Does "spinning the ball in" increase your shooting margin of error?

Me:
...I thought you were arguing that Efren's choice of how to shoot that shot must mean it increases the shotmaking percentage...

jsp:
I did, at least Efren's overall shotmaking percentage.

Me:
...Now you're saying that Efren knows it doesn't.

jsp:
We're talking about stunning the CB without outside english. I'm pretty confident Efren knows that stun without english increases throw.
Click to expand...

My point was that stun, with or without english, makes the shot more sensitive to errors of all kinds, including putting too much or too little english on. So stun, with or without english, is worse than roll for cinching the shot.

But I'm not the one who thinks Efren shot stun without english in the video. You do. So you still haven't answered my question.
Click to expand...

You mean about watching the other videos? I've already said I don't think what a handful of pros do is meaningful to this question, but I'll watch them if it matters to you.

pj
chgo
 
My point was that stun, with or without english, makes the shot more sensitive to errors of all kinds, including putting too much or too little english on. So stun, with or without english, is worse than roll for cinching the shot.

Ever gamble late in the morning where humidity went up and that the table is now full of chalk dust from hours of action?
Stun? Meaning the cueball is skidding/sliding instead of rolling?
Even Bill Incardona on video said, " thereby by drawing the cueball, he increased the level of accuracy on that shot."
I've seen one pro roll the cueball to pocket the 9-ball. Rodulfo Luat against Archer on the finals of World 9-Ball eons ago ( 1995 iirc ). 9-ball was inches from the side pocket. Yup, he missed and the announcer said he couldn't believe Luat rolled the cueball.
Parica almost always punches the 9-ball in with no english for what it's worth.
 
people are trying to argue that efren (or whoever) used english to aviod a skid, or to avoid a scratch. these are rationalizations made by people who have unknowingly convinced themselves of unsound principles, namely that center ball will be the most accurate stroke to cinch most (if not all) shots. really folks, have you watched top pros play?? they do in fact utilize natural outside english as a shotmaking tool (buddy hall even has gone as far as to call it "helping english"). is there any "real" argument here??

this "center ball is most accurate theory" has been passed on by instructors for years, and to be quite honest i think it would be like trying to argue that you can be a better bowler by throwing the ball strait at the pins. it's far oversimplified and if you'd like to actually play very good you need to ignore it. people probably argued that throwing a bowling ball strait is best for years, but the results proved otherwise, and now it is the accepted highest percentage path.

that is also the case in pool, the highest percentage path can be seen any time you watch a quality pro play. as i've said, i can actually think of a few reasons why english would help accuracy too, but i choose not to divulge great information that will fall on deaf ears. the earth isn't flat, bowlers shouldn't throw strait and pool players shouldn't cinch (certain) cut shots with center ball. i guess you have to decide for yourself who is right.
 
jsp (re Yang and Orcullo):
...it can be observed that they use outside english to cinch almost every cut shot on the 9 ball.
Click to expand...

Maybe they did, but I couldn't observe it on any of the videos you posted. I can't see where they hit the CB or how it's spinning (if at all) going into the OB. Maybe with slomo...

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Damn, there go my hopes for a pro career...

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

you know, you're right. telling you why natural english is better at cinching balls wouldn't help you, BUT if you actually just started using it, then that would in fact help you. to each their own however.

don't these threads have weird underlying tones. if you think about it, somebody is actually (probably anyway) correct and they are actually attempting to help the person who may or may not be responding in such an arrogant and rude manner. a fascinating dynamic.
 
enzo said:
you know, you're right. telling you why natural english is better at cinching balls wouldn't help you, BUT if you actually just started using it, then that would in fact help you. to each their own however.

don't these threads have weird underlying tones. if you think about it, somebody is actually (probably anyway) correct and they are actually attempting to help the person who may or may not be responding in such an arrogant and rude manner. a fascinating dynamic.
Click to expand...
What's arrogant about giving your reasons for why you think such and such is true and exposing them to rebuttal? I think there is more arrogance, at least the appearance of it, when you say it's this way or that way without any underlying rational, and that anybody who disagrees with it is wrong. Moreover, you're suggesting that those of us who disagree are incapable of even understanding your arguments, should you deign to lay them on us! And we're the ones who are arrogant?

Jsp and others have offered some reasons why outside might be preferable, some of which I agree with for certain situations. Where's yours?

Jim
 
Last edited:
Hey, can't we all get along?:)

Spin or don't spin ... whatever works for you! But I wonder if it comes down to what you know and use most often. I would think most 9 ballers are constantly hitting stun or draw shots with outside english, spinning out of corners or up the rails -- possibly more often than stunning without any juice. So it's a shot you know ... you know the stroke and the aiming path that'll work, so maybe you're inclined to stay with that.
 
I'm getting tired and don't have the stamina to read the rest of this thread before asking..

What about skids? Inside english I find gives rise to skidders more (I could be wrong.. I'm no expert on skidders just my experience). Outside english I never have a problem with the skid unless I slow roll.

I'm not talking about juicing the cb with outside.. just a hair.

Speaking of skidders time to throw these damn tighty whiteys out!
;)

EDIT: Whoops..just read this page and I see "skid" referenced above. I apologize.
 
Last edited:
Jude Rosenstock said:
Okay, I hope this puts the argument to rest.
If you want a physics professor in Yankee Stadium's centerfield this Spring, you might want to consider finding a very fast left fielder.
Click to expand...

Hey Jude! I take offense to that statement! I'll be a physics professor relatively soon and I played center field (in high school). I can run 40 m in less that 5 sec (when I was 20 possibly):D .

Anyhow, the original point to this thread: is using english in a situation where you don't need to play position (i.e. cinching the ball) more "accurate"?

I put accurate in quotations because that is the essential point that everyone seems to be skirting around. What I feel is more accurate might not feel more accurate to someone else.. your sense of accuracy when trying to pocket the 9 ball is totally subjective and depends on your entire pool playing history. You "learned" what was accurate by trial and error and feedback from the feeling you get when you stroke the shot and whether or not it goes in consistently.

What is most definitely objective in all of this discussion is that fact that a vast majority of pool players, pros and amateurs alike, feel that a little outside english is the more accurate way to cinch the 9 ball. The empirical data is there in hundreds of accustats tapes and every poolroom in the world.

Try using inside english.. I guarantee you'll hate it! :p
 
Jal said:
What's arrogant about giving your reasons for why you think such and such is true and exposing them to rebuttal? I think there is more arrogance, at least the appearance of it, when you say it's this way or that way without any underlying rational, and that anybody who disagrees with it is wrong. Moreover, you're suggesting that those of us who disagree are incapable of even understanding your arguments, should you deign to lay them on us! And we're the ones who are arrogant?

Jsp and others have offered some reasons why outside might be preferable, some of which I agree with for certain situations. Where's yours?

Jim
Click to expand...

i actually wasn't calling any particular person arrogant here, it is worded bad, but i just said in these threads people argue but the person who is right is really trying to help the other, i just think that is interesting in itself. kinda like "biting the hand that feeds you" concept. and just like the dog that bites, the people have no idea what they are doing. again i'm not referring to anybody, just the dynamic.... as i named no names and pointed no fingers. wasn't even necessarily talking about this thread.

the fact is i'm interested in things that are practical and useful. mulling over equations and disussing theory i dont think is useful. seeing how almost every top professional in the world shoots: very useful. that is my rational for recommending natural spin on many cut shots and not providing the theory behind my reasons.

where i get heated is when somebody suggests that a player isn't using natural spin to pocket balls when they MOST OBVIOUSLY are in any person's mind who watches with an objective eye. that irritates me and i think it's rationalizing ones own preset beliefs.
 
Travis Bickle said:
Hey, can't we all get along?:)

Spin or don't spin ... whatever works for you! But I wonder if it comes down to what you know and use most often. I would think most 9 ballers are constantly hitting stun or draw shots with outside english, spinning out of corners or up the rails -- possibly more often than stunning without any juice. So it's a shot you know ... you know the stroke and the aiming path that'll work, so maybe you're inclined to stay with that.
Click to expand...
That's actually a great point. If you shoot a shot often enough, then even if it's theoretically prone to more errors than an alternative shot, the fact that you shoot that (theoretically) inferior shot much more often than the superior alternative still makes it the best overall solution...for you.

For example, I can tell Jordan that he was shooting his jump shot with too little of an arc...that the theoretical optimum arc on a jump shot to maximize shooting error should be 55.8 degrees instead of the 48.5 degrees he normally shot. So was he wrong or did he make "mistakes" shooting 7 degrees lower than the theoretical optimum, even if that's what years playing world-class basketball molded him to do? I know it's not a perfect analogy, but you get my point. ;)
 
Patrick Johnson said:
My point was that stun, with or without english, makes the shot more sensitive to errors of all kinds, including putting too much or too little english on. So stun, with or without english, is worse than roll for cinching the shot.
Click to expand...
You know, we're really not in disagreement with the theory at all. You, Jal, and I are on the same page regarding the physics.

We just differ on our thoughts regarding if professionals are "wrong" shooting certain shots the way they do. More than the average pool player, I keep the theory and physics of pool in mind. But there comes a point where you just have to look at the data of years of experience rather than the theory in determining what should be considered the "correct" way to shoot. Ultimately, most of it is up to the individual player.
 
Speaking of skidders time to throw these damn tighty whiteys out!
James Rempe says that all the time when he's commentating.
 
jsp said:
... I've noticed that I've been subconsciously spinning more balls in for certain cut shots ... Why would I tend to do this? Here's an interesting thought. ... Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
When I was playing a lot of nine ball, I also tended to play the nine with outside on a lot of shots. It felt more comfortable. Also, since I was playing for specific position on the cue ball -- often frozen to the middle of the end rail -- the spin would often help me get there if I had a half-ball or a 45-degree cut on the nine. (Yes, this is anecdotal but it is first hand.)

I am also aware of the theory about why you are better off keeping the shot as simple as possible. Is it possible that for some players and in some situations, it is better to make the shot a little more complicated? I think it might be.

How can a player like Mike Sigel -- to take an example of a fairly good player who has advocated outside english -- reduce his number of misses? Once he gets his percentage of missed shots down into the 1% region, progress is hard. If he miscues twice a week, it is far too often and he has to fix his chalking or his tip. For typical league players, miscuing twice a week would be a big improvement, and they probably have bigger things to work on like not being able to get position. My point is that the top players need to work on defects that are relatively rare for others but that start to dominate the reasons for missed shots.

One of those defects is skid (also called "cling," or "kick" in the UK, or the more descriptive term I prefer, "bad contact"). In previous discussions of skid, it has come out that some players who play fairly frequently are completely unaware of the problem. I assume that their games have not progressed to the point that they know pretty well how they hit the shot when the ball leaves the tip. Consequently, when the object ball skids wide of the pocket by a couple of balls, they just figure their aim or delivery must have been off.

How often does kick occur? It depends a lot on the conditions. I was a referee at one tournament where it seemed to happen about once every couple of hours of play. Sometimes it will happen two or three times in a match.

In a tournament match in Sacramento, Louie Roberts and Mike Sigel missed one shot between them in 21 racks. (Roberts won on the hill by breaking in the nine ball.) If you add two skids to that match, it could have made all the difference.

So, suppose Mike Sigel can apply outside english accurately enough to do "contact induced throw" cancellation without the known problem of having too much/too little outside. He probably cannot prevent skid by controlling whether the chalk spots on the cue ball land on the object ball. What is the best way for him to play? It may be for him to use "helping english" on at least some cut shots.
 
We just differ on our thoughts regarding if professionals are "wrong" shooting certain shots the way they do. ... Ultimately, most of it is up to the individual player.
Click to expand...

But the question wasn't "is the way Efren shoots the best way for Efren?" The question was "Does spinning a ball in actually increase your shooting margin of error on a cut shot (error in terms of where the CB can contact the OB to pocket the shot)?" Efren came up as somebody whose shooting habits we should take into account when answering this physics question generally.

I agree that Efren probably plays the best way for Efren, but that isn't what the OP asked about or what I was talking about.

pj
chgo
 
bagofpaper said:
Hey Jude! I take offense to that statement! I'll be a physics professor relatively soon and I played center field (in high school). I can run 40 m in less that 5 sec (when I was 20 possibly):D .
Click to expand...


Maybe you can play for the Mets then?
 
jsp said:
That's actually a great point. If you shoot a shot often enough, then even if it's theoretically prone to more errors than an alternative shot, the fact that you shoot that (theoretically) inferior shot much more often than the superior alternative still makes it the best overall solution...for you.

For example, I can tell Jordan that he was shooting his jump shot with too little of an arc...that the theoretical optimum arc on a jump shot to maximize shooting error should be 55.8 degrees instead of the 48.5 degrees he normally shot. So was he wrong or did he make "mistakes" shooting 7 degrees lower than the theoretical optimum, even if that's what years playing world-class basketball molded him to do? I know it's not a perfect analogy, but you get my point. ;)
Click to expand...

spin or don't spin, whatever works for you. yes, BUT, like in bowling.... throw it strait or use spin to curve it, whatever works of you, well, that may not be all that great if you are trying to improve..... point is to play your best in bowling you will need to curve the bowling ball, what works for you (at some particular time) isn't necessarily too important when you utilize information properly. you should definitely start at least trying to curve your bowling ball if you want to become better at some point cus every top player does it. every top pool player uses natural on certain cuts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top