IMHO - you need to go back to the lab - so far you are 0 for 3.
Questions about English
- Thread starter JDP12
- Start date
IMHO - you need to go back to the lab - so far you are 0 for 3.
Dead Crab's description is good, but simplified. What's missing in this description is swerve, which is a huge factor in a table length shot like this. Over this distance (and especially if you're bridging near the rail) swerve reduces "effective squirt" significantly, sometimes dramatically. It's even possible for swerve to completely overcome squirt so that you have to adjust your aim in the opposite direction of the spin you're applying. Swerve is always present (except for shots that are pretty short and pretty hard, with a nearly level stick), but it's especially important in this shot. Maybe you should use a shorter shot to find your "average" pivot point/bridge length.
The point of this is that backhand english isn't an exact science - where you place your bridge for the pivot changes from shot to shot depending on how much swerve there is in the shot (which depends on shot length, speed, amount of sidespin, elevation of the cue, cloth cleanliness/age, ball cleanliness/age, even humidity). Backhand english can be a useful technique despite all these variables - it will still get you closer to the correct aim adjustment for any shot, but you'll almost invariably have to make some small additional aim adjustment "by feel".
And here's the kicker: it may or may not be a good thing to know about the "by feel" part of backhand english. Most backhand english users believe (or pretend to believe) that it's an exact adjustment for every shot, which allows their subconscious to make the final adjustment without being confused by "too much thinking". Colin Colenso, on the other hand, makes all the adjustments consciously, even mathematically. You'll have to decide how to do it for yourself.
pj
chgo
I wouldn't recommend this approach (that I've quoted from Colin Colenso) for most people. It is too complex and too difficult to apply; although, it is useful to understand the basic principles in the method.
Instead, I would recommend the basic videos and links here:
Regards,
Dave
Instead, I would recommend the basic videos and links here:
Regards,
Dave
Is there noticeable swerve when the axis of rotation of the CB is 100% on the horizontal plane with 0% vertical axis spin?
I think the reason why you have to mention it is no one on earth has a perfectly level cue and hits the exact equator of the ball unless it's by accident.
Aw shucks - thanks, Dave. That's high praise coming from you.
Personally, I'm somewhere between the two extremes of "totally by feel" and "Colin Colenso total consciousness". I try to think about all the variables as I'm lining up the shot, to be sure my subconscious has all the data it needs, and then I try to let that all go just before I shoot, getting out of the way of my subconscious for the final aim and stroke refinements.
Some day I'll have the time and patience to start a thread about the different degrees of conscious vs. by-feel aiming.
pj
chgo
True - nothing that gets you off the vertical axis is an exact science. However, when you do it correctly, it'll get you a LOT closer to the promised land than what many casual users might think.
For me, BHE provides a tight structure to work within. This tight structure allows me to do the same thing over and over and increase consistency over straight-feel alone.
I'm with you on this one. I firmly believe in having a complete understanding of all of the effects, to help guide the subconscious. Even "aiming by feel" relies on subconscious understanding, IMO. I like using BHE as a starting point, especially for short and/or fast shots with a near-level cue; but I also use knowledge-based and experience-based "feel" to make adjustments to account for shot speed, shot distance, ball/cloth conditions, and cue elevation (although, I try to avoid English like the plague when cue elevation is required).
Regards,
Dave
Last edited:
I don't think so.
Right.
pj
chgo
EDIT: I don't think the equator can be hit with a level cue even by accident. Even in the rare cases where the butt of the cue is not over a rail, you'd have to grip the butt with your fingertips in order to get it close enough to the cloth for a level cue hit at the equator (1-1/8" high). It might also be difficult for some to get their bridge that low. Might as well assume it ain't happening.
Last edited:
Wow. I'm taking a screenshot of this post and saving it. It's the first time we agreed on anything, I think.
As for bhe, I think as a group we've only scratched the surface. I'll leave it at that.
Wow. I'm taking a screenshot of this post and saving it. It's the first time we agreed on anything, I think.
Damn! Now I'm going to have to rethink everything.
pj
chgo
P.S. I don't want to spoil this kumbaya moment, but just in case one of our other scientifically minded posters notices, I should point out that this statement has a typo in it:
Rotation "on the horizontal plane" is "vertical axis spin" (spin around a vertical axis). If there's no swerve, then there's 0% horizontal axis spin.
I knew what you meant, so I didn't mention it before.
Last edited:
I almost feel as good as when I saw that Susan Boyle video (the British woman on "Britains Got Talent"). :crying:Damn! Now I'm going to have to rethink everything.SpiderWebComm said:Wow. I'm taking a screenshot of this post and saving it. It's the first time we agreed on anything, I think.
Now I think even world peace is possible. :grin-square:
Peace,
Dave
OK, so I worked on english shots today. I noticed something... WHen I hit it best, across a full table diagonally and aimed it straight in with one tip of english in either direction the object ball still went almost perfectly straight in, maybe an inch or so off..
So i take it that that is a good thing, a sign that I'm starting to get this right.
I think what I'll do is maybe measure off inches on my cue because sometimes when I don't hit it correctly, the object ball totally swerves off course..I think that is because of an inconsistent bridge length.
Also... it seemed that depending on the speed and distance of the shot, the bridge length changes a little.. Is it just error on my part or is that true? Seemed like it wasn't me.
So i take it that that is a good thing, a sign that I'm starting to get this right.
I think what I'll do is maybe measure off inches on my cue because sometimes when I don't hit it correctly, the object ball totally swerves off course..I think that is because of an inconsistent bridge length.
Also... it seemed that depending on the speed and distance of the shot, the bridge length changes a little.. Is it just error on my part or is that true? Seemed like it wasn't me.
http://www.joetucker.net/side_spin_workouts.htm
Good videos and easy to understand. He also vents about his thoughts on parallel english and why.
Good videos and easy to understand. He also vents about his thoughts on parallel english and why
.If your goal is to make the ball go into a pocket.
Just a note about the nomenclature since it's important for avoiding confusion. Object balls don't really swerve, practically speaking, unless struck by an airborne cueball - "swerve" meaning to follow a curved path. This has to be qualified a bit if you're playing on heavy napped cloth, but you likely aren't. They are, however, 'thrown' by friction with the cueball during the collision in a direction they normally wouldn't go if you look at the geometry alone. This effect is small when the cueball has a lot of topspin or backspin on it as it arrives at the object ball, and can generally be ignored in these cases. If the cueball doesn't have a lot of topspin or backspin, the throw effect is greater and you'll often enough have to compensate for it. Most players learn to do this subconsciously, but it doesn't hurt to be aware of it.
Yes, you are correct. Speed and distance affect how much the 'cueball' swerves on the way to the object ball. And generally speaking (there are exceptions), speed affects how much the object ball is thrown off its geometrically ideal direction during the collision. Higher speeds actually reduce friction between the balls.
I think an easy way to remember how bridge length adjustments affect the shot when using the backhand pivot method (which it seems you are doing) to apply outside english (right sidespin when hitting the object ball on its right side, i.e, cutting it to the left), is that with a typical cut shot, moving your bridge hand back will result in a fuller hit on the object ball, i.e., more (exposed) shaft = more object ball.
The above affects the initial direction of the cueball as it leaves the tip. This is called "squirt", or "deflection" by some. As far as the curved path the cueball subsequently follows (swerve), striking high on the cueball (in addition to the applied english) will generally result in more effective swerve (sideways displacement of the cueball as it reaches the object ball), while striking low will produce less. This is for shots with only a modest distance separating the balls. The opposite can be true with large distances. (Striking low produces more swerve overall, but it happens much more gradually. Thus the term "effective swerve.")
Combining these to sort of auto-compensate when applying outside english using the backhand pivot method then, striking high on the cueball = more exposed shaft when pivoting, low = less. And since greater shot speed reduces effective swerve but doesn't affect squirt (practically speaking), greater speed = less exposed shaft, less shot speed = more. Unfortunately, the latter is an inverse relationship, which isn't as neat and as easy to remember as the other ones. I'll leave it to you to work out these relations for inside english (left sidespin when cutting the object ball to the left, i.e., still hitting the object ball on right side).
As you probably realize, these details (and others) are maybe good to be consciously aware of while developing a feel during practice. But the end goal is for all of this to become second nature.
Jim
Last edited:
Jim,
Excellent post. FYI, I've added it to my BHE summary document here:
Regards,
Dave
Nitpick: this is the case for outside english, but for inside english the opposite is true.
Where you been, Jim?
pj
chgo
Thank you much Dr. Dave. I've made some edits and you may want to check to see if I've blown it.
(Still looking forward to delving into the new material which you've been adding over the last few months to your website...it just seems to be one thing after another that gets in the way lately.)
Jim