What's Good About A Good Stroke?

While struggling with consistency most of my playing years I decided to tear it down and rebuild. Without getting too detailed I changed pretty much everything in my setup. Things started to improve after an initial curve.
However I came to realize the one aspect of the whole equation that brought about the major improvement in accuracy and consistency was the grip. I also think it is the most overlooked component in the process.

The reason I believe this is that it has so much influence on the direction of the tip, more than any other component. I have seen some great players that do some odd things in their execution, from jumping up to jamming the cue in the lights after every stroke but the one thing they do "right" is the grip.
 
Slasher said:
... I have seen some great players that do some odd things in their execution, from jumping up to jamming the cue in the lights after every stroke but the one thing they do "right" is the grip.
Click to expand...

And what do you believe is the "right" grip?
 
AtLarge said:
And what do you believe is the "right" grip?
Click to expand...

The only way I can quantify it is to say that it needs to be loose enough to allow the cue unimpeded travel along a straight path through the bridge hand but tight enough to maintain control and afford power.
 
Slasher said:
The only way I can quantify it is to say that it needs to be loose enough to allow the cue unimpeded travel along a straight path through the bridge hand but tight enough to maintain control and afford power.
Click to expand...

That's a good answer, and one that I think allows a myriad of ways to actually hold the stick.
 
nobcitypool said:
The actual law of physics is that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. One of Newtons's 3 laws of motion. The actual direction of motion of the cue, at the time of contact with the CB, does matter. I believe what Dave is saying is that it is irrelevant what is done prior to point of contact or after the point of contact if the direction and speed of of the cue is the same in all cases. I believe the debate here is what type of stroke is able to deliver the cue tip to the aim point at the desired speed most consistently. One way to accomplish that is a fundamentally simple, consistent stroke. Another way is to have savant type of natural skill. Ask Lee Trevino or Jim Furyk if they needed better fundamentals. But that doesn't mean Joe Sixpack has a better chance of making the pro tour by trying to mimic their swings.
Click to expand...

If one were to compare the impact postitons of Lee Trevino & Jim Furyk to hundreds or even thousands of other Professional Golfers you would find them to be in the 'same' positon at impact, fundamentally sound. It is not how one gets there that matters, but that one does get there that counts.

I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of the 'discussion' at hand. I 'believe' I was trying to determine if two(2) different paths during contact time might have different effects as I think that they should.

In this instance, I am not interested in what is the most simple for most people. I'm interested in what is the most effective. Everyone on this sight is not a novice. I have been playing at a fairly high level for 46 years, about 20 with an astigmatism, and have ruptured a disc in my back 2 years ago. If there is a better way, I am willing to give it a fair try, but not just because someone tells me it is better. So far, I have not been convinced & I certainly do not 'feel' that it is any better than what I refer to as the 'piston' stroke or J stroke.

To me, straight to & through contact time, would seem to be more effective than an arc moving downward during contact time. They are different. What is percieved to be insignificant or negligible to one may not be so to another.

Two examples:

Ray Floyd dropped a club off at the trailor to be re-gripped with instructions of only ONE(1) layer of tape under the grip. The tech apllied two, just to test him. As soon as he put his hands on the club he said in a bit of an upset & disappointed tone, 'I told you I only wanted only ONE(1) layer of tape.' He coud feel with his hands the thickness of ONE(1) layer of tape

John Havlechek was warming up & informed the equipment manager that the rim was a 1/4 inch too low. The manager thought he was kidding, but John persisted. The manager measured the rim & it was a 1/4 inch too low.

As you have inferred in another post it is what is done before contact that affects what happens during & after contact. Does one(1) mm or 1 degree in the wrong direction make a difference? Can what happens over the course of 1/8 to 1/4 inch during 1 to 2/1000 of a second make a difference? Ask that question to an eye doctor doing Lasiks surgery.

Do certain pros place the tip where they intend to strike the cue ball & then strike it there? The answere is no. They place the tip, or practice stroke usually low & strike higher. They have their reasons.

Certain experiments are done under certain perameters. Change any one perameter & one may get a different result. I have seen some very conclusive information from Dr. Dave but he made an ammendment to a statement just today regarding english. If anyone thinks they are infallible, they will one day have a very enlightened awakening. I'm not talking about Dr. Dave. He seems to be a very reasonable man.

I hope this clarifies some points.

Sorry for the rant. No offenses meant. I sincerely hope non are taken.
With respects,
 
Neil said:
Going by your definition, anyone that uses backhand english has a bad stroke. If the stroke is only after contact, what difference does it make if you have a good or bad stroke, as the cb is already gone??
Click to expand...

Neil thanks for your question. My point is if you need the tip to hit exact spot, it is not stroke that directs that, it is how your stance, bridge position, hands mechanics, and most importantly your eyes have to be focused at exact tip contact point of which all fixed and will hit cue at exact same spot needed all the time Sure it takes practice. Stroke is defined by either follow through smooth stroke, or punch stroke, even if you have the best stroke and hit wrong target at CB you would not blame it on stroke, it is simply you missed the target. Similarly you hit a nail, do you blame it on your hand or you eye is not focused on the target.
If you use back hand, lots of time you miss because you think you are pivoted, but you are parallel to CB path (at the time of the hit) of which deflection does not occur as anticipated and you will miss
 
Scott Lee said:
No matter what somebody does...traditional or nontraditional...elbow drop or no elbow drop...what matters most is the ability to define the motions (semantically and physically) and create a process that you can train yourself to do without thinking. You think about it while you're getting ready to shoot, but when your bridge hand hits the cloth your unconscious takes over. To be able to do that on every shot, on demand, under pressure, in one try, should be the ultimate goal of anybody who wants to consider themselves a good amateur, let alone a pro-ability player. The fact is that using SPF to learn an accurate and repeatable pendulum stroke, is the easiest method for the most players, and delivers significant improvement results, with correctly applied disciplined practice.

It's not for everyone, but for people who are 1) new to the game; 2) veterans that still struggle with consistency, or who have plateaued; or 3) people who play really well one week and flat poorly the next...and have no idea why (or how to fix it), SPF can work wonders. That pretty much covers most poolplayers out there. So...in the end, all that matters, is how you choose to go about it...figure it out on your own; or take a shortcut, get some good direction and a little shove in the a$$! LOL Either way...it's up to YOU!

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

Well said. That seems to be a fair assessment. Your '3 part players description' may encompass 75% or more, but not eveyone out there or here.:wink:.

Best Wishes,
 
Last edited:
ENGLISH! said:
If one were to compare the impact postitons of Lee Trevino & Jim Furyk to hundreds or even thousands of other Professional Golfers you would find them to be in the 'same' positon at impact, fundamentally sound. It is not how one gets there that matters, but that one does get there that counts.

I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of the 'discussion' at hand. I 'believe' I was trying to determine if two(2) different paths during contact time might have different effects as I think that they should.

In this instance, I am not interested in what is the most simple for most people. I'm interested in what is the most effective. Everyone on this sight is not a novice. I have been playing at a fairly high level for 46 years, about 20 with an astigmatism, and have ruptured a disc in my back 2 years ago. If there is a better way, I am willing to give it a fair try, but not just because someone tells me it is better. So far, I have not been convinced & I certainly do not 'feel' that it is any better than what I refer to as the 'piston' stroke or J stroke.

To me, straight to & through contact time, would seem to be more effective than an arc moving downward during contact time. They are different. What is percieved to be insignificant or negligible to one may not be so to another.

Two examples:

Ray Floyd dropped a club off at the trailor to be re-gripped with instructions of only ONE(1) layer of tape under the grip. The tech apllied two, just to test him. As soon as he put his hands on the club he said in a bit of an upset & disappointed tone, 'I told you I only wanted only ONE(1) layer of tape.' He coud feel with his hands the thickness of ONE(1) layer of tape

John Havlechek was warming up & informed the equipment manager that the rim was a 1/4 inch too low. The manager thought he was kidding, but John persisted. The manager measured the rim & it was a 1/4 inch too low.

As you have inferred in another post it is what is done before contact that affects what happens during & after contact. Does one(1) mm or 1 degree in the wrong direction make a difference? Can what happens over the course of 1/8 to 1/4 inch during 1 to 2/1000 of a second make a difference? Ask that question to an eye doctor doing Lasiks surgery.

Do certain pros place the tip where they intend to strike the cue ball & then strike it there? The answere is no. They place the tip, or practice stroke usually low & strike higher. They have their reasons.

Certain experiments are done under certain perameters. Change any one perameter & one may get a different result. I have seen some very conclusive information from Dr. Dave but he made an ammendment to a statement just today regarding english. If anyone thinks they are infallible, they will one day have a very enlightened awakening. I'm not talking about Dr. Dave. He seems to be a very reasonable man.

I hope this clarifies some points.

Sorry for the rant. No offenses meant. I sincerely hope non are taken.
With respects,
Click to expand...

By two different paths, I assume you mean the angle of the cue with respect to the table (reference surface). If the angle of the cue stick and the contact point on the OB are exactly the same and moving at the same speed, the movements that occurred prior to reaching that point (and any movements made after the OB leaves contact with the CB) are totally irrelevant. If any of those 3 metrics (cue stick angle, OB contact point or speed) are different, the results will be different.

I don't believe anybody is arguing you should change your stroke. I would think after the millions of strokes you've likely made as it is today, changing it would likely be a formidable if not near impossible challenge. I believe the real argument is, were one to take a complete new player and try to teach them the most fundamentally sound stroke, it would be the Pendulum stroke with the SPF concepts. Further, that argument continues in that by utilizing that teaching method, that player would develop a repeatable stroke faster than by teaching any other method.

I don't believe Scott, Dave or any of the other experts are trying to say this is the only way one can achieve proficiency. In fact, I know they're not. That would be obviously wrong. Just the same no one could deny Trevino and Furyck are HOF'ers just because their swings are unconventional. Perhaps that is the key word, i.e., conventional. Perhaps the argument should actually be whether or not the Pendulum swing and SPF are what should be considered as conventional and everything else unconventional with neither carrying a negative connotation.
 
AtLarge said:
And what do you believe is the "right" grip?
Click to expand...

I can answer that, as I had been playing and finally plateaued 20 yrs later. I knew my grip was wrong so I went to a pro event and for two or three days just ''watched'' the great players of that era, and how they gripped their cues. After watching many I chose a path and stuck to it, complete game changer, and my pocketing percentages went waaaay up and I didn't need to play as much to keep sharp.
I watched, Mizerak, Sigel, Hall, Medina, Shuput, Goose, Fat Randy, Jerry Brock, Gabby, David Howard and that group during the early 80's at Reds in Houston. That's how I did it, they all have very similar grips in many ways, I just chose a combination of them all that was most common.
Change took about 2-3 mths to feel comfortable, but I knew it was the right thing to do.
Hope this helps.
 
naji said:
Neil thanks for your question. My point is if you need the tip to hit exact spot, it is not stroke that directs that, it is how your stance, bridge position, hands mechanics, and most importantly your eyes have to be focused at exact tip contact point of which all fixed and will hit cue at exact same spot needed all the time Sure it takes practice. Stroke is defined by either follow through smooth stroke, or punch stroke, even if you have the best stroke and hit wrong target at CB you would not blame it on stroke, it is simply you missed the target. Similarly you hit a nail, do you blame it on your hand or you eye is not focused on the target.
If you use back hand, lots of time you miss because you think you are pivoted, but you are parallel to CB path (at the time of the hit) of which deflection does not occur as anticipated and you will miss
Click to expand...

Are you saying you are looking at the contact point on the CB when you hit it versus looking at the OB?
 
Island Drive said:
I can answer that, as I had been playing and finally plateaued 20 yrs later. I knew my grip was wrong so I went to a pro event and for two or three days just ''watched'' the great players of that era, and how they gripped their cues. After watching many I chose a path and stuck to it, complete game changer, and my pocketing percentages went waaaay up and I didn't need to play as much to keep sharp.
I watched, Mizerak, Sigel, Hall, Medina, Shuput, Goose, Fat Randy, Jerry Brock, Gabby, David Howard and that group during the early 80's at Reds in Houston. That's how I did it, they all have very similar grips in many ways, I just chose a combination of them all that was most common.
Change took about 2-3 mths to feel comfortable, but I knew it was the right thing to do.
Hope this helps.
Click to expand...

You said what you did but didn't answer the question. Are you going to share your grip or are you just suggesting that others do what you did? I've already shared what I'm doing at the moment.
 
naji said:
Neil thanks for your question. My point is if you need the tip to hit exact spot, it is not stroke that directs that, it is how your stance, bridge position, hands mechanics, and most importantly your eyes have to be focused at exact tip contact point of which all fixed and will hit cue at exact same spot needed all the time Sure it takes practice. Stroke is defined by either follow through smooth stroke, or punch stroke, even if you have the best stroke and hit wrong target at CB you would not blame it on stroke, it is simply you missed the target. Similarly you hit a nail, do you blame it on your hand or you eye is not focused on the target.
If you use back hand, lots of time you miss because you think you are pivoted, but you are parallel to CB path (at the time of the hit) of which deflection does not occur as anticipated and you will miss
Click to expand...

Nevermind, seems whatever I say someone has to twist it to find fault with it, so I just won't bother saying anything. (don't mean you) Too many on here don't want to learn anything, just have someone say that their way is right.
 
ENGLISH!:
Can what happens over the course of 1/8 to 1/4 inch during 1 to 2/1000 of a second make a difference? Ask that question to an eye doctor doing Lasiks surgery.
Click to expand...
Or ask a quantum physicist if you want a really ridiculous analogy.

Pool isn't quantum physics or eye surgery - it's governed by more "blunt" forces than you imagine. For instance, the directional change of the cue tip during contact is probably 99.9% (if not more) due to its impact with the CB, and an insignificant % due to whatever arc it was moving along before contact. I think we can safely consider the tip's "direction of force" to be whatever it was at the moment of impact.

pj
chgo
 
Pushout said:
You said what you did but didn't answer the question. Are you going to share your grip or are you just suggesting that others do what you did? I've already shared what I'm doing at the moment.
Click to expand...

All four and the little pinkie (5th) comes into play on shots when minimal cue ball movement is needed.
 
Is this thread still going on really? If you have to ask whats good about a good stroke, chances are you will probably never understand.
 
Island Drive said:
All four and the little pinkie (5th) comes into play on shots when minimal cue ball movement is needed.
Click to expand...

That's what I was doing and got much more movement than I wanted. When I went back to the two finger grip it seemed to be straighter and there was less cue ball movement. I guess it would be three if you count the thumb:)
I'll have to see how it holds up over time.
 
nobcitypool said:
By two different paths, I assume you mean the angle of the cue with respect to the table (reference surface). If the angle of the cue stick and the contact point on the OB are exactly the same and moving at the same speed, the movements that occurred prior to reaching that point (and any movements made after the OB leaves contact with the CB) are totally irrelevant. If any of those 3 metrics (cue stick angle, OB contact point or speed) are different, the results will be different.


Regarding the blue highlights above, I assume (which I try to never do)that you meant cue ball & cue tip by your OB's. If so, I agree with your statements.

What I was trying to point out & question is a different cue tip path during contact.. In one (pendulum) the hand is rising to the chest with the cue tip arching downward. In the other (piston - J stroke) the hand & tip are moving along the straight line shot vector.

I 'real eyes' that the time & distance is very small, but small differences do matter.

As to conventional vs. unconventional, perhaps it could also be a comparison along the lines of average vs advanced.

I'm not saying that the pendulum stroke should not be taught to the average person trying to learn to play better pool. I'm merely investigating a difference that I 'see'. I also wonder why past or present Champions have not 'naturally gravitated' to the pendulum but instead those Champions have naturally gravitated to the piston - J stroke.

The golf swing changed from the old traditional one to the modern one when the shafts went form hickory to steel. I don't know of any such significant equipment change in pool equipment that would require such a change in the 'pool stroke'.

If I were to start a national franchise of pool instructors , as of now, I would not make them conform to the principle of the 'pendulum follow through" in their teachings.

I feel & think that this difference is worth examining. I feel & think that the piston J-stroke is more 'humanly natural' & less contrived than the 'pendulum follow through'. If so, that, in & of itself, would be an advantage.

The bottom line seems, to me, is to move the tip during contact in a straight line. It appears, to me, that the piston - J stroke does that better than the 'pendulum follow through'.

One does not swing a baseball bat down & up, hoping to hit the ball at the bottom of the arch. One strives to have it 'bottom out' on a flat line for as long as possible to increase the effective 'hitting area'. I know that this is not an exact comparison, but it is a common principle whenever attempting to increase the margin of efficiency of 'hitting' anything.

If this is a taboo topic then burn me at the stake.
I just 'think' inquiring minds want to know. Brand the difference as insignificant & we can just move on to more pleasant discussions.

I 'real eyes' that I am 'bucking the system' & the system probably wishes that I would just go away & perhaps I will, as has apparently so many pros, not that I am a pro because I am certainly not. I am an amatuer. I play for my love of the game. I'm here for my love of the game.

Best regards,
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top