Tip shape

[Patrick Johnson]

The idea is that the cue is lined straight along the line of the shot on contact and then angles out through the finish of the stroke.

So the stroke doesn't change direction until the tip contacts the CB, and then changes direction during 1-2 thousandths of a second contact? That sounds even more improbable to me than what I thought you were saying - but you obviously make it work, so more power to you, Fran.

pj
chgo

 

[dquarasr]

As much as I had doubted swiping's effectiveness, I must change my position based on experts' testimony here that it does indeed work.

And again, thanks for the very informative and civil discussion. I appreciate that this thread did not devolve despite some strong opinions aired.

 

[FranCrimi]

So the stroke doesn't change direction until the tip contacts the CB, and then changes direction during 1-2 thousandths of a second contact? That sounds even more improbable to me than what I thought you were saying - but you obviously make it work, so more power to you, Fran.

pj
chgo

Well, you do seem very enthusiastic about coming up with an explanation for it without trying or experimenting with it. It sort of reminds me of the critics of the elbow drop technique who like to come up with answers without experiments.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Well, you do seem very enthusiastic about coming up with an explanation for it without trying or experimenting with it.

I'm not really in the market for a swipe stroke that accomplishes the same thing as a straight stroke (compensates for squirt). But like I said, if you like it, more power to you.

pj
chgo

 

[bbb]

As much as I had doubted swiping's effectiveness, I must change my position based on experts' testimony here that it does indeed work.

And again, thanks for the very informative and civil discussion. I appreciate that this thread did not devolve despite some strong opinions aired.

thank the lord that this is NOT the aiming section!!!!!!

 

[phreaticus]

thank the lord that this is NOT the aiming section!!!!!!

You have to admit this thread got super nerdy. Would have been a bit more fun with at least a little cussing & passive aggressive behavior!

 

[dquarasr]

You have to admit this thread got super nerdy. Would have been a bit more fun with at least a little cussing & passive aggressive behavior!

Ok, here goes: you suck, you’re a g-damned liberal conservative, you can’t make two balls in a row, and forget you.

How’s that?

 

[bbb]

Ok, here goes: you suck, you’re a g-damned liberal conservative, you can’t make two balls in a row, and forget you.

How’s that?

Spidey could spot you the 6 -out
you have to spend time over there to understand….
no disrespect intended

 

[phreaticus]

Ok, here goes: you suck, you’re a g-damned liberal conservative, you can’t make two balls in a row, and forget you.

How’s that?

Thats more like it

 

[dquarasr]

Spidey could spot you the 6 -out
you have to spend time over there to understand….
no disrespect intended

Oh, I've spent too many hours slogging through the aiming conversation, perpetuating 25+ years of meaningless dislike and drivel. It's sort of like a train wreck: you hate yourself for not being able to avert your eyes.

 

[WobblyStroke]

That would be true if the cue was angled before contact, but that's not how this works. The idea is that the cue is lined straight along the line of the shot on contact and then angles out through the finish of the stroke. The cb doesn't get away fast enough, thus the tip contact time is longer.

This can't be right. Time of contact is too brief to time initiating anything at contact.

What is almost surely happening is you line up straight, swerve R/L as you come into contact (which produces an angle at contact aimed R/L of target, the ball deflects L/R and continues on near how you originally aimed it staight with R/L spin on it.

Just to use my brief accidental swiping due to arc in my stroke, the arc is there throughout the stroke and the tip is moving slightly right over several inches. As mentioned before, I did find it spins the ball more even with same tip contact. Whether that is due to force applied in intended side of spin or longer tip contact as you suggest, I have no idea, I just experienced more spin.

 

[FranCrimi]

This can't be right. Time of contact is too brief to time initiating anything at contact.

What is almost surely happening is you line up straight, swerve R/L as you come into contact (which produces an angle at contact aimed R/L of target, the ball deflects L/R and continues on near how you originally aimed it staight with R/L spin on it.

Just to use my brief accidental swiping due to arc in my stroke, the arc is there throughout the stroke and the tip is moving slightly right over several inches. As mentioned before, I did find it spins the ball more even with same tip contact. Whether that is due to force applied in intended side of spin or longer tip contact as you suggest, I have no idea, I just experienced more spin.

As I've said before in previous discussions on this subject, it's all speculation. I'm sure you're right in what you experienced.

I didn't find that I experienced more spin with that method, but that's just me. I remember when I first got the Predator shaft, I was actually getting less spin response by using the swipe method than I did using the swipe method with a solid wood shaft, so I started using the parallel method of applying side spin with the Predator. There are some variables to also consider, like angle of attack, for example.

This is strictly a feel player's technique --- if players try to calculate it, they'll go nuts. This is why I think people who live by measurements immediately reject the premise.

 

[WobblyStroke]

As I've said before in previous discussions on this subject, it's all speculation. I'm sure you're right in what you experienced.

I didn't find that I experienced more spin with that method, but that's just me. I remember when I first got the Predator shaft, I was actually getting less spin response by using the swipe method than I did using the swipe method with a solid wood shaft, so I started using the parallel method of applying side spin with the Predator. There are some variables to also consider, like angle of attack, for example.

This is strictly a feel player's technique --- if players try to calculate it, they'll go nuts. This is why I think people who live by measurements immediately reject the premise.

Precisely. All the moving parts would be impossible to calculate. I spin the ball on many shots ala old school guys like Earl and Seigel and am occasionally asked by others how I even aim all the different spins at different speeds, with different distances between the balls. There are so many factors of deflection, and swerve on the ball, that all play together to make for an accurate strike. I tell them, "I don't". I see the shot, get down and do warmup strokes that float around a bit and the tip settles where it needs to for the speed I'm stroking at. I don't do anything consciously to aim and tbh I don't remember ever doing anything other than letting my arm figure it out without me.

re the amount of spin: I meant I got more spin than expected for so little offset from center with the unintended arc. As in 1/4 tip right english stroking on an arc produced more R spin than 1/4 tip R english stroking str8 at it perpendicular to the ball.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I got more spin than expected for so little offset from center with the unintended arc. As in 1/4 tip right english stroking on an arc produced more R spin than 1/4 tip R english stroking str8 at it perpendicular to the ball.

The arc stroke hits the same CB spot at an angle, therefore farther from "effective center'.

pj
chgo

 

[WobblyStroke]

The arc stroke hits the same CB spot at an angle, therefore farther from "effective center'.

makes sense. and with no extended contact or fancy lateral force vectors.