Thing is .......your perspective is yours not mine.
From my perspective...I slide cue the back from the cue ball and the reverse the slide to go forward.
From my perspective, I pull the cue back from the CB ....to a point then push it forward to the CB.
To pull the cue back, my bicep extends, while my triceps contracts. To push the cue forward, my bicep contracts and my triceps extends.
In others words, a person perspective is only good from them. It is not a industry standard.
Greg,
That's the point & you stated it earlier. There are no real standards that allow or assist in general discussion.
Wouldn't it be good to have common ground from which to speak when discussing matters.
I think some if not many fail to take into consideration the 90* angle between the upper & lower arm point of reference where there is a change.
Just to make a point, consider the follow statements.
Push the butt end of the cue away.
Pull the the tip away from the cue ball.
Those two statements describe the same movement. But they describe that same movement relative to different locations in space relative to the hand.
We connect to the cue with the hand. So, why not make the hand the common relative reference point along with the 90* relation between the upper & lower arm?
For discussion purposes, let's say that we all start off with the arm bent to the 90* point & the forearm is straight down, with the tip 1" from the cue ball.
If that angle is extended, then the hand is being pushed out away from the shoulder.
Then, when that angle is contracted the hand is being pulled in toward the shoulder.
Now...we are back to that 90* point.
If the contraction of the angle is continued by the hand being pulled in toward the shoulder, as in a full pendulum swing, then the cue was pulled into & 'through' or past the resting point where the ball sat.
But, if that 90* angle is extended with the hand moving out & away from the shoulder then the cue was pushed into & 'through' or past where the ball sat.
That is the difference between a full pendulum swing & say a piston J stroke or a full piston stroke.
Note that I said that the tip was 1" from the cue ball.
One of my issues with the full pendulum swing, as I believe is taught by the Set Pause Finish method, is that IMO it requires a 'perfect' set up for it to work as formulated. As you well know that is certainly not always available when actually playing pool.
Why learn a method that in all likelihood one will change at some point down the line?
That is sort of like teaching one a 'just make contact' type baseball swing & then later on down the line them trying to hit home runs with that swing. Why not first see if one has a home run type power swing & perhaps help with the development of that 'natural' power swing.
Again, a prominent golf instructor said, 'I may not be able to build a swing of a championship winner...but, if I'm not careful I can certainly ruin one.'.
SmoothStroke's approach seems to be a more correct approach.
As I've said elsewhere, there are basic fundamentals & there are individual fundamentals.
I think some of what is being put forth as basic fundamentals are not really basic fundamentals but instead are adaptations of fundamentals that some have chosen & are putting forward as true basic fundamentals, when in fact, they are just their interpretation or selection of variations of the basic fundamentals. Hence in reality they are individual fundamentals.
Mr. Jewett's post was an example of what would more readily be considered as one of the Basic Fundamentals or 'best practices'.
Each individual should make their own determination as to how they blend their own fundamentals with the true real basic fundamentals.
Naturally, all of the above are just my take & my opinions.
Sorry for the rant on your dime & the mixture of topics.
Best 2 You & All,
Rick
