What cue stroke are you using?

[Tony_in_MD]

Now that Mr. Obstinate has me on ignore, I will post this little video showing that using the pendulum stroke, the cue will indeed be "level" for several inches before contact. (level as the table allows) Just in case there were any that actually thought his bogus claims had any merit:wink:...... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNIW3zwmeYo&feature=youtu.be

I suggest placing a piece of paper along the line of my cue, then hit play, pause, play, pause, ect. That way, you can readily see just how far the cue stays on the same plane.

Then yet, maybe I'm doing it wrong because my cue doesn't describe a large arc like he says it's supposed to.???

edit: oops, my hand hit my chest! My alignment must be way off! Darn!

Bumping this up. I was away for a few hours traveling. Has English viewed the video yet?

 

[Tony_in_MD]

I've watched Neils videos, and thanks for the repost because I missed the original post.

Its not so easy to see but if you pay close attention its visable, and also the outcome of the CB shows what really went on.

On his piston video the CB slides forward a few inches when he was setting up for a CCB hit. The tip has clearly risen, maybe due to him not being comfortable with the style of stroke. On both the other strokes the CB just stuns.

I'd like to see a close up side on shot of just the bridge hand to the CB. Slow motion would give us with not so good eyes a chance to see what's happening. I'd also like to see a close up front view of the stroke without a CB or cueing over a CB.

I've tried all the strokes in this thread for shits and giggles and all can be done with a level cue and a straight cue for the last atleast 4 inches of the stroke before contact and the same again after contact (I did them without a CB but lined up against a doughnut as the CB). My wrist action changed with each stroke to keep the cue as level as I could for as long as I could.

So one has to ask who gives a crap if your cue rises or drops before and after contact?

Glad to see you tried it, that puts you one over on English as he has refused too.

As far as your last question, only English does.

 

[Neil]

Bumping this up. I was away for a few hours traveling. Has English viewed the video yet?

He has had it available to view, Tony. Either he refuses to have an open mind and view it, or he has viewed it, as I suspect he did, and refuses to man-up to being wrong all along. Obviously, he won't be giving out any apologies if he won't even admit to being wrong.

 

[Mikjary]

Let's do a little recap for all the fine readers out there.

- I (and people that actually know a thing or two about pool physics) have said that the CB only knows location of the hit, and the speed of the hit. If two players hit the CB in the exact same spot and at the exact same speed, then the results would be identical. Regardless of the type of stroke used.

- You disagreed. Something to the tune of the piston stroke is more level after contact.


So yes, Rick. You did say that.

Jon,

I hope you don't mind me using your statement. I'd like to present a point here to get an actual discussion going.

Despite all the petty (and I do mean petty) squabbling being tolerated here by Wilson...we may have stumbled onto an interesting point. I remember something Bob Jewett said a while back about what was quoted above.

He mentioned the same idea of stroke speed and location, but added a caveat..."angle of attack". I was hoping he would chime in and save this thread, but I'll try to paraphrase him from what I remember of his post.

He talked about two players hitting the cue ball in the identical place with the same speed. One player was a novice and the other player was advanced. Their results would not be the same for a certain amount of spin unless the novice player through luck and randomness had the same angle of attack.

What is the angle of attack? Is it related to the method of stroking? And if it is, which stroke is optimum?

As I said before, if Mike Massey hits the cue ball at the same speed and location as a novice player, who's going to get more juice on the ball? Will both strokes produce exactly the same results?

Forget this school yard brawl and analyze THE stroke instead. Maybe one stroke IS better than the other... :grin-square: My apologies to Bob Jewett who is correctly not wasting his time with this testosterone feeding frenzy of a thread.

Best,
Mike

 

[bbb]

neil nice perfect stop shot
oh btw you did it with a fixed elbow stroke
not sure what to call that
pendulum???:grin:
if jews and christians were debating is jesus the messiah
they wouldnt get anywhere
to rick
can you agree to disagree with the pendulum stroke guys and stop battling???
and vice versa
you are entrenched in your beleifes
they are entrenchened in theirs
id like to be the one to call a camp david and say truce
not sure what you all would do with the free time result from this truce
:grin:

 

[BeiberLvr]

Now that Mr. Obstinate has me on ignore, I will post this little video showing that using the pendulum stroke, the cue will indeed be "level" for several inches before contact. (level as the table allows) Just in case there were any that actually thought his bogus claims had any merit:wink:...... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNIW3zwmeYo&feature=youtu.be

I suggest placing a piece of paper along the line of my cue, then hit play, pause, play, pause, ect. That way, you can readily see just how far the cue stays on the same plane.

Then yet, maybe I'm doing it wrong because my cue doesn't describe a large arc like he says it's supposed to.???

edit: oops, my hand hit my chest! My alignment must be way off! Darn!

Bumped for Rick

 

[Ghosst]

Sorry to report Neil, but I can't hit a pendulmn shot to save my life. Everything is a "J" hook or a piston stroke. I don't have any video editing software on my tablet or I would post the video now (I took a single long video).

<-- reporting live from the poolhall.

 

[Neil]

Jon,

I hope you don't mind me using your statement. I'd like to present a point here to get an actual discussion going.

Despite all the petty (and I do mean petty) squabbling being tolerated here by Wilson...we may have stumbled onto an interesting point. I remember something Bob Jewett said a while back about what was quoted above.

He mentioned the same idea of stroke speed and location, but added a caveat..."angle of attack". I was hoping he would chime in and save this thread, but I'll try to paraphrase him from what I remember of his post.

He talked about two players hitting the cue ball in the identical place with the same speed. One player was a novice and the other player was advanced. Their results would not be the same for a certain amount of spin unless the novice player through luck and randomness had the same angle of attack.

What is the angle of attack? Is it related to the method of stroking? And if it is, which stroke is optimum?

As I said before, if Mike Massey hits the cue ball at the same speed and location as a novice player, who's going to get more juice on the ball? Will both strokes produce exactly the same results?

Forget this school yard brawl and analyze THE stroke instead. Maybe one stroke IS better than the other... :grin-square: My apologies to Bob Jewett who is correctly not wasting his time with this testosterone feeding frenzy of a thread.

Best,
Mike

Mike, the angle of attack is the angle of the cue in relation to the level table surface. The more angle you have, the more coriolis effect you have. At an extreme angle, it's called a masse' shot. The steeper the angle, the less forward momentum you get. At the small angles we are talking about with a normal pool shot, it would be very difficult to see any difference, although technically, there is some difference with each degree off level. Essentially, what we are talking about here is how quickly the swerve takes effect.The spin and the squirt stay the same. It has nothing to do with what stroke one uses.

This thread has nothing to do with a testosterone feeding frenzy, or anything like that. It is about one thing, and one thing only. Rick consistently tries to mock what instructors teach by putting out false info. Instructors and others on here don't allow that to happen because they don't want those that don't know any better to be mislead by him. We want this to be a good place to go for people to get accurate info.

This thread isn't about which stroke is better. That is up to each individual. Although the pendulum is easier to teach, easier to replicate accurately, and easier to diagnose, it is not, nor has ever been taught by good instructors as the only way. It is about Rick accusing instructors, in this case Randy G., of making false accusations once again. And him not letting it go despite the evidence in front of him that he is wrong, again.

Rick got offended by an instructor because he was shown to be wrong, and then Rick's vindictive side came out in full force. He has been trying to discredit what instructors teach ever since with his innuendos and flat out lies. All the while twisting things to try and make himself look like the good guy.

 

[BeiberLvr]

Mike, the angle of attack is the angle of the cue in relation to the level table surface. The more angle you have, the more coriolis effect you have. At an extreme angle, it's called a masse' shot. The steeper the angle, the less forward momentum you get. At the small angles we are talking about with a normal pool shot, it would be very difficult to see any difference, although technically, there is some difference with each degree off level. Essentially, what we are talking about here is how quickly the swerve takes effect.The spin and the squirt stay the same. It has nothing to do with what stroke one uses.

This thread has nothing to do with a testosterone feeding frenzy, or anything like that. It is about one thing, and one thing only. Rick consistently tries to mock what instructors teach by putting out false info. Instructors and others on here don't allow that to happen because they don't want those that don't know any better to be mislead by him. We want this to be a good place to go for people to get accurate info.

This thread isn't about which stroke is better. That is up to each individual. Although the pendulum is easier to teach, easier to replicate accurately, and easier to diagnose, it is not, nor has ever been taught by good instructors as the only way. It is about Rick accusing instructors, in this case Randy G., of making false accusations once again. And him not letting it go despite the evidence in front of him that he is wrong, again.

Rick got offended by an instructor because he was shown to be wrong, and then Rick's vindictive side came out in full force. He has been trying to discredit what instructors teach ever since with his innuendos and flat out lies. All the while twisting things to try and make himself look like the good guy.

Bingo! I would love to see one, just one, post from an instructor that has ever said the piston stroke is horrible.

 

[Neil]

Bingo! I would love to see one, just one, post from an instructor that has ever said the piston stroke is horrible.

There's nothing wrong with a piston stroke. As long as it works correctly. Problem is when it stops working correctly. With a video and slo mo, it gets tricky for a qualified instructor to diagnose just where the problem is that needs correcting. For the individual person it becomes almost impossible to diagnose and correct without adding other unnecessary "band-aids" that will only cause other problems down the road.

 

[sfleinen]

Mike, the angle of attack is the angle of the cue in relation to the level table surface. The more angle you have, the more coriolis effect you have. At an extreme angle, it's called a masse' shot. The steeper the angle, the less forward momentum you get. At the small angles we are talking about with a normal pool shot, it would be very difficult to see any difference, although technically, there is some difference with each degree off level. Essentially, what we are talking about here is how quickly the swerve takes effect.The spin and the squirt stay the same. It has nothing to do with what stroke one uses.

This thread has nothing to do with a testosterone feeding frenzy, or anything like that. It is about one thing, and one thing only. Rick consistently tries to mock what instructors teach by putting out false info. Instructors and others on here don't allow that to happen because they don't want those that don't know any better to be mislead by him. We want this to be a good place to go for people to get accurate info.

This thread isn't about which stroke is better. That is up to each individual. Although the pendulum is easier to teach, easier to replicate accurately, and easier to diagnose, it is not, nor has ever been taught by good instructors as the only way. It is about Rick accusing instructors, in this case Randy G., of making false accusations once again. And him not letting it go despite the evidence in front of him that he is wrong, again.

Rick got offended by an instructor because he was shown to be wrong, and then Rick's vindictive side came out in full force. He has been trying to discredit what instructors teach ever since with his innuendos and flat out lies. All the while twisting things to try and make himself look like the good guy.

Bingo! I would love to see one, just one, post from an instructor that has ever said the piston stroke is horrible.

This is exactly right. AT NO TIME did any instructor say that the "piston stroke is inferior" to the pendulum stroke or anything of the sort. I dare Rick to produce ONE POST where an instructor said this.

No, rather, instructors might have said that the pendulum stroke is easier to troubleshoot, less moving parts, K.I.S.S. principle, etc. For beginners -- or those seeking the instructor out looking for the instructor to diagnose problems with consistency -- if the instructor notices the student has a stroke that's all over the place or else doesn't have a good baseline, of course the simplest accurately-repeatable and easiest-to-troubleshoot movement is recommended.

Rick, on the other hand, being brain-spinlocked on the "cue must travel straight, cue must travel straight, cue must travel straight" notion, takes umbrage with the fact that his stroke -- the piston stroke, with all its moving parts (elbow, shoulder, wrist) -- is not the baseline stroke taught by instructors. And what does he do? He blames RandyG "for causing all of this" -- essentially blaming RandyG for all of Rick's own Rick-initiated actions (i.e. "the devil made me do it") -- for something that RandyG said in passing more than a year ago. In fact, it was so long ago, that most of us have no idea what post Rick is talking about.

For a while, most of us were entertaining Rick's questions, and doing our best to be patient with the never-ending onslaught of further questions, challenges, "but you're wrong and you need to justify your position to me," etc. And then came his "need bio-mechanical explanation" thing. What the heck is that, anyway? Sounds like a biology major who fixes cars on the side trying to explain the inner workings of an engine or something. I was tempted at some point to go dig up some 12X or calculus formulas on how to predict the arc of a swinging pendulum, and then throw that at him with the directive, "here, solve for the variable 'x' and that's your answer."

Anyway, good explanation by Neil. It essentially nails it, and I hope my additional details help further explain why this entire thread -- as is any "pendulum stroke" started by Rick -- is a complete sinkhole of time. Rick has "pendulum stroke" lockjaw, is in the midst of a grand mal seizure, and needs "get back to reality" tetanus shots.

-Sean

 

[Ghosst]

Unfortunately he blocks everyone so he'll never see the replies. Even if he unblocked a few people once you're into an argument this deep it's probably next-to-impossible to read with an objective eye. He's even gone off on me a few times which is why I don't participate in his threads.

 

[Mikjary]

Neil,

Thank you for your detailed response. I'm glad you included a physical description to the question of what is "the angle of attack", for those who weren't familiar with it. Let's to take it a step further and apply it to each person's individual stroke and why they are all NOT created equal.

An advanced player's stroke "in relation to the table surface", describes their physical positioning during their stroke, but not descriptive of what they do to get into that position. I would like to see an examination of what we do to develop a high level stroke and define it. I think there isn't an actual definition of the parts making up the pool stroke because we don't know enough about its components. "Do this", is a limited teaching tool.

What separates the pro from the 20 year banger? Raising or lowering my cue butt, moving my hand backward or forward on my grip, shortening my bridge, etc., are all ways to change a stroke. I think the bickering in this thread can be summed up to a common denominator...timing.

The desired result in each stroke when applying the correct angle of attack, contact point, and speed, is dependent on the timing of hitting the cue ball. IOW, you will not achieve the correct angle of attack, speed, or contact point without the correct timing in your stroke.

This should be the basis of the discussion. Not the length of the flattening out of the stroke and its distance. At what point of the stroke is the cue ball being contacted? For most, it will change on 50% of their shots. The consistent pro will hit the cue ball 90% of the time not too early or late. They don't get the funny english or no english. Their timing is repeatable.

And yes, this thread has turned into a brawl. Neither side is backing down, so fagedaboudit! Every opinion is a piece of the puzzle. Nobody knows it all. If they do...please send me your PayPal info. I've got a few questions backing up on this end.

Best,
Mike

 

[sfleinen]

Unfortunately he blocks everyone so he'll never see the replies. Even if he unblocked a few people once you're into an argument this deep it's probably next-to-impossible to read with an objective eye. He's even gone off on me a few times which is why I don't participate in his threads.

It's long been suspected that Rick peeks at the posts even though the poster is on Rick's "published Ignore list" (whatever that means -- but it apparently feeds his desire to be noticed, and gives him a reason to "not" reply). Also, Jon (BeiberLvr) is helpful in that he's not on Rick's "published Ignore list" (although Rick threatened him with that, too), and replies to our posts with a full quote of the original. So Rick ultimately sees them, one way or the other.

Not that we care, btw. Everything we're saying here has long and repeatedly been said to him in the past -- mostly in the Ask the Instructor forum, where Rick sees fit to dispense "advice." It's like the Joey Isuzu character going into the nearest auto repair center and intercepting the customers coming in to get their car fixed, giving the customer "advice" to stuff banana peels into the rear differential to "cure" a grinding noise heard back there.

-Sean

 

[lfigueroa]

Jon,

I hope you don't mind me using your statement. I'd like to present a point here to get an actual discussion going.

Despite all the petty (and I do mean petty) squabbling being tolerated here by Wilson...we may have stumbled onto an interesting point. I remember something Bob Jewett said a while back about what was quoted above.

He mentioned the same idea of stroke speed and location, but added a caveat..."angle of attack". I was hoping he would chime in and save this thread, but I'll try to paraphrase him from what I remember of his post.

He talked about two players hitting the cue ball in the identical place with the same speed. One player was a novice and the other player was advanced. Their results would not be the same for a certain amount of spin unless the novice player through luck and randomness had the same angle of attack.

What is the angle of attack? Is it related to the method of stroking? And if it is, which stroke is optimum?

As I said before, if Mike Massey hits the cue ball at the same speed and location as a novice player, who's going to get more juice on the ball? Will both strokes produce exactly the same results?

Forget this school yard brawl and analyze THE stroke instead. Maybe one stroke IS better than the other... :grin-square: My apologies to Bob Jewett who is correctly not wasting his time with this testosterone feeding frenzy of a thread.

Best,
Mike

Angle of attack has always meant, to me, how your cue tip goes through the CB. If you think of a pin cushion and imagine pins all inserted at the same spot you'll see that they can vary in their angle of attack, from just a bit to a lot.

The late Harry Sims one day spent some time with me on a billiard table and explained his theory on AoA for a while and demonstrated how a descending stroke differs from an ascending stroke, along with a few other variations.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Mikjary]

Angle of attack has always meant, to me, how your cue tip goes through the CB. If you think of a pin cushion and imagine pins all inserted at the same spot you'll see that they can vary in their angle of attack, from just a bit to a lot.

The late Harry Sims one day spent some time with me on a billiard table and explained his theory on AoA for a while and demonstrated how a descending stroke differs from an ascending stroke, along with a few other variations.

Lou Figueroa

I noticed in your analogy, you used the word, "pin". :wink: Would you say that the higher level strokes out there use the ascending and descending movement which I call, "pinning"? Does your stroke change with the differing AoAs (you get credit for the new acronym)?

Best,
Mike

 

[lfigueroa]

I noticed in your analogy, you used the word, "pin". :wink: Would you say that the higher level strokes out there use the ascending and descending movement which I call, "pinning"? Does your stroke change with the differing AoAs (you get credit for the new acronym)?

Best,
Mike

I was making zero connection to whatever definition of "pin" you might be thinking of. As to the stroke thing, I believe it can go either way: some guys will swipe through and others will piston through.

Lou Figueroa

 

[ENGLISH!]

Here is the blue....
I did it my way because it gives the same result but with only one measurement required. Since this demonstration was of my own invention, your option was not on the table at the time.

When you put a 5"long tangent line centered at the bottom of a 15" arc, what result do you get?

Greg,

If the line is centered at the bottom of the arc then when the rod swings up & takes the line with it the front side of the line arcs down below the line of level as the back end of the line moves above the line of level. What you did SETS the line level during the course & range of the pendulum swing. Your line IS SET level & straight (Unless I misunderstand you). You have formed a triangle with the rod at the end of the swing being two sides & a level line at the bottom. But the bottom of a pendulum is not straight. Tracking the swing of the bottom of a pendulum forms a curved arc as the rod is swung.

If you keep the line attached to the rod representing the tangent line perpendicular to the rod/forearm the angle of it in constantly changing. It only returns to a level position at one point & for one instant before the angle changes again 'immediately' on the other side.

Bob Jewitt's chart of the analysis of tracking the tip travel for a fixed elbow stroke indicates 3 arcs, one as the cue is swung up, two as it is swung down & 3 as it is swung up on the front side.

That is why I found randG's assertion very interesting. Bob Jewitts' chart of the analysis of the tip travel for an elbow drop stroke tracked the tip movement straight but with the elbow moving in the up down directions.

The conclusion of that analysis was that by taking the moving elbow out that the stroke would be 'more simple' 'like a pendulum'.

That is another discussion.

The point is that the pendulum stroke is called more simple with the elbow stationary & then randyG asserts that the tip also moves straight for several inches. My question was basically, 'how & why'.

I THINK we ALL know that for that to happen something has to change during the swing of the pendulum. The only place for that to happen is in the connect from the end of the forearm to the connection to the cue, which is what Renfro/Chris pointed out is rarely if ever talked about.

I thought I might get an answer as to what is going on there but only guys like Chris, Mike, & Pidge have any ideas or are willing to talk about it.

So, IF the tip is moving straight as asserted for several inches what exactly is going on in the area of the connection to the cue & the wrist that would make or allow straight/'level' tip travel as is the case of Bob Jewitt's chart for tracking the elbow drop stroke?

Again, I appreciate your efforts but I'm looking for a simple explanation that 'everyone' can understand.

Regards & Best Wishes,
Rick

 

[Ghosst]

Does anyone know if Rick intentionally misspells Bob's last name as a snipe or is it just a constant mistake? It irks me because Bob is highly respected and has been a friend for a long time.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Does anyone know if Rick intentionally misspells Bob's last name as a snipe or is it just a constant mistake? It irks me because Bob is highly respected and has been a friend for a long time.

I take the misspelling as a sign of honor and respect. Just think Efrem, Effren and Segal. Nobody ever types Haul, though.