PDA

View Full Version : Object Ball Throw



Jager85
12-29-2006, 01:10 PM
<font color="blue">
I find it kind of strange that people are always concerned about Cue Ball deflection/squirt, but not too many people seem to be concerned about throw. Personally I don't think it matters how much CB deflection there is it is all what you are used to playing with.

A new shooter going from no english to english will have problems no matter what cue they use and must find correct adjustments. On the other hand, an experienced pool player going from an older cue to a low deflection cue will also have problems at first just needing to comensate the other way.

Also, what the post was originally about (throw), doesn't reducing CB deflection just magnify the effect of throw. Think about it using extreme right english will deflect the cue ball to the left missing the pocket to the right(without comensation). With that same english/shot, the object ball will throw to the left and, depending on the throw-squirt ration, center the ball back up with the pocket.

This all depends on the balls being used(for how much they grip each other and throw), the cue being used(for how squirt and deflection it causes the CB), how close the CB is to the OB(fore how much difference the deflection will actually make), and how close the OB is to the pocket(for how much difference the throw will actually make).

I was surprised at how hard a straight shot was with OB and CB close together on a long table shot. You actually have to compensate for throw and not deflection so with right english you still need to aim to the right of center. My eyes took a long time to see the shot go in and they still don't see it all the time.

Is that just with me or have others noticed that?

It just seems to me a player has to find a cue that they are comforatable with and stay consistent rather than using several cues with completely different styles. The only effect I see in getting used to a low deflection shaft is it minimizes the effect of a bad stroke on the ball.
</font color>

cushioncrawler
12-29-2006, 04:13 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> <font color="blue"> ...I was surprised at how hard a straight shot was with OB and CB close together on a long table shot. You actually have to compensate for throw and not deflection so with right english you still need to aim to the right of center..... </font color><hr /></blockquote>
Jager -- shoodnt u have said that u havta compensate for deflection not throw???
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> <font color="blue"> ....The only effect I see in getting used to a low deflection shaft is it minimizes the effect of a bad stroke on the ball.... </font color> <hr /></blockquote>
Jager -- I reckon that every cue compensates better than every other cue for some sort of shot somewhere sometime. Likewize, every cue can make a shot "worserer" than any other cue.

Hencely, i reckon that a low deflection shaft will make some shots "better" than they deserve, but allso make some shots "worserer". madMac.

dr_dave
12-29-2006, 05:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr>I find it kind of strange that people are always concerned about Cue Ball deflection/squirt, but not too many people seem to be concerned about throw.<hr /></blockquote>
I don't agree with the second part of your sentence. Throw has been discussed at great length on this forum (see the links under "throw" here (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/threads.html)). Also, my most recent series of articles in BD deal with throw. You can find them here (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html). I've written seven articles in the series already, and I plan to continue the presentation for several more months.

I hope you and others find some of the info in the articles useful (or at least interesting).

Regards,
Dave

Jal
12-29-2006, 05:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr>I find it kind of strange that people are always concerned about Cue Ball deflection/squirt, but not too many people seem to be concerned about throw....<hr /></blockquote>I couldn't agree more. An awful lot of shots are missed because of it, and probably a fair amount of these misses are incorrectly blamed on a bad stroke.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr>...I was surprised at how hard a straight shot was with OB and CB close together on a long table shot. You actually have to compensate for throw and not deflection so with right english you still need to aim to the right of center. My eyes took a long time to see the shot go in and they still don't see it all the time.

Is that just with me or have others noticed that?<hr /></blockquote>Sure. On those long ones I never use english and try to get by, positioning wise, with at least a fair amount of follow or draw on the cueball. This greatly reduces throw even if some unintended english is applied. And for a shot at medium speed (7-8 mph) and with the cueball at natural roll or reverse natural roll (draw), the little throw that you do get is compensated by the compression of the balls, yielding an object ball direction almost perfectly along the initial line-of-centers at impact. But this is theoretical and will of course vary a little with different balls.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr>It just seems to me a player has to find a cue that they are comforatable with and stay consistent rather than using several cues with completely different styles. The only effect I see in getting used to a low deflection shaft is it minimizes the effect of a bad stroke on the ball. <hr /></blockquote>Yes, but how much? Some people, such as Predator themselves, measure something like a 25-35% reduction, while others get a decrease more like 50-75% (or more)!

In addition to what you said, it's also easier to compensate for squirt when there's less of it....unless you're used to compensating for more of it.

Jim

Bob_Jewett
12-29-2006, 06:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr>I find it kind of strange that people are always concerned about Cue Ball deflection/squirt, but not too many people seem to be concerned about throw....<hr /></blockquote>I couldn't agree more. An awful lot of shots are missed because of it, and probably a fair amount of these misses are incorrectly blamed on a bad stroke. ... Jim<hr /></blockquote>
Well, I agree with the general thrust of the discussion, but there are several points to be made.

There are still people who believe squirt doesn't exist. There are lots more who feel that as long as you are accustomed to a particular stick, how much it squirts is unimportant. (I think this is cerainly false for very squirty sticks, and is also false for those who try to use backhand english.)

There are people who believe that throw doesn't exist. There are people who might admit to spin-induced throw but don't believe in collision-induced throw and probably vice-versa. There are people who believe that, for example, on a half-ball hit without side spin, the cut angle is always 30 degrees, whereas it is rarely 30 degrees. Further, some believe that speed and follow/stun/draw do not influence the cut angle. Some people believe that throw and transferred side spin are unrelated whereas in reality you can't have one without the other.

With all the bogus beliefs listed in the above paragraph, I think Jim is right that players often blame the wrong cause for misses. The amazing thing is that players can play at the levels that are sometimes reached (missing maybe one or two balls in 100) often while subscribing to the bogus beliefs.

dr_dave
12-30-2006, 08:27 AM
Bob,

Excellent summary! If we keep writing articles, providing experimental evidence, showing demonstrations, and providing high-speed video proof, maybe some of the non-believers will start seeing the light. I am also often shocked by what some great players, book authors, and instructors believe about squirt and throw.

Regards,
Dave
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr>I find it kind of strange that people are always concerned about Cue Ball deflection/squirt, but not too many people seem to be concerned about throw....<hr /></blockquote>I couldn't agree more. An awful lot of shots are missed because of it, and probably a fair amount of these misses are incorrectly blamed on a bad stroke. ... Jim<hr /></blockquote>
Well, I agree with the general thrust of the discussion, but there are several points to be made.

There are still people who believe squirt doesn't exist. There are lots more who feel that as long as you are accustomed to a particular stick, how much it squirts is unimportant. (I think this is cerainly false for very squirty sticks, and is also false for those who try to use backhand english.)

There are people who believe that throw doesn't exist. There are people who might admit to spin-induced throw but don't believe in collision-induced throw and probably vice-versa. There are people who believe that, for example, on a half-ball hit without side spin, the cut angle is always 30 degrees, whereas it is rarely 30 degrees. Further, some believe that speed and follow/stun/draw do not influence the cut angle. Some people believe that throw and transferred side spin are unrelated whereas in reality you can't have one without the other.

With all the bogus beliefs listed in the above paragraph, I think Jim is right that players often blame the wrong cause for misses. The amazing thing is that players can play at the levels that are sometimes reached (missing maybe one or two balls in 100) often while subscribing to the bogus beliefs. <hr /></blockquote>

Jager85
01-03-2007, 11:14 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> <font color="blue"> ...I was surprised at how hard a straight shot was with OB and CB close together on a long table shot. You actually have to compensate for throw and not deflection so with right english you still need to aim to the right of center..... </font color><hr /></blockquote>
Jager -- shoodnt u have said that u havta compensate for deflection not throw???
<hr /></blockquote>
CushionCrawler -- No, but you are right I mis-typed the sentence....I was surprised at how hard a straight shot was with OB and CB close together on a long table shot. You actually have to compensate for throw and not deflection so with right english you still need to aim to the LEFT of center...

Jager85
01-03-2007, 11:20 AM
I probably did not do enough research on throw then. I will take a look at those forums/articles Dave, thanks for those. But I do also agree that too many shooters don't believe in squirt/throw. I have been trying too work with my wife on english and she gives up alot because she always misses the shot. She understands the concepts but I think 1st she needs to improve her stroke and then figure out if she is overcompensating which I think could be a possibility. Anyway, she was at a bar shooting with a couple of her frinds and she asked advice from a 7, the highest handicap in our league, and he kept telling her that there is no such thing and she should not think about them. I just wonder how he can be a consistent 7 and not believe in throw or squirt/deflection.

Deeman3
01-03-2007, 12:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> I probably did not do enough research on throw then. I will take a look at those forums/articles Dave, thanks for those. But I do also agree that too many shooters don't believe in squirt/throw. I have been trying too work with my wife on english and she gives up alot because she always misses the shot. She understands the concepts but I think 1st she needs to improve her stroke and then figure out if she is overcompensating which I think could be a possibility. Anyway, she was at a bar shooting with a couple of her frinds and she asked advice from a 7, the highest handicap in our league, and he kept telling her that there is no such thing and she should not think about them. I just wonder how he can be a consistent 7 and not believe in throw or squirt/deflection. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Remember, a 7 is not particularily that great a player and, if he is limited to mostly bar tables, the effect of throw and other physical results are not as apparent as on a larger table. As well, I have heard of a couple of world class players who swore such things did not exist. How did they play? I guess there mind just made the needed compensations and they did not know exactly how they hit the balls. Another possibility is that they were great shotmakers who got position by only playing the center of the cue ball. If you think about it, if the game did not allow off center hits, for instance, you could still play a pretty mean game given you had all the other skills. Shots REQUIRING spin are not that high a percentage of events and you could certinly work around it in most games. Just because we use this for far too many shots for our own convienence, doesn't mean we have to.

Besides, he's right in one sense, she probably doesn't need to clutter her game up with these physical movements until she progresses a little more. The game has enough challenges at the beginnning and intermediate level. </font color>

DeeMan

cushioncrawler
01-03-2007, 12:42 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> CushionCrawler -- No, but you are right I mis-typed the sentence....I was surprised at how hard a straight shot was with OB and CB close together on a long table shot. You actually have to compensate for throw and not deflection so with right english you still need to aim to the LEFT of center... <hr /></blockquote>
I sometimes throw the OB say 12" off line to get the pot even tho i "aim" dead center on the OB. Here the throw might be the max of perhaps 6", and the extra 6" of "apparant throw" is really only due to masse of the qball before it gets to the OB, even tho the qball might be only 6" away from the OB. When the 2 balls are this close together it iz difficult to judge the angle, which might be say halfball, better to aim dead center and uze swerve and throw (for me). Here i am hitting slow or even very slow -- i couldnt play this shot at medium pace or hi-pace i think.

In fact, with the 2 balls in line for a pocket, and close together, the dead straight pot is difficult (for me) -- here i am talking about a medium or hi-pace shot, with zero sidespin, especially if screwing. This time koz i naturally hit a bit left of center the qball squirts right a bit and the OB hits the left jaw, here the hi-pace duznt give the qball a chance to masse left enuff. madMac.

Bob_Jewett
01-03-2007, 01:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> ... Anyway, she was at a bar shooting with a couple of her frinds and she asked advice from a 7, the highest handicap in our league, and he kept telling her that there is no such thing and she should not think about them. I just wonder how he can be a consistent 7 and not believe in throw or squirt/deflection. <hr /></blockquote>
The 7 was right in a sense. Your wife should probably not worry about those things. If she tries to shoot a particular shot in a particular way and misses to the left, there is only one thing she has to realize: she must aim more to the right the next time. That's it. That's all. For most players, all the theory stuff is just confusing unless it is explained clearly with clear examples that they shoot themselves. It is not easy to explain the problems clearly or to develop clear examples that the student can shoot herself.

Further, we have had the recent example of a former World Champion (and the current World 8-Ball Champion, depending on your affiliation) saying that an object ball can't be thrown. I think that's pitiful, ignorant buffoonery on the part of the FWC unless he was seriously misquoted. You can become a champion, and in fact one that dominates the tour, without knowing what is physically happening on the table.

See the ball. See the pocket. Remember how to shoot the shot. Make the ball. Get the shape. That's all you have to do. It does not require understanding, it requires memory.

Qtec
01-03-2007, 08:19 PM
Tap Tap Tap.

Great post Bob. Knowledge doesn't make the player.Any SL3 who took the time to read thru all the posts we have had on squirt, throw etc probably knows more about the physics than the best player in their club.
Compared to experience,talent and character, knowledge is of minimal importance in deciding who wins when two good players are matched up.
You don't have to understand how a cue is made, to be able to use one.


Qtec ........

dr_dave
01-04-2007, 08:53 AM
I'm here to defend knowledge. A previous posting (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=227296&amp;page =&amp;view=&amp;sb=&amp;o=&amp;vc=1) summarizes some of my contentions, and I have more below.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>Knowledge doesn't make the player.Any SL3 who took the time to read thru all the posts we have had on squirt, throw etc probably knows more about the physics than the best player in their club.
Compared to experience,talent and character, knowledge is of minimal importance in deciding who wins when two good players are matched up.<hr /></blockquote>
Agreed. Knowledge alone is not usually a deciding factor in a match between two really good players. They already know what they need to know to be top players. (So I guess they have "knowledge" after all.)

Knowledge doesn't make somebody a good player, but I think it can dramatically speed up the learning process for many beginner to intermediate players. For example, if someone learns the 30-degree-rule peace-sign technique (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=211492&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=), they will immediately know where the CB will go (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=234071&amp;page =0&amp;view=&amp;sb=&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=) for many shots. The alternative is to spend years building intuition to serve as a substitute for the knowledge. Most top players "just know" where the CB will go; but most beginner and intermediate players don't know, and they can benefit from the knowledge.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>You don't have to understand how a cue is made, to be able to use one.<hr /></blockquote>
Agreed. That is one of many examples of the type of knowledge that is not useful to a player (unless that player also happens to be a cue maker).

Regards,
Dave

Qtec
01-04-2007, 09:16 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The alternative is to spend years building intuition to serve as a substitute for the knowledge. Most top players "just know" where the CB will go; but most beginner and intermediate players don't know, and they can benefit from the knowledge.
<hr /></blockquote>

Its not intuition or 'just knowing' Dave. That belittle's the years of practice and ups and downs that every good player has to go thru to eventually be in control of what happens on the table and to the balls.
If anyone wants to know whaere the QB will go on a 3/4 ball shot with top, all they have to do is get their cue out, rent a table and only play 3/4 B shots for an hour. After that hour he/she will be able to predict the path of the QB pretty accurately.
Problem is for most players is that its pretty boring.

Q

Billy_Bob
01-04-2007, 10:52 AM
I did something interesting...

A few months ago I showed a first day beginner friend of mine 3 basic videos. (Dr. Daves, Jimmy Reids, Billiard Academy), and I taught him some basics.

He learned what he should be trying to do (proper stroke, leave cue ball for your next shot, etc.), what is possible (30/90 degree rules, cut shot possible or not, high/low percentage shots theory, the problems with using english, shots which can be possible with a carom, etc.), and how to play defensive.

After just a couple of months of this learning, he had a 7 ball run. And he is beginning to win against other players - some of them average players.

He still has a lot of "beginnerness" in his game (does not take as much time as he should or think about his next shot before shooting sometimes, hits too hard sometimes, etc.), but he is paying attention and trying to do what he should be working on/attempting to do.

Most important of all, the other night he had two balls on the short rail next to each other (long ways) and a straight in on one of the balls. He intentionally used follow and the correct speed to get position on the second ball! (He thought about his next shot before shooting the first!)

So at least in this case, if knowledge could be packaged in a box, I think it could be called "Banger-B-Gone"!

Jager85
01-04-2007, 11:56 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> Your wife should probably not worry about those things. If she tries to shoot a particular shot in a particular way and misses to the left, there is only one thing she has to realize: she must aim more to the right the next time. That's it. That's all.
<hr /></blockquote>
The only thing wrong with this is say she shoots the same shot 3 times. 1st shot she uses no english misses to the left. 2nd scenario she uses some right english and, remembering her last miss, aims a little more to the left; now she misses to the right. 3rd shot she uses some left english and, remembering her last miss, aims a litte bit to the left (adjusting less than the last adjustment); she misses again to the left. Here is where she gets frustrated and gives up. The moral is you can't make adjustments based on a previous miss if the english used is not the same. New players would take forever to learn these concepts without description.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> For most players, all the theory stuff is just confusing unless it is explained clearly with clear examples that they shoot themselves. It is not easy to explain the problems clearly or to develop clear examples that the student can shoot herself.
<hr /></blockquote>
I know she understands the concepts because I did describe them in detail and setup a number of shots for her to shoot herself without any compensation so she saw where they missed. The I had her shoot numerous different shots having her tell me what was going to happen and which way she had to compensate.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>See the ball. See the pocket. Remember how to shoot the shot. Make the ball. Get the shape. That's all you have to do. It does not require understanding, it requires memory. <hr /></blockquote>
Learning is much faster and easier with understanding. I am an engineer at a machinig company and experienced in CNC Lathes, Shavers, Hobs, Broaches, and Automation. If the machine requires a certain process for adjusting things manually there is a reason. Understanding this reason makes it much simpler to do every time and to decipher new problems that occur. Memorizing is harder and it will not help with future problems.

Curtis Nielsen

dr_dave
01-04-2007, 12:01 PM
Billy_Bob,

Thank you for sharing that success story.

Banger-B-Gone and Peace,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> I did something interesting...

A few months ago I showed a first day beginner friend of mine 3 basic videos. (Dr. Daves, Jimmy Reids, Billiard Academy), and I taught him some basics.

He learned what he should be trying to do (proper stroke, leave cue ball for your next shot, etc.), what is possible (30/90 degree rules, cut shot possible or not, high/low percentage shots theory, the problems with using english, shots which can be possible with a carom, etc.), and how to play defensive.

After just a couple of months of this learning, he had a 7 ball run. And he is beginning to win against other players - some of them average players.

He still has a lot of "beginnerness" in his game (does not take as much time as he should or think about his next shot before shooting sometimes, hits too hard sometimes, etc.), but he is paying attention and trying to do what he should be working on/attempting to do.

Most important of all, the other night he had two balls on the short rail next to each other (long ways) and a straight in on one of the balls. He intentionally used follow and the correct speed to get position on the second ball! (He thought about his next shot before shooting the first!)

So at least in this case, if knowledge could be packaged in a box, I think it could be called "Banger-B-Gone"!
<hr /></blockquote>

Qtec
01-04-2007, 01:11 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The only thing wrong with this is say she shoots the same shot 3 times. 1st shot she uses no english misses to the left. 2nd scenario she uses some right english and, remembering her last miss, aims a little more to the left; now she misses to the right. 3rd shot she uses some left english and, remembering her last miss, aims a litte bit to the left (adjusting less than the last adjustment); she misses again to the left. Here is where she gets frustrated and gives up. The moral is you can't make adjustments based on a previous miss if the english used is not the same. New players would take forever to learn these concepts without description. <hr /></blockquote>

The 'same' shot?
With this kind of practice its a miracle she can pot a ball at all! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif


Qtec

Qtec
01-04-2007, 01:22 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> I did something interesting...

A few months ago I showed a first day beginner friend of mine 3 basic videos. (Dr. Daves, Jimmy Reids, Billiard Academy), and I taught him some basics.

He learned what he should be trying to do (proper stroke, <font color="blue"> a lifelong endeavour. </font color> leave cue ball for your next shot, etc.), <font color="blue"> something witch takes years of practice. </font color> what is possible (30/90 degree rules, cut shot possible or not, high/low percentage shots theory, <font color="blue"> a beginner can miss ANY ball. </font color> the problems with using english, shots which can be possible with a carom, etc.), and how to play defensive. <font color="blue"> Why would a beginner want to learn to play defensive?</font color>

After just a couple of months of this learning, he had a 7 ball run. And he is beginning to win against other players - some of them average players. <font color="blue">Winning or losing isn't a sign of progress because most beginners win their games on other players mistakes.
A player should ALWAYS measure their own progress on their own performance, not someone else's.
</font color>

He still has a lot of "beginnerness" in his game (does not take as much time as he should or think about his next shot before shooting sometimes, hits too hard sometimes, etc.), but he is paying attention and trying to do what he should be working on/attempting to do.

Most important of all, the other night he had two balls on the short rail next to each other (long ways) and a straight in on one of the balls. He intentionally used follow and the correct speed to get position on the second ball! (He thought about his next shot before shooting the first!) <font color="blue"> You can't play a shot on the table without the QB going somewhere. </font color>

So at least in this case, if knowledge could be packaged in a box, I think it could be called "Banger-B-Gone"!
<hr /></blockquote>

Qtec

Jal
01-04-2007, 01:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
The only thing wrong with this is say she shoots the same shot 3 times. 1st shot she uses no english misses to the left. 2nd scenario she uses some right english and, remembering her last miss, aims a little more to the left; now she misses to the right. 3rd shot she uses some left english and, remembering her last miss, aims a litte bit to the left (adjusting less than the last adjustment); she misses again to the left. Here is where she gets frustrated and gives up. The moral is you can't make adjustments based on a previous miss if the english used is not the same. New players would take forever to learn these concepts without description. <hr /></blockquote>

The 'same' shot?
With this kind of practice its a miracle she can pot a ball at all! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif


Qtec <hr /></blockquote>
Since your last post locked onto Dr.Dave's semantics, maybe you should look up the meaning of "hypothetical". No wait, if you do that you'll never be able to integrate it seamlessly into a sentence. Much better to osmose. Here are some examples of its usage in everyday life:

[thinking, thinking, thinking...]

Oh blast it, I looked it up and now have no idea myself...just like what that miserable physics has done to my game. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Jim

SpiderMan
01-04-2007, 03:18 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> If the machine requires a certain process for adjusting things manually there is a reason. Understanding this reason makes it much simpler to do every time and to decipher new problems that occur. Memorizing is harder and it will not help with future problems.

Curtis Nielsen <hr /></blockquote>

Curtis,

I pulled out the portion of your post that I'm comfortable agreeing with entirely. It's a fine analogy, in response to those who see no benefit in understanding the physics of pool.

SpiderMan

Bob_Jewett
01-04-2007, 05:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> ... The only thing wrong with this is say she shoots the same shot 3 times. 1st shot she uses no english misses to the left. 2nd scenario she uses some right english and, remembering her last miss, aims a little more to the left; now she misses to the right. 3rd shot she uses some left english and, remembering her last miss, aims a litte bit to the left (adjusting less than the last adjustment); she misses again to the left. ... <hr /></blockquote>
I call those different shots. In fact, every time the speed, side spin, draw/follow, distance to the object ball or cloth conditions change, there is a new shot to deal with. I think that should be explained to any new player before she starts using side spin -- explain squirt, swerve and throw and the things that affect those effects.

If you want to show her how to compensate for short shots with side spin, and she has a standard-squirt cue stick, you might want to show her "aim-and-pivot" squirt compensation. That way she can build from a knowledge of plain shots, and there is a very simple recipe to follow to get the compensation.

But being able to use the recipe is not the same as understanding why the recipe works. Most players seem to have a real problem understanding the concept of cancelling errors, or the very simple (to someone who does math a lot) geometry of aim-and-pivot that shows why the errors can cancel. Most players who use aim-and-pivot, or "backhand english" as it is sometimes called, have no understanding of the limits to its application. Since they make shots beyond those limits, I have to conclude that they play by feel rather than a strict system. And in the end, all players have to play by feel if they intend to play well.

Now, while practicing, I think it is very useful to be able to answer the question, "Why did I miss that shot?" I think you will make progress faster that way, even though I (and Billy Bob) have no proof of it. But it is not necessary to understand shots to learn how to play well. Even the so-called "30-degree rule" Billy Bob mentioned that was so helpful to his friend, is a rough recipe and there are about ten more layers to that onion that Billy Bob didn't mention. About two layers down, you learn that the angle is not 30 degrees.

Also, it is not so easy to really diagnose what went wrong on any particular shot unless a great deal about the shot is understood. For example, you shot a 30-degree cut shot with stun (no follow or draw) and you hit the ball too full. You try again with follow, and you make the ball. You think you shot along the same line. What is your conclusion? Bad stroke? Bad aim? A possible answer, which very few players or even physicists and engineers are aware of, is that the cut angle changes significantly on shots for a fixed fullness of hit if you change only the amount of draw/follow. I think that pretty much every player who has played well enough to consistently make both kinds of shots corrects for the difference subconsciously.

Qtec
01-05-2007, 09:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
The only thing wrong with this is say she shoots the same shot 3 times. 1st shot she uses no english misses to the left. 2nd scenario she uses some right english and, remembering her last miss, aims a little more to the left; now she misses to the right. 3rd shot she uses some left english and, remembering her last miss, aims a litte bit to the left (adjusting less than the last adjustment); she misses again to the left. Here is where she gets frustrated and gives up. The moral is you can't make adjustments based on a previous miss if the english used is not the same. New players would take forever to learn these concepts without description. <hr /></blockquote>

The 'same' shot?
With this kind of practice its a miracle she can pot a ball at all! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif


Qtec <hr /></blockquote>
Since your last post locked onto Dr.Dave's semantics, maybe you should look up the meaning of "hypothetical". No wait, if you do that you'll never be able to integrate it seamlessly into a sentence. Much better to osmose. Here are some examples of its usage in everyday life:

[thinking, thinking, thinking...]

Oh blast it, I looked it up and now have no idea myself...just like what that miserable physics has done to my game. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Jim <hr /></blockquote>

What makes you think that his story is hypothetical.
He replied to this post,
[ QUOTE ]

Bob:
"Your wife should probably not worry about those things. If she tries to shoot a particular shot in a particular way and misses to the left, there is only one thing she has to realize: she must aim more to the right the next time. That's it. That's all."


J's reply,
"
The only thing wrong with this is say she shoots the same shot 3 times. 1st shot she uses no english misses to the left. 2nd scenario she uses some right english and, remembering her last miss, aims a little more to the left; now she misses to the right. 3rd shot she uses some left english and, remembering her last miss, aims a litte bit to the left (adjusting less than the last adjustment); she misses again to the left. Here is where she gets frustrated and gives up. " <hr /></blockquote>

Sounds to me like he is speaking from experience.
Qtec /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[ BTW, A very good practice, even for experienced players is to set up a realatively easy 9B runout but you have to do it without using any E.ie, left/right spin.]

Qtec
01-05-2007, 11:34 PM
Lets try an experiment. Ask Jager85 to have his wife read the 'English for beginners'thread and see if there is an immediate improvementin her play! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
I wonder what Eferen would have posted on that thread! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

A guy who can't run 3 Fn balls can log on here , read all the physics posts and go to the club, [where he still can't run 3 Fn balls] but he can explain to everone why he missed!
" I miscalculated the angle. I thought it was 36. 5 degrees and with a squirt factor of 0.45 on my Pred Z shaft, tapered to 10.92 mm, which meant that I had to hit 0.75 of the QB [ ????????,.......I bet somebody knows /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif] but I think forgot to allow for CIT. then again, I am using 57 aiming methods so the table must be off! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Just joking guys. Please- no hate mail. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif


What the physics does is explain the things you do and see on the table. What might be of use to a 50 something? yr old experienced pool player might not be the right info for a 12 yr old running racks purely on an ,action and reaction ,style of play.!

If you have a young talent you have to train him to be the best he can be. Thats a lot different from lessons to someone who is 50 and plays once a week and just ONCE wants to beat his girlfriend! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

It all depends.


Q

Qtec
01-05-2007, 11:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I think that pretty much every player who has played well enough to consistently make both kinds of shots corrects for the difference subconsciously.
<hr /></blockquote>
In most sports they would call that a skill.

Qtec

Billy_Bob
01-06-2007, 10:36 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>...Why would a beginner want to learn to play defensive?...<hr /></blockquote>

In my friends case, he plays some better players at my house who frequently play defensive shots on him. Also if they can "see" a ball, chances are good they will make a shot.

So he is learning to leave the CB in a nasty spot if he does not have a shot.

Also so he can "get even" with us. My best friend and I will play safety after safety on him. So he is highly motivated to "return the favor". He gets quite excited when he can play a safety and leave one of us without a shot. He will jump up and down and yell "Yeaaaaa!"

FYI he played his first money tournament last night and got into the money. (Although it was a very easy tournament and there was a lot of luck involved.)

He was playing or attempting to play defensive shots sometimes. I think this may have been just enough to give him an advantage over the other players who have more skill than he does, but little knowledge of the game.

Jager85
01-08-2007, 10:56 AM
The whole scenario of 3 shots was hypothetical...not experience. The frustration and giving up part is just from knowing my wife and how she gets. The point was that if a begginner does not know anything about squirt/throw/deflection how are they supposed to know the meaning of the 'same shot'. The same shot to a begginner with no knowledge probably would say the same shot is just the same angle/distance.

Deeman3
01-08-2007, 12:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr> The whole scenario of 3 shots was hypothetical...not experience. The frustration and giving up part is just from knowing my wife and how she gets. The point was that if a begginner does not know anything about squirt/throw/deflection how are they supposed to know the meaning of the 'same shot'. The same shot to a begginner with no knowledge probably would say the same shot is just the same angle/distance. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">Jager,

I don't know. This game is difficult enough for a beginner and with all the trouble mastering the basics of aim and such, I think it is a little much to ask of them to take on the very fine points of the game until they become a little more comfortable. I have made this mistake with my own wife in teaching her more than she is prepared to know. They just get it down that hitting a ball here makes it go there and you say, "O.K. now we are going to change the rules completely." I think you need to concentrate on her hitting the center of the cue ball with her cue and making it go in the right direction first. There are plenty of players out there who thik they are good but can't even do that. If she starts missing a ton of shots or position because of not knowing throw, squirt, etc. then tell her. I just can't see it being that important early on.
</font color>

DeeMan
Q, I loved your comment on the three balls physics people....

Qtec
01-08-2007, 07:05 PM
The situation J describes happens in every poolhall, every night. A guy tries to teach his girlfriend-wife how to play. They are not practicing, they are playing a game. The guy says, [ QUOTE ]
No E on this. Just hit half the OB,with the center of the QB. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Ok. You need a little IE on this one so you have to aim more to the right. Girlfriend thinks, the right of where. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif [ QUOTE ]
The point was that if a begginner does not know anything about squirt/throw/deflection how are they supposed to know the meaning of the 'same shot'. The same shot to a begginner with no knowledge probably would say the same shot is just the same angle/distance.
<hr /></blockquote>
It wasn't his wife who said 'same shot', it was the teacher in this case.
Same angle maybe but when you hit the QB on a different spot, the QB takes another path.
If it was the same shot the QB would take the same path and arrive at the same position. Thats called replication- something that is essential to becoming a good player. If you can´t hit the same shot twice you can never be a good player.
I can't put it any simpler than that.
If I have a straight shot and I play to stop the ball dead. Then I try to draw it back 6 diamonds.
Is that the same shot.

Its not.

A beginner doesn´t/ shouldn´t know anything about squirt-throw etc because its not important. A beginner shouldn´t be playing with ANY E unless they can first send the QB in a straight line to a specific target. ie, before you can a allow for squirt- throw ect, you first have to know where to aim without any E.
There are no quick fixes to being able to play a good game and this is what irks me about the aiming and physics threads. They suggest that knowledge alone will improve your game.
Qtec

Jager85
01-10-2007, 11:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
There are no quick fixes to being able to play a good game and this is what irks me about the aiming and physics threads. They suggest that knowledge alone will improve your game.
Qtec <hr /></blockquote>
Knowledge alone does not improve your game but it does speed up the learning process.

Monday night I went out and shot some pool with my wife and one of her friends and out of curiosity asked each of them the definition of the same shot. They both said where the cue ball and object ball are in the exact same position. This shows that the teachers definition of the same shot needs to be made clear before they can be told to aim right from a ball missed left etc.