Preshot routine - part II on youtube

[asbani]

I'm with you, Mike. No pause. Has Efren ever paused on his backstroke? I also train not to change my mind or even hesitate once I get down over the shot. Glad to see I am not totally alone.

unknownpro

he doesn't pause, thats why his stroke struggle alot? Or haven't you seen alot of games for him? He jumps alot after shots. these jumps make him almost miss alot of shots. I'll give you a video to check out why his stroke is struggle and why? Because he doesn't pause, then it make him Jump right after the shot, check it out.

Just notice him after his cue hits the cueball, look at his body language and what he does.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X1tgkLvyUME

in my opinion, efren has the worest stroke ever.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

in my opinion, efren has the worest stroke ever.

MMMMMMMMKAY. That's nice.

 

[JoeyA]

he doesn't pause, thats why his stroke struggle alot? Or haven't you seen alot of games for him? He jumps alot after shots. these jumps make him almost miss alot of shots. I'll give you a video to check out why his stroke is struggle and why? Because he doesn't pause, then it make him Jump right after the shot, check it out.

Just notice him after his cue hits the cueball, look at his body language and what he does.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X1tgkLvyUME

in my opinion, efren has the worest stroke ever.

This particular video and game showed what tension can do to a player. Efren didn't pause and jumped like a kangaroo. That wasn't his typical body language. Tony paused on his back stroke, moved as soon as he shot the ball and dogged the 9 big time. Also, not typical for him either.

JoeyA (been there and done that-glad to see the pros dogging it every now and then. )

 

[Andrew Manning]

Mike's right, the velocity can cross 0 without pausing, even though this means there is an instant where the cue is not moving.

For those who argue for an intentional pause, think about it in terms of muscle movement. Before the backstroke, the cue is at rest, and so the tricep must exert backwards force on it to start it moving backwards. During the middle of the backstroke, the cue is moving backwards, and the bicep must exert forward force on it to make it stop going backwards and start going forwards.

Now in that instant where the backward motion of the cue is stopped, if the bicep continues pulling forward like it was before, then the cue will start moving forward with no "pause" in the acceleration. The stopping of the backswing and starting of the forward swing are one continuous event. This is the stroke Mike idealizes, and physiologically it makes the most sense to me too.

If you're on randyg's school of thought, then when the bicep is done stopping the cue, it takes a break before starting the cue's forward motion. This means from the beginning of the backstroke through the forward stroke, the tricep exerts force, then the bicep does, then they both pause, then the bicep goes again. This is more complicated than Mike's version, where the tricep pulls, and then the bicep exerts force smoothly and constantly all the way through the back of the stroke and the forward stroke.

Also, thanks to Colin Colenso's shotput research, I know that muscles contract with more force when already under load, meaning that during the forward stroke, you have more available power if you haven't paused your bicep's exertion than if you had interrupted it at the back of the stroke. Having more available power means less effort and strain to achieve the same results, which can only be good for your accuracy.

Any counter-arguments from the SPF folks? I learned a lot that I find very valuable from my lesson with Scott, but I think this part of the SPF school of thought is flawed for the reasons stated above. Please no replies using the phrase "they don't know what they don't know" or "it has worked for thousands of students". I'd like to investigate this topic on it own merits using real reasoning, rather than see it dismissed as ignorance, which has happened in previous threads.

-Andrew

 

[PKM]

For those who argue for an intentional pause, think about it in terms of muscle movement. Before the backstroke, the cue is at rest, and so the tricep must exert backwards force on it to start it moving backwards. During the middle of the backstroke, the cue is moving backwards, and the bicep must exert forward force on it to make it stop going backwards and start going forwards.

Now in that instant where the backward motion of the cue is stopped, if the bicep continues pulling forward like it was before, then the cue will start moving forward with no "pause" in the acceleration. The stopping of the backswing and starting of the forward swing are one continuous event. This is the stroke Mike idealizes, and physiologically it makes the most sense to me too.

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning, it seems to me it's tricep for the backstroke, pause, then switch to bicep for the forward stroke. Does that contradict what you're saying?

Edit: I think I see what you're saying, the bicep comes into play to stop the backstroke, but it is still not contracting until the forward stroke.

 

[Andrew Manning]

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning, it seems to me it's tricep for the backstroke, pause, then switch to bicep for the forward stroke. Does that contradict what you're saying?

The problem is, that there are two distinct parts of the backstroke: starting the cue moving back, and bringing it to a stop at the back. Then there's the forward stroke. I didn't mention the second part of the forward stroke (bringing the cue to a stop at the end) because it happens after the CB's gone.

So you use your tricep to start the cue moving backwards, but objects in motion tend to stay in motion, or so says Newton, so some force in the forward direction is necessary to stop the cue's backward motion. The bicep provides this force, meaning the bicep IS working during the end of the backstroke. If you stop the cue at the back of the stroke for any amount of time, this means the bicep has to cease working after it finishes stopping the cue. Then it starts again from rest to accelerate the cue forward.

However, the bicep could just not stop working between stopping the backstroke and starting the forward stroke. This means fewer discrete muscle actions, and also means that even at the very beginning of the forward stroke, the bicep is already under load (from stopping the backstroke), meaning you have more available power for the forward stroke.

Make sense?

-Andrew

EDIT: Now that you edited your post, I think you see what I'm saying. The term "contracting" is confusing in this case, so I'm trying to use "working" or "exerting force" instead, since as in the case of slowly lowering a weight after a bicep curl, the muscle can be working as it's lengthening as well as contracting.

 

[PKM]

EDIT: Now that you edited your post, I think you see what I'm saying. The term "contracting" is confusing in this case, so I'm trying to use "working" or "exerting force" instead, since as in the case of slowly lowering a weight after a bicep curl, the muscle can be working as it's lengthening as well as contracting.

Right, I don't know enough about the physiology, but I guess the argument for pausing is that there is an important enough difference between going from contracting the tricep to contracting the bicep. I'm not sure it makes much of a difference as long as you've got a smooth motion and you're not jerking it forward.

 

[Andrew Manning]

I'm not sure it makes much of a difference as long as you've got a smooth motion and you're not jerking it forward.

I think you are probably right when you say not "much of a difference". I do think, because of the points I made above, that the motion will be smoother with no "pause" at the back, due to the simpler muscle involvement.

-Andrew

 

[mikepage]

Mike's right, the velocity can cross 0 without pausing, even though this means there is an instant where the cue is not moving.[...]

And if you cross zero with a small slope, which is what I recommend, it can look an awful lot like a pause.

There are some complications in the bicep/tricep discussion that lead me to believe it may not be a productive way to analyze the stroke.

Here I'm talking about continuous back-and-forth stroking motion.

Given the mass distribution in your forearm, hand, and stick, the length of your forearm, and the gravitational constant g, there is a characteristic pendulum frequency. That is, there is a natural frequency of that pendulum when gravity is the only restoring force. If you are stroking back and forth at that frequency, then (neglecting friction) your bicep and tricep don't need to apply any force at all--no pushes and no pulls.

Things change when you use your arm to drive the system at a different frequency, and they change in a different direction for faster-than-natural stroking and slower-than-natural stroking.

In the slow-stroke limit--what might be called the adiabatic limit (imagine you want to take a full ten seconds for each back-and-forth), the bicep is needed every time you're back of the neutral position, whether the cue is in the back stroke or the forward stroke segment. Similarly the tricep is used whenever the tip is forward of the ball position.

In the fast stroke limit, on the other hand, your muscles overwhelm the gravitational restoring force, and you, essentially are always applying a force back toward the set position.

I think reality is kind of complicated here. And besides any value you might assign to a gullible student thinking, wow! that guy must really know what he's talking about because I can't understand him!, I think it's more trouble than it's worth.....

 

[randyg]

Mike's right, the velocity can cross 0 without pausing, even though this means there is an instant where the cue is not moving.

For those who argue for an intentional pause, think about it in terms of muscle movement. Before the backstroke, the cue is at rest, and so the tricep must exert backwards force on it to start it moving backwards. During the middle of the backstroke, the cue is moving backwards, and the bicep must exert forward force on it to make it stop going backwards and start going forwards.

Now in that instant where the backward motion of the cue is stopped, if the bicep continues pulling forward like it was before, then the cue will start moving forward with no "pause" in the acceleration. The stopping of the backswing and starting of the forward swing are one continuous event. This is the stroke Mike idealizes, and physiologically it makes the most sense to me too.

If you're on randyg's school of thought, then when the bicep is done stopping the cue, it takes a break before starting the cue's forward motion. This means from the beginning of the backstroke through the forward stroke, the tricep exerts force, then the bicep does, then they both pause, then the bicep goes again. This is more complicated than Mike's version, where the tricep pulls, and then the bicep exerts force smoothly and constantly all the way through the back of the stroke and the forward stroke.

Muscles always pull, never push. I think you made a slight error. The Triceps pull the cue back (with out the help of the Bicep) and the Biceps pull the cue forward.

Also, thanks to Colin Colenso's shotput research, I know that muscles contract with more force when already under load, meaning that during the forward stroke, you have more available power if you haven't paused your bicep's exertion than if you had interrupted it at the back of the stroke. Having more available power means less effort and strain to achieve the same results, which can only be good for your accuracy.

Any counter-arguments from the SPF folks? I learned a lot that I find very valuable from my lesson with Scott, but I think this part of the SPF school of thought is flawed for the reasons stated above. Please no replies using the phrase "they don't know what they don't know" or "it has worked for thousands of students". I'd like to investigate this topic on it own merits using real reasoning, rather than see it dismissed as ignorance, which has happened in previous threads.

-Andrew

There are three good reasons why a smooth backstroke with a perfect transfer is taught in Pool School. MOTION-MUSCLES-EYES

 

[Kyros]

I like having a pause in my backstroke to refocus on the object ball before I pull the trigger.

Checkout some of the popular snooker players, almost all of them do that.

 

[Andrew Manning]

Muscles always pull, never push. I think you made a slight error. The Triceps pull the cue back (with out the help of the Bicep) and the Biceps pull the cue forward.

Well, muscles do always pull and never push, but I have no idea how that's relevant.

The tricep does pull the cue back, and bicep does pull it forward. That pull forward can start while the cue's still moving backward. Think of it like flicking a quarter with your thumb; the muscles that extend your thumb are pulling before the flick, and then once your finger releases your thumb, the thumb starts moving. Your bicep is pulling on the cue as its moving backwards in order to bring it to a stop at the end of the backswing. As soon as the cue's backward motion is stopped, the bicep's pull will move the cue forward. This would mean no pause with any duration at the back. If you wanted a pause there, you'd have to stop pulling with your bicep once the cue's backward motion has been stopped, since at this point your bicep's pull, if continued, would imediately start the cue moving forward.

There are three good reasons why a smooth backstroke with a perfect transfer is taught in Pool School. MOTION-MUSCLES-EYES

Well, that's very cryptic. If you don't have any interest in explaining what you teach in great detail over the internet, then that's totally understandable, but it will make debating with you quite difficult. Anyway, you mention the word eyes here, and it reminds me of the reason Allison Fisher quotes as to her pause; that it gives her a last moment to lock in the focus of her eyes on the object ball. This, I feel, is a valid reason to pause, but I don't feel it's necessary. Why wouldn't your eyes already be focused on the object ball when starting the backswing?

-Andrew

 

[unknownpro]

he doesn't pause, thats why his stroke struggle alot? Or haven't you seen alot of games for him? He jumps alot after shots. these jumps make him almost miss alot of shots. I'll give you a video to check out why his stroke is struggle and why? Because he doesn't pause, then it make him Jump right after the shot, check it out.

Just notice him after his cue hits the cueball, look at his body language and what he does.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X1tgkLvyUME

in my opinion, efren has the worest stroke ever.

I think his body moves on most all of his shots intentionally.

unknownpro

 

[unknownpro]

This particular video and game showed what tension can do to a player. Efren didn't pause and jumped like a kangaroo. That wasn't his typical body language. Tony paused on his back stroke, moved as soon as he shot the ball and dogged the 9 big time. Also, not typical for him either.

JoeyA (been there and done that-glad to see the pros dogging it every now and then. )

My explanation for this is that all three balls were missed by focusing on the contact point. When you are tight and want to cinch the balls you naturally tend to focus harder on the contact point. This causes you to stroke your tip toward the contact point. Efren, using inside english overcuts the first ball. Tony, using outside, bricks it full. Efren, using outside, bricks it thick also. All the natural result of this tendency. Ignoring the contact point is critical at all times, imo.

I've seen the same thing a thousand times. High pressure causing increased focus on the wrong thing. The harder you try the more you will miss if you don't focus on where your tip must go instead of the cueball.

unknownpro

 

[JoeyA]

My explanation for this is that all three balls were missed by focusing on the contact point. When you are tight and want to cinch the balls you naturally tend to focus harder on the contact point. This causes you to stroke your tip toward the contact point. Efren, using inside english overcuts the first ball. Tony, using outside, bricks it full. Efren, using outside, bricks it thick also. All the natural result of this tendency. Ignoring the contact point is critical at all times, imo.

I've seen the same thing a thousand times. High pressure causing increased focus on the wrong thing. The harder you try the more you will miss if you don't focus on where your tip must go instead of the cueball.

unknownpro

Tell me a little more about your statement "Ignoring the contact point is critical at all times, imo."

And just a little more detail with your last sentence. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "where your tip must go instead of the cueball."

Thanks in advance!


JoeyA

 

[bigdaddygerald]

What about the wrist? When im in dead stroke and commiting to every shot, my forearm will start forward while my cue is still going backward.

 

[unknownpro]

Tell me a little more about your statement "Ignoring the contact point is critical at all times, imo."

And just a little more detail with your last sentence. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "where your tip must go instead of the cueball."

Thanks in advance!


JoeyA

I should've said anytime the shot is not dead straight. If there's a cut involved and you are looking at the contact point you cannot be looking where your tip must go to make the ball. No english - too thick, outside english - way too thick, inside english - too thin. The only way to make the balls with inside or outside when focusing on the contact point is to let the cueball curve. When you are tight and focused and stroke all the way through then you miss because you didn't curve the cueball. Or because you didn't focus on real spot your tip must be going toward, which is the nearest edge of the ghost ball for the english you are using.

unknownpro

 

[mikepage]

I should've said anytime the shot is not dead straight. If there's a cut involved and you are looking at the contact point you cannot be looking where your tip must go to make the ball. No english - too thick, outside english - way too thick, inside english - too thin. The only way to make the balls with inside or outside when focusing on the contact point is to let the cueball curve. When you are tight and focused and stroke all the way through then you miss because you didn't curve the cueball. Or because you didn't focus on real spot your tip must be going toward, which is the nearest edge of the ghost ball for the english you are using.

unknownpro

OK now it makes sense. I think the ambiquity is in the phrase "contact point." I was thinking earlier you meant where the tip contacts the cueball. Now I see you mean where the cueball contacts the object ball.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...you naturally tend to focus harder on the contact point. This causes you to stroke your tip toward the contact point.

...[overcuts and undercuts are] the natural result of this tendency. Ignoring the contact point is critical at all times, imo.

I know what you're saying, but it's not true for everybody. In my case, paying close attention to the contact point at all times is critical for success. My aiming accuracy and consistency goes way up when I'm most aware of the contact point.

pj
chgo

 

[randyg]

Well, muscles do always pull and never push, but I have no idea how that's relevant.

The tricep does pull the cue back, and bicep does pull it forward. That pull forward can start while the cue's still moving backward. Think of it like flicking a quarter with your thumb; the muscles that extend your thumb are pulling before the flick, and then once your finger releases your thumb, the thumb starts moving. Your bicep is pulling on the cue as its moving backwards in order to bring it to a stop at the end of the backswing. As soon as the cue's backward motion is stopped, the bicep's pull will move the cue forward. This would mean no pause with any duration at the back. If you wanted a pause there, you'd have to stop pulling with your bicep once the cue's backward motion has been stopped, since at this point your bicep's pull, if continued, would imediately start the cue moving forward.



Well, that's very cryptic. If you don't have any interest in explaining what you teach in great detail over the internet, then that's totally understandable, but it will make debating with you quite difficult. Anyway, you mention the word eyes here, and it reminds me of the reason Allison Fisher quotes as to her pause; that it gives her a last moment to lock in the focus of her eyes on the object ball. This, I feel, is a valid reason to pause, but I don't feel it's necessary. Why wouldn't your eyes already be focused on the object ball when starting the backswing?

-Andrew

Hi Andrew

There are three very distinct eye movements in pool. BEFORE-DURING-AFTER. In school our Instructors focus on what's right for the student.

99% of our students choose #1. Helps focus and aids their stroke naturally.
0% of our students choose#2. Puts too much strain on their eyes and stroke.
1% of our students choose #3. Puts an premium on the longer "pause".

You make mention of the great Allison Fisher. When Allison was in our school she talked with the class about her #3 eye pattern and her longer (than normal) "pause" and how they are related. I did not see any of the other students rush off to copy her. Nor did I see any Instructors try to change her. What is right for one may not fit another.

You guys go fight for the right of the meaning of the term, "pause". We will continue to put out great students who's ability to understand their options of SPF and P.E.P (Personal Eye Movements) make them better players with every stroke.

OPEN MINDS-OPEN DOORS......SPF=randyg