Face square?

[BC21]

I'd like to answer a question you didn't ask. Personally speaking, I play best when everything is RELAXED. I notice something in you that you see often in pool halls. Your face is all scrunched up. Lips are tight, forehead furrowed. Maybe your glasses are causing that. I find it hard to keep one part of my body relaxed when another part is tense. If your face has tension it is likely the muscles related to delivering the cue are also tense, even just a little. Again, for me personally, when I learned how to deliver the cue while maintaining relaxation, questions of head position or feet or all that stuff just didn't matter. Balls go in from everywhere as long as your muscles allow you to deliver the due in the direction you want it to go.

Great point. Studies have shown that facial expressions can alter the mindset, affecting how the mind perceives your current situation. A frown or angry expression tells the brain to tense up the muscles and get ready for conflict. A smile tells the brain that all is good, no stress or bad shit is going down. In other words, when Efren laughs off a mistake or error, he is keeping his mind calm and collected, which keeps his stroke mechanics smooth and free of unnecessary tension.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

A smile tells the brain that all is good

I often remind myself to smile when I have negative feelings. As soon as I do I feel better; no particular "positive thoughts" needed - the simple physical act of smiling is enough to make an emotional difference.

pj
chgo

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I'm okay with a square face, but what is the advantage?

A square face is key for assessing the shot pre-stance, while standing erect:

1) Consistency in early aim

2) We are built to sight and walk toward targets facing forward

But in the final stance, the view of the target on the ob is different than while standing up--the equator of the sphere looks different. The natural way to stand for a right-hander is with the head rotated, left eye closer to the target.

 

[FranCrimi]

I'm okay with a square face, but what is the advantage?

A square face is key for assessing the shot pre-stance, while standing erect:

1) Consistency in early aim

2) We are built to sight and walk toward targets facing forward

But in the final stance, the view of the target on the ob is different than while standing up--the equator of the sphere looks different. The natural way to stand for a right-hander is with the head rotated, left eye closer to the target.

Is this what you're referring to?

www.liveabout.com/stance-the-big-secret-369009

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Is this what you're referring to?

www.liveabout.com/stance-the-big-secret-369009

Not particularly. There are multiple ways to stand at the table in balance with good fundamentals.

 

[Zerksies]

Your height looks fine. When i was in my 20's i probably got down that low as you are looking. Now that i am in my 40's I'm probably at your height. I think myself i have better depth perception on the shot being a little higher.

 

[Dan White]

Is this what you're referring to?

www.liveabout.com/stance-the-big-secret-369009

Who knew so many instructors were doing it so wrong for so long?

 

[FranCrimi]

Who knew so many instructors were doing it so wrong for so long?

I'm bewildered by that article, Dan.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I'm bewildered by that article, Dan.

Me, too. The final "do it this way" (#8) appears to be completely and totally broken and will not work at all for the vast majority of players. It is very surprising that someone who claims to teach how to play pool would have allowed such a picture to be attached to his name. Perhaps someone failed to proof read the web page.

 

[WobblyStroke]

Me, too. The final "do it this way" (#8) appears to be completely and totally broken and will not work at all for the vast majority of players. It is very surprising that someone who claims to teach how to play pool would have allowed such a picture to be attached to his name. Perhaps someone failed to proof read the web page.

Lil harsh lol.
While odd looking in the photo for sure, I don't disagree with the advice as I personally come straight down with the head too as do many pros.... we just have that head where it needs to be before starting down.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Me, too. The final "do it this way" (#8) appears to be completely and totally broken and will not work at all for the vast majority of players. It is very surprising that someone who claims to teach how to play pool would have allowed such a picture to be attached to his name. Perhaps someone failed to proof read the web page.

Rude--you could have asked instead of assuming--and wrong.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Rude--you could have asked instead of assuming--and wrong.

You could have explained his "error". Or could you?

pj
chgo

 

[FranCrimi]

Lil harsh lol.
While odd looking in the photo for sure, I don't disagree with the advice as I personally come straight down with the head too as do many pros.... we just have that head where it needs to be before starting down.

I don't come straight down over the line. My head and sight leave sight of the shot line for a bit as I move into my stance ---- HOWEVER, not before I've planted my foot on the line of the shot which is my anchor in bringing my head back over the line as I get down over the shot.

So we all get there --- one way or another. But that's not the issue here.

The issue is that Matt is saying in his article, that placing your head over the shot line is an optional move, and that if you set up the way he describes, you will see just fine with your head to the side of the shot line.

Beats me....maybe he's trying to turn us all into tennis players.

 

[WobblyStroke]

I don't come straight down over the line. My head and sight leave sight of the shot line for a bit as I move into my stance ---- HOWEVER, not before I've planted my foot on the line of the shot which is my anchor in bringing my head back over the line as I get down over the shot.

So we all get there --- one way or another. But that's not the issue here.

The issue is that Matt is saying in his article, that placing your head over the shot line is an optional move, and that if you set up the way he describes, you will see just fine with your head to the side of the shot line.

Ahh, I see. I mean, if we look at young Niels Feijen cueing under his right ear it seems like SOME ppl can make that work. I wouldn't go as far as to say it is optional for everyone as I believe the vast majority will see best over the line. As with anything, there will be outliers making it appear more 'optional' than it really is for most players.

BTW, we can sometimes take phrasing for granted as there are many ways to express the same concept, but I absolutely love the use of the term 'anchor' in technique discussions as it really seems to resonate with students and helps them understand that some points MUST be locked down in a particular spot for consistent perception/striking.

 

[Dan White]

I don't come straight down over the line. My head and sight leave sight of the shot line for a bit as I move into my stance ---- HOWEVER, not before I've planted my foot on the line of the shot which is my anchor in bringing my head back over the line as I get down over the shot.

So we all get there --- one way or another. But that's not the issue here.

The issue is that Matt is saying in his article, that placing your head over the shot line is an optional move, and that if you set up the way he describes, you will see just fine with your head to the side of the shot line.

Beats me....maybe he's trying to turn us all into tennis players.

SVB career earnings $1.5 million

Novak Djokovic career earnings $159 million and counting.

Maybe he has a point!

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I don't come straight down over the line. My head and sight leave sight of the shot line for a bit as I move into my stance ---- HOWEVER, not before I've planted my foot on the line of the shot which is my anchor in bringing my head back over the line as I get down over the shot.

So we all get there --- one way or another. But that's not the issue here.

The issue is that Matt is saying in his article, that placing your head over the shot line is an optional move, and that if you set up the way he describes, you will see just fine with your head to the side of the shot line.

Beats me....maybe he's trying to turn us all into tennis players.

Since inception, this article has said in photo 7 "The head is comfortably over the line of shot . . . "

I next describe how I (Matt Sherman) can see the shot well from a bit to the side, but that "after, I can pull or tuck my head in over the cuestick as in this photo" (and as shown in Photo 8).

Additionally, when teaching stance in this fashion, I invite the student to stroke straight forward without tucking their head in, demonstrating that the cue on line is superior to the head, eyes (or feet or whatever) on line.

You've done the same, no doubt, demonstrating how one may shoot well with the eyes closed, after the cue is on line.

 

[FranCrimi]

Since inception, this article has said in photo 7 "The head is comfortably over the line of shot . . . "

I next describe how I (Matt Sherman) can see the shot well from a bit to the side, but that "after, I can pull or tuck my head in over the cuestick as in this photo" (and as shown in Photo 8).

Additionally, when teaching stance in this fashion, I invite the student to stroke straight forward without tucking their head in, demonstrating that the cue on line is superior to the head, eyes (or feet or whatever) on line.

You've done the same, no doubt, demonstrating how one may shoot well with the eyes closed, after the cue is on line.

I'm not going to debate your intent. I speak and read English. This article is atrocious.

 

[Dan White]

Since inception, this article has said in photo 7 "The head is comfortably over the line of shot . . . "

I next describe how I (Matt Sherman) can see the shot well from a bit to the side, but that "after, I can pull or tuck my head in over the cuestick as in this photo" (and as shown in Photo 8).

Additionally, when teaching stance in this fashion, I invite the student to stroke straight forward without tucking their head in, demonstrating that the cue on line is superior to the head, eyes (or feet or whatever) on line.

You've done the same, no doubt, demonstrating how one may shoot well with the eyes closed, after the cue is on line.

Aside from any comment on the content, the article comes off as clickbait, intenting to attract interest by use of outrageous claims. Maybe the website requires such things.

 

[BC21]

...... I invite the student to stroke straight forward without tucking their head in, demonstrating that the cue on line is superior to the head, eyes (or feet or whatever) on line.
......

Ref the bold... The mind brings everything together - what we see, how we align to it and how we can tell if our cue is in tune with certain anchors, like our back foot and our elbow and grip hand and bridge hand.

Consistency comes from repeatedly lining the body and cue up to what we see, over and over and over again, shot after shot after shot, looking at the line the cue/stroke needs to be on, then stepping into that line and ensuring that what we feel (body alignment, muscle memory) fits what we see.

Sure, a player can look at the line, place the cue stick on that line, then fire away with complete ignorance, not paying any attention to exactly how or where that line is in relation to their body (mainly the feet, shoulder, and elbow). But if they want to become more consistent, it's a good idea to pay attention to exactly where that line can be anchored to the body, and that should be the first thing that happens.

In other words, look at the line the cue needs to be on, then place all your anchors on that line as you move into the shot. With the body aligned to what you're seeing, the cue will fall into place automatically.

The stroke is a delivery machine - your body is the alignment mechanism for the machine. Getting the body aligned to what we see ensures that the stroke will be delivered on line.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I'm not going to debate your intent. I speak and read English. This article is atrocious.

We're not debating my intent. You made a claim refuted by the actual words of the article, ""The head is comfortably over the line of shot . . . "

I respect your desire to police our sport for the benefit of everyone. But comments like "for tennis players" are demeaning to both of us.