CB Path vs Stroke

3kushn

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been reading this forum for some time and most Instructors agree that after the CB is contacted, It's all over. No argument.
What seems to me the instructors are also saying is ... No matter HOW the CUE is delivered, the point of contact is the Only Thing That Matters.

Why is it that when you talk to Masters of a game, they talk about different stroke techniques. Short, Long, Choke.....

I'm fortunate enough to be listening to Dick Jaspers in person teach all day today and tomorrow.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
.. Why is it that when you talk to Masters of a game, they talk about different stroke techniques. Short, Long, Choke.....
Ummmm... Because there is as much voodoo in carom as there is in pool? There are some carom players who believe in a lot of strokes. There are some very, very strong players who believe one stroke suffices. If it helps you prepare for a particular shot to think there is a special stroke for that shot, then such a belief can be helpful. It's not always important to separate belief from reality.
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been reading this forum for some time and most Instructors agree that after the CB is contacted, It's all over. No argument.
What seems to me the instructors are also saying is ... No matter HOW the CUE is delivered, the point of contact is the Only Thing That Matters.

Why is it that when you talk to Masters of a game, they talk about different stroke techniques. Short, Long, Choke.....

I'm fortunate enough to be listening to Dick Jaspers in person teach all day today and tomorrow.
Rather than 'point of contact,' I think probably a clearer phrase would be 'time of contact.' I think a lot of instructors are using the word 'point' as a moment in time rather than a spot on the ball.

As Patrick said, point, angle and speed, although I would change 'speed' to 'force.' I'm no scientist, but I would think that the moment of contact is the effect of motion rather than motion itself.

And the motion we're referring to is the stroke. And yes, I do think circumstances can change the way a particular player chooses to deliver the cue to accomplish the desired result at impact. So if an expert shows their methodology, pay attention. It may work for you.

However, you have to keep an open mind, because you are not them, and it may not suit your style of play. There isn't just one method of delivery for every shot. You have choices. And that's where a good teacher comes into play. An instructor with good insight can tell what your style is or even what your potential style is, and help you sort out some of the things that probably won't work for you.
 
Last edited:

WobblyStroke

Active member
Why is it that when you talk to Masters of a game, they talk about different stroke techniques. Short, Long, Choke.....
Different types of strokes/deliveries of the cue get different reactions from the cue ball. You are right that tip position/direction is most important but what these different strokes really affect most is the level of acceleration of the tip at contact. Personally, in my early development I came across info that taught a punch stroke, follow stroke, snap draw, snip draw. Each has its benefits and draw backs and is best suited for a type of shot. When people learn just the one stroke it is the follow stroke which has a smooth acceleration and longest follow through of any of the strokes mentioned above (and there are a handful of others at least). I will only go into the punch stroke to illustrate why playing other types of strokes could be beneficial. The punch shot keeps spin off the ball and is good for stop/stun, stun draw/follow type of shots where the focus is accuracy of strike with no need for much spin at all. These were often prescribed for use on 'cinch' shots, meaning those where you have to just pocket the ball and position will be automatic. The stroke is characterized by a firmer grip with no wrist action. It is mechanically simple and easy to execute, esp under pressure, but its drawback for other types of shots is that it doesn't spin the ball well nor does it work very well at anything below medium speed.
To this day I def play different strokes for different shots but I don't really think about it. I just go through the rehearsal strokes for what I want coming into the ball and then let it go. The differences in speed and acceleration result in some differences in follow through characteristics (not just length) but I don't pay any mind to this anymore. I'm sure many pros don't either. But definitely in the 80s, 90s, the American pros in particular certainly paid attention to and practiced different types of strokes, the evidence being their commentary on play if you ever got to hear guys like Rempe or Davenport call a match.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... what these different strokes really affect most is the level of acceleration of the tip at contact. ...
It may interest you to know that both theory and experiment have shown that the acceleration at the moment of impact has essentially no influence on the shot. The important parameter is the speed of the cue stick, not the acceleration. Many people confuse speed and acceleration.

(Of course elevation, tip offset from center, and the direction the stick is pointing are also critical to the shot, but they are a different topic.)
 

WobblyStroke

Active member
It may interest you to know that both theory and experiment have shown that the acceleration at the moment of impact has essentially no influence on the shot. The important parameter is the speed of the cue stick, not the acceleration. Many people confuse speed and acceleration.

(Of course elevation, tip offset from center, and the direction the stick is pointing are also critical to the shot, but they are a different topic.)
Thanks for that correction. Anecdotally it sure does seem to affect spinrate, but I guess as in other sports feel and real are different. Fran said similar thing about Force and F=ma meaning more acceleration=more force. I guess the accelerate to and through thought mostly works because you don't decelerate.

I'm interested to know in these experiments if they measured cue acceleration on a completed stroke without contact being made? The reason for my interest is that obv peak acceleration will occur before contact, but contact will slow everything down. A golf example to illustrate: measured clubhead speed is highest coming into contact, but when swinging at air, peak speed occurs beyond the point contact would have occurred. Would the same hold true for power draw or force follow strokes? Would be interesting to find out.

Either way, at least anecdotally, and maybe it is very much a confidence and 'belief' thing like you mentioned in your previous post, delivering the cue differently does tend to get a different reaction from the ball, whether that be because of differences in acceleration (and resulting speed at contact), tip moving slightly downward or floating up to hit higher, or whatever.

Edit: saw your vid with dr. dave and read a write up linked to it. Most of the info presented seems to be based on pendulum strokes. However, snap draws, snip draws, etc have a lot of wrist action as the player snaps the wrist into contact. That has to accelerate into contact and would continue to accelerate if not for slamming into a cue ball. Dave Gross in the stroke acceleration video was used as an example of a player that accelerates into contact and he had a lot more wrist action (to go along with his elbow drop) than you or Dave. I find myself unconvinced on acceleration not mattering, given that a low speed, short follow through 'snip draw' stroke that is basically a wrist snap seems to get a lot more action on the ball than a pendulum stroke executed at same speed with same cueball contact. This could just be more feel vs real I suppose, but fits with every other wrist snap acceleration curve you see in other sports. My buddy has a high speed camera so I guess I have a lil project to set up and see for myself...at least for my strokes.
 
Last edited:

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
The acceleration at the moment of contact depends on the force the grip hand applies. The force between the tip and ball during contact is many times greater than that force. That is why what the hand is doing at impact is irrelevant. As mentioned somewhere, this was a major problem in the original Iron Willie (Predator's cue testing robot), which had a very, very strong grip. Human hands are not like that.
 

phreaticus

Well-known member
I’m not quite sure I actually understand whats being being discussed here, but it may be worth pointing out that force (power), velocity, and speed are all different things (velocity being the vector form of speed).

Also, while “angles” seem to dominate pool discussions, actually we’re dealing with 3D vectors, ie quantities that include both direction & magnitude.

Finally, there is an element of “time” involved in the “point” concept - as in the duration of time that the tip contacts the CB through delivery.

All of which makes “stroke” quite an interesting thing to analyze, develop, teach, and discuss.

Are there really instructors that teach the notion that there is only one type of stroke and how its delivered doesn’t matter? New concept for me…

✌️
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... Are there really instructors that teach the notion that there is only one type of stroke and how its delivered doesn’t matter? New concept for me…
It depends on what you mean by "how it's delivered." What do you mean?
 

Island Drive

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been reading this forum for some time and most Instructors agree that after the CB is contacted, It's all over. No argument.
What seems to me the instructors are also saying is ... No matter HOW the CUE is delivered, the point of contact is the Only Thing That Matters.

Why is it that when you talk to Masters of a game, they talk about different stroke techniques. Short, Long, Choke.....

I'm fortunate enough to be listening to Dick Jaspers in person teach all day today and tomorrow.
I think cue delivery is everything when in the final cueing motion/after the wind up.... then the top of the swing/Transition to, the throwing motion.
Hitting through the cue ball with a ''straight'' swing at the chosen contact point on the cue ball, as well as the chosen/exact spot on the object ball, simplifies everything, and allows the shooter to ''do more with less''.
Basically, hitting the shot FAT.
 

phreaticus

Well-known member
It depends on what you mean by "how it's delivered." What do you mean?
Good question, I was just referring to the language the OP used, and I’m also a bit confised to whats actually being discussed here. To me its super obvious that there are many different types of strokes. When we say “stroke” it encompasses many different aspects of technique/style; timing, power, vector, velocity, acceleration, etc - yes? There are various grip, wrist, elbow, overall delivery mechanisms to achieve these performance characteristics, yes? Among players, and within each player’s own bag of tricks. Like clearly there are different types of draw stroke - classic long/low/level vs angled/short/punchy, etc.

I guess we all develop a fairly consistent style for the most part - but there are clearly all sorts of variations. Do folks teach that this isn’t so?

Not challenging - asking. Thx
 
Last edited:

3kushn

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
unscientific I know but this shot Jaspers says "I think this one requires an elevated cue and a long stroke>
There were 2 decent players in this session who first attempted this with a level cue and missed, then elevated and got close or made the shot.
It was my experience as well when I got home to practice it.
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
unscientific I know but this shot Jaspers says "I think this one requires an elevated cue and a long stroke>
There were 2 decent players in this session who first attempted this with a level cue and missed, then elevated and got close or made the shot.
It was my experience as well when I got home to practice it.
So here's the million dollar question: Why do you think that an elevated cue and a long stroke had more success than a level cue? I don't know the answer. I'm just wondering if you experimented with it and came to any conclusions for yourself.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bbb

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
So here's the million dollar question: Why do you think the an elevated cue and a long stroke had more success than a level cue? I don't know the answer. I'm just wondering if you experimented with it and came to any conclusions for yourself.
One possible explanation is that there is a bias for people who don't know the shot to hit that draw tickie too full -- makes sense to get the very flat angle across the end rail. The elevation gives them a thinner hit than they are planning for and that is what's needed on the shot. I'm not saying that's the reason, I'm just giving an example.

The problem with "specialty strokes" is that the cue ball is very restricted in what it can do. All a player can change is its spin, speed and direction. A "standard" stroke can change each of those over the whole normal range of shots, including the cue ball requirements of the tickie shown.

And an explanation of why elevation may actually make a shot easier: it bends the path of the cue ball and that may be required to get a hit or avoid a kiss. I don't think that applies to the shot shown.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbb

3kushn

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
So here's the million dollar question: Why do you think that an elevated cue and a long stroke had more success than a level cue? I don't know the answer. I'm just wondering if you experimented with it and came to any conclusions for yourself.
I don't know the answer either. The elevated cue (6"?) and long stroke is what was suggested, and yes I did experiment when I got home and so far I'll say I was way more successful with following the instruction. I didn't spend a ton of time. Half dozen shots with a level stroke all failed. Then elevated and immediately saw the CB path drastically improve. BTW the shot doesn't require a much English at all, the 1st and 2nd rail give you all you need. Not much curve happens before the 1st rail.

Just speculating that suggesting a long stroke may generally speaking, may improve the quality of the stroke. Now I'm back to the argument I originally brought up. What does stroke quality have to do with anything, as long as the cue tip strikes the CB where it needs to be struck?
 

bbb

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I don't know the answer either. The elevated cue (6"?) and long stroke is what was suggested, and yes I did experiment when I got home and so far I'll say I was way more successful with following the instruction. I didn't spend a ton of time. Half dozen shots with a level stroke all failed. Then elevated and immediately saw the CB path drastically improve. BTW the shot doesn't require a much English at all, the 1st and 2nd rail give you all you need. Not much curve happens before the 1st rail.

Just speculating that suggesting a long stroke may generally speaking, may improve the quality of the stroke. Now I'm back to the argument I originally brought up. What does stroke quality have to do with anything, as long as the cue tip strikes the CB where it needs to be struck?
i am not an instructor but your question may be putting the cart in front of the horse.
what i mean is in order for the cue tip to hit the cue ball where it needs to be struck needs a quality stroke
not the other way around
jmho
icbw
2 more cents worth from me
i think the different strokes promoted by carom players are a way to express the timing and tempo of the stroke in question for the shot in question
jmho
icbw
 

goettlicher

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I’m not quite sure I actually understand whats being being discussed here, but it may be worth pointing out that force (power), velocity, and speed are all different things (velocity being the vector form of speed).

Also, while “angles” seem to dominate pool discussions, actually we’re dealing with 3D vectors, ie quantities that include both direction & magnitude.

Finally, there is an element of “time” involved in the “point” concept - as in the duration of time that the tip contacts the CB through delivery.

All of which makes “stroke” quite an interesting thing to analyze, develop, teach, and discuss.

Are there really instructors that teach the notion that there is only one type of stroke and how its delivered doesn’t matter? New concept for me…

✌️
No Certified that I know of. Maybe some other type teachers might think that.
 

goettlicher

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been reading this forum for some time and most Instructors agree that after the CB is contacted, It's all over. No argument.
What seems to me the instructors are also saying is ... No matter HOW the CUE is delivered, the point of contact is the Only Thing That Matters.

Why is it that when you talk to Masters of a game, they talk about different stroke techniques. Short, Long, Choke.....

I'm fortunate enough to be listening to Dick Jaspers in person teach all day today and tomorrow.
Refresh me, who is Dick jaspers?
Thank you
randyg
 
Top