Illustration of BHE....

[dr_dave]

You misunderstand my point. Like I said, analysis isn't the strength of system users.

In fact, I do choose my tip/ball contact point that carefully. The fact that you think that's absurd is more evidence to me that systems teach imprecision.

I don't think you do based on your level of play and would love to test you on it if given the chance. I'll leave it at that. I would love to shoot position shots with you as well in front of lots of people if given the opportunity so we can see who's precise and who talks shit. To say BHE isn't precise is ludicrous.

Analyze that.

Here is my analysis:

childish and immature post​

I know PJ brings out the worst in you, but the PJ-Spidey school-yard fights are starting to get a little old.

Regards,
Dave

PS: For BHE to be "precise" for all types of shots, you would need to "adjust" for all if the factors listed here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#English_effects​

I'm not saying you don't adjust, but basic BHE (without "adjustments") doesn't account for all of these factors.

 

[cmbwsu]

......[size=+2]✁[/size]......the PJ-Spidey school-yard fights are starting to get a little old. ......[size=+2]✁[/size]......

Can't we all just get along -- kiss and make up ya'll.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I don't think you do based on your level of play

What is my level of play?

pj
chgo

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Here is my analysis:

childish and immature post​

I know PJ brings out the worst in you, but the PJ-Spidey school-yard fights are starting to get a little old.

Regards,
Dave

PS: For BHE to be "precise" for all types of shots, you would need to "adjust" for all if the factors listed here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#English_effects​

I'm not saying you don't adjust, but basic BHE (without "adjustments") doesn't account for all of these factors.

Who said you don't adjust? I just said it was 100% as solid a foundation as any other way. Dr. Dave.... PJ wouldn't know because PJ hasn't tried it. I know, because I play nearly every shot that way.

I know those factors you refer to. My point is what's your point? You have to figure in those factors no matter what you do. If you can figure the factors better with BHE, is that a bad thing?

I don't think my earlier post is childish. I think PJ brings out the worst in me because he knows so much about pool he doesn't even need to try shit to know it doesn't work... according to him. In the meantime, people are running out well with the things he protests against.

You're the doctor --- that doesn't bother you when someone posts about a subject and they aren't even educated about it... and when asked to try it they say they don't need to?

I'm not sure what your doctorate is in, but I'm sure you didn't profess to know everything without trying it first.

That's like me calling myself Dr. SpiderWeb saying I have a doctorate in engineering and I say I don't have to go to school because I already know what will work and what wont.

 

[Flex]

It isn't BHE that gets you out of sticky situation, its the use of english. How it gets applied doesn't matter

Oh, how I wish you were correct.

BHE is often the easiest way to spin the rock, not always, but often.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

What is my level of play?

pj
chgo

I'd love to find out.

We should just play some 14.1 or banks. Loser is banished to billiards digest forum forever.

 

[easy-e]

I'd love to find out.

We should just play some 14.1 or banks. Loser is banished to billiards digest forum forever.

Your voice is like a mxture of Fergie and Jesus!

 

[cmbwsu]

Your voice is like a mxture of Fergie and Jesus!

Do a poll easy-e!

 

[easy-e]

Do a poll easy-e!

How? I have never done that before. What should I poll?

 

[Colin Colenso]

Parallel english is not a myth, but it is never supported by the geometry. That is, you can prove geometrically that you can never get the CB to travel on the ideal aiming line using PE.

Not being a nit picker, but just pointing out that there are a couple of curios where Parallel Aiming works.

1. If the CB and OB are quite close (say 6 inches) and the shot is played not too hard such that the Spin Induced Throw cancels out the squirt of the CB over the small distance of travel.

The practical application of this can be a few shots including soft draw into a near rail or IE on an almost straightish shot near a rail to make the CB run through. Both times when CB and OB are quite close.

2. A swerve / masse elevated shot where the swerve cancels out the squirt. This doesn't come up very often obviously.

Colin

 

[devindra]

I'd love to find out.

We should just play some 14.1 or banks. Loser is banished to billiards digest forum forever.

hahha love the bet.... i want some side action :grin-square:

 

[PKM]

Parallel english is not a myth, but it is never supported by the geometry. That is, you can prove geometrically that you can never get the CB to travel on the ideal aiming line using PE. If you think PE works, I suggest you are very close to the pocket where the error is not apparent, or you are not perfectly parallel to the original aiming line as you think you are.

The latter is usually the case, and I don't think too many people are claiming that the aim is unchanged on most shots. I think when people say parallel english, they are talking about coming up with a new aiming line (estimating the effects of squirt) and then applying english by moving parallel to the new line. The final position would appear to be a pivot compared to the original aiming line with center ball, but the difference is the way that you approach the shot in that you are not actually pivoting the cue to apply it.

 

[Colin Colenso]

Just a point on Parallel English, seeing as though it's being discussed.

If one aims with parallel english and then swoops a little when applying it, that adjustment, usually subconscious often works pretty well.

I think that's part of the reason why a lot of players swoop or pull toward the english.

Colin

 

[JB Cases]

The latter is usually the case, and I don't think too many people are claiming that the aim is unchanged on most shots. I think when people say parallel english, they are talking about coming up with a new aiming line (estimating the effects of squirt) and then applying english by moving parallel to the new line. The final position would appear to be a pivot compared to the original aiming line with center ball, but the difference is the way that you approach the shot in that you are not actually pivoting the cue to apply it.

This is exactly the description but if it's done exactly as you wrote "by moving parallel to the aiming line" then the shot will not and cannot work - ever.

What actually happens is that the player moves their entire stance so that they are approaching the shot on a line that intersects the aiming line - which ends up with the exact same cue position as if they had pivoted consciously.

Thus it's misleading to use the term parallel english in connection with "successful shot" because no one is actually applying spin parallel to the aiming line in order to hit the desired contact point. IF one does in fact apply spin parallel to the aiming line then they will never hit the same spot as they would with center ball. The stick line MUST cross the aiming line for the cueball to hit the same spot when hit with side spin.

I will give $100 to anyone who can prove otherwise. Here is a video that demonstrates what I am talking about. If anyone can show me that they can stroke on a line parallel to the marked line in the video without pivoting the cue - meaning the cue must go in a straight line that is parallel to the marked line - and have the cueball hit the rail at the center of the marked line where it meets the rail then they get my $100. Even at very slow speeds there is a little deflection and the cueball does not hit the center of the line.

Hitting the cueball so softly that it barely gets to the rail does not count because that type of shot is of no value to our discussion.

Here is my video demonstrating Deflection, Shifted English and Back Hand English.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuYNF0yF6zY

 

[JB Cases]

Just a point on Parallel English, seeing as though it's being discussed.

If one aims with parallel english and then swoops a little when applying it, that adjustment, usually subconscious often works pretty well.

I think that's part of the reason why a lot of players swoop or pull toward the english.

Colin

If one does that they they are using back hand english in a reverse fashion and while this will probably result in a pocketed ball it will also probably result in unintended position play.

And yes a lot of players swipe across the cueball because that is what they have learned works even though it's not conscious and is a bad habit. They have learned that when they are trying to apply side spin that they are misjudging the amount of adjustment and so they subconscioulsy swipe because this results in more successful pocketing.

I used to be very guilty of this. And as a result my pocketing was decent but my position play sucked.

However I am certain that there are players who have become very good at consistently swiping the cue in the right way to make the cueball do what they want it to.

When I had really bad habits - funky stroke, jumping up, lunging in, and so on I still managed to run 98 balls in 14.1 and run five racks of 8 ball and five racks of 9-ball. We have all seen the guy with lousy fundamentals who can play pretty sporty. People can overcome most anything if they do whatever they are doing consistently.

 

[JB Cases]

Oh and Colin, one does not aim with Parallel English - it's a myth

In the name of proper terminology please don't put those two things together as a proper method of aiming.

One aims to a spot that is offset from the contact point and then applys force on a vector that crosses the orginal aiming line. One never ever aims to a spot on a line that is parallel to the no-spin aiming line/contact point in order to hit the contact point.

 

[Flex]

Oh and Colin, one does not aim with Parallel English - it's a myth

In the name of proper terminology please don't put those two things together as a proper method of aiming.

One aims to a spot that is offset from the contact point and then applys force on a vector that crosses the orginal aiming line. One never ever aims to a spot on a line that is parallel to the no-spin aiming line/contact point in order to hit the contact point.

Actually, John, there are times when that is EXACTLY the way I aim those shots. I aim them that way, and stroke so as to produce the ball potting desired along with the shape hoped for. Is it consistent?? I sure wish it was for me...

Flex

 

[JB Cases]

Actually, John, there are times when that is EXACTLY the way I aim those shots. I aim them that way, and stroke so as to produce the ball potting desired along with the shape hoped for. Is it consistent?? I sure wish it was for me...

Flex

Show us on video an example of aiming to hit the centerline contact point and using parallel english to do it. That is when your INTENTION is to hit the contact point that corresponds with pocketing the ball on any shot with some distance. If the shot is sitting in the hole then of course you can hit the cueball anywhere in the general direction and make it.

I believe that such a shot is nearly impossible to hit the proper contact point. Of course you can make balls this way as the offset may not be enough to throw the ball outside the margin of error for the pocket width.

My point is that when you intend to hit the same contact point that that you would with no english - which is where the whole squirt compensation discussion is centered around - then that is impossible to do when you cue is aligned parallel to the aiming line.

Of course, as advanced players you can USE the knowledge of WHAT is really happening to your advantage and perform a shot aiming this way for a PARTICULAR reason. All good players know how to "throw" a ball in using an off-centerline hit and spin. We know how to use the rails and "cheat the pocket" by aiming off the center line.

The point I was making as pertains to the discussion is that "parallel english" is the wrong terminology to use when discussing the day-to-day shots where you want to hit the contact point using side spin.

So, ok, parallel english is not a myth but it has no place being taught as a standard method of applying side spin. It is a technique that is useful for a limited range of specific shots. Gee that sounds like the same statement Colin and Pat made about BHE, which in fact has a pretty much unlimited range.

 

[Colin Colenso]

The point I was making as pertains to the discussion is that "parallel english" is the wrong terminology to use when discussing the day-to-day shots where you want to hit the contact point using side spin.

So, ok, parallel english is not a myth but it has no place being taught as a standard method of applying side spin. It is a technique that is useful for a limited range of specific shots. Gee that sounds like the same statement Colin and Pat made about BHE, which in fact has a pretty much unlimited range.

JB,
I agree that parallel english is bad terminology. God knows where it started. I don't know what other descriptive term is suitable to describe it. Shifted English is a bit vague I think. Perhaps you can define what you mean by it?

It's really a combination of FHE and BHE, but it can be done after the bridge and stance is taken, or done beforehand. I used to do it before, just slide up the the CB with off center aim. Then fidget around a bit until it looked right.

It's a shame the methods are not clearly defined and named. It makes discussion of them clumsy. For me, parallel aiming / english pretty much refers to anything that isn't pure BHE or pure FHE, though it is a very poor term.

Colin

 

[Flex]

Show us on video an example of aiming to hit the centerline contact point and using parallel english to do it. That is when your INTENTION is to hit the contact point that corresponds with pocketing the ball on any shot with some distance. If the shot is sitting in the hole then of course you can hit the cueball anywhere in the general direction and make it.

I believe that such a shot is nearly impossible to hit the proper contact point. Of course you can make balls this way as the offset may not be enough to throw the ball outside the margin of error for the pocket width.

My point is that when you intend to hit the same contact point that that you would with no english - which is where the whole squirt compensation discussion is centered around - then that is impossible to do when you cue is aligned parallel to the aiming line.

Of course, as advanced players you can USE the knowledge of WHAT is really happening to your advantage and perform a shot aiming this way for a PARTICULAR reason. All good players know how to "throw" a ball in using an off-centerline hit and spin. We know how to use the rails and "cheat the pocket" by aiming off the center line.

The point I was making as pertains to the discussion is that "parallel english" is the wrong terminology to use when discussing the day-to-day shots where you want to hit the contact point using side spin.

So, ok, parallel english is not a myth but it has no place being taught as a standard method of applying side spin. It is a technique that is useful for a limited range of specific shots. Gee that sounds like the same statement Colin and Pat made about BHE, which in fact has a pretty much unlimited range.

Unfortunately, I don't have the means to produce such a video, but I assure you that that is exactly the way I shoot a good number of inside english shots where moving the cue ball 2 rails and out is the desired outcome.

To pull the shot off with any consistency it's necessary to have the speed of the cloth down, have a good feel for how much squirt will be produced for the stroke used and how much swerve will kick in. Not easy, I know...

Flex