Tuck and Roll

SpiderWebComm said:
...why not "who have you beaten?"
Click to expand...
Do you think all pros agree with Buddy on this (or anything)? If not, how many of the "disbeliever pros" have you beaten? Getting any clue yet why your appeal to authority arguments don't work?

SpiderWebComm said:
You started playing pool when you were around 50 as per info on RSB when it was there.
Click to expand...
I started playing daily in my 40s. I've been playing and learning since my early 20s.

Patrick Johnson said:
...what's "a straight alignment offset from CCB"? Does it mean with the cue angled (i.e. pivoted) to compensate for squirt? That's how I do it.
Click to expand...
SpiderWebComm said:
Can you please copy and paste where you said that and what topic on the forum?
Click to expand...
Trouble with the language again? Here's what I said before in the same post you're quoting:

Patrick Johnson said:
"Pivoting the cue beforehand and stroking straight through the tip/ball contact point without swiping/swooping/tucking/rolling"? I've been doing it and promoting it since before you started playing pool.
Click to expand...
SpiderWebComm said:
Contact points on CB or OB don't exist for me.
Click to expand...
I said "tip/ball contact point" - in other words where you intend to hit the CB. Maybe you never make that specific decision...?

pj <- yep, different languages
chgo
 
I think this rolling the wrist is something earl strickland does. At least some form of this.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Do you think all pros agree with Buddy on this (or anything)?
Click to expand...
Do you think all pros agree with you and what you post on this forum? How about any pros?
Patrick Johnson said:
I started playing daily in my 40s. I've been playing and learning since my early 20s.
Click to expand...
That's not what I ever saw posted on RSB, EVER. Very LATE 40's. You can say whatever you want now because it's completely gone on RSB.
You didn't play a whole helluva lot at any age before 50. You were married and had a daughter. That didn't lend itself to hanging out in pool rooms along with a job to support them. Only after a divorce did it pick up.
Patrick Johnson said:
I said "tip/ball contact point" - in other words where you intend to hit the CB. Maybe you never make that specific decision...?
Click to expand...
Where I intend to hit the CB is NOT...let me say it again...a visual or guessed OB ball "contact point". So NO, it isn't a decision I have to make. Where the tip strikes the CB is mostly CCB which is where the pivot takes me from an inside starting point.
But it may vary based on other considerations.
Patrick Johnson said:
pj <- yep, different languages
Click to expand...
Yep, it is different languages.
 
Last edited:
kaznj said:
I think this rolling the wrist is something earl strickland does. At least some form of this.
Click to expand...
He does it on follow through. I think the cue ball is gone by then. I don't know if it serves a purpose, like how an elbow drop allows you to follow through a little easier, or if it's an involuntary part of the motion that doesn't cause problems, so why change it. It doesn't seem to do anything for me.
 
That guy, by luck and a lot of playing the "wrong way", figured out how his tip aim changed with moving his hand. In most players that tried this, they would just miss for a year till their brain figured out how to adjust to make the shot, same as any other way or aiming. You do it long enough, even if the mechanics are flawed, you will make balls just due to plain repetition. But those players very very rarely go past a low B level.
 
hang-the-9 said:
That guy, by luck and a lot of playing the "wrong way", figured out how his tip aim changed with moving his hand. In most players that tried this, they would just miss for a year till their brain figured out how to adjust to make the shot, same as any other way or aiming. You do it long enough, even if the mechanics are flawed, you will make balls just due to plain repetition. But those players very very rarely go past a low B level.
Click to expand...
I can see that working on a bar table with big pockets, but I think the consistency of stroking straight into the proper spot on the cue ball is necessary on a big table with tight pockets. At best, you'd need to put in a lot more work to get to that level.
 
With as much time as players spend at the table, inflections like that tuck and roll bit, form like bad habits. I think what's wrong with alinear cue motion is it will put you in unnecessary foul trouble.
 
tomatoshooter said:
I'm aware of double hits on the cue ball when the object ball is very close, are there other dangers?
Click to expand...
Well not so much that but contact fouls with other balls. For instance, with other balls in close proximity, even if you are able to stroke successfully, the imaginary confinement can cause a "lisp" that results in a miss.
 
hang-the-9 said:
That guy, by luck and a lot of playing the "wrong way", figured out how his tip aim changed with moving his hand. In most players that tried this, they would just miss for a year till their brain figured out how to adjust to make the shot, same as any other way or aiming. You do it long enough, even if the mechanics are flawed, you will make balls just due to plain repetition.
Click to expand...
Tip and shaft aim does change by "tucking the fingers under" or "rolling the knuckles upward" as well as getting different English.
If you're at CCB and tuck the fingers under on the backstroke, the tip of the cue will move from CCB to the right of center and be angled. If you're at CCB and roll the fingers and knuckles upward, the tip of the cue will move from CCB to the left side and be angled. Depending on how much you tuck or roll, the elbow will move slightly further away from the body or in closer.

So, I can hear the questions and arguments brewing already. (In the squeakiest girly voices, "Well why even do that?") Because it's just another way to combine aiming with English. You aim center ccb to cob and do it. The OB will either go to the left or right depending on the amount of tuck or roll and length of backstroke. It's up to the PLAYER to learn how much it will cut the ball and spin.

Once it's learned, you can aim ccb to 1/4 OB or ccb to ob edge.

And if you have your minds made up that it's worthless and something you don't even want to mess around with, that's fine also.

I'm not going to go into a pissing contest with anyone on here about it. You either try it or you don't. Or contact Buddy Hall directly.
Ta-ta.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
Tip and shaft aim does change by "tucking the fingers under" or "rolling the knuckles upward" as well as getting different English.
If you're at CCB and tuck the fingers under on the backstroke, the tip of the cue will move from CCB to the right of center and be angled. If you're at CCB and roll the fingers and knuckles upward, the tip of the cue will move from CCB to the left side and be angled. Depending on how much you tuck or roll, the elbow will move slightly further away from the body or in closer.

So, I can hear the questions and arguments brewing already. (In the squeakiest girly voices, "Well why even do that?") Because it's just another way to combine aiming with English. You aim center ccb to cob and do it. The OB will either go to the left or right depending on the amount of tuck or roll and length of backstroke. It's up to the PLAYER to learn how much it will cut the ball and spin.

Once it's learned, you can aim ccb to 1/4 OB or ccb to ob edge.

And if you have your minds made up that it's worthless and something you don't even want to mess around with, that's fine also.

I'm not going to go into a pissing contest with anyone on here about it. You either try it or you don't. Or contact Buddy Hall directly.
Ta-ta.
Click to expand...
Whether it CAN work after enough practice I don’t think anyone is debating. The simple fact is that tons of things in sports require the highest level of exact consistency. The level of success a person has is generally directly proportional to increasing consistency (call it robot like if you wish). The level of consistency is generally inversely proportional to the amount of variables in the action performed. A few examples- golf putt. When you get to where you can repeat the exact stance and same stroke upon your intended line, the only thing you change for length of putt is length of backswing. The variables I control are reduced essentially to 1. I cannot control course variables. If I, for some reason, wanted to I could always line up center cup, instead of my aim path that is adjusted to the actual path the slope and hills will cause it to roll on. From center cup aim I could control the direction of my putt by how much I roll my wrists through the stroke. This controls the angle of the face of my putter thereby determining direction of ball. This is as exact of a comparison as can be made to the method you describe. The problem with it is it introduces so many variables they cannot be accounted in the golf analogy I’ve arguably introduced the possibility of 44 different angles (assuming I’m covering 22.5 degrees either direction from the ideal 90 degree clubface) that are incorrect. I’ve went from adjusting length of backswing only which is still required in the 2nd method, to adding having to be perfectly timed with how much I’ve rolled my wrist at moment of impact. Can it be done? Sure. Anybody practicing anything long enough with enough dedication will gain muscle memory to become proficient. Go to a golf course and you’ll see some crazy stuff. Occasionally you’ll see crazy stuff on a scratch golfer. It’s the exception for a reason, though, and it’s the same reason you won’t see crazy stuff on tour. I have a million things to learn and improve upon before I would claim to be a proficient pool player. I know without a doubt that eliminating variables is how I get there. It’s how I’ve shot under par while not being a good golfer and it’s how I’ve bowled 299 and 300 games. It’s not that it can’t work it’s that it’s as inefficient as driving through Iowa to go from FL to GA
 
23DenaliBDE said:
Whether it CAN work after enough practice I don’t think anyone is debating. The simple fact is that tons of things in sports require the highest level of exact consistency. The level of success a person has is generally directly proportional to increasing consistency (call it robot like if you wish). The level of consistency is generally inversely proportional to the amount of variables in the action performed. A few examples- golf putt. When you get to where you can repeat the exact stance and same stroke upon your intended line, the only thing you change for length of putt is length of backswing. The variables I control are reduced essentially to 1. I cannot control course variables. If I, for some reason, wanted to I could always line up center cup, instead of my aim path that is adjusted to the actual path the slope and hills will cause it to roll on. From center cup aim I could control the direction of my putt by how much I roll my wrists through the stroke. This controls the angle of the face of my putter thereby determining direction of ball. This is as exact of a comparison as can be made to the method you describe. The problem with it is it introduces so many variables they cannot be accounted in the golf analogy I’ve arguably introduced the possibility of 44 different angles (assuming I’m covering 22.5 degrees either direction from the ideal 90 degree clubface) that are incorrect. I’ve went from adjusting length of backswing only which is still required in the 2nd method, to adding having to be perfectly timed with how much I’ve rolled my wrist at moment of impact. Can it be done? Sure. Anybody practicing anything long enough with enough dedication will gain muscle memory to become proficient. Go to a golf course and you’ll see some crazy stuff. Occasionally you’ll see crazy stuff on a scratch golfer. It’s the exception for a reason, though, and it’s the same reason you won’t see crazy stuff on tour. I have a million things to learn and improve upon before I would claim to be a proficient pool player. I know without a doubt that eliminating variables is how I get there. It’s how I’ve shot under par while not being a good golfer and it’s how I’ve bowled 299 and 300 games. It’s not that it can’t work it’s that it’s as inefficient as driving through Iowa to go from FL to GA
Click to expand...
You left one thing out that can't always be controlled and gets the best of them. NERVES. Which causes puckering asshole syndrome; grip tightening; grip loosening; flinch; yip; deceleration; acceleration; guiding; open clubface; closed clubface;
And that IS SEEN on TV with the best of the best pro players all the time. (I'm sure a few have been left out)

Btw, what I posted about tuck and roll will NOT be the best way for a below average or even average player to get involved with. Also not good for a very rigid player that adheres to A, B, and C every time they have a ball to make. There's more feel in the hands and artistry. But instead of putting as the example, I'd say tuck and roll is more of a dynamic movement that would be used in pitching the ball with different flop shots, spin shots, bladed shots around the green and a variety of lies or in a sand trap. The hands, wrists, fingers, are a lot more active and used which is where "feel" really comes into play. Tuck and roll is feel along with experience from hours of practice and confidence.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top