GentlemanJames
Well-known member
Perhaps TomatoShooter explains it better and more simply than I can.
Again, hoping this helps. - GJ
Cueball tip location
- Thread starter nataddrho
- Start date
Perhaps TomatoShooter explains it better and more simply than I can.
Again, hoping this helps. - GJ
There is no way that is where you would miscue or you and everyone else would miscue shooting a ball on the rail where all you can hit is the top part. You should be able to hit the cueball with even part of the tip showing past the ball. As long as more than half the tip is not outside the radius of the cueball we should be able to execute a good hit even with a bit of speed, given the tip is in good shape and so is the stroke hehe. I go past half way on the cueball when using spin a lot. Maybe if the lower part of the tip was on that spot it would be getting close to a miscue, but the center of the tip there, I don't buy that. Bert Kinister in one of his videos showed how far on the outside of the cueball you can hit, and it was pretty far.
Last edited:
That's to address level cue syndrome.
There is one difference and a similarity. On the rail you are shooting down at the ball. This winds up the ball against the cloth. Also the ball offers little resistance to a high hit so there would be slack even with a partial over the limit hit. Plenty of action for such a delicate hit. With a draw shot, you cannot mirror image this effect. (no hitting up on the ball, no table friction to aid in the action.
I think a lot of it has to do with the chord of the cue line. In a draw shot it makes a shallow cut and exits into the table. In the follow shot it angles toward center mass before exiting.
It matters in cases where stroke error is causing misses...when practicing, if I miss a shot repeatedly and am not sure why, I find it helpful to line it up again and watch CB last to verify I hit the CB correctly. If I make it, I assume my previous misses were a stroke error; if I miss it again, it's likely an alignment error. There are simple drills that can recalibrate either issue.
The miscue limit is the farthest from CB center that the ball can be contacted with the tip. Any other way of measuring (center or edge of tip) is too ambiguous. That’s why checking chalk marks is required.
Tip/ball contact more than halfway from center to edge of the CB will result in a miscue. That’s not a guess.
pj
chgo
The diagrams are based on the actual tip contact point rather than the center of the tip, and of course for english right at the miscue limit the contact point would be on the very inside edge of the tip. This also means that something like 90+% of the tip is past the contact point/miscue limit point during maximum english shots which creates an optical illusion of sorts making it seem like we are hitting closer to the edge of the ball than we really are.
But your claims of half of the tip being past the edge of the cue ball during maximum english shots (if I am correctly understanding what you are claiming below) still couldn't happen even if you were gauging by the center of the tip.
Instead of relying on conjecture and perception it is quick and easy to prove it one way or the other as many others have done. As suggested earlier in the thread just use a striped ball with the stripe perfectly facing you (orient the stripe vertically for left/right english testing, and horizontally for high/low english testing of course) and try to have the actual contact point fall outside of the stripe on a good hit as proven by the chalk mark. The maximum actual contact point that can be achieved on a good hit isn't near as close to the edge of the ball as most people perceive it to be.
That is because for a cue ball on the rail you are hitting down on the ball more than you typically do which changes how much of the ball you are hitting and you just failed to take that increased angle into consideration. Both the angle of the cue and the contact point matter (although it is rather customary not to mention the angle of the cue when talking about a level cue so in these types of discussions it is generally pretty safe to assume they are specifically talking about a level cue if not otherwise specified).
For example, if the cue ball were frozen to the rail and you shot with a truly level cue (which would be hard to do on most tables since your bridge has to be on the rail which automatically puts your cue hitting at a down angle) you might only be hitting say one eighth of the cue ball with a level cue which would result in a miscue. But when you elevate the cue and hit that exact same actual contact point on the cue ball you are now hitting say one quarter of the cue ball from that more elevated angle and would now be within the miscue limit from that angle.
You have to gauge how close you are hitting to the edge of the cue ball in relation to and adjusting for the angle you are shooting from.
Last edited:
Well of course if you aim way to the edge of the ball then shoot away from it, there is a very good likelihood of a miscue. The miscue limit should be based on a proper stroke, going at least straight through the ball not shooting away from it.
If I had a dollar for how many times I have tried to explain this to PJ I could buy all three of us one of those fancy japanese steak dinners with enough left over for dessert and drinks! Front hand english, back hand english, and parallel english each striking the exact same place on a cue ball will give three different results since the line of force in relation to the contact point of the cue ball on the table matters and each way of applying offset will change that line of force.
All ways of applying english do not get the the cue stick to the exact same place and position, something often claimed in the past!
Maximum distance from center that can be hit without miscuing varies with type of english used. I suspect that maximum spin using all types of english are the same or the same within the limitations of practical usage on a pool table.
I can hit further out with parallel english than with backhand english without miscuing. Can I generate more spin with parallel english?
I experimented with front hand english a little. Very effective and less unintended consequences than back hand english. Have to use it enough to plant the bridge hand right or shift the bridge and I hate shifting the bridge after planting it. I think I might like front hand english best if I used it more. I definitely like it better than back hand english but hard to get past HAMB and using parallel english!
Apologies for cropping most of your excellent post. If I didn't the concise statement I wanted to talk about would have been lost.
Hu
Unless you have very little idea what you’re doing, if the cue ball goes where you wanted it to and the object ball goes where you wanted it to, the tip hit the cue ball pretty damn close to where you wanted it to…
I have no idea what you mean by "shooting away from [the cue ball]", perhaps you can explain.
If you are talking about a swoop stroke (it doesn't sound like you are otherwise you would have said so?), where the stroke path is intentionally curved in an exaggerated fashion rather that being reasonably straight, I would say that nobody that can run two balls actually does that, and even if they did the stroke was still towards the cue ball although it does end up hitting at a different angle than it initially appeared they were setting up for. In any case, in these types of discussions it can be assumed that everybody is talking about "normal" strokes that weren't intentionally "swooped" unless they specify otherwise.
You are always shooting toward the cue ball. On each shot the stroke line of your cue is bisecting the cue ball and the only thing that changes from shot to shot is how much of the cue ball is on each side of that bisecting line. Once there is less than about one fourth of the cue ball on one side of that line you will miscue. This is why with the cue ball on the rail and a level stroke you might only be hitting say one eighth of the way into the ball and would miscue, but when you elevate your cue and hit that very same spot on the cue ball you are now hitting at least one quarter or more into the cue ball and are now within the miscue limits.
Keep in mind that the imaginary bisecting line comes out from the actual contact point on the tip, not from the center of the tip (except of course on those shots where the tip contact point is the center of the tip because you were hitting center ball with no english at all).
Last edited:
I don't recall you ever saying anything about this to me - I've always had and said the same thought.
I've always agreed with this too.
Who has claimed that? Not me. What I have said is this: no matter how you get the tip there, it has to hit the same spot on the CB from the same direction to get the same results.
Yes, if measured from the same viewpoint - the direction of tip travel at contact.
Not when measured from the same viewpoint.
And what's "parallel" english? What's parallel to what?
pj
chgo
We are never measuring from the same viewpoint using different forms of applying spin as each one results in a slightly different head position. For purposes of this discussion which is already trending south with your denial of understanding exactly what parallel english is, I'll point out four viewpoints if your line of sight is directly above the line of the shot.
Looking down the shot line with no english applied, we will call this viewpoint A, Tada!! This is also the baseline, perfect viewpoint to make the shot with no spin applied.
We will call the viewpoint using FHE viewpoint B since it is closest to viewpoint A.
We will call the viewpoint using BHE viewpoint C since it is second closest to viewpoint A.
When using a parallel shift with no pivot point to move the cue stick we will call this viewpoint D since it is furthest from viewpoint A.
I am only talking about our head position when saying different viewpoints are different distances from viewpoint A.
OK, now we will see why I established these baseline definitions. If we maintain our head at viewpoint A or return it to A after aligning the shot, it becomes possible to see that from this original viewpoint to hit the cueball with no spin, it is possible to hit the cue ball further out with no miscue when the cuestick is moved parallel to it's original position than it can be with any point of the cue shared with the original cue position.
A parallel shift has resulted in zero angle change so we can hit furthest out on the surface of the cue ball using this form of side. FHE creates less angle than BHE so the surface of the cue ball can be hit further out with FHE than with back hand english. BHE creates the greatest angle of the three methods so the surface of the cue ball can be hit the least far out of the three methods discussed.
Any or all of these methods can be combined. When I use front hand english or parallel shift english I sometimes make tiny adjustments with back hand english. Just for grins I have also applied all three forms of side for awhile practicing. It works but is needlessly complex both mentally and physically as expected.
Review for PJ:
BHE: Side is the result of moving the grip hand side to side with the physical pivot being at the bridge hand to establish the new contact point.
FHE: The bridge hand is relocated to the side with the grip hand in the approximate position it would be shooting without spin to establish the new contact point.
Parallel English, AKA Parallel Shift English: The entire cue stick is moved to the side with the angle of the cue stick remaining the same as it was before applying english to establish the new contact point. The cue stick is parallel to it's original position.
If the exact same point on the cue ball is hit using the three different methods of establishing the contact point, it will give three different results due to three different cue stick angles and three different directions of force.
Hu
It sounds to me like both of you (Patrick Johnson and ShootingArts) are essentially in agreement and saying and trying to say the same things but where you just each have very different ways of thinking about it and wording it that wouldn't have been most intuitive to the other.
On a side note, I think the only "viewpoint" that matters to the specifics being discussed here is the "viewpoint" of the cue stick at the moment of impact, as in exactly how much of the cue ball is on each side of the bisecting line created by the direction of the cue at the moment of contact (with said line coming out from the contact point on the tip). Where your head is in relation to this seems immaterial to me.
I think what Hu is trying to make clear (and that Pat seems to agree with) is that each of the types of english will give the same results at maximum, and each is the same amount of actual english with the same miscue limits when looking from the perspective of the stroke line at contact, but that from the shooters perspective you will see that they have different actual contact points since each one came in at a slightly different angle to the shooters line of sight. While this seems true to me, I think it simplifies things and avoids confusion when we try to only talk about where the cue ball is being contacted from the perspective of the stroke line/down the line of the shaft at the moment of contact since this is all that really matters to the physics of things.
On a side note, I think the only "viewpoint" that matters to the specifics being discussed here is the "viewpoint" of the cue stick at the moment of impact, as in exactly how much of the cue ball is on each side of the bisecting line created by the direction of the cue at the moment of contact (with said line coming out from the contact point on the tip). Where your head is in relation to this seems immaterial to me.
I think what Hu is trying to make clear (and that Pat seems to agree with) is that each of the types of english will give the same results at maximum, and each is the same amount of actual english with the same miscue limits when looking from the perspective of the stroke line at contact, but that from the shooters perspective you will see that they have different actual contact points since each one came in at a slightly different angle to the shooters line of sight. While this seems true to me, I think it simplifies things and avoids confusion when we try to only talk about where the cue ball is being contacted from the perspective of the stroke line/down the line of the shaft at the moment of contact since this is all that really matters to the physics of things.
Last edited:
I agree, except I think squirt needs to be included. It angles the stick’s force into the CB away from the line of the shaft in the direction of CB travel - making the CB’s direction of travel the line that determines the CB’s center and miscue limit.
This means that for a given CB direction the CB’s center and miscue limits are the same no matter what stick angles are used for high or low squirt because the direction of force into the CB is the same.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
The product might be worthwhile if they could provide traces of the pros and the ideals. Otherwise you can spend a million bucks to discover you shoot crooked.
To me tip contact is an objective thing where your mind tries to make it subjective from the perspective of your vision. (BHE vs. parallel vs. tip radius vs. shaft thickness vs. chicken wing)
I think specialty cue balls are hard to practice with because they slow down your flow too much. They are great visual aids (like on screen cueball graphics) from an era when on screen cueball graphics didn’t exist yet.
I think deflection, throw, swerve, pivot points, tangent lines, rolling angles, cheating the pocket and cueball paths are very real things that affect the outcome of a shot in significant ways. Most beginners have no idea just how much tip contact PRECISION is the cause of their woes and just how much a stronger player makes choices about these things in fine detail in which the beginner doesn’t even know the choice exists.
I prefer to fine tune accuracy for these concepts in ways that are measurable and involve shooting shots in a manner that can be repeatable in high frequency and repetition. The Mighty X drill (or a simple progressive top english intentional follow-in scratch shot) is more valuable to me than specialty cue balls and soda bottles. But I don’t discount the possibility of DigiCue being useful here.
I think specialty cue balls are hard to practice with because they slow down your flow too much. They are great visual aids (like on screen cueball graphics) from an era when on screen cueball graphics didn’t exist yet.
I think deflection, throw, swerve, pivot points, tangent lines, rolling angles, cheating the pocket and cueball paths are very real things that affect the outcome of a shot in significant ways. Most beginners have no idea just how much tip contact PRECISION is the cause of their woes and just how much a stronger player makes choices about these things in fine detail in which the beginner doesn’t even know the choice exists.
I prefer to fine tune accuracy for these concepts in ways that are measurable and involve shooting shots in a manner that can be repeatable in high frequency and repetition. The Mighty X drill (or a simple progressive top english intentional follow-in scratch shot) is more valuable to me than specialty cue balls and soda bottles. But I don’t discount the possibility of DigiCue being useful here.
From the top of the cueball view, red line shaft alignment, you are shooting away from the center to the edge of the cueball, black shaft alignment you are shooting straight towards the cueball edge. Shooting along the black line, don't see how you would miscue unless you go way to the outside edge or use a hard tip that is not very grippy or use some bad chalk that slides off the cueball easier. I play with a soft tip with decent chalk and can hit pretty well to the outside edge.