BHE challenge.

[Jaden]

Ok here goes...

Alright I will try to explain what I'm talking about now....

John had it right in his last post, the important difference is not having to manually adjust and rely on your intuitive judgement which most people will second guess anyways if they haven't already second guessed their aimline. Most angled shots when lined up correctly look wrong.

Now back to the explanation.

When using BHE, for any amount of English you have a specific offset. The bridgehand will ALWAYS be in line with the original no english shot, so if your initial aim is correct, so is the subsequent shot. Not because the amount of squirt is necesarily perfect, but because the amount of squirt coupled with CI Throw between the CB and OB equalize. So that it's understood, in my experience and from what I've been shown by one of the best players arguably Ever, BHE will result in potted balls, without further adjustment so long as the original aimline is true and the stroke is true.

Now on to PE. PE refers to shifting on the Parallel plane from the original aimline to add spin to the CB....

Of course in most situations this doesn't work because squirt will change the angle, so manual adjustment of the aimline is necesary in most situations. Not all situations though. If you doubt that last statement setup a shot from six to eight inches and aim straight on it then use PE without adjustment. it will drop. Now because manual adjustment is necesary for most shots, you will not end up with the same shot in most situations as you would with BHE.

Ok if you look at a shot where you line up with center ball and then rotate from your bridge(use BHE) your bridge hand is still in a perfect line with your original aimline. If you use PE this is not the case. From what I know of PE (and I used to use it exclusively) you line up on the main line then shift on a parallel plane to the point on the CB that you want to hit for spin, then you make minute adjustments for squirt throw etc. because you've moved your bridge hand, it is no longer on the original aimline. i.e. there is no constant, it is all based on feel and experience, so you will be off center on most shots. The reason that this works, (but is not as consistent), is because it is feel based. Your subconscious is doing all of the necesary calculations for you. What is actually happening that allows it to work when the bridge is not on the original aimline is that because it is not on the original aimline you have just like john said a greater mass behind the shot making more of the energy transfer to forward motion as opposed to side spin.

Because there is less side spin there is less collision induced throw between the CB and the OB, allowing the angle to be off center and still make the shot. The problem with this method is that you can't be absolutely sure you are on the right aimline and will often second guess yourself and try a last minute adjustment that will throw off the shot. The same thing can be said of BHE except that once you except that it WILL work you can avoid second guessing yourself, where as with PE you always have to do the manual calaculations making second guessing yourself a possibilty at all times.

Yes it is possible that for a shot with the same amount of english using PE you will end up with the same shot as with BHE making them kind of one and the same, but that's in a perfect world. In the real world, it will most often not be the same even though the shots can still be made. It is because there is more variability with PE that it is an inferior method to BHE and IS different in 90% or greater of situations, even if the difference is too minute to notice.
It is in some circumstances and with many people more and with some people most circumstances different enough to make a substantial difference and decrease your consistency.

I hope that answers the question as to how PE IS different to BHE.

 

[Snapshot9]

thoughts ...

I understand what is trying to be conveyed here,
but the very fact that you are pivoting at the end
of your stroke would lend itself to having more
variance than PE stroke.... lol In otherwords, I
still think you would undercut cut shots with inside
english. I am not convinced that BHE would not
cause the cue ball to swerve slightly on its way
to the contact point. It seems to me that someone
needs to conduct a variance analysis. I realize earlier
illustrations tried to illustrate this, but I am just not
convinced.

 

[jsp]

John had it right in his last post, the important difference is not having to manually adjust and rely on your intuitive judgement which most people will second guess anyways if they haven't already second guessed their aimline. Most angled shots when lined up correctly look wrong.

I think you and John are misunderstanding my argument. I agree that PE and BHE are different in the sense of how you address the ball and your aim line. In PE, you shift your aim line parallel to the original aim line by the amount of english you want to impart on the CB, and then you must your aim line depending on the amount of squirt you "feel" might occur. In BHE, you stay at the original aim line, but you just pivot your backhand with respect to your bridge hand to impart english on the CB. I agree that both are different methodologies to impart english, and I also agree that BHE is a superior methodology because it takes the variable of "feel" more out of the equation.

However...

What I have been arguing from the start is that there is nothing different between these two methodologies when it comes to striking the CB, since both times you are stroking straight through the CB. Given the same contact point on the CB and intended CB trajectory, the angle of the cue at impact for both cases would be exactly the same. Therefore, the amount of english would be exactly the same. Why would they be any different? There is nothing magical about BHE, such that it would produce more spin given the same contact point and cue angle. That is all that i'm arguing.

Sure, there can be a case using BHE where you can impart more spin and have the CB go in the same direction, but you'd have to strike the CB at a different contact point and the cue stick angle would also be different. Likewise, you can reproduce the exact case using PE, by shifting your aim line more off center and also rotating your aim line even more because of the extra amount of squirt you'll experience.

Visualize both cases with the pool player completely invisible, so that all you see is a cue stick and CB. PE and BHE would be completely the same when the CB is struck, given the same contact point on the CB.

 

[Jaden]

I don't know how much clearer I can make it.

I think you and John are misunderstanding my argument. I agree that PE and BHE are different in the sense of how you address the ball and your aim line. In PE, you shift your aim line parallel to the original aim line by the amount of english you want to impart on the CB, and then you must your aim line depending on the amount of squirt you "feel" might occur. In BHE, you stay at the original aim line, but you just pivot your backhand with respect to your bridge hand to impart english on the CB. I agree that both are different methodologies to impart english, and I also agree that BHE is a superior methodology because it takes the variable of "feel" more out of the equation.

However...

What I have been arguing from the start is that there is nothing different between these two methodologies when it comes to striking the CB, since both times you are stroking straight through the CB. Given the same contact point on the CB and intended CB trajectory, the angle of the cue at impact for both cases would be exactly the same. Therefore, the amount of english would be exactly the same. Why would they be any different? There is nothing magical about BHE, such that it would produce more spin given the same contact point and cue angle. That is all that i'm arguing.

Sure, there can be a case using BHE where you can impart more spin and have the CB go in the same direction, but you'd have to strike the CB at a different contact point and the cue stick angle would also be different. Likewise, you can reproduce the exact case using PE, by shifting your aim line more off center and also rotating your aim line even more because of the extra amount of squirt you'll experience.

Visualize both cases with the pool player completely invisible, so that all you see is a cue stick and CB. PE and BHE would be completely the same when the CB is struck, given the same contact point on the CB.

I don't know how much clearer I can make it, but I'll try.

I brought up the illustration of PE to BHE from a previous post let me post it here again.

In this image you can see that you would be striking the CB in the exact same place as with BHE using PE relative to the original aimline, which is very importantbecause that is how everyone determines how much english to apply, but more of the mass of the cue is devoted to a transfer of energy toward forward motion rather than spin motion. This is without any adjustment for squirt I know but let me finish.

If you adjust for squirt here, you are going by feel and experience alone, and because you are going by feel you would not necesarily end up in the exact position as is illustrated from BHE. The reason for this is because if more energy is tranfered toward forward motion than side spin two things occur.

One, becuase more energy is transferred to forward motion, there is a reduction of squirt because the additional forward inertia tends to prevent the effects of squirt. besides which, there would be less squirt because the angle of intersection is reduced.

Two, because less energy is transferred to side spin, there is less collision induced throw between the OB and the CB. This allows for the aim to be slightly different and the shot to still go in. So, while the image depicted for PE isn't exactly how it would be, in the majority of cases it will not be identical to the BHE model either. It will be somewhere in between.

This is all because of the variability of the bridge position when using PE.

 

[jsp]

In this image you can see that you would be striking the CB in the exact same place as with BHE using PE relative to the original aimline, which is very importantbecause that is how everyone determines how much english to apply, but more of the mass of the cue is devoted to a transfer of energy toward forward motion rather than spin motion. This is without any adjustment for squirt I know but let me finish.

I totally understand that the BHE case in your figure would impart more spin on the CB. But are you implying that in both cases the CB will depart in the exact same direction? Forget about english-induced throw between the CB and OB, just focus on the precise direction of the CB ball after contact. If your answer is yes, then I'd have to say that your diagram is fundamentally flawed. What the diagram is implying is that for a given contact point on the CB, the CB will depart in the exact same direction REGARDLESS of the contact angle of the cue. That would be incorrect. In your figure, take the same contact point but have the cue be 90 degrees tangent to the surface of the CB ball. This would be a full hit, and we would agree the CB would not go toward the dotted arrow as designated on the figure. Take a cue going 88 degrees, and then take a cue going 2 degrees. You still think the CB will go toward the dotted arrow?

 

[Jaden]

I totally understand that the BHE case in your figure would impart more spin on the CB. But are you implying that in both cases the CB will depart in the exact same direction? Forget about english-induced throw between the CB and OB, just focus on the precise direction of the CB ball after contact. If your answer is yes, then I'd have to say that your diagram is fundamentally flawed. What the diagram is implying is that for a given contact point on the CB, the CB will depart in the exact same direction REGARDLESS of the contact angle of the cue. That would be incorrect. In your figure, take the same contact point but have the cue be 90 degrees tangent to the surface of the CB ball. This would be a full hit, and we would agree the CB would not go toward the dotted arrow as designated on the figure. Take a cue going 88 degrees, and then take a cue going 2 degrees. You still think the CB will go toward the dotted arrow?

no no no not at all. Based on the diagram the PE version sould shoot off to right of the dotted line, but the PE shot will deviate much less from its' own aimline than the BHE will from it's own aimline. Any shot that is at the same angle of deviation AND the same point away from the standard aimline will deviate exactly the same. Because they are the same shot. LOL.

What I AM saying is that for people who use PE as opposed to BHE, the majority of the time they will be positioning their bridge in different positions, changing the angle of deviation and decreasing overall consistency AND there will be less observable squirt and less spin for the same amount of percieved english, again, only in most cases.

It's important to note that it is only the perceived amount of english, because in the majority of cases PE shots will have less actual spin than BHE. That is why many people claim that once they switched to BHE there was a lot more action on the CB.

 

[jsp]

i think we're getting somewhere...

no no no not at all. Based on the diagram the PE version sould shoot off to right of the dotted line, but the PE shot will deviate much less from its' own aimline than the BHE will from it's own aimline.

Oh...well, in that case, I would draw a brand new figure . Your figure is a bit misleading, especially with that dotted arrow in the vertical direction. No one would argue against the fact that the two cases in your drawing would have different amounts of spin. However the CBs would also go in two different directions. Therefore, you're comparing apples to oranges.

Any shot that is at the same angle of deviation AND the same point away from the standard aimline will deviate exactly the same. Because they are the same shot. LOL.

Ding ding ding. THAT is exactly my point! You can always configure a PE shot from a BHE shot. Set up your BHE shot, and leave your cue stick exactly where it is, keeping the exact same CB contact point and cue angle. Now shift your body such that it fits the description of a PE shot, by making your aim line go in the same direction as the cue stick.

When you say that you can obtain more spin on a BHE shot, i'm just arguing that you can impart the same spin using a PE shot, just by adjusting the orientation your body and leaving everything else the same. But essentially, they are exactly the same shot if you look at the CB contact point and the angle of contact.

Likewise, you can go the other direction...you can configure a BHE shot from a PE shot. Set up a shot using PE. If you're hitting with left hand english, then your current aim line would be a little left of your intended CB trajectory because of squirt. To make it a BHE shot, don't move your bridge hand or your back hand at all...keep the cue perfectly where it is. Just orient your body such that now you are looking straight down the center of the intended CB trajectory. Ta da, you have BHE. However, when you shoot the shot, both cases are EXACTLY the same, because they are the same shot. That is my whole argument.

 

[jsp]

What I AM saying is that for people who use PE as opposed to BHE, the majority of the time they will be positioning their bridge in different positions, changing the angle of deviation and decreasing overall consistency...

Yes, I totally agree with you on this statement, at least this half of the statement. The reason why people use the BHE methodology is because it is easier to impart more spin on the CB while obtaining greater consistency. However, you can also impart just as much spin on the CB using PE, but it'll just be difficult to estimate all the variables at such a degree of spin. I think we can agree on that.

 

[Jaden]

I'm talking averages not cans.

Oh...well, in that case, I would draw a brand new figure . Your figure is a bit misleading, especially with that dotted arrow in the vertical direction. No one would argue against the fact that the two cases in your drawing would have different amounts of spin. However the CBs would also go in two different directions. Therefore, you're comparing apples to oranges.


Ding ding ding. THAT is exactly my point! You can always configure a PE shot from a BHE shot. Set up your BHE shot, and leave your cue stick exactly where it is, keeping the exact same CB contact point and cue angle. Now shift your body such that it fits the description of a PE shot, by making your aim line go in the same direction as the cue stick.

When you say that you can obtain more spin on a BHE shot, i'm just arguing that you can impart the same spin using a PE shot, just by adjusting the orientation your body and leaving everything else the same. But essentially, they are exactly the same shot if you look at the CB contact point and the angle of contact.

Likewise, you can go the other direction...you can configure a BHE shot from a PE shot. Set up a shot using PE. If you're hitting with left hand english, then your current aim line would be a little left of your intended CB trajectory because of squirt. To make it a BHE shot, don't move your bridge hand or your back hand at all...keep the cue perfectly where it is. Just orient your body such that now you are looking straight down the center of the intended CB trajectory. Ta da, you have BHE. However, when you shoot the shot, both cases are EXACTLY the same, because they are the same shot. That is my whole argument.

Yes it can be the same, we're starting to see eye to eye here I think.

I'm not saying that things aren't possible, nor am I saying that BHE shots can create more english. I am saying that the MAJORITY or the average shot using BHE is not only more consistent but it has more spin for a shot at the same angle. That's all I've been saying. I just didn't want to have to write a book to convey the idea in detail. Oh well....


Oh and I was only using that image to illustrate the basic tenets of PE over BHE I don't have the resources to create one from scratch and I had used that one from someone else's and modified it.

 

[onepocketchump]

I understand what is trying to be conveyed here,
but the very fact that you are pivoting at the end
of your stroke would lend itself to having more
variance than PE stroke.... lol In otherwords, I
still think you would undercut cut shots with inside
english. I am not convinced that BHE would not
cause the cue ball to swerve slightly on its way
to the contact point. It seems to me that someone
needs to conduct a variance analysis. I realize earlier
illustrations tried to illustrate this, but I am just not
convinced.

I don't pivot at the end of my stroke. I pivot at the beginning and stroke a few times before I hit the ball. Once you have the point fixed that you want to strike then it is relatively easy to pivot, stoke and hit it.

In fact, this is probably another reason that using BHE is superior to PE. It is more forgiving. If I hit the cueball a little off the intended contact point then the object ball will still go in and only my position may suffer. But if I hit the cueball a little off using PE it may increase the deflection/squirt/swerve signifigantly and cause the object ball to miss the pocket.

Notable players who pivot on the last stroke and aho are deadly accurate are Efren Reyes and Francisco Bustamante. I am absolutey convinced of this as I have studied their stroke on a frame by frame basis after I started using BHE. I had to know. So I began studying AccuStats tapes and all the recordings I ever made to see just how they stroke and aim. I have never been able to discern from the tapes what aiming method they use but the pre-stroking routine is easily seen in slow motion. Anecdotaly, way back when in the early 90s when Bustamante came to Germany, everyone in Germany used to comment on his "unorthodox" style. He would always look as though he were lining up on anything besides the ball he was shooting. And everyone knows about his looping stroke. Busta's tip goes to the lower left corner of the ball on his pre-strokes and then he pivots to the contact point on the last stroke.

As for the undercutting of inside english shots. One of my friends who is arguably a strong shortstop was amazed when I showed him how to line up and use BHE. He says that it is the dead nuts for inside english shots. And it is. Before I used to struggle tremdously with them. Now they are cake.

John

 

[LastTwo]

I don't pivot at the end of my stroke. I pivot at the beginning and stroke a few times before I hit the ball. Once you have the point fixed that you want to strike then it is relatively easy to pivot, stoke and hit it.

In fact, this is probably another reason that using BHE is superior to PE. It is more forgiving. If I hit the cueball a little off the intended contact point then the object ball will still go in and only my position may suffer. But if I hit the cueball a little off using PE it may increase the deflection/squirt/swerve signifigantly and cause the object ball to miss the pocket.

Notable players who pivot on the last stroke and aho are deadly accurate are Efren Reyes and Francisco Bustamante. I am absolutey convinced of this as I have studied their stroke on a frame by frame basis after I started using BHE. I had to know. So I began studying AccuStats tapes and all the recordings I ever made to see just how they stroke and aim. I have never been able to discern from the tapes what aiming method they use but the pre-stroking routine is easily seen in slow motion. Anecdotaly, way back when in the early 90s when Bustamante came to Germany, everyone in Germany used to comment on his "unorthodox" style. He would always look as though he were lining up on anything besides the ball he was shooting. And everyone knows about his looping stroke. Busta's tip goes to the lower left corner of the ball on his pre-strokes and then he pivots to the contact point on the last stroke.

As for the undercutting of inside english shots. One of my friends who is arguably a strong shortstop was amazed when I showed him how to line up and use BHE. He says that it is the dead nuts for inside english shots. And it is. Before I used to struggle tremdously with them. Now they are cake.

John

John I don't think you studied the tapes enough. I have also studied Efren's stroke intently, and his stroke is straight as an arrow on shots with no sidespin. On shots with sidespin, on occasion his stroke veers off in the direction of the spin he is applying, but only slightly.

Bustamante USED the crossover system. Almost identical to what Nick Varner has always used. It's very complicated. That was when he first came to the USA. Now he shoots straight thru on the majority of his shots.

 

[Jaden]

Efren does stroke straight.

He may or may not adjust his line on the final stroke but he travels straight through the CB on almost every stroke. He is the person who showed me BHE. He didn't call it backhand english though. In fact he didn't call it anything at all. He was visiting his friend Alex at shooters in Riverside, CA and was messing around on the table next to where I was playing. There wasn't any body else of any playing ability there, so there wasn't any action.

Efren was just playing around practicing and he was doing these massively spinning shots with apparent ease consistently over and over again and I asked him how he did that. Alex translated for him and explained BHE, but I was two feet from him watching him stroke and he stroked straight through the ball.

This was probably in 99. I didn't believe it would work. Up to that point and for three years after, I always used PE. I couldn't imagine that BHE could compensate for all of the variations of shot. A friend of mine ,(non pool player), was there with me and when Efren had walked in, I asked him if he knew who that was? HE had no clue and I told him that he was arguably one of the best players in the game. When we left I was so convinced that BHE couldn't work and that Efren must be subconsciously adjusting that I started telling people that I knew more about pool than Efren Reyes.

Then about three years later I'm playing with a buddy of mine, Chip Klein, and he describes BHE, again not calling it that, but explaining the concept none the less. I told him "hey, Efren Reyes taught me that system years ago but I thought there was no way it would work and haven't even tried it."

I tried it that day and have been using it ever since, I was an A player at that point and my consistency has gone up considerably since.

The moral of this story is that if the best player in the world tells you what works, don't assume that just because you can't understand it that it isn't true, even if what you know does work.

WEll actually the point of the story was to say Efren shoots straight but that other one sounded better.

 

[TheConArtist]

He may or may not adjust his line on the final stroke but he travels straight through the CB on almost every stroke. He is the person who showed me BHE. He didn't call it backhand english though. In fact he didn't call it anything at all. He was visiting his friend Alex at shooters in Riverside, CA and was messing around on the table next to where I was playing. There wasn't any body else of any playing ability there, so there wasn't any action.

Efren was just playing around practicing and he was doing these massively spinning shots with apparent ease consistently over and over again and I asked him how he did that. Alex translated for him and explained BHE, but I was two feet from him watching him stroke and he stroked straight through the ball.

This was probably in 99. I didn't believe it would work. Up to that point and for three years after, I always used PE. I couldn't imagine that BHE could compensate for all of the variations of shot. A friend of mine ,(non pool player), was there with me and when Efren had walked in, I asked him if he knew who that was? HE had no clue and I told him that he was arguably one of the best players in the game. When we left I was so convinced that BHE couldn't work and that Efren must be subconsciously adjusting that I started telling people that I knew more about pool than Efren Reyes.

Then about three years later I'm playing with a buddy of mine, Chip Klein, and he describes BHE, again not calling it that, but explaining the concept none the less. I told him "hey, Efren Reyes taught me that system years ago but I thought there was no way it would work and haven't even tried it."

I tried it that day and have been using it ever since, I was an A player at that point and my consistency has gone up considerably since.

The moral of this story is that if the best player in the world tells you what works, don't assume that just because you can't understand it that it isn't true, even if what you know does work.

WEll actually the point of the story was to say Efren shoots straight but that other one sounded better.

Didn't they call Tuck and Roll not BHE, .

 

[Jaden]

Didn't they call Tuck and Roll not BHE, .

No one I talked to called it anything, they just described it, they described it as finding the aimline for a centerball shot and then rotating to the point that the cue tip would make contact with the desired amount of english and then stroke on that line instead of the aimline.

Efren didn't talk very good english so I didn't talk directly to him much at all. Chip just explained it as I just did and showed it to me which is when I recognized it as what Efren had showed me in late 99 early 2000.

The only time I heard it referenced as BHE is on this forum within the last two months. The only thing I changed from how it was related to me was raising and lowering my bridge for follow and draw. This minimizes swerve on long shots and lets you not have to adjust for anything. From what I understood you would normally just pivot from the bridge for any follow or draw.

Anyone who's masse'd knows that a downward inside draw shot will cause swerve, so to minimize this tendency I lower my bridge for draw shots and raise my bridge for follow shots.

 

[TheConArtist]

Icy,,,,,,,, I haven't really had the pleasure of watching Efren play on t.v. when i first started playing and watching t.v. i seen him play the challenge of champions, and i wasn't thinking of anything about aiming techniquest or systems then it was just shoot the ball and now as the years went by i started getting into fundamentals etc... so how does he play does he play just like Francisco, cause from what i seen on my recordings it looks like he plays with BHE, tuck and roll, slip stroke what ever it is called lol.

 

[Jaden]

aim and pivot.

I've always referred to it as the aim and pivot system because that's exactly what you do. I think BHE is an incorrect term because if you were to just use your hand then it would be closer to a tuck and roll and that would decrease consistency in my opinion. I always rotate from the shoulder so that my stroke doesn't change and will remain consistent.

For PE, I always referred to it as parallel shift, because you find your aimline and then shift on a parallel plane to the adjusted aimline. I prefer descriptions as opposed to labels because labels just lead to confusion if people are talking about different things.

 

[TheConArtist]

I use this method of aim tuesday night at the leagues, and shot a perfect score, long cuts banks everything was going in, like the pockets were just eating them up. One player said to me are you using right english on all your shots, i said yeppers, but this is just one system that i use, as one system can't be used for all shots i think anyways. Thanks for sharing Jaden. Cole.