BHE vs FHE

[Cornerman]

To me, if fallen into a discussion over semantics. You consider an upper body rotation which causes the cue to pivot at the bridge an application of BHE. I do not. We have common ground. We're just on opposite sides of the fence.

It may be semantics, but I never (meant to) suggest that an upper body rotation that causes the cue to pivot at the bridge is an application of Backhand English. Backhand English is explicitly pivoting about your bridge hand to adjust the tip's direction by moving the grip hand, i.e. the "Back Hand." You keep talking about a 5" movement, so I just went to the table to see what that looks like. I shift my hips. So slight that you'd never notice. Most shots aren't 5" movement. The shift if any is within the realm taking a breath. It feels like you're making up motion that isn't reality.

 

[BasementDweller]

Paging @Poolmanis

Could you answer the question of how you approach the cue ball when it comes to english usage? Do you approach the shot having already adjusted for english, or do you come down on a center ball aim line and adjust from there? I think I already know, but would like to hear how one of AZ's best players does it.

 

[The_JV]

Excellent points.

Extremely well constructed posts from BRKNRUN.

However, my argument has nothing to do with shot pictures, aiming methodology, etc... Merely that randomly offsetting one's backhand on a shot by shot basis is counter intuitive to developing and maintaining solid mechanics.

 

[BC21]

Brian, it's no big deal either way. It's not some kind of monster move. The end result is only a few MILLIMETERS from the tip position left or right from CCB. It doesn't do anything to the stroke. If it's so terrible, how do you justify a parallel shift from right
or left as being perfectly normal and acceptable?

Pivoting the cue tip from ccb to 6mm left or right of center requires a grip hand movement of about 1 inch closer or farther away from the body. Pivoting 12mm (1 tip of spin) results in about a 2 inch grip hand movement. That is a big deal when it comes to muscle memory.

Consistent stroke mechanics is a matter of muscle memory. So, when trying to groove a consistent stroke, having your grip hand misaligned with your body by an inch or two on certain shots is pretty significant.

That's why, imo, rotating or pivoting the entire body/stance to the adjusted aim for spin is better than simply moving your grip hand in or out from it's natural alignment with the body.

It's just my opinion, like it or not, I don't care. But, for anyone learning how to play, I believe what I'm suggesting would be more beneficial and effective at grooving consistent stroke mechanics.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

The finding of the center ball aim line just doesn't seem like something a "pro" would ever have to do consciously, since if they can't see that line then they probably aren't a pro, aside from the odd difficult shot.

If the shot is a dead straight in shot, the center line should be obvious. Center cue ball and cue aimed directly at Center OB aimed directly at Center pocket.
On a cut shot, Center cue ball aimed at center OB aimed at wherever it takes you. Then, "What place on the rail, how far the OB is off the rail and how far from the pocket?"
That tells a lot right there regardless of the aiming method. Decide from there with the appropriate alignment and tip offset.
As an example, if it's a right cut where is the center and/or left edge of the tip to be positioned? CCB, inside CCB, or outside center CB? Then what? You tell me.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Extremely well constructed posts from BRKNRUN.

However, my argument has nothing to do with shot pictures, aiming methodology, etc... Merely that randomly offsetting one's backhand on a shot by shot basis is counter intuitive to developing and maintaining solid mechanics.

It may be counterintuitive in your mind, but it's incorrect and total bullshit. Mechanics are what they are. (now, go ahead and put me on Ignore)

 

[brunswick1901]

Canadian Ross Nichols, an excellent snooker player showed me Front Hand and Back Hand English and it worked great while he was coaching me.

After Ross left, without his guidance the BHE and FHE stopped working and it ruined my straight in stroke.

It took a week for me to regain the confidence in my game.

I am sure the BHE and BHE works but for me using a straight stroke worked the best.

 

[The_JV]

It may be semantics, but I never (meant to) suggest that an upper body rotation that causes the cue to pivot at the bridge is an application of Backhand English. Backhand English is explicitly pivoting about your bridge hand to adjust the tip's direction by moving the grip hand, i.e. the "Back Hand."

Right on, we completely agree...

You keep talking about a 5" movement, so I just went to the table to see what that looks like. I shift my hips. So slight that you'd never notice. Most shots aren't 5" movement. The shift if any is within the realm taking a breath. It feels like you're making up motion that isn't reality.

No what I meant to point out with the 5" variance isn't what you'll see within a given adjustment for a single shot. ...but the amount of adjustment you could see between one shot and another. Of course players aren't, or hopefully aren't, playing max english one way and then other way consistently. However that is very close to range of adjustment you could potentially see if pure BHE is employed. <--so no torso/hip compensation

My stance has always been that a potential deviation of +/- 2.5" at the grip hand isn't beneficial to building and maintaining good mechanics. Nothing more, nothing less. It most certainly can be done. However IMHO, I don't see the value in it, especially when you can make the same cue adjustments by rotating the torso and maintain identical fundamentals.

 

[The_JV]

Pivoting the cue tip from ccb to 6mm left or right of center requires a grip hand movement of about 1 inch closer or farther away from the body. Pivoting 12mm (1 tip of spin) results in about a 2 inch grip hand movement. That is a big deal when it comes to muscle memory.

Consistent stroke mechanics is a matter of muscle memory. So, when trying to groove a consistent stroke, having your grip hand misaligned with your body by an inch or two on certain shots is pretty significant.

That's why, imo, rotating or pivoting the entire body/stance to the adjusted aim for spin is better than simply moving your grip hand in or out from it's natural alignment with the body.

It's just my opinion, like it or not, I don't care. But, for anyone learning how to play, I believe what I'm suggesting would be more beneficial and effective at grooving consistent stroke mechanics.

OMG, thank you so very much.... I'm not the only one

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I completely agree of your assessment of backhand english. What I'm saying is you can also pivot your cue on your bridge without altering your grip hand position in relation to your body.

Let me put it this way. You approach the table as if you're going to shoot a ball. Hand planted, ready to pull the trigger. Grip arm in a vertical orientation in relationship to your body. You then stand up adjust you feet so you've spun 10 degrees to the left. Approach as you did the time before and land you bridge hand in the identical position. You are now stroking the cue 10 degrees to the left from the original shot and your grip arm is vertical. If you compare the two alignments. Do you consider the second to be BHE adjustment of the first..?

Clearly it's not. Even though your bridge hand is identical. The two shots are stand alone otherwise. You grip arm is neutral (vertical). Your cue is pivoted in relation to the same point on the table. Rotating only your body to adjust cueing angle is not an application of BHE. Even though you have pivoted the cue in relation to the bridge.


Completely agree

I didn't call BHE a specific stroke. However it is 100% a deviation of natural/neutral stroke. Otherwise you'd be placing no more english on the CB then you would if no adjustment is made.

To me, if fallen into a discussion over semantics. You consider an upper body rotation which causes the cue to pivot at the bridge an application of BHE. I do not. We have common ground. We're just on opposite sides of the fence.

Dude, you're not getting this. Not getting it at all and your thoughts are all over the place and overwhelming you.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Extremely well constructed posts from BRKNRUN.

However, my argument has nothing to do with shot pictures, aiming methodology, etc... Merely that randomly offsetting one's backhand on a shot by shot basis is counter intuitive to developing and maintaining solid mechanics.

Sez you, and even a stick of dynamite isn't going to change your thought processes because you're so locked into what you think and believe. Where does "randomly" come into the picture? Who said that? The TIP, the TIP, the TIP, the TIP of the cue
tells you what amount and how much movement is required. NOTHING IS RANDOM!! And YES, it's solid mechanics!

 

[Cornerman]

My stance is always been that a potential deviation of +/- 2.5" at the grip hand isn't beneficial to building and maintaining good mechanics. Nothing more, nothing less. It most certainly can be done. However IMHO, I don't see the value in it. When you can make he shot cue adjustments by rotating the torso and maintain identical fundamentals.

I'm not against this. It's just not backhand english. If the question is "why do backhand english versus torso english?" The answer is fairly straightforward: backhand english already works for me, and it solved many english compensation challenges I had 25 years ago. It's very easy to understand the concept of backhand english and very easy to try to see if it works out for people. As always, if it doesn't work for someone, they can try something else. Backhand English works immediately for anyone I've ever shown. Why bother using backhand english at all for a player that already has little challenges with english and compensation? Not much reason to use it at all.

Can we improve the basis of Backhand English to ensure player's mechanics are still sound? Absolutely. Hal Houle never ever stopped players from expanding from the basic concepts. But he wanted to make sure people understood the basics. What happens in AZ is that posters make up stuff to argue against.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I'm not against this. It's just not backhand english. If the question is "why do backhand english versus torso english?" The answer is fairly straightforward: backhand english already works for me, and it solved many english compensation challenges I had 25 years ago. It's very easy to understand the concept of backhand english and very easy to try to see if it works out for people. As always, if it doesn't work for someone, they can try something else. Backhand English works immediately for anyone I've ever shown. Why bother using backhand english at all for a player that already has little challenges with english and compensation? Not much reason to use it at all.

Can we improve the basis of Backhand English to ensure player's mechanics are still sound? Absolutely. Hal Houle never ever stopped players from expanding from the basic concepts. But he wanted to make sure people understood the basics. What happens in AZ is that posters make up stuff to argue against.

Or they're just flat out clueless and heads are incased in cement!

 

[The_JV]

I'm not against this. It's just not backhand english. If the question is "why do backhand english versus torso english?" The answer is fairly straightforward: backhand english already works for me, and it solved many english compensation challenges I had 25 years ago. It's very easy to understand the concept of backhand english and very easy to try to see if it works out for people. As always, if it doesn't work for someone, they can try something else. Backhand English works immediately for anyone I've ever shown. Why bother using backhand english at all for a player that already has little challenges with english and compensation? Not much reason to use it at all.

While I'll continue to struggle with why one would opt for pure BHE over a torso pivot. I can accept that some/many have learnt the method and put in the table time to circumvent the potential pitfalls with inconsistent grip arm mechanics. The reality is, much like you've stated more than once. The real world adjustment of the backhand isn't consistently to the extremes, so although I'll never agree to it being moot, I'm more than willing to admit it may not be all that difficult to overcome.

Can we improve the basis of Backhand English to ensure player's mechanics are still sound? Absolutely. Hal Houle never ever stopped players from expanding from the basic concepts. But he wanted to make sure people understood the basics. What happens in AZ is that posters make up stuff to argue against.

Well the thread is entitled "BHE vs FHE". So there was meant to be a debate over the pros/cons. IMO there is a bigger con to pure BHE then there is FHE. The math is the math. I'm not making things up. Just speaking to the reality of the mechanical compromises.

 

[Cornerman]

While I'll continue to struggle with why one would opt for pure BHE over a torso pivot. I can accept that some/many have learnt the method and put in the table time to circumvent the potential pitfalls with inconsistent grip arm mechanics. The reality is, much like you've stated more than once. The real world adjustment of the backhand isn't consistently to the extremes, so although I'll never agree to it being moot, I'm more than willing to admit it may not be all that difficult to overcome.

Well the thread is entitled "BHE vs FHE". So there was meant to be a debate over the pros/cons. IMO there is a bigger con to pure BHE then there is FHE. The math is the math. I'm not making things up. Just speaking to the reality of the mechanical compromises.

What I'm implying that you're making up is things like "put in the table time to circumvent the potential pitfall with inconsistent grip arm mechanics." There are two falsehoods there, but they seem to be the basis of your "reasoning." There was never "inconsistent grip arm mechanics," and there was never "putting in the table time to circumvent the potential pitfalls." That's just made up AZ stuff that if you don't make it up, they become non-debates. I'm glad you're more than willing to admit it may not be "all that difficult to overcome," but your premise is that there is something difficult to "overcome."

If "pure backhand english," whatever that means to you, doesn't work for you, is illogical / incosistent/incorehent to you, then it's going to be a bigger con than it is a pro for you. I was just on the table, and going through a few racks with a higher deflection cue, paying close attention to the pivots... there's so little motion such that the description and visual of that motion does not align with pitfalls, inconsistent mechanics or any such made up things.

 

[Cornerman]

A positive out of all this discussion is that I revisited my Bull Carbon shaft and want Wes Bond to build me one that fits my Schuler.

 

[ChrisinNC]

What I'm implying that you're making up is things like "put in the table time to circumvent the potential pitfall with inconsistent grip arm mechanics." There are two falsehoods there, but they seem to be the basis of your "reasoning." There was never "inconsistent grip arm mechanics," and there was never "putting in the table time to circumvent the potential pitfalls." That's just made up AZ stuff that if you don't make it up, they become non-debates. I'm glad you're more than willing to admit it may not be "all that difficult to overcome," but your premise is that there is something difficult to "overcome."

If "pure backhand english," whatever that means to you, doesn't work for you, is illogical / incosistent/incorehent to you, then it's going to be a bigger con than it is a pro for you. I was just on the table, and going through a few racks with a higher deflection cue, paying close attention to the pivots... there's so little motion such that the description and visual of that motion does not align with pitfalls, inconsistent mechanics or any such made up things.

This thread has received nearly 200 posts in the last 48 hours - unbelievable.

If someone chooses to apply spin, in my opinion, it happens automatically / subconsciously without attempting to break down the physics of exactly what happens. Trying to analyze or change the way one has always done it, I think is just asking for trouble.

I think of this as a similar topic to analyzing your eye pattern throughout your preshot routine until cue ball impact. If you start trying to analyze and mess with something you have always done subconsciously forever, it could potentially screw you up.

 

[Cornerman]

J

This thread has received nearly 200 posts in the last 48 hours - unbelievable.

If someone chooses to apply spin, in my opinion, it happens automatically / subconsciously without thinking about the physics of exactly what happens. Trying to analyze or change the way one has always done it, I think is just asking for trouble.

Just to be clear, I personally am not telling anyone to use or not use Backhand English. But, I'll step in when I think someone needs clarification or is misrepresenting my long understanding of Backhand English. If a player is having problems with compensating using English and isn't getting results from rote, they might want to consider Backhand English. If they're not having those problems, no need to look farther than the pool table.

 

[BasementDweller]

I don't think it's remotely fair to imply that JV or anyone else is effectively arguing against straw men. I've been reading about BHE for years and today is the first day I've seen BHE coupled with a hip movement or a hip pivot of some sort.

The math is the math. If you don't compensate for the cue's movement, you will by necessity have a different angle of attack (relative to one's body) based on the shot. On its surface, that seems counterproductive to maintaining a repeatable stroke.

I recognize players from yesteryear used such an approach to some extent, but with ever increasing precision demands, maybe this approach isn't the best one.

 

[Cornerman]

I don't think it's remotely fair to imply that JV or anyone else is effectively arguing against straw men. I've been reading about BHE for years and today is the first day I've seen BHE coupled with a hip movement or a hip pivot of some sort.

The math is the math. If you don't compensate for the cue's movement, you will by necessity have a different angle of attack (relative to one's body) based on the shot. On its surface, that seems counterproductive to maintaining a repeatable stroke.

I recognize players from yesteryear used such an approach to some extent, but with ever increasing precision demands, maybe this approach isn't the best one.

For me at least, from Day 1 from my sharing my discussion with Hal, and that would be some 25 years ago, moving at least the head to get head alignment back was something disclosed. This hip movement, I admit on extreme english there is a slight shift, but you'd never see it. In the vast majority of my pivots, there is no movement. The hand movement is just too small to even think about moving the hips. If you were standing next to me, I know you'd see no need for additional movements as long as we're not talking extremes.

Could I be pre-shifting knowing I'm going to wag left or right? Possibly. I wouldn't deny it. But the vast majority of my shots with english, which is the majority of my shots, period, if there's body movement when I pivot, you'd have to be very nitpicky. There's as much movement or more when players are simply settling into their shot when down.