LOL= I love a dare!
The Greatest Myth in Billiards' History - The Bad Stroke!
- Thread starter Colin Colenso
- Start date
I'll take a moment to quote Scott Lee's impressively-compressed definition of a good stroke which he posted to AZB a couple years ago and which has stuck with me ever since:
"A good stroke is Relaxed, Repeatable, and Accurate."
The learning methods and practicing methods for achieving each of these three elements are well worth exploring and discussing individually (and large portion of instructionally-intended AZB threads directly or indirectly do exactly that).
I think Colin's present thread, while intended to minimize the role of the stroke itself as it relates to shooting errors, actually usefully expands up the nature of factors that affect Accuracy.
Arnaldo
Actually, I think "bad alignment" is the bogey man for a piss poor stroke. Get folks with poor stroke, not horrible, but not perfect, and they HATE long straight in shots?
Why, because their stroke is off and pushes the cueball off course, or puts unintended spin on the cue ball and throws ob of course.
Of course, those same folks don't mind a long cut shot, you know why? Cause their "stroke" will not be blamed by the shooter... Oh, I undercut it, I overcut it, blah, blah, blah. But the straight in shot does not lie.
Just too many moving parts in the stroke for it NOT to be the biggest cause of worry for an amatuer player. Not saying some folks do NOT have problems with alignment, cause many do. But that repeatable stroke, on easy shots and tough ones, every time is not an easy task for many.
You're right Neil.
BHE, as it has been explained is far from complete.
It's been one of my goals to study it and compile a much more detailed video instruction of BHE. It would be very useful to CTE aimers who find pot line to slight undercut, which is how I standardized my system years ago, based on memorizing pot angle with medium to firm follow, which equates to line of centers to slight undercut... as medium to firm follow has CIT that throws the OB a little thicker.
After doing it for 7 or so years, I have a lot of advice to share. Would like to make it great quality, but may have to compromise. I've no intent to sell it, just make it easier to understand and learn and let others build upon it and/or improve it.
Like all systems, there are some 'what ifs' and some 'whys' apart from other peculiarities which I've mostly got suggestions to help fix.
Certainly just line up and pivot from the natural cue pivot point will prove disappointing as longer shots are attempted, various speeds and particularly outside english is used.
But, it's possible, and 90+% of shots can be executed predictably with BHE if one knows the slight adjustments.
Colin
Neil,
For me, alignment and aiming are decided by the bridge V position.
I consider all other aiming and alignment methodologies to be descriptions of getting the bridge V on that line, and when it comes to BHE, on that line and at the correct distance from the CB.
Colin
I'm glad you responded ChicagoRJ, as it allows us to get our teeth into the meat of the matter.
You say strokes push balls off course. I ask how and what tests have ever shown this.
If my bridge length is longer than my pivot point and I swipe and hit the right side of the CB, my testing shows that the CB travels left of the alignment from bridge V to CCB (Center Cue Ball).
If I swipe slowly right and hit CCB, my testing shows the CB travels a little right of the line of my bridge to CCB.
But when I strike firm to CCB with swipe, my tests so far can't show any significant difference in the line of CB travel.
Hence the reason for this thread. Who has evidence about stroking changing paths for various speeds, pull acrosses, swipes, off centrer hitting v bridge lengths? I've seen little data and yet everyone seems to be convinced that the stroke can and does do far more than the physics or any testing has indicated.
Colin
Have you read all of Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett's and Mark Wilson's material? How much data is enough? Stroke errors cause loss of precision. Loss of precision means that what you intended to have happen isn't going to happen, but something else un-intended will happen.
If I intend to hit at 1:00 (O' clock) on the cb, but mishit due to a crooked stroke and hit at 2:00, I will get a different result than I intended to have. The squirt will be different, which means that the cb will not go down the intended line at all.
There are a ton of examples I could give here. Suffice it to say that the game is all about precision. And lack of precision is what causes slumps, loss of consistency, not getting better despite playing countless hours, ect.
I don't even know where to start with this. Sure backhand english is fantastic when you slam balls in with the proper bridgelength the ball goes straight. Hooray.....Then why not hit every shot 800 miles pr. hour every time and keep the stroke length the same. You will become the new world champion, congratulations you have broken the code. Why doesn't Efren do this I wonder?
This game or any other billiard game that I know of is not about slamming balls in 800 miles pr. hour. It's about finesse. With finesse shots the stroke does matter. Hitting the ball in the wrong place will make it go somewhere other than you intended and may in turn cause you to miss the object ball because of throw or swerve, as Neil pointed out.
Besides a good stroke is about speed control and timing, which is easier to achieve with good stroke fundamentals.
Nothing new so far. However I do disagree with you on another point. You act as if our body is made out of metal and bolted to the ground, when this is far from the case. It is unnatural for the body to remain still when your arm is moving. Even if your stance is rock solid ther will be some movement of the body. If you have too much movement you can actually cause shifts in the brigde hand and thus miss. The likelyhood of this increases with stroke speed and especially with a poor stroke/fundamentals. This should be common sense.
Last edited:
Dr. Dave and I have discussed effects of swoop and so forth to degrees and are generally in agreement as far as I've discovered.
I'm not saying that the stroke doesn't have it's place. A great smooth straight stroke is a powerful tool.
My central point is that many people blame misses on a bad stroke, when the stroke had little if anything to do with the miss.
The silent assassin is alignment, via incorrect bridge positioning on most occasions.
I'm intending on doing more comprehensive testing of swoop/ swipe effects in the near future to further understand the effects. From what I've done thus far, the firm swipe appears to produce insignificant aiming effects.
With regard to side english CB hitting, I've tested this for 7 years using BHE. What I've found is that stroke plays some role, but on most shots using BHE, if the bride is in the correct place, for most shots, the OB will go in, regardless of the stroke, unless it is horrendous.
SP99,
I can play BHE at all speeds. It needs a knowledge of CIT and SIT and of course some swerve adjustments. Power shots require less adjustment, that's true, but keep in mind that anyone playing soft shots with english has to compensate somehow.
The body fixed point is something most BHE experimenters will struggle with. I think it's a matter of practice.
What I do know is that many good players who have been playing for 20 plus years can't work out how effortlessly I put maximum english on shots with ease on a shot they have never been able to execute.
It's not natural feeling, and takes some time to learn to lock in the bridge, when your brain is trying to move it into a more natural feeling position.
After some time, you just trust it, and the locked bridge stays in place.
Colin
These days, a large number of players, including many top players, use LD shafts. And many of those players probably use bridge lengths on many shots that are shorter than their shaft's natural pivot length. Will you be able to provide advice that will help those players as well -- through the use of front-hand english and combinations of FHE and BHE?
Last edited:
Ron Swanson
Banned
As ever, i don't have the foggiest what you lot are on about.
I find this to be an interesting subject.
I have to disagree with what you said above. Pros spend considerable time on practice strokes focusing on a precise spot on the cue ball they wish to contact. Their stroke delivers the tip to the spot they want to contact more often than an amateur. Why would pros spend so much time on that if only alignment is important?
Are you saying that if your bridge is in the correct place it doesn't matter where you contact the cue ball if your are aligned correctly?
When we attend the big tournaments, we bring our 4 camera system, with 1/16 speed slow-motion & we get to analyze lots of players. We've probably been successful in helping everyone tighten up their game, because of one thing & another.
Only after we have videoed them performing a myriad of shots, do we even begin the analysis. A 4 camera system tells a lot, especially when the player can visit with us, while viewing himself in the video. When we say, "that could be a problem", "that" doesn't have to be cussed & discussed, it is a visible "motion or placement" that the player & analyzer can immediately see, understand & move toward some modification or elimination".
We never try to remold a player, we try to highlight their strengths, minimize their outstanding faults & help them to understand what's needed to fine tune their abilities to play good pool.
Years ago I met up with an old friend at a pool hall. This is one of those guys that usually can't take advise, so I set up a trap to make him start asking questions. I told him I'd lay a quarter on the table that indicated my prediction whether he would miss a shot or make it. Heads it would make, tails it wouldn't. My predictions were in the 80-90%. The key was simply watching his footwork. If his footwork was flawed he usually missed, if not he usually made the shot. He finally crumbled and asked how I knew, when I predicted a miss on a really simple shot on the 8 ball.
I'm not sure why you are saying that a bad stoke is mostly an alingment problem. If I line up perfectly then move my hand to the right as I'm shooting, I'm not going to hit where I am trying to hit. Or if I pocket the ball I may not be able to hit it with the spin I am trying for because the tip moved as the arm went forward.
Or you are just waving the stick around wildly like beginners do even if you line them up on the shot line yourself.
Plus a bad stoke can lead to other issues like not being able to draw or follow the cueball well, especially draw. Many people pound the shit of ouf the cueball when trying to draw and they end up with a stop shot because they have a crappy stoke that raises their tip up when they actually shoot or they jerk the cue to a stop.
Or you are just waving the stick around wildly like beginners do even if you line them up on the shot line yourself.
Plus a bad stoke can lead to other issues like not being able to draw or follow the cueball well, especially draw. Many people pound the shit of ouf the cueball when trying to draw and they end up with a stop shot because they have a crappy stoke that raises their tip up when they actually shoot or they jerk the cue to a stop.
It's probably because that's not what he's saying (the bolded part).
Colin can handle the rest.
You need to define your terms. Where does "stroke" end, and "alignment" begin?
My definition of a "good stroke" is the ability to deliver the cue in the direction you want, at the speed you want, and at the contact point on the cue ball that you want. Under this definition, having a good stroke is very important.
The simple test/proof of this is that long straight shots, which are trivial from the point of view of aiming. These are not easy shots. People miss them, even great players.
Another thing that is trivial from the point of view of aiming (or "alignment") is hitting a long straight shot and then drawing the ball say a table length or more. There's nothing to judge, no angles, the only question is whether you can consistently deliver a straight powerful stroke that impacts the cue ball well below center, but not so far that you miscue.
My definition of a "good stroke" is the ability to deliver the cue in the direction you want, at the speed you want, and at the contact point on the cue ball that you want. Under this definition, having a good stroke is very important.
The simple test/proof of this is that long straight shots, which are trivial from the point of view of aiming. These are not easy shots. People miss them, even great players.
Another thing that is trivial from the point of view of aiming (or "alignment") is hitting a long straight shot and then drawing the ball say a table length or more. There's nothing to judge, no angles, the only question is whether you can consistently deliver a straight powerful stroke that impacts the cue ball well below center, but not so far that you miscue.