Stupid question

[MisspentYouth]

Is it my imagination or do players with snooker stances use draw and stun waaay more than most players? And they seem to not have a smooth stroke compared to say Earl or Shane or whomever, but they get the CB where they need to anyway. They have powerful strokes but it seems like they shouldn't, like they are poking at it all the time. I'm thinking in particular here of Shaw and Appleton. Maybe it's not even a snooker stance thing. Maybe it's an English eight-ball thing? Maybe not though because Dechaine has kind of a similar thing going on. Seems like Earl and similar players putting 10 tips of spin and jacking it around 50 cushions is dying out. But maybe that is due to the speed of the cloth increasing so much over the last 15 years? Hmmm.

 

[Ty-Tanic]

With snooker I feel like you use draw and stun shots more because your not moving the ball very much (if your playing correctly). So using Stun and Draw may slow the pace of the CB allowing them to get position. 14.1 is the closest pool comes to being snooker. You use very little movement with the cue ball and you have to bust out stacks quite a bit. Also Snooker balls are smaller and there is twice as much table to shoot on so maybe quick pokey strokes helps them with their accuracy. Over all you would have to ask a pro why they do what they do. I am sure you would get all kinds of different answers. This is just my .02 cents.

 

[Straightpool_99]

I've said the same things many times on here, and have gotten a lot of flak for it. I still believe it is true. The ultra fast cushions and cloths do not reward the big strokes, and the pocket style that's in vogue now punishes inaccuracy, so a big powerful stroke is not as much of an advantage anymore. Accuracy is where it's at, and the snooker stance will provide that. The stroke will not be as pretty, but they get plenty of action on the ball anyway, at least in the current conditions. If the IPT style of cloth were to become popular again, that may change, but it does not seem to be the case, so prepare for the age of short, snooker style strokes.

Also the position play in snooker is a bit different from what you will see in 9 ball etc. For the most part you will play on fuller angles and play no rails or 1 rail in snooker. For longer type positions, snooker players will usually play 1 rail position where 9-ballers play 2-rails. It has to do with the snooker table being bigger, the cushions having less "reactive" rubber with a rounded nose, and the pockets being smaller. While a 2 railer out of the corner is a natural shot on a pool table it will be an "exotic" shot on a snooker table. You can't get as much variation in the angle because the rail will not "grab the ball" and the cloth will "eat" the spin before it can take hold. This means you need a lot of english and speed to get the same result as on a pool table (and many times you can't). If you can ever get to a snooker table I recommend you try some extreme spin shots. If you are like me, you will be amazed at how many shots are just plain impossible on a snooker table, that would be considered easy on a pool table. This I believe will account for the many faulty ideas that are being held by accomplished snooker players. Many of them believe you cannot transfer spin onto object balls!! In a way it's true, because on a snooker table it's hard to do that in a way that produces any observable effect.

 

[accdealer]

i think you might be onto something. i feel like with the size of the table and the nappy cloth that traditional snooker is played on, it might be easier to simply draw the ball rather than rely on the cueball going around the table using the rails and slow cloth. additionally, there are so many more balls on a snooker table and im pretty sure the top players wouldn't ever want to run into or change the position of any of the colored balls. so, whipping the cueball 2,3 or 4 rails around the table may not be practical. In reference to the stun shot, i think you will also find that any decent 14.1 player will also use a lot of stun shots. i think that's the nature of an offensive minded game like 14.1 or snooker where you have a lot of balls in a concentrated area. you figure in snooker, all 15 of the red balls and the colors worth the most points are all on one end of the table. so, stunning the cueball and keeping it in the neighborhood is probably a good idea. additionally, with the nappy cloth and small pockets, i think they'd prefer to hit the balls with some pace, rather than just tapping them in.

additionally, granted there's a lot of snooker players who have become top pool players here in the US, but wouldn't you think they would all be champions? i mean, here's a guy or gal who's used to firing a ball 100 mph into a hole that's less than 2 times the size of the ball. how could you possibly expect them to ever miss? or even better, how do you leave a player like that? think they're afraid of a long 'difficult' shot?

I feel like in general, position play has changed a lot over the years. there's many types including what you are referring to with the snooker players.

not trying to hijack your thread, but lets see how many we can think of.

1. buddy hall, sort of a less is more approach, barely moving the rock unless he has to.

2. Hopkins, wont draw the ball unless he absolutely has to. obviously, he has figured out how to design his patterns around his stroke and it works very well.

3. efren, well if we knew what efren put on the ball and how he did it, we could rewrite every pool instructional ever written.

4. earl, as you mentioned, whatever it takes to put the ball in the hole and get the rock where it needs to be. uses draw, follow, side English and multitudes of combinations of the 3. i feel like his position isn't as precise as some others, but makes up for it with incredible shot making. when it's clicking, he'll barrel through like a freight train.

be interested in any other styles

 

[accdealer]

damn, 3 responses before mine posted, at least i feel like we're more or less on the same page.