So he points his stroke to the left so his dispersion pattern is centered on the pin. That's what he's "aiming" for.
pj <- don't make me draw a picture
chgo
What Do You Look For in a Pool Instructor
- Thread starter lfigueroa
- Start date
pj <- don't make me draw a picture
chgo
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
We certainly agree here. We have gone so far down this golf tangent that the original comparison of there being value in knowing which side of a ball you hit on can be beneficial has been lost.
Hitting a trace of spin makes aim adjustments easier and ball interactions more predictable. That is the benefit players using this style of play claim.
This all started with the mentioning of a comment by JJ in commentary about how 'the internet will tell you this shot doesn't need any spin on it, but I'd struggle to find you one pro that doesn't hit it with low outside." Boyes agreed. Since then we've had a cpl days of golf talk lol
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
Again....no. lol. We might both need to draw pictures.
The left edge of his dispersion pattern will be at the pin.
Patrick,
I have enough experience engaging in these exchanges that if I were at all wise, I wouldn't. With that caveat, I want to say this against my better judgement:
You have demonstrated barely a high school level understanding of geometry, logic, and physics in the years that I have read you on azb. Nevertheless, you engage with others on these questions as if you have won the Nobel prize or Fields medal. You are the quintessence of the (edit: left edge of the) Dunning-Kruger effect. I realize that this statement is very belittling and only invites a defensive reply. I'm not smart enough to find a more loving way to put it. I kinda like you despite the above remark.
Why do you like to argue things that you don't know, amigo?
Lou
Last edited:
Then he'll miss all shots but the ones that land at the left edge of his dispersion pattern.
pj
chgo
You're welcome to correct me. Something other than "nuh uh!" would be refreshing.
pj
chgo
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
That's golf man. Yes he will miss the hole with his irons, but the point is to get safely on the green and have an easy 2 putt. Some of his misses will be closeish to the hole, some will be farther away but still mostly on the green.
By aiming at the hole, too many of his misses would end up off the green (again, this is for a left tucked pin). Jack was many things, but a great wedge player he was not. Even if a guy is great with his wedge, he'd rather not be short-sided on a chip/pitch.
This course management consideration applies just as well to the theoretical str8 ball hitter. He'd be a fool to aim his shot directly at a left tucked pin. He'd aim out closer to the center of the green and play for an easy 2 putt. His miss one way would result in a ball all over the pin, a miss the other way would give a more challenging 2 putt. The key difference is that he doesn't know which miss is coming. A consistent fader like Jack KNOWS he can aim a str8 shot at the pin and be confident he won't be left of that. For the millionth time: he's controlling the nature of his miss and setting the edge of his dispersion pattern.
Good answer, Pat.
...so he aims so his dispersion pattern is centered to the side of the pin - that's his "target".
In pool there's only the "pin" (pocket), no green - so you always aim so your dispersion pattern is centered on it, no matter what route you expect the CB to take.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
i hate to side track this very interesting (
) and informative () discussion of the last few pages
but can i remind everyone of post #1........
) and informative () discussion of the last few pagesbut can i remind everyone of post #1........
So far this year, I nominate the above post for "Post Of The Year 2023". GREAT!
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
You can play damn fine pool if your tip never leaves an area the size of a dime. As in, you can spin the living hell out of the ball that close to center. It takes a nice stroke but most people are playing such extreme english they might not know what a nice stroke can do.
Some books regularly recommend 2 or 3 tips of english and it just floors me. Perhaps with slow cloth or something, but if you do that on modern cloth you are making yourself work way too hard.
Better yet, as you said, speed and angle. You can put a "touch" of english on the ball to help it's direction off the rail or to throw the object ball a bit. As I improve in pool I find myself playing mostly center ball with a few straight left/right shots to fling the CB off the rail if I get out of line.
dquarasr
Registered
(At the risk of perpetuating the tangent of the original topic . . . . )
Two to three tips of English? What do we agree is "a tip of English"?
I just looked at a cue with about a 13mm shaft and tip. If I'm dead center, one tip of side English would be moving the tip to the extreme edge of the center tip position. (Center tip would have 1/2 the tip off center, and 1/2 right of center; one tip would have the tip 1.5 tips off center at its outer edge, the center of the tip 1 tip off center). If this is our definition, two tips would be WELL past the miscue limit, like, not even close.
Or are we calling one tip of English putting the edge of the tip exactly at the center of the CB (the center of the tip is one tip away from center)? If so, two tips of English (now aligning the edge of the tip with the previous edge of the tip at "one tip") would be about as far as one should consider going without risking miscue.
You're also welcome to correct my logic and geometry - let's see who's wrong about what.
pj
chgo
It was how it was put together and phrased in the whole package. Just beautifully done. As far as trying to apply geometry to the golf swing, it shows how illogical and ignorant you are about the subject and game of golf itself. Humans aren't robots. Every swing is a little different from another due to physical differences, and every body part comes into play throughout the swing from start to finish. Sometimes good, and other times not so good. For those who are beginners or high handicaps, it's pretty
much NEVER good. That would be your category or even worse. There's no geometry for that. Only words like..."you gotta be
shitting me! Get him the hell outta here because he's tearing up the course and pissing everybody off by holding up play."
I am going to talk a little about this, tell a tale about The Golden Bear, and a tale about SVB.
Within a half dime of center will indeed meet most shot needs. Chances are if more is needed it is high or low, not to the side. Getting long in the tooth now I have probably heard or read a dozen times "I spent years learning spin only to find out I don't need it!" or words to that effect when people start really using speed and angles. Of course knowing how to spin a ball and the other things you learn while learning spin aren't really wasted, people just learned they were much better served with speed and angless.s
I watched an absolutely beautiful pool match a few months ago best I recall. It was a matchroom event but after that memory fades. I don't remember who was playing, what the match was for, semi's, finals, or what, what event it was. What I remember is that both players played beautiful fantastic boring pool! Both players didn't do more with the cue ball than they needed to. As a general statement they never used two or three rails when one would do. A fantastic match since they did exactly what I have advocated for decades!(grin)
We are discussing why pro's do this or that, a big part of it is that we are all creatures of habit. Shane is a class act almost always and a great player, hard to not be a supporter of his. I was watching a match he played purely for pleasure. However, twice in one match I noticed he got himself in trouble for no reason. Early in a game he had a very simple shot. One rail follow and back out to his next ball. "Impossible to miss." Instead, he went all the way around the table in heavy traffic, bumped a ball unintentionally, and missed his next shot giving away the game.
Later in the same match he did exactly the same thing, giving away another game. No traffic to interfere with two less than half table follow shots but being a creature of habit like all of us he went with the shots he usually shot, apparently never considering the easy and safe shot. Running into traffic on both of the trips around the table he chose instead of follow. No reason to choose either of these tougher shots other than we are creatures of habit. I have to believe he never considered the far easier follow shots.
Never a golf fan but I read things I wasn't interested in sitting in doctor's offices. Reading about Jack was often entertaining. He simply did what others wouldn't attempt. Blasting balls out of water traps instead of taking a drop for example. Out from under six or eight inches of water is awesome, some claims that he hit balls under fifteen inches of water! I am pretty sure that is impossible but many believe it, Jack was a monster!
A senior executive of a multi-billion dollar company got into a pro-am type event long after Jack's "retirement". He was in a foursome with one of the Mexican legends, Jack Niklaus, and another amateur that had paid big bucks to play. The executive hit a nice solid shot deep into the green and he was happy with his results at the first tee, excellent drive for him. Jack came to the tee last and seemed to effortlessly hit a ball into center green about a hundred yards further than anyone else! That was when the executive knew he was in for a long humiliating day. Best I recall Jack would have been well into his seventies then.
The executive stifled a desire to turn pro golfing until retirement. Then he joined the senior tour. He won several events and consistently placed well in many events. He made more on the senior tour than he made as an executive. Too late he learned he could have been a successful pro, maybe top twenty or so.
That would certainly be me! Like many things, golf played well looks deceptively easy. My dad who as far as I know had never hit a golf ball in his seventy plus years was watching golf on TV one day when I dropped by. He said, "I could have been good at that." Not impossible had he devoted his life to it but I had to think he was deceived by how easy it looked on TV.
I chose pool because it fit my skills and inclinations. I was a fair performer at many things as a young man but only fair. When I found out that people would pay me to play pool while watching naked dancing ladies it was heady stuff for a fifteen year old! I had found my niche.
Hu
I didn't apply geometry to the golf swing - I applied it to the result, where it applies no matter what swing (or pool stroke) is used.
You might have a shot at understanding what you read if you weren't in constant attack mode.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
I would want a instructor for Diamond table play-not Valley boxes.
That would probably serve you far better for the long haul.
Lou Figueroa