Training for a backstroke pause

Wileydog said:
Speed requires a time lapse and measuring the speed at the point where it reaches zero is nearly impossible. That’s where calculus comes in. It allows you to use math formulas to calculate real world situations. We know it has to stop, but, mathematically, it doesn’t.
Click to expand...

I am a Mech Eng by degree, had more than my fill of calculus and differential equations. I am curious about what calculus formula you are utilizing to determine the fly wouldn't stop? Intuitively, I think that although the stop or pause is infinitesimally small and impossible to measure, it does occur. I'm trying to think of anything in the real world that can make a perfect 180 change of direction without a momentary pause.

I think formulating a calculus formula to deal with the fly or bullet would be very difficult to derive due to what happens to the body of the fly and/or bullet upon impact. If you made the assumption the shape of either remained the same at impact, it would be much easier. But that isn't the case. Perhaps I should be cruel and propose this problem to one of the Math Professors as a potential bonus question on their next Calc III final. LOL
 
C.Milian said:
Yeah but the idea is that it is important.
Click to expand...
I understand that's your idea. My idea is that your idea isn't the only one, and that it's not necessarily so important for everybody.

And that it's not a physical certainty whenever a cue reverses direction.

pj
chgo
 
nobcitypool said:
I am a Mech Eng by degree, had more than my fill of calculus and differential equations. I am curious about what calculus formula you are utilizing to determine the fly wouldn't stop? Intuitively, I think that although the stop or pause is infinitesimally small and impossible to measure, it does occur. I'm trying to think of anything in the real world that can make a perfect 180 change of direction without a momentary pause.

I think formulating a calculus formula to deal with the fly or bullet would be very difficult to derive due to what happens to the body of the fly and/or bullet upon impact. If you made the assumption the shape of either remained the same at impact, it would be much easier. But that isn't the case. Perhaps I should be cruel and propose this problem to one of the Math Professors as a potential bonus question on their next Calc III final. LOL
Click to expand...

I'm happy you're a Mech Eng by degree, had more than your fill of calculus and differential equations. Maybe you should re-read my posts. I'm the one that agrees with what you just said. I've got a computer science degree and I'm a technical architect by trade and, although I had my fill of calculus in school, I never had to apply it in my field, so feel free to prove the others wrong.
 
nobcitypool said:
For the briefest of moments when the maximum compression occurs, the mass of the fly's body is not moving forward or backwards, it is stationary (the pause).
Click to expand...
Yet the train's still doing 60 mph. How can the train be doing 60 while the (finally fully squashed) fly stuck (now very firmly) to it's nose is motionless?

Detailing all the squashing action is just kicking the can down the road. Sooner or later you have to deal with the fly, either all at once or in molecular parts, changing direction.

pj
chgo
 
Wileydog said:
Can you give the exact area of a circle? We know it exists, but can we mathematically calculate it to an exact amount? Math doesn't always fit exactly into reality.
Click to expand...
I think it's more accurate to say we don't (yet) have the math to precisely describe some things. The area of a circle is a much different thing than gravity's acceleration of a thrown ball.

pj
chgo
 
Wileydog said:
I'm happy you're a Mech Eng by degree, had more than your fill of calculus and differential equations. Maybe you should re-read my posts. I'm the one that agrees with what you just said. I've got a computer science degree and I'm a technical architect by trade and, although I had my fill of calculus in school, I never had to apply it in my field, so feel free to prove the others wrong.
Click to expand...

You must have gotten a chip on the shoulder along with your diploma my friend. :smile: I wasn't disputing you or attempting to put you down, I was truly curious about the calculus formula you stated would prove the point. It's been so long since I referenced a calculus book or formula that I wouldn't care to attempt putting something together for this problem.

I'm sure with you being a computer science major you realize that many of the calculus formulas employed by a computer are never exact (since it is digital and not analog), they simply get it accurate out to so many decimal places it is essentially irrelevant.

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, this is simply a slightly interesting side note to the core topic.
 
Wileydog said:
Can you give the exact area of a circle? We know it exists, but can we mathematically calculate it to an exact amount? Math doesn't always fit exactly into reality.
Click to expand...

Considering pi is used in calculating the area of a circle, technically speaking, the calculation is not perfectly exact. However, if my pool stroke was within 100x the accuracy of that calculation, I'd be a very happy fellow.
 
Man, this is endless.

All this argument apparently is because someone put forward the idea that a pause before your forward swing is good, and it's valid... and part of what makes it good & valid is... all strokes have a natural pause anyway?

And the case against is... "well, I don't see pros pausing, I see a continuous looping stroke"...

And then the case for is... "well, the pause is still there, it's just .01 milleseconds, or it's technically happening on an abstract physics level even if it's not visible"

christ.

If anyone thinks the pause is worth doing, then just recommend it unequivocally. It's not relevant that someone is already 'subconsciously' or 'technically' pausing. It's not relevant that Niels uses it but Busty doesn't. Either you have tried it, and feel it truly helps your game, or you tried it, and found it to be not useful. All the rest is nitpicking and trivia.
 
nobcitypool said:
You must have gotten a chip on the shoulder along with your diploma my friend. :smile: I wasn't disputing you or attempting to put you down, I was truly curious about the calculus formula you stated would prove the point. It's been so long since I referenced a calculus book or formula that I wouldn't care to attempt putting something together for this problem.

I'm sure with you being a computer science major you realize that many of the calculus formulas employed by a computer are never exact (since it is digital and not analog), they simply get it accurate out to so many decimal places it is essentially irrelevant.

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, this is simply a slightly interesting side note to the core topic.
Click to expand...

No problem, I thought it sounded a bit condescending. All my posts agree with you, that, in order to reverse directions, it has to stop. Sorry guys, for taking it off topic. I’m done arguing this part.

Post 1 - If you look at the cue from the standpoint of where the cue contacts your bridge hand, the cue has to stop at the end of the back sroke, no matter how much pivot you have. At some point, the cue stops going back on you bridge and starts going forward. You can't reverse directions at the point of your bridge without stopping.

Post 2 - Really? Take a look at the point of contact of the cue and your bridge during your stroke. At some point it is going backward through your fingers. At some point it is going forward through your fingers. How does it do that without stopping at some point?

Post 3 - Lets say you use a closed hand bridge. I assume you will agree that, at some point, the cue stick is going in 1 direction through your fingers and at another point the cue stick is going in the opposite direction. If that is true, at some point the cue stick has to pass through a speed of zero to get to the opposite direction through your fingers. At that instant, a speed of zero means it isn't moving forward or backward.

Post 4 - Speed requires a time lapse and measuring the speed at the point where it reaches zero is nearly impossible. That’s where calculus comes in. It allows you to use math formulas to calculate real world situations. We know it has to stop, but, mathematically, it doesn’t.
 
CreeDo said:
Man, this is endless.

All this argument apparently is because someone put forward the idea that a pause before your forward swing is good, and it's valid... and part of what makes it good & valid is... all strokes have a natural pause anyway?

And the case against is... "well, I don't see pros pausing, I see a continuous looping stroke"...

And then the case for is... "well, the pause is still there, it's just .01 milleseconds, or it's technically happening on an abstract physics level even if it's not visible"

christ.

If anyone thinks the pause is worth doing, then just recommend it unequivocally. It's not relevant that someone is already 'subconsciously' or 'technically' pausing. It's not relevant that Niels uses it but Busty doesn't. Either you have tried it, and feel it truly helps your game, or you tried it, and found it to be not useful. All the rest is nitpicking and trivia.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Pause, or don't pause. It's up to the player. But that's not really how this developed. It developed because there are instructors who are preaching that all players pause and that it is physically impossible not to pause.

I have suggested that it's not the case, that the Filipino stroke is an example of how a player can shoot with a continuous loop with no pause.

I think it's important to keep an open mind and to experiment. There are always new things to learn about pool. It shouldn't be about protecting what we think we know. We should always be inquiring and trying things out for the benefit of ourselves and those who come to us for lessons.
 
Well said Fran, surprising to see people arguing over milliseconds. Maybe we should call it a "pronounced pause" instead, just to avoid debate.
 
The "Pause" has been described numerous times on this board.

PAUSE: A word used to evaluate the quality of Transition of the cue stick during it's backward movement to it's final forward movement.

"A good Pause would have a movement that would ensure that there would be no "re-gripping" or "re-aligning" at the moment of Transition.

randyg
 
Bambu said:
Well said Fran, surprising to see people arguing over milliseconds. Maybe we should call it a "pronounced pause" instead, just to avoid debate.
Click to expand...

Thanks Bambu. According to Webster's, a pause is a temporary stop. We would have to change it's definition to avoid debate, and I'm not so sure we should. Then we would have to redefine 'stop,' and on and on.
 
I think it should be as smooth of a transition as possible.
Similar to a good putting stroke. Pounding nails is another example of a smooth transition. You would not hit the head of the nail with the center of your hammer head nearly as often if you had an extended pause on your backswing. Try it some time. Set the nail first or you will smash the he'll out of your thumb.
The original poster is welcome to extend his pause if he so desires.
I personaly dont think anything good can happen during an extended pause.
In other words; I think only bad things can happen during an extended pause.
When I think of a pronounced/extended pause, I think of Charles Barkley's ugly golf swing.lol
You might as well try no backstroke.
 
It is not a loop. You are just making a very un-experienced guess. If you loop your stroke it would pause even more because of the momentum created from your arms motion (even if you try to circle the motion it may not be what your mind wants your arm to do).

That said. Everyone that is mentioned, those that compete at a very high level do pause. But people want to preach that it is not necessary. I don't understand that.

I thought the point is to teach what is done by people that have been playing for most of their life, and who are taught by people who devoted their life to playing this game at the highest level. Even if some may not get there, why shoot them of it?

"Do whatever you want"

"Whatever feels comfortable for you"

"I don't see so and so doing it"....really? They do it. I think anyone that teaches using this line should be evaluated.
 
Perhaps we can all agree, Busty and Efren have very short pauses as compared with others. Is it possible that pros like Busty see the balls so much better than us mere mortals, they dont need to pause? (In other words, they dont need that longer lasting, final look at their object ball.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top