What's Good About A Good Stroke?

[dr_dave]

Here's what I posted previously:

A "good stroke" is consistent, accurate, and repeatable, with both tip contact point and cue speed.

Now, there are several attributes that generally contribute to a "good stroke" (see stroke 'best practices' and technique advice), but these certainly are not necessary for a "good stroke."

Concerning draw shots, there can be many reasons why a person might not be consistent or successful. They are summarized and demonstrated here:

draw shot technique advice​

I think the bolded blue statement says it all.

Above missing main ingredient amount of spin desired at contact point which is dictated by the nice follow through stroke, and as you said speed. Would speed alone does it maybe!!

As PJ has pointed out, no particular type of follow-through is required for a "good stroke," according to my definition. A complete, straight, and consistent follow through is often a symptom of a "good stroke," but it is not a requirement. For more info, see the follow through resource page.

Regards,
Dave

 

[naji]

Followthrough isn't necessary. If you can be accurate in tip placement and speed without following through you'll get the same results. This could be demonstrated with a spring loaded cue or a padded stroke-stopper.

pj
chgo

I am not going to argue much about follow through, but in order to develop speed one has to follow through so brain does not order hand to stop mid way and loose speed.
I will agree with your definitions as well as Dr. Dave's , but the definition have to include a specific objective of stroke, which is "desired CB direction, and desired spin or no spin at time of contact of OB-not before and not after) without this statement addition it will be open for speculation.

 

[duckie]

Follow through implies moving past a certain point. In this case, the point is the surface of the CB.

If there was no follow through, then the CB would never move. So, you do need follow through. The real question is how much is useful.

If the CB left so soon at cue contact, then there would not be a push shot foul rule.

And once again, define slow, medium and fast speeds. This is why there are so many weasels words to describe the results of test.

Without knowing what the true speed is being used in test results, all results are really just for that person's definition of what they consider slow, medium and fast and as such can not be applied to another person whose definitions of slow, medium and fast are different.

You can design a stroke machine that limits the amount of follow through. This is the only way to truely test what the affects of follow through have on a ball. The machine will also control the speed of the cue from 0 to whatever.

FWIW, follow through does matter.

 

[dr_dave]

Follow through implies moving past a certain point. In this case, the point is the surface of the CB.

If there was no follow through, then the CB would never move.

IMO, "follow through" refers to the motion of the cue after the CB leaves the tip (i.e., after the hit).

FWIW, follow through does matter.

Agreed. The follow through doesn't have a direct effect, but if it is somehow limited or off line, this is usually a symptom of an issue with the stroke into the ball, which does have a direct effect on the shot.

Again, the follow through is simply a "symptom" or an "indicator" of a "good stroke." For more info, see the stroke follow through resource page.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Slasher]

All of these motions, follow through, drop elbow, backswing etc have very little to do with the cue ball reaction. What they do affect is the muscle control and coordination. A long backswing will aid cue speed, a long follow through will prevent tension in the arm muscles as will acceleration. It's all about taking the tension out of the swing, do this and you will be able to develop more cue speed and straighter cueing, straighter cueing more accurate strike of the cue ball.

 

[Slasher]

naji...Wow, you finally got it...and only 316 posts after I posted the exact same thing (see post #159).

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

Aren't these just results and do not explain the mechanics of achieving them?

 

[Neil]

Follow through implies moving past a certain point. In this case, the point is the surface of the CB.

If there was no follow through, then the CB would never move. So, you do need follow through. The real question is how much is useful.

If the CB left so soon at cue contact, then there would not be a push shot foul rule.
Duckie, study this link http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2009/sept09.pdf and you will learn about it. Also, a push shot is when you place your tip on the cb, and push forward. Not using a normal stroke. The effect is very different when using an actual push shot. People always want to site that rule, but don't even know what a push shot actually is. ???
And once again, define slow, medium and fast speeds. This is why there are so many weasels words to describe the results of test.
Why once again? You have even been given the info you seek in M.P.H. and in table lengths, what more do you want??
Without knowing what the true speed is being used in test results, all results are really just for that person's definition of what they consider slow, medium and fast and as such can not be applied to another person whose definitions of slow, medium and fast are different.

You can design a stroke machine that limits the amount of follow through. This is the only way to truely test what the affects of follow through have on a ball. The machine will also control the speed of the cue from 0 to whatever.

FWIW, follow through does matter.

You don't even need a machine to test it. Just have your hand hit the edge of the table, or use a pendulum stroke and start the address at the cb with the finish position of the stroke. You can't follow through more than a fraction of an inch that way. And, just so you know, you will obtain the same results as when you use a long follow-through.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

... the definition have to include a specific objective of stroke, which is "desired CB direction, and desired spin or no spin

Accurate tip placement, angle and speed are the only things needed to accomplish any of these things.

Of course the desired spin and speed dictate how we want to hit the cue ball, but actually hitting it that way (the job of the stroke) is all about contact point, angle and speed.

pj
chgo

 

[Scott Lee]

Pete...I've never said elbow drop is wrong...I have said to those who struggle with consistency in their stroke, that elbow drop is a more complicated action, and therefore subject to more potential error (for no greater reward in the outcome). All of that is true. If you can make elbow drop work for you, then by all means have at it. The fact remains that you cannot "add more spin" strictly due to elbow drop. The huge majority of players are not, nor will ever be, pro level players, who practice gigantic amounts of time to be as good as they are. So, for the people who are looking for something better, to consistently set up and deliver the cue accurately, the pendulum stroke is a better alternative. As for the video, the shots sure looked like "C" ability shots to me. It has no bearing on how somebody plays. Lots of people play pretty well with "nontraditional" strokes.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

I don't know Scott (and no, I'm not attacking you, everyone can have an opinion, "Angry Is Over"), I used to think that (about the elbow drop), but am seeing it more and more with the great players when they really want to add the spin. I know it can be done without it, but it gets done with it.

And Collen is a great shooter, and those shots aren't easy. If they were, lots of the AZ community would be posting videos of them. Just Saying.

Pete

 

[ENGLISH!]

I am not going to argue much about follow through, but in order to develop speed one has to follow through so brain does not order hand to stop mid way and loose speed.
I will agree with your definitions as well as Dr. Dave's , but the definition have to include a specific objective of stroke, which is "desired CB direction, and desired spin or no spin at time of contact of OB-not before and not after) without this statement addition it will be open for speculation.

Mr. Naji,

I have a simple question with no inferences intended. I was just wondering, are you an instuctor?

Thanks in advance for the clarification.

 

[Scott Lee]

Slasher...My explaination and yours follow the same path...loose grip, natural timing, and let the cue do the work. BTW, that was some great video you posted of you shooting snooker. I loved the table length draw shot, which was done perfectly by you (even though you drew it a hair too far), and looked effortless and smooth. You have a great stroke!

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

Aren't these just results and do not explain the mechanics of achieving them?

 

[CJ Wiley]

Notice how Shane Van Boening has fully released his wrist, like a hammer

The way to get the feeling of creating/producing more energy in your stroke is to pick up a hammer and drive some nails. Notice the way your wrist is used to create maximum force to the head of the hammer.

Your arm will move at a consistent speed and your wrist will "kick in" at the last instant with what we call in pool a "flick of the wrist" to drive the nail accurately and powerfully.

The tip is like the head of the hammer and the cue is the "delivery system" for the tip. If you drive some nails, then hit some pool balls you will feel this leverage and the *kinetic energy it produces.

*The kinetic energy of an object is the energy which it possesses due to its motion.[1] It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its stated velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes. The same amount of work is done by the body in decelerating from its current speed to a state of rest.

In classical mechanics, the kinetic energy of a non-rotating object of mass m traveling at a speed v is ½ mv². In relativistic mechanics, this is only a good approximation when v is much less than the speed of light.

 

[sfleinen]

The way to get the feeling of creating/producing more energy in your stroke is to pick up a hammer and drive some nails. Notice the way your wrist is used to create maximum force to the head of the hammer.

Your arm will move at a consistent speed and your wrist will "kick in" at the last instant with what we call in pool a "flick of the wrist" to drive the nail accurately and powerfully.

The tip is like the head of the hammer and the cue is the "delivery system" for the tip. If you drive some nails, then hit some pool balls you will feel this leverage and the *kinetic energy it produces.

*The kinetic energy of an object is the energy which it possesses due to its motion.[1] It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its stated velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes. The same amount of work is done by the body in decelerating from its current speed to a state of rest.

In classical mechanics, the kinetic energy of a non-rotating object of mass m traveling at a speed v is ½ mv². In relativistic mechanics, this is only a good approximation when v is much less than the speed of light.

The problem, CJ, is that the "flick" you're talking about -- when driving a nail with a hammer -- is in the OPPOSITE DIRECTION from a "flick" used to drive a cue forward. The muscle groups involved are on the opposite sides of the forearm.

While using a hammer in a "wristy" fashion does strengthen the forearm overall, it would be more apropos to throwing objects "overhand." When using a cue in a wristy fashion, that's an UNDERHAND throw.

Now, if you turn the hammer over (hammer face facing up, claw facing down), and practice hammering nails into the underside of a table, flicking your wrist upwards, now *that* would be the apropros movement to strengthen the correct muscles.

P.S.: when my Dad retired from the NYC police, he did roofing and carpentry for decades, having me along as his helper. Believe me, I can swing a hammer.

-Sean

 

[CJ Wiley]

.R>E>S>U>L>T>S>'The Game is the Teacher'

The problem, CJ, is that the "flick" you're talking about -- when driving a nail with a hammer -- is in the OPPOSITE DIRECTION from a "flick" used to drive a cue forward. The muscle groups involved are on the opposite sides of the forearm.

While using a hammer in a "wristy" fashion does strengthen the forearm overall, it would be more apropos to throwing objects "overhand." When using a cue in a wristy fashion, that's an UNDERHAND throw.

Now, if you turn the hammer over (hammer face facing up, claw facing down), and practice hammering nails into the underside of a table, flicking your wrist upwards, now *that* would be the apropros movement to strengthen the correct muscles.

P.S.: when my Dad retired from the NYC police, he did roofing and carpentry for decades, having me along as his helper. Believe me, I can swing a hammer.

-Sean

That's cool Sean, my father owned a lumber yard, and I was doing a lot of hammering at a young age, as was Earl Stickland and many other players.

That's right, you are one of the first of the "regulars" on here that have acutally tried to understand something I've suggested. If you don't pre cock your wrist it is just like hammering nails "face up" like you observed. You can "pre set" your wrist either way and most people DO NOT pre cock them like I do. Mine's from playing so much tennis, golf and martial arts, so unless you have done these things you should just "pre set" your wrist as you normally do. You'll just experience less "release".

The feeling of the FORCE/Power with the wrist is the same and that is the main thing that I try to get people to feel to dramatically improve their stroke. I just got an email from a guy in Poland that is using my techniques and has improved an amazing amount in just two weeks. That's what makes it all worth while to me....R>E>S>U>L>T>S>'The Game is the Teacher'

The way I personally change this is I pre cock my wrist up so it can ONLY move down. This is a powerful technique, but not one I recommend.

CLICK LINK TO SEE HOW SHANE DOES THIS:

 

[ENGLISH!]

Greg,

Almost all of what you say is true. However the wrist only moves in a finite number of ways. The axis of movement in CJ's hammer analyogy is similiar. I would modify it to say holding the hammer 'up side down' & 'stroking' a nail into the bottom side of a table. That puts the back & forth emphasis of motion in better perspective. It can be a small hammer and a small nail. It can even be a 19 oz. hammer. Maybe an even better anaylogy would be to hold the hammer backwards & stroke a nail into the bottom of a base board. Remember these analogies are not meant to be exact. I know that the intended force of a hammer is different due the hammer head being attached 90* to the handle. Analogies are meant to relay a different association. The only exact 'analogy' to stroking a cue would be stroking a cue.:wink:

Best Regards,

CJ,

What's up? I'm not a regular? I made that backwards hammering up analogy way back in post 408 when Mr. Dukie, Greg, was sort of slamming it.:wink:

Regards,

 

[CJ Wiley]

It depends on how everyone defines "regular" LoL

CJ,

What's up? I'm not a regular? I made that backwards hammering up analogy way back in post 408 when Mr. Dukie, Greg, was sort of slamming it.:wink:

Regards,

Honestly, in this picture, if he had a hammer in his hand would he be releasing it up or down?

 

[naji]

Mr. Naji,

I have a simple question with no inferences intended. I was just wondering, are you an instuctor?

Thanks in advance for the clarification.

I am not an instructor but one that just in love with the game and want to question everything about it, and accept no answer that does not make lots of sense. Been playing for more than 30 years.
Hope that helps.

 

[sfleinen]

Honestly, in this picture, if he had a hammer in his hand would he be releasing it up or down?

CJ:

That looks like a neutral wrist, to me. I.e. when you watch Shane break, he's down low initially, but "stands up" during the delivery of the cue to the cue ball, and the wrist is kind of neutral -- maintaining its angle to the cue, more or less, and using mostly arm muscles for that break. That "finish" position you show is the result.

Are you trying to say he's instead "pressing down" on the cue with forearm muscles (i.e. pressing the wrist downwards as in a hammer blow)? If so, what purpose would that serve?

-Sean

 

[ENGLISH!]

Honestly, in this picture, if he had a hammer in his hand would he be releasing it up or down?

Well they look like they are well into the 'follow through' & 'look' similiar to that of the stabbing thrusting 'stroke' of a sword, especialy Mr. Archer's, at least to me.

 

[Nostroke]

I would like to see a 'good stroke' in slow motion-maybe one where the ball has been drawn by one player softly and impressively and just break down the stats on the stroke, speed, levelness, consistent speed, distance etc and whatever else can be used and then another stroke on the same shot that was not as successful and note the differences in speed etc.

I do not think that the difference in success is primarily the point where the CB is contacted. If we could get to the point where the success of the stroke on the table can be predicted in advance just by studying those stats before the full shot is seen--then we will know (I think) just what is a good stroke.