Difficult (for me) 9-Ball Shot/Position
- Thread starter Samiel
- Start date
I think Allen Hopkins spins his ball pretty well, and often can predict better than you or I where his ball will end up. While a smooth stroke seems to work more consistently for some, it is not required for either great spin or accuracy.BRKNRUN said:
Bob Jewett said:
And Julie Kelly too. Both "strokes" if you want to call them that look ugly to me but as you point out, results are results.
For sure, the CB doesn't know if it's been it smoothly or by a jabbing stroke. All it cares about is the force applied to it and the degree of offset at which it is struck.
The smooth accelerating stroke helps most people to deliver the tip to the intended place at the intended speed...but if you can control a jabby stroke as brilliantly as Hopkins can it works as well or better than smooth strokes.
I recently saw a study published...possibly by you Bob...that the variation off a straight forward/backward motion was measurably less than other top pros who were studied.
I'm not recommending the Hopkins/Kelly stroke for anyone and I assume you are not either. But the true benefits of the smooth accelerating stroke are often misunderstood IMHO.
You don't get any more or less spin with a jabby stroke...rather, most people are simply more likely to strike the CB where they intend to if they use a smooth, classic stroke.
Regards,
Jim
I just recorded myself doing this shot. I didn't count, although I think I did it 7/10 (unedited). I'm on a Gold Crown IV that was purchased from the Super Billiard Expo Pro Event. It has 4.5" pockets, Simonis, and the TV Pro Cup Aramith balls.
I pretty much shot it the same as how I posted from work. Speed isn't that critical w/ the exception of scratching in the corner from the 2nd rail or coming up short off the 1st rail. I never hit the shot hard - as Jewett mentioned, it's all about RPMs. I think on a 7' table, I'd torture this shot to death repeatedly until I got bored or until my arm got tired.
I think the only time the sides come into play is when you really mis-hit the OB and hit it too thin. I'm always playing the shot thick - probably more thick than what naturally feels right. From there, I throw it in and the spin takes me naturally there.
As soon as youtube processes the video, I'll post the link. I'm excited, this is my first youtube video.
Dave
I pretty much shot it the same as how I posted from work. Speed isn't that critical w/ the exception of scratching in the corner from the 2nd rail or coming up short off the 1st rail. I never hit the shot hard - as Jewett mentioned, it's all about RPMs. I think on a 7' table, I'd torture this shot to death repeatedly until I got bored or until my arm got tired.
I think the only time the sides come into play is when you really mis-hit the OB and hit it too thin. I'm always playing the shot thick - probably more thick than what naturally feels right. From there, I throw it in and the spin takes me naturally there.
As soon as youtube processes the video, I'll post the link. I'm excited, this is my first youtube video.
Dave
Last edited:
BRKNRUN said:
OK, for additional stirring... how about this... how would the cloth affect the two shot options? Three tables, all with Simonis, all things being equal except that one table has brand new, slick cloth vs. one with relatively new and clean but broken in cloth vs. one with old and dirty cloth?
Neil said:
Well...no. He made 10 of 13 SHOTS which is 77% success rate.
Two additional shots...#s 1 and 3 ended up with questionalbe position. If he missed only 1 of those 2, the success ratio goes to 70%.
A true test would be to pocket BOTH shots so there can be no argument over position.
In addition, shooting the same shot repetitively like that is NOT a true test. Only when shots are interspersed with others can a true test of "game condition" probabilities be tested.
In addition, he played on his own table under non-match conditions where the only distraction was his cats! (-:
Given the above variables, I think my original estimate is pretty correct.
Whether the shot is advisable has a lot to do with the opponent and the score of the match.
For example, ahead 7-2 in a race to 9 the shot would be attractive. But Hill/Hill for the match? As noted, a miss is a sell out so A LOT of players would duck that shot.
Regards,
Jim
av84fun said:
Depends on the person. I agree the situation changes the shot... situations can change any shot on the table. Dog makes people do ridiculous things - I've been there for more than my share.
If you're a player, you're shooting this shot and going for the out 100% of the time 100% of all situations. If you're a tour pro, you're GETTING OUT here. Doesn't mean you will 100%, but I can't see a tour pro duck on this shot no matter what. My % wasn't stellar, but I'm not even sure I consider myself a player, and I'm going for this 100% of the time. Pros def would. I wish some tour pros would read this and jump in at any time. John Schmidt, Danny Harriman, Ray Martin, Black Jack, Gwapo, Dynamite, JoeT, someone.
Now, if someone isn't comfy with the shot, you have to recognize that and shoot within your ability (Jude's safety).
Last edited:
Sporty shooting Dave. I just tried it...with no warm-up at all. Made the shot 6/10 but scratched in the corner once.
And yes, on a bar box, it's a completely different shot. A poke that would scratch cross-side on a 9 ft. would be perfect on a bar box....plus can be shot more softly...plus is a shorter/easier shot to begin with.
Regards,
Jim
And yes, on a bar box, it's a completely different shot. A poke that would scratch cross-side on a 9 ft. would be perfect on a bar box....plus can be shot more softly...plus is a shorter/easier shot to begin with.
Regards,
Jim
SpiderWebComm said:
You raise an interesting point....i.e. when you can leave the opponent nothing better than a table-length bank, what probability percent whould you require if you're at hill/hill for the tournament and given that a miss is a sell out????
My guess is that most pros would seriously consider ducking if they didn't think they could make the shot 90% of the time.
I'll ask a pro friend of mine and will honestly post the response.
Regards,
Jim
av84fun said:
Thank you. I recorded this when I came home from work at 5:15 and spent the balance of the time cutting the clip and uploading it youtube. I think if I practiced this shot, my % would be pretty high and like I said-- I'm no player.
Youtube was pretty easy - I'll try to do that more often. I'm not saying you didn't do what you said, but it'd be cool to have you post a video and everyone else who can do one so we can see the different, repeatable ways to make the shot well. I'm sure people have different styles - I'd like to see them. It's interesting.
av84fun said:
I think my point is - show me a tour pro who DOESN'T think they can make that 90%? I'm a loser player with a 50 hour a week job. I think someone who paid his/her way through life playing can make 2 out of 10 more than loser me.
Here's a example of a more advanced shot..Play the shot rail first with extreme low left.The cue will slide to the opposite rail and then shoot up to the head rail.This is a hard shot but one that I practice often to work on stroke,I usually put the shot on the left hand side of the table and shoot down from the head string.after about 5 tries I can pocket the ball and the cue just slowly slides to the rail and the accelerates up table.From the left side the shot is extreme ow right at about 5:30 and 2 tips.
LILJOHN30 said:
I just tried that on my table. On my very first try I hit it really well. I like your way on a frozen ball! Thanks.
That's a hard shot for anyone. I remember Grady Matthews (on a Accustats tape) saying that its a sucker shot to attempt pocketing the ball and drawing back for the 9 ball. My attempt (on a 9 ft table) would be to cross bank the 8 if you make it fine if you miss at least you leave distance. On a bar table I would try pocketing the ball and staying on that end of the table for the next shot.