in the shot sequence is included in fundamentals. A swerving final stroke is a common example of bad fundamentals.

Excellent, lets view it from the other side of the fence, what if everything was not right from stance to bridge... but the final delivery is laser straight. Since a straight stroke could be delivered by some players regardless of their fundamentals, then why is it seen as part of a whole?

 

[Bob Jewett]

Excellent, lets view it from the other side of the fence, what if everything was not right from stance to bridge... but the final delivery is laser straight. Since a straight stroke could be delivered by some players regardless of their fundamentals, then why is it seen as part of a whole?

If you know of a player like that, I would like to see a video.

What useful purpose does the distinction you are trying to make serve?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Greeting and merry xmass,

I know the title question might seem obvious, however, I would like to put my questions as follows:

1- Is the final delivery part of the fundamentals? or
2- Are fundamentals i.e. stance, grip, bridge etc. exist to help produce the delivery (as a final product)?


I hope the above is clear, let me hear your thoughts


Sam

Is “delivery” different from “stroke”, a commonly recognized fundamental?

pj
chgo

 

[Cue Strokers Arabia]

If you know of a player like that, I would like to see a video.

What useful purpose does the distinction you are trying to make serve?

I am just wondering and by observing players who are fundamentally sound such as Eklent Kaci or Fedor Gorst and others who have what we can describe as non-textbook fundamentals yet a laser straight stroke (Delivery) like Bustamante for example. This got me thinking that the delivery is the core fundamental in the whole cycle. A player can get to legendary status for having only a super stroke (not easy but possible) however on the contrary, if a player has the best mechanics and they fail to produce the desired stroke, they are not going to get anywhere.

 

[garczar]

Greeting and merry xmass,

I know the title question might seem obvious, however, I would like to put my questions as follows:

1- Is the final delivery part of the fundamentals? or
2- Are fundamentals i.e. stance, grip, bridge etc. exist to help produce the delivery (as a final product)?


I hope the above is clear, let me hear your thoughts


Sam

Anything done prior to the moment the CB is struck is fundamental in my book. Delivery is just another name for stroke and yes its a fundamental.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... , if a player has the best mechanics and they fail to produce the desired stroke, ....

To me "best mechanics" means among other things that they have set up correctly on the cue ball and have chosen the right angle of the stick, the correct tip offset (amount and type of spin) and they have brought the cue forward along that chosen line at the right speed.

What flaw in your hypothetical "perfect mechanics but a lousy player" is going to cause them to miss the shot or position?

Of course if they plan the shot wrong, there will be problems, and correct planning requires experience. Is that sort of what you are getting at?

 

[bbb]

I am not an instructor

Straight thru the cue ball on the forward stroke what you call “delivery”
is the goal
Text book “fundamentals “.
the parts that get you there
Get you there more reliably
jmho
busty in pool
jim furick (sp) in golf
are 2 examples of guys that do goofy things before delivery
but their delivery is perfect
so to answer your question
from the end of the back stroke to the finish is what counts
how you get there
is individual
but some ways give you a better chance of success
jmho
icbw

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I am just wondering and by observing players who are fundamentally sound such as Eklent Kaci or Fedor Gorst and others who have what we can describe as non-textbook fundamentals yet a laser straight stroke (Delivery) like Bustamante for example. This got me thinking that the delivery is the core fundamental in the whole cycle. A player can get to legendary status for having only a super stroke (not easy but possible) however on the contrary, if a player has the best mechanics and they fail to produce the desired stroke, they are not going to get anywhere.

You've posed something fascinating, certainly.

Some very good players have practice stroke movements with the hand or wrist that waggle the cue but their final stroke is different.

Many very bad players deliver the cue quite straight through the stroke with intention but their aim is incorrect.

The issue to me is what is a "non-textbook fundamental" as you wrote? If a player has an unorthodox stance, aim rubric or even stroke, but their basics/fundamentals obey physics, anatomy and geometry . . .

 

[Ratta]

No matter if you have so called "textbook fundamentals" or an "unorthodox style"-
Important is, that you have consistency. Imo the very best example is Busti. When I saw him the very first time in the early 90 s here in germany.....my first thought was (seeing him from behind": What the fuck.....how can he even hit the cueball?....

And fact is, that Busti has an unbelievable cue ball control- a deadly precise shotmaking- and his speed control is top notch.

So it s funny to discuss about "perfect fundamentals" or "unorthodox fundamentals". To be able to send Whitey from A to B is the key to success.

Everyone will tell (and that is in my opinion right) you, if you start with "good fundamentals"- and immediatley having help from a good player or good instructor- you will definitley benefit for a lifetime.

 

[Dan White]

Greeting and merry xmass,

I know the title question might seem obvious, however, I would like to put my questions as follows:

1- Is the final delivery part of the fundamentals? or
2- Are fundamentals i.e. stance, grip, bridge etc. exist to help produce the delivery (as a final product)?


I hope the above is clear, let me hear your thoughts


Sam

"Delivery" seems to mean the forward movement of the cue before, during and after impact with the cue ball. I'd say the delivery is the result of your fundamentals, good or bad, and is not a fundamental in and of itself. It is the outcome.

 

[Bob Jewett]

"Delivery" seems to mean the forward movement of the cue before, during and after impact with the cue ball. I'd say the delivery is the result of your fundamentals, good or bad, and is not a fundamental in and of itself. It is the outcome.

I think you need to include in fundamentals hitting where you intend on the cue ball. Bad delivery can ruin that.

I think you need to include in fundamentals hitting the ball at the intended speed. Bad delivery can ruin that.

I think you need to include in fundamentals having the cue stick along the right line at contact. Bad delivery can ruin that.

In any case, I think the OP is straining at a gnat.

If you are an instructor and a beginning student does something totally unorthodox, such as address the cue ball outside the edge and low on every shot, should you not worry about it? After all the student is just expressing his own unique way of playing. The answer is no. Of course you should try to get the student to adopt a style that is much more likely to allow them to improve faster. As an instructor you have a duty to get them to at least try the "normal" way of playing.

You see lots of instances in the forums of people saying things like, "Willie does goofy thing X. Can I play like Willie by doing that goofy thing?" It's like conspiracy theories. There are hundreds of goofy things champions do, real and imagined, so which ones are you going to try to put into your game to play like a champion? Which of the thousands of conspiracy theories are you going to pollute your mind with? Why leave any out?

 

[Bob Jewett]

... So to answer your question, from the end of the back stroke to the finish is what counts. ...

No. What actually counts is where on the cue ball you hit along with the speed and the angle of the cue stick. Anything you or the cue stick is doing outside that few milliseconds is irrelevant to the shot. An excellent example of a horribly broken stroke is Judd Trump. His stroke is crooked on every shot. He always lines up on the right side of the ball and then swoops to the center or whichever spot he wants to hit.

The real question for instructors is what is the easiest way for students to learn. I think that way is without the goofy stuff.

Trump was asked about his stroke. He said he was entirely unaware when he learned to play that he was doing such a thing. Of course you have to wonder where his game would have gone if he had found a useful instructor/coach early on and had developed a cue action like Neil Robertson. Maybe he would never have won all those tournaments.

 

[Dan White]

I think you need to include in fundamentals hitting where you intend on the cue ball. Bad delivery can ruin that.

I think you need to include in fundamentals hitting the ball at the intended speed. Bad delivery can ruin that.

I think you need to include in fundamentals having the cue stick along the right line at contact. Bad delivery can ruin that.

In any case, I think the OP is straining at a gnat.

If you are an instructor and a beginning student does something totally unorthodox, such as address the cue ball outside the edge and low on every shot, should you not worry about it? After all the student is just expressing his own unique way of playing. The answer is no. Of course you should try to get the student to adopt a style that is much more likely to allow them to improve faster. As an instructor you have a duty to get them to at least try the "normal" way of playing.

You see lots of instances in the forums of people saying things like, "Willie does goofy thing X. Can I play like Willie by doing that goofy thing?" It's like conspiracy theories. There are hundreds of goofy things champions do, real and imagined, so which ones are you going to try to put into your game to play like a champion? Which of the thousands of conspiracy theories are you going to pollute your mind with? Why leave any out?

Bob -- not sure who your post was directed at but to be clear my post was merely to suggest that the "delivery" is the outcome of whatever your fundamentals or ingrained practices produce on any given shot. I agree with whatever you said about gnats.

 

[Pin]

1- Is the final delivery part of the fundamentals? or
2- Are fundamentals i.e. stance, grip, bridge etc. exist to help produce the delivery (as a final product)?

This question lodged itself in my mind. As a complete abstraction, how do you divide fundamentals and output?
(Straining at a gnat is a great term for this, so I suppose that's what I'm doing!)
I then forgot about the question, until my answer popped into my mind.

It's a false distinction. Pretty much any factor can be cast as either a fundamental or an output.
Stance, grip, and bridge are outputs of various muscle contractions, and also 'fundamentals' in cue delivery.
Cue delivery is an output of stance, grip, bridge, etc., and also a fundamental in playing a shot (along with shot selection and positional plan, etc).
A shot is a component (fundamental) in putting together a rack.
One match is a component in winning a tournament.
One pool player's career is a component in picking a Mosconi Cup team.
Is the gnat dead yet?

Whether OP should think of final delivery as a fundamental presumably depends on the context, but realistically, I think the answer is very probably that he should.

 

[BC21]

It seems to me that the cue delivery is the result of fundamentals. And the performance quality of the delivery depends on the consistency and quality of those fundamentals, despite how orthodox or unorthodox they happen to be.

 

[FranCrimi]

Delivery is affected by the other fundamentals the player is using, however, it is not exclusively the result. The player still has to perform a movement that he can change without changing the other fundamentals, like stroke speed and timing.

 

[BC21]

Delivery is affected by the other fundamentals the player is using, however, it is not exclusively the result. The player still has to perform a movement that he can change without changing the other fundamentals, like stroke speed and timing.

A fundamental is part of the roots, the core of a developed skill. Speed and timing, which are elements of the delivery, are developed. I wouldn't consider them fundamentals.

I mean, if the result of any performed skill can be considered a "fundamental", then every single aspect of performing any skill can be called fundamental. But typically what's considered fundamental is the roots or core of the skill, not the performance of that skill.

 

[FranCrimi]

A fundamental is part of the roots, the core of a developed skill. Speed and timing, which are elements of the delivery, are developed. I wouldn't consider them fundamentals.

I mean, if the result of any performed skill can be considered a "fundamental", then every single aspect of performing any skill can be called fundamental. But typically what's considered fundamental is the roots or core of the skill, not the performance of that skill.

I think you're being a little too abstract with the definitions. I'm 100% sure that the delivery is a fundamental and is not just a result. As an instructor, I've gotten to see many different combinations of fundamentals. I've seen players with great fundamentals ---with perfect stances --- pretty much perfect everything, get down and poke-stroke the ball with poor stroke timing. That can't possibly be the result of any of the fundamentals leading up to that stroke.