any truth to slight elevation on draw shots?

[Patrick Johnson]

This is absolutely NOT true (must hit the ball below center to get draw).

"Hit the ball below center" means "hit with the stick pointed below the ball's center of mass", not "hit below the horizontal equator".

Fast Larry was in my house

My sympathies.

I like the low and level Scott Lee taught me, but you will have more miscues with this.

There's no reason to miscue more often with a level cue than with an elevated one.

IMHO I think the low and level is harder to hit than the chop down draw.

I think you're just hitting closer to center when you're hitting downward. You could do the same thing when hitting level.

Fast Larry also says

...nothing worth hearing.

pj
chgo

 

[seymore15074]

This is absolutely NOT true (must hit the ball below center to get draw).

You must hit below center to get draw, however, center is relative to the elevation of your cue for a center hit...

If your cue is at a 45 degree angle, the center line is at a 45 degree angle staring you in the face.

It's not a hard concept, and obviously we are all well aware of how to draw a ball. Why must everyone argue over terminology so damn much?

 

[Hail Mary Shot]

I think we need to change the topic into a statistical question like "which drawshot do you prefer, level or elevated?" or "how often do you miscue in a level draw compared to an elevated draw?" figures are good measurement. as to powerdraw, it's still debatable. some say left and some say right !

 

[td873]

This is absolutely NOT true (must hit the ball below center to get draw).

Actually, this is ABSOLUTELY true: you MUST hit below center to get draw. Your statement illustrates your misunderstsanding. Your reliance on Fast Larry confirms it.

-td

 

[Bob Jewett]

Actually, this is ABSOLUTELY true: you MUST hit below center to get draw. ...

No, not absolutely. Some people think "below center" is the same as "below the equator". A more reasonable definition is that for a ball hit "below center," a line dropped perpendicularly from the center of the cue ball to the projection of the axis of the cue stick would intersect the table if continued in that direction. Or as Byrne put it, if you're aiming below the "pit of the peach", you will get draw.

 

[Skeezicks]

I'm not wading through 3 pages of replies. Please forgive me if what I say has been said already.

I've heard a few people say you should elevate your cue slightly on draw shots (I'm thinking specifically of power draw shots, where I have some trouble). Mostly though I've heard to keep the cue as level as possible, obviously it will not be completely level.

You will get no more rpm with an elevated cue and therefore no better power draw. You can get a higher spin/speed ratio. The drag shot aspect of that might be useful for something. One thing I use it for is to get exaggerated bend off of the tangent line.

 

[td873]

No, not absolutely. Some people think "below center" is the same as "below the equator". A more reasonable definition is that for a ball hit "below center," a line dropped perpendicularly from the center of the cue ball to the projection of the axis of the cue stick would intersect the table if continued in that direction. Or as Byrne put it, if you're aiming below the "pit of the peach", you will get draw.

I figured that as a physics guy, you wouldn't argue where the center of a sphere was AKA your "pit of the peach." Have you been reading too much DCP, Bob
Besides, I'm not sure your "reasonable" definition is usable (since it took 37 words to get out), or even understandable by those "people" you mentioned. As for "below the pit of the peach," that's usable -> and short. I'll quote PJ on this one. I think he is "people":

"Hit the ball below center" means "hit with the stick pointed below the ball's center of mass", not "hit below the horizontal equator".

I stand by my statement that you must absolutely hit below the center. The only thing missing was a reference line. That line is parallel to your striking angle. And it has to go throught the center of the cue ball. Of course using your tip contact point as reference. Doh, now my definition is getting unworkable.

Below center. Period. Absolutely.

-td

 

[Hail Mary Shot]

I'm not wading through 3 pages of replies. Please forgive me if what I say has been said already.
You will get no more rpm with an elevated cue and therefore no better power draw. You can get a higher spin/speed ratio. The drag shot aspect of that might be useful for something. One thing I use it for is to get exaggerated bend off of the tangent line.

that is absolutely true.

 

[av84fun]

Wow your right I see that problem every day LOL

You don't have to see it every day in order to be well advised to practice a given shot. That particular one is featured in one of Byrne's books or videos...I don't recall which because I have them all... and he states that a player who can execute the shot routinely "should be feared."

I can see this having a use but lets be honest that cluster was already there. and if you chose to break it with a power draw off of another ball ... thats poor position play and planning on your part.

To be "honest" how do you know is was "already there" and/or was a result of "poor position play and planning?"

One skill you seem to need more work on is the decision as to when to get into clusters. The advanced player will play so as to position the CB so as to not only break out the cluster, but to send the balls in question to places from which the run can be continued and does NOT just blast into clusters at the earliest opportunity and hope for the best.

It is ENTIRELY possible in a given layout that getting into a cluster could ONLY be accomplished with a draw shot and it is equally possible that drawing into it might provide the best angle to distribute the balls in a way that would maximize the odds of continuing the run.

If your shooting clear down the table with the intention of drawing all the way back to where you started. you missed position somewhere along the way.

Sorry, but that's just nonsense. Example. After the break during which the 1 ball was pocketed, the CB ends up near the head spot...the 2 ball is in the jaws of the right foot corner and the 2 ball is on the head rail.

SO...you shoot "all the way down the table with the intention of drawing all the way back to where you started." (using follow on such a shot become draw off the rail and risks stopping the CB far down table and trying to thin the shot is chancy due to contact with the points of the pocket. There would be SCORES of other examples that refute your thesis.

and you might have a point it can bail you out of a tight spot but truth be told unless it was a missed safety by the other guy. you shouldn't be in that position to begin with.

Simply incorrect as noted above. Some of the most dramatic moments in professional competition result from the not at all rare need to use power draw.

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

Not relevant???...Massey is the PERFECT example of elevated cue draw. None do it better!...Very Relevant.

I interpreted Scott's remark as saying that since Massey has an almost unequalled power stroke, the rest of us can't do what he does whether we elevate our cues or not.

My take is that since we HAVE to elevate slightly in the vast majority of cases (due to the existence of the rails) then it is best to standardize on a slight elevationn for sake of consistency.

As for whether a perfectly level or slightly elevated cue will produce the greatest draw distance (all other things being equal) I have no clue and unless the Jewetts or Keohlers of the world have actuall conducted controled scientific experiments to PROVE the matter all the "one way is best" people are doing is commenting on their highly limited personal observations wherein the result could just as easily be influenced by muscle quickness, the exactness of aim and all the other factors that combine to produce an optimal result.

Possibly such experiments have been conducted that I have not seen. But until then we are all just guessing as to which method produces the greatest draw distance. Therefore, it seems to me that such phrases as "in my opinion"..."based on my observations" etc. should replace the more frequently used phrases such as "no that is wrong" etc.

All the above is, of course, just my opinion! (-:
And I would greatly appreciate being pointed to any formal studies that might have been conducted on this subject.
Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

I'm not wading through 3 pages of replies. Please forgive me if what I say has been said already.
You will get no more rpm with an elevated cue and therefore no better power draw. You can get a higher spin/speed ratio. The drag shot aspect of that might be useful for something. One thing I use it for is to get exaggerated bend off of the tangent line.

Would you please point me to your source of experimental data that proves what you assert is correct?

Please know that I am not in the least suggesting that it is NOT correct. Rather, I just wouldn't know the FACTS one way or the other and I would be interested in reading about any study that would prove that point.

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

td873

Below center. Period. Absolutely. {/QUOTE]

You are obviously extremely knowledgable and I don't mean to be at all argumentative, but I think that Bob was closer...a lot closer actually to conveying the point that your above bottom line statement.

The age old problem with such attempts at brief description is that a huge percentage of the viewing audience will equate "below center" with center being depicted as lines around the circumference of the ball...like lines of latitude on a globe.

Byrnes reference to the pit of the peach far more successfully draws the readers attention that the "center" in question lies NOWHERE on the surface of the ball but INSIDE IT! (the center of mass)

So I vote for Byrne's description since it is both brief and graphic.

Regards,
Jim

 

[Skeezicks]

Would you please point me to your source of experimental data that proves what you assert is correct?

Please know that I am not in the least suggesting that it is NOT correct. Rather, I just wouldn't know the FACTS one way or the other and I would be interested in reading about any study that would prove that point.

Sorry, no experimental data.

The question was about power draw. Power draw is propotional to CB rpms only. There are two ways to increase CB rpms- increase the tip offset and increase the speed of the cue. An elevated cue can get no greater offset before miscuing than a level* cue can. An elevated cue will not be accelerated more than a level* cue will. (Do you disagree here?) Hence no greater rpms, hence no greater power draw.

I think many are thrown off by two things when thinking about this. The first is confusing quantity and quality of spin. And the second is from watching carom players spinning those big CBs like crazy with elevated cues on fast clean heated carom cloth. (The CBs are likely juiced if it's an exhibition.)

IMO

 

[av84fun]

Sorry, no experimental data.

The question was about power draw. Power draw is propotional to CB rpms only. There are two ways to increase CB rpms- increase the tip offset and increase the speed of the cue. An elevated cue can get no greater offset before miscuing than a level* cue can. An elevated cue will not be accelerated more than a level* cue will. (Do you disagree here?) Hence no greater rpms, hence no greater power draw.

I think many are thrown off by two things when thinking about this. The first is confusing quantity and quality of spin. And the second is from watching carom players spinning those big CBs like crazy with elevated cues on fast clean heated carom cloth. (The CBs are likely juiced if it's an exhibition.)

IMO

Thanks. But some have suggested that with an elevated cue, you get more launch off the table than with a more level stroke...all other things being equal...and while airborne, the CB holds its rpm's better due to the absence of cloth friction and therefore AT THE POINT OF OB CONTACT which is the only rpm that matters, there will be greater rpm as a result of an elevated cue than a level one.

If you disagree with that, I am just curious as to why?

An elevated cue will not be accelerated more than a level* cue will. (Do you disagree here?)

I'm not sure. The following factor MAY be so tiny as to be meaningless but...just as your car will move faster at a given engine rpm when traveling down a 5 degree downward slope than it would travel on a level road...of course due to the gravitational assist...the dowward tilted cue stick MAY be able to travel faster with a given degree of force than a level cue.

Intuitively, I would assume that any gravitational assist to a downward sloped cue stick would be statistically irrelevant...but intuitition gets us into trouble sometimes!! (-:

At the risk of being redundant with other posts, where I come down is, sicne we HAVE to elevate on the vast majority of draw shots because of the rails, why not STANDARDIZE on a slight elevation for the sake of consistency which is one of the most valuable traits in all sports.

For example, I tend to hit the vast majority of my draw shots (where I need only 2-3 diamonds of distance) at the exact same spot on the CB and vary the pace only! Doing so gives me only one variable whereas, if I alter both the pace and the CB contact point, then the error factor is compounded (you could choose to only alter the contact point and keep the pace the same and accomplish the same thing but altering pace works better for me.)

I TOTALLY agree that the carom exhibitions on TV recently were a HOOT to watch!!

Regards,
Jim

 

[Jal]

...There are two ways to increase CB rpms- increase the tip offset and increase the speed of the cue. An elevated cue can get no greater offset before miscuing than a level* cue can. An elevated cue will not be accelerated more than a level* cue will. (Do you disagree here?) ...

I'm afraid it's not that simple. An elevated cue produces more impulse both between the stick and cueball, and between the cueball and cloth. Apparently nobody here knows which one wins the battle.

Jim

 

[Jal]

But some have suggested that with an elevated cue, you get more launch off the table than with a more level stroke...all other things being equal...and while airborne, the CB holds its rpm's better due to the absence of cloth friction and therefore AT THE POINT OF OB CONTACT which is the only rpm that matters, there will be greater rpm as a result of an elevated cue than a level one.

If you disagree with that, I am just curious as to why?

The airborne part doesn't necessarily mean a greater spin rate at the OB. If two balls start off at the same point, one sliding on the surface, the other beginning with a bounce, the latter ball will lose more speed and spin during that bounce, and each subsequent bounce, than the other one merrily sliding along. But it's not obvious how much this applies at a particular cue elevation since there are various degrees of overlapping of the stick/CB and CB/cloth impulses, depending on elevation and perhaps speed. In other words, because of continuing stick interference, that first bounce doesn't act quite like a normal bounce.

Jim

 

[td873]

So I vote for Byrne's description since it is both brief and graphic.
Jim

Below the "pit of the peach" is exactly the same as "below center" since the "pit" IS [conceptually] the center. Moreover, to say that "below the pit of the peach" is more accurate than "below center" because "below center is unclear" is oxymoronic. IMO, there is no more clarity in the peach analogy than using the word center. There is no added clarity because of fruit.

As an example, if you could imagine the center of the cue ball (i.e., the pit of the peach) when you address your draw shot, and then make the rest of the ball "disappear" (figuratively of course), your tip would have to be aiming "below the center" (i.e, below the pit of the peach).

As a sidenoted: A paragraph long technical description is simply a long winded description of what "hitting below center" means. Put another way, it does not disprove "below center" rather it defines and clarifies it. Thus, "below center" cannot be incorrect, since the technical definition illustrates where "below center" is.

On a technical note: there is no question that we are talking about rotation of a sphere. And how is this rotation (spin) achieved? By striking the cue ball at an offset in relationship to the center of the sphere (aka "below the pit of the peach"). The obvious prerequisite is that the contact point of the stick must be at an offset. This offset is necessarily defined by a line passing through the center of the cue ball parallel to the angle of the cue stick. Thus, when discussing draw on a cue ball, you absolutely have to be below the center.

Lastly -> even if your reference point is the horizontal line parallel with the table passing through the center of the cue ball - you STILL have to hit below this line (aka, below the center, aka below the pit of the peach) since, the cue stick must also be parallel to the table given the plane to determine offset.

-td

 

[seymore15074]

Below the "pit of the peach" is exactly the same as "below center" since the "pit" IS [conceptually] the center. Moreover, to say that "below the pit of the peach" is more accurate than "below center" because "below center is unclear" is oxymoronic. IMO, there is no more clarity in the peach analogy than using the word center. There is no added clarity because of fruit.

I think the "pit of the peach" thing makes it much clearer. Not because it's fruit, but because then you think of center as a little ball in the middle of the cue that can be hit "below" from elevations, too; rather than just thinking of center as an equator... When someone hears the pit of the peach, they are not thinking about a circular ring around the outside of the cueball anymore...

Oh wait, not that I even care anyway...

 

[Skeezicks]

that is absolutely true.

The triple grin! So I take it this was covered already.

 

[PetToilet]

only read the first two pages, but actually, you will get more spin (which you can see by breaking everything into components. for an easy comparison, do masse), but it will be negated by the fact that the cue ball goes up in the air, so less action.

edit: doh this is an old thread.