Flex said:
If you don't mind me asking, how would you rate yourself?
What english do I use?
- Thread starter cstepro348
- Start date
If you don't mind me asking, how would you rate yourself?
Look, the bottom line is, I know exactly how most people feel. I was much the same way. I read every instructional book out there, watched every tape, listened to every piece of advice. I tried every system. Some of these systems actually are quite good and are very consistent with the mathematics of the game. BHE, diamond systems, the light-system, ghost-ball, all of them were devised because they represent a very close similarity to what actually occurs. I think I made it as far as B-level listening to this advice and I'm not ashamed of that. B-level is quite strong among non-professionals but it really is the ceiling for most system-players.
What's amazing is, your "gut" has been there all along. When you're sitting in the chair and you see the cue-ball racing around the table colliding with balls left and right, you know BEFORE the collision whether a ball will fall in a pocket as a result. You just know what's about to occur. In fact, if something happens that you didn't expect, it hits your senses like scratching chalk on the board. No matter how many times I see it, watching a skid makes my hair stand on end. It's because your brain knows what is SUPPOSED to happen.
So if your brain is so well trained, why on Earth do you continue to calculate your decisions consciously? This is the question I asked myself one day and if you haven't already, one day you likely will too. Letting your gut take-over takes a degree of training too but you'll be amazed (and slightly nervous) over how much you can allow your instincts to control.
Yes, those systems are going to work for the most part. Yes, you can get by with them for quite some time. Yes, if you're a D-player, you can go a long way with that knowledge. However, becoming a better player requires more minute calculations; your brain's personal specialty. This is where "dead-stroke" lies. This is your auto-pilot. This is the feeling of not even trying defined. You want to get better? Get off the training wheels and start listening to your inner-voice.
What's amazing is, your "gut" has been there all along. When you're sitting in the chair and you see the cue-ball racing around the table colliding with balls left and right, you know BEFORE the collision whether a ball will fall in a pocket as a result. You just know what's about to occur. In fact, if something happens that you didn't expect, it hits your senses like scratching chalk on the board. No matter how many times I see it, watching a skid makes my hair stand on end. It's because your brain knows what is SUPPOSED to happen.
So if your brain is so well trained, why on Earth do you continue to calculate your decisions consciously? This is the question I asked myself one day and if you haven't already, one day you likely will too. Letting your gut take-over takes a degree of training too but you'll be amazed (and slightly nervous) over how much you can allow your instincts to control.
Yes, those systems are going to work for the most part. Yes, you can get by with them for quite some time. Yes, if you're a D-player, you can go a long way with that knowledge. However, becoming a better player requires more minute calculations; your brain's personal specialty. This is where "dead-stroke" lies. This is your auto-pilot. This is the feeling of not even trying defined. You want to get better? Get off the training wheels and start listening to your inner-voice.
Adjusting. If you're not using a method, per sé, then you are using judgement based on feel and experience.cstepro348 said:
The easiest suggestion is to pay attention. Whitey doesn't lie. If you always miss that particular shot the same way, then make the proper adjustment.
What I've seen over and over and over is that someone will miss an easy shot. For example a two foot shot with inside english. And they'll miss it again and again and again, the same way. And they'll say the same thing over and over: "I didn't throw it enough." Does it seem fairly obvious that if you miss the same way over and over, and you attempt to adjust the same way over and over, but still miss it over and over, that something in the thought process is wrong? That's usually the case, from what I've seen. And it's usually a piece of education that makes a world of difference. And that education can come from an instructor, a poster, or from simply truly paying attention to the miss.
Sure. If you can't draw, and people tell you to follow through and keep the cue level, then it's obvious that they're just passing you some standard answer that may have helped them somehow, but won't help you. If you're doing all those things, and the cueball isnt' comeing back, you're not hitting the ball low. You may be aiming low, but you're not hitting low. Whitey does not lie. Ask someone to watch your tip and elbow.
Fred
Last edited:
I'm sorry Jude, but this isn't right. And posts like this only further the bad reputation of backhand english or aim and pivot because you being a knowledgeable poster will say something, and those that don't know any better will simply accept it. You're a powerful poster, and in this case, what you're saying isn't really right, and people will agree with you because you're you.Jude Rosenstock said:
If you don't use backhand english in your play or your instruction, is it fair for you to tell people on this board how others use it? How others teach it? I'm a supporter and a practioner of backhand english. That's no secret. What you've described doesn't apply to how I use or how I teach it. If anyone thinks for one second that the use of backhand english is so rigid that practioners would be so silly to try to use the same technique for all range of shots, then the bane of forum posting and continued failure to read is just rearing its head yet again. I hope those that simply nod their head of approval at your post at least realize that. Maybe I can get them questioning it at least.
It's also obvious that the tool called backhand english cannot be properly described on the forum in words. So, maybe it's just time for me to give up. Colin's video is enough. It's not a magic tool. It's not an end-all. It's one tool that makes learning about squirt so easy, it's sickening that I didn't learn it earlier.
I've said many times when the basic use is used: squirt heavy shots where cueball swerve is at a minimum. Two obvious points:
- 95% of players have no idea how to shoot with tremendous english at a firm speed,(wouldn't those players want a tool to get them on the right path if they haven't figured it out on their own?)
- and not every shot is going to fall under these conditions. Watching Colin's video will show how he adjusts for some of the different shots. And the adjustments are going to be identical to anyone else's method.
And in closing, there are many backhand english techniques where we aren't shooting english at all, but center ball (no swerving either). For those that are now scratching their heads saying "that doesn't make sense," I can say.. "see.... that's what I mean." Backhand english is nothing but a tool.
Fred
Last edited:
Jude Rosenstock said:
I'm a serious student of the game. Been at it consistently for about 3 and a half years.
How would I rate myself? Not so sure.
However, perhaps the ranking Phil Capelle gives in "Play Your Best 9-Ball" is of some assistance, he writes:
"C is an Average player. Your typical daily high run is 5-6 balls.
B is an advanced player. You can consistently run 5-7 balls, and are capable of running the easier layouts.
A is an expert player. You can run complete racks with consistency."
Using his ranking, I'd comfortably fit in his B category, although he may be a bit generous with his ranking.
BTW, the autopilot comments you make in a post on this page are spot on and from time to time when I'm in dead stroke, it seems I can't miss and get shape too, and then run out a rack making it all look very easy.
Thanks for your question
Flex
Cornerman said:
Could you point me in the direction of this video please?
Rick
hustlefinger said:
Here's the link:
http://www.cue-tv.com/InstructionalVideos/
Scroll down to:
Back Hand English Introduction
Flex
Flex said:I'm a serious student of the game. Been at it consistently for about 3 and a half years.
How would I rate myself? Not so sure.
However, perhaps the ranking Phil Capelle gives in "Play Your Best 9-Ball" is of some assistance, he writes:
"C is an Average player. Your typical daily high run is 5-6 balls.
B is an advanced player. You can consistently run 5-7 balls, and are capable of running the easier layouts.
A is an expert player. You can run complete racks with consistency."
Using his ranking, I'd comfortably fit in his B category, although he may be a bit generous with his ranking.
BTW, the autopilot comments you make in a post on this page are spot on and from time to time when I'm in dead stroke, it seems I can't miss and get shape too, and then run out a rack making it all look very easy.
Thanks for your question
Flex
Ok Flex, I would have to say you are ready to let go of your training-wheels. You need to sit-down and really think about auto-pilot. Although you may have gone into auto-pilot a few times, even a bunch of times, the next step is to gain an understanding of it.
This is what I do. You don't need to immitate it but merely use it as a guide:
Pocketing a ball: I stand behind the cue-ball and look at the object-ball. I decide what is the comfortable place to hit and immediately get into my stance. Sometimes, I may be cutting a ball only slightly (say 15 degrees from a straight shot) and the "comfortable" contact point may appear to be a full-hit. I never question it, I just shoot. I want to feel as though there is no doubt I am going to deliver my cue right through the cue-ball. If I feel uncomfortable after entering my stance, I'll immediately get-up and start over. My backhand will begin to favor one side or the other which is frequently my body's way of telling me that I am not properly inline with the correct angle.
Using english: Only when I am behind the cue-ball will I decide which english to use. I do this for a number of reasons but primarily because I don't want to prejudge the shot and cloud my decisions. Once I make the decision on what to use and how much, I'll go to my "pocket a ball" routine.
Kicking: Ironically, it's a near identical approach to any other shot. I will stand behind the cue-ball and decide where I will want to contact the object-ball and the speed/spin I'll need to use. I'll then look at the rail(s) I wish to contact and go with what feels most comfortable.
When I enter my stance, I am in pure execution-mode. I'm not there to make decisions, make angular corrections or think about speed. I'm there to shoot and will often fire-away within 3-5 practice strokes. If I'm comfortable, I fire away. That's it. If anything non-execution related enters my mind, I immediately exit my stance.
Flex said:
Thanks Flex
Flex said:
tsk,tsk,tsk
Obviously, you leave yourself behind the ball and snooker yourself often haven't ya, little buddy! Ok, here's my question, why the heck would you want to apply ever so much side on the cueball that it is rather even better to either a) use speed control to position yourself in a better spot, b) use side but hit it either harder or easier to maintain that position, or c) just hit center and work on your speed control.
Try this for a change: apply a kickshot with more than one tip of side; do you feel that you're in control of your cueball?
Leave the excess of side for Freegame or 3-Cushion billiards. If you really know how to control the cueball for pool, then attempt trying to "EXPERIMENT" with only one tip - unless you want some serious throw with the OB.
PEACE!!!
SlickRick_PCS said:
But you're the one who said this:
And this is clearly false. Any amount of watching any top player, A player, shorts stop, will see in a game of 9-ball or any game for that matter just how far off center they go. People always say things like "never use more than 1 tip of english." Problem is, what they say and what they do don't always coincide. This is one of those times.SlickRick_PCS said:
It's nice to say it to beginners. What happens when they go beyond being a beginner? There isn't a person on this board that I've met and shot with that doesn't go beyond 1 tip, even if they've said on this board that they don't or they shouldn't. Not one person. And I've met over a hundred board posters.
Many of us had a small seminar lesson with Jerry Brieseth at the Derby City, and we went over a couple of pattern shots that he considered the "Bread and Butter" of top 9-ball play (for those that were there, it was the one rail two the second diamond pattern). And the the english he was discussing was definitely over 1 tip, and sometimes to the very edge.
Nick Varner held a clinic in my hometown. Nobody who was at that clinic would tell you that Nick stayed 1 tip within center. He was way out to the edges, and even said that you have to have the confidence in shooting out there.
Fred
Last edited:
Cornerman said:
Hey Fred,
You bring up some very interesting points. What I have tried to convey (aside from my personal approach) is that BHE is a system of compensation that closely mimics the actual deviation that occurs when using english. However, upon examination of extreme tests, it quickly becomes evident that the system has a rather specific range and can be quite wrong once you fall outside that range.
With that said, I think that by relying on it, you are inhibiting your growth-potential as a player. You look at it as a quick and easy tool for pocketing balls while using english. I see it as a quick-fix that blocks the user from really learning about these shots.
Personally, I think it's a common thing among lots of instructors to systemize their methods. Many instructors believe that if their students can show immediate competence without actual hard-work that they've done their job. However, among many of the system-instructors I have met, I have yet to see them produce a professional player as a result of their teachings. It is this sort of collegiatized version of pool instruction that I am adamantly against since every time I take a close look at these systems, I find that they are fundamentally wrong and no professional actually uses them.
I mean, I can't tell you what to do. All I can say is, there was a time when I thought I wasn't going to get any better and I was using systems. I stopped using systems and every day, I wonder if my improvement will ever cease. I've fallen in-love with the game all over again and see no ceiling. I think my way will yield similar results in others. I think if you saw the game as I do now compared to how I did, you'd know why I was so resolute.
wow Jude way to open up and get some nitty gritty details in their, you all better listen to this guy because he has knowledgeable experience.
And your lucky he takes his sweet time to communicate it to you.
Hopefully Jude they are listening and trying to hear where you are coming from.
ITs a lot better than that pro player barretta thread I think over there is a bunch of lolligagging nonsense reminscing about old pictures and thirty pounds ago.
And your lucky he takes his sweet time to communicate it to you.
Hopefully Jude they are listening and trying to hear where you are coming from.
ITs a lot better than that pro player barretta thread I think over there is a bunch of lolligagging nonsense reminscing about old pictures and thirty pounds ago.
i always thought i was the first person to use this method. i don't know if i am but the story is, and this may sound stupid but, it came to me in a dream in 1982. i woke up with this epiphany and couldn't wait to get to the table a try it. i tested it, somewhat perfected it then showed it to many or the top players in my area (south chicago) and every single one had never heard of doing this and could not believe how this worked. they deemed it the "Lilek" method named after yours truly of courseJude Rosenstock said:
. the trick to using this is you *must* know how to pocket all shots with only using center-ball using a level stroke. not that easy to do after you've been playing years using conventional methods and "helper" english on your shots. i have taught this to many players and it is an invaluable tool to playing the best pool you can imo. for longer shots you are right that there is some compensation needed but the way i see it is you have to compensate for deflection on any shot using english long or short without this method so why not make the adjustment a smaller one across the board and make your margin for error much smaller. seems smart right?Jude, so do you also oppose aiming, banking, kicking and speed systems? Or mainly for top players? Just curious. Systems grate against my own way of feeling a shot, but they've got a lot of fans among better players than me, it seems.
Personally, and probably like a lot of other anti-system players here, when I'm "feeling it," there's no question in my mind about speed or angle or juice, you just know it. Of course, I'm not always feeling so hot, lol.
Personally, and probably like a lot of other anti-system players here, when I'm "feeling it," there's no question in my mind about speed or angle or juice, you just know it. Of course, I'm not always feeling so hot, lol.
Most systems are just a baseline. You're always going to have to make adjustments for the table due to humidity, cloth speed and rail conditions.
If you rely entirely on systems whether it's banking, kicking or aiming systems they will eventually hold you back.
BHE is a case in point, it will get a beginner to the point they can make a ball using spin in some circumstances. If you shoot a shot time after time, your brain automatically adjusts for throw and deflection and all that. You don't have to think about it, you just know.
If you rely entirely on systems whether it's banking, kicking or aiming systems they will eventually hold you back.
BHE is a case in point, it will get a beginner to the point they can make a ball using spin in some circumstances. If you shoot a shot time after time, your brain automatically adjusts for throw and deflection and all that. You don't have to think about it, you just know.
Travis Bickle said:
Well, before I make any blanket statements, I want to make sure I state what I mean. Systems frequently do have a success-range. That is to say, there are some shots where a given system works just fine and referencing that system when nothing feels quite right isn't bad.
With that said, I can't think of a single system I reference anymore. I look for a point-of-contact and when one seems to "lock-in", I go with it. Sometimes, if I question it, I'll walk around and examine it a little (like when I'm kicking and the contact point looks deeper than a reflective angle) but oftentimes, I'll go with it and ignore what conventional methods have taught me.
SlickRick_PCS said:
That's all fine and dandy. I avoid using extreme english whenever possible, however there are shots that require it. How often does that come up? Rarely. When do I use it? Hmmmm... on some shots where I need to power the cue ball with lots of spin to zig zag around the rails and cross table for position. Do I like having to do it? Not exactly, but if it's the only way I can reliably pot the OB and get shape, I'll do it without second thoughts.
As for snookering myself and so on, well, it does happen to me, just as it does to the best of pros from time to time.
As for using one tip of english: I try to get by using no english at all, or as little as possible. 1/4 or 1/8 tip is often enough. The key is knowing when using it is necessary.
Also, if you want to see some serious throw on the object ball, try shooting very softly, pocket speed with a touch of spin on the cue ball. Now that will throw the ball...
Flex
I absolutely agree with this.Jude Rosenstock said:
This is where I believe you are looking at BHE from what I would consider the worst viewpoint. I view it as an educational tool for players to get a hold of firm english/squirt. From there, as others and yourself point out, there's no substitute for hard work. What I've found is that the concept of bhe english when shown on a table gives both beginners and advanced players a more concrete understanding of their cue and its squirt characteristics. And better yet, they should be able to go from one stick to another stick in a relatively shorter period (compared to themselves and themselves only), since they have this tool. That is to say, take everything you say a person should do. Add BHE as a tool, and I think they'll increase their learning rate.
I'm not sure why you view BHE as a crutch or something that people lean on. That would be like me saying that a pre-shot routine is a crutch. When you call it "quick fix" and such, it really drives home the idea that you don't understand it or don't want to understand it. You might as well call the ghost ball a quick fix, since you can't rely on it either, and its use won't help you learn anything about swerve or squirt.
Fred
Cornerman said:
The reason why I say such is because pool has a lot to do with how you visualize things and I think the sooner a player approaches a shot the correct way, the better. Nobody enjoys missing and if they think they've found a way to avoid it for now, they're going to continue using it.
A preshot routine is ENTIRELY different and is a poor comparison. This method is meant to be a reminder to approach each shot the same way. Anyone who wants to be good at anything has a routine.