Golf Theory - Putting - Does it apply to pool
- Thread starter fxskater
- Start date
drivermaker said:
D'maker,
Maybe this is what is holding back some of the "normal players."
The next time you get a chance, watch Danny DiLiberto play a game or two of one pocket or straight pool. What you will see is a tremendous number of slow rolling shots hit with the most level cue action you've ever seen (the cue scrapes the rail on every shot), struck just above center. The reason: on a good table the slower rolling shot has a better chance of being accepted by the pocket, the level cue minimizes unintentional squirt/curve/throw, and the soft stroke maximizes your ability to predict the final resting place of whitey. No shot is hit any harder than absolutely necessary to get perfect position. On a good (level) table the most reliable way to obtain position is with soft follow - the more patterns you can play that include this shot, the higher your percentage of completing those pattern successfully.
I know that many of us will think we are good at "slow rolling", but until you have seen one of the masters do it, you really have no idea what an art form they have made of the slow rolling game - ideal technique to master if you want to be successful at one-pocket or straight pool (though I believe Danny D. also has major titles in 9-ball and 8-ball). I slow roll 15 or 30 shots a day (for about a year now) and have seen tremendous improvement in my ability to pocket the balls, and predict the final cue ball position - it has been a TREMENDOUS straight pool weapon, it can win you many games, most players fail to perfect it, and sometimes (often) it is the only way to keep shooting.
Having said that, I'm sure everyone would rather learn to shoot the "jacked up 5 rail masse' draw shot" because of course we will need to use it in a game once in the next 2000 years (and of course our make percentage will still be about 1%)
RichardCranium said:
I can hear it now, buzzers going off all over the pool room. ha ha Any idea of how much pressure it takes to set off the buzzer? While a golf grip is more snug that a pool grip (well mine is anyway). LOL It shows Tiger's concern for holding the club to tight. That's probably when he zings one out in right field.
I've always been one to preach a light grip. More recent years my focus is still a light grip but even if it is a little tight, keep the pressure consistant. That is far better than loose at first and getting tight before impact.
Hey are Cleveland TA5 irons a good buy? I can get a demo set, just the 6 iron used inside for about $229 as I recall. With woods about $300 I think.
Rod
Last edited:
DeadStrokeMan said:
Stateing the obvious about speed correlating to english isnt at all what i was getting at. I wasnt talking about the Tip either. These were some things that i thought could reduce bounce:
Banana Shaped shaft, don't make fun of me here, i think there might be a way to bend the shaft for a more level shaft delivery, the main problem here is impact and weight behind the shaft.
Forearm design. I'm sure something could be done here.
Basicly, I know the point of a break cue (speed, impact) and i also know the physics of why the ball jumps, (speed, impact, and cue angle) all I'm thinking is that there could possibly be something in trying to Design i high impact cue that does not bounce. Of course 3 soft tips will make the cueball stay on the table, but like you say it defeats the purpose of the break cue. Does anyone think there could be anyway to make the cueball stay on the table LONGER with high impact shots?
This is probably going nowhere, but someone has to have a better idea than 3 soft tips glued on top of each other.
RichardCranium said:
That is not the one i was watching.
The one i was watching was 0 degrees but had groves to put topspin on the ball, it hopped a bit, but because of the forward spin it started rolling faster. Not sure on the physics. It was called the 2 Bar Putter, not to be confused with the popular 2 ball putter.
RichardCranium said:
A banana shaped shaft would let you kinda scoop below the rail and maybe get 1 degree less on your cue angle? Is this not possible? I figured someone might have at least ONE positive idea that might make it feasable, but i guess the reality is that there isnt a feasable way. I thought we could get some wild suggestions like my Banana Shaft Idea, but i guess not. Common folks, absolutely NO WILD suggestions? Afraid to look like a moron?
Ryan Lynn <<<<< not afraid of looking like a MORON.
fxskater said:
"Banana shaped" - Thats interesting because I've actually used the WORST CUE I COULD FIND in bars - many times ... just for fun. And when I shoot I put the scoop down and have noticed precisly what you said. Hmmm ...
You can actually snag a couple of degrees closer to level like that. Perhaps that is the answer. However - the cue probably wouldn't last long with that moment being applied to it under tremendous stress - *SNAP* LOL
fxskater said:
Yes, I believe you could adjust the 'hit angle' by curving the shaft in the bridging area. This would however introduce another error due to the variations in bridging distance, and variations in the degree of curvature. Imagine a curved shaft used with an extremely short bridge, the curve would have little effect. Use the same curved shaft with a long bridge and the tip might miss the ball due to the curve (above, below into the cloth, or beside the CB depending on the alignment of the curvature). A curved cue could be used only for specific shots, it's not a general purpose cue. Also, the stroke would take some getting used to IMO. And it would really mess with the heads of our friends the cuemakers
I don't think you're a moron btw, just a bit 'loopy' in this case
Dave
drivermaker said:
kinda early in the year for you to be collectin firewood aint it???
VAP
drivermaker
Banned
Williebetmore said:
Willee...I think the message in this post is so important, so vital, that it can't be stressed often enough for improvement in the game and especially for top level play, which most players will never even get to sniff. Unfortunately, you could post this everyday on here for the next decade and it would fall on deaf ears and not sink in, let alone be worked at. Everybody is always looking for the "secret" to the game. There's no one factor that's the "secret" in of itself, and I guess the secret really is, "there are no secrets". But I'd have to classify slow rolling with follow to be right up there and damn close to being a super secret.
drivermaker said:
Huh?...What? Whut?
We call it "Stormy" pool, named after the bar where we played it. They had a cueball the size of a bowling ball and the ONLY way to get shape was with follow.
I also learned to play pool with a cue with no tip (commons area at a college, so maintenance was nil) and, to me, this is the best way to learn to hit softly, just above center (there's no other way to do it). Try it and you'll become very good at soft follow hits. Get an old cue, take off the tip and start shooting.
I'd give you my secret to a successful putt, but, again, I'd have to shoot ya.
Jeff Livingston
drivermaker said:
D'maker,
You can get by without it in 9-ball, but in straight pool and one-pocket it is a major WEAPON for your arsenal. Of course, even after one lesson with Danny D. I was still hitting it too hard, after the second lesson I'm starting to get the hang of it. It is extremely analagous to the pitch shot in golf; some pro's teach it as a "mini-swing." Only problem is, if you don't practice this mini-swing, you will never master it.
As I've noted (??bragged/boasted??) before, I have almost every book on pool; I can't recall any slow rolling advice or drills (at least not any that were any damn good, or good enough to get you to Danny D.'s level). I think that this is one more example of the huge advantage in seeking out lessons from top players. Yes, I'm a huge advocate of studying the literature of the game, and letting a stroke guru build you a good stroke; but lessons from the top pro's are also of tremendous (and totally complimentary) benefit. I've had lessons from several top pro's (including 2 who have been #1 in the world) and I ALWAYS take away tidbits that I can't find in any book (and several that contradict some of the books).
For example; I regularly do drills where I shoot straight in shots; with the object ball 3 diamonds from the pocket, and the cue ball 3 diamonds from the object ball. I practice pocketing these shots, and have fairly well perfected the ability to stop the cue ball, let the cue ball replace the object ball, let the cue ball drift one ball width ahead of the object ball. In a lesson with Danny D., he said, "that's nice, now what do you do with this??" He then placed the object ball a foot or two from the pocket, and placed the cue ball 2 inches away from it. How many players can stop the cue ball perfectly, replace the object ball with it (perfectly), follow one object ball's width ahead, draw 1 inch back, draw 2 inches back, draw 3 inches back???? Danny D. can, I can't (yet). Then do the same things with the cue ball from 1 or 3 or 4 or 5 inches away from the object ball. GEEEEEEZZZ, its harder than many players think. When I first started with these things I was better at positioning the cue ball from 3 feet away than I was from up close. I don't like anyone's straight pool chances in a long match against Danny D. unless he can do these things - absolutely essential skills in my opinion, but in what book do you ever see anyone advocating or teaching these things? People that know how to do this will rip you a new one in 14.1 or one-pocket.
Fortunately for us, we don't have to worry about people developing these skills, because they are buried here in the secret knowledge section of the last page of a wound down thread. End of screed.
P.S. - if someone had showed me all of this stuff (this is only a small portion of what Danny D. showed) when I was 16, I'd be giving Efren the last 3. That's why I'm such a big fan of pool instruction; playing well shouldn't be big secret unattainable goal. Pool is simple compared to golf (if you can find/cajole/bribe/extort/threaten/force at gunpoint someone to show you).
I'm glad to hear that slow-rolling is acceptable in some camps - the ones that learned 14.1 in the beginning. The smoothest player I ever saw was Mosconi. And, I don't remember him using much low. On most shots, he just left shape that allowed centerball or high to get to the next ball. Gawd, it looked sooooo easy.Williebetmore said:
Putting relates to pool in tempo (speed) and aiming, and that's all in my book.
Heard a great golf commentary about a putt from the "infinitely wise" Lanny Wadkins the other day. "All he has to do is pick the right line, and hit it on that line at the right speed, and he'll make it." NO SHIT!!! And, he gets paid to say that!?!?
Gaaahhhhhhh . . . . .
Williebetmore said:
Over the last while I have been practicing my slow rollers. The way I figure it, there is a minimum speed to pocket a ball as the ball must make it to the lip of the pocket (like Tigers chip on 16 at the Masters). Any speed above that would be needed for shape only. So, I was determined to learn that minimum speed. It took quite a few sessions before I was to the point where a miss would sometimes end up short of the pocket (too little speed). For quite a while I would hit softly and make the ball ... turns out I was not hitting anywhere near soft enough ! It is truely amazing how far those balls will roll with very little encouragement.
I gotta try those stop / stun shots from various distances like you mentioned, sounds like an enlightening experience.
Dave
DaveK said:
Dave,
It IS an enlightening experience. You will note the recent craze of "difficult shot workouts." While I am certainly enthusiastic about mastering the really difficult shots (and one of my instructors insists on it), I find myself using these very difficult shots once an hour or once a night. The shots Danny was showing me I use EVERY single rack (and I will also note that in my straight pool league I see most of the players missing position trying to stun the ball forward when a simple slow roller would have easily accomplished the task with no risk).
Williebetmore said:
My stun shot abilities improved in proportion to the heave in my basement floor. The more tilt I get on the old Brunswick, the more I have to play stun shots for shape ! This has been going on for years now, and I'm really improving
Off to practice now ...Dave
Williebetmore said:
How about the drill where you place 3, 5, or 7 balls in a semi-circle around the side pocket and then work your way around the cirlce without missing or getting out of shape (and not hitting the rail)? One of the guys who helped me learn pool used to bet college guys 50 cents that they couldn't run out with 7 balls set up like that. When they got out of shape on, usually, ball two, he'd set up five balls and bet 'em again. Then three. He ate free lunch for about a year or so.
Your thoughts apply to 8-ball on a barbox, too....the best game, btw.
I heard Mosconi's average cueball travel was less than 12 inches or so (correct me if I'm wrong on this, please) and that he liked to hit balls to the uptown corners often, which would keep the cueball tighter.
I'm gonna start practicing these types of "easy" shots.
Thanks,
Jeff Livingston
chefjeff said:I heard Mosconi's average cueball travel was less than 12 inches or so (correct me if I'm wrong on this, please) and that he liked to hit balls to the uptown corners often, which would keep the cueball tighter.QUOTE]
He wasn't afraid of going uptown, that's for sure. Cracked me up during his exhibitions, complaining about being "out of position" about every three to four balls, during an effortless five to six rack "demonstration" run.
In another thread, Jude stated how the cue ball got worn down from use. Bet Willie's lasted a long time.
chefjeff said:
Jeff,
I know that Mosconi proposed as little cueball travel as possible. In his biography he lists as perhaps his finest accomplishment a 125 and out run (when games were to 125) in a championship match (don't remember the opponent - buy his biography and study it) where he claims he was never more than 8 inches from any of the 125 pocketed balls.
Mosconi is also well known for liking to get into the middle of the pack with the cueball and shoot outwards from there (as opposed to many other top players who prefer middle of the table).
He also brought his own balls to each exhibition - which emphasizes a point SJM has made in a PM that the slow rolling game not only requires good level tables, but also benefits from clean, polished balls (which is why I have a commercial ball polisher in my basement pool room).
Lastly I will re-post a drill and Mosconi anecdote from the KC guys. Willie promoted a straight pool drill (also described in his instructional books) where you line up 12 or 13 object balls along the foot string, take ball in hand and fire them into the far corner pockets. He proposed doing it with ball in hand for each shot, then when you are good, trying to do all 12 or 13 in sequence with just ball in hand for the first shot, trying to get perfect position each time for the next object ball. The KC guys report he showed this drill to some doofus in KC who couldn't even begin to make 2 or 3 in a row. The jerk was just complaining loudly about how this was a stupid drill and wasn't even possible; finally stating he would bet no one could actually do this (I don't remember the amount he would wager). The KC guys ran immediately to Willie, who came to the table and bet that not only could he do it, he could do it in less than 1 minute. Wagers were placed and Willie fired away. Bang, bang, bang Willie made all 13 in a row, perfect position each time, less than 30 seconds. I've tried the drill, just seems impossible to me right now (4 or 5 in a row seems pretty good).
You hear lots of opinions about the best shotmakers of all time (ie. Efren, Lassiter, Sigel, Mizerak), but these guys saw them all and considered Willie head and shoulders above the others (of course these are degenerate pool gamblers and about as reliable as your vintage '74 Pinto). The pro's seem to uniformly hate him, but I suspect there is always a little jealousy tinting their view.
really guys ...
greens and pool tables have nothing in common other than both are green normally. Getting a feel for the surface is individual. Strokes are different.
Each has a proper stroke and what to do on the stroke. Each has nuances to look for and how to correct. Many pool players can not shoot good pool after playing a lot of golf, example, Cory Duell, 2002-2003.
And I would say normally, the most 'tuned' in person would be the person that is real good at playing 'Golf' on a snooker table.
greens and pool tables have nothing in common other than both are green normally. Getting a feel for the surface is individual. Strokes are different.
Each has a proper stroke and what to do on the stroke. Each has nuances to look for and how to correct. Many pool players can not shoot good pool after playing a lot of golf, example, Cory Duell, 2002-2003.
And I would say normally, the most 'tuned' in person would be the person that is real good at playing 'Golf' on a snooker table.