Proof of what causes miscues

[jeffj2h]

A few years ago I came across an August 1991 article from Billiards Digest by Dr. George Onoda titled "Avoiding Miscues on Draw Shots". It's available on Bob Jewett's web site (item 31): http://www.sfbilliards.com/miscellaneous.htm

Dr. Onoda stated that the cause of miscues on draw shots was that the cue tip contacts the table surface and bounces up into the cue ball. It's not because you didn't chalk enough or your tip needs scuffing. It made sense to me but I had no empirical evidence. Until now!

This week I've been practicing distance draw shots. I started with the CB near the center of the table and attempted to pocket the OB and draw the CB back to the end rail. Once proficient at that I backed the CB up a donut and repeat. Finally I start with the CB on the foot spot.


Two things have further proven to me that draw miscues are caused by a bouncing tip:
1) Before I got smart, I put three small rips in my cloth from miscues while practicing this drill
2) After each miscue the green protective cloth swatch has moved forward a half inch or more, pushed by the cue tip bouncing off it.

 

[jka]

That makes sense. I wonder if there is any slo-mo video out there to support this. Paging Slomoholic to the white courtesy phone...

 

[SloMoHolic]

I just had a funny burning sensation in my ears... Weird.

 

[SloMoHolic]

I no longer have a home table, but I can confirm that draw miscues often result in the tip bouncing off the cloth. But to be clear, the tip bouncing off the cloth doesn't cause the miscue; it's the other way around.

 

[seven_7days]

I have another theory...it's called "choking".

 

[branpureza]

Dr. Onoda stated that the cause of miscues on draw shots was that the cue tip contacts the table surface and bounces up into the cue ball. It's not because you didn't chalk enough or your tip needs scuffing...

If that were the case then what causes miscues from the various other outer edges that aren't used when applying bottom English like side or top?

And why is there usually a stripped mark left on the side of the tip after any miscue? Such a mark that would have to come from the cue ball itself, not the tip hitting the cloth as the angle of the cue wouldn't allow for it.

 

[jeffj2h]

Ohh, someone posted a few days ago complaining about stains on their measles CB. You can see from mine that after 5 hours of this drill it has developed secondary skin disorders.

I believe those black marks are from cloth burns, not the cue tip. They come off with Aramith ball cleaner and a lot of elbow grease.

 

[SloMoHolic]

Let me amend my post by stating two things:

1. It is entirely possible to hit a good draw shot with no miscue, and still have your shaft bounce into the cloth.

2. If your cue tip does actually hit the cloth before it hits the cue ball, that would seem like a nearly guaranteed miscue to me.

Hopefully Dr. Dave has some slow motion videos that would help us out here.

-Blake

 

[itsfroze]

In the future I'll am going to start using the shortened from. ---->(IMBSITW)

But for now,

"It must be something in the water"

 

[SloMoHolic]

I must be having trouble forming complete thoughts tonight.
I also wanted to mention that if the cue ball is positioned on the cloth swatch, it is possible the the friction between the cue ball and the cloth is responsible for the movement of the swatch (with or without the cue tip also touching the swatch). This is fairly common when people use cloth swatches on their break shots.

-Blake

 

[jeffj2h]

If that were the case then what causes miscues from the various other outer edges that aren't used when applying bottom English like side or top?

Here is an experiment to try that Bert Kinister showed me. Have a friend hold the cue ball firmly on the table. Chalk your cue tip. Now place your cue tip on the cue ball and push with extreme force. You will find that if you are using a parallel cue shift to produce the english, you can use much more english then your would have thought, without the cue tip sliding off the CB. You can even have the edge of the tip hanging in the air outside the edge of the CB! Earl Strickland has said that he often uses more then two tips of english, and I don't see him miscue much.

Now try the experiment again but angle the cue (use a pivot shift to produce the english). The cue tip will slide off the CB much easier.

 

[jeffj2h]

I also wanted to mention that if the cue ball is positioned on the cloth swatch, it is possible the the friction between the cue ball and the cloth is responsible for the movement of the swatch (with or without the cue tip also touching the swatch). This is fairly common when people use cloth swatches on their break shots.
-Blake

Blake,
That is exactly why I never place the CB on top of the cloth swath. I place the swatch in about the position you see it in the "Original" pic, and the CB is on top of the donut.
-Jeff

 

[JolietJames]

The OP is correct about the draw shot miscues. This fact was taught to me by Bert Kinnister many years ago. It is why i have packaging tape on my tabke where the balls are spotted when doing the mighty X drill. To prove his point he held tbe cue ball in place on the table and challenged me to make a well-chalked tip slide off the CB. I was way off center and pushing the tip into the CB. It didn't slip off the CB once.

 

[branpureza]

Here is an experiment to try that Bert Kinister showed me. Have a friend hold the cue ball firmly on the table. Chalk your cue tip. Now place your cue tip on the cue ball and push with extreme force. You will find that if you are using a parallel cue shift to produce the english, you can use much more english then your would have thought, without the cue tip sliding off the CB. You can even have the edge of the tip hanging in the air outside the edge of the CB! Earl Strickland has said that he often uses more then two tips of english, and I don't see him miscue much.

Now try the experiment again but angle the cue (use a pivot shift to produce the english). The cue tip will slide off the CB much easier.

Not exactly sure what this has to do with my question.

You stated:

Dr. Onoda stated that the cause of miscues on draw shots was that the cue tip contacts the table surface and bounces up into the cue ball. It's not because you didn't chalk enough or your tip needs scuffing.

And I'm saying that if the above statement is true then what causes other miscues while using side English or top?

Here is an experiment to try that Bert Kinister showed me. Have a friend hold the cue ball firmly on the table. Chalk your cue tip. Now place your cue tip on the cue ball and push with extreme force. You will find that if you are using a parallel cue shift to produce the english, you can use much more english then your would have thought, without the cue tip sliding off the CB. You can even have the edge of the tip hanging in the air outside the edge of the CB! Earl Strickland has said that he often uses more then two tips of english, and I don't see him miscue much.

Now try the experiment again but angle the cue (use a pivot shift to produce the english). The cue tip will slide off the CB much easier.

Back to this.. if the tip of your cue is round why would it matter if you are parallel or pivoting to the edge of the cue ball?

 

[branpureza]

The OP is correct about the draw shot miscues. This fact was taught to me by Bert Kinnister many years ago. It is why i have packaging tape on my tabke where the balls are spotted when doing the mighty X drill. To prove his point he held tbe cue ball in place on the table and challenged me to make a well-chalked tip slide off the CB. I was way off center and pushing the tip into the CB. It didn't slip off the CB once.

I don't understand what this proves.

If someone is holding the cue ball in place making it stationary and you are forcing your cue which is a rigid object straight into it of course it isn't going to slip off. You could have a ball bearing at the end of your cue and it wouldn't slip off because you are forcing the cue straight into a stationary object. The only way it would slip off is if your bridge hand gave way or you pivoted the cue away from the ball.

When you miscue what happens? The cue ball veers wildly away from the contact point. If you're holding the cue ball in place it can't go anywhere and you can't miscue unless your bridge gives way.

 

[jeffj2h]

If that were the case then what causes miscues from the various other outer edges that aren't used when applying bottom English like side or top?

My description of the experiment of having a friend hold the CB may explain this (but what do I know). When the cue hits the CB at an angle, it miscues more easily then when the cue hits the CB parallel to the aim. So miscues when using left or right english might be increased by non-parallel aim at impact.


Perhaps Bob or Dr. Dave can chime in here.

 

[dr_dave]

I can confirm that draw miscues often result in the tip bouncing off the cloth. But to be clear, the tip bouncing off the cloth doesn't cause the miscue; it's the other way around.

1. It is entirely possible to hit a good draw shot with no miscue, and still have your shaft bounce into the cloth.

2. If your cue tip does actually hit the cloth before it hits the cue ball, that would seem like a nearly guaranteed miscue to me.

I agree 100%. The tip gets driven to the table with most good action draw shots. And with a miscue, it gets driven to the table with significant force (often with the tip wedging between the CB and the table, which can cause CB "scoop" and cloth damage).

Hopefully Dr. Dave has some slow motion videos that would help us out here.

A draw shot miscue is basically the same as a "scoop" jump shot. Several good examples, with slo-mo playback, are in the following video:

HSV B.2 - Illegal "scoop" jump shots

FYI, more information and video demonstrations of miscues can be found on the miscue foul resource page.

Enjoy,
Dave

 

[Black-Balled]

I no longer have a home table, but I can confirm that draw miscues often result in the tip bouncing off the cloth. But to be clear, the tip bouncing off the cloth doesn't cause the miscue; it's the other way around.

The cloth bouncing off the tip?! Genius!

Haha...but what about miscues of the hi-English type then?

 

[dr_dave]

The cloth bouncing off the tip?! Genius!

Haha...but what about miscues of the hi-English type then?

I think a follow miscue is caused by the tip bouncing off the "ether," but don't quote me on that.

Dave

 

[BasementDweller]

My description of the experiment of having a friend hold the CB may explain this (but what do I know). When the cue hits the CB at an angle, it miscues more easily then when the cue hits the CB parallel to the aim. So miscues when using left or right english might be increased by non-parallel aim at impact.


Perhaps Bob or Dr. Dave can chime in here.

***Edit***
It was actually this discription I thought I was referring to:

Here is an experiment to try that Bert Kinister showed me. Have a friend hold the cue ball firmly on the table. Chalk your cue tip. Now place your cue tip on the cue ball and push with extreme force. You will find that if you are using a parallel cue shift to produce the english, you can use much more english then your would have thought, without the cue tip sliding off the CB. You can even have the edge of the tip hanging in the air outside the edge of the CB! Earl Strickland has said that he often uses more then two tips of english, and I don't see him miscue much.

Now try the experiment again but angle the cue (use a pivot shift to produce the english). The cue tip will slide off the CB much easier.

Thanks for the interesting initial post.

Judging by this description I think I see where you are going wrong. When you compare hitting the cue ball at an angle with hitting the cue ball parallel to the aim line you are really talking about completely different aim lines. In the one shot where you are hitting the cue ball at an angle you will have way more English on the ball than on the other shot so you will be more likely to miscue in that example.

I think this boils down to the misconception about parallel English. It really doesn't exist in the way people on here think it does.

I think it was Dave Segal (spiderwebcom) that first mentioned using a bridge to see what really happens when you supposedly use parallel English. Line up a straight in, center ball shot with the bridge and then slide over "parallel" and see what happens. If your cue is not angled to account for the squirt you will not make the shot. What you find out is there really is only one angle of attack for any shot/English combination and it doesn't matter which way you apply English (backhand, fronthand, parallel or any combination of the above) you always end up with your cue pointing in the same direction.

At least this has been my understanding of this for some time now. I’m never above being corrected by those more knowledgeable than I am so we’ll see what the smart guys have to say.