Holding the cue tip on the cue ball

[JoeyA]

Have any of you ever heard a top player say. "I hold the tip on the cue ball when I shoot this shot" (referring to a particular shot)?

1. If so, what do you think it means?
2. If so, what do you think the attempt to do so, achieves?
3. Can you give an example?

Thanks,
JoeyA

 

[HittMan]

extended tip contact

Hey Joey,

I intentionally let this one age a while to see if your troll brought in any of the usual participants. In their absense...I'll sweeten the bait.

I too have heard this concept from better players...so have many others.

The reference concerns lengthening the period of contact between the CB and the tip of the cue and the increased spin/control that comes from it. This has been argued several times to no avail because the prevailing wisdom is rooted in the seminal article on squirt and testing performed by several different parties. The measured time of contact is apparently within a narrow enough range to an end to this discussion for many. I, however, am not of this group and think that extended tip contact is a reality and the problem with the proof lies within either our testing methods/capabilities/interest or our interpretation of the test data because ... I have observed otherwise. I am reminded of the age-old question "Are you going to believe me or your lying eyes?" when this argument comes up.

My interpretation of the article is that for a given velocity/accelleration of the cue, a given line of force and a given strike point on the cue ball - no one can get the ball to spin more (hit the ball better) than anyone else. This is where we part ways due to simple observation. You have played enough good players to know this is simply not the case.

For example, can Cliff spin the ball better a low speed than most? I say the answer is categorically yes. Squirt converts say no it's all about where he hits the ball...assuming the velocity and line of force is constant.

Who knows...they could be right. I don't care enough to perform the experiments. I have suggested a couple of potential shortcomings in the conceptuals...that's enough for me.

Just my opinion...you be the judge.

Andy Bruce
Hitt Cues

 

[Cory in DC]

Have any of you ever heard a top player say. "I hold the tip on the cue ball when I shoot this shot" (referring to a particular shot)?

1. If so, what do you think it means?
2. If so, what do you think the attempt to do so, achieves?
3. Can you give an example?

Thanks,
JoeyA

I recently had someone who shoot very strong show me what he meant by this, so here goes my attempt at what he would say:

1. He means a smooth stroke that accelerates through the point of contact, as opposed to constant or decreasing speed.
2. He thinks you get more rotation for a given amount of speed and tip offset.
3. An example would be any case in which you need more spin than you might typically get for a given amount of English. E.g., power draw with English, need to widen the rebound off the rail to miss a ball, ...


My thoughts on this:

a) It works. I get more spin when I envision and try to keep the tip on the ball.

b) I believe the learned conclusion of the physics experts at RSB was that it should not work -- tip contact time is virtually instantaneous. To my mind, it seems it could work in principle, since tips are made of leather, which does compress (I've seen enough mushroomed tips to convince myself of that).

c) But insofar as tips compress, the effects are probably slight. I think that "keeping the tip on the ball" is mostly important as a mnemonic -- it makes you focus on a smooth, evenly accelerating stroke. This probably lowers the odds of a miscue and also might make for a more level hit.

It's well know that the CB first hops and slides and then rolls after being struck with the cue. It's always seemed to me that when the CB is hopping and sliding it will lose spin more rapidly than when it's rolling. If so, then the mnemonic of "keeping the tip on the ball" may actually help people maintain a smooth level stroke, thereby slowing the rate at which side spin is lost, which is observationally nearly identical to putting more spin on the CB in the first place. QED.

But I could well be wrong. Flame on.

Cory