Cue Power: Snooker versus 9 ball (Argument settler)

J

johnnysd

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
My friend is trying to really improve and become a top local player and he is very focused on working on changing his stance and alignment (mostly using Mark Wilson's teachings and concepts)

In discussing this with him one of the concepts is that in pool (especially 9 ball) you have to be astride the target line and that a snooker stance facing and straddling the target line is unsuitable for pool because in pool you need much more "cue power"

Having played both quite a bit I fundamentally disagree with that statement strongly. Now I will stipulate that snooker tables have in general faster cloth and that it is slightly easier to get "action" on the cue ball with the smaller ball diameter and tip size.

But snooker is played on a 6x12 table where just a simple spotted black is close to as long of a shot as a full length shot on a bar table.

Not to mention the power needed to make shots from balk or go in and out of balk on a low blue. In addition it seems to me that power draw comes up far far more often in snooker than it really does in pool.

But he is adamant that snooker is a finesse game and 9 ball is a power game that requires more cue action.

Would be interested to see what people think.
 
johnnysd said:
,,, But he is adamant that snooker is a finesse game and 9 ball is a power game that requires more cue action.
...
Click to expand...
Of course he's right about snooker when the player is around the black spot, but of course he is wrong the rest of the time. A standard play is to shoot a long red from baulk and draw (screw) the cue ball back to baulk. He may also think snooker players don't use side spin.

Even on shots around the black spot, if the player ends up nearly straight, he may crank the power way up to move the cue ball sideways.
 
I don't think I've used half the power playing pool as I did in snooker. If I was setting the tone against an opponent in snooker I'd let my stroke out with a few power bomb stun/draw shots . Playing off the pack or object ball to get back into balk doesn't take alot of power. On a 9ft it's a smaller playing surface and alot of power isn't required as much. That IMO.
 
I rarely have to use power on a 9 footer playing 9 ball, in fact I find you really can’t let your stroke out that often. It’s more of a smooth stroke rolling the ball, even if you have to come around 3 rails “power” is not your friend!
 
johnnysd said:
My friend is trying to really improve and become a top local player and he is very focused on working on changing his stance and alignment (mostly using Mark Wilson's teachings and concepts)

In discussing this with him one of the concepts is that in pool (especially 9 ball) you have to be astride the target line and that a snooker stance facing and straddling the target line is unsuitable for pool because in pool you need much more "cue power"

Having played both quite a bit I fundamentally disagree with that statement strongly. (Now I will stipulate that snooker tables have in general faster cloth )and that it is slightly easier to get "action" on the cue ball with the smaller ball diameter and tip size.

But snooker is played on a 6x12 table where just a simple spotted black is close to as long of a shot as a full length shot on a bar table.

Not to mention the power needed to make shots from balk or go in and out of balk on a low blue. In addition it seems to me that power draw comes up far far more often in snooker than it really does in pool.

But he is adamant that snooker is a finesse game and 9 ball is a power game that requires more cue action.

Would be interested to see what people think.
Click to expand...
I’ve always found snooker cloth to be heavier. Normal pool cloth tends to weigh 22 ounces per square yard…..Snooker cloth tends to be 27 to 40 ounces per square yard….and with a smaller and lighter ball, I feel it has to be hit harder, generally. And snooker cues require a carom
taper because the game requires a strong hit.
 
When I watch top snooker players, I am always amazed at the distances they use stun and check side. I would try to do the same thing and my next shot would be on a different half of the table.
 
VarmintKong said:
When I watch top snooker players, I am always amazed at the distances they use stun and check side. I would try to do the same thing and my next shot would be on a different half of the table.
Click to expand...
The first time I saw Allison Fisher in person, she had a nearly straight-in shot and had to move the cue ball sideways. POW! without apparent effort and the cue ball went where she wanted.
 
as for the stance, i played snooker before i played pool and have always used a snooker stance in pool. a snooker stance is steady but it's bad for the back if you have a back injury. it has been difficult to unlearn it too.

as for finesse / power, both games have that and there are players with varying styles in both games too
 
skogstokig said:
as for the stance, i played snooker before i played pool and have always used a snooker stance in pool. a snooker stance is steady but it's bad for the back if you have a back injury. it has been difficult to unlearn it too.

as for finesse / power, both games have that and there are players with varying styles in both games too
Click to expand...
roger that. i have back, neck, hip issues and the snooker stance would land me in the er. i tried it for a couple days and went back to more side-on pool delivery.
 
pt109 said:
I’ve always found snooker cloth to be heavier. Normal pool cloth tends to weigh 22 ounces per square yard…..Snooker cloth tends to be 27 to 40 ounces per square yard….and with a smaller and lighter ball, I feel it has to be hit harder, generally. And snooker cues require a carom
taper because the game requires a strong hit.
Click to expand...
^^^^^^^
this guy should know ......(y);)
 
garczar said:
roger that. i have back, neck, hip issues and the snooker stance would land me in the er. i tried it for a couple days and went back to more side-on pool delivery.
Click to expand...
I started off playing snooker with the typical snooker stance and as I learned I developed a box style stance that let my arm go thru alot better . I was more solid at the table and up from the cue 4-6". At 71 years old I'm just getting back into playing pool and trying slowly to get where I'm comfortable at the table with different heights off the cue
 
I'm not a snooker player but I do believe 9 ball on average has more power strokes. Going 2 rails out of the corner with draw, and 3 rails forward, are routine shots. So is going back and forth across the table a few times. They all require a hard stroke.

In snooker, you can only use a hard stroke when the OB is towards the middle of the table, such that it can be pocketed in the center of the pocket, without hitting the pocket rounds. If the OB is near the rail, the shot becomes near impossible due to the rounded pocket facings. In pool, you can hit the ball almost break speed from about anywhere on the table, even on the cushion. This opens up way more position possibilities in pool than in snooker. I do believe if snooker had pockets cut like pool, the strokes would all be exactly the same.

As far as a sideways pool stance being able to deliver a harder stroke than a head-on snooker stance, I don't know if that's true. Allison and Kelly use the head on stance from their snooker background and play pool at the highest level.
 
The thinking that you need more cue power for pool, I believe, stems from a couple of things - the break and larger/heavier balls. People think you need to put more power into hitting a pool ball but the extra power is negligible. Also, snooze has a lot more pocket speed shots so it can be perceived as using less power. But trust me, trying to get down to the pack from a yellow requires a bit of elbow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbb
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top