What beginner pool tip do you wish you learned sooner?

bbb said:
are you saying the unconventional methods they adopted
lead to " More consistency and less susceptibility to breaking down under pressure "
so should be adopted by everyone ??????
or they just worked better for shane and mika
Click to expand...
I think mechanical presets are fantastic for locking in consistency but which particular ones to use and how will be player dependent. Schmidt has a funky grip/wrist preset that obv works great for him. Orcollo has the most absurdly pronated grip you'll ever see. Also works awesome for him. So these guys and SVB all stray from convention and apply the same mechanical concept yet it ends up looking completely different in each case.

The beautiful thing about a conventional neutral hang is that it is easy to communicate and apply for just about everyone. But can it be improved upon as players lean into their own preferred feels and tendencies? Of course. And these top players, among countless others, have developed setups and little moves that make their strokes go, that do make them better and less likely to break down.

As far as Mika's stroke goes... it is radically different from a conventionl stroke in terms of force production. As are many pinoy strokes. The major advantage of that stroke type is speed control and effortless power. I think strokes of this nature when married with a reliable mechanical structure have the highest ceiling of any in the world. But that is a matter of opinion and personal preference I guess.

Earl, SVB, Mika, Efren, and Busty are 5 of my favorite players and arguably all in the top 10 all time. None are conventional. Their strokes are not full of flaws that have been overcome by countless hours of play. They are better.
 
WobblyStroke said:
I think mechanical presets are fantastic for locking in consistency but which particular ones to use and how will be player dependent. Schmidt has a funky grip/wrist preset that obv works great for him. Orcollo has the most absurdly pronated grip you'll ever see. Also works awesome for him. So these guys and SVB all stray from convention and apply the same mechanical concept yet it ends up looking completely different in each case.

The beautiful thing about a conventional neutral hang is that it is easy to communicate and apply for just about everyone. But can it be improved upon as players lean into their own preferred feels and tendencies? Of course. And these top players, among countless others, have developed setups and little moves that make their strokes go, that do make them better and less likely to break down.

As far as Mika's stroke goes... it is radically different from a conventionl stroke in terms of force production. As are many pinoy strokes. The major advantage of that stroke type is speed control and effortless power. I think strokes of this nature when married with a reliable mechanical structure have the highest ceiling of any in the world. But that is a matter of opinion and personal preference I guess.

Earl, SVB, Mika, Efren, and Busty are 5 of my favorite players and arguably all in the top 10 all time. None are conventional. Their strokes are not full of flaws that have been overcome by countless hours of play. They are better.
Click to expand...
Again i ask
If they are better should a player try to copy it?
 
There's no "it" about how come a beater, beats. It's a system and things like headroom come to mind. I say headroom for convenience. You can see it at work and doesn't require a lot of specificity.
 
If
bbb said:
Again i ask
If they are better should a player try to copy it?
Click to expand...
The simple answer is no. U can TLDR the rest.

Players can learn to apply certain ideas or mechanical principles and arrive at their own particular style, but to try to copy the visual appearance of someone else's fully refined technique would be foolish.

This is actually a big problem with THE fundamentals too. People get caught up in the form and getting the look right, but they miss the function and the reason it looks that way. Most people fall inside a fairly narrow range and the prescribed right look will get them at least close to ideal. For some lucky folks, that exactly right look will have them locked in and their stroke dead repeatable and 'on rails'. Others will be just that few degrees off perfect for them and never attain that top level of consistency.

Those greats I mention above have "better" strokes because they are reliable and repeat over and over and can be trusted to do so under great pressure. This goes beyond mere mechanics, tho their mechanics are sound even if they don't match the cookie cutter textbooks. And even the textbooks barely ever touch on efficient force production, which at best is left to the subconscious. At worst, some recommend biceps. Want to guess how many of the 5 greats I listed power their stroke with their biceps? I'd wager a lot on zero.
 
WobblyStroke said:
If

The simple answer is no. U can TLDR the rest.

Players can learn to apply certain ideas or mechanical principles and arrive at their own particular style, but to try to copy the visual appearance of someone else's fully refined technique would be foolish.

This is actually a big problem with THE fundamentals too. People get caught up in the form and getting the look right, but they miss the function and the reason it looks that way. Most people fall inside a fairly narrow range and the prescribed right look will get them at least close to ideal. For some lucky folks, that exactly right look will have them locked in and their stroke dead repeatable and 'on rails'. Others will be just that few degrees off perfect for them and never attain that top level of consistency.

Those greats I mention above have "better" strokes because they are reliable and repeat over and over and can be trusted to do so under great pressure. This goes beyond mere mechanics, tho their mechanics are sound even if they don't match the cookie cutter textbooks. And even the textbooks barely ever touch on efficient force production, which at best is left to the subconscious. At worst, some recommend biceps. Want to guess how many of the 5 greats I listed power their stroke with their biceps? I'd wager a lot on zero.
Click to expand...
thanks @WobblyStroke
one last question (for now ...:ROFLMAO:)
whats TLDR ?
 
WobblyStroke said:
If

The simple answer is no. U can TLDR the rest.

Players can learn to apply certain ideas or mechanical principles and arrive at their own particular style, but to try to copy the visual appearance of someone else's fully refined technique would be foolish.

This is actually a big problem with THE fundamentals too. People get caught up in the form and getting the look right, but they miss the function and the reason it looks that way. Most people fall inside a fairly narrow range and the prescribed right look will get them at least close to ideal. For some lucky folks, that exactly right look will have them locked in and their stroke dead repeatable and 'on rails'. Others will be just that few degrees off perfect for them and never attain that top level of consistency.

Those greats I mention above have "better" strokes because they are reliable and repeat over and over and can be trusted to do so under great pressure. This goes beyond mere mechanics, tho their mechanics are sound even if they don't match the cookie cutter textbooks. And even the textbooks barely ever touch on efficient force production, which at best is left to the subconscious. At worst, some recommend biceps. Want to guess how many of the 5 greats I listed power their stroke with their biceps? I'd wager a lot on zero.
Click to expand...

So, are you saying that efficient stroke force production is by gravity or that it is by active shoulder motion?

If active flexion of the elbow is excluded, those would seem to be the two choices.
 
Not Dead Ted said:
So, are you saying that efficient stroke force production is by gravity or that it is by active shoulder motion?

If active flexion of the elbow is excluded, those would seem to be the two
Click to expand...
Producing a coordinated multi joint movement efficiently is complex. Talented movers will do this naturally subconsciously. This is why leaving stroking to the subconscious is currently the best advice being offered. What it certainly is not, is muscling one of the joints, like the over simplified "triceps back, biceps forward" rooted in a fifth grader level understing of movement, would suggest.

You're right though, for all the guys saying things like, "let the cue do the work", gravity certainly plays a role.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
"Triceps back, biceps forward" sounds like an accurate description of a pendulum stroke, avoiding extraneous movement by freezing the elbow in place. What's wrong with it?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
Im not gonna get into the minutia of how efficient movement works here but will say that I've heard pendulum purists say things like "it's okay if the elbow moves up slightly in the backswing".

I will go one further than them by saying it is not just okay, but that this tiny ossilation you see in the elbow of so many top players makes the stroke much more efficient.

I'm not saying they do this consciously (tho iI'm sure the obvious big moves are for some), but rather that their subconsciously driven stroke is utilizing a charachteristic of vertabrate movement that purely contraction driven movements cannot compete with in efficiency nor force control.

So there's nothing wrong with triceps back, biceps forward, there are just better ways to move is all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbb
WobblyStroke said:
Im not gonna get into the minutia of how efficient movement works here but will say that I've heard pendulum purists say things like "it's okay if the elbow moves up slightly in the backswing".

I will go one further than them by saying it is not just okay, but that this tiny ossilation you see in the elbow of so many top players makes the stroke much more efficient.

I'm not saying they do this consciously (tho iI'm sure the obvious big moves are for some), but rather that their subconsciously driven stroke is utilizing a charachteristic of vertabrate movement that purely contraction driven movements cannot compete with in efficiency nor force control.

So there's nothing wrong with triceps back, biceps forward, there are just better ways to move is all.
Click to expand...
"Vertabrate movement" means movement of the spine (vertabrae), right? How do you think that works in the stroke?

And how does slight rising of the elbow on the backswing "make the stroke much more efficient"?

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
"Vertabrate movement" means movement of the spine (vertabrae), right? How do you think that works in the stroke?

And how does slight rising of the elbow on the backswing "make the stroke much more efficient"?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
Vertabrate movement as in how movement evolved in all vertabrate animals. This applies to efficient movement in a horse or cheetah as much as it does to a human.
 
Bob Jewett said:
I think it turns out that the biceps is not the main muscle that brings the stick forward. It is some other muscle next to the biceps.
Click to expand...
Yes, if relying on an elbow flexor contraction as the primary driver of the stroke, it isn't actually the biceps, it is the other elbow flexor, the brachialis. Tho many people do indeed use the biceps and are often plagued by their wrist turning over as the primary function of the biceps is suppination (turning the palm face up in a dead hang... or curling the wrist in towards the body in a pool stroke)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bbb
Patrick Johnson said:
"Vertabrate movement" means movement of the spine (vertabrae), right? How do you think that works in the stroke?
Click to expand...
WobblyStroke said:
Vertabrate movement as in how movement evolved in all vertabrate animals. This applies to efficient movement in a horse or cheetah as much as it does to a human.
Click to expand...
My question was "How do you think that works in the stroke?" I don't think "it's how movement evolved" answers that.

And again, how does slight rising of the elbow on the backswing make the stroke much more efficient? Do you know of any specific drawbacks to using a pendulum stroke with fixed elbow?

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
Patrick Johnson said:
My question was "How do you think that works in the stroke?" I don't think "it's how movement evolved" answers that.

And again, how does "slight rising of the elbow on the backswing make the stroke much more efficient"?

Do you know of any specific drawbacks to using a pendulum stroke (with fixed elbow)?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
You misunderstood my answer. By "vertabrate movement," i was referring to how movement works in all vertabrate animals, not the bones of the spine.

That little elbow ossilation is a tell tale sign that the player is moving naturally... more in line with how vertabrates evolved to move. And yes, it is more efficient. Not only does it feel more effortless, but it literally uses fewer calories. I'm sure you could see how saving calories and needing less food would act as a driver behind this evolutionary development.

As I said, coordinated multi joint movements and force production are complex. You can take entire university level courses on the topic and not cover it all. So yes, reducing a multi joint movement down to muscle A back, muscle B forward is laughably over simplifying it.

"Leave stroking to the subconscious" is the best we got right now. Maybe one day someone will explain the details to yall in a book ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top