Weak kickers with jump cue jump from "C" to "B"

[Black-Balled]

I believe in the 'shoot the best shot for the circumstances' theory, be it jump, kick or punt.

How many games are really won because of a jump shot? In my experience, usually 1/10 at the most. I do not agree that perfect execution there would lead to jump from C-> A.

Overstatement: a tool commonly used in speach and literature that attempts to falsely bolster claims.

 

[Celtic]

Good point. And if he did have a SuperJuice 5000 then everyone else would have one as well and we would be back to who uses it the best.

And it would mitigate the natural talent of the people who can use the standard pool cue to get the required backspin results without the gimmick specialized cue and further dilute the require skill needed to play the game at the top level.

BTW, I am done argueing with you, most of that post was just arguing for the sake of arguing and I have better things to do. If you cannot see how a jump cue is truly a specialized piece of equipment aimed at a specialized type of shot, or more likely just want to argue against that while seeing it full well I don't have the time to bother.

 

[Robert Raiford]

I think they should ban cutting balls directly into the pockets. It makes it too easy for weaker players to run balls, and allowing it completely negates all the years of hard work it takes to acquire carom and banking skill. In fact, just ban those pesky pockets altogether. Then we might actually get people to try three-cushion in this country

Robert

(Approximate number of times I've seen a jump cue used in 3-cushion ever: zero point zero zero zero. Heck, most players have never even used a bridge before. In games a jump cue would be less useful, but I think it has undeveloped potential there in artistic play.)

 

[Roadie]

No, read this slow.

Jump cues allow the jump shot to replace a huge percentage of the shots that would traditionally required either a kick or masse shot to contact the appropriate object ball.

That is correct, the jump cue offers another alternative to contact the object ball. And why is having more choices a problem?

Without the jump cue many shot are impossible to jump with a full length cue or beyond the level of difficulty where one would consider a jump shot.

Just as without a leather tip and chalk most shots with side spin are impossible. You have made my point. The jump cues ADDS shots that were previously too difficult or nearly impossible. Now a whole new range of shots are there and players can further develop their game by learning all those new shots, as well as learning how to tighten up their safety game defending against the jump cue. Everyone wins.

Jump cues have reduced the benefit of a high level of skill in masse or kicking because the jump shot with a jump cue is relatively easy compared to the other two skill sets and thus has replaced both for a large number of shots.

Again we disagree about the "high level of skill". As I previously stated I can show a player a system and have them kicking accurately in ten minutes. Comparing skill sets is a fallacy and a red herring in this discussion. It is not fundamentally harder to kick than it is to jump. Both actions require conscious and willful effort on the part of the player as well as skill to properly judge the variables and execute to them.

Again, the jump cue does not replace any shots it adds to the choices.

Thank you for telling me to read slowly. It's good to be reminded of that in discussions such as these.

Let me ask you this question framed under today's one foul ball in hand rules?

If the shooting player misses his object ball and the cue ball comes to rest in a position where any kick or masse is impossible but a jump shot is possible should the incoming player be penalized with only two choices instead of three as to how to get to the object ball?

At the end of the day the player is standing there with a stick in his hand - he is the only one who can hit the cue ball and make it do something. So who really cares what he uses as long as it's not automatic. Last time I checked my jump cue was not jumping balls until I picked it up and manipulated it.

Do you know of any jump cue that makes shots by itself?

 

[Roadie]

And it would mitigate the natural talent of the people who can use the standard pool cue to get the required backspin results without the gimmick specialized cue and further dilute the require skill needed to play the game at the top level.

Or it would raise everyone's skill level up.

Send and APA4 back in time to 1850 with a modern cue, some chalk and a copy of Robert Byrne's Standard Book of Pool and he will earn a great living on the exhibition circuit.

BTW, I am done argueing with you, most of that post was just arguing for the sake of arguing and I have better things to do. If you cannot see how a jump cue is truly a specialized piece of equipment aimed at a specialized type of shot, or more likely just want to argue against that while seeing it full well I don't have the time to bother.

Ok, thank you for the time you spent. I have enjoyed the discussion. We don't see this aspect of the game in the same way and that's alright too. I am certain we both enjoy the game despite our differing opinions on this subject.

 

[Roadie]

I think they should ban cutting balls directly into the pockets. It makes it too easy for weaker players to run balls, and allowing it completely negates all the years of hard work it takes to acquire carom and banking skill. In fact, just ban those pesky pockets altogether. Then we might actually get people to try three-cushion in this country

Robert

(Approximate number of times I've seen a jump cue used in 3-cushion ever: zero point zero zero zero. Heck, most players have never even used a bridge before. In games a jump cue would be less useful, but I think it has undeveloped potential there in artistic play.)

I once was privileged to be a bystander watching Mike Massey, Raymond Cuelemans and another player I don't know playing around with shots on the carom table. Mr. Massey used a masse cue to jump over two balls frozen to each other and the cue ball went short rail, long rail, reverse back into the short rail to come back to the frozen balls and split them to make the three cushion carom.

 

[Black-Balled]

I believe in the 'shoot the best shot for the circumstances' theory, be it jump, kick or punt.

How many games are really won because of a jump shot? In my experience, usually 1/10 at the most. I do not agree that perfect execution there would lead to jump from C-> A.

Overstatement: a tool commonly used in speach and literature that attempts to falsely bolster claims.

hOSE THE MORAN KNOW? NOBADY SAYS A THAS ONLY YOU.

 

[Robert Raiford]

I once was privileged to be a bystander watching Mike Massey, Raymond Ceulemans and another player I don't know playing around with shots on the carom table. Mr. Massey used a masse cue to jump over two balls frozen to each other and the cue ball went short rail, long rail, reverse back into the short rail to come back to the frozen balls and split them to make the three cushion carom.

I meant to say I've never seen a jump cue used in competitive play. I know Mike and am familiar with that great shot you're talking about. He has an amazing stroke and is one of the only guys I've seen really incorporating jumping in three-cushion artistic shots in a new way (i.e. combining jump and masse, especially with full-ball jumping.) Now that he has a table in his house I'm expecting great things along these lines from him in the future I hope he sparks some friendly one-upsmanship with this among other top artistic shooters like Sayginer, Rojas, Torres, etc.

On a completely separate matter but still related to jump cues and the idea of cues for specific shots, I've been thinking that players should be lagging with their jump cues for better speed control. Since most already have jump cues anyway, it's not like they need to do anything but practice with it.

The lag is super-important in competitive play, and lighter cues provide better speed control because it takes a greater change in stick speed to make a given incremental change in CB speed compared to using a heavier playing cue. Combining that with the physics tricks always trying to touch the rail on a lag (because of cushion inefficiency) and hitting about 1/5-radius above center to maximize rolling velocity would make for deadly lagging with practice. I've even considered practicing the lag with just my shaft for this reason, but it's too short to comfortably stroke (stupid rules setting minimum cue lengths aside.)

Robert

 

[Masayoshi]

I don't see where a jump cue will actually improve a C players game. I'm usually thrilled if a low skilled opponent takes out his jump cue because I know that there is a very small likely hood of him coming out ahead in that situation unless its on the last few balls. Most of the time he will probably fail to clear the obstruction, miss the object ball entirely, or hit the ball, but miss and leave me something easy. If he gets lucky and makes the ball, hey good shot, but he still has to get out. If he doesn't get out from there (which is usually the case with C players) it just makes my job easier. If he gets lucky and hooks me or leaves me in a tough spot, that's life. It could happen on any shot. It doesn't take a complete lock up safe to stop a C player's jump shot.

Now with A players and above, that's another story. There, the advantage is more clear as the jump shot will be more consistent, run out potential after the jump is higher, and decision making will have been improved.

 

[Roadie]

Yes, he should accept the situation. That's his draw. It's like saying if you make a play that ends up being masterful, accidentally, your opponent gets to design a way out. Its like the tournament director distributing the prize money amongst the field equally instead of allowing those who have trained the hardest to have the best chance at competing for the prize money. If you handicap the tournament to where the A vs C is an even match, separate A, B, C players in their own brackets, the eventual winner is usually not likely the most talented.

So to go very deep into the human condition would it be fair to say that your view is that man should accept his fate and not seek to overcome and influence his own destiny.

To wit, a pool player should accept another player's good fortune as his own bad fortune and resign the game, give up the chance at extra income even when a legal and proper choice exists for him to have a chance to win?

My point is for all of those who would make this a question of equipment only is why is it that you do not see that modern rails make kick shots possible? Modern tips make spin possible. And modern jump cues make jumping possible. Modern rules make all these three aspects of the game necessary to have every possible chance to make a legal hit and avoid the ultimate disadvantage which is giving the opponent ball in hand.

All of the modern equipment, cues, slate, cloth, rails, tips, chalk, and jump cues, have been designed to give the player more control over his own fate. These things have been engineered to the tightest and and best tolerances, honed to perfection within the parameters of the game itself, and none of them do anything without a player to interact with them.

Most would complain bitterly if they were forced to play in a tournament with worn out pitted cloth and inconsistent dead rails. If a player were constantly thwarted by bad rolls due to equipment then they would be quite upset to have the fate of their income hinged to luck rather than skill.

So everything that is done to build equipment in pool is done to minimize luck and increase skill. That a jump cue makes jumping easier has nothing to do with luck. It simply makes a task that was inconsistent and difficult and reduces the physical exertion needed, reduces the variance in performance caused by one "standard full length" cue being better than another one for jumping, and allows the player to exercise the full measure of their talent and skill upon the shot.

Thus, when fate gives them a situation where the only viable escape is a jump kick with right spin to hold up the cue ball on the first rail then the player has a chance rather than to unscrew and settle for less. That the chance is there is due to the jump cue being in existence. Whether the player can make that shot is entirely up to their ability.

 

[Roadie]

No, it wouldn't be fair to come to that conclusion. You asked if we should accept not being able to continue, if a way exist only by way of using a jumpcue. If my tuition is at stake, and its the final game of the last set with an opponent that plays to the inch with me, I would draw for my only out. But I try not to fall into those situations. Further, my view on game rules criteria should not be based on always having a move under all conditions. Just like alternating breaks evens out the game in favor of the weaker opponent, allowing more possibilities of contacting your target handicaps the better kicker more than it helps, thus immensely helping the lower caliber player. This is an agent of balance, not a criteria that designs the better player.

How does having options handicap the better kicker?

The notion that having a jump cue somehow diminishes the skill advantage of the other player is something that comes up frequently in this argument and one that I fully disagree with.

When a player comes to the table and he is hooked then he always has three possible choice, kick, masse, or jump. Depending on exact placement he may have all three or none of those options. Whatever that player has at his disposal in terms of his kicking ability, his ability to masse or jump has nothing whatsoever to do with the opponent's skill in these three areas.

The only place where a jump cue does diminish an opponent's skill is when a player is weak on their safety play. Similarly if one player knows how to kick like Matlock then that also diminishes the weak safety player's ability to win against a Matlock-level kicker.

For those of you who don't know it David Matlock may know more kicking systems than any other professional pool player living. I drove cross country with him once and he has more ways to hit a ball than one nationwide crossing could encompass.

As for the rules, I believe that the rules are meant to encourage players to do the best they can within the rules to give themselves the best chance to win.

As I stated earlier jump cues have been around since the mid 80s. In the mid 90s rules were established to define the rules concerning jump cues to standardize them.

These cues are an accepted part of the game now. They are practically uniform in their construction and nearly identical in their performance.

Just like a normal pool cue they are available to everyone and thus insure that every player looking at a jump shot is starting from the same point. And it's from that point that they only have to relay on their skill and talent and nerves to make or miss the shot.

So, I respectfully disagree with you in that I feel that a player should have every possible and legal out at their disposal.