I disagree slightly in regards #3. You may hit the CB at the same speed whether accelerating or decelerating. The scientists may disagree but IMO it does make a difference in CB reaction.For a single given cue, the only possible dynamic influence a player can have on a cue ball is the following:
The impact time (duration) is only, at the very most, 2ms. It is physically impossible for human muscles to react at this speed, and therefore the impact vector does not change due to player influence.
- The impact vector. The vectorincludes the following:
- position on the face of the cue ball (center of contact patch)
- angle of incident
- velocity
With the same cue, the effective end mass can be changed very slightly with bridge length. But since the bridge hand does not move during the stroke, this is a static parameter and is not included.
It might be possible to grip the cue very firmly and add total effective mass to the cue, but I am unsure about this and don't know if this is true.
Chalk is binary. You either keep static friction during the (good hit) or transition from static-to-kenetic friction (miscue). Miscues aren't purposefully used as a technique so aren't considered. Tip softness helps maintain static friction to some degree.
Therefore, any twisting, swooping, drilling, side-movement, or any other claimed dynamic cueing motion doesn't "add" anything. Different types of strokes only change the three components of the impact vector.
Dropping your elbow too early, following through properly, stroking downwards into the table, good action, bad action, etc. all only impact the accuracy of delivering the intended impact vector.
This means that if two different strokes, from either the same or different players, using the same equipment, creates the exact same impact vector... then the shot outcomes will be equivalent.
Therefore, there is no such thing as "a need for different types of strokes". (Excluding jumps, breaks and masse's which are different developed skills.)
The same stroke can reproduce all effects possible with proper accuracy.
---
Do you agree? Or am I missing something. A lot of fellow players have discussions with me about their 'special magic strokes'
"How" a cueball is hit.
- Thread starter nataddrho
- Start date
To reiterate my position, many of these poor players, debilitatingly handicapped by poor technique and incorrect information, can produce the goods for the cash over quite a broad range of play. I wouldn't try clocking them by what their strokes look like.
It can cause the equivalent of about a 1% increase/decrease in the mass of the stick. Like many things it has an effect but is is not important to the shot and there are better ways to achieve the same resulting ball motion.
The main problem with having a lot of acceleration at impact -- and that's the only way you are going to get even a 1% effect -- is that the speed of the shot will depend greatly on the stroke timing. If you contact at zero acceleration -- at peak velocity -- it makes almost no difference if your timing is a little off.
xX-Wizard-Xx
Well-known member
wow
In my understanding, controlled acceleration is important because of the stability of the muscle groups involved. You start decelerating, poking, jabbing, jerking your transition, dog stroking and/or not following through then you’re likely introducing different muscle groups in your arm to the shot and will find your tip position drifts away from your intended trajectory by erratic amounts from shot to shot. So it ends up being a factor of #2 affecting your CB action rather than #3.
For a single given cue, the only possible dynamic influence a player can have on a cue ball is the following:
The impact time (duration) is only, at the very most, 2ms. It is physically impossible for human muscles to react at this speed, and therefore the impact vector does not change due to player influence.
- The impact vector. The vectorincludes the following:
- position on the face of the cue ball (center of contact patch)
- angle of incident
- velocity
With the same cue, the effective end mass can be changed very slightly with bridge length. But since the bridge hand does not move during the stroke, this is a static parameter and is not included.
It might be possible to grip the cue very firmly and add total effective mass to the cue, but I am unsure about this and don't know if this is true.
Chalk is binary. You either keep static friction during the (good hit) or transition from static-to-kenetic friction (miscue). Miscues aren't purposefully used as a technique so aren't considered. Tip softness helps maintain static friction to some degree.
Therefore, any twisting, swooping, drilling, side-movement, or any other claimed dynamic cueing motion doesn't "add" anything. Different types of strokes only change the three components of the impact vector.
Dropping your elbow too early, following through properly, stroking downwards into the table, good action, bad action, etc. all only impact the accuracy of delivering the intended impact vector.
This means that if two different strokes, from either the same or different players, using the same equipment, creates the exact same impact vector... then the shot outcomes will be equivalent.
Therefore, there is no such thing as "a need for different types of strokes". (Excluding jumps, breaks and masse's which are different developed skills.)
The same stroke can reproduce all effects possible with proper accuracy.
---
Do you agree? Or am I missing something. A lot of fellow players have discussions with me about their 'special magic strokes'
Won't these hypotheses be testable with collision data from your Digi-Ball...data that we have not been able to access before?
xX-Wizard-Xx
Well-known member
if you spin the cue as it hits the cue ball you can cause the cue ball to dive to the right or left depending on the twist direction of the cue ... 
Depends on how expensive your chalk isif you spin the cue as it hits the cue ball you can cause the cue ball to dive to the right or left depending on the twist direction of the cue ...
Another "quicksand" question.
All I gotta say is you need to know your A-S-S.
Even then there is extension beyond.
I just watched a good short-stop play the other day.
Shot speed was consistent 90% of the time. English was used to control BOTH speed and position. I have watched dozens of others at short-stop and PRO speed and they do the same.
I'm sittin' this one out.
I’m having trouble wording the following the way I want to… a discussion can be had objectively and logically absent of criticism. Something like that.
I am not telling anyone to do anything different. I am pointing out that the only thing that can be done to a cue ball is position, speed, angle of tip.
However they make that happen is fine.
But my point is that it is just those three things. There is no fourth leg of the stool.
Separately, you now need to decide if you care about a detail like this, because why would I mention it if I didn’t have a point.
My point is that if you get an outcome of a shot you didn’t expect, then you didn’t hit the cue ball with the vector that you predicted. Therefore if the vector was recorded, it would provide all information on what went wrong.
Yes.
Looking forward to it.
Love seeing pool players argue with Sir Isaac Newton.
I have no argument with anything stated in the original post; just answering the question posed and reiterating to those that find anything less that a textbook stroke unworthy.
I'm a peanut guy.
I like your writing style. It’s very animated.
dquarasr
Registered
I have you on ignore but every so often I do read your posts for kicks.
I don’t consider myself a mean person and I try to be respectful. But your posts elicit a certain reaction from me….
Do you try to be so f-ing “out there”, or does it come naturally?
Do you want attention or something? You said you weren't getting on board three posts ago.
Not everything is about you.