“The same physics apply” to spinning the CB against its direction of travel vs. with it?
pj
chgo
power draw?
- Thread starter measureman
- Start date
pj
chgo
Usually it isn't. That's my point.
You're a smart guy Patrick... What happens to a skidding CB's inertia when it strikes the OB directly on the same plane...? Assuming the same mass, it stops, right..? Exactly how a hard hit stop shot works. Now IF EITHER follow/draw english (spin) has been applied during that shot. That spin will grab the cloth and the CB will move in the appropriate direction. This does not change based on the spin applied.
Now what makes 'power whatever' difficult for some, is the indirect hit, resulting carom angle, and the effects the heavy CB spin have on CB path. I'm happy to be proven wrong. However I believe the immediate carom angle (still skidding, no english effect) to be identical. Again, I'm happy to be wrong. Once the spin grabs, then it's a crap shoot.
I'll argue that some consider power draw harder to control merely because the vast majority of players are typical heavy draw bangers and are terrified by the notion of playing with strong follow. Let alone 'power' follow. So, they are simply forming an opinion based on heavy exposure to their own inadequacies rather than physics.
Cicerone88
Active member
Just because it’s a shot that doesn’t present itself very often, doesn’t mean you should dismiss it entirely by calling it a fools errand. Having a powerful draw shot in your skillset can be the difference between winning or losing.
Not to mention the psychological effect against your opponent. Corey Deuel for example has stunned opponents and audiences for decades with highlight reel power stroke shots. Larry Nevel is another one that can’t be forgotten.
Last edited:
It is, imo, a fool's errand in application. Never claimed that you shouldn't have the ability to draw the ball the length of the table, and maybe even somewhat further. However that distance does not require all that much "power". Usually power draws are a example of a player shooting an OB somewhere at the other length of the table and managing to pull the CB back to the other end. The odds of such a shot being the pivotal 'must have' to win a match is exceedingly slim to non-existent. I have zero doubt an alternative with far greater odds of success, albeit no where near as entertaining, could be implemented.
Any player would be infinitely far better off using the time they might use to develop "power draw" into pattern dev and table IQ.
So having the same amount of spin on the CB at CB/OB contact is achieved with the same stroke force (it's "just as easy" because "the same physics apply")?
pj
chgo
Last edited:
That's true if the cue ball is close to the object ball. If you have five diamonds to the object ball, draw is harder.
As for working on power draw, I think the main point is to expand your comfort zone. If you know you can draw the cue ball 9 diamonds, 6 is a lot more comfortable.
Sry, I'm tripping over your wording. I want to make sure I respond correctly.
My stance is that it takes the same amount of skill/effort to control power draw as it does power follow. The physics of behind the stroke and the reaction of the CB before the spin takes hold to the cloth is the same. The only variant is tip placement.
Perhaps we can resolve this more quickly if you describe what you think makes power draw more difficult to control. ...or maybe how the physics differ between to the two shots.
Cicerone88
Active member
As Bob said, draw takes more stroke speed than follow unless the balls are close together. More stroke speed = more stroke control issues.
pj
chgo
That's the perception because bottom english (draw) is scrubbed off as the CB bounces along the shot line. However the same effect happens when striking with a power follow shot. Albeit to a immeasurable lesser degree. This effect is far more noticeable when playing on a dirty, heavily used table, with dirty balls and humid climate. Pretty much anything that would increase the friction between the CB and cloth.
This is why "power draw" effect is infinitely easier to accomplish on a fresh table with dry conditions. However the same benefits are in effect for power follow.
I genuinely surprised at your take. The same stroke speed is required to generate the same amount of english on the CB. Regardless if you're striking the top or bottom of the CB. The dynamics of that spin scrubbing off prior to striking the OB is the debate. The variables in play are consistent regardless of the shot type. Note that a CB enduring a "power shot" will not spend much if any time in contact with the table. If anything the power follow suffers more scrubbing due to being forced into the table after tip contact. Whereas the power draw will launch the CB immediately.
100%... It's the concept that one shot requires more speed to travel the same amount of reactive distance is the misconception.
Give me a minute... I'll watch and get back to you
- Not power draw. Relatively easy safe option, but it was a 2 way anyway
- Not power draw. Siding generated that action. Relatively easy safe option
- Well struck draw, but I wouldn't ranked it as 'power'. Again though, extremely easy safe options
- Ok, Gorst hit it hard enough to qualify for power. However there wasn't much risk with the close proximity. Also could have rolled the shot and played safe with the 6.
- Finally a good example. Note how close the 2 was to the pocket. Certainty that he was getting the pot. Might as well go for the deep draw. Worst case he hits it bad and snooker Ruiz behind the wall of balls in the corner.
- LOL... He gets way more than he's hoping for there. Clearly he had too much cut angle and was hoping to use the bottom rail to get better on the 8. One more time, was this a miracle do or die..? No, in fact I have zero doubt he was crapping himself when he saw it rolling toward the 10.
- Albin was in a weird spot there. I can't convince myself that the safe play would have been the better option this time. That said, once again much like Big Ko. The proximity to the pocket makes swinging for the power draw low risk. I'll rank this as the first example where the power draw may have been the right risk. Ko's example not being risky.
- I remember Biado's shot there. Always wondered if that was the actual intent... 3 rails to the 2 would have been way easier. However are you going to try and convince me that what happened was the best option..? Could have rolled it and played an extremely easy safe.
- Earl swung at an easy pot and screwed the hell out of it. Once again, the risk was low. Only one ball he needed to worry about snookering himself with. Once again, a multitude of safe options he chose not to do.
- Guess when you have a reliable stroke like SVB's you can take those risks. A mere mortal would have played the stop shot and rolled a safety using the 3.
There was a theme throughout the first ten. I have zero doubt the rest would have been much different. None of those shots were the only choice. All, save maybe Albin's had very good opportunities to play a move and get another opportunity.
How about this... I will concede that if you want to compete with the top 50 on the planet. The you should place emphasis on developing a ridiculous power draw shot. Of course that will likely be byproduct of elite play in all other aspects. Still stand firm on the overwhelming vast majority would be better served developing a safe game and their table IQ. Nothing in that vid, at least the first ten examples, leads me to believe otherwise.
Last edited:
Maybe it is the concept of a "power" follow that needs to be clarified or elaborated on. When I think of a "power" follow, I am thinking of a firmly struck cue ball that has a visible moment after contact where it stops, maybe hops back a split second, and then takes off forward. I agree that getting that type of action on the cue ball is just as hard for me as a power follow.
Likewise, what I consider a "standard" follow shot, meaning a rolling cue ball at contact that continues moving forward after contact, is much easier than a power follow for me.
Maybe that's just my unskilled characterization of follow vs. power follow? To me power follows are every bit as hard to manage. Think about putting so much top spin when trying to kill the cue ball on the rail...that is a shot that is a crap shoot for me...
And I'm genuinely surprised at yours.
That's true at the moment of striking the CB, but the amount of english remaining when the CB strikes the OB is definitely not the same - unless the OB is very close to the CB to begin with.
pj
chgo
Cicerone88
Active member
Hahah wow kudos for doing a play by play, we couldve just went over a few like Ko, Biado, or Shane because yes some of them I wouldn’t count as power draw either.
I think Biados shot is a good example. The 1 stuck out of the pocket just enough where hes too full and couldn’t clip the 1 thin enough to easily come back down, and if he tried to spin with left he again risks hitting the 1 too full and collide into the 9. He’s almost straight on with a full 1 ball so the power draw makes sense.
And yes while in some of these shots you could roll the ball in and play safe after, some of the safeties available are pretty weak and you’re giving up possession. Sometimes you just gotta grip it and rip it.
Last edited:
"Immeasurable lesser degree." Yeah. And sometimes not at all. I think most power follow shots are hit at less than 70% of the height of the cue ball, and in fact will get more follow on the way to the object ball.
Once the object ball is gone, spin forward and spin back are indistinguishable, but in practice getting that spin to the object ball is very different for draw and follow.
Jeff Ignacio showed me this shot after we played many years back. He may have the most powerful stroke I’ve ever seen and still looks effortless
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
I struggle like hell with a power follow, draw not so much. But I guess it's because when I was younger and learned draw I relied on it on almost every shot. It made learning 9B or rotation games a real bear.
yes a stiff wrist is not good. but it is the cue speed that counts and you simply get more speed by flicking your wrist. it has nothing to do with your wrist being stiff or not.
and 100 percent of those videos and demonstration shots are done on fast cloth and with polished balls.
go into a regular pool room and do it with your playing cue and win some of my money. we can start with 500 or 1000 bucks.
and 100 percent of those videos and demonstration shots are done on fast cloth and with polished balls.
go into a regular pool room and do it with your playing cue and win some of my money. we can start with 500 or 1000 bucks.