Bridge and stroke length

[sparkle84]

It’s not the distance between the bridge hand and ball, but the distance from my bridge hand and grip hand.

I don’t have a standard bridge to ball distance. But I have noticed that if I use a longer distance between my grip hand and bridge hand, it effects how my shoulders are turned which seem to matter in my style of play.

Ok, thanks. That's what I thought you were referring to but it was a little confusing because bridge hand to tip is what this thread was primarily discussing.
Still can't understand how increasing or decreasing the distance between your 2 hands would change the angle of your body. Have to try it next time I play.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Perhaps you'd like to explain how the following variables would affect bridge lengths in regards to speed control.
1) Thickness of contact on OB
2) Type and amount of english applied to CB
3) Distance of OB from rail being contacted
4) Angle of CB into the rail
5) Speed of stroke acceleration

If you could also give a link to video of someone using a 3" bridge that would be appreciated.

1) Thickness of contact on OB
2) Type and amount of english applied to CB - same as above
3) Distance of OB from rail being contacted
4) Angle of CB into the rail
5) Speed of stroke acceleration

Numbers 1-4: You can assess the shot and decide if you want to do a soft, soft-medium or medium stroke--3-inch soft, 5-inch soft-medium, 7-inch medium, for example.

Number 5: That's my point, if you stroke smoothly back to the fingers then come forward smoothly using the same pace on each stroke, there is more time to accelerate with a longer bridge--automatic cue ball control speed.

I don't have a video handy of me demonstrating 3-, 5-, 7-, but if you experiment with these length bridges and the same smooth stroke/smooth pace I think you'll be delighted.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Speed control has nothing to do with bridge length, but is solely stroke related.

When a short distance is used between the bridge hand and grip hand, this allows for a different shoulder angle than when a long distance is used between the bridge hand and grip hand.

With a long bridge/grip distance, the bridge arm is extended straighter causing the shoulders hence upper body to rotate toward the bridge hand. You are standing at a angle to the shot.

With a short bridge/grip distance, the shoulders hence upper body does not need to rotate as much and you are standing more square to the shot than with a long bridge/grip distance.

Just my observations about my playing. Recently, I’ve been paying attention to my shoulder angle in relation to the shot. I’ve founded being more square to the shot helps my consistency and a short bridge/grip distance allows for this.

If you use the same pace of stroke with varying bridge lengths, using smooth acceleration generated naturally--and it helps to stroke back to the bridge hand consistently, the bridge hand forming a natural swing fulcrum--the cue stick has more time to accelerate with a longer bridge.

I've showed this to many students and it works every time to help them automate speed control.

What cannot logically work as well is to use, for example, a consistent 11-inch bridge, and on one shot backstroke three inches and on the same shot next time backstroke eight inches, and rely on "feel", aka a jerking motion forward with poor timing and poor cue stick angle.

Yes, pros use super-long bridges and at times, super-short backstrokes, which is a learned technique that requires a grip change mid-stroke to do effectively, but can anyone explain how using the same length bridge while varying backstroke length is more efficient than always stroking back to the fingers? As part proof, I will let students in clinics do their usual thing then make them guess how long or short their backstroke was--they always err.

3-inch bridge: thought is "smooth backstroke to fingers, then smooth forward" = soft stroke

5-inch bridge: thought is "smooth backstroke to fingers, then smooth forward" = soft-medium stroke

7-inch bridge: thought is "smooth backstroke to fingers, then smooth forward" = medium stroke

Less variables in the stroke is a good thing, yes? Guaranteed speed control is a good thing, rather than a lunging stroke, yes?

And Duckie and anyone else, no disrespect, but TRY what I'm saying before telling me further comments that it's "wrong".

 

[sparkle84]

1) Thickness of contact on OB
2) Type and amount of english applied to CB - same as above
3) Distance of OB from rail being contacted
4) Angle of CB into the rail
5) Speed of stroke acceleration

Numbers 1-4: You can assess the shot and decide if you want to do a soft, soft-medium or medium stroke--3-inch soft, 5-inch soft-medium, 7-inch medium, for example.

Number 5: That's my point, if you stroke smoothly back to the fingers then come forward smoothly using the same pace on each stroke, there is more time to accelerate with a longer bridge--automatic cue ball control speed.

I don't have a video handy of me demonstrating 3-, 5-, 7-, but if you experiment with these length bridges and the same smooth stroke/smooth pace I think you'll be delighted.

Nope, can't say I'm delighted, more frustrated than ever. Don't have a video handy? Perhaps because none exist. Yours or anybody else's. Nobody uses a 3" bridge, ever, unless it's somehow necessary due to interfering balls.

Let's just put number 5 aside for now because you seem to think the world would be a better place if everyone would just use the same pace of acceleration on every shot.

Previously you said "a three-inch bridge for a soft stroke, a five-inch bridge to send the cue ball half a table length after impact with the ob and rail, and a seven-inch bridge to send the cue ball to other side of the table"
How can you make a blanket statement like that and expect to be credible.
Questions 1-4 will result in widely varying CB travel distances with (let's say) a 5" bridge. Now what do we do? Oh, I guess we have to assess the shot.
Well let's say that we are hitting the object ball 27% fuller then your original cut (wait a minute, you never mentioned a cut angle) which we'll now guestimate means an increase to a 5 7/8" bridge length.
Why do you think that your idea of soft, soft-medium & medium strokes is the same as mine or someone elses.
I'm done, you can have the last word, this stuff is really making my head hurt.

 

[DynoDan]

I notice that when I concentrate on using a ‘slip stroke’ (cue as projectile), I get better results with a longer than normal bridge length.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Nope, can't say I'm delighted, more frustrated than ever. Don't have a video handy? Perhaps because none exist. Yours or anybody else's. Nobody uses a 3" bridge, ever, unless it's somehow necessary due to interfering balls.

Let's just put number 5 aside for now because you seem to think the world would be a better place if everyone would just use the same pace of acceleration on every shot.

Previously you said "a three-inch bridge for a soft stroke, a five-inch bridge to send the cue ball half a table length after impact with the ob and rail, and a seven-inch bridge to send the cue ball to other side of the table"
How can you make a blanket statement like that and expect to be credible.
Questions 1-4 will result in widely varying CB travel distances with (let's say) a 5" bridge. Now what do we do? Oh, I guess we have to assess the shot.
Well let's say that we are hitting the object ball 27% fuller then your original cut (wait a minute, you never mentioned a cut angle) which we'll now guestimate means an increase to a 5 7/8" bridge length.
Why do you think that your idea of soft, soft-medium & medium strokes is the same as mine or someone elses.
I'm done, you can have the last word, this stuff is really making my head hurt.

1) I disagree re: lack of video proves or disproves a subject. I've shown this technique in private lessons and in group clinics with 20 or more students at once.

2) Lots of people use short bridges, particularly when automating speed control. Place an eight ball just off the rail and a cue ball just off the eight ball--in the game of Eight Ball, most league players try to feather a safety stroke here and fail. A half-inch bridge will pull off a beautiful safety using a full backstroke, full forward stroke.

3) Maybe you would play better using the same pace of stroke on each shot. It's something striven for in a number of stick-and-ball sports.

4) I used table-section terms instead of soft- and medium-stroke terms, yes. I neglected to describe the placement of the object balls.

5) You seem self-taught, but countless books and other pool instruction materials use soft, medium and hard as teaching conventions.

6) I've shown these techniques to many players before, so I asked that critics try this technique at the tables. Did you try it or no?

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I notice that when I concentrate on using a ‘slip stroke’ (cue as projectile), I get better results with a longer than normal bridge length.

That would be true for most players--since there is time to accelerate through the stroke and catch it with the hand without mussing impact with the cue ball.

The projectile stroke works because of Newton's 1st law, paraphrased as "throw a cue forward and it goes straight forward forever if you don't interfere with it using clenched muscles." The same is true for players who use the smooth, evenly paced backstrokes and forward strokes I'm advocating on this thread. We can think of pros who use a punch stroke, but never jerky, clenched strokes.