why did jose hit the 9 this way?

[BC21]

1) Have you read the whole thread? Dr. Dave did a wild arm movement--everyone I know who swoops does a tiny wrist movement. A tiny movement of the wrist is enough to deviate the cue tip.

2) The placebo effect does not explain the many students of mine who swoop successfully or the pros who've done so here and there for a century.

I understand what you're saying. The last second quick wrist action causes more sideways tip speed across the surface of the cb when compared to swooping the entire stroke arm. This makes sense to me, and I actual do use wrist action like this on certain shots. I feel like it works better for me on these shots than a straightforward stroke through the cb. But that's me. I feel like I can shoot softer using a little wrist action and get great spin, where as I'd have to shoot a little firmer using a straightforward hit to achieve the same spin.

It makes sense if I look at it like this: When a cb strikes an ob off center the friction between the balls imparts a slight rotational spin to the ob. When a spinning/rotating cb collides with an ob, the sideways motion across the surface of the ob imparts a little more spin/rotation, or spin tranfer or whatever, to the ob, regardless of the fact that the contact time and friction between the balls is very small. Now, if we have a cue tip moving straight through the cb on an off center hit, natural (due to an absorbent tip and plenty of chalk) there is much more friction and much more contact time (when compared to cb to ob collisions), so plenty of spin is applied to the cb. If, in addition to moving forward through the cb, if the tip were also moving sideways across the surface of the cb it seems like it might create more cb spin, but no more than can be generated using a straight stroke with different speed.

The only thing that really matters is results, and results vary depending on one's ability to strike the cb exactly as intended. I believe I can get the same results either way, swoop or no swoop, max english, but it's all relative to the speed I use for each method. As difficult as this game can be for those trying to learn, it's probably not good to deviate from traditional straightforward stroking fundamentals until the player has developed an excellent stroke and can manipulate it at will.

 

[FranCrimi]

I think I (mostly) get how you see it now, Fran, even if we interpret it differently. Thanks!

pj
chgo

:grin-square::grin-square::grin-square::grin-square:

 

[BilliardsAbout]

So, you believe that by a tiny wrist movement they are going to significantly change the stroke? In my view, such thinking is entirely wrong and broken.

As for the "everyone I know", it seems that you cannot name anyone in the top 100 Fargo-rated players who uses the technique. Of course if it is a "tiny wrist movement" I suppose one could look at any video where the grip can be seen and exclaim, "There! See that! That tiny wrist movement is what I'm talking about. That let Ouschan spin the cue ball around three cushions effortlessly. This pro knows the secret of playing great pool."

I agree with both you and Pat. Pat is out of line for implying you are not honest. (He did not actually call you a liar.) I believe that you believe what you are saying. On the other hand, I am quite certain that what you are saying is incorrect and it would be a mistake for anyone to try to follow your instruction in this area of pool. And I agree with Pat that your style of argumentation is, stated charitibly, slippery.

You are far overstating my position, I did not say swooping is the pro secret of pool. Nor did I say a wrist twist significantly changes the stroke.

I didn't say watch for a slight wrist twist among the pros. I've prior posted on this thread regarding top pros and swoop indicators. Your remarks show me you haven't read most of my posts on this thread nor PJ's nor Fran's.

You aren't the only person claiming I should never teach a wrist swoop, yet my students benefit from it. Perhaps I will video an upcoming group clinic and post it here.

Thanks for affirming my honesty.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I understand what you're saying. The last second quick wrist action causes more sideways tip speed across the surface of the cb when compared to swooping the entire stroke arm. This makes sense to me, and I actual do use wrist action like this on certain shots. I feel like it works better for me on these shots than a straightforward stroke through the cb. But that's me. I feel like I can shoot softer using a little wrist action and get great spin, where as I'd have to shoot a little firmer using a straightforward hit to achieve the same spin.

It makes sense if I look at it like this: When a cb strikes an ob off center the friction between the balls imparts a slight rotational spin to the ob. When a spinning/rotating cb collides with an ob, the sideways motion across the surface of the ob imparts a little more spin/rotation, or spin tranfer or whatever, to the ob, regardless of the fact that the contact time and friction between the balls is very small. Now, if we have a cue tip moving straight through the cb on an off center hit, natural (due to an absorbent tip and plenty of chalk) there is much more friction and much more contact time (when compared to cb to ob collisions), so plenty of spin is applied to the cb. If, in addition to moving forward through the cb, if the tip were also moving sideways across the surface of the cb it seems like it might create more cb spin, but no more than can be generated using a straight stroke with different speed.

The only thing that really matters is results, and results vary depending on one's ability to strike the cb exactly as intended. I believe I can get the same results either way, swoop or no swoop, max english, but it's all relative to the speed I use for each method. As difficult as this game can be for those trying to learn, it's probably not good to deviate from traditional straightforward stroking fundamentals until the player has developed an excellent stroke and can manipulate it at will.

Thank you. When you consider the tiny movement required to bring a tip over a half tip's width or so in the stroke--it's not a big chicken wing movement and is simply accomplished.

Again, I don't teach english (in a first lesson or two or three or four!) in most cases, however, when someone complains about struggling with english for a long time, a minuscule wrist move patches them up in about a stroke or two. Seriously.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I guess it depends on where you draw the line between slippery and dishonest. You may be more charitable than I. I may have more experience with his slipperiness.

Anyway, it's history for me.

pj
chgo

Your remarks above are inappropriate. I've asked you several times on this thread to debate (or not) without slander. Slander goes way beyond your typical ad hom accusations and rude behavior.

With this post, I'm asking the moderators to review your behavior in this thread.

 

[sparkle84]

You are far overstating my position, I did not say swooping is the pro secret of pool. Nor did I say a wrist twist significantly changes the stroke.

I didn't say watch for a slight wrist twist among the pros. I've prior posted on this thread regarding top pros and swoop indicators. Your remarks show me you haven't read most of my posts on this thread nor PJ's nor Fran's.

You aren't the only person claiming I should never teach a wrist swoop, yet my students benefit from it. Perhaps I will video an upcoming group clinic and post it here.

Thanks for affirming my honesty.

Can't wait for the video. Better yet, when and where is the clinic? Can I attend?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...in addition to moving forward through the cb, if the tip were also moving sideways across the surface of the cb

In other words, at an angle to the centerball shot line, like adding sidespin is always done.

it seems like it might create more cb spin

Not more than a straight stroke matching the final angle. And not more spin or less squirt or fewer miscues either. For the short time of their contact with the CB, the "different" strokes are virtually identical.

but no more than can be generated using a straight stroke with different speed.

This is true - and it's why swooping (or wrist flicking or whatever) is a bad deal: a technique that's inherently less accurate/consistent - in return for no physical benefit.

Of course your comfort with a technique is worth something by itself - but I'd advise learning players to know the pesky facts about it.

pj
chgo

 

[sparkle84]

There is no excuse for your rude behavior throughout this thread. None. I've been exceptionally thorough in responding to you, and more than patient.

Really? That's what you think?
I don't think you've responded to a single question or statement I've (or others) made. At least not in a way that's either logical or that addresses the issues. I'm not interested in your thoroughness or your patience. I'm interested in you replying to the issues.
About the only thing you're good at is "skirting the issue"

You think my responses are rude? Why? Because I ask you to back up your statements?

Here's how you back up your statements or reply to someones question:

"Perhaps you missed where I said it's been proven by me and my countless students in dozens of clinics and private lessons where my methods and techniques have shown them in a couple minutes an easy way to do something they've struggled with for decades."
So, just take my word for it. That seems to be what you want.

Before you come back with "I never said that" in case you can't figure it out, I'm PARAPHRASING.
Same as Bob was when you replied with "I never said any of that". It seems it's ok for you to paraphrase but God forbid, anyone else does it.

In reality, what you "never" do, is answer a question.
I know you fancy yourself James Bond but guess what, the stuff he does in the movies isn't real.
Pool is real. It's hard, very hard. Making claims such as "most league players improve 2 levels after just a 2 hour lesson with Matt" isn't real. So an APA 3 becomes a 5 in just 2 hours?
I hope you don't expect anyone to believe that. Nobody's that gullible.

Well, I'm done beating my head against the wall. Time I've wasted with you in this thread I probably could have increased my fargo rating 100+ points.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Really? That's what you think?
I don't think you've responded to a single question or statement I've (or others) made. At least not in a way that's either logical or that addresses the issues. I'm not interested in your thoroughness or your patience. I'm interested in you replying to the issues.
About the only thing you're good at is "skirting the issue"

You think my responses are rude? Why? Because I ask you to back up your statements?

Here's how you back up your statements or reply to someones question:

"Perhaps you missed where I said it's been proven by me and my countless students in dozens of clinics and private lessons where my methods and techniques have shown them in a couple minutes an easy way to do something they've struggled with for decades."
So, just take my word for it. That seems to be what you want.

Before you come back with "I never said that" in case you can't figure it out, I'm PARAPHRASING.
Same as Bob was when you replied with "I never said any of that". It seems it's ok for you to paraphrase but God forbid, anyone else does it.

In reality, what you "never" do, is answer a question.
I know you fancy yourself James Bond but guess what, the stuff he does in the movies isn't real.
Pool is real. It's hard, very hard. Making claims such as "most league players improve 2 levels after just a 2 hour lesson with Matt" isn't real. So an APA 3 becomes a 5 in just 2 hours?
I hope you don't expect anyone to believe that. Nobody's that gullible.

Well, I'm done beating my head against the wall. Time I've wasted with you in this thread I probably could have increased my fargo rating 100+ points.

Yes, an APA 3 can become a 5 in a two-hour lesson and often does. For example, someone who can cut balls beautifully but really struggles with draw (or position play or you-name-it), which gets used so very often. Then they go out and win every match they play for weeks in a row until their league handicap is raised. Draw is something that should take minutes and not hours to correct IMHO, so we have time in a lesson for much more.

But you don't need to take my word for anything. I offer you a free two-hour lesson. I can drive the lesson agenda or you can or I can take the first hour and you can dictate the second--my hope is we'd patch up our differences and come to understand one another better.

Part of where I'm coming from on this thread is I don't like the "every stroke has to be done like X" teaching school--coming from non-teachers on this thread, so I'm not sure that's even a school.

If you're open to learning new things, you can get a lot from me in a lesson. You are likewise an experienced, skilled player and I bet I can learn from you, too. How about it? What do you have to lose except some time? And I love teaching whether free or paid. We can even not do swoop and just let me work with you on stance, aim and stroke--even though you don't need help there, perhaps--and you'll understand my methods better.

Regarding backing up swoop statements, I do see your point. Honestly, I often hesitate to answer even direct questions at AZ because some people are pretty vicious, looking to entrap me. I don't get that vibe from you, so let me put some things down here, all in one place for you:

1) Swooping IMHO doesn't give extra english, it gives better cue ball control--don't confuse me with others who say it gives magic juice! That's not me. I get it--those guys could make anyone angry.

2) Fran Crimi mentioned a possible center ball hit/double hit, think about it, you get extra cue ball down-the-line shot control if so--the cue ball would logically go down the shot line further, with less deflection--so good, it might be an illegal stroke--have you read her posts here?

3) I teach straight stroke aim to most students--if you miss a shot in practice using the vertical axis, assess whether you overcut or undercut, and reset the shot for practice. COMMIT to a straight stroke so you can learn cut aim better.

4) However, what top players are good at is varying from a straight stroke whether consciously, subconsciously or both, to make good things happen--the points below come into focus, therefore...

5) Mosconi, Greenleaf, etc. can IMHO be seen swooping, Hal Houle taught it some, etc. -- it goes way back (IMHO or In My Humble Opinion means "let's not argue about hard-to-see video here)

6) Foreign players who dominated the sport for years in the USA gave swoop a "carabao" revival in more recent times (that is not up for argument, we're talking Hall-of-Fame-level folks who were asked "how are you putting that much english on the ball they way you aim and practice stroke"? then the articles and commentary followed until "backhand" and "carabao" entered the pool world in strong ways)

7) Every pro, including some truly top pros, who aim at base-of-center-ball on every stroke, must flick out a bit to impart english--I'm open if someone wants to guess how they impart english without a flick or twist/swoop! Think about it, a base-of-ball pro has to deviate to hit along the vertical axis, and does so and wins huge tournaments--so why is it disbelieved they deviate for sidespin or lack the ability to do so? And if they teach lessons, should they teach what they do or teach "just do straight strokes for everything, aim center ball for center ball"? That's do what I say, not do what I do hypocrisy, yes?

8) Pros who aim center-to-center or center-to-half-ball for cut shots are flicking balls in--you can see Earl Strickland do this sometimes, get down on a cut on the line between centers but cut the ball in with a slight stroke deviation--CJ Wiley can be seen on some of his instruction videos running racks while calling "center-to-center" or "center-to-half" before each shot, etc. By the way, aligning center-to-center then reaching for the cut applies outside english--which can counteract throw--right? Of course it can.

My point in the old Earl quote I posted was that he and others have said something like "I spin most shots in, beginners who can't do this should stick to straight strokes"--we can detail some of this over a table in a free lesson--everyone I show this to thinks its interesting even if they disagree/don't use the technique afterward--it's simple to show you in person or over a Skype how this technique works and how an amateur can learn it rather fast...

9) I usually talk to pro friends about other things, but Kennedy and Esposito agreed they AND many of their colleagues will offset for english, but backstroke on a slight curve to point back at center cue ball with their cue tip, then flick out a slight curve again to impart english coming forward...

Are you willing to clear the air with me going forward? I really hope so. I came to some beautiful realizations that helped my students because I humbly realize I always have more to learn about our beautiful game.

And I "get it", strong players who do straight strokes only don't want to hear anything else, but will you be more open or more closed going forward from today?

I apologize for my length--but you asked me to backup my assertions.

And as nicely as I can, I sincerely ask you to consider me an honest person willing to discuss things with you--if you're open, I'll try to be more open, too.

Thanks.

 

[BC21]

Originally Posted by BC21 ...in addition to moving forward through the cb, if the tip were also moving sideways across the surface of the cb it seems like it might create more cb spin.

In other words, at an angle to the centerball shot line, like adding sidespin is always done.
pj
chgo

Not really. Place a basketball or beach ball on a table and poke it left of center with your finger using a straightforward approach, straight into/through the ball. The ball will move forward and also begin to rotate/spin clockwise away from your finger at the same time. Now fix the ball on the table again and this time swipe your finger across the surface of the ball in a sideways motion, not straight into the ball. This will give the ball more rotational spin rather than forward motion.

A combination of swiping while moving forward will propel the ball forward more without compromising the spin ceated by the swiping motion across the face of the ball. With just the right amount of forward force and swiping speed you can have the ball move forward and also be spinning very quickly. The same spin can be produced when poking straight through, left of center ball, but it would take more more speed and the ball would move forward quicker. So two different effects can be achieved with the two different hits on the ball.

Naturally there is not as much friction when we move this example over to pool balls. But there is still enough between tip and ball to produce similar results. I played one pocket with a guy that was great at manipulating the cb on certain banks. He would get rediculous cb holds on impossible looking bank angles by shooting a soft flick of the wrist type stroke. The same cb action would not be possible using a straightforward english applying stroke, at least not for me. I practiced this shot for a long time and it always took more speed than I wanted in order to get the ob to the hole, and the excess speed caused the cb to move more than I wanted after contact with the ob. But pinching it as he does works just fine. It's a feel thing, and therefore very difficult to pull off with consistency.
But that's why we practice.

 

[FranCrimi]

Okay, that's enough.

You're not a liar Matt? Seriously? Are you still insisting these days that you created the term 'chin lock?' Remember when you insisted that you invented it independently of Jerry Briesath and that it must have been a coincidence that you both created the same term?

Yeah. You lie. Like a rug. Now quit acting like Mr. innocent. You're not. Are you at the point now where you're believing your own BS?

Why don't you just cut your losses and stop trying to explain yourself here. Let this thread go already. Sheesh!

 

[bbb]

one persons experience
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=497735

 

[sparkle84]

Okay, that's enough.

You're not a liar Matt? Seriously? Are you still insisting these days that you created the term 'chin lock?' Remember when you insisted that you invented it independently of Jerry Briesath and that it must have been a coincidence that you both created the same term?

Yeah. You lie. Like a rug. Now quit acting like Mr. innocent. You're not. Are you at the point now where you're believing your own BS?

Why don't you just cut your losses and stop trying to explain yourself here. Let this thread go already. Sheesh!

What she said.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...two different effects can be achieved with the two different hits on the ball.

Easy to prove. Or disprove. I've posted the simple test several times.

pj
chgo

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Okay, that's enough.

You're not a liar Matt? Seriously? Are you still insisting these days that you created the term 'chin lock?' Remember when you insisted that you invented it independently of Jerry Briesath and that it must have been a coincidence that you both created the same term?

Yeah. You lie. Like a rug. Now quit acting like Mr. innocent. You're not. Are you at the point now where you're believing your own BS?

Why don't you just cut your losses and stop trying to explain yourself here. Let this thread go already. Sheesh!

Yes, I remember. It was embarrassing.

No, I'm not a liar.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

What she said.

Do you have a different response to the nine points I gave above and the offer to reconcile with you?

 

[BC21]

Guys, think about this regarding a swoop stroke and how long the tip may stay on the cue ball:

At impact, the pool cue is directly over the line of the shot. Initial contact is on the center axis. If the cue ball leaves the tip immediately, then where does the side spin come from?

This is an excellent question. It comes from the sideways force of the tip across the surface of the ball at the same time it is moving forward into the ball. Or initial tip contact was slightly off center to begin with.

All of the arguments about the tip moving in just one direction when it strikes the cb only applies to a cue that is moving in a straight line to the cb, striking it left or right of the center will naturally cause the cb to rotate around its center of mass. But a tip that swipes across the surface of the cb while also pushing it forward has TWO different forces that cause the cb to begin rotating.
One is the off-center hit, just like with a straight stroke, and the other is the sideways motion across the cb surface.

The action is similar to what happens when a cb with left spin strikes an ob and imparts right spin (spin transfer), only the tip is much more effective at imparting such a spin due to absorption at impact and plenty of friction between tip and cb. We already know that an ob can pick up a little rotational spin when struck by a sliding cb. But we impart even more spin on the ob when we use a little spin on the cb.

The motion of the cb across the surface of the ob transfers more spin to the ob than a straightforward sliding hit between the balls. So it isn't illogical to believe that similar results can be obtained between tip and cb, only more exaggerated due to slightly more contact time and more friction between the two objects.

Of course it's all speed and feel, and that isn't easy or consistent without a lot of practice. And I've only found a handful of shots where it comes in handy. 99.9% of the time a straight stroke through the cb provides excellent control and spin.

 

[cookie man]

The motion of the cb across the surface of the ob transfers more spin to the ob than a straightforward sliding hit between the balls. .

Would the two different methods result in the same cue ball path?

 

[BC21]

Would the two different methods result in the same cue ball path?

Yes, of course, but at different speeds. And the spin transference is speed dependent also. More cb spin does not lead to more spin transfer, etc...

I've found that if I bank an ob using a lot of english to help spin the ball off the cushion, and want to limit how far the cb travels after hitting the ob, I'm going to do this little flick of the wrist move because I know it works better for me than using parallel or bhe with a straight stroke. It feels like the cb needs to be hit a little harder with the straight stroke in order to get the ob to react the way I need it to, but the excess cb speed does not allow the cb to end up where I want it.

Without a super slow motion video I'm not exactly sure what is happening. All I know is how it feels and what the results are when I happen to do this little flick shot. And that's all that matters. It is probably nothing like the swoop stroke these guys are arguing about, but it seems similar.

UPDATE: I shot several shots today using this flick of the wrist method and comparing it to a straight stroke method for english. By paying attention to tip chalk marks on the cb I was able to figure it out. The wrist flick is a downward and away motion, producing a little massé action. Using left english, the tip mark for each flick shot showed below the horizontal axis on the cb, while the marks for each straight left shot landed on the horizontal axis. Different hits on the cb. In other words, a slightly elevated cue going straight to bottom left on the cb, using a little jab stroke, produces the same action as this flick of the wrist move.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Would the two different methods result in the same cue ball path?

The cue ball will move nearly in the direction the tip is moving at the moment of contact. For a normal stroke, that is nearly straight forward except for a little cue ball deflection.

One thing the swoop believers have failed to do is precisely describe the path of the cue tip. It would be nice to see a scale drawing of what they imagine the tip's path to be and compare that to the reality of the video of what actually happens on their best swooping stroke.