More elbow dropping nonsense

[JoeW]

I think that I might add, it is unnecessary use of muscles and joints and that such unnecessary movements should be avoided if possible.

It requires one to learn to coordinate upper arm and the pendulm swing at, and beyond, contact. Such precision required with the dropped elbow is unnecessary and can contribute to an unreliable stroke. Buddy Hall is one exception, however, this requires his talent and dedication.

Occam's razor should be applied here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

It is useful as a training device that emphasises the need to follow through and as such may contribute to a "better" follow through for some people. However the price (see above) is probably too high.

It is generally needed if one believes that the cue tip should rest on the table at the completion of a shot. The pendulum swing, by it nature, results in the cue tip more elevated than at contact. However, it seems to me that "tip on the cloth" is a pool player's myth, except in so far as it contributes to a straight follow through.

I can equivocate more but those are a few possible additions that may contributes to the possibility of deciding to use or avoid the dropped elbow.

 

[pooltchr]

By comparison, it would be akin to shortening your golf swing (ie. bringing the club shaft perpindicular rather parallel), because it's easier to coordinate the action to hit the golf ball consistently.

Except the goal in pool is rarely to hit the ball as far as you can. Watch a golfer when he has a chip shot, or is putting...it's a much shorter and more controlled swing.
I can't recall ever trying to hit a cue ball as far as possible.

Steve

 

[Cameron Smith]

Except the goal in pool is rarely to hit the ball as far as you can. Watch a golfer when he has a chip shot, or is putting...it's a much shorter and more controlled swing.
I can't recall ever trying to hit a cue ball as far as possible.

Steve

You're taking my example too literally. The point refers to simplifying a motion in order to increase accuracy while sacrificing power.

Occam's razor is only applicable if we can prove that there are no reasonable benefits to an elbow drop. So far this hasn't been established.

Has anyone contacted Del Hill yet?

 

[JoeW]

You're taking my example too literally. The point refers to simplifying a motion in order to increase accuracy while sacrificing power.

Occam's razor is only applicable if we can prove that there are no reasonable benefits to an elbow drop. So far this hasn't been established.

Has anyone contacted Del Hill yet?

As a theory the elbow drop includes additional assumptions that do not appear, on the surface, to be needed.

One could test such a theory be establishing the amount of work required for most (90% ?) of a pool player's shots. Then one would would determine the amount of work that is needed to accomplish the shot and obtain position. If, as I suppose, it would turn out that the work required can be accomplished without the elbow drop then the elbow drop is unnecessary.

To determine if the elbow drop contributes to more accuracy and or reliability one could use a length of table shot and various cut angles with substantial variance in the probablity of making yhe shot. Using the two techniques in a counterbalanced design should lead to a conclusion about the effacy of including a dropped elbow in one's routine.

I suspect I would prepare for such a study by first demonstrating that I was reasonably accurate with both techniques and then I would set up a series of difficult shots requiring difficult positional results.

The results would lead to something the individual could use.

At this point it would seem that the onus is on those who think that the shot making needs to be more complicated.

 

[JoeyA]

As a theory the elbow drop includes additional assumptions that do not appear, on the surface, to be needed.

One could test such a theory be establishing the amount of work required for most (90% ?) of a pool player's shots. Then one would would determine the amount of work that is needed to accomplish the shot and obtain position. If, as I suppose, it would turn out that the work required can be accomplished without the elbow drop then the elbow drop is unnecessary.

To determine if the elbow drop contributes to more accuracy and or reliability one could use a length of table shot and various cut angles with substantial variance in the probablity of making yhe shot. Using the two techniques in a counterbalanced design should lead to a conclusion about the effacy of including a dropped elbow in one's routine.

I suspect I would prepare for such a study by first demonstrating that I was reasonably accurate with both techniques and then I would set up a series of difficult shots requiring difficult positional results.

The results would lead to something the individual could use.

At this point it would seem that the onus is on those who think that the shot making needs to be more complicated.

Joe,
You make excellent contributions to the forum as always but for the most part, the people who utilize the elbow drop the most seem to be professional players and I doubt that they care to prove anything, especially to forum members such as ourselves.

In fact, most professional players would probably prefer for us to stay right here in pool academia arguing that one cannot accelerate through the cue ball.

I really don't get it. There are a large cadre of AZBers who continue to argue that the elbow drop is "complicated" and adds "unncessary movement" to the stroke shot.

Perhaps playing pool at a high level is a little more complicated than some are willing to give credit for and maybe, just maybe, occasional elbow drop is necessary for high level play.

If you want to play at a lower level, a basic pendulum stroke may be all you need.

JoeyA

 

[dr_dave]

DD,
You misunderstand. We true fanatic pool players expect YOU to do all of our scientific analysis for us....we're too busy playing pool and expressing our strongly held (if sometimes poorly informed) opinions on internet forums to actually commit to a course of scientific inquiry.

I like having "opinions" at times also, and sometimes I don't have the time or strong enough interest for scientific inquiries. And believe it or not, I actually like spending time playing pool also.

It would be great to take a bunch of beginners, and measure their precision with and without elbow drop.

I would not be the best person to perform this experiment because I am confident the answer is: Most beginners are much more consistent with no elbow drop. That's just my opinion (backed up by some experience working with beginners over the last few years).

Regards,
Dave

 

[Scott Lee]

JoeyA...Totally unnecessary comment here...not to mention totally inaccurate. A natural pendulum stroke allows MOST players who learn it correctly, to play at a higher level. Stick to what you know best...which is "whatever works best for someone, go ahead and use it!"

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

If you want to play at a lower level, a basic pendulum stroke may be all you need.

JoeyA

 

[dr_dave]

Not much to add. The primary advantage to the elbow drop is to improve the timing of your stroke, which is more or less covered in your list.

I would remove, "it looks smoother, and many people think it looks better",

Looks aren't nearly as important as effect. Throughout my development I spent time trying to make my fundamentals aesthetically pleasing. Eventually I stopped caring and just wanted to put the balls in the pockets, lol.

The disadvantages you have listed are all more or less connected. They are also not reasons to avoid the technique if we can assume the advantages to be true, at least not for the serious player.

By comparison, it would be akin to shortening your golf swing (ie. bringing the club shaft perpindicular rather parallel), because it's easier to coordinate the action to hit the golf ball consistently.

Thank you for your thoughts.

I think "looks" can be important to some people. If they think they look good, they might have more confidence. On the other had, if they think people are noticing something about their technique that doesn't look quite right, they might be self conscious, distracted, and less confident at times.

A just thought of another possible advantage to add to the list:

- If the timing and coordination of the elbow and shoulder are good, the cue tip can be made to move in a straight line over the entire stroke. This could help some people maintain truer aim and sighting and hit the desired point on the CB more consistently.​

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Dr. Dave:

Is your table 4x8?

Yes, but the cloth is fairly slow and has average slickness. It is actually easier for me to draw on a larger table if it has slicker and faster cloth. It is also more difficult for me to draw on a smaller table if the cloth is stickier and slower. I assume you are referring to:

NV B.65 - Power draw technique advice from VEPS I
​

Not that it makes that much difference. A great shot either way.

Thanks.

So was your original "Very sick" comment referring to my video, or was it referring to Blackjack's or Spidey's videos? It doesn't really matter, I'm just curious, because all three Daves (me included) seemed to think your earlier post was directed toward them.

Regards,
Dave (Doc, not Blackjack or Spidey)

 

[dr_dave]

... It [elbow drop] is generally needed if one believes that the cue tip should rest on the table at the completion of a shot. The pendulum swing, by it nature, results in the cue tip more elevated than at contact. However, it seems to me that "tip on the cloth" is a pool player's myth, except in so far as it contributes to a straight follow through.

Joe,

I'm not sure what you mean here. With a near-level cue, elbow drop tends to lift the tip, unless it is counteracted by shoulder motion, in which case the tip can be made to go straight (or even drop).

With a pendulum stroke, with a fixed elbow, the tip must finish down after tip contact. As the grip hand comes up, the tip must go down (unless the cue is being lifted above the bridge). Right?

Regards,
Dave

PS: BTW, I am assuming the forearm is perpendicular to the cue at CB contact, as is normally recommended with a pendulum stroke.

 

[JoeW]

Joe,

I really don't get it. There are a large cadre of AZBers who continue to argue that the elbow drop is "complicated" and adds "unncessary movement" to the stroke shot.
JoeyA

With the elbow drop one adds the shoulder as a lever. The upper arm must be dropped and guided in the vertical plane requiring additional fine motor control of the upper arm and the elbow which must be held in place during these movements.

None of these additional movements are required with a pendulum swing which uses the elbow as a fulcrum.

I suspect that elbow dropping is something that initially helped the player to learn to follow through. Later it became part of their style of play. The essential element was learning to follow through -- not drop the elbow.

I think that most people agree that the contact time between cue tip and cue ball is extremely limited. Therefore, the elbow drop does not contribute, in any meaningful way, to the length of time the stick is in contact with the ball.

The elbow drop is used, I suspect, to help the player stay on line throughout the pre and post contact portion of the swing. The brain / mind is aiming through the cue ball, perhaps at the OB contact point, and this may be what contributes to a more consistent follow through.

On the other hand if one could learn to trust their pendulum swing it too would be more likely to be straight because it involves fewer muscles and joints that need to be coordinated.

I suspect, but obviously do not know, that professional players read this and other forums. Anyone who is serious about their sport continues to learn and try new things over a life time of playing.

In graduate school I had a disastrous argument with the head of our department who was a theoretician when he asked me if I was primarily a theoretician or a practitioner. My answer was that we could not function without both positions in any serious considerations. Practice leads to questions and theory guides studies of the way to effectively practice. Both elements are needed to improve the conditions.

 

[JoeW]

Joe,

I'm not sure what you mean here. With a near-level cue, elbow drop tends to lift the tip, unless it is counteracted by shoulder motion, in which case the tip can be made to go straight (or even drop).

I think, but don't know, that an elbow drop results in something like a piston motion and would drive the stick through the ball and possible down to the table if that was the intent.

With a pendulum stroke, with a fixed elbow, the tip must finish down after tip contact. As the grip hand comes up, the tip must go down (unless the cue is being lifted above the bridge). Right?

I guess I see this differently. With the cue held in the web between the thumb and first finger there is no reason for the grip hand to drive the cue stick down. This is, in my opinion, the better way to hold a cue becasue it basically eliminates any wrist twist that might result from gripping the cue with the fingers.

If, as you say, the arm is vertical (perpendicular to the line of travel) at cue ball contact and one is using a pendulm swing, the follow through after contact is on the upswing of the pendulum by definition -- right?
Regards,
Dave

PS: BTW, I am assuming the forearm is perpendicular to the cue at CB contact, as is normally recommended with a pendulum stroke.

Added text here so it will post

 

[JoeW]

I understand what you mean when you say that the hand is up at the end of the pendulm. The tip of the stick goes down if the bridge is the fulcrum after contact. if the bridge is not the fulcrum the stick continues to rise.

With the closed bridge the stick is held down. with the open bridge the stick will rise -- will it not?

In this sense the closed bridge is the better bridge in so far as it contributes to "better" follow through. None the less the pressure will be on the upper finger in the closed bridge because the stick is rising. So this appears to be a reasonable argument for a closed bridge to improve follow through.

This is getting complicated.

 

[randyg]

I understand what you mean when you say that the hand is up at the end of the pendulm. The tip of the stick goes down if the bridge is the fulcrum after contact. if the bridge is not the fulcrum the stick continues to rise.

With the closed bridge the stick is held down. with the open bridge the stick will rise -- will it not?

In this sense the closed bridge is the better bridge in so far as it contributes to "better" follow through. None the less the pressure will be on the upper finger in the closed bridge because the stick is rising. So this appears to be a reasonable argument for a closed bridge to improve follow through.

This is getting complicated.

Not too complicated. The stick will rise from two things for sure. A tight grip or a dropped elbow.

Closed or open should have no bearing on the stroke....SPF=randyg

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I think what JoeyA is saying is that there is a huge majority of pros who drop their elbow. I'm not convinced it's because lack of instruction, rather than for improved function.

Dropping your elbow does not raise your tip. The only way your tip would rise is if you're not finishing your stroke. As your elbow drops, your shooting hand is coming forward and up. The net-effect is a level stroke with the tip not moving up or down. If you drop your elbow and your tip comes up, you did a lot wrong.

 

[JoeyA]

JoeyA...Totally unnecessary comment here...not to mention totally inaccurate. A natural pendulum stroke allows MOST players who learn it correctly, to play at a higher level. Stick to what you know best...which is "whatever works best for someone, go ahead and use it!"

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Stick to what you know best...which is "whatever works best for someone, go ahead and use it!"
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Scott,
Totally unnecessary comment ABOVE, not to mention, arrogant at best.
You should stick to what YOU do best and that is HAWKING "lessons" to members of this forum That's about as nice as I can be right now.

FTR, I was just making an observation about who uses what and wasn't trying to be critical of the pendulum stroke. I use it and so do most other amateurs.

It seems that MANY, MANY PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS use the elbow drop. There must be a reason and if you and the rest of the "professional instructors" don't want to find out why the real professionals use it, then just bury your head in the sand and continue teaching that the elbow drop is unncessary and too complicated.

JoeyA

 

[dr_dave]

I understand what you mean when you say that the hand is up at the end of the pendulm. The tip of the stick goes down if the bridge is the fulcrum after contact.

Exactly.

if the bridge is not the fulcrum the stick continues to rise.

With the closed bridge the stick is held down. with the open bridge the stick will rise -- will it not?

...only with a tight and constraining grip, which you should not have, regardless of what your elbow is doing.

In this sense the closed bridge is the better bridge in so far as it contributes to "better" follow through. None the less the pressure will be on the upper finger in the closed bridge because the stick is rising. So this appears to be a reasonable argument for a closed bridge to improve follow through.

With a proper grip and stroke, the type of bridge doesn't matter (except for firm shots with follow or English where you might not want the cue leaving the bridge after the hit). If anything, arguments can be made for why an open bridge is better in general. For more info, see:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/bridge.html#open​

But most of the pros use a closed bridge for most shots, so this is probably just a bunch of worthless info.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Cameron Smith]

As a theory the elbow drop includes additional assumptions that do not appear, on the surface, to be needed.

One could test such a theory be establishing the amount of work required for most (90% ?) of a pool player's shots. Then one would would determine the amount of work that is needed to accomplish the shot and obtain position. If, as I suppose, it would turn out that the work required can be accomplished without the elbow drop then the elbow drop is unnecessary.

To determine if the elbow drop contributes to more accuracy and or reliability one could use a length of table shot and various cut angles with substantial variance in the probablity of making yhe shot. Using the two techniques in a counterbalanced design should lead to a conclusion about the effacy of including a dropped elbow in one's routine.

I suspect I would prepare for such a study by first demonstrating that I was reasonably accurate with both techniques and then I would set up a series of difficult shots requiring difficult positional results.

The results would lead to something the individual could use.

At this point it would seem that the onus is on those who think that the shot making needs to be more complicated.

For such a test I would think you would need to use different people of various sizes and strengths. Otherwise wouldn't you only be determining what works best for you?

I don't dispute that you can execute big draw shots with a pendulum stroke. My contention is that you can produce these results with less effort since, as I have stated numerous times, you can create a better follow through which improves the timing of your stroke. And less effort usually leads to increased consistency.

In snooker, timing is a very important part of ones stroke. You want to get the most out of your stroke with the least amount of effort since you have so little room for error. It's not just about making the shots, it's about doings so reliably. But it's not that difficult a motion to coordinate since most of the elbow drops are roughly an arms width (assuming you don't have big arms).

I was periodically checking how far my elbow dropped while playing snooker today. On most of my draw and follow shots, I was dropping about an arms width. The only full drops I had were on the 9-10 foot screw shots or when I was trying to create an angle out of an almost straight in shot (depending on how far away the cue ball was). But on many of my shots when I was in position with the right angle, my elbow didn't move at all since the natural finish didn't neccessitate it.

 

[ShootingArts]

taking advantage of the pendulum

You can take advantage of the pendulum by not making any compensation for the arc and timing hitting the cue ball early or late in the stroke for follow and draw. It is much like a swoop shot which can put a massive amount of sidespin on a cue ball if perfectly timed. It's very tough to perfectly time a side swoop however. On the other hand, swooping up or down using a pendulum only requires doing nothing to prevent it. Since the swoop is part of the basic stroke the timing is simply a matter of choosing where in the stroke to hit the cue ball.

Hu

For such a test I would think you would need to use different people of various sizes and strengths. Otherwise wouldn't you only be determining what works best for you?

I don't dispute that you can execute big draw shots with a pendulum stroke. My contention is that you can produce these results with less effort since, as I have stated numerous times, you can create a better follow through which improves the timing of your stroke. And less effort usually leads to increased consistency.

In snooker, timing is a very important part of ones stroke. You want to get the most out of your stroke with the least amount of effort since you have so little room for error. It's not just about making the shots, it's about doings so reliably. But it's not that difficult a motion to coordinate since most of the elbow drops are roughly an arms width (assuming you don't have big arms).

I was periodically checking how far my elbow dropped while playing snooker today. On most of my draw and follow shots, I was dropping about an arms width. The only full drops I had were on the 9-10 foot screw shots or when I was trying to create an angle out of an almost straight in shot (depending on how far away the cue ball was). But on many of my shots when I was in position with the right angle, my elbow didn't move at all since the natural finish didn't neccessitate it.

 

[Scott Lee]

JoeyA...Me arrogant? Ha...read your own posts. The reason we teach what we teach is because it's EASIER to develop an accurate and repeatable stroke. Take the top 200 pros (that should cover about anybody out there)...let's say they all drop their elbow on every shot (they don't). If you looked at each one's "process" it would be different from the next guy, but works for that individual, due to persistance and longevity. Instead of trying to copy what some pro does, the average person, seeking to increase the consistency of their own process, is much better off finding something that they develop themselves, and commit to practicing long enough for it to become a habit, and replace what they used to do. This applies to appx. 39,995,000 out of the appx 40 million players just here in the U.S. The odd 5,000 players who have already developed what they like, should continue doing just that. Even so, we've had many top level champion players CHOOSE to develop a pendulum stroke with NO elbow drop. Apparently they must know something too.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Scott,
Totally unnecessary comment ABOVE, not to mention, arrogant at best.
You should stick to what YOU do best and that is HAWKING "lessons" to members of this forum That's about as nice as I can be right now.

FTR, I was just making an observation about who uses what and wasn't trying to be critical of the pendulum stroke. I use it and so do most other amateurs.

It seems that MANY, MANY PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS use the elbow drop. There must be a reason and if you and the rest of the "professional instructors" don't want to find out why the real professionals use it, then just bury your head in the sand and continue teaching that the elbow drop is unncessary and too complicated.

JoeyA