Is there an established system for discussing stroke speed?

[ENGLISH!]

Judy and Gene used SPF.

NO.

They did not use any contrived method thought up by someone else.

They used their NATURAL TALENT. :thumbup2: :thumbup:

Everyone has natural talent. The secret is to get it out without the road blocks of conscious contrivances.

 

[Straightpool_99]

Here are my thoughts after sleeping on this.

The SPF system is different than the PAT method. The OP is looking for an "established" (uniform) method of communicating CB speed.
This is as close as you'll ever get, unless you make one yourself and force everyone else to comply.
A 1 speed for SPF is a lag, 2 lengths of the table minus 2 diamonds & the 1 speed for PAT is 6 diamonds, etc. for both. They do NOT match up.
I know. The PAT drills are available in book form and are accessible around the world. That's why I suggested that.
Someone from Alphabet, USA might have a method where letters are used for every 1/2 table length.
If he makes a successful book, then maybe it'll catch on.
So... we need the BCA, or whomever, to come up with "OFFICIAL" CB speed designations that are defined by distances of a rolling CB.
Please forgive me, but that's hillarious. The BCA?! :rotflmao1:
I would think that 1 table length might = 1, 2 table lengths might = 2, etc. but without the 2 diamonds less for the kitchen line that is involved in both the SPF & PAT designations. Why confuse the mater using such odd lengths?
The PAT one is basically a drill to practice speed and not meant to be a system as such. Having beginners both cue from the rail and learn speed control at the same time is just too brutal and adding the diamonds just makes it more difficult to remember the drill.
The above is NOT that of which I have an issue even though & think a physical pointing of the path & the landing area is much better for human beings as Michael Angelo did not paint by numbers & the caveman did not use numbers for his distance recognition when he throw his spear & we are visual creatures, especially the male gender.
But the OP meant to ask for a system by which to communicate speed to others.Besides, emulating cavemen or once-in-a-century artists is probably not the way to go when teaching the masses pool. Snooker for instance is tought using the five cut (quarters) system. That seems woefully inadequate, don't you think`? The thing is, when these five angles are ingrained, you have a mnemonic system under which to categorize your observations, thus enhancing your learning. The drill Steve Davis shows here will teach you to pot balls all over the table:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7M3z-lSSwI
Kids learn language the same way, by learning specific (verb conjugations or whatever else) and generalizing that specific knowledge and applying it to different situations, which is why they sometimes make mistakes with irregular verbs, etc.
My issue is the method dictated by SPF to obtain those speeds for the distances. My issue is delivery method of the cue stick for SPF.
That's irrelevant to this discussion.
SPF 'dictates' the 'stroke' method that should be used, a complete full back swing & a complete forward full follow through, or finish, delivered by various different arm speeds with a stationary elbow.
That goes against the grain of orthodox snooker teaching (the full swing), as you probably know. Still that's not the matter at hand.
So for THAT to be the "established" method for communicating CB speed, EVERYONE would have to change their stroke method to coincide.
What? No, of course not. That does not follow AT ALL.
I, for one, will NEVER go to a full arm pendulum swing type of cue stick delivery.
I don't think I will either, but again it's not the matter at hand.
Players in NO other sport, that I know of, uses a full arm motion with number designations assigned to desired distances of ball travel & most of them are playing for an extreme amount more money & prestige, etc, than pool players.
Pool may have some common traits with other sports, but the demands for exactness are at a completely different level.
I hope that better explains my take.

Best Wishes for You & Yours,
Rick

I've tried to show you why I disagree with your take on this above. I for one, think that it is helpful to learning to group your observations into fewer categories, and that is in fact how human beings learn and understand the world. It is certainly a lot easier of a task than trying to learn by grouping all your observation into one lump of random observations. Some people are just naturally talented at tasks and don't need to be taught anything to be quite proficient. That does not help the rest of us much, does it? In fact, even those talented individuals may enhance their learning by some sort of regimented practice, at a conservatory for a musician for instance. They are usually not just thrown some notes and asked to practice for 10 years, are they? They are taught musical theory, which again, simplifies and categorizes otherwise unique pieces. Sometimes human learning tendencies go wrong, as with stereotyping, etc, but all in all, almost every type of learning (of complex tasks) benefits from at least some kind of categorization. Learning this system of speed/cut whatever, will not confine you to those categories. It will merely give you strong and well practised points of reference.

 

[ENGLISH!]

I've tried to show you why I disagree with your take on this above. I for one, think that it is helpful to learning to group your observations into fewer categories, and that is in fact how human beings learn and understand the world. It is certainly a lot easier of a task than trying to learn by grouping all your observation into one lump of random observations. Sometimes it goes wrong, as with stereotyping, etc, but all in all, almost every type of learning (of complex tasks) benefit from at least some kind of categorization. Learning this system of speed/cut whatever, will not confine you to those categories. It will merely give you strong and well practised points of reference.

I think we might agree more than disagree on some of these matters but not on others.

1 is twice 2 but not in the SPF 'system' nor the PAT 'system' because of the 2 diamond kitchen area. That will not be in play during the course of a regular game that is not a drill.

Why not practice hitting the ball one(1) table length so that the ball hits the rail & comes out the equal two diamonds?

In the SPF 'system' 1 speed is a lag but of 2 diamonds less than two table lengths...

but a 2 speed is only 2 diamonds less than 3 table lengths & is NOT double 1 speed.

I see issues because of the contrivances, but if had to choice one I would go with the PAT 'system' as it is more of a 1 to 1 relationship, numbers to table lengths.

Anyway, I certainly will NOT be using either if I am playing doubles, team, or helping another to get a feel for the correct speed of any shot.

Best Wishes for You & Yours,
Rick

PS I agree regarding the BCA & that was said with tongue in cheek. So... how do you feel about the BCA/PBIA instructor program?

 

[duckie]

How far the CB travels is not a good way to measure stroke speed.

The same speed stroke used for a near straight in shot when used for a high angle shot will have the CB travel farther than the near straight in shot.

Sometimes there is a need to open clusters meaning the energy in the CB will be used up in moving other balls and not traveling as if it had not hit any other balls.

No matter how you try, you cannot communicate stroke speed in any useful manner.

This shows the limitations words have in describing somethings. In some Aikido training, there is no words spoken to describe the moves. The student is shown the move and it is up to them to figure out how to do it since no words can be used to explain how to do it.

Pool is a lot like this.

Oh and English..........STFU already.

 

[ENGLISH!]

How far the CB travels is not a good way to measure stroke speed.

The same speed stroke used for a near straight in shot when used for a high angle shot will have the CB travel farther than the near straight in shot.

Sometimes there is a need to open clusters meaning the energy in the CB will be used up in moving other balls and not traveling as if it had not hit any other balls.

No matter how you try, you cannot communicate stroke speed in any useful manner.

This shows the limitations words have in describing somethings. In some Aikido training, there is no words spoken to describe the moves. The student is shown the move and it is up to them to figure out how to do it since no words can be used to explain how to do it.

Pool is a lot like this.

Oh and English..........STFU already.

I agree with you.

But how should I take your last comment?

 

[philly]

I agree with you.

But how should I take your last comment?

Take it personally. I'm surprised you haven't been told this more often. Soon you will have everybody on ignore. What's that tell you?:speechless:

 

[Straightpool_99]

How far the CB travels is not a good way to measure stroke speed.
Well, it's the only one that's easlily observed by the player. Armspeed/cuespeed etc will also yield different results depending on other factors, so they're pretty much useless, even when known. Cueball speed is extremely tricky to observe (as a ft/s value) and is clost to impossible to convey to others.
The same speed stroke used for a near straight in shot when used for a high angle shot will have the CB travel farther than the near straight in shot.
The degree of cut (in fractions) will give you a decent idea, even after a collision, especially on stun shots.
Sometimes there is a need to open clusters meaning the energy in the CB will be used up in moving other balls and not traveling as if it had not hit any other balls.
When you hit multiple balls, the resultant cueball position is too chaotic to be accurately controlled to a pinpoint location. You will have some idea, but it's not a good example of speed control. There is of course a feel one can develop over many hours of training (years), and most never do, IMO.
No matter how you try, you cannot communicate stroke speed in any useful manner.
You can give a rough idea, with the number systems. Better than nothing, IMO.
This shows the limitations words have in describing somethings. In some Aikido training, there is no words spoken to describe the moves. The student is shown the move and it is up to them to figure out how to do it since no words can be used to explain how to do it.

Pool is a lot like this.

Oh and English..........STFU already.

If something is difficult to communicate, I still think one should at least give a try. Let's say some beginner is playing straightpool, and he's blasting his breakshots extremely hard, let's say a 4 speed in the PAT drill, and missing a lot of them. Would it not be useful to say: "Take your speed down to 2 and use a tip of high and inside" (if that is what the shot requires)? He can then adjust his speed from that to the exact value he wants, according to his own results. I could of course show it to him, but IMO it's better to let the person learn the technique through thinking and acting himself, using his own "database of shotspeeds/situations". He will then make the teaching his own, integrating it into his own frame of reference, not simply copying someone else, who might not be around for the next situation and lumping it together with other random situations that he might not remember.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Take it personally. I'm surprised you haven't been told this more often. Soon you will have everybody on ignore. What's that tell you?:speechless:

Your post tells me that you seem to be a 'butt hurt' individual from another subject matter, just as a couple of others in this thread are.

Best Wishes for You & Yours.

 

[ENGLISH!]

If something is difficult to communicate, I still think one should at least give a try. Let's say some beginner is playing straightpool, and he's blasting his breakshots extremely hard, let's say a 4 speed in the PAT drill, and missing a lot of them. Would it not be useful to say: "Take your speed down to 2 and use a tip of high and inside" (if that is what the shot requires)? He can then adjust his speed from that to the exact value he wants, according to his own results. I could of course show it to him, but IMO it's better to let the person learn the technique through thinking and acting himself, using his own "database of shotspeeds/situations". He will then make the teaching his own, integrating it into his own frame of reference, not simply copying someone else, who might not be around for the next situation and lumping it together with other random situations that he might not remember.

How about telling him to hit it about half as hard?

I understand your willingness to help others, but in the big picture of this I think you are trying to defend what is really not defensible in any real non contrived manner.

Hit the break as hard as you can. Hit it as soft as you can. Now hone in on something more to the middle of those.

Saying hit it with speed 2.5 means nothing to probably 90% plus of the playing public.

Best to Ya.

 

[Straightpool_99]

How about telling him to hit it about half as hard?

Within a framework of learning (given that the person has practised the drill) the numbers give a more accurate idea of the speed. Like I said, when you hit multiple balls, it's not always easy to tell exactly how hard the person is hitting the balls. If you are both familiar with the drill, then your personal feel of the shot (learned by hitting this shot for years and also the drill) can be verbally transferred to the individual, without accurately knowing the precise speed HE is using at the moment. Spin measured in tips is also "contrived" as you say. Yet it is practical to use. Should we abandon it and go to millimeters instead, as in: "Use 4,5mm high and 5,2 mm right with a cueball speed of x ft/s"?

Oh, and I have no stake in this discussion. I just think it's silly to just throw something away because it may not be perfect, unless you plan to replace it with something better.

 

[GoldCrown]

Your post tells me that you to be 'butt hurt' individual from another subject matter, just as a couple of others in this thread are.

Best Wishes for You & Yours.

Actually you are a pretty interesting person. You blow more wind than a hurricane. You beat a dead horse and eat it. Nobody really GAF about anything you write... And you stick around like a bad habit. You have a good tolerance for being abused. In real life you must be a Customer Service specialist or a stand up philosopher. When can we see your video of your speed and control system. I asked you first. Show us yours we'll show you ours.
I do have an extra copy of a SPF DVD. Yours for the asking.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Within a framework of learning (given that the person has practised the drill) the numbers give a more accurate idea of the speed. Like I said, when you hit multiple balls, it's not always easy to tell exactly how hard the person is hitting the balls. If you are both familiar with the drill, then your personal feel of the shot (learned by hitting this shot for years and also the drill) can be verbally transferred to the individual, without accurately knowing the precise speed HE is using at the moment. Spin measured in tips is also "contrived" as you say. Yet it is practical to use. Should we abandon it and go to millimeters instead, as in: "Use 4,5mm high and 5,2 mm right with a cueball speed of x ft/s"?

Oh, and I have no stake in this discussion. I just think it's silly to just throw something away because it may not be perfect, unless you plan to replace it with something better.

A tip of english to some is to put the inside edge of the cue tip at the the center line which would yield something between like 5.575 & 7 mm of english depending on the size & shape of their tip... while to others it is to put the center of the tip 3mm from the center line.

What good is it tell someone an amount of english if you do not also tell them how hard to hit it & possibly with what connection to the cue to have when they hit it?

As Duckie said, some things simply have no words to accurately describe them. One just has to experiment with them until one FEELS it & garners an understanding.

The Game simply does not have a universal language as does Music.

And for one to think that can dictate one & take on that responsibility would be rather arrogant, IMO.

Best 2 Ya.

 

[Neil]

So ladies and gentleman, what have we all learned from this thread?

Me learn me want to be like caveman. Caveman no use numbers, me no use numbers. Numbers bad. Me throw spear at white rock. Me hit white rock here, make white rock go there. Me put twist on spear, make white rock do funny things. Me make white rock hit pretty colored rock. Make pretty colored rock roll into little cave and go away. ugh ugh ugh

 

[ENGLISH!]

Actually you are a pretty interesting person. You blow more wind than a hurricane. You beat a dead horse and eat it. Nobody really GAF about anything you write... And you stick around like a bad habit. You have a good tolerance for being abused. In real life you must be a Customer Service specialist or a stand up philosopher. When can we see your video of your speed and control system. I asked you first. Show us yours we'll show you ours.
I do have an extra copy of a SPF DVD. Yours for the asking.

My 'system' is in my subconscious mind & has been developed by very many repetitions of very many shots to garner what actually happens during ALL of the many various angles of collisions between the balls.

I do not have any contrived, made up, supposed 'system'.

But you go ahead & post your video of you beating the 10 ball ghost with yours & your full swing motion for every shot method.

That is, if you can get away from your comedy routine long enough to do it.

I asked you 2nd.

What other childish immature games do you want to play?

 

[GoldCrown]

A certain posters thoughts on communicating/discussing speed/control. This is how it translates. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MxtN0xxzfsw

 

[ENGLISH!]

Me learn me want to be like caveman. Caveman no use numbers, me no use numbers. Numbers bad. Me throw spear at white ball. Me hit white ball here, make white ball go there. Me put twist on spear, make white ball do funny things. Me make white ball hit pretty colored ball. Make pretty colored ball roll into little cave and go away. ugh ugh ugh

--------------------------------------

 

[ENGLISH!]

----------------------------------------

 

[Straightpool_99]

A tip of english to some is to put the inside edge of the cue tip at the the center line which would yield something between like 5.575 & 7 mm of english depending on the size & shape of their tip... while to others it is to put the center of the tip 3mm from the center line.

What good is it tell someone an amount of english if you do not also tell them how hard to hit it & possibly with what connection to the cue to have when they hit it?

As Duckie said, some things simply have no words to accurately describe them. One just has to experiment with them until one FEELS it & garners an understanding.

The Game simply does not have a universal language as does Music.

And for one to think that can dictate one & take on that responsibility would be rather arrogant, IMO.

Best 2 Ya.

I can tell that you are not going to agree with me on this, so I'll tell you something you'll hate even more: There is actually a 3 cushion system, using fractions and tip positions to give accurate 3 cushion hits, that is increasingly being utilized by great players. I suppose you think that is contrived nonsense as well. I was actually taught by an older carom player when I started out. He taught me spin by first showing the speed he was using. Then shooting the ball straight up and down the table at that speed with a certain tip offset and going to the corner he defined that as one tip. I've built my knowledge of spin reactions upon that one minute lesson. I didn't think it was worthless then, and I certainly don't now. That one tip definition is accurate, because it changes with the table conditions, even silly ones like the new superball cushions. Which means that I can shoot the shot, knowing I need one tip of english on any table, so long as I've calibrated what that means.

The result is what I'm after, so that's what I base my calculations on, not what some guy has defined as a tip. The same with travel length. That is what I want, so that is what I measure/train for. It's convenient to use table lengths, so that's what I use. I don't want to tell people they need a radar gun, a protractor or a calculator. You don't get to do that in a game anyway. Use the things you have: Your cue, the table/diamonds, the tip diameter and of course your memory.

 

[GoldCrown]

What other childish immature games do you want to play?

Bottle tops, wall ball, step ball, hit the coin, kick the can. I use SPF for all games. Scared to know the truth. Improve your game. Set, 2 warm up strokes. Backswing and pause. Foreswing and Finish

 

[Tony_in_MD]

Neil,

You got it wrong, you can only learn from a Professional Caveman who throws his spear with a TOI.

Me learn me want to be like caveman. Caveman no use numbers, me no use numbers. Numbers bad. Me throw spear at white ball. Me hit white ball here, make white ball go there. Me put twist on spear, make white ball do funny things. Me make white ball hit pretty colored ball. Make pretty colored ball roll into little cave and go away. ugh ugh ugh