What cue stroke are you using?

What type of stroke are you using?


  • Total voters
    122
  • Poll closed .
No. I'm not joking but I thought you must have been.

Do you (or was it Neil) that honestly thinks posting a high speed video of a cue stroke proves anything.

But if you do some pause/play one can see that the butt end of the cue raises up about 3 inches. That means that the tip arcs down & you can see it if you look close BUT since his bridge length just about matches his back stroke length the tip is force back up as it nears his bridge. so in affect the whole cue has been lifted above where is was at address. Then he delivers the cue like in that video of Oyster's student so the cue fires down on the new angle. You can see it much better in Oyster's video.

Now.. since it is a high speed video you really can't see what the fast moving tip really does EXACTLY just prior to contact & certainly not during contact. BUT the tip goes dramatically down to the cloth as the hand goes to 90* & past.

So ... that video proves nothing & it certainly explains nothing.

I was just at the pool hall and decided to try out the piston stroke, and I have to say I owe you a massive apology. You were so totally right about everything, and I only hope that one day those pendulum wielding jerks see the light as well.

I was able to follow through 12" (give or take an inch or two) straight through the CB, and the results were out of this world. So much spin on the CB, it made my head spin lol literally. I drew the CB 3 table lengths against this guy and he quit me mid-set lol crazy right?

I am mad about one thing though, and that's everyone now sees how amazing I am, and I can't get any action. I'll have to give Justin a call and see if he can't book me on TAR against one of those hacks.

Thanks again so much Richard. You are truly a king among men.

Have a splendidly blessed day.

Jon
 
hmmm. applicable here?

“The difference between faith and insanity is that faith is the ability to hold firmly to a conclusion that is incompatible with the evidence, whereas insanity is the ability to hold firmly to a conclusion that is incompatible with the evidence.”

― William Harwood, Dictionary of Contemporary Mythology

Yeah it's amazing how the belief about the earth being flat, for how many decades, really changed & that the earth is round thing really caught on.
 
No. I'm not joking but I thought you must have been.

Do you (or was it Neil) that honestly thinks posting a high speed video of a cue stroke proves anything.

But if you do some pause/play one can see that the butt end of the cue raises up about 3 inches. That means that the tip arcs down & you can see it if you look close BUT since his bridge length just about matches his back stroke length the tip is force back up as it nears his bridge. so in affect the whole cue has been lifted above where is was at address. Then he delivers the cue like in that video of Oyster's student so the cue fires down on the new angle. You can see it much better in Oyster's video.

Now.. since it is a high speed video you really can't see what the fast moving tip really does EXACTLY just prior to contact & certainly not during contact. BUT the tip goes dramatically down to the cloth as the hand goes to 90* & past.

So ... that video proves nothing & it certainly explains nothing.

Jon, you are going to have to guide him step by step on how to watch a video in slo-mo, and how to use a piece of paper along the bottom of the cue to check how straight or level or whatever he thinks it is, is. He won't figure it out on his own.
 
I know the same frustrating feeling. I've been on a quest lately to identify my dead stroke trance. I look for triggers that help me get there. Oddly enough one of them is to breathe only through my nose. :grin:

Another is this timing thing I've been working on. Another test, like the last one, is for rail shots. I used to have trouble with them until I realized, I was changing the length of my bridge to shoot them. It threw my cueing/timing off and life sucked.

I try to make my bridge length similar on the rail to regular shots off of the rail. It keeps the flow going and I really start to relax. I pocket a lot more balls, too. BTW, some of this info I've plagiarized and added my own spin to it. But, I feel that it's improving the content. After all, pro players don't really know what's happening. They can just do it. :confused:

Best,
Mike


The subject of "triggers" would make an interesting subject for discussion... for those that subscribe to and understand the idea.

Lou Figueroa
 
I was just at the pool hall and decided to try out the piston stroke, and I have to say I owe you a massive apology. You were so totally right about everything, and I only hope that one day those pendulum wielding jerks see the light as well.

I was able to follow through 12" (give or take an inch or two) straight through the CB, and the results were out of this world. So much spin on the CB, it made my head spin lol literally. I drew the CB 3 table lengths against this guy and he quit me mid-set lol crazy right?

I am mad about one thing though, and that's everyone now sees how amazing I am, and I can't get any action. I'll have to give Justin a call and see if he can't book me on TAR against one of those hacks.

Thanks again so much Richard. You are truly a king among men.

Have a splendidly blessed day.

Jon

I think you better go back & put that in green or is it orange or someone might misunderstand you.
 
Jon,

You hinted at some opinions you had regarding bridge length, etc.

And you posted that drawing that had the upper arm 'level' & parallel with the cue & the forearm straight down.

Do you think that the angle that the upper arm is set has anything to do with something?
 
No. I'm not joking but I thought you must have been.

Do you (or was it Neil) that honestly think posting a high speed video of a cue stroke proves anything.

But if you do some pause/play one can see that the butt end of the cue raises up about 3 inches. That means that the tip arcs down & you can see it if you look close BUT since his bridge length just about matches his back stroke length the tip is force back up as it nears his bridge. so in affect the whole cue has been lifted above where is was at address. Then he delivers the cue like in that video of Oyster's student so the cue fires down on the new angle. You can see it much better in Oyster's video.

Now.. since it is a high speed video you really can't see what the fast moving tip really does EXACTLY just prior to contact & certainly not during contact. BUT the tip goes dramatically down to the cloth as the hand goes to 90* & past.

So ... that video proves nothing & it certainly explains nothing.

Why is it every time I get a dead lock on something, such as what Rick will say if and when he finally views the video, that I can't find a single person willing to bet against me? :(

Now, if someone would repost this part in blue so Rick will read it, maybe this charade can finally end once and for all. (one can only hope)

Hold a piece of paper along the bottom of the cue from the cue at cb address going back along the length of the cue. Now, repeatedly and quickly, hit the pause/play button. You can clearly see that the cue stays level from about an inch and a half past my bridge hand all the way to the cb.

Now, when it hits the cb, the cue moves. Just like it will with any stroke. The fact that the cue dips to the cloth a ways after contact is proper for a pendulum stroke. It in no way, shape, or form constitutes or even hints at the result of a poor stroke.


If he still, after doing that, stands by what he said in that it shows nothing, well.... there's a number of names for people like that.
 
The subject of "triggers" would make an interesting subject for discussion... for those that subscribe to and understand the idea.

Lou Figueroa

Lou and Mike, for me, it has always been a system of doing something, not just one thing. For me, it is SEEING the ball go in the hole and getting the position I want before I ever bend down. Using a strict PSR so I am doing the same thing on each shot. Getting down, becoming one with the cue and the table (meaning that is all there is in the whole world at that moment- nothing else exists), very slow pull back, and then just letting my subconscious totally take over. It shoots the shot when it is ready.

Doing the exact same thing on each shot tends to "get me there", or in "the zone" the quickest way. It's not something that can be forced.
 
Jon,

You hinted at some opinions you had regarding bridge length, etc.

And you posted that drawing that had the upper arm 'level' & parallel with the cue & the forearm straight down.

Do you think that the angle that the upper arm is set has anything to do with something?

Precisely. How the upper arm moves before, during, and after contact is what keeps the cue level for an extended period of time. I'm gonna keep working on it.
 
The following is a copy & paste of a thread that I started in the Ask the Instructor sub forum nearly a year ago in Sept 2012 when some instructors were 'cutting' each other up pretty bad.

The question is:

How can an end be put to all of the bickeing, snipes, spiteful arguments, twisted words, verbal attacks,, back stabbing, name calling, insults, etc. that some, obviously not all, but some of the instructors are partaking in on many of the threads on some of the forums?

Remember! The question is only for any instructor that has an answer. Please do NOT respond if you wish to partake in any of the aforementioned activites.

I would sincerely like to see an end to such totally non-productive activities. I think they only relay a very bad impression of pool instructors in general & does nothing to improve the image of cue sports to any new comer to the game that also comes onto AZB.

I think an 'armistice' should be called & agreed to by all, so as to promote what I thought was the purpose when I first joined AZB, which is better cue sports for the betterment of the game.

With restrained hope,
Rick

PS IMHO Any 'hidden' agendas should be put behind that of the main agenda, which in my opinion is to promote the game we love as best that each one of is capable of doing. The game is what it is, but it would not hurt to give it a 'B-12' shot in the arm. We all should be at least civil to one another as members of the cue sports community. 'In fighting' will only hurt & hold back the game, not help it.

PSS I mean no offense to any instructor nor to anyone in general. I'm just trying to help us all here on AZB & in doing so hopefully help the game a bit.

PSSS Maybe there should be a code of ethics to which all of us on AZB, not just instructors, should subscribe. If a FedEx employee does anything to disparage the FedEx image while in a Fedex uniform, that employee is gone from Fedex faster the they can say, 'but'.

I sincerely hope this helps & does not fan any 'flames'.
 
The following is a copy & paste from the 'pendulum sweet spot' thread not long before it was closed.

Neil,

I am getting rather tired of your distorted & untrue statements. I did not start this thread to knock what instructors teach. If that is your opinion, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. But you are mistaken as you often are & you should not be stating it as fact. You are wrong. You & others are not omniscient & can not read my mind or my intentions.

I started this thread to get a bio-mechanical explanation of an assertion by randyG that there is a 'sweet spot' of level straight line tip travel for several inches in a 'fixed elbow pendulum stroke'. I don't see it & it does not show up in Bob Jewitt's comparison to a piston stroke.

I even stated that if it were the case, it might even change my opinion of the 'fixed elbow pendulum stroke'.

The thread was going rather well until you got involved & I even asked for it to be closed when it went south.

I wound up getting banned after nobcity jumped in insulting me again & I responded in a somewhat 'threatening manner',

That was my mistake.

As usual, you, & your like, want to mis-categorize & distort matters for your purposes.

I simply 'love' the way you & a couple of others think that you can read my mind & my intentions. If this were in the real world I'd probably file law suits against you for slander & liable.

You often say that 'everyone' can see right through me. Well I would bet that almost everyone can see you for what you are as well.

I bumped this thread when I noticed that it had gone over 6,000 views. (It's now over 6,600 views.) To me that says that it is a subject of interest. You almost immediately tried to bury it with your stalking & trolling. WHY?

Apparently YOU have a motive.

My intention was & is to get truthful & useful information out so each individual can make their own determinations. I am not trying to suppress anything as it seems to appear that you might be trying to do.

If the pendulum stroke is as good as some make it out to be then it should be able to stand up to a few investigative questions.

I think the first go round of this thread brought out how vitally important the 'associated grip' is for the pendulum stroke to work to it's best efficiency. I'd say that that might have been good for those that may not have been aware of that & perhaps were using a 'bad' grip for the stroke.

This thread was a good opportunity for the pendulum proponents to give a good explanation of how it actually works. But to just make statements without any bio-mechanical support simply does not cut it for me.

I never have & do not blindly follow. My 9th. grade civics teacher taught me to always consider the source & any possible motives that they might have for what they are saying.

When you teach, do you forbid your students from asking questions. If so, I would never want anyone to take a lesson from you.

I've tried on several occasions to put aside our differences but you have refused them all.

My response to you here might be a mistake but I can not sit idly by while you make false assertions as to my intent.

I started this thread with sincere intentions of getting an explanation IF one existed. It was a good opportunity lost by the proponents of the pendulum stroke.

The opportunity is for now still present, but as I said to just make statements of what one wants to put out without any bio-mechanical support simply does not get it done with me.

And to correct another of your mis-assumptions, I am not looking for it to help me with MY stroke. I don't use an SPF pendulum stroke & I don't want to do so. But if it is the best that others can do, then it is the best stroke for them. I have said similar things rather often but you & others want to mis-categorize & distort my opinions & my intentions for your own purposes.

Keep doing what you're doing. I'm sure more & more people will realize just what you are doing.

Rick

PS I really do sincerely wish you well.
 
Last edited:
Neil's account of what happened regarding my initial contact with Scott Lee is 100% incorrect. If that is what Mr. Lee told him then Mr. Lee's memory is failing him.
 
Last edited:
I have no idea who Tony could have had a phone conversation regarding 'buyer's remorse'? Because as far as I know I have never given out anyone's name. In fact I can't even remember any of the names because they were lurkers that never post & they said that that would never 'say' anything on here because they did not want to get the abuse.
 
Last edited:
Did anyone notice how Neil 'brow beat' HisBoyElrow for simply expressing his opinion?
 
Last edited:
Concerning that post you quoted -- oh my gawd. :thud:

Don't know where to begin with that one, but suffice to say his tennis ball analogy is not only full of holes, but completely invalid and inapproriate to use. Yeah, let's compare two SOFT surfaces contacting each other (the tennis ball and the racquet) -- which has a HUGE contact time because of compression and flexion of both surfaces -- to a situation where you have an absolutely hard surface (cue ball) and a semi-hard material with a hard backing that's too thin (the leather tip, that is) for any variability in contact time to mean anything. And, also let's completely forget about the fact that this supposed "difference in angle" he's talking about between a piston stroke's straight follow-through the cue ball vs. a pendulum stroke's slight dive after contact with the cue ball isn't even measurable enough to make a difference. "Oh my gosh! That 1/16 of an inch difference in attack angle is *SO* tantamount to my argument, and you numbskulls aren't seeing it!!" Yeah, let's forget the fact that the contact patch on the cue ball where the tip hits can completely consume that 1/16-inch difference.

Hit absolutely center ball on the cue ball with a piston stroke, and you get a stop shot. Hit the same spot on the cue ball with a pendulum stroke where the cue travel has started on its downward dip due to the pendulum arc (which you and I and everyone else knows this situation is ACTUALLY due to a bad "Set" alignment to begin with), and what do you get? The same stop shot! Good grief, some examples of the human species can get really brain-spinlocked on such minutiae that mean -- in the REAL world -- absolutely nothing.

I mean, I think we know what ENGLISH! is trying to get at -- he wants a stroke where he's "guaranteed" not to be affected by any rise and fall of the cue tip due to a pendulum arc. We totally get what he's getting at. But what he's completely forgetting -- as evidenced by the fact that he never took this to the table, nor took any instruction and instead relying on his own pure conjecture and supposition -- is that this is not what's happening.

What I find particularly hilarious is his comparison to the days where people believed the earth was flat and here he is trying to say the earth is round. What he's not getting is we are well past those days of supposition and have PROOF that a pendulum stroke gives more than a couple full inches of completely flat cue travel through the cue ball. But he's here arguing with us that the earth is flat -- based purely on his supposition and conjecture about what he "thinks" -- when it's LONG been proven the earth is round. He just refuses to see the proof. Forget the fact there is video evidence out there (including in this very thread); "my gosh, a pendulum arc just *HAS* to cause a perfectly-rising and -falling tip that has no straight travel to it whatsoever!" :thud:

He won't see this post, obviously, because he has me on his publicly-displayed Ignore list. Or will he? ;)

Sad to see someone get *so* brain-spinlocked on such minutiae, then claim he's not the one continually bringing it up. (Umm... how about this very thread's existence to begin with? And all those he posted in the Ask the Instructor forum? And he's blaming RandyG for all this?)

I know this -- in my retirement years, I would definitely have MUCH BETTER things to do with my time than waste it on a forum on such stupid minutiae.

-Sean

Please see the portion in bold blue above & please provide such proof as that is all that my initial inquiry ever sought, but has never been provided. Mr. Jewett's charts of his analysis of the tip travel that I have seen does not show that.
 
Last edited:
randyg made the assertion just prior to me opening my 'pendulum sweet spot' thread in the Ask the Instructor sub forum which was May 6, 2013.

I do not blame RandyG for anything related to me. I had no idea who he was before coming on AZB in June of 2012.
 
Last edited:
A police officer just arrested me.

I had so many words in my mouth that did not belong to me that he figured I must have stolen them.
 
The problem as I see it is that you write so much "stuff" and go down so many rabbit holes that you may truly not remember what you say.

Are these lurkers the same members that gave you bad information regarding Ghossts true identity?

Or is this just another conspiracy theory?

Since you are now reading our posts, take Neil's suggestion regarding the video, and I expect an apology from you regarding the distortions you have posted about me, and every other instructor who you imply is deceiving their students.

Until I get it, I will continue to remind you that I want to see video proof of your straight stroke (with your eyes closed in action) refer back to my challenge if you forgot. Realize, there was no money involved, never was, I just want to see you do something that you say everyone who strokes straight through the ball can do.

Until then, read more, argue less, and keep your ego at the door.


I have no idea who Tony could have had a phone conversation regarding 'buyer's remorse'? Because I as far as I know I have never given out anyone's name. In fact I can't even remember any of the names because they were lurkers that never post & they said that that would never 'say' anything on here because they did not want to get the abuse.
 
Back
Top