Throwing Your Cue....

SUPERSTAR said:
Your the one with the camera set up, and the equipment on hand.

Show what you can do.

Lets see some power draw shots, and some sick follows, and inside and outside English positions shots.

Throw your best stuff out there.

If it is good, i will freely admit that it is. I have no problem with giving a compliment where it is deserved, but for this to be something that you want other people to learn and practice, there has to be some reason for it.

AKA, things they can't do normally.

If you manage to do that, i will be impressed, but if not then why on earth would anyone even consider this an option if it can't take them to the next level.
Click to expand...

It does take them to the next level, that's my point.

You tell me what you want me to do (something within SuperStar's ability) and I'll do it. I'm not going through the trouble to do this just to say it's a pvssy shot. You give me the parameters and I'll deliver.

If you give me Mike Massey-like shots, I wanna see you do them first.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
It does take them to the next level, that's my point.

You tell me what you want me to do (something within SuperStar's ability) and I'll do it. I'm not going through the trouble to do this just to say it's a pvssy shot. You give me the parameters and I'll deliver.

If you give me Mike Massey-like shots, I wanna see you do them first.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be ridiculous stuff, but it should be good enough to settle the issue with the skeptics. I for 1 am on the fence about it.

Set up a decent draw shot. You decide what you think is appropriate.

Then set up a high sidespin follow...say something like where you have to follow the ball with inside english and come 2 rails and out.

See, for me to believe, i have to see it. That all.
Plus, i am not about to go bang up my cue just so i can find out.
And i am not alone in this aspect. I know there are plenty of people on this forum who like to debate theory and technique and while some of it is valid, some of it isn't. But if your going to get people to actually practice this, and throw their cues, you have to do something more then a stop shot.

If you really want to settle this and stick it up every guys a.s.s who doesn't believe, this is what you need to do.

Cause otherwise, they aren't going to accept doing a replace the ball stop shot as proof, despite the fact that i personally know that it's not exactly the easiest thing TOO do. There has to be more practical applications then just shots of that nature.
 
I'll say this Spidey you have the stone cold nuts against the bet Scoot Lee offered for one hundred a shot for Kinesters #1, but he can't bet now that he can see how well you make the shot. We met at DCC in the TAR booth and I need you to pm me more clear directions on the bank video as it was unclear to me about the shift and the second part about the outer edge when you have time please. See you soon at US Open or DCC I hope. Thanks for the videos--Leonard
 
SUPERSTAR said:
It doesn't have to be ridiculous stuff, but it should be good enough to settle the issue with the skeptics. I for 1 am on the fence about it.

Set up a decent draw shot. You decide what you think is appropriate.

Then set up a high sidespin follow...say something like where you have to follow the ball with inside english and come 2 rails and out.

See, for me to believe, i have to see it. That all.
Plus, i am not about to go bang up my cue just so i can find out.
And i am not alone in this aspect. I know there are plenty of people on this forum who like to debate theory and technique and while some of it is valid, some of it isn't. But if your going to get people to actually practice this, and throw their cues, you have to do something more then a stop shot.

If you really want to settle this and stick it up every guys a.s.s who doesn't believe, this is what you need to do.

Cause otherwise, they aren't going to accept doing a replace the ball stop shot as proof, despite the fact that i personally know that it's not exactly the easiest thing TOO do. There has to be more practical applications then just shots of that nature.
Click to expand...

I did the shot #1 because, in my opinion, it's a far higher difficulty than the shots you described. With shot #1, you must be mega-accurate in tip positioning and follow-through as well as stroke straightness.

Spinning around the table with as Hall puts it, "Whippin' action" is cake. ANYONE can do that.

Look at my Lambros... there isn't a nick on it. Dropping the cue 1" isn't doing anything to the cue or table.

Just cause I love ya man, I'll setup some angled shots and whip the shit outta the ball and post something tomorrow. If you wanna see force follow and force draw.... zzzzzzzzzz no prob. I'm almost wasting my time. If you want a combination of precision and power... you just got it with the previous link.

If you want just precision, maybe 3 rail inside english position shots.... that's more impressive to me. But you guys are the judge, not me.
 
poolcuemaster said:
I'll say this Spidey you have the stone cold nuts against the bet Scoot Lee offered for one hundred a shot for Kinesters #1, but he can't bet now that he can see how well you make the shot. We met at DCC in the TAR booth and I need you to pm me more clear directions on the bank video as it was unclear to me about the shift and the second part about the outer edge when you have time please. See you soon at US Open or DCC I hope. Thanks for the videos--Leonard
Click to expand...

Thanks, I appreciate that. I know none of you guys know me, but when I say this is totally average--- it is. When I'm firing on all cylinders, the % shoots from 60% (30 balls) to about 80%. Heck, I dogged almost 50% of the 2nd rack.

I would never bet with Scott--- he's the man. Plus, I need his help on something mechanical.. so I'd never bet him. What people may not know is that I shot that shot non-stop for nearly 5 months straight, every day, thousands of times. It's all I did for a long time. No pool, just that shot. So going shot-for-shot with someone is good action unless they're an elite player (as long as lag-drawing is not allowed).

Edit:

I'm not looking for shot #1 action, btw... or any action. I suck and I'm a nit.
 
Last edited:
SpiderWebComm said:
... I know for a fact I'm releasing before contact.... no doubt in my mind. ...
Click to expand...
People are often mistaken about this sort of thing. Can you tape it from an angle where we can see when the stick starts to move relative to your grip hand. In the clip I saw, this can't be determined.

Also, I would be far more impressed by a shot which leaves the cue ball within a diamond of the end cushion you're shooting from. Can you do that with this throwing technique?
 
Bob Jewett said:
People are often mistaken about this sort of thing. Can you tape it from an angle where we can see when the stick starts to move relative to your grip hand. In the clip I saw, this can't be determined.

Also, I would be far more impressed by a shot which leaves the cue ball within a diamond of the end cushion you're shooting from. Can you do that with this throwing technique?
Click to expand...


Again, I don't know how many times I've written this so far, Dave is saying that throwing the cue like this will prevent the cue twisting in any direction from your grip tightening up. He offered this up as an alternative shot for people that may have trouble keeping everything in line on long straight in shots.

I haven't seen him say even one time that he can stop the cue ball on a postage stamp after going 5 cushions with inside spin. It's an alternative shot for people that have a tendency to grip too tight on the money ball and dog it from the infamous grip twist.
MULLY
 
Bob Jewett said:
People are often mistaken about this sort of thing. Can you tape it from an angle where we can see when the stick starts to move relative to your grip hand. In the clip I saw, this can't be determined.

Also, I would be far more impressed by a shot which leaves the cue ball within a diamond of the end cushion you're shooting from. Can you do that with this throwing technique?
Click to expand...

You mean leave a ball in a corner pocket, shoot from the other corner pocket (with me having enough room to bridge comfy), and suck it back to the rail I'm shooting from? No prob. I'll do that tomorrow.

I only have a webcam, so you can either see my release or see the action of the ball. I release barely before impact.

I haven't tried, but I wouldn't bet against me shooting from the kitchen to an OB close to a corner and sucking it back off the rail I'm shooting from and sending it out of the kitchen again. Not saying I can, I haven't tried. I wouldn't bet against it though.
 
mullyman said:
Again, I don't know how many times I've written this so far, Dave is saying that throwing the cue like this will prevent the cue twisting in any direction from your grip tightening up. He offered this up as an alternative shot for people that may have trouble keeping everything in line on long straight in shots.

I haven't seen him say even one time that he can stop the cue ball on a postage stamp after going 5 cushions with inside spin. It's an alternative shot for people that have a tendency to grip too tight on the money ball and dog it from the infamous grip twist.
MULLY
Click to expand...

I know, Mully. But I guess people wanna know if it's a gimmick or not. So be it. If people want me to snap balls multiple rails, accurately, with it... I will. *yawn* If a shot has a difficulty of, say, 8 traditionally, it's like a 6 if you throw it. People will eventually "get" what I was trying to say in my original post. *yawn*

If it takes 115 posts to send a message home to some people and educate them on something they have no clue about or understand, noooo prob.
 
Last edited:
Actually Leonard, I would win the bet. Dave did not hit the shot exactly as it is supposed to be hit, even ONCE! He got close a couple of times, but not spot on. The CB must REPLACE the OB exactly...which is what Kinister's shot #1 is. It cannot roll forward, back up, or move sideways. That's why these demonstrations have to be set up with measureable results (i.e.: putting both balls on hole reinforcements, so it is an exact replacement; and using a laser to make sure the shot is a dead straight line...you can't do it visually, it's too subjective to error). I already mentioned how tough this shot is, and even Bert cannot hit it perfect, on demand...especially for big cash (notice too, that I declined to bet with Dave on that shot, with both of us shooting it, unless the balls were moved closer together). I will say, Dave hit the shot very well, for getting close!

Scott (not Scoot) Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

poolcuemaster said:
I'll say this Spidey you have the stone cold nuts against the bet Scoot Lee offered for one hundred a shot for Kinesters #1, but he can't bet now that he can see how well you make the shot. --Leonard
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Scott Lee said:
Actually Leonard, I would win the bet. Dave did not hit the shot exactly as it is supposed to be hit, even ONCE! He got close a couple of times, but not spot on. The CB must REPLACE the OB exactly...which is what Kinister's shot #1 is. It cannot roll forward, back up, or move sideways. That's why these demonstrations have to be set up with measureable results (i.e.: putting both balls on hole reinforcements, so it is an exact replacement; and using a laser to make sure the shot is a dead straight line...you can't do it visually, it's too subjective to error). I already mentioned how tough this shot is, and even Bert cannot hit it perfect, on demand...especially for big cash (notice too, that I declined to bet with Dave on that shot, with both of us shooting it, unless the balls were moved closer together). I will say, Dave hit the shot very well, for getting close!

Scott (not Scoot) Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

Scott:

Nobody on planet earth could beat, say, a 15-ball shot #1 ghost using hole reinforcements on a 9' table. I'd venture to say it's impossible--- including Efren. That's why I stipulated you can be 1/2 rotation forward (which can be minimized to 1/4 easily and fairly). I was proving the strength of the technique more than my shot #1. Considering the cue was airborne at impact, not too bad.

Am I wrong? Using hole reinforcements is mega-extreme. Do you know anyone who can beat a rack with hole reinforcements at that distance? Just curious.

Dave
 
SpiderWebComm said:
You mean leave a ball in a corner pocket, shoot from the other corner pocket (with me having enough room to bridge comfy), and suck it back to the rail I'm shooting from? ...
Click to expand...
More or less the same position you demonstrated is fine, but we need a side view. If you want a specific shot, try distance 5 of shot 5C (page 12) of http://www.sfbilliards.com/basics.pdf (attached)...

bob2.gif
 
Last edited:
Bob Jewett said:
More or less the same position you demonstrated is fine, but we need a side view. If you want a specific shot, try distance 5 of shot 5C (page 12) of http://www.sfbilliards.com/basics.pdf (attached)...

View attachment 74598
Click to expand...

I can definitely get the CB back to the rail at position 5- guaranteed . In that little gray box? Low %. That's tough. Suck it back out of the kitchen after hitting the rail at that position.... likely, but not a lock.

So I don't have to make multiple videos tomorrow... is everyone agreeable that this proves throwing the cue isn't gimmicky? If not, I'd rather have you guys vote on it. This can be a "poll the audience" thing :) Just like TV.... I love it.
 
Dave...Make the shot perfectly 15x in a row? Nope, I doubt anybody could that, under the conditions I put up. Perhaps 50%, if you had PAT 3 skills (like Thorsten, Ortmann, Randyg, and maybe Souquet...because they practice this shot). However, you're saying it's 'mega-extreme' to use hole reinforcements? Not at all...we use them all the time, in pool school, to show exact results...and I already said you didn't do too bad. Just not anywhere near perfect...which is how Kinister describes shot #1. BTW, I already said I think that shot is brutal, to be able to shoot it, the way Bert describes it, no matter what kind of grip or swing you use! Personally, I think the shot is mostly BS. Learning to hit a PERFECT stop shot (same perameters as in my other post) is far more important.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

SpiderWebComm said:
Scott:

Nobody on planet earth could beat, say, a 15-ball shot #1 ghost using hole reinforcements on a 9' table. I'd venture to say it's impossible--- including Efren. That's why I stipulated you can be 1/2 rotation forward (which can be minimized to 1/4 easily and fairly). I was proving the strength of the technique more than my shot #1. Considering the cue was airborne at impact, not too bad.

Am I wrong? Using hole reinforcements is mega-extreme. Do you know anyone who can beat a rack with hole reinforcements at that distance? Just curious.

Dave
Click to expand...
 
Bob Jewett said:
More or less the same position you demonstrated is fine, but we need a side view. If you want a specific shot, try distance 5 of shot 5C (page 12) of http://www.sfbilliards.com/basics.pdf (attached)...

View attachment 74598
Click to expand...


My initial thoughts on looking at this particular shot is that I can probably do this on a fairly consistent basis. Let me make sure about this. I have to pocket the ball in the upper corner and draw the CB back into that boxed area? Am I allowed to use a cushion? Seems like a helluva cheat of the pocket to not use the cushion.
MULLY
 
Scott Lee said:
Dave...Make the shot perfectly 15x in a row? Nope, I doubt anybody could that, under the conditions I put up. Perhaps 50%, if you had PAT 3 skills (like Thorsten, Ortmann, Randyg, and maybe Souquet...because they practice this shot). However, you're saying it's 'mega-extreme' to use hole reinforcements? Not at all...we use them all the time, in pool school, to show exact results...and I already said you didn't do too bad. Just not anywhere near perfect...which is how Kinister describes shot #1. BTW, I already said I think that shot is brutal, to be able to shoot it, the way Bert describes it, no matter what kind of grip or swing you use! Personally, I think the shot is mostly BS. Learning to hit a PERFECT stop shot (same perameters as in my other post) is far more important.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

The only reason I said mega-extreme is you have a few mm tolerance in the reaction of the OB and you're multiple feet away. The difference between a stop shot and a replacement shot is really big--stroke wise-- with shot #1. Anyone can lag-draw, stop that ball. I think I could do that until I got 'bored' and missed. It's not the shot, I think, that's important with shot #1, it's the stroke required.

You're totally correct though... being able to control long-range stop shots is crucial--comes up WAY more times than needing to stun-follow a long range ball.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Yes, leave the cue ball in the gray box. The point is accuracy.
Click to expand...

It looks like the angle into the pocket, based on your setup is dead straight in. Do you cheat the pocket and use the rail? Or, are you throwing the OB in right right-spin to get that far to the right? I never shot it or practiced it--- I just want to get the idea before I start recording.

What's par for the course? If I setup the OB on #5 and the CB at the position shown, how many times out of 10 is Bob Jewett in the little gray box?

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top