That may be so they are on the center of the ball more consistently. A few pros never address the cue ball where they intend to hit it.
What the pros do differently ...
- Thread starter jbart65
- Start date
Right. Saying "Filler uses center more" is very different from saying "Filler never uses English." It is a relative measure to other pros. FWIW, in my watching I do feel like Filler chooses options that allow for center axis hits more frequently than most other pros--even though he is quite adept at spinning the rock as needed.
Sometimes success is just minimizing the chances for mistakes.
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
Remember pros are often playing on new cloth too. That makes a difference. On real world cloth, follow or a natural cue ball is often more predictable. Nothing like stroking a 1' draw shot and it takes immediately and goes 3'.
On new cloth you can pretty much get anywhere with stun.
The same can be said for new pro {Basketball players, baseball players, football players, and race car drivers} th young guns can do things the older guys cannot, but the older guys know how to take home the prize more often.
Making position is a bit more than ½ the shot, potting the ball is in the ⅓ range.
The mark of a 14.1 continuous player, too.
In my opinion, you can break it down to a single rule: Most of the time, professionals aim to choose the shot with the highest percentages. This usually involves a blend of shotmaking and position success rates. Occasionally, they are willing to take higher risks when the potential reward justifies it. This is more common in defensive play, but can also apply to offensive shots.
I have to add, though, that because of fundamentals and skills in various parts of the game, their decisions will often differ from the average player. But this doesn't mean that the concept for an average player is different. Depending on their skills, they have to choose their highest percentage shots. Over the years, I've learned to adjust my decisions, depending on whether I am playing my A, B, or C game. By simply playing the right shot, you can win matches even when you are just not feeling it.
I have to add, though, that because of fundamentals and skills in various parts of the game, their decisions will often differ from the average player. But this doesn't mean that the concept for an average player is different. Depending on their skills, they have to choose their highest percentage shots. Over the years, I've learned to adjust my decisions, depending on whether I am playing my A, B, or C game. By simply playing the right shot, you can win matches even when you are just not feeling it.
When I watch Filler from the front row, he shoots most shots with some kind of English, very similar to every professional. His delivery just looks impeccably clean. I think that fools people. In all the times I’ve watched this young man live, there’s never been an indication that he chooses center axis more frequently. He does choose ball paths that lead to longer shots more than others, and sometimes he has to add *more* spin to give the longer shot.
When someone sees the entire pattern and uses angles and speed massive amounts of spin are often not necessary.
There was a time when I might use more than half a tip of side spin once or twice in a six or eight hour session. It was as rare to use a lot of draw or force follow. Some nights I used a lot of spin just for grins when there were only one or two balls left on the table. Playing tap in shape made the other player grab the rack and saved me a little walking sometimes.
Learning angles and speed is so big that I have heard people many times say they spent years learning spin, now they don't need it! A bit of an exaggeration but just a bit. With angles and speed most of my shots were less than three feet, almost all of them. At that distance an angle that would be wicked on a table length shot becomes fairly routine.
I suppose the close game had it's origins in straight pool but it still works very well on a pool or snooker table. I found snooker to be more like barbox than playing on a nine foot table because once I got started on reds and sevens I wasn't leaving that three by six down table area very often until I ran out the numbers which was basically a drill that I saw most games.
Spin is fine but using extreme spin often bites most players, even most pro players, over the length of a set. Tangling with traffic unintentionally causes a loss of shape and a miss.
Hu
There was a time when I might use more than half a tip of side spin once or twice in a six or eight hour session. It was as rare to use a lot of draw or force follow. Some nights I used a lot of spin just for grins when there were only one or two balls left on the table. Playing tap in shape made the other player grab the rack and saved me a little walking sometimes.
Learning angles and speed is so big that I have heard people many times say they spent years learning spin, now they don't need it! A bit of an exaggeration but just a bit. With angles and speed most of my shots were less than three feet, almost all of them. At that distance an angle that would be wicked on a table length shot becomes fairly routine.
I suppose the close game had it's origins in straight pool but it still works very well on a pool or snooker table. I found snooker to be more like barbox than playing on a nine foot table because once I got started on reds and sevens I wasn't leaving that three by six down table area very often until I ran out the numbers which was basically a drill that I saw most games.
Spin is fine but using extreme spin often bites most players, even most pro players, over the length of a set. Tangling with traffic unintentionally causes a loss of shape and a miss.
Hu
Atorontopoolplayer
Active member
Think filler uses stun around the table a little more than other pros do. Have heard JJ mention this in commentary previously
I was talking to Aranas once and he said you have no idea how exhausting it is to play 800 speed consistently. I think he was referring to what you said.
The pros do not use more or less spin than each other. They ALL play all over the cue ball. That's the biggest myth, almost as bad as elbow drop is bad.
The layout of the table dictates the pattern the pro will chose. Once that pattern is chosen, it does not matter if Shane or Filler or Archer is shooting. The CB must be hit in the exact same place and the exact same speed by all 3 of them to get the same pattern.
When you hear a (knowledgable) commentator say "he is going 2 rails out of the corner here, or 3 rails forward there, or stun straight across here", etc. all those shots have to be hit the same way whoever is shooting.
This event had JJ and Frost in the booth a lot. There is not a single shot that surprised them. This is all grade school shit. Pros play every single portion of the CB according to the pattern on the table.
Go drop your elbows a mile, hit the balls hard, and spin the shit out of the CB. That's how to play this game.
Now, when comparing pros to D players and bangers, they don't know anything about pool, and those types of players will be rolling the CB and playing soft and timid shots. That's not pool. Don't even look at those players, you will lose pool IQ points.
The layout of the table dictates the pattern the pro will chose. Once that pattern is chosen, it does not matter if Shane or Filler or Archer is shooting. The CB must be hit in the exact same place and the exact same speed by all 3 of them to get the same pattern.
When you hear a (knowledgable) commentator say "he is going 2 rails out of the corner here, or 3 rails forward there, or stun straight across here", etc. all those shots have to be hit the same way whoever is shooting.
This event had JJ and Frost in the booth a lot. There is not a single shot that surprised them. This is all grade school shit. Pros play every single portion of the CB according to the pattern on the table.
Go drop your elbows a mile, hit the balls hard, and spin the shit out of the CB. That's how to play this game.
Now, when comparing pros to D players and bangers, they don't know anything about pool, and those types of players will be rolling the CB and playing soft and timid shots. That's not pool. Don't even look at those players, you will lose pool IQ points.
oscargrouch
Active member
Yeah. What's up with this? Is it some kind of specific method? See it a lot but it seems strange to not be telling your brain where you want the tip to go.
I agree with you the vast majority of the time so natcherally I posted when I don't! There are literally an infinite number of ways to get the cue ball to the same place. I wish there was some scale to say what is really different and what is just a tiny variation of the same thing but as long as we have spin, speed, and rails there is no limit to how we can do things. Early Efren was a fine example. The commentators used to calling the next shot gave up in despair! Efren's view of a pool table was so different from the US conventional view that they finally had to acknowledge, "No idea what he is going to do, let's watch!" Just for example, one rail of follow can get the same result as three or four rails of draw.
Draw, follow, spin, speed, and angles can all get the cue ball to the same place. If that isn't enough, we can combine some of these things to get the effect we want. That is where the art of pool comes in. Some call pocketing a ball and playing shape a 50-50 effort, I see it as more 20-80 on most shots with eighty being shape. The usual first collision of the cue ball is with the object ball. If this collision is wrong the rest of the cue ball's path magnifies the error and makes it extremely obvious. If the cue ball travels sweetly and properly along it's path, that started with a perfect collision with the object ball.
Hu
I think Bustamante has been quoted as saying he did it to confuse his opponents so they couldn't figure out where he hit the cue ball. Some players from the 1950s are said to have done it for the same reason.
The problem I have with this is that unless you are playing the dumbest guy in the hall, he can figure out where you hit the cue ball by what the cue ball does. You can't hide stuff like that.
On the other hand.... I was giving a lesson to a fairly serious beginner. She had already spent over $2000 on lessons. We got to draw. She had somehow never made the connection between hitting the cue ball low and getting the cue ball to come backwards off an object ball. The whole thing of "where you hit determines the spin, how hard you hit determines how much" was a revelation.
Against some people the strategy of aim here, hit there may work.
We had a shot called a kill shot. Just enuf low on the ball so it starts forward roll on point of contact w object ball. You gotta experiment w this technique to get the proper amount of backspin on the cue ball so it stops the slide on contact with object ball. This works even better than stun in my opinion, but you gotta have the stroke for it. You can hold some pretty tough angles close if you learn and use this shot.
I hit below center twice as much as above.
Has served me well over the years.
The only thing I find surprising is the number of follow shots played in that match. I don't disagree with your findings of course, I just haven't been paying attention to how much follow is being used by the top pro's or this is an atypical match, I don't know which.
I have long thought that slight stun, a little below center, is the true starting point for building shots for most top players. They are still hitting center ball to some extent but they are doing it with the upper portion of their cue tip. I haven't looked at this in years so this might have changed too.
Many started with a very low address to be sure they found center ball, some find it from top, not as common. The old deal of hiding what you did was real but pretty much went out with the dinosaurs. Other decent players knew how you hit a ball or could find out quickly setting up a shot they were curious about after the match.
The greatest kick I ever saw was on a bar table, a young Johnny Archer playing me. Started off with a very close kick into the foot rail, seven more contacts with rails zee banking before hitting the object ball. It stopped in the jaws without touching them, the shot finally ran out of gas. There were at least ten balls on the table when he made that shot to add a little complexity. I couldn't make the shot with just the four balls directly involved on the table. It hit every rail on the table once, two twice.
Hu
The pros have an astonishing commitment to fundamentals, and are far more disciplined than amateurs.
that's called a 'drag' shot. great tool to have.
Much truth to what you say but ... the pros most definitely do not choose all the same patterns. Give 10 players the same layout and there is bound to be several that choose appreciably different runouts.
Some players have pronounced tendencies or preferences compared to others. I think SVB uses more hard draw, for example, than other players. He plays with more power than the Ko brothers, too.
Why? Because he can, for one thing. He is a strong dude. But maybe he gets out of line more often, too.
And yes, sometimes JJ and Frost are surprised by shot selection. Not often, mind you, but enough to be noticeable. JJ has often talked about how Daniel Maciol approaches the game differently than other players.
In another vein, players who stay in line more often are going to choose somewhat different runout paths than those who get out of line more often.
And players who try to get as close as possible to the object ball will play a bit differently than those who accept longer shots.
If every player played the same way, I'd find the game boring. Fortunately it's not.
Last edited:
Great post.
Controlling draw might be the toughest thing in pool.
Bringing the ball back 2 inches, 10 inches, four feet as desired accurately.