WRISTS - The "hidden power catalyst" of a great stroke or "just along for the ride"?
- Thread starter CJ Wiley
- Start date
Pay Up Sucker
Banned
really, what am i blind to? please back your words up
i have know problem understanding CJ teachings or why he is here. The difference between me and bunch of you other guys is "i know when to take advantage of opportunity" as you guys prefer to waste it on a battle of ego's.Pay Up Sucker
Banned
If this is so common, how come it took so long for it to be outed on the world biggest pool forum with all the self proclaimed experts after 40+ pages? I never heard of this technique before.
Last edited:
Are you taking advantage of the opportunity to listen to both kinds of explanations? Sounds like you're dismissing the "non-pro" advice just like you think others are dismissing CJ's advice. Maybe the first advice you should give a fair chance is your own.really, what am i blind to? please back your words up
pj
chgo
I'm sorry, I must have missed it. What is the common technique that has just been outed?
Seriously, I've lost the thread of this thread... What technique are you talking about?
Maybe you've (understandably) just never heard it described in CJ's unique way. If you're talking about hitting below center to get follow, it's definitely common and used by any experienced player. Even CJ's version (trying to swipe the tip upwards) is a fairly common way that some players think they can increase spin - but it's always debunked as a bad idea that doesn't really do what they think.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Pay Up Sucker
Banned
I am able to take all the techniques CJ has spoken about to the table and i am able to shoot the see system, cte systems. I am pretty good at taking advice and pick and choosing whats valuable info and whats not from all.
really, what am i blind to? please back your words up
See, that's where you're not reading the words. No one, except CJ, is posting with any ego. The others are simply putting out accurate info that some of you don't like because it goes against what CJ is saying.
You ask what you are blind to? Apparently what anyone but a pro posts. The part of what CJ has posted that is correct, has been posted by many on here many times in the past. Yet, you and others dismissed it because of who said it, or who DIDN'T say it. You guys don't want accurate info, fine. No point trying to help someone that doesn't want to be helped.
Pay Up Sucker
Banned
Firstly, i do not feel the need to know the science or physics behind a particular shot that i can do or someone is speaking of. “Some of you guys” are shoving that down CJ’s throat and everyone else’s too. Make your post on the science/physic stuff and then move on with the thread already.
Feel free to start a thread on a technique Neil because i don’t see any threads on them?. Well going through the thread, i did not see anyone other than cj explaining how to do his techniques so i am pretty much stuck following him. I see a lot of science/physics talk from you guys but its not really needed is it?. I see you keep saying everything is common and you leave it at that. I now push you post aside until you back up what you’re saying with info and I don't mean swerve cancels out squirt stuff either.
Last edited:
Keep it up guys and you will be able to drive away another person who could contribute much to the board.
Tolerance would go a long way here. If you don’t like some one’s idea, teaching methods or whatever, leave them alone and go your own way to create your own following if that is what you seek.
The truth speaks for itself and when people try different methods they will quickly learn the truth of what helps them play better.
Taking on some role of arbiter, rule enforcer or pretending to be the person with the only or the right answers is divisive and arrogant.
I think that what is being done to CJ is very unfortunate. I cringe when I see a person with good intent attempting to help and having to read the ugly comments some of you are making. I know that I am much less likely to be around the board anymore because of this sad state of affairs. In fact it is CJ’s attempts to be helpful that bring me back to this thread. The ugly stuff by intolerant and rigid people drives me away.
You know sometimes you have to wade through a lot of useless stuff to get to one nugget of gold. And it is often worthwhile.
Some people have more difficulty than others expressing an idea or a concept that is subtle and yet it is often worthwhile to struggle with their thought patterns to learn a little more than you knew before.
Tolerance would go a long way here. If you don’t like some one’s idea, teaching methods or whatever, leave them alone and go your own way to create your own following if that is what you seek.
The truth speaks for itself and when people try different methods they will quickly learn the truth of what helps them play better.
Taking on some role of arbiter, rule enforcer or pretending to be the person with the only or the right answers is divisive and arrogant.
I think that what is being done to CJ is very unfortunate. I cringe when I see a person with good intent attempting to help and having to read the ugly comments some of you are making. I know that I am much less likely to be around the board anymore because of this sad state of affairs. In fact it is CJ’s attempts to be helpful that bring me back to this thread. The ugly stuff by intolerant and rigid people drives me away.
You know sometimes you have to wade through a lot of useless stuff to get to one nugget of gold. And it is often worthwhile.
Some people have more difficulty than others expressing an idea or a concept that is subtle and yet it is often worthwhile to struggle with their thought patterns to learn a little more than you knew before.
Watch Larry Nevel's monster force-follow shot on the 8 ball here at 2:15:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=tg3hk9L49MU#t=125s
To me, that looks something like what CJ is describing. His cue is slightly elevated, he doesn't hit the ball much above center, and he follows-thru on a downward angle with the tip ending near the cloth.
He must be hitting the CB at least slightly above center (from the perspective of his cue angle), because otherwise it would result in a sliding stun shot when hit with that velocity.
I can roughly duplicate that shot with a nearly level cue and a hit near the top miscue limit of the CB, and follow-thru high. It will be interesting to try it with CJ's "pinning" method to see if more juice can be added. It does make some intuitive sense to me: perhaps there is some "pinching" of the CB between the tip and the cloth that slightly increases the duration of tip-CB contact time, and certainly hitting closer to the center-mass of the CB should result in more forward energy transfer.
A related thought experiment: imagine you have a horizontal rod that is attached to a stationary pivot point in its center, and your goal is to spin it around that pivot point as fast as possible with a single "hit". If you hit it out at one of the ends, you will have more leverage and the hit will be "easier", but the resultant spin speed at the end points will be no greater than the speed of your hit. Alternatively,if you hit it close to the pivot point, the hit will be "harder" (as you don't have as much leverage there), but *if* you have the power to get through it with a good hit there, the speed at the end will be multiplied by the distance between your hit and the end. It's the same principle in spinning a toy top – you spin it fastest by twisting its narrow stem, not by grabbing it around its edges and spinning it.
My somewhat fuzzy (and perhaps non-intuitive) hypothesis: a powerful hit closer to (but not at) the center of the CB can result in more spin than the same speed hit further from the center of the CB, due to the multiplying effects of the distance from center.
Dr. Dave, have you done any experiments along these lines? I remember one of your experiments stated that max draw can be obtained with a hit slightly above the miscue limit, but I wonder if even more draw can be obtained with a sufficiently powerful stroke even closer to center ball. Or, perhaps follow works better with this technique since you're not fighting cloth friction as much with the forward roll as with the backwards roll.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=tg3hk9L49MU#t=125s
To me, that looks something like what CJ is describing. His cue is slightly elevated, he doesn't hit the ball much above center, and he follows-thru on a downward angle with the tip ending near the cloth.
He must be hitting the CB at least slightly above center (from the perspective of his cue angle), because otherwise it would result in a sliding stun shot when hit with that velocity.
I can roughly duplicate that shot with a nearly level cue and a hit near the top miscue limit of the CB, and follow-thru high. It will be interesting to try it with CJ's "pinning" method to see if more juice can be added. It does make some intuitive sense to me: perhaps there is some "pinching" of the CB between the tip and the cloth that slightly increases the duration of tip-CB contact time, and certainly hitting closer to the center-mass of the CB should result in more forward energy transfer.
A related thought experiment: imagine you have a horizontal rod that is attached to a stationary pivot point in its center, and your goal is to spin it around that pivot point as fast as possible with a single "hit". If you hit it out at one of the ends, you will have more leverage and the hit will be "easier", but the resultant spin speed at the end points will be no greater than the speed of your hit. Alternatively,if you hit it close to the pivot point, the hit will be "harder" (as you don't have as much leverage there), but *if* you have the power to get through it with a good hit there, the speed at the end will be multiplied by the distance between your hit and the end. It's the same principle in spinning a toy top – you spin it fastest by twisting its narrow stem, not by grabbing it around its edges and spinning it.
My somewhat fuzzy (and perhaps non-intuitive) hypothesis: a powerful hit closer to (but not at) the center of the CB can result in more spin than the same speed hit further from the center of the CB, due to the multiplying effects of the distance from center.
Dr. Dave, have you done any experiments along these lines? I remember one of your experiments stated that max draw can be obtained with a hit slightly above the miscue limit, but I wonder if even more draw can be obtained with a sufficiently powerful stroke even closer to center ball. Or, perhaps follow works better with this technique since you're not fighting cloth friction as much with the forward roll as with the backwards roll.
Back it up? It already is, many times over on the forums, going back many years. The fact that you didn't bother to learn from them before doesn't change the fact that it is backed up. Why should I or anyone else bother to re-quote all those back posts when they weren't read the first dozen times around? You want to push me aside, I really don't care. It's obvious that's nothing new for you with me and the others that provide accurate info on here. You want to see it, go search Scott Lee posts. Not too long ago this was talked about in reference to Earl doing it. And, as usual, when it was explained how it is done, and that is not something mystical, the instructors were dismissed there too.
Getting the cb to follow hitting below center on the cb.
Pay Up Sucker
Banned
lol@ the bold? right Neil
This post may make sense to you and everyone else but it does not to me and we should leave this alone now.Pay Up Sucker
Banned
I don't argue the physics of pool and if i want to know about anything involving the physics of pool, the first person i would ask would be PJ. I also just got involved into this discussing the top of tip technique and that is where the "hit the cue ball at center to create follow" i believe. It was pulled out of the technique and discussed i think.
Last edited:
Great post and so true. CJ has shown more patience in this thread than anyone should have to. CJ is simply explaining what he does, he is always careful to mention that his methods might not work for everyone, if it doesn't work for you put the info on the shelf. What is so wrong with that? How many times must we hear from a couple of posters that they don't care what "we" learn as long as THEY deem it correct, yet they refer to CJ as arrogant and condescending lmao. I stopped coming to AZ after all the clutter of the BS aiming threads, now there is a poster that gives an interesting perspective from a pro's point of view and the same old suspects are doing their best to derail his threads.
Pay Up Sucker
Banned
Cj is fine! he sees how things go on here and im sure he still is enjoying it. I just would like people to back up what they say on here and not through out blanket posts routinely and when called upon, they fold.