There was a thread talking about this that disappeared. I was amazed at how many people didn't think this was possible.
Think about ping pong. With a flat paddle the ball is always hit in the center. Contact time is probably less than pool.
How could any spin possibly be imparted?
Hit the cue ball off center and you will apply spin - or any other round ball.There was a thread talking about this that disappeared. I was amazed at how many people didn't think this was possible.
Think about ping pong. With a flat paddle the ball is always hit in the center. Contact time is probably less than pool.
How could any spin possibly be imparted?
If you know what the stroke is then you can figure out when & where it might be applicable.
Do you know what it is or do you think it is simply applying BHE during a stroke.
I suggest you go read the thread in the instructors forum & then do like Fran Crimi said, 'Happy Experimenting'.
Yet, you are the one that constantly states that you don't need to go to a table to figure things out. The explanation should be enough, according to you. You demand explanations with CTE, but yet refuse to ever give any even when so many are asking for just ONE example from you.
Or is it simply that you feel the need to agree with someone you like, but have no idea whatsoever on what you are actually agreeing to? ;;
6. The swipe stroke has never been shown to produce more spin that a regular stroke can produce from a given offset.
You show that you do not even know the difference between a matter of the mind & a matter of physical activity.
The comparison of an Aiming Method & a 'specialty stroke' are in no way similar.
You constantly make SENSELESS analogies.
You've become nothing but a stalking troll.
Why don't you instead make 'productive' use of your time & go wipe out ALL of your post since the last time that you put in ALL of that time & effort to wipe out ALL of your post & show everyone just how 'rational' you can be.
Based on a limited amount of experimentation, I believe it can. I explained what I tried, and gave the results here a couple of years ago. My posts begin at #33 on page 3 in the thread, but the photo I took of the Rempe training ball I used is on post #43.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=322047&highlight=swoop+stroke&page=3
I have not worked on this technique anymore since then. For one, it is highly inconsistent, at least for me. Also, in the last two years I have made good strides in improving my stroke, and I can now get all the spin I want without miscuing all the time. Still, what I found back then is that I could get a significant amount more spin at the same offset as a straight stroke, but only when the planets all aligned for me. Most of the time, I just blew the shot badly.
You know Rick, even with erasing 9,000 posts, I still have more actual content on here than you do with all your posts.![]()
Based on a limited amount of experimentation, I believe it can. I explained what I tried, and gave the results here a couple of years ago. My posts begin at #33 on page 3 in the thread, but the photo I took of the Rempe training ball I used is on post #43.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=322047&highlight=swoop+stroke&page=3
I have not worked on this technique anymore since then. For one, it is highly inconsistent, at least for me. Also, in the last two years I have made good strides in improving my stroke, and I can now get all the spin I want without miscuing all the time. Still, what I found back then is that I could get a significant amount more spin at the same offset as a straight stroke, but only when the planets all aligned for me. Most of the time, I just blew the shot badly.
What rational individual takes the time & effort to personally go back & individually 'erase' 9,000 of their own posts so that they can punish the members of the forum for not taking him seriously?
I'll leave it to the majority of the readership to make that determination.
In case you or another has not noticed....
I'm the one making the EVEN numbered posts, which means that I am responding & have NOT initiated anything.
The stalker is the one doing the initiating.
Sorry Rick, but from my perspective you are say this:
You: There is a specialty stroke technique that has advantages over a normal stroke.
Us: What are the advantages? Do you have proof?
You: Go experiment.
You/Renfro: .001 to .002 seconds is a significant difference to the human body and brain.
Us: That doesn't make sense since the human brain let alone body can't react, process or do much of anything that fast.
You: Yes it does and you just don't understand. Physics.
Us: Well yes exactly! That's what we keep referencing. Does the specialty stroke do..
You: This is a part of physics only I and one other person believe in or understand.
Us: But actual scientists have..
You: Nope they have not properly experiment.
Us: Can you at least give some proof or experiment results?
You: No go experiment yourself "Have fun."
Our conclusion: Whether we have or have not experimented ourselves is irrelevant if we don't come to the same conclusion as you. You are basically asking for an opinion as a result of experimentation when you haven't given us an example of your experimentation to base off of. It wouldn't matter either because if we came to a different conclusion or reinforced our previous statements we would be wrong by default in your eyes.
Our experience on the table won't matter, our educational background won't matter. We will always be wrong and you will always be right, because anyone who takes a scientific or analytical approach to pool probably doesn't play well and has no feel for the game.
Its like a Scientologist telling a Buddhist he doesn't know anything about spirituality.
There was a thread talking about this that disappeared. I was amazed at how many people didn't think this was possible.
Think about ping pong. With a flat paddle the ball is always hit in the center. Contact time is probably less than pool.
How could any spin possibly be imparted?
Ahh... No it is not always hit center, nor is a tennis ball both of which use a lot of top spin or even slightly top/side to keep it in play.
In addition, I would say the rubber surface of a ping pong paddle allows for not only more contact time but also more contact surface thus giving even more spin with the shot as a result of the additional surface space and surface tension.
Think about ping pong. With a flat paddle the ball is always hit in the center. Contact time is probably less than pool. How could any spin possibly be imparted?
I read it, understand it, and also understand why you and others feel the way you do.
Let me explain a couple of things about the swoop stroke.
1. As you found out, it is extremely unreliable and a terrible way to try and utilize english.
2. You really can't go by the contact point (chalk mark) on the cb when using the swoop stroke. The reason you can't, is because center cb is determined by the angle of attack of the cue. When swooping, that angle can change a fair amount. Hence, where center cb is will also change a fair amount. So, the first thing when checking chalk marks is that you have to figure out just where center cb actually was relative to the cues angle of approach.
3. Because of #2, one can easily think they are getting more spin using a swoop stroke, or, as you did, think they hit a couple attempts good and got more spin than they were getting because from their vantage point, they didn't hit very far off center cb.
Aah, all you have to do is present some facts to him. Seems to make him blow a gasket or something.![]()