Back hand English

Matt_24

Matt_24

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've heard the term "back hand english" used and perhaps I'm slightly confused. I learned aiming/english mostly on my own through trial and error. I have no problem aiming, applying English, etc, etc.....but still want to learn this terminology.

When I aim, I site the shot before I get down on the cue ball....lining it up in my mind as if I was using a centerball hit. That is how I find the "line" of the shot. When I get down on the shot, and I'm aiming up on the cue ball, I might take two practice strokes "in" the line - aiming for a centerball hit, and when I again find the line while I'm in my stance, I'll start aiming with english. So, I'm still lined up for a centerball hit, but I'm aiming on the cue ball to apply english. I'm guessing this is "backhand english"?

Anyhow, this may not be the best explanation of how I personally do things, but I was just curious if I was using backhand english. Can anyone name any pro's that use this method of applying English so I can study it a bit? This is just the way I naturally figured out how to do things. What are the other methods?

Thanks.
 
Matt_24 said:
I've heard the term "back hand english" used and perhaps I'm slightly confused. I learned aiming/english mostly on my own through trial and error. I have no problem aiming, applying English, etc, etc.....but still want to learn this terminology.

When I aim, I site the shot before I get down on the cue ball....lining it up in my mind as if I was using a centerball hit. That is how I find the "line" of the shot. When I get down on the shot, and I'm aiming up on the cue ball, I might take two practice strokes "in" the line - aiming for a centerball hit, and when I again find the line while I'm in my stance, I'll start aiming with english. So, I'm still lined up for a centerball hit, but I'm aiming on the cue ball to apply english. I'm guessing this is "backhand english"?

Anyhow, this may not be the best explanation of how I personally do things, but I was just curious if I was using backhand english. Can anyone name any pro's that use this method of applying English so I can study it a bit? This is just the way I naturally figured out how to do things. What are the other methods?

Thanks.
Click to expand...


Back Hand English is just another namefor aim-and-pivot. You aim centerball and then pivot about your bridge hand (by moving your back hand) to shoot with english. It works if the following conditions are met:

1. You happen to be bridging at or close to the cue's squirt pivot point
2. There is no swerve (stick very level or cueball close to object ball)

It's a good thing to know about and understand, but watch out for those who claim this is some sort of prescription for what ails you....
 
Ok, this is what I've always done then - just naturally. I guess if you play enough you find what works (if you're really practicing, paying attention, and making an effort to improve ---- I know we've all seen the guys banging balls for 20 years who still can't run out a rack of 9 ball). This method always made the most sense to me.

When you start talking swerve, and pivots, and this and that.........I try to block that from my mind..LOL. Scares me a bit, and over-complicates what is really very simple (I think). I just simply:

1. Aim up a shot for a centerball hit in a standing position (pre-shot routine) to find the shot line.
2. Get down on the ball (which if done properly automatically gets your cue dead in that shot line) and aim my tip in that line to the center of the cueball.
3. Once I'm confident of the aim (which is usually right away), I will adjust my tip to hit the type of english I want. I may adjust my bridge hand, but also might not. I really don't think about that and have never paid attention to it...(and don't want to).

I can't view the video here at work but i'll try and check it out some other time. If anyone can decipher if my above description is backhand english, let me know. Whatever it is...it works perfect for me.
 
Listen, I've been playing all of my life. I can play all games pretty decent. For the life of me I've never experience "squirt" (at least not with pool balls...<rimshot>). Sorry, I couldn't resist a good dirty joke.

On a serious note-

Please define: SQUIRT

Please define: SWERVE

I've ALWAYS avoided these technical discussions...but since I started this we might as well continue! :) Thanks for the info various pool professors.
 
Matt_24 said:
Please define: SQUIRT
Click to expand...
If you hit the CB with left english, the trajectory of the CB will tend to deviate to the right (of the line parallel to your cue). If you hit the CB with right english, the CB will tend to deviate to the left. This phenomenon of the CB deviating to the opposite direction of where you apply your english is defined as squirt (others define it as deflection).

Matt_24 said:
Please define: SWERVE
Click to expand...
If you hit the CB with left english, the CB may initially "squirt" to the right, but if allowed enough room to roll, the left spin will make the CB curve, or swerve, back to the left. So swerve is the phenomenon that brings the CB back in the direction of the applied english due its spin. Swerve is mostly observable on long and soft shots with english.
 
Matt_24 said:
I've ALWAYS avoided these technical discussions...but since I started this we might as well continue! :) Thanks for the info various pool professors.
Click to expand...


I was going to ask how you had 900+ posts but had never read about BHE on this board.......but that comment above explains it...

I would suggest using the search feature and typing in BHE...you will get enough study material to last you months....

I would suggest some key things too look for.....
  • Of course watch Colin's video
  • "Cornerman" and others have made some posts regarding finding "your" cues pivot point
  • Look for references to "short shot" vs "long shot" BHE
 
Matt_24 said:
Ok, this is what I've always done then - just naturally. I guess if you play enough you find what works (if you're really practicing, paying attention, and making an effort to improve ---- I know we've all seen the guys banging balls for 20 years who still can't run out a rack of 9 ball). This method always made the most sense to me.

When you start talking swerve, and pivots, and this and that.........I try to block that from my mind..LOL. Scares me a bit, and over-complicates what is really very simple (I think). I just simply:

1. Aim up a shot for a centerball hit in a standing position (pre-shot routine) to find the shot line.
2. Get down on the ball (which if done properly automatically gets your cue dead in that shot line) and aim my tip in that line to the center of the cueball.
3. Once I'm confident of the aim (which is usually right away), I will adjust my tip to hit the type of english I want. I may adjust my bridge hand, but also might not. I really don't think about that and have never paid attention to it...(and don't want to).

I can't view the video here at work but i'll try and check it out some other time. If anyone can decipher if my above description is backhand english, let me know. Whatever it is...it works perfect for me.
Click to expand...
Matt,
From that description it appears you are doing it by feel. Which is ok...most pros do it this way. Not necessarily because it's the best way, but it is the only way they could figure out how to do it.

There are a reasonable percentage of shots where just lining up center ball on the CB and pivoting will result in a pot with enough accuracy. On the ones that would miss, players tend to avoid them or subconsciosly make compensations with the bridge and/or cue action to adjust.

Colin
 
Last edited:
Colin Colenso said:
Matt,
From that description it appears you are doing it by feel. Which is ok...most pros do it this way. Not necessarily because it's the best way, but it is the only way they could figure out how to do it.

There are a reasonable percentage of shots where just lining up center ball on the CB and pivoting will result in a pot with enough accuracy. On the ones that would miss, players tend to avoid them or subconsciosly make compensations with the bridge and/or cue action to adjust.

Colin
Click to expand...

I am a feel player - 150%. The best players I've ever seen learned by feel, as well as copying what they say from other players and eventually figuring out WHY they did this or that in their techinque, and WHY it truly worked. Hitting balls, gambling, and copying good players is how I learned.

If I tend to overthink a shot, or position, or something like that I get paralysis by analysis. When I'm playing bad, I speed up to play better.....because I demand myself to just trust my abilities and run out. The extent of my thinking is what shape I want to get. Running out is fun.

Swerve, and throw, and twist, and shout, and squirt......good lord. I could never make a ball if I started thinking about all of that.

So, I guess I've established that I'm more of a feel player in technique....but I understand how the balls react (although I've never bothered to give each reaction a term - or learn the term.....like "squirt"...sorry, couldn't resist saying "squirt" again --does this qualify for a warning?) and I can run out.

For you technical guys (Colin, Cornerman, etc)..who are obviously talented at math, and calculus, physics, etc...and really enjoy formulating that "x" amount of english equals "y" amount of squirt or swerve and "z" reaction to the cueball......what is going through your mind during your pre-shot routine, and as you are executing a shot. I can imagine some "Good Will Hunting" type calculations floating around in the air as you line up the shot....or you doing a math problem on the mirror in the bathroom as you are taking a break in the match (sorry...really like that movie). Perhaps your imaginary roommate at Princeton who is an English major is yelling and bothering you while you're trying to shoot.....oops..that is A Beautiful Mind, right? Another Math genius though.

ok..i'll shut up now. Looking forward to more responses.
 
Matt_24 said:
I am a feel player - 150%. The best players I've ever seen learned by feel, as well as copying what they say from other players and eventually figuring out WHY they did this or that in their techinque, and WHY it truly worked. Hitting balls, gambling, and copying good players is how I learned.

If I tend to overthink a shot, or position, or something like that I get paralysis by analysis. When I'm playing bad, I speed up to play better.....because I demand myself to just trust my abilities and run out. The extent of my thinking is what shape I want to get. Running out is fun.

Swerve, and throw, and twist, and shout, and squirt......good lord. I could never make a ball if I started thinking about all of that.

So, I guess I've established that I'm more of a feel player in technique....but I understand how the balls react (although I've never bothered to give each reaction a term - or learn the term.....like "squirt"...sorry, couldn't resist saying "squirt" again --does this qualify for a warning?) and I can run out.

For you technical guys (Colin, Cornerman, etc)..who are obviously talented at math, and calculus, physics, etc...and really enjoy formulating that "x" amount of english equals "y" amount of squirt or swerve and "z" reaction to the cueball......what is going through your mind during your pre-shot routine, and as you are executing a shot. I can imagine some "Good Will Hunting" type calculations floating around in the air as you line up the shot....or you doing a math problem on the mirror in the bathroom as you are taking a break in the match (sorry...really like that movie). Perhaps your imaginary roommate at Princeton who is an English major is yelling and bothering you while you're trying to shoot.....oops..that is A Beautiful Mind, right? Another Math genius though.

ok..i'll shut up now. Looking forward to more responses.
Click to expand...


The beauty of BHE (IMO) is that you actually think less....Once you find your cues "sweet spot" (pivot point) the only thing you think about is lining up for a "no english" shot and then pivot...(or swoop depending on your method of application...I actually use a mini swoop on "long" shots and pivot on short shots)....You really don't need any math to find your cues pivot point....

another benefit I am sure you will realize if you have not already is that using BHE you can actually cue closer to center CB and get as much english as you would further out from center using PE.
 
BRKNRUN said:
The beauty of BHE (IMO) is that you actually think less....Once you find your cues "sweet spot" (pivot point) the only thing you think about is lining up for a "no english" shot and then pivot...(or swoop depending on your method of application...I actually use a mini swoop on "long" shots and pivot on short shots)....You really don't need any math to find your cues pivot point....

another benefit I am sure you will realize if you have not already is that using BHE you can actually cue closer to center CB and get as much english as you would further out from center using PE.
Click to expand...

Pivot point, Swoop, mini-swoop? I just felt my game decline by 2 balls after reading this post.

On long shots I tend to find the point of contact on the object ball, and aim my cue ball to hit there. On short shots I (yes..you knew I was going there) find the point of contact on the object ball, and aim my cue ball to hit there. Works every time.

Don't take me seriously...I'm just enjoying giving you a hard time because you're smarter than me. LOL...
 
Matt_24 said:
Pivot point, Swoop, mini-swoop? I just felt my game decline by 2 balls after reading this post.

On long shots I tend to find the point of contact on the object ball, and aim my cue ball to hit there. On short shots I (yes..you knew I was going there) find the point of contact on the object ball, and aim my cue ball to hit there. Works every time.

Don't take me seriously...I'm just enjoying giving you a hard time because you're smarter than me. LOL...
Click to expand...

From my experience I have come to the conclusion that I am not smarter than anyone...so your statement is incorrect...LOL

There are two methods of applying BHE

Aim & Pivot
Aim & Swoop

The key to both methods of applying BHE is that the (bridge hand) does not move. (unless your using a predator shaft, but I doubt I would even attempt BHE using a predator shaft)

I use Aim & Swoop on long shots mainly for accuracy in making the ball...What I personally do (if I am even using english at all on long shots) is to set up as if I were going to shoot the ball with no englsh, then on the actual stroke I will (keeping the bridge hand solid) err in the stroke to favor hitting the right side or left side of center on the CB (depending on the needed english)...I am only talkinig about 1/2 tip or so of swoop and if you watch me shoot....you would probably not even notice if you did not know I was applying BHE via the swoop.......(Watch Earl & Buddy for the Swoop method of english)

For me getting more than a tip off center coupled with a (long) shot can lead to an ugly miss...I really try to use as little english as possible on long shots....I relate this type of shot to hitting a 3-iron in golf....Yes I "can" do it if necessary...but I sure don't want to have to hit 3-iron into every green (if you know what I mean)...
 
Matt_24 said:
I am a feel player - 150%. The best players I've ever seen learned by feel, as well as copying what they say from other players and eventually figuring out WHY they did this or that in their techinque, and WHY it truly worked. Hitting balls, gambling, and copying good players is how I learned.

If I tend to overthink a shot, or position, or something like that I get paralysis by analysis. When I'm playing bad, I speed up to play better.....because I demand myself to just trust my abilities and run out. The extent of my thinking is what shape I want to get. Running out is fun.

Swerve, and throw, and twist, and shout, and squirt......good lord. I could never make a ball if I started thinking about all of that.

So, I guess I've established that I'm more of a feel player in technique....but I understand how the balls react (although I've never bothered to give each reaction a term - or learn the term.....like "squirt"...sorry, couldn't resist saying "squirt" again --does this qualify for a warning?) and I can run out.

For you technical guys (Colin, Cornerman, etc)..who are obviously talented at math, and calculus, physics, etc...and really enjoy formulating that "x" amount of english equals "y" amount of squirt or swerve and "z" reaction to the cueball......what is going through your mind during your pre-shot routine, and as you are executing a shot. I can imagine some "Good Will Hunting" type calculations floating around in the air as you line up the shot....or you doing a math problem on the mirror in the bathroom as you are taking a break in the match (sorry...really like that movie). Perhaps your imaginary roommate at Princeton who is an English major is yelling and bothering you while you're trying to shoot.....oops..that is A Beautiful Mind, right? Another Math genius though.

ok..i'll shut up now. Looking forward to more responses.
Click to expand...

Matt,
First let me say that I think your questioning and decision for playing the way you do represents wise advice.

When I first read of BHE, I was pretty enthused, being an analytical type. But from what I could find on the subject, and comparing that to the knowledge of physics regarding particularly throw, squirt and swerve, but also other variables, and with some testing, I soon found that BHE was far from an instant cure all.

For quite some time I've been testing and working out ways to predict and counter for these variables on a range of shots. After a lot of work, I now can estimate the required adjustments for most shots pretty well, but certainly not perfectly, but I believe, on many shots, approaching, if not surpassing the intuitive capabilities of the finest pros.

I do believe, that with a well developed system, and adequate practice, a systematic approach can be significantly superior in using english for a wide range of shots than trial and error via intuition. But no such system now exists. One of my aims is to expand upon the formulation of one.

As for what I'm thinking when using this type of system: BRKNRUN summed up part of it very well, when he said it actually can simplify the process. But to be sure, in the initial phases of learning some shots, and trying to work out the required adjustments for speed, bridge length, offset, cue elevation etc, it can certainly put you off the shot.

But after a while you know almost instantaneously where the initial aim should be for most shots required. In such a case, I might line up the pot as if potting for center ball medium follow speed, then adjust my bridge a mm or so left so as to align the shot at the inside jaw of the pocket. Then I just pivot and shoot straight on that line at the speed and spin imagined.

This doesn't revove all intuitive judgement from playing. What it actually does is use the one intuitive skill that we are most adapt at as the baseline. That is, the medium speed center ball follow pot.

If you can't line those up intuitively, then the system won't be very useful.

Colin
 
Colin,

So to sum it up you're saying:

Practice ( - with the purpose of learning/improvement )

Repitition ( - of all shots, particularly those you're not familiar with or have been giving you problems, developing muscle memory )

Focus ( - on what you're doing, how the balls are reacting, etc )

Study ( - watching and playing against better players, studying what they do and trying to figure out for yourself "why" they do it....they can tell you verbally, but is has to "click" for you as a player by doing it until you intuitively understand it and reach a level of success with a particular application of style or technique )

...and just paying attention to how the balls react to particular aims, applied english, bridge lengths, strokes, etc, develops and improves ability.

Everyone does the same thing to be a better player. We just phrase it differently. :)
 
Matt_24 said:
Colin,

So to sum it up you're saying:

Practice ( - with the purpose of learning/improvement )

Repitition ( - of all shots, particularly those you're not familiar with or have been giving you problems, developing muscle memory )

Focus ( - on what you're doing, how the balls are reacting, etc )

Study ( - watching and playing against better players, studying what they do and trying to figure out for yourself "why" they do it....they can tell you verbally, but is has to "click" for you as a player by doing it until you intuitively understand it and reach a level of success with a particular application of style or technique )

...and just paying attention to how the balls react to particular aims, applied english, bridge lengths, strokes, etc, develops and improves ability.

Everyone does the same thing to be a better player. We just phrase it differently. :)
Click to expand...
That's kind of right Matt,
but with the traditional method, it's pretty much trial and error. Whereas, with a systematic approach that is accurate in terms of its physical analysis, one can readily recognise the possible cause of missing a shot.

For example. Say you're playing a long half ball shot down the rail slow with inside english from 6 inches away from the OB. Usually a player will undercut the shot, due to the throw, but he may not understand why. He just learns to aim thinner for this shot.

A few minutes later he has the same shot, but needs to play it firm with IE. He may aim expecting the undercut, but be surprised that this time he overcuts the shot.

But a player who knows the underlying principles (complex as they may be) has a good chance of predicting the expected outcome, without having to repeat that particular shot many times.

When he misses, he can probably identify the correct cause, rather than wonder if the cause was bad aiming, bad stroking, a skid, a bad roll etc etc.

So being able to predict outcomes, based on a knowledge of the variables, helps a player to quickly narrow down the causes of bad shots and to correct them with significantly less trial and error.

And having an alignment and adjustment mechanism, allows a player to make objective, rather than subjective comparisons of each shot attempt.

Colin
 
Last edited:
Colin Colenso said:
That's kind of right Matt,
but with the traditional method, it's pretty much trial and error. Whereas, with a systematic approach that is accurate in terms of its physical analysis, one can readily recognise the possible cause of missing a shot.

For example. Say you're playing a long half ball shot down the rail slow with inside english from 6 inches away from the OB. Usually a player will undercut the shot, due to the throw, but he may not understand why. He just learns to aim thinner for this shot.

A few minutes later he has the same shot, but needs to play it firm with IE. He may aim expecting the undercut, but be surprised that this time he overcuts the shot.

But a player who knows the underlying principles (complex as they may be) has a good chance of predicting the expected outcome, without having to repeat that particular shot many times.

When he misses, he can probably identify the correct cause, rather than wonder if the cause was bad aiming, bad stroking, a skid, a bad roll etc etc.

So being able to predict outcomes, based on a knowledge of the variables, helps a player to quickly narrow down the causes of bad shots and to correct them with significantly less trial and error.

And having an alignment and adjustment mechanism, allows a player to make objective, rather than subjective comparisons of each shot attempt.

Colin
Click to expand...
Very nicely said Colin. May I paste this as a preamble to all of my posts? :)

I can see people having an aversion to math and physics, but I think they're in a state of denial or resentment when they claim that knowlege of it is a detriment to one's game. It could be a distraction, shortcircuiting your natural tendency to develop a "feel", and maybe for that reason it's better to develop a basic set of skills before getting into the details. But you've expressed well why being aware of them can be very helpful.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Jal said:
Very nicely said Colin. May I paste this as a preamble to all of my posts? :)
Click to expand...
You're welcome, but it's at your own risk:p

I can see people having an aversion to math and physics, but I think they're in a state of denial or resentment when they claim that knowlege of it is a detriment to one's game. It could be a distraction, shortcircuiting your natural tendency to develop a "feel", and maybe for that reason it's better to develop a basic set of skills before getting into the details. But you've expressed well why being aware of them can be very helpful.

Jim
Click to expand...
I've long thought the phrase 'paralysis by analysis' should be 'paralysis by bad analysis'.

The thing is, it can take a darn long time to learn to analyze the variables in pool, and to implement an effective system of compensation. There is nothing in the way of a complete guidebook out there, only scattered, unformulated, bits and pieces, gathered by players in much the same way as a mad english dog ungathers its poop :eek:

So it's little wonder that intuitive adjustments are often more successful than consciously calculated adjustments based only on a partial understanding of the physical variables.

Colin
 
Last edited:
Colin Colenso said:
...The thing is, it can take a darn long time to learn to analyze the variables in pool, and to implement an effective system of compensation. There is nothing in the way of a complete guidebook out there, only scattered, unformulated, bits and pieces, gathered by players in much the same way as a mad english dog ungathers its poop :eek:...
Click to expand...
I have a feeling that one day the pool world will be witnessing the birth of an encyclopedic tome written by you know who (not me). I haven't had the chance to read Dr. Dave's book yet, but I think it probably does a good job of throwing light on many of the physical principles which aren't covered in other works. If he keeps revising and adding to it, you might have to go a long way to surpass it.

Jim
 
Jal said:
I have a feeling that one day the pool world will be witnessing the birth of an encyclopedic tome written by you know who (not me). I haven't had the chance to read Dr. Dave's book yet, but I think it probably does a good job of throwing light on many of the physical principles which aren't covered in other works. If he keeps revising and adding to it, you might have to go a long way to surpass it.

Jim
Click to expand...
Yes Jim,
Dave's done a great job collecting and explaining tons of physical theories and experimental data.

But the next step I feel is to take that new knowledge and apply it to a methodology for implementation on the table.

eg. We might know that a 3/4 ball cut shot at slow-medium speed with heavy outside english will throw the OB considerably different to soft stun shot, or a power follow shot, but shouldn't we have a standard to compare it to, so that we can adjust? What is the angle our mind sees most readily? Does the mind already make the compensation in alignment? Should we train our mind to recognize angles in any particular way, to aid with this adjustment?

And then how should we adjust? Lengthen the bridge hand, aim for the edge of the pocket, aim for the center and then shift the bridge to the side, apply the english with reverse swipe?

They are all options, but which is best, and what type of training is best for gaining control over these variables?

So until an effective systematic approach, to dealing with these variables we know about, is presented and practiced, then what we have is scattered ideas, not really something that should change the funamental way players currently learn.

They may use the information to help out on a few shots here and there in a systematic way, but these represent just a small fraction of the potential power of a well integrated system.

Hope that's not too confusing. (There is a point or two somewhere in the middle I believe):D

Colin
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top