McCready had a ''hitch'' in his style didn't he?
Cornbread Red had sumptin goin' on too
Cornbread Red had sumptin goin' on too
Do you think he needs his accessories to maintain his stroke or is it that his accessories make him comfortable and give him confidence for whatever reason?? I am guessing that it is the later.Well, maybe because Earl's "fundamentals" require ass weights, finger sleeves, and everything short of a beekeeper suit?
Yea I don’t quite understand the bunting reference either. Most of the great players today exhibit a pool stroke that looks extremely smooth and well timed with a longer draw back and very very complete and even speed all the way through the cue ball with tip going to the cloth.I disagree about players bunting today.
Last night for instance, most of the shots were on the firmer side.
No top player today strays as far from textbook as Billy. Lots of stromg players who can't come close to being pro do stray quite far. Even more bangers do. Draw your own conclusions.You know, there are a LOT of elite players both past and present that have things in their form that aren’t textbook, the list is quite long. It’s like Jeremy Jones told me once, if you’re playing 6,8,10 hours a day, you can make almost anything work.![]()
I don’t think that you are missing anything either. Buddy was one of the “prior generation” of players who had the stroke fundamentals that would have translated very effortlessly into this modern pool playing equipment world.So what separates Buddy's fundamentals from, say, Gorst's? His stroke was fluid with an easy followthrough, he kept his head down and his body still, and he was a long acknowledged master of pattern play. What am I missing?
There are times that some people play "firm" on fast tables in order to control the cue ball with a punch stroke and speed rather than a normal stroke.I disagree about players bunting today.
Last night for instance, most of the shots were on the firmer side.
They were not 5" pockets in the tournies back then. Al Conte set them up with 4.5" pockets and his tables played great.Yea I don’t quite understand the bunting reference either. Most of the great players today exhibit a pool stroke that looks extremely smooth and well timed with a longer draw back and very very complete and even speed all the way through the cue ball with tip going to the cloth.
Tight pockets and fast tables really require this stroke technique both for accuracy and to create enough backspin on the cue ball to slow it down when needed off the very fast cushions in place today.
I think that , in the “old” days of 5 inch short shelf pockets, slower cloth and cushions- AKA the Brunswick GC series— one could “get away” with stroke mechanics far less demanding in consistent execution than what is needed today to be a top 100 player.
I am not saying that old time greats would not be great today - I think they would adopt to this modern style - but a lot of strokes that were sloppy in years past just could not cut mustard against today’s pro players on this equipment.
SVB seems to use that punch stroke with a desired speed quite often over using a lot of spin strokingThere are times that some people play "firm" on fast tables in order to control the cue ball with a punch stroke and speed rather than a normal stroke.
This allows you to keep a constant stroke speed instead of bunting.
I had rather use speed and a "dead" cue ball to move around the table rather than a rolling cue ball and having to constantly rely on different stroke speeds and varying amounts of spin.
So, some of Al's tourneys weren't at 5in that you know of?They were not 5" pockets in the tournies back then. Al Conte set them up with 4.5" pockets and his tables played great.