Same Number of Warm Strokes on Every Shot?
- Thread starter Donny
- Start date
Donnie,
Your goal is to be as consistent as possible in every part of your game. When you practice, work on having the same number of warm-ups. (I like two myself, but if for some reason I feel an adjustment is needed, I will make the adjustment, and then two more. It's always in sets of two)
Now, when you are playing, do NOT count your warm-ups. If you are practicing consistently with two, it will become a habit that you don't need to think about. Practice time is training time...when you work on developing habits. Play time is when you allow all the practice time to find it's way into your game.
You will play the way you practice, eventually.
Steve
YES YES YES! I paid big money for lessons and this is the basis of a good stroke. If you do 3 warm up stokes and don't feel confident to pull the trigger..then you start over again...3 more. Sure that's technically 6 but the idea is 3 (or whatever you choose) strokes is your number to go ahead and shoot. Each one should be a different facet of the shot...aiming...english...posistion/power (not necessarily in that order) The additional 3 would be the start of your shoot routine not pre-shoot that comes before you even start the strokes.
Hope this helps!
I am not an instructor but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!
Steve...I agree about the warm ups. However, I'm not sure if I've shared this with you, or not. I have with Randy, and a few other instructors. I call it stroke verification, and it runs directly aligned with the mental and phyical processes of the top professional golfers. Here's a scenario I encountered, watching pro golf on tv. Most times there's a journalist and a pro golfer commentating (as in most sports). Here's what the pro playing says to himself..."Okay, I've got 190 yds to the pin...hand me the 7 iron." He steps up to the ball, and then steps back a couple of steps. He checks his grip, and makes two or three SWINGS, through the grass, at the exact speed that he plans to hit the shot. Then he steps up to the ball...does his 'waggle', and strokes the golf ball at the EXACT SAME SPEED that he just practice swinged a minute before. The pro golfer announcer was able to tell exactly what the pro player was going to do, just by watching him run through these practice swings, and then say it on tv, only to have the pro player then do exactly what he described.
This is what I recommend (and do myself), for my students, is to practice swing at the speed you want to stroke the shot with. As you develop the feel and timing of your process, set your bridge hand down NEXT to the CB (aiming at an imaginary CB, sitting right next the real one). Go through your pre-shot routine. At your set (stop at the the CB), pull back and deliver the cue at the speed you believe you need for the shot (both for pocketing and position play)...lose grip, lose grip, lose grip. This reinforces the exact swing speed you need, for the shot. Then you step into the real CB, and do the exact same thing! All you have to do then, is swing your grip hand to your natural finish position, with a relaxed grip! It works!
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
-
This is what I recommend (and do myself), for my students, is to practice swing at the speed you want to stroke the shot with. As you develop the feel and timing of your process, set your bridge hand down NEXT to the CB (aiming at an imaginary CB, sitting right next the real one). Go through your pre-shot routine. At your set (stop at the the CB), pull back and deliver the cue at the speed you believe you need for the shot (both for pocketing and position play)...lose grip, lose grip, lose grip. This reinforces the exact swing speed you need, for the shot. Then you step into the real CB, and do the exact same thing! All you have to do then, is swing your grip hand to your natural finish position, with a relaxed grip! It works!
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
-
Last edited:
From what I recall, I've written to pull the trigger when ready.
I'm too tired or lazy to even go see whatever I'd previously written on this subject, but you guys can probably find it easily enough. From what I recall, I've written to pull the trigger when ready or something to that effect. Now that might seem as obvious as can possibly be when you realize that by not waiting until perfectly ready, you may find yourself pulling the trigger before or, depending on your predetermined number, even after you are at that perfect peak moment of readiness.
If I simply finished this quote at this point I'd have probably won too many of you over to my side of the argument a bit unfairly. Unfairly because there is not only an argument for the opposing opinion (using a predetermined number of strokes), it may even be considered a bit stronger than what I've given you in the first paragraph.
I'll now take a shot at explaining the opposing view and, to be as fair as i can be, in somewhat greater detail ,while somehow leaving out the one thing that that might give away my secret. It is not at all easy providing explanations when unable to tell it all, believe me!
I can't help wondering at this moment if anyone has ever previously explained this subject in much detail in a book or magazine. Seems I've always disagreed with authors on those few times I've come across thorough explanations re fundamentals. I'd sure appreciate a photocopy of the text with indication of date and/or source of the explanation if they did. You see, one of my favorite things is finding out when certain technology in pool, caroms, or snooker, etc. was first developed. If anyone here would be likely to know this, it would probably be Brett. Now back to the point.
The first thing to mention is that pulling the trigger after a specific number of preparatory strokes might cause a poorly trained player to frequently rush his or her mental computations or thought process to suit the number of strokes to be used. With time and proper training however, a low number of preparatory strokes, such as 1 or 2, as compared to 4, 5, or 6, will be much like the speed-chess game is to a chess player. Doing so will gradually inable you to speed up what I like to call your "mental shooting procedure."
The speeding up of your "mental shooting procedure" is a good thing; so good in fact that I teach my students how to accomplish just that in an a specific exercise for that purpose. In using this predetermined stroke method with just 1 or 2 preparatory strokes you will in time find yourself reaching a point of full readiness somewhat faster and faster. You will also gradually find yourself better and better able to time your thought process to the preset number of strokes despite the fact that some shots would otherwise require more time than others.
I advise anyone learning this predetermind number of stroke method to break down each and every step in what they would consider an ideal mental shooting procedure early on (unless someone like Brett just hands it over on a silver platter) and put those steps into a most logical sequence. This is not absolutely necessary, of course, it merely increases your chances of becoming really good at it.
That breakdown of mental shooting procedure happens to be exactly what I'd done for myself around 1969 when deciding take up the cue, attempting to then become a top-level 3-cushion player. This was after years of almost total abstinence from any and all cue games (I'd later quit playing 3-cushion around a year too early to have truly accomplished that goal).
So now you might ask, why did Robin first explain that it's best to take as many strokes as seems necessary. It is because I happen to know how to achieve the best possible results by doing it that way. You see, I've not yet explained all I happen to know about this subject because I'd like to publish books on fundamentals one day. Please realize that I'm not alone in this attempt to get my book-publishing project off the ground. I'm simply unable to just give away most of what will be in those books beforehand. I can't even explain one of the main advantages of Brett's method because from doing so, my own method becomes that much more apparent.
So where does that leave you? It leaves you where I came in. Some of you prefer one way and some the other. In the absence of knowing my particular method, you are probably best off simply learning Brett's. I also teach but probably charge more, refuse most students, require non-disclosure agreements, and will refund all unused money that was paid in advance and tell you to go your own way if I consider you to be anything less than an excellent student. I'm a bit of a perfectionist I guess.
Please don't get upset with me for not telling you all I know. You might feel much better about this particular subject upon realizing that both methods have been used with great success by some of the straightest of shooters of the past in both pool and snooker.[/I]
My switch in methods years ago could have easily been noticed by others because, unlike my previous years in both pool and 3-cushion, in my last couple of years I've not had to stop and restart preparatory strokes even once. I was a bit surprised that nobody ever picked up on that fact because of how I'd previously stopped and restarted preparatory stroking quite often. They just didn't seem to notice. That requirement to restart was never again necessary with my new method.
A student of mine, one who knows this particular subject quite well, brought this particular thread to my attention earlier this evening. I now realize I should let my current and/or former students know that I'm trying real hard to get caught up in piled-up work that I'm obligated to get done and so please wait another couple of weeks before tempting me with notice of these threads. This for me is like walking past the chocolate counter. Maybe I should ask Mr. Howson or Mr. Bryseth to ban me from further posts for at least two more weeks. I'll sleep on that one.
For whatever it was worth,
Eddie Robin
PS: I happen to prefer words like "preparatory" by the way, so as to not need further explanation. I, for example will be using "side" or "side-spin") in place of english which i think as ridiculous as the creation of "squirt" to replace "deflection".
I'm too tired or lazy to even go see whatever I'd previously written on this subject, but you guys can probably find it easily enough. From what I recall, I've written to pull the trigger when ready or something to that effect. Now that might seem as obvious as can possibly be when you realize that by not waiting until perfectly ready, you may find yourself pulling the trigger before or, depending on your predetermined number, even after you are at that perfect peak moment of readiness.
If I simply finished this quote at this point I'd have probably won too many of you over to my side of the argument a bit unfairly. Unfairly because there is not only an argument for the opposing opinion (using a predetermined number of strokes), it may even be considered a bit stronger than what I've given you in the first paragraph.
I'll now take a shot at explaining the opposing view and, to be as fair as i can be, in somewhat greater detail ,while somehow leaving out the one thing that that might give away my secret. It is not at all easy providing explanations when unable to tell it all, believe me!
I can't help wondering at this moment if anyone has ever previously explained this subject in much detail in a book or magazine. Seems I've always disagreed with authors on those few times I've come across thorough explanations re fundamentals. I'd sure appreciate a photocopy of the text with indication of date and/or source of the explanation if they did. You see, one of my favorite things is finding out when certain technology in pool, caroms, or snooker, etc. was first developed. If anyone here would be likely to know this, it would probably be Brett. Now back to the point.
The first thing to mention is that pulling the trigger after a specific number of preparatory strokes might cause a poorly trained player to frequently rush his or her mental computations or thought process to suit the number of strokes to be used. With time and proper training however, a low number of preparatory strokes, such as 1 or 2, as compared to 4, 5, or 6, will be much like the speed-chess game is to a chess player. Doing so will gradually inable you to speed up what I like to call your "mental shooting procedure."
The speeding up of your "mental shooting procedure" is a good thing; so good in fact that I teach my students how to accomplish just that in an a specific exercise for that purpose. In using this predetermined stroke method with just 1 or 2 preparatory strokes you will in time find yourself reaching a point of full readiness somewhat faster and faster. You will also gradually find yourself better and better able to time your thought process to the preset number of strokes despite the fact that some shots would otherwise require more time than others.
I advise anyone learning this predetermind number of stroke method to break down each and every step in what they would consider an ideal mental shooting procedure early on (unless someone like Brett just hands it over on a silver platter) and put those steps into a most logical sequence. This is not absolutely necessary, of course, it merely increases your chances of becoming really good at it.
That breakdown of mental shooting procedure happens to be exactly what I'd done for myself around 1969 when deciding take up the cue, attempting to then become a top-level 3-cushion player. This was after years of almost total abstinence from any and all cue games (I'd later quit playing 3-cushion around a year too early to have truly accomplished that goal).
So now you might ask, why did Robin first explain that it's best to take as many strokes as seems necessary. It is because I happen to know how to achieve the best possible results by doing it that way. You see, I've not yet explained all I happen to know about this subject because I'd like to publish books on fundamentals one day. Please realize that I'm not alone in this attempt to get my book-publishing project off the ground. I'm simply unable to just give away most of what will be in those books beforehand. I can't even explain one of the main advantages of Brett's method because from doing so, my own method becomes that much more apparent.
So where does that leave you? It leaves you where I came in. Some of you prefer one way and some the other. In the absence of knowing my particular method, you are probably best off simply learning Brett's. I also teach but probably charge more, refuse most students, require non-disclosure agreements, and will refund all unused money that was paid in advance and tell you to go your own way if I consider you to be anything less than an excellent student. I'm a bit of a perfectionist I guess.
Please don't get upset with me for not telling you all I know. You might feel much better about this particular subject upon realizing that both methods have been used with great success by some of the straightest of shooters of the past in both pool and snooker.[/I]
My switch in methods years ago could have easily been noticed by others because, unlike my previous years in both pool and 3-cushion, in my last couple of years I've not had to stop and restart preparatory strokes even once. I was a bit surprised that nobody ever picked up on that fact because of how I'd previously stopped and restarted preparatory stroking quite often. They just didn't seem to notice. That requirement to restart was never again necessary with my new method.
A student of mine, one who knows this particular subject quite well, brought this particular thread to my attention earlier this evening. I now realize I should let my current and/or former students know that I'm trying real hard to get caught up in piled-up work that I'm obligated to get done and so please wait another couple of weeks before tempting me with notice of these threads. This for me is like walking past the chocolate counter. Maybe I should ask Mr. Howson or Mr. Bryseth to ban me from further posts for at least two more weeks. I'll sleep on that one.
For whatever it was worth,
Eddie Robin
PS: I happen to prefer words like "preparatory" by the way, so as to not need further explanation. I, for example will be using "side" or "side-spin") in place of english which i think as ridiculous as the creation of "squirt" to replace "deflection".
Watch any pro you want in any youtube video for 10 minutes worth of shooting and see if a single one of does the same number of warmup strokes every time.
A lot of guys (including intelligent posters, respected instructors and very good players) recommend it, but personally I think it's sheer superstition =)
Don't pay attention to or count your warmup strokes. Let that arm do what it needs to.
The most important thing - never shoot before you're ready.
If the pro instructor is telling you "ok, that's your third warmup stroke, now fire it in" but your brain is telling you "I think I might be undercutting this a hair, but maybe I'm lined up ok"... listen to the brain. You must be free of all doubt before you swing.
Taking too many is almost by definition impossible because nobody willingly sits there and strokes air for no reason even though they're ready shoot. They might not KNOW the reason, it might be a subliminal thing, but there's always a reason.
A lot of guys (including intelligent posters, respected instructors and very good players) recommend it, but personally I think it's sheer superstition =)
Don't pay attention to or count your warmup strokes. Let that arm do what it needs to.
The most important thing - never shoot before you're ready.
If the pro instructor is telling you "ok, that's your third warmup stroke, now fire it in" but your brain is telling you "I think I might be undercutting this a hair, but maybe I'm lined up ok"... listen to the brain. You must be free of all doubt before you swing.
Taking too many is almost by definition impossible because nobody willingly sits there and strokes air for no reason even though they're ready shoot. They might not KNOW the reason, it might be a subliminal thing, but there's always a reason.
Scott,
I see what you are talking about. I have always done my "speed check" while at my port-of-arms position, once I have made the decision what speed I need to stroke the shot.
I would think trying to match the full stroke speed when you have to stop short of actually contacting the cue ball could be a bit difficult. But I'm always open to possibilities, so I may have to try your suggestion next time I get to the practice table.
Thanks
Steve
I see what you are talking about. I have always done my "speed check" while at my port-of-arms position, once I have made the decision what speed I need to stroke the shot.
I would think trying to match the full stroke speed when you have to stop short of actually contacting the cue ball could be a bit difficult. But I'm always open to possibilities, so I may have to try your suggestion next time I get to the practice table.
Thanks
Steve
I hereby ban you, Sir. Write another book for us, please!
Hi Black-Balled,
Another interesting name! Good one Mr. Black-Balled!
Does that mean you like my books and really want more of them or is it that you simply want to get rid of me?
I'm unable to stop and yet have to, yet unable. Don't want people getting away with their mischief, and on the other hand ...
This forum could be so much more valuable to us all if people stuck to the issues. Problem is that when name calling does occur the person called jerk, liar, or idiot or whatever feels a need to respond when such name-calling is accompanied with innuendo that makes it seem that the person being called a jerk, liar, or idiot, actually is a jerk, liar, or idiot.
I came to make friends by providing some of my knowledge to help you guys and now feel that it isn't working. My efforts to help are contually thwarted by attack-like quotes and so I don't actually have much time for helping. Frustrating to say the least.
Best, Eddie Robin
Hi again CreeDo,
The argument for or against a set number of predetermined strokes should not be solved by what the pros or instructors are saying because so many things they have have said and done have been so wrong. Can't go by authorities; authorities once said the world was flat. Must go by logic.
Just look at the strengths and weaknesses of both methods. With the predetermined strokes one may find himself having to shoot before he's ready. However that happens, for the most part, to those that have faulty mental shooting procedures and such things are not being taught because most teachers don't understand the subject. however, here's where a look at the pros is of value. Watch Brett in action again. Do you see him shooting before he's ready? I don't see him shooting before he's ready.
Forgive me Brett for saying I believe I have an even better way, if I was a bit more of a politician I'd have said my way is at least as good as yours. However, you, like myself, will be attacked by many of the instructors in this country that have already decided their ways are best because they have so much agreement going for them (CreeDo may even be one of those BCA Certified Instructors for all I know).
Those that you are arguing with on this point fail to realize something you might have explained. Your way is far more than simply being conducive to enhanced rhythm, your way of lessened number of strokes is, as i've previously mentioned, a way to speed up the mental shooting procedure as well, but also quite important is that your way has far greater predictability!!!
Enhanced predictability tends to considerably lessen thoughts about am I ready? Am I almost ready? Should I stop stand up and restart? No, no, no, NO! in addition to an enhanced rhythm, the shooter's abilities are far more focused on what he's doing because of enhanced predictability.
For whatever it was worth,
Eddie Robin,
PS: CreeDo, are you an instructor? in a School or BCA Certified Instructor by any chance? I'm suddenly quite curious about that possibility.
I only wish to get rid of you if it yeilds further masterpieces. You are a special man and I hope we can enjoy more of your work.
We are lucky to have you amongst us.
exactly newstroke, the brain will start to wander off what your doing and negative thoughts will creep in to your routine and contribute to you missing the shot.
I personally take 4 ~ 6 warmup strokes. I can feel how my aim on the shot is by this. If I feel off I get up and scan the shot from an upright position. I used to one poke so many shots and I would miss horribly or not get good shape. I see a lot of pros do this and they miss bad or lose shape. My game went up 4 balls when I started to focus on taking enough warmup strokes. Too many can be bad as well. If you're ready to take the shot by your 6th warmup you know you're not aimed properly and need to get up off the shot.
Wow! It may take another month or so, but you may then learn just how much of a difference your show of appreciation has made. I've almost given up on future contributions to AZBilliards.
Sooooo difficult to explain on a forum as compared to when writing a book. In a book on fundamentals I'd have so much explained before ever touching on the subject of predetermined strokes that by time reader gets there they will more easily grasp things. How can I possibly explain in a single page how, if I was playing nowadays, I would be switching styles from one technique to another for reasons that would take an entire chapter?
Just reminded of the time again!!!
I teach use of a method I'd developed in the 70s that actually incorporates parts of both styles this thread is all about, the result being an indeterminate number of strokes. Didn't mean to divulge that much but I'm weak, much like in the past with chocolate. But now i digress. Wow! Never used that word before and it just popped out. I've not had much in the way of schooling but i'm very gradually becoming somewhat more literate as I go.
However, and this subject of preparatory strokes is getting quite tricky for me for I've students that have not yet reached a point of learning this; hopefully they are reading these posts while continue to restrain themselves from butting in from a desire and willingness to back me up.
When they do reach a certain point in development, and none of them are near that point as yet as far as I know, they will want to then learn a method much the way Brett shoots but with three, then two, then one prep stroke so as to gradually speed up their mental shooting procedure. This type training be done over a fairly long period of time. Eventually, they could switch back and forth from time to time from using my original method to either of the predetermined-stroke methods.
The reasons for switching around you see, has to do with how the mind sort of gets a bit lazy when using the same procedure over and over causing what i call the shooter's "billiard IQ" to drop from all the automaticity. I'm reminded of how, one of the world's greatest cue talents from back in the 30s would place his tip on the cloth by the base of the ball before pulling it back in preparation for his final stroke. Can you imagine how much his attention on the impending impact with cueball would suddenly increase at the moment of truth? Just when it was most needed? Don't recall his name at the moment but I do recall that he beat one of my heros, James Evans, two out of three very long 14.1 money matches despite fact that Evans scored the greater number of total points. I personally believe Evans' game had not yet peaked at the time.
I'm not at all pleased with my wording but this is not a subject that can easily be explained while I'm rushing to get to other things. There are many areas of the game that require such switching around. Take the cuestick for example. Ever notice how much attention you put on the cue when playing with one you have just bought or have borrowed from another?
Such an increase of attention on the cue will cause an increase in one ability or another as a result. Fixing the elbow works mostly because of increased attention in that very important part of your body; same of course with Brett's dropping of elbow. Top pool hustlers from way back when would just take a cue from the rack. One of the advantages from doing so was the increased attention that I'm referring to. I know all about how many have explained to play with the same cue all the time. Just more of the nonsense out there. However, strive to stick with a specific size and shaped tip and, whatever you do, do not switch from one cue to another that deflects considerably more or less; that would be a very big no-no.
By the way, I've learned quite a bit from various research and study over the years, and, though I've not played any type billiard game for years, I've applied what I've learned to those various games and have found that I now understand far more than when i was a player at any of them. If I should ever decide to take up the cue once again, I'd train the way I currently teach.
Have not had a cue for a very long time though offerred one by Dennis Dieckman a few years ago. Though he does do excellent work, and was willing to make it to my specs, I just couldn't put him through all that work when I may never get to use it even in a single game--when I don't play, I don't play at all, and my last game of anything was with Frank Torres at his Crystal Billiards here in las Vegas around 1983 I guess. Hadn't played for years before or since then. Okay, okay, I'm coming down now ... gota leave ya!
thanks for your kind words (I needed them more than you know),
Eddie R