Top 10 Pool and Billiard Myths Busted and Debunked
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
You're welcome. We aim to swerve. :grin-square:Thanks Dave and company for the informative video
I'm glad to hear it.Seems my "nip" draw question was properly addressed.
Catch you later,
Dave
No, it guarantees nothing and is not needed for an accomplished player except when they opt for it.
That said, for the vast majority of players, the closed bridge makes it easier to keep the cue from wobbling a bit from side to side for those with less than adequate stroke fundamentals, which means most players. Even Dave had conceded the closed bridge can be a "crutch" for those who require it. As we all seem to understand, though, with training and instruction, the "crutch" will not be necessary.
You can actually get the same effective offset from center with any cue elevation.
Some people who are afraid to aim low on the ball might actually get more spin when they elevate. For more info, see the following illustration from the cue elevation effects resource page.
Regards,
Dave
That’s just not true. Certainly not in reference to elevations that are going to make the cueball leave the table for any significant period of time. Your diagram is for just below center. You can hit just below center from a wide range of cue elevation angles. Not so for hitting well below center and therefore draw shots. And even if you someone does perform some acrobatics to be able strike the cueball low enough and with extreme cue elevation as to equal the same contact point as someone playing deep draw with a flat cue, their follow through is going to be so minimal that it drastically reduces the effectiveness of the draw shot, which is the point you demonstrate in your video.
With regards to the microseconds of extended contact with the cueball, it’s Barry Stark’s argument, and I agree with him, that this minuscule amount of extra time in contact with the cueball is what results in ‘sweet timing’. And his little experiment supported this. His pro reported when he timed the ball well, and these shots matched the shots that the Slomo camera recorded as having extended contact with the cueball. I think we can all agree that as soon as we hit a shot that feels well timed, we no know we’re going to get a bunch of work on the ball. I think those microseconds make a big difference on the cueball.
Look at someone like Ronnie O. He times the ball beautifully and moves the cueball effortlessly. He can move the cueball around a lap of the table with half the effort that other pros use, and I think it’s because he times his acceleration perfectly. And i don’t think that same timing is possible with a short jabby stroke.
Now technically, I suspect you’re right in saying that if the short jabby stroke is able to reproduce the same acceleration and power as the long flowing stroke, then yes, you’ll get the same result. But the short jabby stroke is unable to produce a whole range of shots that a flowing stroke with a long follow through can. Mark Allen, about the only snooker pro with a short jabby action, admits himself that his action lets him down, that he is unable to play the range of shots that other pros can, and that when he’s playing in less than ideal conditions, this really hampers his game.
Technically, you don't need a bridge at all to draw the ball. You can draw the ball one handed. And hypothetically, you don't need a stroke at all to draw the ball. You can throw the cue like a javelin and make perfect contact to draw the ball. But does it give you the best chance for success...no!
Last edited:
I'd say no. I played open bridge most of my life, and closed for about the last 2 years, and I think I may switch back.
The reason why is that there are more variables with your finger/hand position involved in making a closed bridge. If your index finger is not in the exact same place or moves at all during the stroke, then the shaft will shift.
The shaft is riding on/against more surfaces on a closed bridge, so that means more surfaces have to get in and remain in perfect alignment for consistency.
I think moving forward I'm going to use open except: getting very low on the ball and rail shots. I did a bunch of experimenting last night for a couple of hours, and this is what I've decided is going to work best for me moving forward.
Power draw has 0% to do with the bridge for me. It's all follow through and acceleration on the stroke, in my experience. I get exactly the same amount of draw on those shots open or closed, as I tested last night.
You'd have to do something pretty weird with your stroke for that to happen before hitting the CB.
I don't think a closed bridge fixes any common stroke flaw - "closed bridge works better for draw" is a myth.
pj
chgo
Well stated. FYI, I've added a partial quote of your post on the advantages of an open bridge resource page.
That is my experience as well; although, I think the open bridge is slightly better since there is less friction.
Regards,
Dave
The diagram of the elevated cue shows a contact point at maximum draw.
Dave's right that you can hit just as far above or below center with either stroke. As shown, centerball (and the maximum draw contact point) is elevated when the cue is elevated.
pj
chgo
A closed bridge can definitely help somebody who tends to lift the cue up before the hit (e.g., by tightening the grip firmly during the stroke). In this case, the "closed bridge will work better for draw" (but not for the reasons they might think).
Regards,
Dave
PJ,The diagram of the elevated cue shows a contact point at maximum draw.Your diagram is for just below center.You can actually get the same effective offset from center with any cue elevation.
Some people who are afraid to aim low on the ball might actually get more spin when they elevate. For more info, see the following illustration from the cue elevation effects resource page.
Dave's right that you can hit just as far above or below center with either stroke. As shown, centerball (and the maximum draw contact point) is elevated when the cue is elevated.
Thank you for helping to make this point.
Regards,
Dave
Ugh, relative to center ball based on the angle of the cue. Really? That’s not at all practical and basically irrelevant with regards to actually playing a draw shot.
What Patrick has stated is true.
I don’t believe I said it wasn’t true, did I?
EDIT: If we’re going beyond terse replies: Relative to the bed of the table, you can’t hit as low on the cueball with an elevated cue as you can with a cue closer to parallel to the table. In other words, with a more horizontal cue you are able to contact the cueball closer to the cloth than with an elevated cue. This was important in my original post because it relates to ability to cue through the ball, accuracy, power. And as Dave mentioned, you’re no longer driving the cueball into the bed of the table.
Last edited:
During our normal sort of vacation conversation, our family debated whether requiring all drivers drive without seatbelts might reduce traffic deaths.
Wearing seatbelts there might be 1000 accidents per xxxxx miles driven with 30 of them fatal. Without seat belts, the percentage of accidents that are fatal might go up, but if the number of accidents goes down by a bigger factor (because drivers feeling vulnerable remain more focussed and allow fewer distractions) there might be a net win.
If using an open bridge on a power draw shot causes an aware shooter to be more cognizant of staying down and avoiding extraneous motion, maybe there is a net win.
You’re joking right? You’re telling me the ability to cue parallel to the table has no impact on how much draw you can get?
The amount of spin you get on the cue ball is determined by how far off center you hit and the speed of the stick at the time of impact. Or at least that's what I believe. Do you believe something else?
No, I'm telling you how close to the cloth you can hit is irrelevant when comparing the effectiveness of different cue elevations.
Maybe focus on what's true instead of who's "winning"...
pj
chgo
Again, the following illustration from the cue elevation effects resource page might be helpful.
Any amount of backspin (based on the "tip offset" from center ball) can be produced with any "tip contact point height" on the CB by changing cue elevation.
The exception is when the tip is at the miscue limit with a horizontal cue. Any cue elevation at that tip contact point will result in a miscue.
Regards,
Dave