The Physics of Pool

[Michael Andros]

I am reminded of Irving Crane's stated aiming system. When someone asked him, at an exhibition I attended in New Brunswick, New Jersey in the winter of 1978, what his aiming system was, he said "I try to aim the same way I aimed last time I made the shot." I remember thinking that it can't be THAT easy, but perhaps it really is that simple. Crane had hit every flavor of every shot so many times that he practically had the aiming points memorized, or at least he thought so.

In other words, Lou is right in suggesting that success over the glorious green felt is more about hitting enough balls than learning the sciences that underlie the game. At very least, Crane would probably have agreed.

Or perhaps to paraphrase:

"Nothing beats hard work."

:yeah:

 

[dr_dave]

By happy coincidence, Dr. Dave just posted about his new Top 10 Myths video. Any of those myths in particular that you like better than the "science"?

There are several.

The one about elevated draw; a closed bridge for power draw; sidespin not affecting the path of the CB; the one about more spin from certain cues; and the stroke type not changing shot action.

Lou,

All of your points (which are good) have been discussed in the Top 10 Pool and Billiard Myths Busted and Debunked thread.

Check it out, and please add any thoughts or disagreements that have not already been discussed.

Catch you later,
Dave

 

[lfigueroa]

Overall, I agree with you. I have always been a "slide rule" kind of guy. STEM skills come naturally for me. If understanding physics helps a player's pool game, I should be a heck of a lot better player than I am.

My point of disagreement is that I think there is more to succeeding at pool than "Stance, head position, bridge, grip, levelness of cue, and delivery". Those skills get me close to the pocket, but are not enough for running balls. As I get older, maintaining the mental focus to know a ball is going into the pocket before I shoot it is more difficult over playing sessions. That level of focus comes and goes and the intellectual parts of how to shoot the shot are not enough to overcome the lack when the judgment is not there.

Legs, I agree with you -- there's tons more than the basics.

The basics are the basics. They get you to the right neighborhood. But if you want to get to the right address you're going to need to get down to a whole different level of precision.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

Is there a sport out there that the increased knowledge of physics didn’t help to grow the sport??

The knowledge has it’s place. Let the guys who understand the physics use that knowledge to help grow the sport and help make it better. Sports science is huge in every sport I can think of. But apparently you Pool is too unique for that.

If someone doesn’t want to learn the physics, nothing stops that. Practicing, playing, repetition, and rote are the standard ways we all learn this game. Nothing stops that either.


Freddie <~~~ Open to all ways

I have zero problem with the science and said as much.

But when I'm shooting pool in money match or tournament I'll take what I want from the science but also use my own personal experience, which in some cases goes contrary to the science, to get a good outcome.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

Lou,

Good post. FYI, I just added a quote at the bottom of the following resource page:

physics “understanding” sometimes provides useful insight

For those interested in this topic (including you), please check out the page. Understanding can sometimes speed the learning process; although, one must still develop skill, which can only come with practice and experience.

FYI, here is some other good reading on the topic:

knowledge can be useful, but you still need skill

Enjoy,
Dave

Thanks, Dave.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

Lou,

All of your points (which are good) have been discussed in the Top 10 Pool and Billiard Myths Busted and Debunked thread.

Check it out, and please add any thoughts or disagreements that have not already been discussed.

Catch you later,
Dave

Dave, I don't want to go there.

My point is that we all see things differently when we approach a pool table. We all play on and with different equipment. Our bodies are all different.

For moi, I have been playing pool now for around 50 years. Do I know and have to factor in that when I elevate or I'm jacked up on a rail the ball is going to draw more? Yes. Do I know and factor in that when I want the CB to track through an OB more narrowly that some inside english helps? Yes. And having played with a Meucci and some of the original 314 shafts do I know and have to factor in that with those that I'm going to get more spin? Yes.

In each of those cases it matters not to me what the science says. It matters to me what 50 years of pool playing says -- for me.

Lou Figueroa

 

[BC21]

Thanks, Brian.

I think that for some people an aiming system can be a huge benefit. But at some point I also think a player has to abandon the aiming system and factor in all the nuances that position play introduces to aiming a shot. Because if, for instance, I have to spin the CB for position I have to factor in the throw which is going to completely, perhaps radically change my aiming point. Maybe I'm up on the rail or over a ball. Maybe the balls are throwing different because their super dirty or polished. Whatever it is your wetware has to factor it all in and the aiming system is not going to provide you the answer every time.

Lou Figueroa

Well put. And I agree 100%. Once you get a feel/understanding of how to play, the only aiming system you really need is a well programmed brain.

 

[dr_dave]

Lou,

All of your points (which are good) have been discussed in the Top 10 Pool and Billiard Myths Busted and Debunked thread.

Check it out, and please add any thoughts or disagreements that have not already been discussed.

Catch you later,
Dave

Do I know and have to factor in that when I elevate or I'm jacked up on a rail the ball is going to draw more? Yes. Do I know and factor in that when I want the CB to track through an OB more narrowly that some inside english helps? Yes. And having played with a Meucci and some of the original 314 shafts do I know and have to factor in that with those that I'm going to get more spin? Yes.

In each of those cases it matters not to me what the science says.

It might not matter to you, but based on the discussion and links in the Top 10 Pool and Billiard Myths Busted and Debunked thread, the science agrees with you completely, If the "science" is good, it always agrees with what actually happens at the table. However, unfortunately, some people continue to promulgate myths that have nothing to do with reality.

Regards,
Dave

 

[ChrisinNC]

If you dont know why you missed as soon as the cb comes off the tip, you need to stop and think.

I can tell immediately if I pulled the stroke, let off the stroke, or just flat out saw the shot wrong ie aimed the ball a hair off.

If you cant figure it out, chalk it up as a shot you need to practice.

Understood, but it's still puzzling mentally when you miss a shot you virtually never miss, as doubt can quickly start creeping in to your mindset.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...having played with a Meucci and some of the original 314 shafts do I know and have to factor in that with those that I'm going to get more spin? Yes.

It might not matter to you, but based on the discussion and links in the Top 10 Pool and Billiard Myths Busted and Debunked thread, the science agrees with you completely

Even the part quoted above (more spin from some shafts)?

I think knowing that the science disagrees with your "impression" can be helpful info that makes you a better player.

pj
chgo

 

[dr_dave]

Lou,

All of your points (which are good) have been discussed in the Top 10 Pool and Billiard Myths Busted and Debunked thread.

Check it out, and please add any thoughts or disagreements that have not already been discussed.

And having played with a Meucci and some of the original 314 shafts do I know and have to factor in that with those that I'm going to get more spin? Yes.

It might not matter to you, but based on the discussion and links in the Top 10 Pool and Billiard Myths Busted and Debunked thread, the science agrees with you completely, If the "science" is good, it always agrees with what actually happens at the table. However, unfortunately, some people continue to promulgate myths that have nothing to do with reality.

Even the part quoted above (more spin from some shafts)?

Yes, based on the "science" info here:

getting more spin with an LD shaft

I think knowing that the science disagrees with your "impression" can be helpful info that makes you a better player.

Agreed.

Here's a pertinent quote from my physics “understanding” sometimes provides useful insight resource page:

The purpose of the physics analyses and discussions isn’t always just to help make your game better. Often, it is just to help develop a better understanding of what is going on with the physics. Now, sometimes that improved understanding can help lead to insight and technique advice that can help at the table. Two good examples are the 30° rule and squirt, swerve, and throw effects. In both of these cases, the insight gained from the physics can go a long way to helping people develop and improve faster. Also, for some people, understanding can help improve confidence. Anytime one can back up intuition with understanding, one will usually have more confidence. That way, when one gets down in the stance, one can better focus on confidently executing the shot, without having to subconsciously doubt one’s intuition.

Regards,
Dave

 

[gogg]

The physics of what is going on with all but the simplest shots is actually pretty complicated, more complicated than you have time to sort out completely for every shot.

Of course a bunch of practice is good, you are teaching your brain to make little adjustments based on results. Nobody would ever argue against the idea that lots of practice is good.

But people seem to think they are somehow making physics mystically not apply to them by practicing hours on end. If a high jumper gets better after tons of practice...and maybe studying technique...it isn't because he magically made gravity go away.

Some people learn quicker if they can understand the physics of a shot, some find an aiming system to be a shorthand way to consider the physics and some are only confused by all of this and just need to hit a ton of balls.


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

This is pretty well stated!
My martial arts teachers all teach differently.... a LOT differently.
But the ones who convey the idea to me the best, tend to teach in a similar “style” as it were.
But not everyone learns the same way... the current thought is that we all have a different “modality” of how input BEST conveys into learned data.
One guy (roughly 80% I have been told) learns best from SEEING the shot being done.
Others learn best from explanation that is TOLD to them, so hearingis their best input.
Another needs to read and write it down to retain it.....
We are all ~supposedly ~ a blend of the various inputs. I need to FEEL what it is like to do it right, then keep trying to replicate how that felt
(that is when I start to really own a shot). Of course, I saw it done as well and they may have described it too, as I said a mix of inputs.

But all will agree
No substitute for putting in the time on the table “shooting a million balls” as they say.

 

[jrctherake]

Didn't have time to read every post but:

Some of the "least educated" people I've ever met were extremely strong pool players.

On the other hand, some of the most intelligent people I've ever met cant run 3 balls.

Me? Lol.....I'm out of luck on both accounts. I can't run 3 balls and I'm dumber than a bix of rocks.

The older I get, the more I realize ^^^^^^^^^^^ is true.

Jeff

 

[lfigueroa]

Even the part quoted above (more spin from some shafts)?

I think knowing that the science disagrees with your "impression" can be helpful info that makes you a better player.

pj
chgo

I feel that there is a point at which this stuff can become counter-productive.

I don't want to be standing at the table looking at a bank on a ball near my opponent's pocket with the CB at the other end of the table on the opposite side and having to start thinking about the science.

It's a tough enough game without cluttering up your mind to the point you start second guessing yourself. I'd rather be able to just get down on the shot knowing that I have to adjust for the spin I expect from the cue I'm playing with.

Lou Figueroa

 

[dr_dave]

I feel that there is a point at which this stuff can become counter-productive.

I don't want to be standing at the table looking at a bank on a ball near my opponent's pocket with the CB at the other end of the table on the opposite side and having to start thinking about the science.

That's a bit ridiculous. Nobody who wants to play well "thinks about the science" when they are planning or executing a shot; although, the knowledge-based intuition provided by science or experience-based understanding can certainly help guide one's choices and technique.

Regards,
Dave

 

[lfigueroa]

That's a bit ridiculous. Nobody who wants to play well "thinks about the science" when they are planning or executing a shot; although, the knowledge-based intuition provided by science or experience-based understanding can certainly help guide one's choices and technique.

Regards,
Dave

You're entitled to feel it's as ridiculous as you want.

However, I've seen a guy at the pool room watching your videos on his phone and then try to implement. He gets so tied up with it all he can't execute simple shots. Sometimes I want to go up to him and tell him to forget about learning the game that way and give him some practical advice, but I demur.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Patrick Johnson]

II don't want to be standing at the table looking at a bank on a ball near my opponent's pocket with the CB at the other end of the table on the opposite side and having to start thinking about the science.

I'll bet you had to think about lots of things back when you were learning them that you now know and do without thinking - that was "the science" back then.

Something new may not interest you, but that doesn't mean it would paralyze you (or anybody else) to learn it.

pj
chgo

 

[Island Drive]

Yes, based on the "science" info here:

getting more spin with an LD shaft

Agreed.

Here's a pertinent quote from my physics “understanding” sometimes provides useful insight resource page:

The purpose of the physics analyses and discussions isn’t always just to help make your game better. Often, it is just to help develop a better understanding of what is going on with the physics. Now, sometimes that improved understanding can help lead to insight and technique advice that can help at the table. Two good examples are the 30° rule and squirt, swerve, and throw effects. In both of these cases, the insight gained from the physics can go a long way to helping people develop and improve faster. Also, for some people, understanding can help improve confidence. Anytime one can back up intuition with understanding, one will usually have more confidence. That way, when one gets down in the stance, one can better focus on confidently executing the shot, without having to subconsciously doubt one’s intuition.

Regards,
Dave

When your down, your done!

 

[dr_dave]

I've seen a guy at the pool room watching your videos on his phone and then try to implement. He gets so tied up with it all he can't execute simple shots. Sometimes I want to go up to him and tell him to forget about learning the game that way and give him some practical advice, but I demur.

It sounds like he might be trying to practice shots or techniques he is not yet ready for. But having said that, I don't see anything wrong with learning techniques or shots from well-done instructional videos (if I may say so myself :embarrassed2; although, time spent with a qualified and experienced instructor can probably be more helpful for many ... as can putting in 10,000 hours of smart practice over many years.

Regards,
Dave

 

[ShootingArts]

"Make the damned ball!"

You're entitled to feel it's as ridiculous as you want.

However, I've seen a guy at the pool room watching your videos on his phone and then try to implement. He gets so tied up with it all he can't execute simple shots. Sometimes I want to go up to him and tell him to forget about learning the game that way and give him some practical advice, but I demur.

Lou Figueroa

Lou, one of the funnier moments in a pool hall: I had carefully digested how an aiming system was supposed to work and I headed off to the pool hall to implement it. Object ball two diamonds up the rail from the corner pocket and an inch off of the rail. As you know, you can miss a ball on the rail pretty badly and still have the ball fall in the hole so I never freeze balls on the rail to practice. Then I put the cue ball about ten inches behind where a center spot on the table would be.

I then proceeded to carefully go through the aiming routine over and over and miss the ball! For the next fifteen minutes I missed the same shot over and over. Finally a guy came stomping over, "let me show you how to make that shot." He proceeded to pocket the ball a few times and then had me try despite me explaining to him over and over that the idea wasn't to pocket the ball, it was to pocket the ball using a certain aiming technique. After he left I went back to missing the ball that I had pocketed a few times to make him happy.

I am sure he never grasped why a damned fool would try to pocket a ball another way when ghost ball or opposite side aiming would always pocket the ball. I forget the aiming system I was trying but I hit the ball thin over and over. Had I frozen it on the rail the cue ball would have skidded a bit on the rail and pocketed the object ball making it seem that the aiming system worked.

I never forgot the look on the man's face while he was trying to figure out why I didn't just pocket the ball. I'm quite sure he was convinced I was at least a half bubble off plumb!

Hu