I love this thing. The stroke is like magic.
Myth or real - Stroke smoothness as a requisite for certain shots
- Thread starter Oikawa
- Start date
Well, it depends on what you're referring to as "timing". Many people are really referring to acceleration when they talk about "timing"
Kind of a funny story, when I first started posting here, over twenty years ago now, me and Colin Colenso would get into these long arguments. After arguing and discussing over time, we ended up determing that we agreed on almost everything, we were just using different terms to describe it.
This may be the case here when someone talks about certain shots not being possible without the proper "timing". That has to do with many people REALLY not understanding what's happening when you stroke. They think they know, but don't really.
So while, no, there are no shots that require specific timing, someone who is claiming they do, might not be wrong, they may just not know what they're truly describing.
Last edited:
I made something similar when I was testing my tips.
Seems like both to me: acceleration timed to achieve the target speed at the millisecond of contact. One of the reasons I like a pendulum stroke is that it naturally "coasts" for a bit before contact, making the timing a bit easier.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
"Timing" sounds like CTE for feel. The actual timing would be more along the lines of synaptic latency over neural response over coffee lifting muscular activity.
1. The cue should be coasting on most shots for pros—not accelerating at impact. Smooth strokes are the goal.
2. Many players grip too hard, while pros rely on smoother, more relaxed strokes. Ringside, you sometimes can’t even hear the tip hit the ball.
3. All of my students improve as their flow and smoothness improve—without exception.
Yes, physics dictates that odd strokes can still get the job done. Sure.
I'm having an ongoing argument with a friend about tip/ball contact.
He refuses to acknowledge that different stroke types - as in a smooth stroke that accelerates through the ball, versus a jab that pulls away as soon as possible post result in different outcomes.
He claims the only influence on what happens is the motion at impact.
Spend some time on a 3c billiards table, people! The bigger balls and faster cloth show you things pool does not.
He refuses to acknowledge that different stroke types - as in a smooth stroke that accelerates through the ball, versus a jab that pulls away as soon as possible post result in different outcomes.
He claims the only influence on what happens is the motion at impact.
Spend some time on a 3c billiards table, people! The bigger balls and faster cloth show you things pool does not.
the follow through is just the release. I think
In my experience, it holds true.
I 100% get more deflection when my stroke is quick from the start than when I smoothly accelerate through to the target.
It affects other areas as well but a smooth stroke makes many fairly powerful shots seem effortless.
I 100% get more deflection when my stroke is quick from the start than when I smoothly accelerate through to the target.
It affects other areas as well but a smooth stroke makes many fairly powerful shots seem effortless.
I like to visualize it from the cue ball's perspective: The CB can only "feel" the Angle, Spot and Speed of the tip's impact - all the hard earned stroke mastery that we put into delivering that millisecond of contact is sadly lost on it (fortunately, ASS is all it needs).
I agree with him that only the impact itself has direct influence on the CB, and also recognize the knowledge and technique needed to deliver it.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Yeah but jello brain with the wild ideas is the one has to deliver it - so same thing?
skiergd011013
Well-known member
I was going to say the same thing
Julie kelly also has nearly the same "stroke" as allen
Maybe that means "is teachable" to the most people.
For example, Bustamante:
Picture the shot magically transpiring in your pool space and let yourself be absorbed and melded into this duality of perfection. Release your misgivings and tensions. The spirit will guide you to and through Nirvana. Rinse repeat...
Frankly, I think he might just be shooting _past_ and not _at_ the cueball.
It is a false belief.
According to Newtonian physics, the only thing that causes a cue ball to not be at rest anymore is the impulse vector applied to the face of the cue ball, which has been measured and observed many times with high speed cameras to last less than 1ms. Math agrees. The human body can not generate forces within this short period of time, period.
This means that the impulse vector is the ONLY variable you have to work with. A three dimensional vector is an arrow in space and has the following components:
Position of the Head of the arrow (location)
Length of the tail (magnitude)
Angle of the tail (pitch/yaw)
Therefore the motion of the cue ball is completely determined by:
Tip contact point location on face of the ball the instant the cue tip arrives
The angle of this force
The magnitude of this force.
These can’t be changed during contact.
Fluid mechanics of the air affects things slightly, but it so small it is negligible.
General relativity affects things slightly, but it is so small it is negligible.
Quantum mechanics affects things slightly, but it is so small it is negligible.
The hemisphere that you were born in affects things slightly, but it is so small it is negligible.
You get the idea.
The delivery of the tip to a location on the face of the cueball is not part of this discussion. Its importance in application is isolated from the conversation, because observations of phenomena in isolation from application is exactly what science is.
There is a tendency of uneducated people to be desperate to know something that everybody else doesn’t. They have no credentials to reject an established theory of science based on experience, because their experience is not controlled.
Also, many in the pool player demographic / specific political circles, refuse to allow others to be smarter than themselves. It is called spiteful ignorance. Beware of this.
My credentials: masters degree in electrical engineering, physics focus, and over 10 years of focused pool ball mechanics research.
According to Newtonian physics, the only thing that causes a cue ball to not be at rest anymore is the impulse vector applied to the face of the cue ball, which has been measured and observed many times with high speed cameras to last less than 1ms. Math agrees. The human body can not generate forces within this short period of time, period.
This means that the impulse vector is the ONLY variable you have to work with. A three dimensional vector is an arrow in space and has the following components:
Position of the Head of the arrow (location)
Length of the tail (magnitude)
Angle of the tail (pitch/yaw)
Therefore the motion of the cue ball is completely determined by:
Tip contact point location on face of the ball the instant the cue tip arrives
The angle of this force
The magnitude of this force.
These can’t be changed during contact.
Fluid mechanics of the air affects things slightly, but it so small it is negligible.
General relativity affects things slightly, but it is so small it is negligible.
Quantum mechanics affects things slightly, but it is so small it is negligible.
The hemisphere that you were born in affects things slightly, but it is so small it is negligible.
You get the idea.
The delivery of the tip to a location on the face of the cueball is not part of this discussion. Its importance in application is isolated from the conversation, because observations of phenomena in isolation from application is exactly what science is.
There is a tendency of uneducated people to be desperate to know something that everybody else doesn’t. They have no credentials to reject an established theory of science based on experience, because their experience is not controlled.
Also, many in the pool player demographic / specific political circles, refuse to allow others to be smarter than themselves. It is called spiteful ignorance. Beware of this.
My credentials: masters degree in electrical engineering, physics focus, and over 10 years of focused pool ball mechanics research.
But...
Player has to set this vector in motion. Many have crooked albeit compensated strokes. The nano histrionics may be the only way they can produce the required hit. Ultimately somebody has to _make_ the shot.
The OP wanted confirmation on the following: "My understanding is that for the CB's reaction after hitting it with the cue, all that matters is what the cue is doing at the moment of contact, within a few milliseconds(?) of the impact.... Does anyone here know any science behind this, does the timing/smoothness/delivery etc. whatever you want to call it really affect the range of possible shots that can be executed?"
The answer is no.
No matter how the tip lands on the cue ball, if it generates the same vector as from any other type of smoothness/stroke/timing/delivery, the result of the cue ball will be the same.
Your personal stroke mechanics may end up delivering the tip in a different location with different power and angle. In that case , the vector will be different. But it is the vector difference that makes the cue ball do something different, not an additional parameter affecting the cue ball at the time of contact.
Yeah I know. But the genre is still people insisting ya gotta do this and that etc... they are not entirely wrong.
One more example before I stfu.
The correct physics can only be done by computation. One input. One output.
Absolutely cannot do that with a stick and balls.
The correct physics can only be done by computation. One input. One output.
Absolutely cannot do that with a stick and balls.
DeeDeeCues
Well-known member
The cueball doesn't know how the hit was delivered. Inanimate objects have no knowledge or memory.
What does matter is that humans are meat balloons supported by flexible sticks held together with rubber bands. So when someone says that a stroke has to be performed a certain way, what they are really saying is that they have to perform it that way because of how their body reacts to the forces of the stroke. In other words, you can't put force (i.e. cuestick acceleration) into one part of a flexible system (i.e. the pool player) without that flexible system moving to resolve that force. Therefore, a person needs to compensate somehow to get the reaction needed.
To bring this further, humans are all relatively similar, so what works for one person will likely work to some degree for another. The outliers will have less success learning from the masses (for example, I'm 6'3" 165lbs, what works for someone a foot shorter and 20lbs heavier than me won't work as well for me).
So, there is kind of an absolute truth in what a lot of players claim, but the understanding of why is questionable at best.
What does matter is that humans are meat balloons supported by flexible sticks held together with rubber bands. So when someone says that a stroke has to be performed a certain way, what they are really saying is that they have to perform it that way because of how their body reacts to the forces of the stroke. In other words, you can't put force (i.e. cuestick acceleration) into one part of a flexible system (i.e. the pool player) without that flexible system moving to resolve that force. Therefore, a person needs to compensate somehow to get the reaction needed.
To bring this further, humans are all relatively similar, so what works for one person will likely work to some degree for another. The outliers will have less success learning from the masses (for example, I'm 6'3" 165lbs, what works for someone a foot shorter and 20lbs heavier than me won't work as well for me).
So, there is kind of an absolute truth in what a lot of players claim, but the understanding of why is questionable at best.