Some instructors do teach or at least suggest a snooker stance. The main problem for a lot of people is that pool tables are lower than snooker tables so it takes more effort to get that low.the forum has been slow so i thought i would try to provoke some discussion
:smile:
the forum has been slow so i thought i would try to provoke some discussion
:smile:
i edited your postA snooker-esk stance offers a lot of benefits, but it does not look as cool as them ball banger stances.
Might be that pool tables are lower, but then you get the fsck down still. 3 point contact on body and you're set.
I'll also readily say that van Boening's stance and stroke is terrible. He's still vastly more successful than I am
Chris Melling on the other hand - proper body tension ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5bNceN12kY
Cheers,
M
the forum has been slow so i thought i would try to provoke some discussion
:smile:
Were you thinking of the height of a snooker stance, or the fact that it tends to be more square toward the target with the body?
There are number of commonly accepted ideas that should be challenged. Snooker players stand low and square because snooker pros have said this is best, and for many years.
However, do snooker pros do certain things because they work best or because other pros said to do so when they were young, up-and-coming players?
You can stir....
Most pool players and instructors are idiots, clinging to the old crap. It's as simple as that.
And I don't mean it in a mean way - people don't like change and challenging their own views.
A snooker-esk stance offers a lot of benefits, but it does not look as cool as them ball banger stances.
Might be that pool tables are lower, but then you get the fsck down still. 3 point contact on body and you're set.
However, here you'll find a few excellent instructors that know the benefits.
It takes effort, but the reward is huge.
I'll also readily say that van Boening's stance and stroke is terrible. He's still vastly more successful than I am
Chris Melling on the other hand - proper body tension ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5bNceN12kY
Cheers,
M
I believe that we have just been called an "idiot"!
randyg
not by me randy
i respect your and fellow instructors opinions
larry
Yeah, but he didn't mean it in a mean way.I believe that we have just been called an "idiot"!
randyg
i was referring to the more square to the table and chin very low
your other questions are like which came first the chicken or the egg?
Not quite. There were a bunch of players who imitated, for example, Willie Hoppe's chicken wing stroke, to no avail.
When I'm told it's necessary to place one's chin right atop the cue stick for Snooker, Billiards or Pool, I sometimes ask, "Do you shoot with your chin or your hand and eye?"
When Allison Fisher came here, she didn't convert her square stance to 45 degrees for pool because "that's how it's done". When fine pool players run over 100 in Snooker, they use their pool stance . . .
the forum has been slow so i thought i would try to provoke some discussion
:smile:
If you watch closely, the old players like Mosconi, Hoppe weren't even that accurate, with their heads in the clouds. I mean, dead accurate like the current Snooker pros.
The chin-on-cue is all about a consistent sighting, maybe about detecting a wobly stroke. Physics dictate that 3 contact points make for a consistent movement, that's why we include the body as the 3rd (1st is the bridge).
Do and find out what suits your body flaws best - this is really the advice any trainer should give. For me sighting is a problem, that's why I need a consistent starting point.
Cheers,
M
Would you elaborate on some details?I think the ideal stance for pool has both snooker and pool elements to it.
I, myself, do not have much confidence in what I see from most pool instructors. But to refer to them as "idiots" is over the top, my man.
They're not idiots.
Some are, true enough, so full of themselves (especially the fat bellied ones) that they border on the absurd and I think their prices are way out of line for what they provide. However, nobody forces a buyer to buy anything. That is an individual decision.
But for beginners, intermediates, and those who are stuck at a plateau they do provide a useful purpose. There is no question, in my mind, that the video taping alone can furnish very valuable information for study.
I agree with you about the Brit snooker players being so deadly accurate. Everyone, however, especially if they're tall, just cannot physically bend over that far without spreading the legs very wide to help out. That spreading of the legs can result in unknowingly throwing the shooter off the shot line. Again, the video taping would reveal anything of that nature.
My big beef with most instructors is I never see them in action for the cash..be it matching up gambling or in contests. To me, that is the true test of the nerves and practicing what they preach. And I don't like the prices overall.
I think Bob Jewett is an exception to that. I've seen him at work when the prize money was at stake and he doesn't fool around or blow smoke. He can "drill you" and send an opponent home broke and whining.
To say SVB "has a terrible stroke" is ridiculous..no need in even going there.
Bottom line: "Idiots" is a strong word. (in my opinion)
Stay happy.
There's a lot to be learned from studying snooker stances, but snooker is not pool. Allison Fisher, Karen Corr and Julie Kelly --- all from snooker backgrounds, adjusted their stances to play pool. You may think that they have snooker stances now, but their stances have changed. .