I get the feeling that what you teach is based on your own observations (some irrevalent) for reasons that I can explain. I try to make you explain your observations as to find your reasoning behind them. I believe that there are techniques that allow a person to use his or hers personality incorporated into there stroke. Your approach is a stilted mechanical way of playing with variables that a person shouldn't even have to think about. One being what happens after the qball is rolling as far as the stroke is concerned. I've never said a word about an "end all/"be all" stroke but I find you saying that's WRONG when giving your opinion. Getting off the track abit. The leeway I was talking about was that noone ever questions your assumptions. Your desire to teach an easy to understand, solid cuestick delivery is fraught(sp?) with endless detailed irrevalent errors as you would call them. I could list my accomplishments too but I don't resort to that as a defense to not get into a detailed discussion of why you think this and that. No one else seems to have. .
First time seeing my own stroke
- Thread starter monchiwai
- Start date
I get the feeling that what you teach is based on your own observations (some irrevalent) for reasons that I can explain. I try to make you explain your observations as to find your reasoning behind them. I believe that there are techniques that allow a person to use his or hers personality incorporated into there stroke. Your approach is a stilted mechanical way of playing with variables that a person shouldn't even have to think about. One being what happens after the qball is rolling as far as the stroke is concerned. I've never said a word about an "end all/"be all" stroke but I find you saying that's WRONG when giving your opinion. Getting off the track abit. The leeway I was talking about was that noone ever questions your assumptions. Your desire to teach an easy to understand, solid cuestick delivery is fraught(sp?) with endless detailed irrevalent errors as you would call them. I could list my accomplishments too but I don't resort to that as a defense to not get into a detailed discussion of why you think this and that. No one else seems to have. .
The ones that have granted them leeway are the ones who have never bothered to ask the resoning behind their assumptions, other than we've taught millions/billions and more are lining up every day .. I think there are parts of the stroke they analize that aren't worthy of analysis. (lots of air pudding) Do you really need to talk with scientists/engineers/etc about a simple movement. Do you really need that to learn how to putt in golf?
I am a player with decades and a high level of understanding and the ability to communicate it. The fact that they are selling a product doesn't and have been refining their speil for decades doesn't detract from the fact that they've made too complex a formula(error prone in minute ways) instead of simplifing it.
canwin...I'm not sure why you're so "pig-headed" about this, but I'll try to explain it to you...for the hundredth time. If ONE (not necessarily you, unless the shoe fits) is happy with how their stroke and game is, then don't try to do anything to change it. If one is NOT happy with their progression, then there are ways to improve that sense of consistency. That's what we teach. It works for lots of players. For you to say it cannot work, based on your own biased sense of reasoning...and having never experienced the instruction yourself (although you did seek me out once, to try to get a lesson when I was in Columbus one time), so you really have no knowledge to base your accusations on. Try it once...then you can try to complain about how badly it works.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
What does it matter what the elbow does after contact and the cue is rolling and can you explain what you mean by it doesn't contribute anything possitive to the outcome of the shot? Could you run that by me one more time if not too much trouble? If how far you follow through has no bearing on what happens with the shot then what's the difference between that and the elbow drop?
That which happens after contact is used to help identify what was happening at contact. If all we were to evaluate were the actual time when the tip was in contact with the cue ball, we wouldn't have much to look at, would we?
Steve
So it does in fact sound like you're evaluating whether he's decelerating simply based on his finish. I guess that's why it's as clear as a good/bad hit. You can make suggestions on what he can work on based on how he finishes, but to definitively say he's decelerating is hilariously off base.
One suggestion you could make is that he could slow down his stroke in order to give himself a greater margin of error for control. But again, he's just airing out his stroke.
Q: for the OP, are you getting the expected results from the cue ball. ie the desired english, draw or follow?
These reason I ask is in the video I see some inconsistencies in the mechanics, the BH not finishing in the same position each time, on the follow shots the cue is being pulled inward.
These reason I ask is in the video I see some inconsistencies in the mechanics, the BH not finishing in the same position each time, on the follow shots the cue is being pulled inward.
Last edited:
canwin...I could explain it...again. But I choose not to. All you wish to do is argue...so you can argue with yourself.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
canwin, I'll try to answer your questions as a student but non instructor.
Elbow Drop: Doesn't matter after contact. What matters is timing of the drop and Complicating the stroke by incorporating a drop. I'm a dropper and trying to rid
myself of it. Why? My timing isn't always what I think. Ever hit a high or low ball and not get what you expect? Too much follow or miscue on high or not much draw on low.
That could be an indication of bad timing among other things.
Tightness of the Grip: I think it was Luther Lasiter that said Loose is good, looser is better. This agrees with the Mosconi quote. If you start at about 3:05 of this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS_wU1d1xsk watch the wrist. Not sure if that much wrist action is professed but the point is, with a firm grip he couldn't get that
wrist action unless forced which I'm sure it isn't and also not taught. You will have to agree this guy knew what he was doing.
I can't remember who the lesson came from but one of the instructors I've seen talked about my grip tightness and advised me to loosen up. I went home and started experimenting.
How loose is loose? And what happens as it loosens. I tested this by going to the 2 extremes. A death grip and only holding the cue just laying on my index finger. The results were
marginal control at both ends, very little English with the death grip, and extreme English with the index finger. I then stated to close the gap and ended up with a very loose grip giving
me the best the control/English trade off.
Now a word on the instructors that have chimed in here. I've only hired one of them, Scott Lee, He took a very close look at my elbow drop, went back to video slo mo and
determined that it wasn't a serious problem. He didn't like it but wasn't worried. Another instructor was all over me on that but a couple of years later he told me "don't
get down on yourself about that. The ball is gone by the time it happens.
A good instructor isn't going to fix something that doesn't effect your game. And as far as them teaching only their opinion. Those opinions are based on years of study, research,
and experience. Can you name me any world class athlete that doesn't have a coach? Do you think these coaches only collect paychecks?
It is humbleing, the first time I was videotaped I expected Strickland, I was sadly disappointed. It helps ALOT to get taped though, one thing an instructor can offer that is huge.
The grip pressure has no effect on the CB it can however determine the contact point, too tight or tightening often pulls the cue off the desired line.
I have no idea what you are referring to.
Consistency is the word we are looking for. A tight grip doesn't allow the repeatable acceleration & accuracy that a loose grip affords the player.
randyg
Another disadvantage of gripping up is it takes at least 10 yards off the flight path of your cue and ruins any chance of a tight spiral
One of the snooker instructors who’s name escapes me at the moment, was presenting to a panel which included some former world champions in order to get his certification.
He showed his way of determining the pressure one needs when holding the cue.
He rested the cue tip on the floor and lifted it up to horizontal.
The panel agreed that it was correct pressure for the grip.
Furthermore, in a discussion on how hard to hold the cue, one of the recommended ways of shooting was to start with a looser grip and actually firming it up just prior to the contact.
There are many ways to shoot....
He showed his way of determining the pressure one needs when holding the cue.
He rested the cue tip on the floor and lifted it up to horizontal.
The panel agreed that it was correct pressure for the grip.
Furthermore, in a discussion on how hard to hold the cue, one of the recommended ways of shooting was to start with a looser grip and actually firming it up just prior to the contact.
There are many ways to shoot....
I agree a death grip on the cue is bad. But watching the video close you can clearly see he is slipping the cue in his stroking hand into a proper position on the warmup strokes, you cannot do that with a tight grip. Watch the shot from 0:38 to 0:42 in particular, it is clearly obvious that the cue is slipping in the back hand.
I agree that he comes through the ball and catches the cue with a tighter grip then he has in the stroke, but so does this guy.
http://vimeo.com/4957545
Watch the shot at 2:14 in particular, very clear tightening on the followthroughafter contact.
This guy here has possibly the loosest stroking grip in pro pool.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKBu9DyknbM
Do you see what he does on the stroke? On the backswing he lets the ring finger and pinky off the cue and on the followthrough those two fingers come back into the grip to in effect "catch" the cue.
Ralf here shows that full hand grip after contact very well in this stroke analysis video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGSy85Chc3Q
Loose on the backstroke and becomming a more full hand grip on the followthrough.
That is pretty much what I am seeing in this admittedly dark video. If you pause the OP's video at EXACTLY 0:13 seconds on the final backstroke before the shot you can clearly see his pinky and ring finger are off the cue, he has at most his thumb, pointer, and possibly middle finger on the cue at that exact moment, much like the pro videos above. he then follows through to a full hand grip, just like the pros above.
An accelerometer will easily show whether or not the cue is decelerating at impact.
I instrumented my cue several years ago. This trace shows I made contact about 50msec late, as the cue was decelerating.
The Orange trace is the forward acceleration, the Green trace is side to side.
I instrumented my cue several years ago. This trace shows I made contact about 50msec late, as the cue was decelerating.
The Orange trace is the forward acceleration, the Green trace is side to side.
Hmmph, another analysis I would pay to do. That is very cool JohnnyP and it looks very useful.
Funny how this thread has taken off, all from someone asking a question about his stroke…
I realize to some the BCA certified method of teaching seems very rigid with some of the general views on grip pressure, follow through, elbow drop, etc. I do believe that's done for consistency and simplicity and is based on a lot of research. That's not to say that Keith McCready, or Francisco Bustamante, or any number of other players I could name wouldn't beat the crap out of 99.9% of standardized players. There's more to the game than just having a great mechanically sound stroke, and even a poor technical stroke if done repeatably can work, plus usually hidden in those "weird" strokes are some pretty technically sound positions.
However those types of strokes take many many hours to perfect and more talent than most of us have, which is why the more simple approach of trying to design a framework for most players is probably the way to go. For someone with a decent stroke, as the OP, tweaking a few things as opposed to retooling the entire stroke may be enough to improve, and I don't think any of the instructors were advocating him spending a year to completely revamp his stroke, just mentioning areas of possible improvement as was requested.
I'm an elbow dropper, have tried to not drop it and just can't do it, and after watching many top players realize that they do it as well. I also sometimes hold the cue a little tight, especially under pressure, although I generally play with a relaxed grip and have seen the improved results and effortless spin that comes from that. I know that the cue ball doesn't care how you hit it, or what you do after contact, and it's all based on physics and point of contact, elevation, speed, direction, etc. But in practice, for most of us the best stroke is the simplest and most relaxed and most repeatable. And for that, I think you can't go wrong with the general guidelines of a loose grip, straight or nearly straight wrist, consistent preshot routine with consistent body placement and eye movement, smooth backswing with a pause and smooth accelerating stroke coming to a natural stop. Anything outside those parameters, even though most of us do it, is just cluttering up the stroke.
Scott
I realize to some the BCA certified method of teaching seems very rigid with some of the general views on grip pressure, follow through, elbow drop, etc. I do believe that's done for consistency and simplicity and is based on a lot of research. That's not to say that Keith McCready, or Francisco Bustamante, or any number of other players I could name wouldn't beat the crap out of 99.9% of standardized players. There's more to the game than just having a great mechanically sound stroke, and even a poor technical stroke if done repeatably can work, plus usually hidden in those "weird" strokes are some pretty technically sound positions.
However those types of strokes take many many hours to perfect and more talent than most of us have, which is why the more simple approach of trying to design a framework for most players is probably the way to go. For someone with a decent stroke, as the OP, tweaking a few things as opposed to retooling the entire stroke may be enough to improve, and I don't think any of the instructors were advocating him spending a year to completely revamp his stroke, just mentioning areas of possible improvement as was requested.
I'm an elbow dropper, have tried to not drop it and just can't do it, and after watching many top players realize that they do it as well. I also sometimes hold the cue a little tight, especially under pressure, although I generally play with a relaxed grip and have seen the improved results and effortless spin that comes from that. I know that the cue ball doesn't care how you hit it, or what you do after contact, and it's all based on physics and point of contact, elevation, speed, direction, etc. But in practice, for most of us the best stroke is the simplest and most relaxed and most repeatable. And for that, I think you can't go wrong with the general guidelines of a loose grip, straight or nearly straight wrist, consistent preshot routine with consistent body placement and eye movement, smooth backswing with a pause and smooth accelerating stroke coming to a natural stop. Anything outside those parameters, even though most of us do it, is just cluttering up the stroke.
Scott