Top 10 Secrets of a Good Draw Shot

[dr_dave]

I didn’t watch the video yet... but can you use your teaching techniques to duplicates Corey’s frozen to the rail Mosconi cup draw stroke that was the hot thread a few days ago?

That is obviously a special kind of shot that requires tremendous skill and power. However, many of the tips in the video still apply; although, a shot like Corey's, with the CB on the cushion, extreme cue elevation is required to get the necessary tip contact point.

Watch the video when you get a chance. I know it is hard for you, but I have faith that you can muster the courage.

Regards,
Dave

 

[AF pool guy]

agreed with all points except the level cue



true power draws require a decent amount of elevation

With a non-LD shaft, a little elevation can offset the tendency to hop the cue ball with extreme draw. With today’s LD cues it’s almost impossible to get the natural pivot point below cueball center.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[td873]

I agree with Pat. Cue elevation is required on some shots (e.g., if bridging close to a rail, or if the bridge length is not very long), and it might help some people get more draw action (due to explainable factors), and it can certainly help with quick draw, but there is no advantage to adding elevation on a straight-back draw shot.

For those interested, this topic is covered in detail here:

draw shot cue elevation effects

Enjoy,
Dave

I generally agree with these statements, but there's a little trick I was taught years ago to get maximum draw on a long shot - and it does require a little angle. It's unclear if the results are dramatically different, but I suppose Dr. Dave can run an experiment to find out.

Theory: if you shoot perfectly level, the cue ball slides all the way down the table to the object ball losing rotation the whole way. If you have a little angle (not like a jump shot, more like shooting off the rail a slight, but existing angle) - the cue ball hops down the table with less frictional loss. So, when it hits the object ball, it has [might have / may have / ?] more spin than a "flat" draw shot. Interestingly, Dr. Dave's link [above] states that the cue ball hops down the table. This is precisely the effect you are looking for to maximize draw.

For example, if you watch virtually any power draw shots on youtube, the most extreme versions all have cues with some angle.

Here is Mike Massey's shot. It's lower resolution, but you can kind of make out the cue ball hop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GsRIPSTWfo

Dr Dave version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59amcNEN0Tg

Chris Capp: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqCPqYJ30zo [you can see the obcjet ball hop in a couple shots, which [arguable means the cue ball hit it above center]

Corey's draw shot has him shooting with even more angle and you could make the logical leap that ball is hopping without much dispute. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqCPqYJ30zo

So, despite the common wisdom (which I believe) that draw shots should be hit as level as possible, it appears that there are certain situations where it is beneficial to have a slight angle. I haven't seen anything to the contrary, but I admit that I also haven't seen anything the illustrates the angle has any measurable benefit.

If there is a mathematical reason why hopping down the table reduces draw, I could be easily persuaded. But my quick / common sense approach is that less friction, with the same rotation equals more draw.

[NOTE: I know most will believe that the cue ball is not hopping down the table. But you can put a line of dimes in front of the ball (starting maybe 3 inches away) and you will see that it is hopping quite a ways before it hits the first coin. I'll try take a video or two tonight to illustrate.]

-td

 

[td873]

[NOTE: I know most will believe that the cue ball is not hopping down the table. But you can put a line of dimes in front of the ball (starting maybe 3 inches away) and you will see that it is hopping quite a ways before it hits the first coin. I'll try take a video or two tonight to illustrate.]

-td

Here is the video I shot after my last post.

https://youtu.be/EFPzmzLb3F0

For reference, my table felt is over 5 years old and is about to be replaced. It’s not fast by any stretch. 12 diamonds of draw is a pretty sporty stroke on the equipment now. I’m sure pros could get more, but not me.

I think you can see the cue ball jump most shots. When I tried to level out, I still had some angle. I don’t think my body, in conjunction with the table rails, will let me get perfectly straight. But, I can get straight enough to minimize cue ball hop (I think).

The practical effect (for me anyway) is that there is no significant improvement or measurable negative to having some angle on the shot. There is no real way to execute with an identical stroke, so the variances could simply be differences mechanics between shots. Nevertheless,I suspect that everyone that shoots within 1 diamond of the rail is hopping the ball down the table. And I also suspect that most mega draw shots executed by pros (or whoever) have some angular component where the cue ball hops (vs rolling the entire time).

-td

 

[EddieBme]

... with the right speed, and without miscuing; and draw the CB the desired amount; and do all of this with accuracy and consistency. For the people who have trouble with any of this, the advice in the video can help.

Regards,
Dave

Enjoyed every minute of the video Dr Dave.
While watching the video, i noticed how close your cue tip is when addressing the cb with your warm up strokes. Is that natural for you on all shots, or just the draw shots?
I hadn't noticed how far away my tip is when addressing the cb, until i watched the video. I tried that approach, but it doesn't feel natural to me, and it looks like from my perspective, (when i get down on the shot PSR) that i'm actually touch the cb with my tip. I have to literally think about moving my tip closer, and lean over and look up to see how close i am, (before i can tell), and of course that's a distraction, and it's hard for me to stay focused.

 

[dr_dave]

Cue elevation is required on some shots (e.g., if bridging close to a rail, or if the bridge length is not very long), and it might help some people get more draw action (due to explainable factors), and it can certainly help with quick draw, but there is no advantage to adding elevation on a straight-back draw shot.

For those interested, this topic is covered in detail here:

draw shot cue elevation effects

I generally agree with these statements, but there's a little trick I was taught years ago to get maximum draw on a long shot - and it does require a little angle. It's unclear if the results are dramatically different, but I suppose Dr. Dave can run an experiment to find out.

Theory: if you shoot perfectly level, the cue ball slides all the way down the table to the object ball losing rotation the whole way. If you have a little angle (not like a jump shot, more like shooting off the rail a slight, but existing angle) - the cue ball hops down the table with less frictional loss. So, when it hits the object ball, it has [might have / may have / ?] more spin than a "flat" draw shot. Interestingly, Dr. Dave's link [above] states that the cue ball hops down the table. This is precisely the effect you are looking for to maximize draw.

For example, if you watch virtually any power draw shots on youtube, the most extreme versions all have cues with some angle.

Some cue elevation is required to clear the rails and to get the tip low enough on the ball with draw shots. And for people who drop their elbow (more common with power shots), a little extra clearance is usually desirable (to not slam the cue into the rail, and to not hit one's grip-hand knuckles on the rail or table).

So, despite the common wisdom (which I believe) that draw shots should be hit as level as possible, it appears that there are certain situations where it is beneficial to have a slight angle. I haven't seen anything to the contrary, but I admit that I also haven't seen anything the illustrates the angle has any measurable benefit.

If there is a mathematical reason why hopping down the table reduces draw, I could be easily persuaded. But my quick / common sense approach is that less friction, with the same rotation equals more draw.

FYI, I have done extensive analysis of the physics of draw shots. All of the results are summarized on the draw shot physics-based advice resource page. That math/physics proof for why a more-level cue is better can be found in TP B.10 – Draw shot cue elevation effects.

[NOTE: I know most will believe that the cue ball is not hopping down the table. But you can put a line of dimes in front of the ball (starting maybe 3 inches away) and you will see that it is hopping quite a ways before it hits the first coin. I'll try take a video or two tonight to illustrate.]

The CB hops on pretty much any shot with speed (draw, follow, or stun) because the cue must be elevated some to clear the rails.

Regards,
Dave

PS: Thank you for posting your example video clearly showing the CB hop that comes with speed and even just modest cue elevation.

 

[dr_dave]

Enjoyed every minute of the video Dr Dave.

I'm glad to hear it.

While watching the video, i noticed how close your cue tip is when addressing the cb with your warm up strokes. Is that natural for you on all shots, or just the draw shots?

In my "set" position, where I hold the cue still to verify tip placement and aim, I try to position the tip very close to the CB. I usually don't return the tip that close to the CB during the warm-up strokes, except on the last one where I return to a final "set" position check.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

PS: Thank you for posting your example video clearly showing the CB hop that comes with speed and even just modest cue elevation.

FYI, CB hop is also clearly visible with the slowed-down shot starting at the 11:35 point in my video; and here, I had the cue pretty much as level as I could get it to barely clear over the side pocket. Again, most shots at speed are "jump shots." This happens with follow shots too (see follow shot ball hop).

Regards,
Dave

 

[td873]

FYI, CB hop is also clearly visible with the slowed-down shot starting at the 11:35 point in my video; and here, I had the cue pretty much as level as I could get it to barely clear over the side pocket. Again, most shots at speed are "jump shots." This happens with follow shots too (see follow shot ball hop).

Regards,
Dave

Cool. A pretty good amount of hop! Also, that only looks to be somewhere between 5 and under 10 degrees of angle. Maybe just a hair over 5.

Side note: I scanned the links/proofs for hop-spin, and it was a lot to digest at midnight. But, the conclusion I came away with (for my game anyway) is that shooting level is definitely preferred [mathematically], but the impact of shooting with some minimal angle is not significant enough to worry about as a practical matter. IMO, there are very few situations where you need maximum draw and getting ~80% of tip offset at that point is "good enough." And, to be honest, when shooting at maximum anything (draw, top, center, whatever), my stroke mechanics start to break down and the results are unreliable at best. The harder I shoot past 80-90%, the more likely a stroke deficit is likely to manifest itself. You can train to improve your max [draw/top/speed], but this falls into the bucket of: if your practice time is limited, focus on your core shots and not specialty shots because you'll lose more games by missing something "easy" than you'll win by making some manner of "trick" shot.



-td

 

[td873]

This happens with follow shots too (see follow shot ball hop).

Separate question: is follow hop more significant than draw hop because of the contact point on the cue ball [above center]? (Is the the downward component of the shot the same or different?)

-td

 

[dr_dave]

Cool. A pretty good amount of hop! Also, that only looks to be somewhere between 5 and under 10 degrees of angle. Maybe just a hair over 5.

Side note: I scanned the links/proofs for hop-spin, and it was a lot to digest at midnight. But, the conclusion I came away with (for my game anyway) is that shooting level is definitely preferred [mathematically], but the impact of shooting with some minimal angle is not significant enough to worry about as a practical matter. IMO, there are very few situations where you need maximum draw and getting ~80% of tip offset at that point is "good enough." And, to be honest, when shooting at maximum anything (draw, top, center, whatever), my stroke mechanics start to break down and the results are unreliable at best. The harder I shoot past 80-90%, the more likely a stroke deficit is likely to manifest itself. You can train to improve your max [draw/top/speed], but this falls into the bucket of: if your practice time is limited, focus on your core shots and not specialty shots because you'll lose more games by missing something "easy" than you'll win by making some manner of "trick" shot.

I hope my math and physics didn't give you nightmares. :grin-square:

Very well-stated conclusions. I like them.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

This happens with follow shots too (see follow shot ball hop).

Separate question: is follow hop more significant than draw hop because of the contact point on the cue ball [above center]? (Is the the downward component of the shot the same or different?)

The cue can be closer to level with a follow shot but the downward squirt into the table adds to the hop height. With draw shots, the cue is elevated more, but some of this is cancelled by the squirt-up effect. The answer depends of the squirt (CB deflection) characteristics of the cue, bridge length, and distance from the rail. Generally, I would think the hop would be more for draw shots with typical equipment and bridge lengths. For a 10" bridge length, the cue angle change between max draw and max follow is about 6 degrees, and typical squirt values are in the 2 degree range.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

One observation about Sam's stroke. In part three the camera is in front of Sam. It appears as if Sam is not stroking straight. On the back stroke Sam is pulling the cue closer to her body. This causes the tip to the right. This in turn causes the cue ball to deflect to the left. This is further verified when the cue ball draws back to the left.

FYI, here is a pertinent NOTE from the YouTube video description:

"When I watched this shot in person, I was standing right behind the camera and I don't remember her stroke being crooked. I think I would have noticed if it was, and I would have asked her to do it again with a straighter stroke. I think it looks crooked in the video due to perspective issues with the camera angle and pendulum swing. I have seen this effect is other videos also. Samm's aim might have been slightly off and she might have hit the CB slightly off center, but I think the stroke was straight. Again camera perspective can create optical illusions since the vertical angle of the cue (up and down) is changing during the pendulum stroke. When I can find some time, I will post a follow-up video that clearly illustrates this effect."

I will try to post the follow-up video some time this coming week if I can find the time.

See the new Is this Stroke Crooked … or is it Camera Parallax thread for the follow-up video and further discussion.

Enjoy,
Dave

 

[jviss]

The CB hops on pretty much any shot with speed (draw, follow, or stun) because the cue must be elevated some to clear the rails.

I would think the cue ball is prone to hop whenever there is a vertical component to the impact of the cue, so even a perfectly level cue hitting below center will impart a vertical component.

 

[jviss]

Great Video.

Dr. Dave and Samm, thanks very much for this video. I have watched it probably five times, on the big screen in my billiard room; once straight through, the other times pausing, backing up, etc., as I tried things on the table and made notes. It has greatly improved and reinforced my awareness of proper technique, and slightly improved my actual performance. Time will tell!

I would love to provide a more extensive review, but I've been busy with work. Maybe over the holidays.

One thing I'd like to point out is that you refer viewers to "links in the video description." While watching this on a smart TV, in my case a Samsung, via the Youtube app, the video description does not appear to be available. At least, I can't figure out how to access it.

Regards,

jv

 

[dr_dave]

I would think the cue ball is prone to hop whenever there is a vertical component to the impact of the cue, so even a perfectly level cue hitting below center will impart a vertical component.

The impact direction is determined mostly by the vertical angle of the cue (and squirt to a smaller degree). Hitting below center usually involves a downward impact direction (because the back of the cue is elevated to clear the rails and/or get the tip lower, especially with a shorter bridge length). See all of the posts above for further explanation.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Dr. Dave and Samm, thanks very much for this video. I have watched it probably five times, on the big screen in my billiard room; once straight through, the other times pausing, backing up, etc., as I tried things on the table and made notes. It has greatly improved and reinforced my awareness of proper technique, and slightly improved my actual performance. Time will tell!

I'm glad you liked the video.

I would love to provide a more extensive review, but I've been busy with work.

You need to get your priorities straight. :grin-square:

One thing I'd like to point out is that you refer viewers to "links in the video description." While watching this on a smart TV, in my case a Samsung, via the Youtube app, the video description does not appear to be available. At least, I can't figure out how to access it.

Unfortunately, not all viewing platforms offer access to the video description. For your convenience, here are the resource links from the video:

- draw FAQ resource page
- how to chalk
- chalk type
- miscue limit
- eye pattern
- cue elevation effects
- open bridge
- bridge length
- pre-shot routine “best practices"
- stroke fundamentals and “best practices” advice
- pendulum stroke
- follow through
- elbow drop
- BU Playing Ability Exams
- 3-times-the-angle system “good action” draw

Enjoy,
Dave

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Also, that only looks to be somewhere between 5 and under 10 degrees of angle. Maybe just a hair over 5. ...

There is a simple way to do elevation angle estimation for pool shots. If you take how far above the surface of the table the butt is in inches and subtract how far above the surface of the table the tip is, you get the degrees of elevation (accurate to within about 5% up to 20 inches of elevation). The one degree per inch of cue elevation is true because the typical cue is about 57 inches long.

 

[dr_dave]

I would think the cue ball is prone to hop whenever there is a vertical component to the impact of the cue, so even a perfectly level cue hitting below center will impart a vertical component.

The impact direction is determined mostly by the vertical angle of the cue (and squirt to a smaller degree). Hitting below center usually involves a downward impact direction (because the back of the cue is elevated to clear the rails and/or get the tip lower, especially with a shorter bridge length). See all of the posts above for further explanation.

To be clear, a draw shot causes the CB to hop because the elevated cue is hitting at a downward angle, causing the CB to bounce off the slate. The low tip is not launching the CB up (unless there is a miscue or scoop).

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

There is a simple way to do elevation angle estimation for pool shots. If you take how far above the surface of the table the butt is in inches and subtract how far above the surface of the table the tip is, you get the degrees of elevation (accurate to within about 5% up to 20 inches of elevation). The one degree per inch of cue length is true because the typical cue is about 57 inches long.

Good idea Bob. FYI, I just added your quote at the bottom of the cue elevation resource page.

Thanks,
Dave