PDA

View Full Version : Draw stroke - How low do you go?



killerstroke
12-14-2005, 10:46 AM
I am looking to hear the techniques of the draw stroke. Some people draw by the way of feel. Always hitting low and by the change in their stroke is how far the CB draws. Some change their tip location to change how far they draw. My draw is pretty good, but done mostly by feel. I have a problem getting consistant draw when hitting only a tip below center. Am I right that when using a draw stroke I am trying to get the CB to glide across the cloth. If I were to jack up I would be hurting the stroke because some of the energy istaken up by the CB then skipping across the table. Any advice for a draw shot by tip location, 1/2 tip, 1 tip, 1 1/2 tip etc below center. Thanks!

supergreenman
12-14-2005, 10:54 AM
I've found that you can get pretty much as much spin as you like on a draw shot with just a tips distance from the centre of the cb. It's really not how low you go, it's how well you stroke through the ball.

I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't need to make contact with the cb more than a tips distance for any type of spin except for some extreme situations.

James

Scott Lee
12-14-2005, 11:00 AM
killerstroke...Using "tips" as reference is difficult, because of the different tip sizes, etc. Here's a good general rule of thumb...take the 9-ball, and put the stripe horizontal to the table. Make sure the stripe is exactly horizontal. Aim the top edge of your tip at the bottom edge of the yellow stripe. This is the maximum draw position. The chalk mark should show up on the yellow, just above the edge of the stripe. If the chalk in on the white, you will be miscuing, in all likelihood, and/or jumping the CB. Use a smooth backswing, and a smooth transition to the forward stroke. Complete the stroke to the finish position (tip will be on or close to the cloth), and you'll get natural followthrough. This should result in drawing the ball very easily, even with a soft speed stroke...as long as you're not too far from the OB.

Scott Lee

killerstroke
12-14-2005, 11:03 AM
Are we talking a level cue or slight elevation. I have always used the stripe as a reference.

TedKaufman
12-14-2005, 11:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote supergreenman:</font><hr> I've found that you can get pretty much as much spin as you like on a draw shot with just a tips distance from the centre of the cb. It's really not how low you go, it's how well you stroke through the ball.

I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't need to make contact with the cb more than a tips distance for any type of spin except for some extreme situations.

James <hr /></blockquote>

Good post and you are absolutely correct about it being a result of the stroke, not how low you hit it.

I think most players who have trouble with strong draw shots simply do not follow through enough. They punch at the cueball and choke off the stroke.

I watched a match once with Corey Duel playing ... I think it was against Efren, and he had to shoot at a ball about 8' from the cueball, diagonally across the table. The shot required about a 15* cut, and he had to position the cueball back down the table for the next ball resting on the bottom rail. I thought he would have to follow it, despite interference balls in the middle of the table. Yet to my surprise, he drew it. It was the most amazing stroke I've seen. He literally followed through two FEET through the cueball, made the cueball hook severely off the side rail where the force draw continued driving the cueball to the bottom rail, and actually over-shot position, though he did get out from there. It was a stunning display of your point.

mworkman
12-14-2005, 12:21 PM
I think when you jack up some on a draw shot, and you end up skipping the cueball on the way, you actually reduce the amount of friction and the cueball maintains more spin. So, theoretically you should get more draw. Of course, you run more of a risk of missing your shot because if you hit left/right of dead center bottom, you have to deal with deflection/throw/swerve. I rarely jack up on my draw shots, but sometimes it just seems to be the best choice. I just figure once I start miss-cueing, then I'm hitting too low. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Scott Lee
12-14-2005, 08:21 PM
killerstroke...Usually we like to say, "as level as reasonable." Usually there will be some elevation of the cuestick anyway...and it is possible to elevate the cue considerably and still draw the CB, with an excellent stroke. The poster who implied that not enough followthrough would limit draw, needs to understand that it is more a function of not slowing down the cue, throughout the forward stroke. Continuous acceleration, to the finish position, results in good, consistent action on the CB; not just how far you followthrough. Allison will sometimes only followthrough an inch past the CB, yet draw the ball table length, with ease.

Scott Lee

Scott Lee
12-14-2005, 08:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote supergreenman:</font><hr> I've found that you can get pretty much as much spin as you like on a draw shot with just a tips distance from the centre of the cb. It's really not how low you go, it's how well you stroke through the ball.

I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't need to make contact with the cb more than a tips distance for any type of spin except for some extreme situations.

James <hr /></blockquote>

James...You are correct about getting lots of action staying a tip off center. However, you must increase stroke speed to achieve the same maximum spin, when you don't get out to the 'edge' of the CB. In other words, you can get the most spin, with the least speed, by stoking on the edges of the CB, as opposed to closer in.

Scott Lee

smfsrca
12-14-2005, 11:20 PM
On your final warm up stroke, when you are at your forward pause, allow the bottom of your tip to just touch the surface of the cloth.

killerstroke
12-15-2005, 05:12 AM
I've asked that exact question to a pro. Why do they dip the cue to the cloth then that's where they don't hit it? His response was this is so they can see the CB and where they are going to hit it better. There stroke is so tunned that they will still stroke straight and hit where they want to.

supergreenman
12-15-2005, 08:40 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>
James...You are correct about getting lots of action staying a tip off center. However, you must increase stroke speed to achieve the same maximum spin, when you don't get out to the 'edge' of the CB. In other words, you can get the most spin, with the least speed, by stoking on the edges of the CB, as opposed to closer in.

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

That of course makes sense, and I do increase the distance from the centre of the cb when I want more spin for less effort. I just find that if my game is going a bit wonky I bring the tip in closer to the centre and my game tightens up. I just find you get more predictable results closer to the centre.

James

Billy_Bob
12-15-2005, 12:21 PM
I can get a beginning player who "can not draw", to draw, by "forcing" them to follow through with their shot.

I place the CB 1 diamond away from the OB, then point my finger on the table about 3/4th the distance between the balls. Tell them to hit low, then to follow through and leave the tip of their cue touching the cloth where my finger is pointing.

They don't do it.

I tell them again, LEAVE the tip of your cue touching the cloth where my finger is pointing. Follow through!

They don't do it!

After about 5 times, they finally can leave the tip there and the CB draws back to hit the tip of their cue.

Anyway with that said, I find that the amount of follow through will change the amount of draw. So you can use this to draw back different distances. Follow through more, or follow through less.

Practice: Place a row of balls across the center of the table, place CB 1 diamond back from each ball. Then practice drawing back CB 1 diamond, two diamonds, etc. Try changing the amount of follow through to do this. Chalk well before each shot, especially around the sides of your tip. Examine tip under light after chalking and be sure there are no dark spots on the tip.

Also you can follow through a *lot* and hit the CB quite slowly, and get good draw. See how slow you can hit it with a lot of follow through and still get draw...

iacas
12-15-2005, 09:38 PM
It's interesting reading this conversation coming from a golf background. When you get better at golf, a lot of your effort is focused on achieving the proper spin, be it on a 180-yard cut from the left-center of the fairway or on a 20-yard pitch shot over a bunker.

I'm by no means a great "drawer" of the cue ball, but I can't say that it's because I don't understand the basics. They're the same as with a golf ball - acceleration through the stroke, hit "through" the ball, etc.

Jal
12-15-2005, 11:18 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote iacas:</font><hr>...
They're the same as with a golf ball - acceleration through the stroke, hit "through" the ball, etc. <hr /></blockquote>I think your right although some would argue that it's not necessary and maybe not even desirable to accelerate through the ball, as opposed to coasting at the moment of impact. Their points are that it's a waste of some energy and the cue's pre-impact speed is more sensitive to timing errors when you accelerate. The former is definitely true while the latter is debatable. One advantage to accelerating is that you get an increase in cue speed, up to 10-20 percent over the non-accelerating case. (It's also less sensitive to most stroke errors.) But the real benefit is as compared to the decelerating situation, where pre-impact speed drops off rapidly and is considerably more sensitive to stroke variations.

If I read him right, I don't agree with Billy Bob that you can get more draw with more follow through while continuing to hit the ball at the same speed. The increased follow through is just an indicator that you've moved somewhere along the scale from deceleration to acceleration. This increases cue speed, all other things being equal, and it's this which produces more spin.

Jim

Rod
12-16-2005, 01:29 AM
Use draw to the max (in your comfort zone)change speed of stroke for amount of draw. Its more consistant. You get use to hitting the c/b in the same spot. As your stroke gets better you'll know your limitations. Use less offset when you want the c/b to react slower, as in (avoiding another ball/path). Of course working the pocket helps but you can only go so far, then you risk missing the shot.

Using different tip offsets to control draw shots is a joke. You still have to vary speed no matter what what offset you use. Why vary both unless you have to?

Rod

iacas
12-16-2005, 05:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote iacas:</font><hr>...
They're the same as with a golf ball - acceleration through the stroke, hit "through" the ball, etc. <hr /></blockquote>I think your right although some would argue that it's not necessary and maybe not even desirable to accelerate through the ball, as opposed to coasting at the moment of impact. Their points are that it's a waste of some energy and the cue's pre-impact speed is more sensitive to timing errors when you accelerate. The former is definitely true while the latter is debatable. One advantage to accelerating is that you get an increase in cue speed, up to 10-20 percent over the non-accelerating case. (It's also less sensitive to most stroke errors.) But the real benefit is as compared to the decelerating situation, where pre-impact speed drops off rapidly and is considerably more sensitive to stroke variations.

If I read him right, I don't agree with Billy Bob that you can get more draw with more follow through while continuing to hit the ball at the same speed. The increased follow through is just an indicator that you've moved somewhere along the scale from deceleration to acceleration. This increases cue speed, all other things being equal, and it's this which produces more spin.<hr /></blockquote>

Perception and reality are two very different things. Ideally, you reach your maximum acceleration at the point of impact. Golf instructors have found that if you tell that to students, though, they hit "at" the ball and not "through" the ball, and they actually lose speed, accuracy, etc.

Telling a player to "coast" through the ball would certainly result in deceleration (as golf instructors have learned).

So "accelerate through the ball" is both partly reality (by a microsecond or two) and partly a simple mind trick to get people to stop hitting "at" the ball, which has disastrous results.

Jal
12-16-2005, 01:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote iacas:</font><hr> Perception and reality are two very different things. Ideally, you reach your maximum acceleration at the point of impact.
....<hr /></blockquote>You mean maximum speed, I believe. I think most instructors would agree with this and it definitely is a good way to go. All things considered, it may be the best way to go. But you do get increased cue speed if you actually accelerate through the ball. Maximum speed at the cueball does not coincide with where it would occur if you we're just stroking through air.

Jim

randyg
12-16-2005, 01:56 PM
I was under the impression that we lose about 40% of our cue speed at impact.

SpiderMan
12-20-2005, 12:55 PM
Rod,

I do as you suggest for straight-back draw (use standard offset and vary the stroke), but for draw on cut shots I need to vary both because I want to independently control amount of backspin and sideways travel. Would you agree?

SpiderMan

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr> Use draw to the max (in your comfort zone)change speed of stroke for amount of draw. Its more consistant. You get use to hitting the c/b in the same spot. As your stroke gets better you'll know your limitations. Use less offset when you want the c/b to react slower, as in (avoiding another ball/path). Of course working the pocket helps but you can only go so far, then you risk missing the shot.

Using different tip offsets to control draw shots is a joke. You still have to vary speed no matter what what offset you use. Why vary both unless you have to?

Rod <hr /></blockquote>

Rod
12-20-2005, 02:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> Rod,

I do as you suggest for straight-back draw (use standard offset and vary the stroke), but for draw on cut shots I need to vary both because I want to independently control amount of backspin and sideways travel. Would you agree?

SpiderMan

<hr /></blockquote>

Perhaps I should have been more clear. That's why I included (Use less offset when you want the c/b to react slower, as in (avoiding another ball/path.) Which would include straight in or angled cut shots. In general though, more offset means less speed/effort, which, IMO would help most pool players.

Rod

av84fun
12-20-2005, 04:23 PM
The advice to keep your cue level for the draw stroke is a MYTH. For PROOF, just watch Bustamante or Cory Duel or Allison Fisher play draw shots. They cue to ball as low as physically possible which is MAYBE a tip up from the cloth and the cue stick is angled down slightly. Don't worry about the slight HOP the CB takes when stroked like that because it is an ADVANTAGE not a disadvantage. When the CB is airborne, it retains its backspin for the longest possible time relative to the spin being disapated if the CB remains in contact with the cloth for 100% of its travel.

The keys to the stroke are:
1. FULL back stroke.
2. ACCELERATING forward stroke...not a lunge with deceleration and
3. FULL follow through...i.e. stroke it as though the CB wasnb't even there.

I watched Duel on ESPN jacked up on the head rail(so obviously stroking downward) with the CB one diamond from the opposite pocket at the foot rail and he drew the CB all the way back to the head rail and then back a diamon or two. That was the most powerful draw shot I have ever seen in 30 years playing and watching thousands of matches on TV and video.

The "level cue" advice is fascinating because I have several instructional videos where the instructor tells you to keep the cue level and then they demonstrate the shot with the stick obviously angled downward. What I am talking about is not a big downward angled...maybe 3-5 degrees but clearly downward.
Enjoy

Bob_Jewett
12-20-2005, 05:02 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> killerstroke...Using "tips" as reference is difficult, because of the different tip sizes, etc. Here's a good general rule of thumb...take the 9-ball, and put the stripe horizontal to the table. Make sure the stripe is exactly horizontal. Aim the top edge of your tip at the bottom edge of the yellow stripe. ... <hr /></blockquote>
For more on this idea of using the sripe to see how far off-center you can safely hit, see George Onoda's article in Billiards Digest from 1991 on pages 11 and 12 of

http://www.sfbilliards.com/onoda_all_txt.pdf

Jal
12-20-2005, 06:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote randyg:</font><hr> I was under the impression that we lose about 40% of our cue speed at impact. <hr /></blockquote>No disagreement there. I take "accelerating through the cueball" to mean the cue would continue to accelerate through the cueball's position if it didn't actually strike it.

The fact that it is accelerating in the last few moments does, by itself, next to nothing to increase it's speed. The 10-20% increase in speed is the result of everything that happens from the beginning of the stroke. That the cue is accelerating right up to impact is simply an indication of what went on before, namely, a differently shaped force vs time curve compared to the coasting situation.

This is a theoretical result I should stress (and should've done it sooner). It works if the force vs time curve is a pure sine function. But it also works for at least one example of a more realistic function that JohhnyP provided several months ago with his accelerometer graphs. I've tried moving my grip hand back while keeping my bridge length the same (one way to "accelerate at impact") and was able to draw further by about the amount expected. (I tried this a week later with more ambigous results though??)

Jim

nhp
12-20-2005, 06:45 PM
You will get the most draw by hitting the cueball where you are aiming. Alot of people cant do this. Stroke power comes from a straight and accurate delivery of the cue, not in the wrist or follow thru.

Cane
12-20-2005, 10:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> The advice to keep your cue level for the draw stroke is a MYTH. For PROOF, just watch Bustamante or Cory Duel or Allison Fisher play draw shots. They cue to ball as low as physically possible which is MAYBE a tip up from the cloth and the cue stick is angled down slightly. <hr /></blockquote>

When, as an instructor, I speak to a student of a level cue, I'm talking about two aspects (and I explain these aspects to them).

1. As level as is reasonably possible (I think we all realize that it's absolutely impossible to maintain a level cue on almost all shots) My cue hardly ever is elevated less than 5░ on any shot. AND

2. To have the cue moving on a level plane when it strikes the cue ball. By "level plane" I don't mean level to the ground, but there is a zone in your stroke where your arm is perpendicular to the cue and your cue is moving, relatively, on the same plane for a certain distance and time in the stroke. THAT's what I call a "level cue".

I don't know any instructor, certified or not, that maintains that you must have an absolutely level cue, as in level in relationship to the ground or table... it just can't be done, except in some extreme cases. On the other hand, you shouldn't elevate any more than is necessary to perform the shot at hand, which can be anywhere from 5░ or so, up to 85░ or more (as in the shot you talked about that Corey was shooting). The more elevation you have, the more any cueing error is magnified.

Later,
Bob

av84fun
12-21-2005, 09:00 AM
Hi. As the comments in this thread indicate, "level cue" is a widely misunderstood term. You explain to your students that by level, you don't mean level to the ground. You indicate that you don't know of any instructor who teaches otherwise but just at random, I copied the following off a MAJOR pool instruction site regarding the draw stroke:
"Hitting below center, (vertically), and keeping the cue/stick level is the basic rule for applying draw."

I could provide dozens of other identical examples from some of the most noted instructional authors on the planet so I don't know why your experience in dealing with this subject differs from mine.

But bottom line, anyone with a hard disk recorder (TIVO etc.) or if you buy videos of some of the great matches and pause the action....end of story. The viewer will SEE that nearly all pros impact the CB WAY lower than one tip and that the cue stick is never level to the table...even when the CB lies far enough from a rail to make a dead level cue possible. (Nor does a dead level cue stick mean anything in particular since the TIP is not flat but rounded. So long as the rounded portion of the tip impacts the CB...the CB does not know, or care, whether the cue stick was level
Regards,
Jim

Qtec
12-21-2005, 10:06 AM
[ QUOTE ]
So long as the rounded portion of the tip impacts the CB...the CB does not know, or care, whether the cue stick was level
<hr /></blockquote>
I disagree. Lets say you play a draw shot and we mark the spot. Now I make a hole in the table so that I can hit the same spot but playing from under the table- thru the slate!. Now I dont get draw, I get topspin.
I think the direction of force plays a big part on a Q-ball's reaction.

JMO,

Q

SPetty
12-21-2005, 10:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>Now I make a hole in the table so that I can hit the same spot but playing from under the table- thru the slate!.<hr /></blockquote>I don't know anybody that can make that shot. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Cane
12-21-2005, 11:52 AM
Jim, I think it's a matter of how you and I interpret things differently. When I hear ANYONE say level cue, then to me that means 5░ of elevation is pretty level. I don't feel like any of them are actually trying to convey that you should try to shoot shots with 0░ elevation. Now, maybe they don't all explain it well, but to me it's obvious what they're saying, although, I can agree that it might not be obvious to everyone.

In my interpretation, 5░ to 8░ is a level cue (what is practical for being considered level on most shots). Anything above 10░ or so is not level. When I go 10░ or above, I'm doing so with a purpose; masse, slide draw, jump, or because I'm too close to a cushion and have to elevate to move the CB where I want it.

IMHO, the important aspect is that the cue is travelling on a relatively level plane when it contacts the cue ball. By that, I don't mean level with the table, I mean that your hand should be very close to perpindicular to the cue and not ahead of or behind it, so that the cue is striking the cue ball at the bottom of the arc of your stroke (or reasonably close to it) so that you hit the CB where you intend. Without this "level plane", a player may aim to hit the CB one tip low and if he's ahead of perpindicular, then he may hit it a tip and a half low or if he's behind perpindicular then he may hit it only a half tip low. Big difference when you're playing position to a small window on a cluttered table.

So, maybe you're right in one aspect. The authors of books and websites may not make it clear enough for everyone to understand and maybe should go back and reword to say "as level as is reasonable" and to hit the CB with "the cue on a plane level to your original setup", but I don't think they're going to do that. I think they're going to continue to say "Level Cue" and expect players to understand that level means as little elevation as possible for the shot at hand.

Later,
Bob

Cornerman
12-21-2005, 01:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cane:</font><hr> When, as an instructor, I speak to a student of a level cue, I'm talking about two aspects (and I explain these aspects to them).

1. As level as is reasonably possible (I think we all realize that it's absolutely impossible to maintain a level cue on almost all shots) My cue hardly ever is elevated less than 5░ on any shot. AND <hr /></blockquote> I think most of the people (especially keyboard warriors on the internet) who say "level" or "level as possible" mean level, to the ground. And that if there were no rails, they would actually strive to be level to the ground.

If you don't mean level to the ground, why bother using the word at all? I have never ever told anyone to try to stay "level" or "level as possible" because I think it's misleading. I grew up watching Sigel and Varner, and neither of them are "level as possible" when the contact the cueball, nor do they even attempt to be.

I'd suggest that everyone film themselves, and then put an actual protractor on the film. I think most would be surprised that their idea of "level as possible" is actually greater 10░.

IMO, attempting to be "level as possible" is unnatural and can be a detriment to ones improvement.

Fred

Alfie
12-21-2005, 03:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> I think most would be surprised that their idea of "level as possible" is actually greater 10░. <hr /></blockquote>tidbit- For your standard length cue, up to about 30 degrees the angle of elevation is roughly equal to the number of inches the butt is higher than the tip.

Qtec
12-21-2005, 09:18 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I'd suggest that everyone film themselves, and then put an actual protractor on the film. I think most would be surprised that their idea of "level as possible" is actually greater 10░. <hr /></blockquote>
Here are 3 stills from a video. The first photo is the moment of impact. I could be 10 degrees but I dont think I am any more than that.
http://www.members.lycos.nl/agli2/impact.jpg http://www.members.lycos.nl/agli2/photo32.jpg http://www.members.lycos.nl/agli2/photo33.jpg

The hieght of the rail and your bridge dictates that you can never hit low on the QB and have the Q absolutely level. Once you start hitting higher on the QB tho, a level Q is possible but to be practical, there will almost always be a slight Q angle on all shots.
The idea of the level Q is just that, an idea.
Most begginers have a tendency to jack up the Q when playing draw shots,[ any draw shot] but if they have the 'idea' of the 'level Q', they should be aware of the Q angle and be able to check themselves.

Q

Cane
12-22-2005, 12:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Here are 3 stills from a video. The first photo is the moment of impact. I could be 10 degrees but I dont think I am any more than that.
The hieght of the rail and your bridge dictates that you can never hit low on the QB and have the Q absolutely level. Once you start hitting higher on the QB tho, a level Q is possible but to be practical, there will almost always be a slight Q angle on all shots.
The idea of the level Q is just that, an idea.
Most begginers have a tendency to jack up the Q when playing draw shots,[ any draw shot] but if they have the 'idea' of the 'level Q', they should be aware of the Q angle and be able to check themselves.

Q <hr /></blockquote>

Q, Excellent pictures and spot on post. If Alfies figures are accurate, then it doesn't look like you have more than 3-4░ of elevation... that, in my book, regardless of what other interpretations are, is a pretty damn level cue... I'm pretty tall and long legged, and at age 49, it's a little harder for me to bend that low, but still, looking at mine, I rarely ever have the butt of the cue more than 5" above the tip on impact, so by Alfies figures, 5░ max on normal shots.

VERY nice finish, BTW!

Later,
Bob

Qtec
12-22-2005, 01:51 AM
Thanks Cane. Here's the actual shot.
web page (http://members.lycos.nl/agli2/poolDemo_pagina_1.htm)

Q

Leviathan
12-22-2005, 05:19 AM
Alfie's rule of thumb gives good results. AS

Cornerman
12-22-2005, 07:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cane:</font><hr> [Q, Excellent pictures and spot on post. If Alfies figures are accurate, then it doesn't look like you have more than 3-4░ of elevation... <hr /></blockquote> .

Watching the movie rather than the stills, you can actually see how much angle the cue has at the backswing. And because of where it lays (the left leg is impeded) and the fact that Q is a snooker coach/player (grew up playing very down) will automatically make it a more level shot. All that being said, even this shot looks at a minimum of 6░. If you include the backswing, it's higher.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cane:</font><hr>that, in my book, regardless of what other interpretations are, is a pretty damn level cue... <hr /></blockquote> And again, this is my big bugaboo. I've been saying on the internet for years that people get confused when an instructor says "level" or even "level as possible." Why don't you all just say, slight elevation when that's exactly what it is? Why confuse the issue with using a term, then saying that's not what you really mean? You all do video recordings. At contact, you should easily be able to measure the angle and say, yeah, that's good. And "good" is going to be 5-10░ for most any human. Some will be surprised when there's is greater than 10░.

Watching Allison's style over the years, I have videos of her when she was still a snooker player, and of course she's on TV every week. Her elevation is clearly higher today than it was when she was still the snooker champion.

I'd like to see these draw shots in normal play, a shot where the rail and table doesn't impede what would be a normal stroke elevation (the left leg is what I'm talking about for the right hander):

START(
%AK3Z2%PW9Z2%Qr1W8

)END

START(
%AI2I0%PP6M6%QS7Z3

)END

Fred

Cornerman
12-22-2005, 07:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> The hieght of the rail and your bridge dictates that you can never hit low on the QB and have the Q absolutely level.<hr /></blockquote>Do you have any videos that might show a video that the rail isn't in question?

Personally, the most level someone can get is to use a low draw bridge, or the fist bridge. But, pool players generally don't use the fist bridge. And most pool players don't drop their bridge down for draw. They mostly keep the same bridge and lower the tip (which raises the butt, naturally). That's what I've observed, and since I'm an adamant "elevation isn't a bad thing" fan, I've watched for elevation from top shooters intently over the past several years.

Fred

Fred

Cornerman
12-22-2005, 07:38 AM
Here's an action shot of Jeanette. Notice how high she is off the rail. I know it's a pose, but I can't imagine her "elevating" for the camera. The quiver of the shaft makes me think she's actually at the moment of impact.

No rail should be in question.

http://www.jeanettelee.com/photographer.asp?id=52

Anyone want to take a guess as to how high her elevation is here? Regardless, it's clear she has a few inches to go down to be more level, but I doubt she'd feel comfortable.

Fred

supergreenman
12-22-2005, 08:24 AM
From that picture, I can't see her cue being more elevated than about 5 degrees. The butt is very close to the rail and her bridge is has the cue at about the midpoint of the CB. Being that 1 degree is a little less than .5 of an inch on a standard length cue(1 degree would be 1 inch elevation per every 100 inches).

James

SpiderMan
12-22-2005, 08:30 AM
Hard to be sure from the camera angle, but it doesn't look as if you are jacked up to 10 degrees. Probably about 5.

There is some advantage to jacking up slightly for a long power draw, but for most situations it's better to keep the butt low. Why create a risk of unintentional masse, in addition to changing aim perspective due to head height?

SpiderMan

SpiderMan
12-22-2005, 08:34 AM
I'm not interpreting that as "quiver" of the cue - I think it's probably a motionless pose. It would be normal photographic technique to use depth-of-field control to blur the ball and shaft in the foreground, while keeping her face in sharp focus.

SpiderMan

SpiderMan
12-22-2005, 08:36 AM
Pretty good demonstration of keeping the cue level as possible. I'll stand by my estimate that it's 5 degrees or less.

SpiderMan

Deeman3
12-22-2005, 09:03 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote supergreenman:</font><hr> From that picture, I can't see her cue being more elevated than about 5 degrees. The butt is very close to the rail and her bridge is has the cue at about the midpoint of the CB. Being that 1 degree is a little less than .5 of an inch on a standard length cue(1 degree would be 1 inch elevation per every 100 inches).

<font color="blue">James, If my mind has not completely burned up. Isn't the sine of 1 degree about .01745 which means a 58" cue would be elevated over an inch?

Maybe I'm wrong. Been wrong before.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

Deeman

James <hr /></blockquote>

Cornerman
12-22-2005, 09:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote supergreenman:</font><hr> From that picture, I can't see her cue being more elevated than about 5 degrees. The butt is very close to the rail and her bridge is has the cue at about the midpoint of the CB. Being that 1 degree is a little less than .5 of an inch on a standard length cue(1 degree would be 1 inch elevation per every 100 inches).

James <hr /></blockquote> Given that it's closer to 1" per 50" (1" per 57.3"), does that mean you really think she's elevated 10░?

Estimate the difference between how high the joint is compared to the bed, and how high her tip is to the bed. That should be a good indication (approx. 2░ per inch per 29")
Fred

Cornerman
12-22-2005, 09:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>Hard to be sure from the camera angle, but it doesn't look as if you are jacked up to 10 degrees. Probably about 5.<hr /></blockquote> I think you can estimate how much higher his butt cap is from the tip at contact. The tip is almost hitting the bed. I can't believe that the butt cap is only 5" above.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>
There is some advantage to jacking up slightly for a long power draw, but for most situations it's better to keep the butt low. Why create a risk of unintentional masse, in addition to changing aim perspective due to head height? <hr /></blockquote>I think this is the million dollar loaded question. I would retort with my own loaded question by asking why anyone would risk losing your stroke by attempting to keep the cue more level than what is natural?

Every shot is elevated to a degree, so-to-speak. There's no getting around that. If a player is getting 'unintentional massÚ', then he's always going to get it regardless, and needs different help. Lowering the levelness of the cue, IMO, is worse for him than letting him shoot at a naturally elevated cue.

Fred

Qtec
12-22-2005, 10:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> The hieght of the rail and your bridge dictates that you can never hit low on the QB and have the Q absolutely level.<hr /></blockquote>Do you have any videos that might show a video that the rail isn't in question? <font color="blue">I will have a look. </font color>

Personally, the most level someone can get is to use a low draw bridge, or the fist bridge. But, pool players generally don't use the fist bridge. And most pool players don't drop their bridge down for draw. They mostly keep the same bridge and lower the tip (which raises the butt, naturally). <font color="blue"> There is the difference, I dont. I adjust my bridge height depending on the shot. </font color> That's what I've observed, and since I'm an adamant "elevation isn't a bad thing" fan, I've watched for elevation from top shooters intently over the past several years.

Fred

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Q

wolfdancer
12-22-2005, 10:42 AM
Bob, I believe in the Jacksonville project you took at least one rail off for...a break speed test??? Then wrote a book, featuring Tony A..."Playing with the Rail Off"?? (sorry)
While you wouldn't know this for a fact....I'm wondering if you could take a guess at this......
If you could have tables laid end to end, without interferring rails, and no cloth seams......
What do you think the maximum distance would be for a draw shot to return to it's originating point?
I'd guess, due to cloth friction....less then two table lengths, unless your last name is Massey

av84fun
12-22-2005, 11:38 AM
&lt;&lt;Now, maybe they don't all explain it well,&gt;&gt; Right Bob, that was my point. The word "level" has a meaning that most people interpret as being on a line parallel to the earth...which actually is pretty flat at the point we are standing... /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gifor the floor or the pool table.

The "level" advice is rarely accompanied by any explanation that the author really doesn't mean level in the traditional sense.

Your explanation that the cue stick should remain ON PLANE is excellent...unless you are trying to teach Bustamante's stroke which has more loops in it that an aerobatic airplane! But for the rest of us mortals, your advice is great.

And the TEST of whether the player stays on plane in a draw stroke...since the cue is angled downward...is that the tip will end the stroke being pushed into the cloth. If that does not happen, then the player dropped his/her grip hand shoulder and/or came up on the shot.
REgards,
Jim

av84fun
12-22-2005, 11:40 AM
Right Fred.

supergreenman
12-22-2005, 11:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote supergreenman:</font><hr> From that picture, I can't see her cue being more elevated than about 5 degrees. The butt is very close to the rail and her bridge is has the cue at about the midpoint of the CB. Being that 1 degree is a little less than .5 of an inch on a standard length cue(1 degree would be 1 inch elevation per every 100 inches).

<font color="blue">James, If my mind has not completely burned up. Isn't the sine of 1 degree about .01745 which means a 58" cue would be elevated over an inch?

Maybe I'm wrong. Been wrong before.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

Deeman

James <hr /></blockquote> <hr /></blockquote>

Sorry I was thinking about the measurement for a grade, my mistake. I have to get the model railroad equations out of my head. but along those lines, her cue can't be on more then a 5% grade /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

av84fun
12-22-2005, 11:53 AM
&lt;&lt;Pretty good demonstration of keeping the cue level as possible.&gt;&gt; No, it's actually a good demonstration of a slight downward angle which is the way a normal draw shot should be executed...even when it is possible to have a totally level cue. I think that is the main theme of this thread...i.e. the misunderstanding over the word "level" and/or the theory that level with the table is even a goal that should be pursued.

I agree with Fred. Better to talk about what we mean witout the need for further explanations. Better to suggest that for maximum draw, the cue should be angled slightly downward and that downward angle should be maintained all the way through the follow through, than to talk about keeping the cue "as level as possible."
IMO
Best,
Jim

tdurden87
12-22-2005, 02:39 PM
I try more to strike through the cue ball and get a good hit on it more than worrying about hitting it level.

Qtec
12-23-2005, 01:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> Pretty good demonstration of keeping the cue level as possible. I'll stand by my estimate that it's 5 degrees or less.

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

Spiderman, I had an hour tape, so switched the cam on, ran a few balls and played a few shots. I wasnt trying to prove or demonstate anything in particular when I shot the vide, except for a draw, stun and stun-run. click Demo2 (http://members.lycos.nl/agli2/poolDemo_pagina_1.htm)
Thanks anyway. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Q .merry xmas everyone...or whatever.