Lambros has recently made a few shorter cues for a couple of pretty good players.
Aiming Systems - The End Justifies the Means
- Thread starter CJ Wiley
- Start date
- Status
Lambros has recently made a few shorter cues for a couple of pretty good players.
Hank did the Haney Project which was the number 1 show on The Golf Channel.
Please call me CJ, "Mr. Wiley" makes me feel "antiquated" :wink: That's a great strory about Raymond, I always liked him and his style....he was a great gambler too in his earlier days.
I have a good relationship with Hank Haney (Tiger Woods coach for 6 years) and got invited yesterday to be on his new radio show on a couple of weeks...it goes out to 350 Radio Stations on FOX SPORTS Radio....Hank did the Haney Project which was the number 1 show on The Golf Channel....We have always said we were going to show the world how similiar golf and pool really are....I think we could do that in a very entertaining way
HANK HANEY SHOW HANK HANEY GOLF CHANNEL
Please call me CJ, "Mr. Wiley" makes me feel "antiquated" :wink: That's a great strory about Raymond, I always liked him and his style....he was a great gambler too in his earlier days.
I have a good relationship with Hank Haney (Tiger Woods coach for 6 years) and got invited yesterday to be on his new radio show on a couple of weeks...it goes out to 350 Radio Stations on FOX SPORTS Radio....Hank did the Haney Project which was the number 1 show on The Golf Channel....We have always said we were going to show the world how similiar golf and pool really are....I think we could do that in a very entertaining way
HANK HANEY SHOW HANK HANEY GOLF CHANNEL
Buddy used to burn his shaft with a cigarette if I remember correctly
Buddy used to burn his shaft with a cigarette and always wanted the burn side up. :smile: I've marked mine with a dot using a marker, but after a few games (if gambling) I go into a trance and forget it's even there.
Buddy always said it was more about contacting the same part of the tip (the top part) to the cue ball than anything about the cue its self....hmmm, I've just never been that particular.
Buddy used to burn his shaft with a cigarette and always wanted the burn side up. :smile: I've marked mine with a dot using a marker, but after a few games (if gambling) I go into a trance and forget it's even there.
Buddy always said it was more about contacting the same part of the tip (the top part) to the cue ball than anything about the cue its self....hmmm, I've just never been that particular.
I've heard of this being called "back-hand english". Earl lines the shot up near the center of the cueball and, on the final stroke, hits the cueball off center. I'm assuming, if your bridge hand is stable, that this can only be done by moving your "back-hand" up, down, left, right on the final stroke.
Rubyron,
My guess is that Mr. Strickland turns the cue because of his 'death grip' on the cue. When you grasp that tightly you activate the muscles of the thunb & in the forearm. It is difficult to stroke the cue straight that way & the twisting (my guess) is or maybe was to offset that infringement. However that would be only in one direction. My guesss again is that Mr. Strickland is now so proficient that he can stroke straight while twisting in either direction.
Back hand english does not have to involve any twisting. It is merely moving the tip off center by moving the back hand a bit as opposed to moving both the back hand & the bridge hand to the side, so called 'parallel' english.
Backhand english adjusts, somewhat, for the squirt caused by the shaft deflection when hitting the cue ball off center. If you line up straight & move both front & back hand into a 'paralell' type position there is no 'auto adjustment' for the squirt so to speak. You will probably mis the shot unless you make the appropriate adjustment to account for the cue ball 'squirt' & 'swerve'. That is why some say there is no such thing as 'paralell' english.
Sorry if you already new this 'stuff'. I just thought it could not hurt in case you did not already know.
I'm sure CJ can qualify regarding Mr. Strickland's stroke.
I was tying to help if needed.
Sincerely,
Rick
PS I am NOT an instructor but I have been playing, with english, for 46 yrs.
Last edited:
When Earl strokes there is no twisting. The only way you can tell he hit the cueball off center is by what the cue ball does.
Rubyron,
Perhaps I'm mistaken or we are thinking different things regarding twisting.
In one of Mr. Wiley's post I thought that he said that Mr. Strickland 'twists' & that you would not know it by looking. In a post here today Mr. Wiley refered to his own 'twisting' in clockwise & counter clockwise directions. That is 'twisting', turning the cue not angleling or swooping the cue.
I may be wrong & if I'm wrong then I'm wrong.
Sorry if I've caused any confusion. That was not my intent.
Best Regards,
Rick
Pre stroke slight wrist twist
For me, twisting the wrist CW or CCW in an amount changing the direction of my thumb 10° or 3/16-ths applies an equivalent of one tip right or left english respectively, at the cue ball equator. You can play with the amount and find an english equivalent.
Twist the wrist before rather than during your stroke. This is useful in tight quarters. Basically it allows a center ball aim and cue ball path but with the effect of a tip of english. It can also be used in conjunction with normal english in an additive manner.
:thumbup:
For me, twisting the wrist CW or CCW in an amount changing the direction of my thumb 10° or 3/16-ths applies an equivalent of one tip right or left english respectively, at the cue ball equator. You can play with the amount and find an english equivalent.
Twist the wrist before rather than during your stroke. This is useful in tight quarters. Basically it allows a center ball aim and cue ball path but with the effect of a tip of english. It can also be used in conjunction with normal english in an additive manner.
:thumbup:
Last edited:
I think you must be hitting the ball differently and just getting different natural effects.
If we both hit the cue ball on the same spot at the same angle and speed, we'll get the same results.
When things turn out differently than "science" says they should, my first reaction isn't to assume that I've changed the laws of physics; it's to wonder what I've missed.
pj
chgo
This is correct. You get sidespin by hitting offcenter. You get more sidespin by hitting more offcenter. If twisting your wrist produces more sidespin, it's because twisting your wrist makes you hit more offcenter.
There's no magic in pool. Pool is easy to understand - it's just hard to do very accurately. Forget the voodoo and practice hitting the cue ball where you want to.
pj
chgo
Can you explain what you mean by twisting it before your stroke
What I'm talking about happens at the moment of impact. It either amplifies or counteracts the natural effects of the cue. Can you explain what you mean by twisting it before your stroke, I'm not following what that does if it's not happening at impact.
What I'm talking about happens at the moment of impact. It either amplifies or counteracts the natural effects of the cue. Can you explain what you mean by twisting it before your stroke, I'm not following what that does if it's not happening at impact.
Last edited:
When things turn out differently than "science" says they should, my first reaction isn't to assume that I've changed the laws of physics; it's to wonder what I've missed.
pj
chgo[/QUOTE]
Me too. When I mis or even make a shot or the CB reacts in a manner that I did not expect. I immediately ask 2 questions. 1. what happened & 2. what did I do to cause it?
If I can not quickly answer those because I do not know the answer, I start looking for faulty equipment. My tip, chalk on the balls, a bad rail, something.
I do not think that the ghost ball caused it.
RJ
PS Maybe it was a time warp convergance of a paralell universe causing a break in the time continueum or a solar flare affect that effected the metal in the bar box cue ball. I must have watched too much Star Trek stuff, but I do now have a wireless hand held communicator. I even have the flip up model.
pj
chgo[/QUOTE]
Me too. When I mis or even make a shot or the CB reacts in a manner that I did not expect. I immediately ask 2 questions. 1. what happened & 2. what did I do to cause it?
If I can not quickly answer those because I do not know the answer, I start looking for faulty equipment. My tip, chalk on the balls, a bad rail, something.
I do not think that the ghost ball caused it.
RJ
PS Maybe it was a time warp convergance of a paralell universe causing a break in the time continueum or a solar flare affect that effected the metal in the bar box cue ball. I must have watched too much Star Trek stuff, but I do now have a wireless hand held communicator. I even have the flip up model.
I wonder how many people who are reading these CJ threads, have used a touch of inside on every shot for an hour or more?
Some of these posts are making me think back to the old days of RSB when discussions took place arguing about "accelerating your cue" through the cue ball. The academics said it couldn't be done. The players said they do it. As far as I am concerned, it is the attempt to do so that gives the positive results. Without the attempt to accelerate the cue stick through the cue ball, less positive results will prevail.
Some of these posts are making me think back to the old days of RSB when discussions took place arguing about "accelerating your cue" through the cue ball. The academics said it couldn't be done. The players said they do it. As far as I am concerned, it is the attempt to do so that gives the positive results. Without the attempt to accelerate the cue stick through the cue ball, less positive results will prevail.
Hi Joey,
What is RSB? I agree with you. Similiar to golf, where if you do a certain thing on the backswing it can completely inhibit something being done to the ball unless a countermove is made on the foward swing.
'If you atempt to do this, you won't actually be able to do that but this will occur'. Sometimes the effort has to exceed the intended outcome to actually get that outcome.
My $0.02
RJ aka Rick
Last edited:
Words are just a secondary representation of experience.
You're right on target Joey. The language we are speaking isn't about the physics of the experience, that's going to "feel different" for everyone and we do have to generalize, that's why I'm not going to get into "word play" with people that have no referential index (haven't tried what we're discussing) because until they do we can't speak the "same language". I know these things well enough to be able to tell if someone has done their research and development on the table or not. They show it by the questions and comments they communicate.
Accelerating your cue is more like a "swing thought". The best golfers in the world will only play a round of golf with one, maybe two swing thoughts, and I was the same way. Acceleration was the one I used most often because it was the equal opposite of "dogging it" in my mind. If there's another word you prefer to reframe "dogging it" then replace mine with yours.
These words are merely "anchors" that tie thousands, maybe even millions of thoughts together to consistently achieve an outcome. In this case it's to get your body synchronized to play championship pool, or the best pool you can muster. :smile: We can make it complicated or make it simple, the choice is up to the individual.
I've worked at this Game for thousands of hours to make it as simple as possible. Words are just a secondary representation of experience. If I share my experience there are many that will benefit, and that's why it's worthwhile for me because ultimately if I can help many get better at the Game then the Game can get better for Many. I am very confident this will happen. "The Game is the Teacher"
You're right on target Joey. The language we are speaking isn't about the physics of the experience, that's going to "feel different" for everyone and we do have to generalize, that's why I'm not going to get into "word play" with people that have no referential index (haven't tried what we're discussing) because until they do we can't speak the "same language". I know these things well enough to be able to tell if someone has done their research and development on the table or not. They show it by the questions and comments they communicate.
Accelerating your cue is more like a "swing thought". The best golfers in the world will only play a round of golf with one, maybe two swing thoughts, and I was the same way. Acceleration was the one I used most often because it was the equal opposite of "dogging it" in my mind. If there's another word you prefer to reframe "dogging it" then replace mine with yours.
These words are merely "anchors" that tie thousands, maybe even millions of thoughts together to consistently achieve an outcome. In this case it's to get your body synchronized to play championship pool, or the best pool you can muster. :smile: We can make it complicated or make it simple, the choice is up to the individual.
I've worked at this Game for thousands of hours to make it as simple as possible. Words are just a secondary representation of experience. If I share my experience there are many that will benefit, and that's why it's worthwhile for me because ultimately if I can help many get better at the Game then the Game can get better for Many. I am very confident this will happen. "The Game is the Teacher"
I agree with this, but I think it's important for readers to understand it's a helpful concept, not a physical reality.
But I think this goes too far. Thinking you're "accelerating through the cue ball" isn't a universal necessity for maximum positive results.
It's a defunct usenet forum (the letters stand for rec.sport.billiard) that was the place to go for pool/billiards info until sometime in the early 2000s. It was unmoderated, so it eventually got overrun with trolls and spam. We at RSB used to think moderated forums like AzB were for people who preferred peace to content.
pj
chgo
I'm a science guy too. However, if results are repeatable and current physics science can't explain the results, it's not necessarily voodoo. It could be the scientific explanation has not been found yet or the explanation may not be physics based.
The true scientific explanation might be totally different than what we currently think. Science is not just study of what happens when a robot or perfectly straight stroke hits a ball. Science is not just physics. Psychology and behavior is part of science too. Confidence, perception, human tendencies.
Maybe what we are missing is not the physics explanation. Maybe the technique or piece of equipment, in the hands of an imperfect human, creates repeatable results due to mental explanation or a repeatable "error".
Last edited:
- Status