Long stroke vs. short stroke?

[JoeW]

In the first situation I released my grip from the hammer before it hit the nail. My "aim" was good in that the hammer hit squarely.

I agree there could be much better tests but this simple easily repeatable test might be of use as an idea that merits study.

 

[sfleinen]

Admittedly this is not a very good test. However, it does support my hypothesis.

Without going into all the details, I found that when I had a tight grip the nail went into the wood about ½” farther than when I threw the hammer. The nail went 30 - 40% farther into the wood. And I am not a carpenter !

I can conclude that there was more transfer of energy with a tighter grip. Different conditions would yield different results.

Joe:

Back a couple months ago, an F1 tornado ripped through the back area of my townhouse complex, and pulled over a century+ old Hickory tree onto a neighbors house. I'd assisted that neighbor with removing and cutting up this entire tree with my collection of chain saws. Knowing that you're a carpenter / woodworker, you must know just how hard, dense, and heavy Hickory wood is! I'd spent the weekends of the last couple of months splitting -- by hand, with wedges and a 16lb sledge -- the cut pieces of that Hickory tree, including 3-foot diameter pieces that require several wedges (both plain-blade wedges as well as the "star"-shaped ones).

Like you, I found that if I tightened my grip on the sledge just as it impacted the wedge, and not just "let the weight of the sledge do the work" -- I was able to forcibly drive wedges deeper, per blow of the sledge, into that hard, dense Hickory wood.

Likewise, when I got the pieces down to "splitting maul"-capable size, I was able to split those smaller pieces of Hickory with one stroke of the splitting maul if I tightened my grip just a split second prior to impact, that if I just "let the weight of the maul do the work" -- it would jam into, and I had to lift the log-jammed maul over my shoulder, invert it, and slam the maul downwards onto the splitting surface maul-blade-up to finish the job.

Again, split-second timing of the tightening of my grip on the 16lb sledge, and the 8lb maul, and I got better results than just freely letting the weight of the tool swing.

Initially, it didn't make sense to me, because I was always taught "let the tool do the work." But I think this has to do with what Bob Jewett mentioned about "better coupling" of the mass and weight of my arms to the sledge/maul, resulting in more force delivered. I think that's what's going on, anyway.

Regardless, I can reproduce this at will -- irrespective if I'm splitting wood with sledges/mauls, or delivering a cue. And I'm not a big guy by *any* stretch of the imagination!

-Sean

 

[Scott Lee]

Well Joe...we'll just have a little bet, when I get that cue. As far as the hammer/nail thing...my son is a contractor and carpenter, and he'd argue you about a tight grip delivering more power with the hammer. He'd say it's all about how you swing the hammer...not how hard you grip it.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

My bet is that a tightly held cue stick delivers more energy.

The same thing happens with a hammer. You deliver more force with a tightly held hammer than by throwing the hammer at the nail.

 

[RRfireblade]

In the first situation I released my grip from the hammer before it hit the nail. My "aim" was good in that the hammer hit squarely.

I agree there could be much better tests but this simple easily repeatable test might be of use as an idea that merits study.

I explained the flaw in your test and how it could be repeated correctly.

 

[JoeW]

Joe:

Back a couple months ago, an F1 tornado ripped through the back area of my townhouse complex, and pulled over a century+ old Hickory tree onto a neighbors house. I'd assisted that neighbor with removing and cutting up this entire tree with my collection of chain saws. Knowing that you're a carpenter / woodworker, you must know just how hard, dense, and heavy Hickory wood is! I'd spent the weekends of the last couple of months splitting -- by hand, with wedges and a 16lb sledge -- the cut pieces of that Hickory tree, including 3-foot diameter pieces that require several wedges (both plain-blade wedges as well as the "star"-shaped ones).

Like you, I found that if I tightened my grip on the sledge just as it impacted the wedge, and not just "let the weight of the sledge do the work" -- I was able to forcibly drive wedges deeper, per blow of the sledge, into that hard, dense Hickory wood.

Likewise, when I got the pieces down to "splitting maul"-capable size, I was able to split those smaller pieces of Hickory with one stroke of the splitting maul if I tightened my grip just a split second prior to impact, that if I just "let the weight of the maul do the work" -- it would jam into, and I had to lift the log-jammed maul over my shoulder, invert it, and slam the maul downwards onto the splitting surface maul-blade-up to finish the job.

Again, split-second timing of the tightening of my grip on the 16lb sledge, and the 8lb maul, and I got better results than just freely letting the weight of the tool swing.

Initially, it didn't make sense to me, because I was always taught "let the tool do the work." But I think this has to do with what Bob Jewett mentioned about "better coupling" of the mass and weight of my arms to the sledge/maul, resulting in more force delivered. I think that's what's going on, anyway.

Regardless, I can reproduce this at will -- irrespective if I'm splitting wood with sledges/mauls, or delivering a cue. And I'm not a big guy by *any* stretch of the imagination!

-Sean

Been there done that and found the same thing. It sure does work with an ax and with a maul. I like the coupling idea and thing that the "better coupling" is the answer.

BTW I also find that I get a "better" break with that last last milli-second tight grip and throwing my body into the shot. I am not very big either but I do have the fastest break speed in our "old guys" pool hall at 22 mph. Just last week I found that pushing off my back foot along with all the other contortions (ala that fellow in Australia Colin Colenso )sp) my break is more powerful though I haven't tested the speed lately.

Seems that pocketing the one in the side is actually more important -- ahh those tradeoffs.

 

[naji]

Huh????

Sorry, I am missing the point.

i am sorry Tony, maybe if we meet one day will talk about it.

 

[JoeW]

I explained the flaw in your test and how it could be repeated correctly.

I doubt I could hit the nail squarely from three feet away. Anyway, That is not how we break if I understand your idea.

 

[Living Legend]

Well Joe...we'll just have a little bet, when I get that cue. As far as the hammer/nail thing...my son is a contractor and carpenter, and he'd argue you about a tight grip delivering more power with the hammer. He'd say it's all about how you swing the hammer...not how hard you grip it.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

1000% correct, you need to get a whip like technique going.

 

[JoeW]

The main difference is going to he that in one case, you are adding your arm mass the the mass of the cue/hammer which would result in more energy transfer.

The test would be your tight grip strike and then throwing a hammer equal in weight to the hammer and the part of your arm that was in motion.

The arm mass and weight of the cue are constant in each case. The only difference is the tight grip versus no grip so any difference in penetration would appear to be due to the tight grip + arm mass (assuming the nail is hit squarely each time). Or do you see something I don't see?

My point is that the power of the arm transferred through the tight grip produces a more powerful break. I guess that you think the mass of the arm produces the deeper penetration. This could be true but the point is the same. Increasing the energy transfer (not speed) produces a more powerful break. In order to transfer that energy the player must have a firm grip.

The player with a light grip may have arm mass as they approach the cue ball but the energy is not transferred if the grip is not sufficient to transfer that energy.

 

[Neil]

The arm mass and weight of the cue are constant in each case. The only difference is the tight grip versus no grip so any difference in penetration would appear to be due to the tight grip + arm mass (assuming the nail is hit squarely each time). Or do you see something I don't see?

Here's the way I see it. A tight grip on the hammer will transfer more energy to the nail. That is because there is more weight behind the hammer. However, no carpenter will use a tight grip on a hammer. He won't last thru the day if he does. A carpenter still gets more force than just the hammer by the way he swings it. Just loose enough to not let it go, and a loose wrist. The wrist snap adds speed, which adds power to the swing.

Now, for pool, yes, a robot gripping tightly will change things. However, we are not robots, and cannot grip like a robot unless we have a prosthetic hand. Any time you add grip pressure, you trade off accuracy. In pool, you loose accuracy, you lose power. So, the trade off just isn't worth it. Besides, unless you are going for an extreme exhibition power shot, there is never a need for that much power.

Pool is all about accuracy, not power. Even the break.

 

[RRfireblade]

The arm mass and weight of the cue are constant in each case. The only difference is the tight grip versus no grip so any difference in penetration would appear to be due to the tight grip + arm mass (assuming the nail is hit squarely each time). Or do you see something I don't see?

My point is that the power of the arm transferred through the tight grip produces a more powerful break. I guess that you think the mass of the arm produces the deeper penetration. This could be true but the point is the same. Increasing the energy transfer (not speed) produces a more powerful break. In order to transfer that energy the player must have a firm grip.

Well really....

What I'm saying is having a tight grip at impact is just adding more "effective" mass at the time of collision but could include a number of dynamic factors besides mere hand tension.

The question of the tight (death) grip on the cue was one of a consistant tight grip throughout the entire stroke, not simply tightening up at the precise moment of impact. The act of that immediate tightening is a different case study than the original grip question. It's not an absolute of any singular effect alone.

 

[JoeW]

Here's the way I see it. A tight grip on the hammer will transfer more energy to the nail. That is because there is more weight behind the hammer. However, no carpenter will use a tight grip on a hammer. He won't last thru the day if he does. A carpenter still gets more force than just the hammer by the way he swings it. Just loose enough to not let it go, and a loose wrist. The wrist snap adds speed, which adds power to the swing.

Now, for pool, yes, a robot gripping tightly will change things. However, we are not robots, and cannot grip like a robot unless we have a prosthetic hand. Any time you add grip pressure, you trade off accuracy. In pool, you loose accuracy, you lose power. So, the trade off just isn't worth it. Besides, unless you are going for an extreme exhibition power shot, there is never a need for that much power.

Pool is all about accuracy, not power. Even the break.

I agree that over the long haul one does not maintain a tight grip on the hammer. I learned this when I got tennis elbow in one day of roofing a barn. However, that does not vitiate the idea that one can get more power with a tight grip on the odd occassion when this is needed as Sean and I both found out when splitting a stubborn piece of wood.

I also agree that accuracy is nore important than speed, even on the break shot. However, I thought the discussion was about what one could do, not what one shoud do. There are times when a powerful break can be of use and I do not think it is simply about the speed of the cue stick.

 

[JoeW]

Well really....

What I'm saying is having a tight grip at impact is just adding more "effective" mass at the time of collision but could include a number of dynamic factors besides mere hand tension.

The question of the tight (death) grip on the cue was one of a consistant tight grip throughout the entire stroke, not simply tightening up at the precise moment of impact. The act of that immediate tightening is a different case study than the original grip question. It's not an absolute of any singular effect alone.

Agreed and more effective mass can be added in several ways incluing using the body for leverage, pushing off the rear foot, and the muscle power available from the bicep.

All of this is transferred through a tight grip. I also agree that this tight grip is used just prior to hitting the cue ball.

 

[sfleinen]

Well really....

What I'm saying is having a tight grip at impact is just adding more "effective" mass at the time of collision but could include a number of dynamic factors besides mere hand tension.

The question of the tight (death) grip on the cue was one of a consistant tight grip throughout the entire stroke, not simply tightening up at the precise moment of impact. The act of that immediate tightening is a different case study than the original grip question. It's not an absolute of any singular effect alone.

I disagree. Regardless of whether the mass/weight was "coupled" at the beginning of the cue's movement, or if the weight was "coupled" at the last moment of impact, what would be the difference between the two? At the moment of impact -- which, remember, is all that the cue ball cares about -- what difference does it make if the weight/mass was coupled to the cue throughout the cue's movement, or if it were coupled at the last moment? I would argue that it wouldn't make a difference -- the same weight/mass is hitting the cue ball at the moment of impact regardless if that weight/mass were there the whole time, or "added" at the last moment. The only aspect that would cause confusion is the "robot"; that clamp pressure is there throughout, but remember, that's a robot, and it can do things a human hand cannot.

And besides, let's not lose track of the subject of this thread, folks. I offered the grip analysis merely for an alternative take on "what factors in the stroke can affect the cue ball." That's all. Nothing more. I certainly don't advocate a tight/death grip -- even as much as some respondees here are trying to spin it, lol. And I don't use a tight grip myself -- not even remotely able to be confused with one, in fact. While discussion is always healthy, at the same time let's not twist the reason for why certain information was offered.

-Sean

 

[poolguy4u]

:speechless:

Just a comment...if you don't hold a hammer at the end, the hammer doesn't work too good.

:smile:

 

[dr_dave]

What I tried to say, albeit unsucessfully because I didn't bullet-proof the verbiage, is related to experiments with a homemade "pool robot" I did sometime back, using a straight maple shaft on a cue (no LD or laminated shafts). It was a simple device, with a spring piston, that I fashioned from spare parts. The part of the device that "held" the cue simply had a rubber-coated cradle that the butt of the cue rested in. It also had an optional top piece that I could screw onto the "cradle" to act as a clamp, to prevent any kind of recoil-type of movement in the cue after contact with the cue ball.

When I didn't use the clamp, and just left the cue resting in the cradle, the spring piston "delivered" the cue normally, and I'd got the expected reaction from the cue ball -- including draw. However, when I installed the clamp and tightened it down, I got an unexpected result on draw shots -- the cue ball actually was lifted in the air during delivery, and because the force it delivered was very consistent, I was actually able to consistently "launch" the cue ball straight into a pocket without ever touching the table -- almost like a jump shot, except that the cue tip never touched the table, and the machine wasn't cueing downwards into the cue ball *at all*. Mind you, the "levelness" of the cue never changed, the contact point on the cue ball never changed, and the force didn't change either.

I found that I could actually do the same thing with a very tight grip and a powerful stroke from my own arm, albeit not with the predictability or "accuracy" that the machine could.

In fact, come to think of it, I seem to recall a thread created by Barioni Cues, whereby Bob Jewett himself warned John (Barioni) that he may have unexpected results like this if he tightened the "grip hand" clamp down too much, preventing the natural recoil force on the cue, and he may even get a double-hit or bizarre miscues on what should normally be within safe miscue limits:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=3436553#post3436553
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=3439478#post3439478
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=3449296#post3449296
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=3450005#post3450005

Thoughts?

Sean,

I have also experienced this issue with the cue testing machine I used for squirt experiments many years ago. We had to take a lot of care to design the "grip" to be flexible (like the flesh in a human hand) and to slow the momentum of the mechanism after the hit. If you mechanically clamp down on the cue with a mechanism, the mechanism effectively becomes part of the cue, and the momentum of the mechanism prevents the cue from slowing as much as it would with a human grip (with flexible flesh) and a human stroke (which doesn't add as much momentum after the hit as a mechanism with a more-rigid grip would). With larger tip offsets, a non-human mechanism with a "death grip" easily causes double hits resulting in miscues.

Fortunately, with a typical human grip and stroke, even though the tip can come close to hitting the CB a second time, this does not happen, even close to the miscue limit. For more info and experimental results, see the following article:

"Coriolis was brilliant ... but he didn't have a high-speed camera - Part IV: maximum cue tip offset" (BD, October, 2005)​

However, I could imagine this happening under certain conditions. For example, if a person had a very bony hand with very little flesh between the bones and the cue, and the person used a "death grip," the effect could occur (especially if the person was also wearing Earl-type arm weights). The effect would also be more likely to occur with a very non-whippy and low-squirt (AKA LD) shaft (e.g., a carbon fiber shaft) that flexes back quickly after hitting and bouncing away from the CB with an off-center hit.

Regards,
Dave

 

[AKpip]

Follow through

Long follow through is all for the player, not the CB. It helps the player to calibrate their stroke and make sure they are accelerating when they strike the CB. Some players can achieve this even with a short,quick stroke but for a beginning player I would reccomend lengthening their stroke. It also helps the player to see how pure their stroke was; when they struck the CB did the tip stay level and true, or did it dip or curve? Consistency is critical and a long stroke can help develop that.

Imho

 

[backplaying]

It's amazing and sad that in this day an age, with all the testing that has been done on the subject, that so many on here, especially long term members, have no clue as to the actual science involved. Rrfireblade and Scott Lee are right.

I don't think I would mind being ignorant to the science of pool if I could play three balls better than most of those who do!

 

[Bob Jewett]

Ok if this has been talked about a lot I sure have had no luck in finding it. I am having an argument with my friend and wanted to know every ones opinion about type of stroke having an effect on the path of the cue ball, not how the (for most people) body functions; but JUST the different type of stroke. I hope I am being clear, some may need a farther explanation.

The main result from actual measurements that applies to this is the result that the "tightness" (spring constant) of the tip-to-ball contact is about 100 times larger than the tightness of the stick-hand contact. The flesh of your hand is much, much softer than the thin leather tip. What this means practically in the shot is that the tip-ball interaction is very quick while the stick-hand interaction is very slow. The follow-on result of this is that your grip simply does not have time to affect the outcome of the shot.

As for the "experiments" with hammers, I'd say that the "experimenters" need to think a lot more about what they should have controlled. None of them bothered to measure the speed of the hammer at impact. I imagine that with a loose grip the stopped accelerating the hammer early. So, untrustworthy results.

The situation is perhaps clearer at golf. In this video the club head is on the ball for about 4 frames. That is 0.4 milliseconds. That is not time enough for the force wave to travel from the club head up to the hands. If the frame before club-ball contact a laser cut the club in half at the bottom of the grip, the ball would not notice the difference.

While is makes no difference to the golf ball what the player's hands are doing at the instant of contact, it is those same hands that got the club head moving in the right direction. All of their job is done before the club head hits the ball.

I think that for Iron Byron (the club/ball testing machine), the grip is far less important than for Iron Willie (and the Myth Destroyer). The club shaft itself insulates the grip from having any effect on the hit. For pool cues, the grip is important, but I don't think any human hand is bony enough to worry about.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Lots of good players and even champions have goofy ideas about grip. One champion that I got a lesson from said that a tight/loose grip changed how much side spin is on the cue ball. We did the experiment. With a very, very light just-on-the-fingertips grip, I hit the cue ball straight into the cushion with maximum side spin. It came off to X with speed Y. Next, I used a total white-knuckle death grip with tremendous tension in my arm. With the same maximum side spin the cue ball came off to X with speed Y. No difference.

Of course I could have "cheated" either consciously or subconsciously. I felt that the cue ball should go to the same place, and it did.

I purposely didn't say which kind of grip would give more spin according to the champion -- you will have to do your own experiment.