Earl's Elbow

Please allow me to respectfully insist that the robot test shot I proposed eliminates any human factors and thus should be the definite proof on the matter.
Thanks,
Petros
 
Petros Andrikop said:
Please allow me to respectfully insist that the robot test shot I proposed eliminates any human factors and thus should be the definite proof on the matter.
Click to expand...
I respectfully insist that chalk is a lot cheaper and easier, and any "human factors" will be evident in the position of the chalk mark. On the other hand, it would take lots of time, money, expertise, and effort to design, build, and test a robot capable of doing what you want. A piece of chalk is practically free, and you can do the experiment immediately, and it won't take very long. You might not agree, but I think the results of the experiment will be revealing. It can't hurt to at least try the experiment since it is so easy. You can do it with several different players who you think have the practical skills. I suspect you would see similar chalk-mark results with all of the players that create the effect you've describe. If not, please let us know.

Regards,
Dave
 
"If the cue elevation and speed are the same (or close enough) on all shots"...
The experiment you suggest is very clever, the only thing I humbly believe that takes away 100% perfection from it is the above point.
A robot can take it up to 100% and this is not what I need, this is what every player that took part in these endless discussions about this matter needs.
Let's hope that someone will be able to complete it some day.
I want to thank you guys once again, I have learned really a lot from your observations in this thread!!!
Petros
 
No human can verify using the exact same speed in two shots.
Only a robot can.
Anyway, this could go on forever..
Once again: World champions believe there is a difference in contact duration between tip-CB when elbow drop is used, as there is a difference when a soft tip is used instead of a hard one.
So: different results in the outcome of a shot arrive either from this physical fact that does actually exist, or this minor physical difference is not important and the different results arrive from subconscious player adjustments in each case.
Look, if we disagree that a robot experiment is not what any player would prefer to watch on this, then there is really nothing more I could add to convice you..
Already a certified instructor agrees with me on using the robot method on this if and when it becomes available.
I believe the majority of players would agree with me too.
With all respect as well Neil, whatever you suggest or do could never overcome an experiment which eliminates human factor.
Thank you,
Petros
 
Last edited:
With a robot, the results would not vary. But with a human, the "actual" tip contact point (i.e., not the "perceived" tip contact point) can vary with stroke changes. The tip contact point can be affected by any pre-contact elbow drop, grip tightening, and/or wrist motion. That's why I suggested the chalk-mark experiment. It would clearly show that it is human factors (and not physics) that gives the CB different reaction for different stoke "types."

Regards,
Dave

Neil said:
Petros, with all due respect, I think you are the only one that really needs it. If everything is exactly the same for both shots up to and including contact, and the only change is a short follow through (chest stopping the cue), or a long follow through (elbow drop to extend follow through), then the results have to be the same.

No matter which type of shot (elbow drop or not after the hit) the shot will stay the same for at least an inch after contact. It has already been proven that the tip will stay on the cb for app. .001 seconds, and that the tip will stay on the cb for app. 1/10 of an inch.

I just fail to see how you think that the cue can have any influence on the shot after it is no longer touching the cb?? The ONLY way anything can be different in the results is if something is changed BEFORE contact.
Click to expand...
 
The chalk-mark experiment does involve human factor.
The robot doesn't.
If you change the tip contact point or any other stroke feature you no longer have the same shot under study..
The whole discussion is about whether drob elbow technique affects the shot or not.
World champions believe it does.
It's the robot method that would clearly (100%) show anything on this for good, not any other method where human touch plays a role.
Any human method on this would provide max. 99% (at best..) accuracy when a machine method can provide the desired 100%.
If we don't agree that a machine can provide absolute stable reference values on studying a shot technique (and shots made by humans do..??!!) then we cannot have any further conversation since we begin from a different starting point..
I have really nothing else to add..
Thanks,
Petros
 
Last edited:
Petros Andrikop said:
The chalk-mark experiment does involve human factor.
The robot doesn't.
..
Click to expand...
Well, yes, but.... The chalk mark test, along with a few controls, is simple to implement, is reasonably accurate and can be done by anyone. While not completely satisfactory, sometimes you have to settle for the experiment you can do rather than the experiment you would like to do.

Champions are not always the best people to go to for advice. The world champion (at one time) recommended a 16-mm tip for the small carom games. No one in his right mind would take that advice now.
 
Neil said:
Not to mention one multi-time world champion that advocates basically wearing hockey gear to play properly. :o
Click to expand...
Who evidently watched Friday the 13th and Edward Scissorhands back-to-back-to-back..... Can you get hockey masks with blue-blocker lenses?
 
Bob Jewett said:
Petros Andrikop said:
The chalk-mark experiment does involve human factor.
The robot doesn't.
..
Click to expand...
Well, yes, but.... The chalk mark test, along with a few controls, is simple to implement, is reasonably accurate and can be done by anyone. While not completely satisfactory, sometimes you have to settle for the experiment you can do rather than the experiment you would like to do.

Champions are not always the best people to go to for advice. The world champion (at one time) recommended a 16-mm tip for the small carom games. No one in his right mind would take that advice now.
Click to expand...
Now, if the chalk experiment shows that the tip contact point is the same for each stroke type, and the CB reaction is different, then there might be a reason to study this further.

I've done similar human chalk-mark experiments with Tom Ross. Even though it didn't seem right to Tom at first, the chalk mark did correlate well with CB reaction. I'm confident the same will be true for the current question.

Regards,
Dave
 
for what its worth........

i noticed another legendary champion dropping his elbow also. i think the announcers referred to him as the Kentucky Colonel.

DCP
 
Exceptions are only confirmation of rules..
Most of champions drob elbow at some shots and they know exactly why they are doing it.. Like it or not, one must finally agree that Ralf Souquet for e.g. knows what he's doing more than anyone which may think otherwise..
I agree that perfoming an experiment which is possible is better than one which is not available at the moment. But: still the definite proof lies in the desired experiment which lacks human factor.
Let's hope it will be performed one day in order to settle things from the physics point of view. The practical approach in using these technique is proven in action anyway by champions and will remain.
Thanks,
Petros
 
Last edited:
DrCue'sProtege said:
... i noticed another legendary champion dropping his elbow also. i think the announcers referred to him as the Kentucky Colonel. ...
Click to expand...
Like many (maybe most) players, Nick Varner has two distinct strokes. If he is playing a soft shot, his elbow is still. If he is playing a hard shot, his elbow will drop roughly the thickness of his upper arm. Or at least that is what I observed about 1995 when he visited Executive Billiards in Redwood City.
 
PistolPat said:
It's funny that A LOT of people agree that Earl Strickland has a flaw in his stroke..but yet with this alleged flaw he's a champion of champions and a God given talented cueist.....Maybe all of US are the ones with the flawed stroke......
Click to expand...

well said....
mike sigel drops his elbow as well..
and this nobody....:D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYB2id9qyL8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqOsrJJcpEM&feature=related
arguable one of the most gifted cueists of all time.....
 
Petros Andrikop said:
Most of champions drob elbow at some shots and they know exactly why they are doing it..
... The practical approach in using these technique is proven in action anyway by champions and will remain.
Click to expand...
I agree that there might be good practical reasons for dropping the elbow on some (or even all) shots. FYI, some of the reasons are listed here (see the bullets):

I think another interesting experiment would be to film many top players who drop the elbow different amounts on different types of shots to see exactly when the elbow drop occurs (and to also see what the wrist and grip do) to better understand what kind of effect the stroke can have on each particular shot.

Here's an example for a Mike Massey power draw:

I think this is one example where the "champion" might not know exactly why and when he is dropping the elbow, based on:

Regardless, to be a champion, you don't need to know why or how certain things work. For a champion, all that really matters is results. And if doing something helps create a result consistently, directly or indirectly, then the champion should continue to do whatever that thing is.

Regards,
Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top