That is actually huge and clunky compared to what is available off the shelf. There are accelerometers that would be quite appropriate for the intended purpose that would fit under the bumper.
.
Future Tech Pool Cue
- Thread starter the chicken
- Start date
That is actually huge and clunky compared to what is available off the shelf. There are accelerometers that would be quite appropriate for the intended purpose that would fit under the bumper.
.
Gentlemen, the technology already exists. Only the application needs to be worked out. Probably the attention of an experienced instructor and a software interface and it could fly.
Such things are already used in golf instruction for swing analysis by using high speed video and analysis of various points mapped on the body.
It isn't a replacement for practice, but any such thing is more accurate and consistent than the eyes of the instructor.
An experienced instructor with such a tool in his/her hands would be leaps and bounds beyond the average. He could compile a quantitative database of the strokes of the greatest players and apply that to instruction. No two players are alike and adaptations of the players natural tendencies could be maximized/optimized rather than fought against.
Such a tool could IMHO kick instruction up to a higher level.
.
Such things are already used in golf instruction for swing analysis by using high speed video and analysis of various points mapped on the body.
It isn't a replacement for practice, but any such thing is more accurate and consistent than the eyes of the instructor.
An experienced instructor with such a tool in his/her hands would be leaps and bounds beyond the average. He could compile a quantitative database of the strokes of the greatest players and apply that to instruction. No two players are alike and adaptations of the players natural tendencies could be maximized/optimized rather than fought against.
Such a tool could IMHO kick instruction up to a higher level.
.
I might have missed if anybody mentioned in this thread the problem of straight line delivery of the cue.
An appropriate device inside the cue could be the best to determine whether the cue is delivered dead straight in line or goes off at some point.
That would probably be the best data ever to receive, both for coaching and for practice:smile:
An appropriate device inside the cue could be the best to determine whether the cue is delivered dead straight in line or goes off at some point.
That would probably be the best data ever to receive, both for coaching and for practice:smile:
Who-o-o-o-oa, TheNewSharkster! I'm not holding *anyone* back. If someone wants to make a pool cue device with an accelerometer in it and develop a program that will quantitatively analyze a pool stroke, there's nothing I can do to stop them. I'm just voicing my opinion and questioning the need for a such a device.
Yes, *of course*, technological advances in pool have made things better. Without them we wouldn't have leather tips, chalk, rubber rails, consistently machined slate beds to play upon, and plastic pool balls impervious to changes in temperature and humidity. However, I *am* saying that certain technological advances in today's pool cue equipment may not necessarily be all they're cracked up to be because today's pros aren't surpassing the pros of the past with such significance as to claim their success is due to the technology.
I agree that videotaping a golf swing and analyzing it with computers can help a player to significantly fix their swing. There may be a lot of similarities between golf and pool, but a golf swing is quite different than a pool stroke. When you swing a golf club, the head travels many, many feet in its upward and downward arc. As the club head comes down to strike the golf ball, there's a very small margin of error where and how the club head can properly hit the golf ball. Those small margins will magnify into large errors as the golf ball travels down the fairway.
Compared to golf, the distances in pool are tiny. The typical stroke of a pool cue is... what?... 10 inches. When you strike the cue ball, I'm guessing there's a one millimeter margin of error on the cue ball and a one millimeter margin of error on the object ball. Yes, these small margins will magnify down table and result in a miss. But, with the typical pool shot being... what?... 4 feet long, the resulting magnification in error won't be anywhere near as significant as those in golf.
My point is: I think an accelerometer pool cue device with quantitative stroke analysis would not *significantly* help the player fix their stroke, even coupled with lots of practice. Maybe I'm totally wrong. Maybe the device will revolutionize the pool coaching industry.
The fact of the matter is we're just debating whether or not the imagined device would be useful. You think yes. I think no. We could go back and forth all day. Until someone actually builds it, this is just a moot point. We might as well argue over blondes and brunettes.
Yes, *of course*, technological advances in pool have made things better. Without them we wouldn't have leather tips, chalk, rubber rails, consistently machined slate beds to play upon, and plastic pool balls impervious to changes in temperature and humidity. However, I *am* saying that certain technological advances in today's pool cue equipment may not necessarily be all they're cracked up to be because today's pros aren't surpassing the pros of the past with such significance as to claim their success is due to the technology.
I agree that videotaping a golf swing and analyzing it with computers can help a player to significantly fix their swing. There may be a lot of similarities between golf and pool, but a golf swing is quite different than a pool stroke. When you swing a golf club, the head travels many, many feet in its upward and downward arc. As the club head comes down to strike the golf ball, there's a very small margin of error where and how the club head can properly hit the golf ball. Those small margins will magnify into large errors as the golf ball travels down the fairway.
Compared to golf, the distances in pool are tiny. The typical stroke of a pool cue is... what?... 10 inches. When you strike the cue ball, I'm guessing there's a one millimeter margin of error on the cue ball and a one millimeter margin of error on the object ball. Yes, these small margins will magnify down table and result in a miss. But, with the typical pool shot being... what?... 4 feet long, the resulting magnification in error won't be anywhere near as significant as those in golf.
My point is: I think an accelerometer pool cue device with quantitative stroke analysis would not *significantly* help the player fix their stroke, even coupled with lots of practice. Maybe I'm totally wrong. Maybe the device will revolutionize the pool coaching industry.
The fact of the matter is we're just debating whether or not the imagined device would be useful. You think yes. I think no. We could go back and forth all day. Until someone actually builds it, this is just a moot point. We might as well argue over blondes and brunettes.
Last edited:
I propose it would help the instructor and/or coach...not the player directly.
As you say, the distances and movements are tiny...yet instructors have to watch and correct things that they in fact cannot possibly see regardless of their claims because it is beyond the resolution of human perception.
It could quickly and efficiently identify specific problems for intervention by an instructor.
.
How about a small video camera in the cue tip? You could record your practice sessions and peruse them at a later date.
Aiming could be reviewed. Tip placement on the cue ball for various shots could be looked at. And, the occasional up-skirt shot could be done. :smile:
Aiming could be reviewed. Tip placement on the cue ball for various shots could be looked at. And, the occasional up-skirt shot could be done. :smile:
Who-o-o-o-oa, TheNewSharkster! I'm not holding *anyone* back. If someone wants to make a pool cue device with an accelerometer in it and develop a program that will quantitatively analyze a pool stroke, there's nothing I can do to stop them. I'm just voicing my opinion and questioning the need for a such a device.
Yes, *of course*, technological advances in pool have made things better. Without them we wouldn't have leather tips, chalk, rubber rails, consistently machined slate beds to play upon, and plastic pool balls impervious to changes in temperature and humidity. However, I *am* saying that certain technological advances in today's pool cue equipment may not necessarily be all they're cracked up to be because today's pros aren't surpassing the pros of the past with such significance as to claim their success is due to the technology.
I agree that videotaping a golf swing and analyzing it with computers can help a player to significantly fix their swing. There may be a lot of similarities between golf and pool, but a golf swing is quite different than a pool stroke. When you swing a golf club, the head travels many, many feet in its upward and downward arc. As the club head comes down to strike the golf ball, there's a very small margin of error where and how the club head can properly hit the golf ball. Those small margins will magnify into large errors as the golf ball travels down the fairway.
Compared to golf, the distances in pool are tiny. The typical stroke of a pool cue is... what?... 10 inches. When you strike the cue ball, I'm guessing there's a one millimeter margin of error on the cue ball and a one millimeter margin of error on the object ball. Yes, these small margins will magnify down table and result in a miss. But, with the typical pool shot being... what?... 4 feet long, the resulting magnification in error won't be anywhere near as significant as those in golf.
My point is: I think an accelerometer pool cue device with quantitative stroke analysis would not *significantly* help the player fix their stroke, even coupled with lots of practice. Maybe I'm totally wrong. Maybe the device will revolutionize the pool coaching industry.
The fact of the matter is we're just debating whether or not the imagined device would be useful. You think yes. I think no. We could go back and forth all day. Until someone actually builds it, this is just a moot point. We might as well argue over blondes and brunettes.
You came across like we don't need any new technology in pool.
Which is why some of us use video analysis with slo-mo down to a frame at a time, to aid in analysis.
What the human eye cannot perceive the camera does not have a problem with.
As far as this thread, interesting idea, and one that I would like to see developed.
What the human eye cannot perceive the camera does not have a problem with.
As far as this thread, interesting idea, and one that I would like to see developed.