WRISTS - The "hidden power catalyst" of a great stroke or "just along for the ride"?

Mikjary said:
Let's be careful, here. We're talking about the tip grabbing and swiping the cue ball. We all know the world is flat and this isn't reality. :eek:

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

Go ahead Mike, you are right, science is wrong. CJ said it, so it must be true. Good luck with it. This thread is like a guy from 200 years ago trying to explain how a car works. Would be comical if it wasn't so sad. It's quite interesting to see how many on here are saying how some of this has improved their game so much, when what they describe they are doing isn't even what CJ is describing and saying to do. But, a world champion said to try it, and even if they don't do what he actually said, it's great just because the champ said to do it.

You go ahead and "pop" your cue up while your stroking, and see how accurately you hit the cb.

Simple test for you Mike. Place your tip right at the cb, but low. Now, just raise it real fast, and see how much spin you actually put on the cb. Then ask yourself, "if I can't spin it like this, how in the world can it be spun while moving the cue forward?"
 
Last edited:
Mikjary said:
No, no, and NO, Neil. Lou's right.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

whatever. Good luck with that. It's obvious some don't want actual help on here. What you are wanting to believe is that one can put overspin on the cb. Can't be done for more than a few inches. Been proved many times.
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
It's the exact same concept Lou. You just have the sliding stop sooner so the natural roll of the cb from the friction of the cloth picks up sooner. There's no big mystery here. The science that CJ wants to scoff at explains it very well. It explains why it happens, and how to duplicate it. All this raising the tip to spin the cb stuff is nothing more than someone that really doesn't understand just what he is doing trying to explain what he is doing.

CJ is doing nothing more than taking simple concepts and adding a bunch of mumbo jumbo to it to try and explain what he doesn't understand. That's the difference between top players and actual instructors. Top players can do, but can't explain because they don't understand the concepts they want to scoff at. Instructors can do also, but not as consistently because they don't spend all their time on the table.
Click to expand...


Neil, I believe I understand what you're saying about the shots being similar. However, they are at such far extremes of the stun-follow spectrum that I feel they deserve to be considered two separate techniques, but thats just me.

Now, your second paragraph I fully agree with. Much of what is happening here is him adding a lot of smoke and mirrors, uttering some mumbo-jumbo, and giving it an unusual name.

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
Go ahead Mike, your right, science is wrong. CJ said it, so it must be true. Good luck with it. This thread is like a guy from 200 years ago trying to explain how a car works. Would be comical if it wasn't so sad.
Click to expand...

Yet...
You believe in a book that is a couple of thousand years old, that to you, explains the creation of the universe, and you scoff at modern science when it comes to explaining these things, as is seen in any theological argument that you've been in on these forums over the years.
But you will believe in science when it reinforces your preconceived notion of things, for instance, when it comes to a stroke and follow through.

And you want your statement that is quoted above to have any credibility?

What did you say?
Oh that's right.
"Would be comical if it wasn't..."
 
Neil said:
Go ahead Mike, your right, science is wrong. CJ said it, so it must be true. Good luck with it. This thread is like a guy from 200 years ago trying to explain how a car works. Would be comical if it wasn't so sad. It's quite interesting to see how many on here are saying how some of this has improved their game so much, when what they describe they are doing isn't even what CJ is describing and saying to do. But, a world champion said to try it, and even if they don't do what he actually said, it's great just because the champ said to do it.

You go ahead and "pop" your cue up while your stroking, and see how accurately you hit the cb.

Simple test for you Mike. Place your tip right at the cb, but low. Now, just raise it real fast, and see how much spin you actually put on the cb. Then ask yourself, "if I can't spin it like this, how in the world can it be spun while moving the cue forward?"
Click to expand...

This is going to be one of the very few times I agree with Neil.
 
SUPERSTAR said:
Yet...
You believe in a book that is a couple of thousand years old, that to you, explains the creation of the universe, and you scoff at modern science when it comes to explaining these things, as is seen in any theological argument that you've been in on these forums over the years.
But you will believe in science when it reinforces your preconceived notion of things, for instance, when it comes to a stroke and follow through.

And you want your statement that is quoted above to have any credibility?

What did you say?
Oh that's right.
"Would be comical if it wasn't..."
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, I do not scoff at all of science. But, that doesn't fit your argument, so throw in something that has nothing to do with the subject. Nice strawman, there. :rolleyes:
And, you want to mock me for not believing everything science says, yet, when it comes to pool, it's perfectly fine for you to toss science out the window. hmmm.....
 
Last edited:
lfigueroa said:
The technique actually works, it's something I picked up awhile ago. For many shots you can get forward roll hitting slightly below center.

I don't have a fancy name or dubious explanation for it, for me it's simply a matter of any immediate slide or backwards roll of the CB quickly wearing off because of either the very slight below center hit or distance it travels and the CB quickly achieving natural roll.
Click to expand...
Of course this is what's happening - it's a stun-rollthrough shot with less stun and more rollthrough.

Back on RSB we frequently talked about getting the CB rolling immediately upon contact with the cue tip. I believe Ron Shepard had a name for it, which I can't recall at the moment and that there is a specific point on the CB that is best for that to happen. Using a striped OB as a CB I believe it is the top of the stripe. So many of us adopted that as our method for applying follow to ball.
Click to expand...
I forget exactly what Ron called it - I think of it as "immediate full roll". The place to hit the CB is 5/7 of the distance from the cloth to the top of the ball (80% of maximum follow, just below the edge of the stripe). This is the lowest point you can hit the CB that doesn't cause it to slide before attaining "full roll" (and very nearly the highest point you can hit the CB at all - which is why there's almost never "overspin" follow).

Neil:
Top players can do, but can't explain because they don't understand the concepts they want to scoff at.
Click to expand...
We see this repeatedly here - name players think common techniques are "secrets" because they're not familiar with the mundane explanations for them, and developing players believe it for the same reason. I suppose it's good for those players to hear these things in a way (and from a source) that they believe in, even though they aren't learning why the techniques help them.

In CJ's case I think pretty much all of the techniques that he "can't explain in writing" boil down to "pay closer attention to where you hit the CB". This is a very important lesson that I think deserves its own reality-based discussion (in a language that more players speak). Maybe I'll start one.

pj
chgo
 
Neil said:
Just to be clear, I do not scoff at all of science. But, that doesn't fit your argument, so throw in something that has nothing to do with the subject. Nice strawman, there. :rolleyes:
And, you want to mock me for not believing everything science says, yet, when it comes to pool, it's perfectly fine for you to toss science out the window. hmmm.....
Click to expand...

No. This is wrong Neil.
I said before in another thread a long time ago, that it was not my place to try and sway you from your faith as i didn't want to argue with you about theology.
This continues to be true.

I am simply pointing out that by your very own words, you are stating how someone from the past, could not possibly understand some of the things that we have present day such as a car, as our science is way more modern then theirs was.
The statement is quite interesting when you take into consideration, your faith, and your history of posting. As i'm sure some others have noticed, when it comes to the post i just quoted previously.

As such, you guys can argue about the science behind the stroke and hit, all you want.
Just choose a different example to use if you are going to back up science.

Picking and choosing which science one believes, and which science one disregards, doesn't lend itself to credibility, when telling someone matter-of-factly, that the science is there, as some form of absolute.

Carry on.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I forget exactly what Ron called it - I think of it as "immediate full roll". The place to hit the CB is 5/7 of the distance from the cloth to the top of the ball (80% of maximum follow, just below the edge of the stripe). This is the lowest point you can hit the CB that doesn't cause it to slide before attaining "full roll" (and very nearly the highest point you can hit the CB at all - which is why there's almost never "overspin" follow).
Click to expand...

The height on the CB to strike causing the CB to immediately achieve 'normal' roll is called the Center of Percussion.
 
After 40 pages of post this is now a "common technique" that everyone knows about like all the others? Did you guys ever think it is the pro's that know from trial and error and info exchanged between themselves on what "common techniques" are valuable and which ones are not and that is why they are pro's and you are not?
 
swest said:
Patrick Johnson said:
I forget exactly what Ron called it - I think of it as "immediate full roll". The place to hit the CB is 5/7 of the distance from the cloth to the top of the ball (80% of maximum follow, just below the edge of the stripe). This is the lowest point you can hit the CB that doesn't cause it to slide before attaining "full roll" (and very nearly the highest point you can hit the CB at all - which is why there's almost never "overspin" follow).
Click to expand...
The height on the CB to strike causing the CB to immediately achieve 'normal' roll is called the Center of Percussion.
Click to expand...
FYI to those interested, illustrations, video demos, and instructional articles covering this topic can be found here:


Here's a pertinent illustration from “How High or Low Should You Hit the Cue Ball?” (BD, September, 2011):

tip_height_references.jpg

Regards,
Dave
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Is that a physics term? It doesn't ring a bell.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

It certainly is a physics term, but not how it's described here. I think the Center of Percussion is the point that when you strike it, no rotation happens. But, I don't think there is a practical discussion on a cueball for Center of Percussion since oscillation is part of the percussion discussion.

Freddie <~~~ hat back off
 
Pay Up Sucker said:
After 40 pages of post this is now a "common technique" that everyone knows about like all the others? Did you guys ever think it is the pro's that know from trial and error and info exchanged between themselves on what "common techniques" are valuable and which ones are not and that is why they are pro's and you are not?
Click to expand...

If believing that makes you feel better, go right ahead.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
swest said:
The height on the CB to strike causing the CB to immediately achieve 'normal' roll is called the Center of Percussion.
Click to expand...

Is that a physics term? It doesn't ring a bell.
Click to expand...
It is a physics term. From my online glossary of pool terms and phrases:
center of percussion (COP): technical term used to describe the “normal roll impact height.”

normal roll impact height (AKA “center of percussion” or “immediate roll impact height”): the height at which you can strike the cue ball so it rolls without slipping (i.e., it has normal roll) immediately. This height is at 7/10 of the cue ball’s diameter above the table surface.

normal roll: topspin resulting from natural rolling motion of a ball where there is no sliding between the ball and the table cloth.​

It is also called the "sweet spot" (e.g., when applied to tennis rackets), because impact at this position results in no forces at the pivot point (which is at the base of the CB for an immediate-roll follow shot).

For the physics details, see:


Regards,
Dave
 
Pay Up Sucker said:
After 40 pages of post this is now a "common technique" that everyone knows about like all the others? Did you guys ever think it is the pro's that know from trial and error and info exchanged between themselves on what "common techniques" are valuable and which ones are not and that is why they are pro's and you are not?
Click to expand...

..........
 

Attachments

  • images.jpg
    images.jpg
    6.7 KB · Views: 325
Pay Up Sucker said:
Neil, you need to leave your personal dislike of Cj out of the threads, its becoming a distraction and bit annoying ;)
Click to expand...

Quit reading things into it that aren't there. I don't have a personal dislike of him. I've never even met him. What I dislike is his teaching method. Maybe you should try really listening to what is said, instead of putting a lot of pre-conceived notions in there that blind you to the actual words.
 
If you guys want to see another pro put follow on the Q ball exactly as CJ has tried to explain watch John Brumback.

I was lucky enough to watch him in person (in his basement ) for 3 days put follow on the ball this way time after time.

He is more than a little good at it. It was eye opening to say the least.:)

John is such a great person that if you run into him he would prob. give you a demo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top