If you do it as a progressive practice -- two out of three and add a ball, only one of three and remove a ball -- the question becomes how many can you get up to.
advice for hitting this draw shot?
- Thread starter evergruven
- Start date
I've explained my rationale--it's still theory to you but reality to me and others who shoot the shot.
You are like me or any other player (EVERY other player) in that you can hear about helpful shots, but not improve until you shoot them.
You are not the only person who refuses to shoot shots I suggest. But by contrast, PBIA Master Instructor Tom Simpson, for example, would shoot and critique EVERY unorthodox shot I suggested. THEN we could have real debates. This is an armchair debate from your standpoint only, because the shot works beautifully for me.
If you won't take two or three minutes to play test a technique used and taught by Nick Varner, Hall of Fame legend, how can you improve your skills--ever?
thanks, I'll try it. I've only ever done five at a time, and think it helped that the balls were so close together for me to get in a rhythm. that said, getting a little out of line in that situation has also been a killer
mixing it up by taking balls out and changing the number of balls sounds like a good test/way to progress.
Actually, I already had. Before you said "at least tell me something" I ALREADY MENTIONED IT REDUCES SHOT VARIABLES.
I CAN further site some other advantages as challenged, but for now I'll limit myself to the difference between you and a Master PBIA instructor is you don't shoot shots to debate them, but debate them from the armchair, and the difference between you and me is when a Hall of Famer says, "This is a little trick I use for stop over a distance" I try the trick and sometimes I improve, sometimes I disregard the tip.
The SATISFACTION isn't winning our debate, I'd be FAR more satisfied if I helped you enjoy pool more. So the satisfaction I'll take is that other people will read the thread, try the tip, enjoy their game more.
I haven't said how hitting stop or stun over varying distances between o.b. and c.b. using the same aim point on the vertical axis EVERY time is reducing shot variables?
I didn't say it because I credit you with understanding pool exceptionally well, and also understanding the goal to reduce shot variables to provide consistency, a given in any/every stick-and-ball sport.
It's a compliment to your high intelligence that I didn't need to say it. Do you want to press the point further?
No, probably because you realize (subconsciously at least) it's not true. Hitting one spot on the CB for different distance stop shots means you have to vary something else - since you also (vaguely) specify the amount of butt elevation, the other variable must be stroke speed. You might find that variable easiest to control accurately - that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
pj
chgo
No, I understand that consciously, and knew before your objection, that if you, personally, hit ten shots with consistent stroke speed while adjusting vertical axis, then flipped to adjust stroke speed instead of tip fractions, that being a fine pool player with feel and touch for stroke speed, your stop and stun would improve immediately, exactly Nick Varner's point.
A player as strong as you could casually, even subconsciously while "in the zone" adjust stroke speed, but unless you are highly regimented, would guess at exact tip fractions over varying distances and not stun/stop as well as Nick's technique.
I am asking you to do me a favor, sincerely, take two to three thoughtful minutes to see how NICK VARNER, not I, is correct in his play. You will also learn about the other concepts invoved including cue angle. I know you don't want to shoot these shots--I know you prefer a very level cue, since you often cite how cue elevation causes other problems due to the physics of pool, so I'm asking you to do me this favor. I appeal to you.
That's not a new idea - I've tried it (too limiting for me). It just took this long to drag the actual reasoning for it out of you (including your incorrect claim that it "reduces variables"). If it takes this much effort for your students to get clarity I don't envy them.
pj
chgo
No, it took too much effort on my part to get you to say you tried it, although I don't understand "too limiting for me". If it's variables, I want to limit variables for me and for students. If it's stop, the cue ball tends to stop dead, as it should.
It takes zero effort for most students, by the way, I say "try this" and most of them try it and like it.
Now, some students are minded like you and require a more Socratic or diplomatic approach. And please know that I always appreciate your keen mind but never your rudeness--I like bluntness--just not rudeness. Why was it a neccessity to mock my teaching again, especially since you've never had a lesson with me or played a game with me? I don't get it. I'm just not in the same plane as you. I was taught at a young age that debate was a great thing from a synthesis-antithesis-new synthesis perspective, but never rudeness. I feel like when you mock me or are rude to me, that you are admitting you agree with me in the debate, but just won't admit it, and so go passive-agressive or downright aggressive.
My claim, by the way, that it reduces variables is proved correct. I likewise at first found Nick's comment heretical, but thought it through. Have you considered the following?
In classic pool teaching, what do we do to adjust on the vertical axis? Adust the bridge hand, which creates different cue angles, which in turn provides differing hits on the cue ball, in terms of different feel and feedback through cue vibration. When you always hit on one cue ball spot only, your cue is at the same angle, and the feel is changed only in terms of speed/grip force, thus:
Traditional Stop: Variables include aim on the c.b., stroke speed/grip, feel based on stick angle.
Nick's Way: Aim same, feel same/quite similar through impact, variable is stroke speed/grip.
That's a nice drill. For beginners, it might be better to play a shot straight into the side to avoid stretching issues.
I like it- thanks!
I also like a related drill that focuses on lateral CB control - drawing perfectly straight back.
- spot an OB at center table
- place the CB in line for a straight shot into the side pocket
- pocket the OB and draw the CB back to its starting position
- without moving the CB, re-spot the OB and repeat
Piece o' cake, right? See how many you can pocket before getting too far out of line. It's surprising how difficult it is to make even several in a row - little errors add up quickly.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
If the cue is elevated, the draw comes quicker than when hit with a level cue. For this shot I would elevate the cue so the cue ball comes back closer to the 11 to shoot the 8.
Last edited: