PDA

View Full Version : Power draw



Drop1
12-06-2007, 08:34 PM
I tried a power draw last night,and spent this morning repairing about eighteen inches of cracked plaster,ten feet from the table I figure I did something wrong. I tried to hit the cue ball,as low as possible,and keep my cue horizonal to the table,and cut lose. Should I have jacked up the cue?

aggie_shooter
12-06-2007, 11:59 PM
Now I am no pro, and I'm relatively new to the game, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but here's what I would say about your "issue..."

Hitting a solid, effective, powerful and accurate draw stroke IMO is probably the hardest stroke to master. Things I would say to keep in mind while hitting the shot:

-STAY DOWN THROUGH THE STROKE!.... I think probably the easiest and most common way to mess up a "power draw" stroke is getting up before completely finishing the swing. Along with this is making sure that the bridge hand does NOT move. Because you are 'nervous' about shooting a difficult shot, it's easy to lose form causing you to miscue, or just hit the cue ball where you didn't intend to. If you are striking the ball low and stand during the stroke you are most likely going to create a kind of scooping action so think about the fundamental form you need to be keeping.

-Cue angle... I don't think "jacking up" is quite the remedy you are looking for... You want to elevate just a BIT more than on a normal draw stroke, but nothing dramatic. If you over elevate, even if you manage not to go under and scoop the ball, you're going to cause the cue ball to jump, the same way that hitting a proper jump shot would.

-Cue ball contact point: With a solid, straight and fundamentally sound stroke, you can hit the cue ball surprisingly low without miscue or scooping it, but in general I would say aim at around 2 tips below center or so.. and remember, how low you hit the ball, and also the elevation of the cue both affect the amount of backspin, so experiment and realize a happy medium, also keep in mind that from shot to shot you can adjust each and hit higher with more elevation and get the same spin and hitting lower with less elevation...

You would be surprised how little force it takes to create effective draw if you are able to stroke well, so don't think you have to put everything you've got into a shot in order to go across the table and bring it back. Start but shooting softer across large gaps and slowly increase power as you can better control your stroke.... It takes a lot of practice and patience, but work at it slowly, and you'll eventually get a feel for the shot!

Sorry for the long answer, and good luck!

Jal
12-07-2007, 01:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr>...I figure I did something wrong.<hr /></blockquote>You forgot to put a cushion against the wall. Seriously, you should expect to launch the cueball occasionally when practicing something like this.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr>I tried to hit the cue ball,as low as possible,and keep my cue horizonal to the table,and cut lose. <hr /></blockquote>That sounds good, but the practical lower limit is about half way down from the center of the cueball. That would be where you actually contact the ball with the tip (ie, where you leave a chalk mark).

I think aggie_shooter gave some good advice, especially about using less power to begin with and working your way up. When there is a lot distance between the balls, you may find that with less power, hitting safely above the miscue limit actually gets you more draw than hitting right at the limit. It depends on how much power you can put into it and still maintain control of the cue. At some point, with enough cue speed, or if the balls are fairly close, hitting near the limit will generate the most draw.

Mike Page, a BCA instructor and poster, has a nice video on the subject (see the link), but it's not explicitly about power draw. It is pertinent though, and introduces the concept of a player's personal miscue limit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqqakiKbhHI

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr>Should I have jacked up the cue?<hr /></blockquote>This is sometimes recommended by people who are much better than me - pros for instance. But the physics is questionable in my mind, so I'll wait along with you for further commentary.

Jim

Fran Crimi
12-07-2007, 04:11 AM
Harry,

As Seinfeld says: Don't double dip.

In this case, don't even single dip.

If you like to dip your cue into the ball in your draw shots, and you do it that way when you're power drawing, you may as well set up a bulls-eye on your wall.

Someone here mentioned the word 'straight'. That's the key word. Not level, but straight. Don't change your angle of attack in mid stroke. It's harder to do than you think. You may be a dipper and not even realize it because it could be so subtle. My suggestion is have someone take a movie clip of your stroke with a digital camera. Then play it back in slo mo. See if you dip.

Fran

Ralph_Kramden
12-07-2007, 09:04 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I tried a power draw last night,and spent this morning repairing about eighteen inches of cracked plaster,ten feet from the table I figure I did something wrong. I tried to hit the cue ball,as low as possible,and keep my cue horizonal to the table,and cut lose. Should I have jacked up the cue? <hr /></blockquote>

Make sure you have formed a solid bridge that won't let the cue deflect downward. If the cue deflects downward it will hit the table before the ball moves forward enough to get out of the way and will cause a scoop jump. The cuetip gets pinched between the table and the ball and will lift the ball.

Billy_Bob
12-07-2007, 09:12 AM
What I would call a "power draw" is when the object ball is hanging in the far corner pocket and the cue ball is about a diamond out at the opposite (long) end of the table. Then I shoot the CB and draw the CB all the way back up table (table length draw).

Now I can do this with *my* tip which is a Moori hard dime shaped tip recently scuffed with a sandpaper shaper and a nice even coating of chalk applied all over the tip. Especially the sides of the tip. And when I look at the tip under the light, there are no dark spots. It is the same uniform color and texture of chalk. Looks like brand new low pile carpeting across the entire tip.

I *can't* do this with a house cue with a quarter shaped tip in poor condition, when after chalking, there are dark spots on the tip (when I hold it up to the light). As a matter of fact, I can't shoot as low on the CB with such a tip as I can with my tip. If I shoot too low, I will scoop the ball up into the air!

Note that I have had *my* tip for many years, HOWEVER, when I first got my tip, I could NOT draw the CB all the way back up table.

So there is a lot more to it than the tip, but I don't think I could do this with a tip in poor condition.

I shoot very low on the CB. I follow through what seems like a foot and a half. (Leave the tip of your cue a foot and a half past where the CB was after your stroke). In other words TONS of follow through!

Then don't kill it with speed! Slow down. I can get a lot of draw with a medium speed and a very long follow through.

I shoot level with a closed bridge.

I may be "accelerating" through the cue ball, but I don't know. I just do what I do from tons of practice. Just know how to do it.

Before shooting, I am thinking... "tons of follow through, leave tip way out there, not too much speed".

You can practice with a striped ball as the cue ball. Shoot just the striped ball at the far long rail with draw. The stripe will show you its backwards spin. The trick is to keep it spinning backwards all the way down to the end. (Not... backwards spin, then slide, then forward roll.)

Then once you can get the CB spinning backwards all the way down table, then you need to hit the OB dead center to get it to come back. If you hit one side or the other of the OB, then the CB will go off to the side.

Billy_Bob
12-07-2007, 09:46 AM
P.S. My table has a fairly fast cloth on it. I don't know if this could be done on a table with slow cloth like some bar tables have???

Derek
12-07-2007, 10:47 AM
One thing to consider, and people may disagree with this, is try honing your draw shot with an open bridge. A lot of people may state go with the closed bridge to gain control, but I actually get more control with the open bridge because I know I can't afford to be dipping or swaying. I kind of picked this up from watching a couple of shooters in the area that I admire for their skill and ease of stroke.

I also like the open bridge for keeping my stick level by keeping my grip loose. I just let the gravity of the cue rest on my open V bridge, level the stick with the contact point, and push that baby through for some action.

I contemplated getting some lessons a few months ago on my draw stroke, but I have made some vast improvements with the open bridge and loose grip. My preferred draw practice session is object ball along the head string, cue ball at the foot string, straight-in shot, and drawing back to the foot cushion. So I guess that's 3/4's of the table. I do this fairly consistent now with a smooth stroke.

We also have a local monthly paper in Colorado called the Cue Times. Tom Ross has a monthly article in it and I thought this month's was good. Tom also posts a monthly article in BD.
http://www.cuetimes.com/
(Note: this month's edition, December, has not been scanned and posted yet, but it should show up in the next few days)

stikapos
12-07-2007, 11:14 AM
/ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gifA few ideas for you on Power Draw.
1. Its kinda like the Aflac commercial with Yogi Berra. Its nice to have it if you really need it, but if you really need it, you shouldn't really use it.
2. Patching the wall is a pain, but its better learning at home than yelling out "FORE" everytime you want to practice draw at the pool hall.
3. Stroke is not poke. Loosen up your grip and your wrist. Try not to hit so hard and you'll find that old whitey will be a lot more accomdating.
4. Watch videos of those who do it well.
5. Practice makes perfect. Remember how long it took to learn how not to crash your bicycle ?? Yeah. Same deal.

Best of luck (and make sure to tell the wife to get out of the way while you're practicing or you'll be on the couch for LIFE!) /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif,
tim

Billy_Bob
12-07-2007, 11:32 AM
Right! I also use a light grip.

Artemus
12-07-2007, 02:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>
Mike Page, a BCA instructor and poster, has a nice video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqqakiKbhHI
Jim <hr /></blockquote>

This video certainly contradicts the above video when it comes to the standard teachings of an elbow drop regarding power draw shots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI1Q-8nfiBk&amp;feature=related

I wonder who would have the more powerful draw shot in a competition, hmmmmm?

dr_dave
12-07-2007, 03:10 PM
You can find good power draw advice in my May '06 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/may06.pdf) and under "draw" here (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html).

Good luck,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I tried a power draw last night,and spent this morning repairing about eighteen inches of cracked plaster,ten feet from the table I figure I did something wrong. I tried to hit the cue ball,as low as possible,and keep my cue horizonal to the table,and cut lose. Should I have jacked up the cue? <hr /></blockquote>

Jal
12-07-2007, 04:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>
Mike Page, a BCA instructor and poster, has a nice video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqqakiKbhHI
Jim <hr /></blockquote>

This video certainly contradicts the above video when it comes to the standard teachings of an elbow drop regarding power draw shots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI1Q-8nfiBk&amp;feature=related

I wonder who would have the more powerful draw shot in a competition, hmmmmm? <hr /></blockquote>The miscue limit stuff was relevant, though the video clearly deals with normal draw, especially for those who are, ah, challenged in this area.

Between the two Mikes, not knowing Mr. Page, I would have to go with Mr. Massey.

Jim

mikepage
12-07-2007, 06:10 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> [...]
Between the two Mikes, not knowing Mr. Page, I would have to go with Mr. Massey.

<hr /></blockquote>

Well I know Mr. Page pretty well, being that he's married to my brother-in-law's sister. And I'm gonna have to agree with you...

Jal
12-07-2007, 07:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> [...]
Between the two Mikes, not knowing Mr. Page, I would have to go with Mr. Massey.

<hr /></blockquote>

Well I know Mr. Page pretty well, being that he's married to my brother-in-law's sister. And I'm gonna have to agree with you... <hr /></blockquote>Mike, would you please ask him about jacking up?

Jim

Artemus
12-08-2007, 06:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>
Mike, would you please ask him about jacking up?
Jim <hr /></blockquote>

Do you think he still has to do that if he's married?

Ralph_Kramden
12-08-2007, 09:08 AM
Quote Artemus:
<hr /></blockquote>
This video certainly contradicts the above video when it comes to the standard teachings of an elbow drop regarding power draw shots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI1Q-8nfiBk&amp;feature=related

I wonder who would have the more powerful draw shot in a competition, hmmmmm? <hr /></blockquote>

Check out the stroke that Mike Massey uses for a power draw at both :04 and again at 2:10 in this video. I think he can hit a power draw whether his elbow drops or if it doesn't. He just has a lot of talent.

I think Mike Page is correct in his thinking for most draw shots although it still takes a lot of practice to get a feel for how hard to hit them.

Artemus
12-08-2007, 09:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr> Quote Artemus:
<hr /></blockquote>
This video certainly contradicts the above video when it comes to the standard teachings of an elbow drop regarding power draw shots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI1Q-8nfiBk&amp;feature=related

I wonder who would have the more powerful draw shot in a competition, hmmmmm? <hr /></blockquote>

Check out the stroke that Mike Massey uses for a power draw at both :04 and again at 2:10 in this video. I think he can hit a power draw whether his elbow drops or if it doesn't. He just has a lot of talent.

I think Mike Page is correct in his thinking for most draw shots although it still takes a lot of practice to get a feel for how hard to hit them. <hr /></blockquote>

I think you're correct about the talent of Mike Massey, but he is specifically teaching an elbow drop to players on that video.

Have you ever tried dragging the tip of your cue on the cloth right below and behind the CB until you take your backstroke. It doesn't get any lower than that. On your forward stroke drop the elbow and hit UP on the CB. You'll still be hitting it extremely low and get some great draw. Is that the way it should be played? Probably not and I normally don't do it. However, it does illustrate that there are more ways to skin a cat in this game and do things that don't have to be so dogmatic. If Mike Massey says to drop the elbow and can do what he does with the CB, I think everybody should listen.

bradb
12-13-2007, 04:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I tried a power draw last night,and spent this morning repairing about eighteen inches of cracked plaster,ten feet from the table I figure I did something wrong. I tried to hit the cue ball,as low as possible,and keep my cue horizonal to the table,and cut lose. Should I have jacked up the cue? <hr /></blockquote>

Starting close and working back is good advise.

I also notice that I can draw back very effectively with a rest, but I tend to miscue without it, so that tells me I'm dipping the cue tip. I practise a lot on straight thru stroking. Also don't hold the cue too tight, let it rock in your hand. -brad

SpiderMan
12-14-2007, 10:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I tried a power draw last night,and spent this morning repairing about eighteen inches of cracked plaster,ten feet from the table I figure I did something wrong. I tried to hit the cue ball,as low as possible,and keep my cue horizonal to the table,and cut lose. Should I have jacked up the cue? <hr /></blockquote>

A little bit of jack-up is helpful for maximum draw. But you have to understand why.

First, the amount of backspin you can get is dependent on how far off-center you can hit the ball. If the cue is nearly level to the slate, you may accidentally catch the table with the lower edge of your tip before you hit the ball with the upper edge of your tip. Striking at a slight angle from above lets you have more offset from the center with less risk of striking the table first.

Second, remember that cue-ball "squirt", or "deflection", doesn't occur only in the left-right plane. A level cue introduces a resultant force upward, and tries to golf the cue-ball off the surface. A slight downward angle of the cue can align the resultant CB path parallel to the table. Of course, there are players who argue that a little CB "flight" is a good thing, for reduced CB/table contact, in the name of not losing your backspin to friction. This can still be accomplished with a downward stroke - just use a little more angle than necessary for parallel launch, and you get a little hop due to rebound from the table.

Finally, try to keep this slightly-downward stroke going in as straight a line as possible. It's the best way to accurately return the tip to the exact point on the CB where you lined up, and avoid embarassing home repairs. Fran made a very good suggestion about having yourself videotaped during this shot. It's amazing how some players with otherwise decent form go nuts on a hard draw stroke; jumping up, twisting their wrist, rolling their eyes, etc.

SpiderMan

dr_dave
12-14-2007, 12:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>A little bit of jack-up is helpful for maximum draw. But you have to understand why.

First, the amount of backspin you can get is dependent on how far off-center you can hit the ball. If the cue is nearly level to the slate, you may accidentally catch the table with the lower edge of your tip before you hit the ball with the upper edge of your tip. Striking at a slight angle from above lets you have more offset from the center with less risk of striking the table first.<hr /></blockquote>FYI, I have some illustrations and discussion concerning this in my July '06 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/july06.pdf). Based on the arguments in the article, I don't think table clearance is a valid reason to justify extra cue elevation (unless you have a really fat shaft).

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>Second, remember that cue-ball "squirt", or "deflection", doesn't occur only in the left-right plane. A level cue introduces a resultant force upward, and tries to golf the cue-ball off the surface. A slight downward angle of the cue can align the resultant CB path parallel to the table. Of course, there are players who argue that a little CB "flight" is a good thing, for reduced CB/table contact, in the name of not losing your backspin to friction. This can still be accomplished with a downward stroke - just use a little more angle than necessary for parallel launch, and you get a little hop due to rebound from the table.<hr /></blockquote>But vertical squirt for maximum draw will be in the 3-degree range for a typical cue (see my September '07 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2007/sept07.pdf)), and typical cue elevations (without adding "extra" elevation) are in the same range (see TP A.3 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-3.pdf)). Therefore, added elevation will actually drive the cue ball into the table some, creating some initial loss of spin and ball hop and flight. Right?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>Finally, try to keep this slightly-downward stroke going in as straight a line as possible. It's the best way to accurately return the tip to the exact point on the CB where you lined up, and avoid embarassing home repairs. Fran made a very good suggestion about having yourself videotaped during this shot. It's amazing how some players with otherwise decent form go nuts on a hard draw stroke; jumping up, twisting their wrist, rolling their eyes, etc.<hr /></blockquote>I'm with you on this one.

Regards,
Dave

Deeman3
12-14-2007, 12:59 PM
Spiderman,

Welcome back from road rage and road rash hell.

I might point out that another advantage to a slightly elevated cue is the lift of the cue ball for the first bit of travel that would reduce the spin killing friction for a little of its travel. You know, air mail...

Cornerman
12-14-2007, 01:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Spiderman,

Welcome back from road rage and road rash hell.

I might point out that another advantage to a slightly elevated cue is the lift of the cue ball for the first bit of travel that would reduce the spin killing friction for a little of its travel. You know, air mail... <hr /></blockquote>It would be interesting to see high speed video on this compared to a "level" shot.

Fred

SpiderMan
12-14-2007, 01:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>A little bit of jack-up is helpful for maximum draw. But you have to understand why.

First, the amount of backspin you can get is dependent on how far off-center you can hit the ball. If the cue is nearly level to the slate, you may accidentally catch the table with the lower edge of your tip before you hit the ball with the upper edge of your tip. Striking at a slight angle from above lets you have more offset from the center with less risk of striking the table first.<hr /></blockquote>FYI, I have some illustrations and discussion concerning this in my July '06 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/july06.pdf). Based on the arguments in the article, I don't think table clearance is a valid reason to justify extra cue elevation (unless you have a really fat shaft).

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>Second, remember that cue-ball "squirt", or "deflection", doesn't occur only in the left-right plane. A level cue introduces a resultant force upward, and tries to golf the cue-ball off the surface. A slight downward angle of the cue can align the resultant CB path parallel to the table. Of course, there are players who argue that a little CB "flight" is a good thing, for reduced CB/table contact, in the name of not losing your backspin to friction. This can still be accomplished with a downward stroke - just use a little more angle than necessary for parallel launch, and you get a little hop due to rebound from the table.<hr /></blockquote>But vertical squirt for maximum draw will be in the 3-degree range for a typical cue (see my September '07 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2007/sept07.pdf)), and typical cue elevations (without adding "extra" elevation) are in the same range (see TP A.3 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-3.pdf)). Therefore, added elevation will actually drive the cue ball into the table some, creating some initial loss of spin and ball hop and flight. Right?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>Finally, try to keep this slightly-downward stroke going in as straight a line as possible. It's the best way to accurately return the tip to the exact point on the CB where you lined up, and avoid embarassing home repairs. Fran made a very good suggestion about having yourself videotaped during this shot. It's amazing how some players with otherwise decent form go nuts on a hard draw stroke; jumping up, twisting their wrist, rolling their eyes, etc.<hr /></blockquote>I'm with you on this one.

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I think table clearance may be more of a factor than raw geometry would indicate because of the margin of error in hitting where I aim. This is opinion, of course, and might be colored by unjustified fear of my own inconsistency.

Regarding squirt, I sometimes imagine lining up a draw shot centerball, then using "aim and pivot" to correct for low (rather than side) offset of the tip. This typically results in slightly less jack-up than I would really use on a power draw, so perhaps I am subconsciously falling into the "bounce" camp for reduced table friction. But, if vertical squirt were not a factor, it would be reasonable to assume that an optimum "bounce" angle would be shallower than it is. So, I think it's reasonable to ask - are the folks in the "bounce" camp wrong? Do you lose more potential spin at initial contact (due to excessive angle) than you save by limiting cloth contact during travel? Or is this a significant factor at all? Perhaps friction factors are mostly a wash, and the additional angle just allows us to strike with confidence a little further off-center.

For the same reason, users of low-squirt cues might need less jack-up than normal folks. Unless, of course, fear of a table strike is a limiting factor.

I think it would be interesting to see HSV side views at varying angles of jack-up to note where the cue-ball response transitions between loft, level, and bounce. But I wonder whether a non-robot tester could produce repeatable results.

SpiderMan

SpiderMan
12-14-2007, 01:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Spiderman,

Welcome back from road rage and road rash hell.

I might point out that another advantage to a slightly elevated cue is the lift of the cue ball for the first bit of travel that would reduce the spin killing friction for a little of its travel. You know, air mail... <hr /></blockquote>

Yes, I mentioned the flight concept. Dave implies that the increased initial loss of spin (from driving the ball into the table) may be more significant. I don't know.

For now, I'm typing a lot better than I'm playing, but at least I walk pretty normal. I went out with Sid and tried pool for the first time about 10 days ago. I still can't bend my right index finger, so it hangs down from my grip hand. After whacking it on the rail twice I had to give up!

I also don't have any feeling in my upper left arm or lower left leg, but that seems to be improving from week to week, and shouldn't affect my play.

SpiderMan

SpiderMan
12-14-2007, 01:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Spiderman,

Welcome back from road rage and road rash hell.

I might point out that another advantage to a slightly elevated cue is the lift of the cue ball for the first bit of travel that would reduce the spin killing friction for a little of its travel. You know, air mail... <hr /></blockquote>It would be interesting to see high speed video on this compared to a "level" shot.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Yes, it would.

SpiderMan

Deeman3
12-14-2007, 02:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>For now, I'm typing a lot better than I'm playing, but at least I walk pretty normal. I went out with Sid and tried pool for the first time about 10 days ago. I still can't bend my right index finger, so it hangs down from my grip hand. After whacking it on the rail twice I had to give up! <font color="blue"> So, be honest, you still have to give Sid the orange crush! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

I also don't have any feeling in my upper left arm or lower left leg, but that seems to be improving from week to week, and shouldn't affect my play.

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> I guess you have to be happy that the numbness is continuing to improve but not having that feeling has to be a little scarey for a guy as active as you.

Keep on gettin' better, Buddy. You don't want Chopstick to get too encouraged for your next bout. You know, he's just the type guy to hop a plane to Dallas just to exploit your present condition...JK

Get well and keep healing. If they could take you down in Voodoo Village, the illegals don't have a chance. Bet you have not seen Pedro the racer lately...He is probably back in Texas by now with a new car.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif </font color>

Jal
12-14-2007, 02:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>...Do you lose more potential spin at initial contact (due to excessive angle) than you save by limiting cloth contact during travel? Or is this a significant factor at all? <hr /></blockquote>A bouncing ball, according to simple theory, loses more speed and spin on the first bounce than if it is sliding continously. In other words, in the time it takes a bouncing ball to reach the second bounce, a sliding ball will have traveled farther. This assumes a coefficient of restitution less than 1, which is certainly true for a pool table, and that the coefficient of sliding friction remains the same for both balls.

If the tip is in contact with the ball during an appreciable part of that first bounce, then that is a different story. I don't think the latter applies at moderate cue elevations, but...

Good to see you back.

Jim

dr_dave
12-14-2007, 04:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>I might point out that another advantage to a slightly elevated cue is the lift of the cue ball for the first bit of travel that would reduce the spin killing friction for a little of its travel. You know, air mail... <hr /></blockquote>It would be interesting to see high speed video on this compared to a "level" shot.<hr /></blockquote>I've added this to my list; although, I'm not so sure how well this will "film."

I hope to do a video session within the next month or so. I'll let you guys know when I post the new clips. Let me know if there are other things you also want to see (besides frozen-pair spot shots, shallow-angle rail cut shots, and whip shots, which I already have on the list).

Regards,
Dave

strokeless
12-14-2007, 07:15 PM
i just want to pass on a tip i got from fran crimi.
with a closed bridge, press your bridge hand into the table.
don't know why it works but it does. my draw is stronger.
thanks fran.

Scott Lee
12-14-2007, 08:20 PM
Since the tip is in contact with the CB for 1/1000th of a second, elbow drop has no bearing on power draw. Once the CB has left the tip nothing changes what kind of energy remains on the CB. It's all in the quality of the stroke.

Scott Lee

Fran Crimi
12-14-2007, 09:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote strokeless:</font><hr> i just want to pass on a tip i got from fran crimi.
with a closed bridge, press your bridge hand into the table.
don't know why it works but it does. my draw is stronger.
thanks fran. <hr /></blockquote>

Happy to help. The purpose for that is just to stablize your bridge hand so that it doesn't move as you push your cue through at a higher speed.

Fran

Qtec
12-14-2007, 11:05 PM
The shot looked to me to be normal. To play that shot you would have to have a long bridge and his cue at the bridge was no higher than the rail which is pretty 'level' in my book. He is a big guy with big fingers, could he have been cueing any lower?
We all know that jacking up, say over a ball makes a simple shot difficult. So why do it on purpose?

The most important thing Mike showed was the loose wrist. Without that you can't draw and you can never be consistent.

Q

av84fun
12-15-2007, 02:13 AM
Billy_Bob...Since you follow through as long as you do, it is certain that you are accelerating through the ball...which is the only reason to do so. In other words there is only a millisecond or two of tip-to-ball contact after which the ball has no idea whether you followed through or not.

But if you stroke with rapid speed and DON'T follow through then the cue is likely decelerating at impact.

Also, your are right on with the dime shape. That additional roundness vs. the nickel shape allows the tip to contact the cb further out from center..and the dime shape allows the tip to get lower without glancing off the cloth as you pointed out.

I think that Dr. Dave has written on the subject of tip radius and Predator has done extensive research on that subject as well which is why they ship all their shafts with dime shaped tips.

They also believe that shape helps to reduce squirt as well.
Regards,
Jim

Artemus
12-15-2007, 06:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> Since the tip is in contact with the CB for 1/1000th of a second, elbow drop has no bearing on power draw. Once the CB has left the tip nothing changes what kind of energy remains on the CB. It's all in the quality of the stroke.
Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

COMING SOON TO A POOL ROOM NEAR YOU!!!

THE CAGED OCTAGON POWER DRAW SMACKDOWN ON A GC-V!!!

SCOTT "RIGID ELBOW" LEE VS. MIKE "ELBOW DROP" MASSEY

MICHAEL BUFFER ANNOUNCING - CHUCK LIDDELL REFEREE

WHO WILL WIN AND PROVE THIS POINT ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!

PLACE YOUR BETS AT ANY LAS VEGAS CASINO BY PHONE OR IN PERSON.

Cornerman
12-15-2007, 07:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> He is a big guy with big fingers, could he have been cueing any lower?
We all know that jacking up, say over a ball makes a simple shot difficult. So why do it on purpose?<hr /></blockquote>I think these are two good points to ponder, and really the crux of the whole discussion.

I think he could go lower, but it would actually make things more difficult. He could go higher, but it actually clearly makes things more difficult. So, in the end, I think that there is a natural amount of elevation that is the "optimum" for a natural unencumbered stroke to happen.

I see some people try to stay entirely too level (somethiing that these boards don't help by saying things like "as level as possible"), and IMO, they can't stroke properly to get that fast stroke for a power draw. So, I tell them to elevate. But, my hope is that they elevate to what would be a more natural position.

Fred

randyg
12-15-2007, 07:39 AM
Just a passing comment:

All cue balls bounce when struck and we all play a little bit elevated (maybe 2-3- degrees.

Nobodys better than Mike Massey....SPF=randyg

Artemus
12-15-2007, 08:14 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
The most important thing Mike showed was the loose wrist. Without that you can't draw and you can never be consistent.
Q <hr /></blockquote>

You're exactly right. If you go to about the 1:30 mark on the tape as he's making practice backstrokes, it's quite clear that he's about as loose as he can possibly be in grip pressure with the cue in his fingers and his wrist like rubber. He also does something else at around the 2:10 mark at impact that goes against what a number of instructors teach, he closes his fingers and "SNAPS" or "SLAPS" the butt end of his cue into the fat meaty part of his hand to get that extra cue tip speed ripping through the CB. I watched Tom Rossman on ESPN last week in a trick shot competition against Pellinga and he did exactly the same thing every time to maximize draw and zing the CB back table length.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI1Q-8nfiBk&amp;feature=related

The instructors also advocate staying loose all the way through and not tighten up the fingers or snap the butt.
Whether it's speaking out negatively about dropping the elbow or snapping the cue regarding Massey, is like telling Mike Tyson in his prime, "You can't knock anybody out by hitting them with a double left hook to the body and then coming straight through the middle with an upper cut".
HUH!!?? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Billy_Bob
12-15-2007, 11:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> Billy_Bob...Since you follow through as long as you do, it is certain that you are accelerating through the ball...which is the only reason to do so. In other words there is only a millisecond or two of tip-to-ball contact after which the ball has no idea whether you followed through or not.

But if you stroke with rapid speed and DON'T follow through then the cue is likely decelerating at impact.
<hr /></blockquote>

Well this is interesting! I've tried "accelerating through the ball" with no success.

However what does give me success and where I see a change in draw or follow is if I follow through a little vs following through a lot.

So maybe it is just that I can't understand the words "accelerate through the ball", however I can understand (in my mind) "leave my tip 6 inches past where the CB was". Or "leave my tip a foot and a half where the CB was".

And I do know from watching the high speed videos that the tip is only in contact with the ball for a short period of time, but then there is actually playing and what I have learned works for me and others (following through).

Maybe if it was worded "accelerate through the ball and when you do this, your tip will be going so fast, it will not be able to slow down until it gets a foot and a half past where the cue ball was"??

Billy_Bob
12-15-2007, 11:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> ...Also, your are right on with the dime shape. That additional roundness vs. the nickel shape allows the tip to contact the cb further out from center..and the dime shape allows the tip to get lower without glancing off the cloth as you pointed out.

I think that Dr. Dave has written on the subject of tip radius and Predator has done extensive research on that subject as well which is why they ship all their shafts with dime shaped tips.

They also believe that shape helps to reduce squirt as well.<hr /></blockquote>

This is a very good explanation of a dime tip. I sometimes wonder why a quarter shape would not work the best because it is more the shape of the ball???

But as I have said many times, I have found a dime shape to work best for me - I just did not understand why exactly.

You put it all into words! Thanks...

Heretic
12-16-2007, 12:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Spiderman,

Welcome back from road rage and road rash hell.
<hr /></blockquote>

I do not know you Spiderman, but can empathize. I slid off the road last march, and caught a cement culvert with my road king. I still have not recovered total feeling in my right hand .......I hope you have a speedy recovery

av84fun
12-16-2007, 12:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote strokeless:</font><hr> i just want to pass on a tip i got from fran crimi.
with a closed bridge, press your bridge hand into the table.
don't know why it works but it does. my draw is stronger.
thanks fran. <hr /></blockquote>

Happy to help. The purpose for that is just to stablize your bridge hand so that it doesn't move as you push your cue through at a higher speed.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

Great advice and confirmed by Earl in a youtube clip of The Pearl giving a lesson. At one point he compares the outcome of his own shot with that of the students and said something like..."The difference is because I have a way better bridge than you do." and then went on to discuss the advantages of a highly stabilized bridge.

Regards,
Jim

av84fun
12-16-2007, 01:12 AM
Billy_Bob..
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe if it was worded "accelerate through the ball and when you do this, your tip will be going so fast, it will not be able to slow down until it gets a foot and a half past where the cue ball was"??<hr /></blockquote>

Sure, that works. It's just that overcoming the "inertia of rest" of the cb is accomplished better with an accelerating cue stick. Just gently tap the cb near the bottom and you will impart hardly any backspin...because you first have to overcome the friction imparted by the cloth. After that is accomplished speed and the degree below center of tip contact are the remaining variables.

If you have a decent follow through, the cue just CAN'T be decelerating at cb impact. HOWEVER, just because the cue is accelerating does NOT mean that it has reached its MAXIMUM acceleration at cb impact.

That can only be accomplished with TIMING and the exact same "wrist snap" that accelerates a golf club or a baseball bat from from 35 mph or so to up to 125 mph (Tiger Woods) IN THE LAST COUPLE OF FEET of arm travel before impact. That acceleration is heavily influence by the "pronation" of the wrists an INSTANT before impact.

The exact same physics is true with the pool stroke so the TIMING of the acceleration...so cue speed is maximized at impact and the SNAP of the wrist explains why some players like Massey and Cory achieve the massive amounts of draw that they are able to produce.

The other often overlooked aspect of cue acceleration is founded in Newtonian law which dictates that an object in motion stays in its exact plane unless acted on by a SUFFICIENT opposing force. Blowing your breath on a passing car will not force it off its plane of motion...but a hurricane will!

So acceleration...assuming the cue starts off in exactly the correct direction...will help it STAY in that direction because greater degrees of force are required to make it change direction...and therefore, miss the intended target on the cb.

However, I would hasten to add and am sure that Scott Lee would agree that a "super long" follow through won't add anything that a "normal" follow through would achieve...so long as the above criteria of maximizing acceleration and impact speed are met...and that attempting a super-long follow through can lead to stroke directional errors that offset all the other benefits.

But those who can control a somewhat longer follow through on their power draw strokes and who resultantly drop their shoulders are at no disadvantage...so long as they keep their cues "on a rail" directionally.

So, in the end, it is largely a matter of personal preference based on RESULTS...with the overriding truth that if your cue is decelerating at impact you WILL NOT achieve maximum draw...all other things being equal.


And THANKS for your kind remarks in your next post...but the views are not mine but rather those of Jack Koehler.

Regards,
Jim

av84fun
12-16-2007, 01:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> He is a big guy with big fingers, could he have been cueing any lower?
We all know that jacking up, say over a ball makes a simple shot difficult. So why do it on purpose?<hr /></blockquote>I think these are two good points to ponder, and really the crux of the whole discussion.

I think he could go lower, but it would actually make things more difficult. He could go higher, but it actually clearly makes things more difficult. So, in the end, I think that there is a natural amount of elevation that is the "optimum" for a natural unencumbered stroke to happen.

I see some people try to stay entirely too level (somethiing that these boards don't help by saying things like "as level as possible"), and IMO, they can't stroke properly to get that fast stroke for a power draw. So, I tell them to elevate. But, my hope is that they elevate to what would be a more natural position.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Fred, I entirely agree with your views on the "as level as possible" issued...and get beaten up on A LOT for that!

But as you know, TRULY level strokes are rare in pool due to the existence of cushions and there is a HUGE amount of good gained by consistency. I can't tell you how many times I USED TO over-crank draw shots by adopting a true level cue angle.

So, I don't necessarily disagree with the physics supporting the "benefits" of a truly level cue but I do disagree that there are "effective benefits" because of the inconsistency of swappping to a truly level stroke when we rarely are able to do so in actual play.

Therefore, I suggest that the phrase "slightly elevated" should be the advice given for "standard" draw shots with greater degrees of elevation being dictated by the proximity of the rail or an intervening OB.
(-:

pooltchr
12-16-2007, 07:55 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>

If you have a decent follow through, the cue just CAN'T be decelerating at cb impact. <font color="red"> I'm not so sure this is true. I think if I tried, I could be decelerating at impact and still have a long follow-through. </font color> HOWEVER, just because the cue is accelerating does NOT mean that it has reached its MAXIMUM acceleration at cb impact.
<font color="red"> Agreed! </font color>

However, I would hasten to add and am sure that Scott Lee would agree that a "super long" follow through won't add anything that a "normal" follow through would achieve...so long as the above criteria of maximizing acceleration and impact speed are met...and that attempting a super-long follow through can lead to stroke directional errors that offset all the other benefits.

<font color="red"> Absolutely! Follow-through itself does nothing to alter the results of the shot, since we all know the ball is already gone. Follow-through is only the result of a proper stroke. If the stroke is right, follow-through will be there. 6 inches or 18 inches makes no difference.</font color>


Regards,
Jim
<hr /></blockquote>

Steve

mikepage
12-16-2007, 10:01 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> Billy_Bob...Since you follow through as long as you do, it is certain that you are accelerating through the ball...[...] <hr /></blockquote>

Three comments on the Massey video.

(1) I doubt he is accelerating at impact. The reason I say this is a person acerelerating at impact can get more draw just by starting a half inch further back. And I'm pretty sure Mike has a finely honed stroke for this shot--that there's no simple fix that's going to improve him. It's like saying an eagle would fly faster if he just did such-and-such with his wings---I don't think so.

(2) Mike is good at striking the cueball exactly where he wants to. So for Mike, getting more draw translates to hitting harder. I believe he is merely more comfortable in his upright stance with some cue elevation hitting hard. I think that's all it is.

(3) Mike's elbow drop is a result of hitting hard too. In his final backstroke, Mike's elbow goes up and he lunges his shoulder forward a bit. So by the time Mike gets back to the set position (hitting the ball) he is already pivoting about his shoulder, and his elbow must drop. Again, I think this is about hitting hard. In essence, Mike is applying a "break shot" stroke to a draw shot --because he can. I'm not sure most of us should try that at home ...

Artemus
12-16-2007, 10:35 AM
Here's another two to study. First, we have Cory running a rack in 9 ball but there are two shots in particular to watch. Notice the EXTREME elbow drop in his opening break for power. He doesn't lunge into it with his body or lift his leg up, he basically just drops the elbow with a long follow through as Massey stated. Later, he hits an AMAZING power draw shot on the 4 ball but the only thing you can see from the camera angle is the same long follow through with the cue bending on the table like Massey. To do that, I would have to assume he did the same thing on the draw as he did on the break, drop the elbow to it's extreme in order to follow through that far.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_plsd-1TNNw

Then we have this one. I don't even know where to start analyzing it other than, HOLY BALLS!! Is HE accelerating at impact?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMmq2UXrNf0

mikepage
12-16-2007, 11:55 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>[...]
Then we have this one. I don't even know where to start analyzing it other than, HOLY BALLS!! Is HE accelerating at impact?

<hr /></blockquote>

I doubt it.

Artemus
12-16-2007, 12:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>[...]
Then we have this one. I don't even know where to start analyzing it other than, HOLY BALLS!! Is HE accelerating at impact?

<hr /></blockquote>

I doubt it. <hr /></blockquote>

I don't follow you on this. Do you mean because he's already maxed out his acceleration prior to impact or do you mean as a result of impact with the 6 oz ball that his acceleration reduces?
Let's phrase it differently, do you think he's trying to accelerate beyond impact or as far as it will go as if the CB wasn't even there?

Artemus
12-16-2007, 12:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr> I believe he is merely more comfortable in his upright stance with some cue elevation hitting hard. I think that's all it is.

(3) Mike's elbow drop is a result of hitting hard too. In his final backstroke, Mike's elbow goes up and he lunges his shoulder forward a bit. So by the time Mike gets back to the set position (hitting the ball) he is already pivoting about his shoulder, and his elbow must drop. Again, I think this is about hitting hard. In essence, Mike is applying a "break shot" stroke to a draw shot --because he can. I'm not sure most of us should try that at home ... <hr /></blockquote>

Sounds to me like Massey is breaking ALL the rules that are etched into concrete by the instructors who so vehemently uphold them.

You state that his upright stance elevates the cue angle for starters when he's addressing the shot, and then on his final stroke his right elbow goes UP which increases the angle of the cue to an even greater degree. And then he drops the elbow to follow through as far as he can. Keeping the cue as level as possible, and certainly more than 2-3 degrees because of a rail, was shattered information based on how HE does it and a rail wasn't even close or impeding his stroke.

He hit a power draw almost 2 full table lengths, how else was he supposed to do that if he didn't hit it HARD? /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Here's another one. They ALL do it to get power, whether it's a break shot or a power draw. Same technique and it IS NOT what is etched in concrete. The elbow raises up on the last stroke, the cue angle increases dramatically, the shoulder powers the shot with the elbow dropping and the follow through is as far as possible with the cue bending on the table.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpCbAQlqBpU&amp;feature=related

Jal
12-16-2007, 12:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> ...The other often overlooked aspect of cue acceleration is founded in Newtonian law which dictates that an object in motion stays in its exact plane unless acted on by a SUFFICIENT opposing force. Blowing your breath on a passing car will not force it off its plane of motion...but a hurricane will!

So acceleration...assuming the cue starts off in exactly the correct direction...will help it STAY in that direction because greater degrees of force are required to make it change direction...and therefore, miss the intended target on the cb.<hr /></blockquote>Jim, I agree with a lot of what you said earlier, but this just isn't so. Accelerating in one direction doesn't provide any more resistance to acceleration in any other direction, unless maybe some aerodynamic pressure develops which stabilizes it. But this is unlikely with a cue at cue speeds.

Jim

mikepage
12-16-2007, 12:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> [...]

I don't follow you on this. Do you mean because he's already maxed out his acceleration prior to impact or do you mean as a result of impact with the 6 oz ball that his acceleration reduces?
Let's phrase it differently, do you think he's trying to accelerate beyond impact or as far as it will go as if the CB wasn't even there? <hr /></blockquote>

I think he maxes out his acceleration well before striking the cueball--that his acceleration is probably close to zero at impact. This means he's maxing out the speed of the stick--which, for a given contact point, gives him the most draw.

Artemus
12-16-2007, 01:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr>

I think he maxes out his acceleration well before striking the cueball--that his acceleration is probably close to zero at impact. This means he's maxing out the speed of the stick--which, for a given contact point, gives him the most draw. <hr /></blockquote>

Wouldn't that have something to do with how far his bridge hand was from the CB?
According to your calculations, then I guess he would have an immediate deceleration at impact and post impact by virtue of the CB weight.

Artemus
12-17-2007, 06:24 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr>

Three comments on the Massey video.

(1) I doubt he is accelerating at impact.

<font color="red"> I think he's most definitely accelerating at impact based on his stroke, body positions, and the tremendous speed generated to draw the CB 2 table lengths and get through a stagnant 6 oz object like it wasn't even there. He'd probably decelerate at impact if it was a bowling ball, shot put ball, or civil war cannon ball in place of the CB. Mere mortals like us would more than likely come to a screeching halt at impact and be vibrating like a tuning fork from striking those 3 objects. But even though a CB is 1/3 the weight of a cue, it would still cause deceleration at impact if acceleration wasn't continuing through the ball to maintain speed and get the extreme follow through that he achieves. It can also be seen in ALL of the other videos of Cory, Thorsten, and Nevel. </font color>

The reason I say this is a person acerelerating at impact can get more draw just by starting a half inch further back.

<font color="red"> That's not the only thing a person can do. </font color>

And I'm pretty sure Mike has a finely honed stroke for this shot--that there's no simple fix that's going to improve him.

<font color="red"> Do you honestly think he needs any kind of fix whether simple or complex to improve him? I'd love to see some attempt to dissect his technique and state they can make him better, either on a forum or to Massey himself. LOL </font color>

(2) Mike is good at striking the cueball exactly where he wants to. So for Mike, getting more draw translates to hitting harder. I believe he is merely more comfortable in his upright stance with some cue elevation hitting hard. I think that's all it is.

<font color="red"> It's as simple as that, huh? Just hit it harder. First of all, an upright stance doesn't PROMOTE cue elevation. An upright stance brings the upper arm down into a more vertical position instead of horizontal, or the elbow and upper arm pointing up like Allison Fisher or Ewa Mataya who are so low they're grinding clefts into their chin. Stand straight up next to the table with cue in position and you'll see the arm hanging down and the cue more LEVEL. It takes an effort to elevate the cue and create an angle. </font color>

(3) Mike's elbow drop is a result of hitting hard too.

<font color="red"> It can be looked at the way you described, but I think it's the other way around. It's the elbow drop that allows him or us to hit it harder. Again, watch Cory, Thorsten, Nevel and Massey. They're all hitting it hard, but it's the extreme elbow drop that's helping to lengthen their arm and swing arc from the top or their elevated strokes through the ball. The length of the forearm from elbow to hand is only so long for each of us and if you only use that part from the elbow down you limit yourself in speed and arc length back and especially through the ball. </font color>


In his final backstroke, Mike's elbow goes up and he lunges his shoulder forward a bit. So by the time Mike gets back to the set position (hitting the ball) he is already pivoting about his shoulder, and his elbow must drop.

<font color="red"> This is exactly why I think he and the rest of them are accelerating THROUGH or beyond the CB. That little move with the shoulder, his elbow going up, and elbow dropping alters his original stance enough to go faster and BEYOND where he would have reached the peak of his acceleration if he had stayed still with only his forarm moving from elbow down and remaining horizontal. </font color>

Again, I think this is about hitting hard.

<font color="red"> Getting a 2 table length draw is obviously about hitting hard. But it's not the hitting hard that causes those things to happen. Massey clearly states that you MUST drop the elbow and do the other things along with it that allow him to hit it hard. Again all 4 guys on video do it. The extra hinge and power of the shoulder muscles create a 3 hinge stroke instead of 1 or 2 hinge stroke.</font color>

In essence, Mike is applying a "break shot" stroke to a draw shot --because he can.

<font color="red"> It's not only because he can, it's because he does what he does. It's like a girl or non-athletic guy trying to throw a baseball. Both throw like a "girl". They don't bring the hand, arm, shoulder, and body back into an athletic position and use all of their hinges properly to get speed to fire the ball. It's a sissy blooping throw with nothing on it. To achieve maximum speed whether it's throwing a ball, hitting power draws or break shots, you have to use ALL of your hinges in a coordinated athletic fashion. That means shoulder, elbow, wrist, and fingers. Keep watching those 4 videos over and over and over. If you keep coming up with "no elbow drop" as the one and only most effective way, then have at it. Just so there's no misunderstanding, I think the horizontal upper arm/no elbow drop stroke should be used for most draw shots. But for the REAL power draw, modifications have to be made to turn on the superchargers. </font color>

I'm not sure most of us should try that at home ... <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> I think everyone should try that at home, otherwise you're hitting like a "girl". /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
No offense to women who hit like a guy, I love it! </font color>

SpiderMan
12-17-2007, 10:50 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Heretic:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Spiderman,

Welcome back from road rage and road rash hell.
<hr /></blockquote>

I do not know you Spiderman, but can empathize. I slid off the road last march, and caught a cement culvert with my road king. I still have not recovered total feeling in my right hand .......I hope you have a speedy recovery <hr /></blockquote>

I have no idea exactly what happened to me. I was doing 65 on my valkyrie when hit from behind by a speeding car, and woke up 2 hours later. If anyone could provide a 30-second video of that wreck, I'd pay a lot of money to watch it!

SpiderMan

Jal
12-17-2007, 01:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>... <font color="red"> I think he's most definitely accelerating at impact based on his stroke, body positions, and the tremendous speed generated to draw the CB 2 table lengths and get through a stagnant 6 oz object like it wasn't even there. He'd probably decelerate at impact if it was a bowling ball, shot put ball, or civil war cannon ball in place of the CB. Mere mortals like us would more than likely come to a screeching halt at impact and be vibrating like a tuning fork from striking those 3 objects. But even though a CB is 1/3 the weight of a cue, it would still cause deceleration at impact if acceleration wasn't continuing through the ball to maintain speed and get the extreme follow through that he achieves.</font color><hr /></blockquote>The cue decelerates at impact no matter who's shooting, including Mike Massey. "Accelerating through" doesn't mean the cue actually increases speed. It's a misleading term. But to the extent that it describes something useful, it means one is continuing to apply force at impact. The cue still decelerates because the forces between the cueball and stick are much greater than any force a human can apply at the other end.

Jim

dr_dave
12-17-2007, 03:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>... <font color="red"> I think he's most definitely accelerating at impact based on his stroke, body positions, and the tremendous speed generated to draw the CB 2 table lengths and get through a stagnant 6 oz object like it wasn't even there. He'd probably decelerate at impact if it was a bowling ball, shot put ball, or civil war cannon ball in place of the CB. Mere mortals like us would more than likely come to a screeching halt at impact and be vibrating like a tuning fork from striking those 3 objects. But even though a CB is 1/3 the weight of a cue, it would still cause deceleration at impact if acceleration wasn't continuing through the ball to maintain speed and get the extreme follow through that he achieves.</font color><hr /></blockquote>The cue decelerates at impact no matter who's shooting, including Mike Massey. "Accelerating through" doesn't mean the cue actually increases speed. It's a misleading term. But to the extent that it describes something useful, it means one is continuing to apply force at impact. The cue still decelerates because the forces between the cueball and stick are much greater than any force a human can apply at the other end.<hr /></blockquote>Excellent description!

I think a good phrase to use is: "try to accelerate through the ball."

FYI to others, my May '06 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/may06.pdf) explains this (see item "b") along with other advice for achieving good draw action.

Regards,
Dave

Artemus
12-17-2007, 03:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>The cue decelerates at impact no matter who's shooting, including Mike Massey. "Accelerating through" doesn't mean the cue actually increases speed. It's a misleading term. But to the extent that it describes something useful, it means one is continuing to apply force at impact. The cue still decelerates because the forces between the cueball and stick are much greater than any force a human can apply at the other end.
Jim <hr /></blockquote>

In one of those posts I made, I alluded to that and believe it to be true. I also like the way you phrased it.
However, I do not believe that full acceleration takes place or peaks well BEFORE impact. I think for certain quality players, max acceleration is timed to be just past impact, the CB just happens to get in the way which causes less deceleration. I think they also have the ability to accelarate quicker from the start of the forward stroke and already be at the ball with considerably more speed than most others, such as Nevel and give the illusion of acceleration beyond the CB.

Although deceleration takes place "AT IMPACT" I think the decelaration rate can vary greatly based on an individual's strength level, cue speed, and technique. When you get an ox like Larry Nevel or Mike Massey, not only is the acceleration greater but the deceleration at the ball and through it is less.

When breaking boards or cinder blocks in the marial arts or throwing a punch in boxing, you always want to "attempt" to accelerate well past the target and drive through as far as possible.

Bob_Jewett
12-17-2007, 04:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> ... However, I do not believe that full acceleration takes place or peaks well BEFORE impact. I think for certain quality players, max acceleration is timed to be just past impact, the CB just happens to get in the way which causes less deceleration. ... <hr /></blockquote>
Artemus,

I think the physics guys have a very different definition of the word "acceleration" than you do. What do you mean by "acceleration?"

mikepage
12-17-2007, 04:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> [...] I think for certain quality players, max acceleration is timed to be just past impact, the CB just happens to get in the way which causes less deceleration. <hr /></blockquote>

Artemus -- this would be a very lousy "power" stroke, one in which the player is wasting a lot of potential speed on the cueball.

[ QUOTE ]

I think they also have the ability to accelarate quicker from the start of the forward stroke and already be at the ball with considerably more speed than most others, <hr /></blockquote>

this is no doubt true.

[ QUOTE ]
Although deceleration takes place "AT IMPACT" I think the decelaration rate can vary greatly based on an individual's strength level, cue speed, and technique.
When you get an ox like Larry Nevel or Mike Massey, not only is the acceleration greater but the deceleration at the ball and through it is less.<hr /></blockquote>

This is not true. During the one millisecond deceleration, even the powerful ox-like grip of Mr. Massey has no real effect.

However, just after the ball leaves, Mr. Massey has a substantial acceleration of the cue.

Here's the way I think it works on that Massey draw shot.

Mr. Massey accelerates the cue forward with peak acceleration probably in the early or mid (halfway to the cueball part of the stroke).

There is maximum speed of perhaps 15 mph and close to zero acceleration just prior to impact. Just after impact the stick has slowed to perhaps 8 mph while the hand and arm are still going close to 15 mph.

There is substantial acceleration of the stick as the heavy arm with the ox-like grip continues forward propelling the stick. The stick reaches another maximum speed somewhat above 8 mph before slowing down again in the follow through.

Artemus
12-17-2007, 04:42 PM
Why do I suddenly feel like I'm riding in my car out in the middle of nowhere, the car decides to break down, there's only one scrubby little bar in the entire town and I need to go in to make a call on a land line because there are no towers to pick up cell phones, and when I walk in it's loaded with Ph.D. biker gangs that want to pile on anyone that looks like they can't hit the high notes from making chalk squeak on the blackboards inside?
You guys can beat these questions around yourselves because I'm certainly not going to get a spin job done on me about specific vocabulary regarding the laws of physics and take it to that level. I could care less about the classroom especially from four or more of you that make life complete by writing one thesis after another.

Just remember, keep the upper part of the arm straight, keep everything steady and still, cue level as possible, don't drop the elbow, and accelerate until you can get that 2 table length power draw shot just like Massey. And please, don't forget to keep teaching it, somebody will benefit. Just make sure they pass the vocabulary test and understand the principles fully before attempting anything hazardous to their game.

Also remember, this is the way the best of the best players do it. Attach whatever words or numbers you want to it and be sure to analyze it to death. Anybody with real common sense will only try to emulate it, how sad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI1Q-8nfiBk&amp;feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_plsd-1TNNw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_plsd-1TNNw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMmq2UXrNf0

I stole one of your Harley's and left to go play with street smart pool room gamblers that know how to roll balls but could care less about the why.

dr_dave
12-17-2007, 04:51 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> [...] I think for certain quality players, max acceleration is timed to be just past impact, the CB just happens to get in the way which causes less deceleration. <hr /></blockquote>Artemus -- this would be a very lousy "power" stroke, one in which the player is wasting a lot of potential speed on the cueball.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>I think they also have the ability to accelarate quicker from the start of the forward stroke and already be at the ball with considerably more speed than most others, <hr /></blockquote>this is no doubt true.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>Although deceleration takes place "AT IMPACT" I think the decelaration rate can vary greatly based on an individual's strength level, cue speed, and technique.
When you get an ox like Larry Nevel or Mike Massey, not only is the acceleration greater but the deceleration at the ball and through it is less.<hr /></blockquote>

This is not true. During the one millisecond deceleration, even the powerful ox-like grip of Mr. Massey has no real effect.

However, just after the ball leaves, Mr. Massey has a substantial acceleration of the cue.

Here's the way I think it works on that Massey draw shot.

Mr. Massey accelerates the cue forward with peak acceleration probably in the early or mid (halfway to the cueball part of the stroke).

There is maximum speed of perhaps 15 mph and close to zero acceleration just prior to impact. Just after impact the stick has slowed to perhaps 8 mph while the hand and arm are still going close to 15 mph.

There is substantial acceleration of the stick as the heavy arm with the ox-like grip continues forward propelling the stick. The stick reaches another maximum speed somewhat above 8 mph before slowing down again in the follow through.<hr /></blockquote>As usual, very well stated and accurate (IMO).

I can't vouch for the exact numbers, but they sound reasonable.

Regards,
Dave

pooltchr
12-17-2007, 06:29 PM
I was thinking something similar. Wouldn't acceleration hit it's maximum somewhere between the beginning of the forward stroke and impact? Maximum speed might be closer to impact. Maybe you can set me straight, but I'm guessing that the acceleration would look something like a bell curve if it were charted, since acceleration is the rate of speed increase, not just speed. You would be looking for maximum speed at impact, not necessarily the maximum rate of acceleration?
(Does that make any sense??)
Steve

mikepage
12-17-2007, 07:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> Why do I suddenly feel like I'm riding in my car out in the middle of nowhere, the car decides to break down, there's only one scrubby little bar in the entire town and I need to go in to make a call on a land line because there are no towers to pick up cell phones, and when I walk in it's loaded with Ph.D. biker gangs that want to pile on anyone that looks like they can't hit the high notes from making chalk squeak on the blackboards inside?[...]

<hr /></blockquote>

Hey Dave - You distract him with the slide rule from the left. I'll scream out equations like a mad banshee on the right. Then maybe we can get Jewett and JAL to each take out a knee from behind.

mikepage
12-17-2007, 07:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> I was thinking something similar. Wouldn't acceleration hit it's maximum somewhere between the beginning of the forward stroke and impact? Maximum speed might be closer to impact. Maybe you can set me straight, but I'm guessing that the acceleration would look something like a bell curve if it were charted, since acceleration is the rate of speed increase, not just speed. You would be looking for maximum speed at impact, not necessarily the maximum rate of acceleration?
(Does that make any sense??)
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

Yes this makes sense.

dr_dave
12-17-2007, 10:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> I was thinking something similar. Wouldn't acceleration hit it's maximum somewhere between the beginning of the forward stroke and impact? Maximum speed might be closer to impact. Maybe you can set me straight, but I'm guessing that the acceleration would look something like a bell curve if it were charted, since acceleration is the rate of speed increase, not just speed. You would be looking for maximum speed at impact, not necessarily the maximum rate of acceleration?
(Does that make any sense??)
Steve <hr /></blockquote>I agree with Mike. Your summary makes perfect sense.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
12-17-2007, 11:06 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> Why do I suddenly feel like I'm riding in my car out in the middle of nowhere, the car decides to break down, there's only one scrubby little bar in the entire town and I need to go in to make a call on a land line because there are no towers to pick up cell phones, and when I walk in it's loaded with Ph.D. biker gangs that want to pile on anyone that looks like they can't hit the high notes from making chalk squeak on the blackboards inside?[...]

<hr /></blockquote>

Hey Dave - You distract him with the slide rule from the left. I'll scream out equations like a mad banshee on the right. Then maybe we can get Jewett and JAL to each take out a knee from behind.<hr /></blockquote>I prefer to just hex him with my 30-degree Vulcan peace sign.

Dave

wolfdancer
12-18-2007, 12:16 AM
I don't understand the animosity in your post, since everybody here, lettered or not, is just adding their input to the thread.
Dr. Dave's and Jal's explanations might be a little over my head...ok, a lot over my head...but Mike and Steve I can understand.

It's just a pool discussion; nothing to take offense at, because others have a different opinion then yours.
Now if you want to know the real secret to the power draw, minus the physics, and different muscle groups involved....this is it. Although once sworn to secrecy, and a blood oath never to reveal the technique...in the thought that the knowledge could go to the grave with me...I've decided to publish it here. I once asked a player with a great, and seemingly effortless draw stroke, how did he do it...from a jacked up position on the end rail he could pocket a ball sitting in the jaws of the pocket on the opposite end rail, then have the cue ball draw back, and hit the rail he started from. His answer was he stroked until he felt the power, then began his final stroke.....
There you have it...stroke until you feel the power..then shoot. Unfortunately, I've had games called because of darkness,(they wanted to turn the lights off at closing) while i'm building up this power....

wolfdancer
12-18-2007, 12:21 AM
I thought humor was a right brain "technique" (abstract thoughts, etc) for right handers?
You'll lose your high standing in the Geek Squad, if you keep allowing your mind to wander over there, to the dark side....

wolfdancer
12-18-2007, 12:31 AM
And here, after reading the other post I thought Mike was actually defying some law of Physics.
And since I've seen his show about a dozen times, I'd have believed it.
My best Mike Massey story though is one that took place in LV at the BCA tournament...a guy that used to sell at rodeos was now hawking a "rolling bridge" Mike came by, tried it out, and told the guy he might work the bridge into a couple of his shots. When he walked away, the guy asked us if he was any good...
The rolling bridge needed a wheel alignment, as it had the habit of drifting to the side

wolfdancer
12-18-2007, 12:37 AM
even the powerful ox-like grip of Mr. Massey has no real effect.
...don't bet on that...they don't call Mike..."Tennessee Tarzan", for nothing. And wait'll he hears about you comparing him to an ox. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Artemus
12-18-2007, 05:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> even the powerful ox-like grip of Mr. Massey has no real effect.
...don't bet on that...they don't call Mike..."Tennessee Tarzan", for nothing. <hr /></blockquote>

Don't worry, they won't come after you. You're far to old and feeble to run into the ground. Even they have a code of conduct to leave the decrepit alone.
Btw, what's your definition of POWER? LOL

dr_dave
12-18-2007, 11:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> I thought humor was a right brain "technique" (abstract thoughts, etc) for right handers?
You'll lose your high standing in the Geek Squad, if you keep allowing your mind to wander over there, to the dark side.... <hr /></blockquote>Don't worry about me. When I use humor on the forum, I type with my left hand only. That way, my analytical side can stay clean. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Dave

dr_dave
12-18-2007, 11:41 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> even the powerful ox-like grip of Mr. Massey has no real effect.
...don't bet on that...they don't call Mike..."Tennessee Tarzan", for nothing. And wait'll he hears about you comparing him to an ox. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif<hr /></blockquote>It was Mike Page who first used the "ox" comparison, so send Massey after him, not me.

I bet Massey could have been a great competitor in that ESPN "Strongest Man" contest. It is obvious (from his performance and stories people tell) that his strength and power physiology is much better than that of the average human.

Regards,
Dave

Deeman3
12-18-2007, 01:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> I was thinking something similar. Wouldn't acceleration hit it's maximum somewhere between the beginning of the forward stroke and impact? Maximum speed might be closer to impact. Maybe you can set me straight, but I'm guessing that the acceleration would look something like a bell curve if it were charted, since acceleration is the rate of speed increase, not just speed. You would be looking for maximum speed at impact, not necessarily the maximum rate of acceleration?
(Does that make any sense??)
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Makes good sense even to a neo nerd like me. However, the accelleration might not be a bell curve unless the ball was missing. My feel is that the moment the cue strikes the cue ball, the end of the bell droops (a highly technical term).

Wolfdancer/Dave: Mike would have absolutely no problem with your calling him an Ox. He is as strong as an ox and twice as smart. Now I'm in trouble....

I think we agreed, mostly, years ago, that the feeling of an acceleration through impact was the key, since it may not be a real possibility. After all, it is all about speed applied accurately. With robotics at the point they are today (not just the simple "Iron Mike" type stroke device), it would seem possible and a very practical application to set up a robot with acceleration, speed and measurement of all the input data along the stroke duration to come up with the perfect "stroke" mechanics to apply maximum spin on all shots. So far, all I have seen is high speed photography that shows quite a bit but no data to suggest what really happens in terms of transition and velocity along a time graph. If it does already exist, where and what were the measurable results?

I have a few hundred robots and the PLCs. Anyone want to venture down to Alabama and play? /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif</font color>

dr_dave
12-18-2007, 01:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>So far, all I have seen is high speed photography that shows quite a bit but no data to suggest what really happens in terms of transition and velocity along a time graph. If it does already exist, where and what were the measurable results?<hr /></blockquote>Some people have used accelrometers to directly measure cue acceleration and vibration during a stroke. You can view some results and explanation in TP A.9 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-9.pdf).

Regards,
Dave

Ralph_Kramden
12-18-2007, 01:53 PM
Isn't it about cueball control? No matter how much the cueball draws you must control the ball.

Mike Massey is a trickshot master. Even his finger pool tricks make the cueball dance all over the place. I would imagine in his drawshot videos that the cueball is waxed or sprayed with silicone to minimize the friction.

If someone is capable of hitting a power draw using a breakshot stroke and a dropped elbow, they probably would raise up as the elbow drops. Accuracy would certainly be compromized.

This would be OK for practice or trick shots but IMO it would be detrimental to use such shots in real game situations. Anyone who knows how to draw the ball with any accuracy should be able to straight draw the table length with only a minimum amount of elbow drop.

If the cueball needs to draw two table lengths for position you would be much better off practicing how to hook your opponent. More games would be won by hooking your opponent for BIH than trying to power draw the ball, especially if you can't do it.

Deeman3
12-18-2007, 02:37 PM
Dave,

Seems to be a good start but maybe it could beimproved to give more information.

Such as:

If this were strokes with a human, we don't know where the acceleration is, in terms of potential. The peak of acceleration seems to be at the moment of impact, which is good, but beyond that, how much gas was left in the tank? Would he/she have achieved a higher acceleration rate if, for instance, the impact would have happened a bit later?

The seems to be a little something strange going on in some of the shots where the acceleration dips and goes back up right before impact. That, in itself, seems strange to me. It might be some form of micro recoil or bounce that the instruments see. It would also, perhaps, be clearer if the graph was stretched out a little more to unravel the whole stroke from well before impact. In other words, where is the data in space and time, not just time.

So, it seems, if we had a mechanical measured force (robot?[Davebot] with known acceleration and where that was along the stroke "event" as well as where that potential was in relation to the hit, we might learn more.

I think the end product might be how much does accelerating decellerating or a constant velocity effect the action on the cue ball. It might not have practical application to a player if he/she could not measure their own acceleration but would certainly be interesting and take away doubt about how this variable effects spin.

Does this make sense?

Bob_Jewett
12-18-2007, 03:50 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> ... So far, all I have seen is high speed photography that shows quite a bit but no data to suggest what really happens in terms of transition and velocity along a time graph. If it does already exist, where and what were the measurable results? ... <hr /></blockquote>
I think some of what you are looking for is in http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1999-06.pdf

Deeman3
12-18-2007, 03:54 PM
Bob,

Yes, that is more like what I was talking about.

Thanks

dr_dave
12-18-2007, 03:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>I think the end product might be how much does accelerating decellerating or a constant velocity effect the action on the cue ball. It might not have practical application to a player if he/she could not measure their own acceleration but would certainly be interesting and take away doubt about how this variable effects spin.<hr /></blockquote>I hope to do some accelerometer work this spring with a group of students. When I get some good data (with space and time info), I'll share it here.

Until I see better data, I agree with conventional wisdom that acceleration during tip contact has little (if any) effect. It's the acceleration before impact and the final speed at impact that counts. Acceleration immediately after impact and good follow-through are symptoms of a good stroke, but they obviously have no direct effect.

Regards,
Dave

mikepage
12-18-2007, 04:06 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> ... So far, all I have seen is high speed photography that shows quite a bit but no data to suggest what really happens in terms of transition and velocity along a time graph. If it does already exist, where and what were the measurable results? ... <hr /></blockquote>
I think some of what you are looking for is in http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1999-06.pdf <hr /></blockquote>

That's cool. I don't remember seeing it.

wolfdancer
12-18-2007, 04:19 PM
I'm wondering if I could pick up an extra table length of draw,if I slowed down my acceleration rate, so that I wouldn't be peaking, just prior to contact. I could use the extra distance to improve my max. now of 3 diamonds of draw....
Problem is controlling these fast twitch muscles that I have,and getting the timing down just right, in milliseconds.
I'll have to ask Efran if he also suffers from premature acceleration....

Deeman3
12-18-2007, 04:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> I'll have to ask Efran if he also suffers from premature acceleration....
<hr /></blockquote> <font color="blue">

I am making Efren a shirt that says....Bata Bing, The Other Mafia

About that premature acceleration you are experiencing...try not rubbing your stick so aggressively. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

Artemus
12-19-2007, 08:22 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> ... So far, all I have seen is high speed photography that shows quite a bit but no data to suggest what really happens in terms of transition and velocity along a time graph. If it does already exist, where and what were the measurable results? ... <hr /></blockquote>
I think some of what you are looking for is in http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1999-06.pdf <hr /></blockquote>

That's cool. I don't remember seeing it.

<hr /></blockquote>

What's also cool is you stating this in another post:

"I think he maxes out his acceleration well before striking the cueball--that his acceleration is probably close to zero at impact. This means he's maxing out the speed of the stick--which, for a given contact point, gives him the most draw."

The graph shoots as many bullet holes in YOUR theory faster than an Uzi can spit them out regarding acceleration reaching a peak WELL BEFORE striking the ball.

The graph shows impact AT the peak.

The question I have is, would the graph have shown a higher peak of acceleration if impact hadn't occurred at that particular time. Have you also taken into account that there are a few different ways to accelerate based on the strength, muscle fiber twitch speeds, tempo and timing of any given player? You can have a smooth transitioner who pauses and accelerates gradually to a peak, and you also have explosive accelerators that shoot the cue forward like a cannon.

It's like a person losing their keys and saying, "I looked all over the place and wouldn't you know that I finally found them in the very last place I looked". No kidding, but it WOULDN'T have been the last place looked if the keys hadn't been found.

So what about peak acceleration beyond CB impact if impact didn't take place? I know, I know, I'm just a peasant that doesn't wear the jacket and colors nor ever will.

mikepage
12-19-2007, 09:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> [...]

What's also cool is you stating this in another post:

"I think he maxes out his acceleration well before striking the cueball--that his acceleration is probably close to zero at impact. This means he's maxing out the speed of the stick--which, for a given contact point, gives him the most draw."

The graph shoots as many bullet holes in YOUR theory faster than an Uzi can spit them out regarding acceleration reaching a peak WELL BEFORE striking the ball.<hr /></blockquote>

Artemus, The description I gave is very close to the description I would give if I was actually looking at Bob's graph.

I think you are confusing acceleration with speed. On Bob's graph, acceleration is the SLOPE of the curve, not the value of the curve. The acceleration is largest in the early part of the forward stroke, and it is near zero at impact.

[ QUOTE ]
The graph shows impact AT the peak.<hr /></blockquote>

At the peak SPEED. There apears to be near zero acceleration there.[...]

[ QUOTE ]

So what about peak acceleration beyond CB impact if impact didn't take place? I know, I know, I'm just a peasant that doesn't wear the jacket and colors nor ever will. <hr /></blockquote>

It looks to me like the speed was flattening out just before impact. Looking at the graph, I'd say the speed would have stayed about the same for a few inches if it didn't hit the ball.

Artemus
12-19-2007, 09:59 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr>
It looks to me like the speed was flattening out just before impact. Looking at the graph, I'd say the speed would have stayed about the same for a few inches if it didn't hit the ball.
<hr /></blockquote>

It looks real IFFY to me but it certainly isn't flattening out WELL BEFORE impact as you originally stated. But then again, I don't know how to read an x-ray either.

Let's go back to what I posted in that same place which you didn't quote:

"Have you also taken into account that there are a few different ways to accelerate based on the strength, muscle fiber twitch speeds, tempo and timing of any given player? You can have a smooth transitioner who pauses and accelerates gradually to a peak, and you also have explosive accelerators that shoot the cue forward like a cannon.

It's like a person losing their keys and saying, "I looked all over the place and wouldn't you know that I finally found them in the very last place I looked". No kidding, but it WOULDN'T have been the last place looked if the keys hadn't been found.

So what about peak acceleration beyond CB impact if impact didn't take place?"

I have a feeling you're going to say acceleration is acceleration regardless of who does it and it ALWAYS peaks at the same spot. But my premise is the HOW. Maybe the graph is representative of a "smooth" accelerator as opposed to an "explosive" accelerator like Larry Nevel that finishes with the tip of the cue almost all the way over the rack. It's in the tempo, TIMING, and length of the drive through from technique.

Hey NON-GOOGANS, throw in some responses. Is anything I'm stating making any sense to your unscientific brains (like mine)? Don't be afraid to answer out of fear that you'll fall from good graces. You'll NEVER get a jacket or the colors anyway. Throw out some thoughts.

mikepage
12-19-2007, 12:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr>
It looks to me like the speed was flattening out just before impact. Looking at the graph, I'd say the speed would have stayed about the same for a few inches if it didn't hit the ball.
<hr /></blockquote>

It looks real IFFY to me but it certainly isn't flattening out WELL BEFORE impact as you originally stated. But then again, I don't know how to read an x-ray either.<hr /></blockquote>

You must be thinking of someone else. I never said it flattens out WELL BEFORE impact. I've maintained that it flattens out AROUND impact.

[ QUOTE ]

Let's go back to what I posted in that same place which you didn't quote:

"Have you also taken into account that there are a few different ways to accelerate based on the strength, muscle fiber twitch speeds, tempo and timing of any given player? You can have a smooth transitioner who pauses and accelerates gradually to a peak, and you also have explosive accelerators that shoot the cue forward like a cannon.

It's like a person losing their keys and saying, "I looked all over the place and wouldn't you know that I finally found them in the very last place I looked". No kidding, but it WOULDN'T have been the last place looked if the keys hadn't been found.

So what about peak acceleration beyond CB impact if impact didn't take place?"

I have a feeling you're going to say acceleration is acceleration regardless of who does it and it ALWAYS peaks at the same spot. But my premise is the HOW. Maybe the graph is representative of a "smooth" accelerator as opposed to an "explosive" accelerator like Larry Nevel that finishes with the tip of the cue almost all the way over the rack. It's in the tempo, TIMING, and length of the drive through from technique.

Hey NON-GOOGANS, throw in some responses. Is anything I'm stating making any sense to your unscientific brains (like mine)? Don't be afraid to answer out of fear that you'll fall from good graces. You'll NEVER get a jacket or the colors anyway. Throw out some thoughts.
<hr /></blockquote>

It's you who keeps making claims about ACCELERATION and the like, and then when people respond in a sincere way you poke fun at them for talking about ACCELERATION.

Perhaps reading and trying to understand the responses you've already gotten makes more sense than continuing to bait $^%$# er -- ah.. ask new questions.

Jager85
12-19-2007, 01:01 PM
I had many problems with this as well, and after getting the power draw making the shot was an issue. A few things I keep in mind that helped me emensly is keeping a loose back hand, follow through (alot), and remember it is cue speed that results in CB speed not power so do not force the cue. I always had the tendency when shooting any powerful shot to tighten up and try and force the cue through the ball.

A procedure I follow now that has helped my aim and stroke in these powerful shots is:
-Line up the shot normally except with grip hand closer to the butt end of the cue
-Set any English(including follow and draw)
-Make any compensations
-Take a few practice strokes to ensure your stroke is straight and the shot is aimed correctly
-Move bridge hand an extra 3-4in away from the CB until 90 deg at CB impact
-Take a couple more practice strokes to ensure stroke is straight and aim is correct
-"Cut Loose"

Maybe this only works for me, but give it a shot if you have extra time. Hope it helps.

Jager

Artemus
12-19-2007, 04:16 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr>
You must be thinking of someone else. I never said it flattens out WELL BEFORE impact. I've maintained that it flattens out AROUND impact.

<font color="red"> No, I'm thinking of YOU, Mike Page, on page 2 of this thread when you stated on 12-16-07 at 1:54 PM the following: "I think he maxes out his acceleration well before striking the cueball--that his acceleration is probably close to zero at impact. This means he's maxing out the speed of the stick--which, for a given contact point, gives him the most draw." </font color>

Here we go one more time just for you: ""I think HE MAXES OUT HIS ACCELERATION WELL BEFORE striking the cueball."

<font color="red"> Is that graph NOT a graph of ACCELERATION? I don't see anything flattening out WELL BEFORE impact. </font color>

Let's go back to what I posted in that same place which you didn't quote:

"Have you also taken into account that there are a few different ways to accelerate based on the strength, muscle fiber twitch speeds, tempo and timing of any given player? You can have a smooth transitioner who pauses and accelerates gradually to a peak, and you also have explosive accelerators that shoot the cue forward like a cannon.

It's like a person losing their keys and saying, "I looked all over the place and wouldn't you know that I finally found them in the very last place I looked". No kidding, but it WOULDN'T have been the last place looked if the keys hadn't been found.

So what about peak acceleration beyond CB impact if impact didn't take place?"

I have a feeling you're going to say acceleration is acceleration regardless of who does it and it ALWAYS peaks at the same spot. But my premise is the HOW. Maybe the graph is representative of a "smooth" accelerator as opposed to an "explosive" accelerator like Larry Nevel that finishes with the tip of the cue almost all the way over the rack. It's in the tempo, TIMING, and length of the drive through from technique.
<hr /></blockquote>

It's you who keeps making claims about ACCELERATION and the like, and then when people respond in a sincere way you poke fun at them for talking about ACCELERATION.

<font color="red"> I've poked fun and made some self depracating comments about myself. Do you have that weak of an ego. Is this all such serious stuff to you like the confines of your classroom where strict law and order exists based on your dictates to the students? </font color>

Perhaps reading and trying to understand the responses you've already gotten makes more sense than continuing to bait $^%$# er -- ah.. ask new questions. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> Bad sign, you're losing your cool, dude. Where's the baiting in the last question I asked you. How about you answering old questions. That's OK, forget about it because I don't care to get one of your garbled answers or anything from one of the other gang members. </font color>

mikepage
12-19-2007, 04:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr>
You must be thinking of someone else. I never said it flattens out WELL BEFORE impact. I've maintained that it flattens out AROUND impact.

<font color="red"> No, I'm thinking of YOU, Mike Page, on page 2 of this thread when you stated on 12-16-07 at 1:54 PM the following: "I think he maxes out his acceleration well before striking the cueball--that his acceleration is probably close to zero at impact. This means he's maxing out the speed of the stick--which, for a given contact point, gives him the most draw." </font color>

Here we go one more time just for you: ""I think HE MAXES OUT HIS ACCELERATION WELL BEFORE striking the cueball."

<font color="red"> Is that graph NOT a graph of ACCELERATION? I don't see anything flattening out WELL BEFORE impact. </font color> [...]<hr /></blockquote>

I think you're making no effort to understand this. You're displaying the same misconception that's been pointed out to you and explained by more than one person.

Bob_Jewett
12-19-2007, 05:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> ... Is that graph NOT a graph of ACCELERATION? I don't see anything flattening out WELL BEFORE impact. ... <hr /></blockquote>
No, as the vertical axis says at http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1999-06.pdf it is a plot of speed versus distance the tip has traveled. The tip-to-ball impact occurs more or less where the speed has become constant. That means that the acceleration is close to zero at that time. The peak acceleration must have happened earlier in the shot, perhaps about at the 15-centimeter mark.

Speed and acceleration are very different things. It is important to understand that difference if you want to understand the physics behind pool. Pretty nearly any high school physics text book (or bright high school student) should have a clear explanation of this stuff.

Cornerman
12-19-2007, 05:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote mikepage:</font><hr>
You must be thinking of someone else. I never said it flattens out WELL BEFORE impact. I've maintained that it flattens out AROUND impact.

<font color="red"> No, I'm thinking of YOU, Mike Page, on page 2 of this thread when you stated on 12-16-07 at 1:54 PM the following: "I think he maxes out his acceleration well before striking the cueball--that his acceleration is probably close to zero at impact. This means he's maxing out the speed of the stick--which, for a given contact point, gives him the most draw." </font color>
<hr /></blockquote>This is where the understanding of the proper terminology is in order. Mike said that it flattens out just before impact. That is, the SPEED flattens out. THe graph was on speed, not acceleration.

The ACCELERATION probably maxes out well before that point. Acceleration and speed are two different things. At the very least, by the time impact happens, acceleration is closer to zero. Manhy people actually hit with negative acceleration just prior to hitting the cueball. That is, their speed maxed out, and then they started slowing down just before hitting the ball. I think we all do that at some point, depending on the shot.

Fred

Artemus
12-19-2007, 06:02 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> No, as the vertical axis says at http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1999-06.pdf it is a plot of speed versus distance the tip has traveled. The tip-to-ball impact occurs more or less where the speed has become constant. That means that the acceleration is close to zero at that time. The peak acceleration must have happened earlier in the shot, perhaps about at the 15-centimeter mark.

Speed and acceleration are very different things. It is important to understand that difference if you want to understand the physics behind pool. Pretty nearly any high school physics text book (or bright high school student) should have a clear explanation of this stuff. <hr /></blockquote>

I was a very bright high school student, in physics as well. But I no longer have the text book nor remember much of it because I displaced all of that information in my brain a long time ago with material on business, finance, and the stock market to make money. But you did state something very important in that last paragraph and I guess it made me realize that I don't want to understand the physics in pool. I do know how balls roll on different tables and in varied conditions to put them in pockets without all of the mind numbing stuff. But I do thank you for your explanation here. Can I at least be an honorary member of the gang and still get a jacket with the colors? /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

av84fun
12-20-2007, 08:05 PM
pooltchr...Me... "If you have a decent follow through, the cue just CAN'T be decelerating at cb impact."

You:
"I'm not so sure this is true. I think if I tried, I could be decelerating at impact and still have a long follow-through."

Sure...you could actually come to a full stop and then just push the cue to a long follow through. But I guess I could have made my point more clearly if I had said that accelerating through the ball assists in and contributes to having an optimal follow through.


Thanks for your comments.

Regards,
Jim

Qtec
12-20-2007, 10:49 PM
You have to balance elevation with aiming. No point in drawing the QB that distance if you miss the pot. Making the OB is the first priority.
Mike takes a long bridge because the OB is far away and to shoot thru the QB to the target , he has to get as 'level as possible' to make the ball. . /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
In that situ, I don't think he could physically get more 'level' if he tried.

Jacking up is [ IMO ] is aiming at the cloth instead of the target.

Q

Qtec
12-20-2007, 10:50 PM
Chill out guys.

Q....Merry Xmas........

Scott Lee
12-20-2007, 11:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr> Isn't it about cueball control? No matter how much the cueball draws you must control the ball.

If someone is capable of hitting a power draw using a breakshot stroke and a dropped elbow, they probably would raise up as the elbow drops. Accuracy would certainly be compromized.

<font color="red">Anyone who knows how to draw the ball with any accuracy should be able to straight draw the table length with only a minimum amount of elbow drop.
</font color>

If the cueball needs to draw two table lengths for position you would be much better off practicing how to hook your opponent. More games would be won by hooking your opponent for BIH than trying to power draw the ball, especially if you can't do it.

<hr /></blockquote>

tap, tap, tap!

Scott Lee

Artemus
12-21-2007, 08:32 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr>
<font color="red">Anyone who knows how to draw the ball with any accuracy should be able to straight draw the table length with only a minimum amount of elbow drop.
</font color>
<hr /></blockquote>

tap, tap, tap!
Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

I think we can all agree about not dropping the elbow and drawing it one table length. But is there something that needs to be changed if a player is dropping his elbow and hitting one table length of draw easier than not dropping?

This is where you guys that have it etched in concrete and tap, tap, tappers just can't seem to give it up. It's either one way, my way, or the highway.

Which one of you is going to have the brass balls to walk up to Massey, Cory, Hohmann, or Nevel at the next tournament and tell them what they're doing is completely incorrect and they need to change to become better players?
Which one of you is going to tell Mike Massey to pull his youtube video about dropping the elbow because it's incorrect and ruining players and going against the Koran and they'll burn in hell?

Which one or all of you are suddenly getting a case of "Gonadus Shrivelitis" at the mere thought of saying something to those pros?

There are many more ways to skin a cat in this game and make balls or different shots than just one that's carved in the concrete. Everything DOES NOT have to be based on the perfect biomechanical model.

Scott Lee
12-21-2007, 08:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>I think we can all agree about not dropping the elbow and drawing it one table length. But is there something that needs to be changed if a player is dropping his elbow and hitting one table length of draw easier than not dropping?
<font color="red">That depends on when the elbow moves...before or at contact...yes...after contact, makes no difference (so why do it?...the simpler is better concept). </font color>

This is where you guys that have it etched in concrete and tap, tap, tappers just can't seem to give it up. It's either one way, my way, or the highway.
<font color="red">ummm, I beg to differ. What we teach is consistency...and less muscle groups involved creates better consisitency, and a higher speed swing! </font color>

Which one of you is going to have the brass balls to walk up to Massey, Cory, Hohmann, or Nevel at the next tournament and tell them what they're doing is completely incorrect and they need to change to become better players?
Which one of you is going to tell Mike Massey to pull his youtube video about dropping the elbow because it's incorrect and ruining players and going against the Koran and they'll burn in hell?
<font color="red">Nobody would tell Massey to correct anything. He's already the best in world at what he does (and a good friend of mine!). </font color>

Which one or all of you are suddenly getting a case of "Gonadus Shrivelitis" at the mere thought of saying something to those pros?
<font color="red">It's difficult to objectively debate someone with a closed mind. If you'd rather try to imitate something that a tiny handful of people on earth can do...be my guest. I'd rather teach people how to use what God gave them, to their best advantage!</font color>

There are many more ways to skin a cat in this game and make balls or different shots than just one that's carved in the concrete. Everything DOES NOT have to be based on the perfect biomechanical model.
<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red">Finally, an accurate statement from you, that I can agree with. However, for far and away the majority of players will succeed better with accurate, repeatable mechanics...than those who struggle to imitate their heros! </font color>

Scott Lee

Fran Crimi
12-21-2007, 09:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr>
<font color="red">Anyone who knows how to draw the ball with any accuracy should be able to straight draw the table length with only a minimum amount of elbow drop.
</font color>
<hr /></blockquote>

tap, tap, tap!
Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

I think we can all agree about not dropping the elbow and drawing it one table length. But is there something that needs to be changed if a player is dropping his elbow and hitting one table length of draw easier than not dropping?

This is where you guys that have it etched in concrete and tap, tap, tappers just can't seem to give it up. It's either one way, my way, or the highway.

Which one of you is going to have the brass balls to walk up to Massey, Cory, Hohmann, or Nevel at the next tournament and tell them what they're doing is completely incorrect and they need to change to become better players?
Which one of you is going to tell Mike Massey to pull his youtube video about dropping the elbow because it's incorrect and ruining players and going against the Koran and they'll burn in hell?

Which one or all of you are suddenly getting a case of "Gonadus Shrivelitis" at the mere thought of saying something to those pros?

There are many more ways to skin a cat in this game and make balls or different shots than just one that's carved in the concrete. Everything DOES NOT have to be based on the perfect biomechanical model.
<hr /></blockquote>


Just so you know, Artemus, there are plenty of instructors like myself who don't have a problem with elbow-dropping. The whole "less moving parts" thing has been debated on this forum till the cows come home and neither side will budge. Those who are convinced that the elbow drop is wrong will not change their mind. They have been presented with every type of argument and logic on the planet and they have their opinions and their opinions won't change.

Thankfully for me, the BCA does not require it's instructors to teach students that elbow dropping is bad, because if it did, I would have to quit the BCA Instructor Program.

Fran

Artemus
12-21-2007, 09:13 AM
Here Scott, you need this site. I don't have the closed mind because if you've read all of my posts you would have seen that I'm in agreement with NOT dropping the elbow to a large degree for most players and most shots. And for the beginning to average student they probably shouldn't do anything out of the norm. But, there's a big difference between an averge Joe and an ADVANCED player with good hand eye coordination, skills, and experience.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete

I think you need to go purchase some more. Make sure it's virtually indestructible.

Artemus
12-21-2007, 09:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>
Just so you know, Artemus, there are plenty of instructors like myself who don't have a problem with elbow-dropping. The whole "less moving parts" thing has been debated on this forum till the cows come home and neither side will budge. Those who are convinced that the elbow drop is wrong will not change their mind. They have been presented with every type of argument and logic on the planet and they have their opinions and their opinions won't change.

Thankfully for me, the BCA does not require it's instructors to teach students that elbow dropping is bad, because if it did, I would have to quit the BCA Instructor Program.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

Fran, suddenly I think I'm loving the H**L out of you and your insights. Now I see why you were rated so high among respondents about the Top Teacher Award.

av84fun
12-21-2007, 10:09 AM
Artemus...""Gonadus Shrivelitis"

TOO funny. You made me LOL!

(-:

Qtec
12-21-2007, 10:46 AM
[ QUOTE ]
If someone is capable of hitting a power draw using a breakshot stroke and a dropped elbow, they probably would raise up as the elbow drops. Accuracy would certainly be compromized. <hr /></blockquote>

This is exactly why you SHOULD stand up a little on a power draw. If you are too low, you will have to stand up on the shot to get the cue through.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who knows how to draw the ball with any accuracy should be able to straight draw the table length with only a minimum amount of elbow drop. <hr /></blockquote>

What if you are left that shot? Would you dare to play it?
If it was on a new quick cloth I might have a bash at it.

Q

Qtec
12-21-2007, 10:54 AM
I think we all agree that elbow drop BEFORE hitting the ball is generally a bad thing but Mike releases the cue totally and he has to follow the cue after it hits the QB to catch it. Otherwise it would fly off the table. hence the elbow drop.
Its basically the result of a good power draw.

Watch Mike's head. It doesn't move at all. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI1Q-8nfiBk&amp;feature=related

Q

Fran Crimi
12-21-2007, 11:33 AM
[ QUOTE ]
If it was on a new quick cloth I might have a bash at it.

Q
<hr /></blockquote>


You might have a WHAT at it??

Merry Christmas, Q........ Go Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7OoSl7Toxk)

wolfdancer
12-21-2007, 04:53 PM
Scott, I believe that what you guys are teaching down there at Cue-Tech, is the basis for a player to develop sound fundamentals. I haven't attended the school,but between watching the staff instruct for several hours,in LV, and getting some "second-hand" info from my friend, a Cue Tech alumni...I'd definitely recommend the program.
After being introduced to the "proper mechanics" I think most players will add their own slight deviations as they get more experience. I found a few "variations on a theme" that work well for me. And while my draw stroke will not inspire fear and terror into "Iron Mike"....it gets me from point A to point B...normally...especially if I remember to chalk up beforehand.
Re: the elbow drop.....I buy into FL's theory...let it happen, as long as it happens after contact.
I'd guess that if I took the course, it might seem like the instruction offered was "set in concrete"...but that would be necessary for the process of replacing poor mechanics, with solid mechanics.
There's more then one way to swing a golf club, or bat a baseball....but the core fundamentals are pretty much the same.
Besides nitpicking here over mechanics....there seems to an attempt to discredit your's and RandyG's method of teaching...or am I reading to much into the dispute (been hanging around on the NPR side a bit too much....where everything, including daylight savings is disputed)
Hope you have a fine Christmas!!

Artemus
12-21-2007, 05:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>
There's more then one way to swing a golf club, or bat a baseball....but the core fundamentals are pretty much the same.

<font color="red"> There you go, you just hit the nail on the head and stated it in a nutshell. Fundamentals are extremely important, but even they can be bent from time to time. I consider the elbow thingy more of a preference not necessarily an ironclad fundamental. It's more like the way Keith McCready grips the cue and comes into it sidearm with his body far from the cue and out of the way. Cookie cutter instructors that know only one way would try to change it. Great instructors would see it for what it is and marvel at the fact there are more ways than one to play super pool, even if incorrect on paper. </font color>

Besides nitpicking here over mechanics....there seems to an attempt to discredit your's and RandyG's method of teaching...or am I reading to much into the dispute <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> There's no discrediting going on, quit reading too much into it or even going down that road. As Fran stated, it's nothing that hasn't gone on over here many times before.
Merry Christmas. </font color>

Scott Lee
12-22-2007, 01:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>
Those who are convinced that the elbow drop is wrong will not change their mind. They have been presented with every type of argument and logic on the planet and they have their opinions and their opinions won't change.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

Fran...Show me where I said the elbow drop is wrong. What I have said a thousand times (and will continue to) is that the elbow drop is unnecessary...even for a power draw (which I consider to be table length draw from long distance). What Mike Massey can accomplish, through whatever means, is comparing apples to oranges. I've told you before...I'll have a draw contest with you. Show me a shot you can make dropping your elbow, that I cannot make, keeping the elbow still. I will agree wholeheartedly that we are both entitled to our opinions, and that neither is "wrong"! Happy Holidays! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Scott Lee

Scott Lee
12-22-2007, 01:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> And for the beginning to average student they probably shouldn't do anything out of the norm. But, there's a big difference between an averge Joe and an ADVANCED player with good hand eye coordination, skills, and experience.<hr /></blockquote>

Well, let's see...I just worked with one of the top players in Phoenix a couple of weeks ago (also an AZ state champion &amp; BCA Masters Champion...so I'm guessing he might fit into your description of an 'advanced' player! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif), specifically on his power draw (among other things). He was dropping his elbow, after striking the CB, but was still having trouble hitting the shot with much consistency. After showing him how to shoot the shot without significant elbow movement, his consistency and accuracy went up about 200%...and that was just during the lesson! I just go with what gets results for my students. Nobody is forced (or even encouraged) to do or use anything that they don't find helpful.

Scott Lee

Sid_Vicious
12-22-2007, 03:47 AM
Power and draw and stroke, for the draw, in itself is conflicting in themselves. Relax and just don't try hard. Trying too hard, thats the killer, same thing with those whom flub all their jump shot attempts. Chill out and slow way down, let whatever happens, happen, and then back off some more. It's all just like all of the other thinngs in life's learning which seem our personal anchor..."romance the feel for your own" which we all naturaly own. It is an "easy" attitude, different for everyone, and it does not take a master to show what you already have. Mindset and calm approach...sid

Fran Crimi
12-22-2007, 07:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>
Those who are convinced that the elbow drop is wrong will not change their mind. They have been presented with every type of argument and logic on the planet and they have their opinions and their opinions won't change.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

Fran...Show me where I said the elbow drop is wrong. What I have said a thousand times (and will continue to) is that the elbow drop is unnecessary...even for a power draw (which I consider to be table length draw from long distance). What Mike Massey can accomplish, through whatever means, is comparing apples to oranges. I've told you before...I'll have a draw contest with you. Show me a shot you can make dropping your elbow, that I cannot make, keeping the elbow still. I will agree wholeheartedly that we are both entitled to our opinions, and that neither is "wrong"! Happy Holidays! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

Yes, yes, we all know about your challenge to everyone. Do you honestly think I'm going to learn something by watching you draw the ball with no elbow drop? Don't you think I've seen it all before? Do you have some spectacular talent that I would never have seen the likes of before?

I'm perfectly fine with the concept that you have your opinion and I have mine. That's what makes the world go around. But keep in mind that when a group of you get on here and start tooting your horns about no elbow drop, you can bet your life that I'll be here to make sure others know that there are other opinions out there besides yours.

Fran

Artemus
12-22-2007, 07:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> And for the beginning to average student they probably shouldn't do anything out of the norm. But, there's a big difference between an averge Joe and an ADVANCED player with good hand eye coordination, skills, and experience.<hr /></blockquote>

Well, let's see...I just worked with one of the top players in Phoenix a couple of weeks ago (also an AZ state champion &amp; BCA Masters Champion...so I'm guessing he might fit into your description of an 'advanced' player! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif), specifically on his power draw (among other things). He was dropping his elbow, after striking the CB, but was still having trouble hitting the shot with much consistency. After showing him how to shoot the shot without significant elbow movement, his consistency and accuracy went up about 200%...and that was just during the lesson! I just go with what gets results for my students. Nobody is forced (or even encouraged) to do or use anything that they don't find helpful.

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

Good for you and good for him. It must have been Mike Davis, right? If it wasn't, I'll bet you can't wait to change his game around to make him a better player.

Scott, you speak with a forked tongue. You say to Fran to show where you ever said an elbow drop is wrong and that it's unnecessary, but in the next sentence you're stating that it IS WRONG and how you've done this, that, and the other with somebody to improve their game by getting rid of an elbow drop.

Forget about a draw contest with Fran or anybody else. Here's your challenge. Go on youtube and find a two table length power draw from ANYONE and post the link on here for us to see. Better yet, take a video of yourself doing a two table length power draw and post it.

For some reason I keep smelling something baking in the oven.
http://www.thecookiecuttershop.com/

Scott Lee
12-22-2007, 07:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>

Yes, yes, we all know about your challenge to everyone. Do you honestly think I'm going to learn something by watching you draw the ball with no elbow drop?

<font color="red">You just might! </font color>
Don't you think I've seen it all before?
<font color="red">Apparently not, or you'd realize that there is validity to this teaching concept! </font color>
Do you have some spectacular talent that I would never have seen the likes of before? <font color="red">Certainly not! Just teaching what is easy, accurate, and repeatable! </font color>

I'm perfectly fine with the concept that you have your opinion and I have mine. That's what makes the world go around. But keep in mind that when a group of you get on here and start tooting your horns about no elbow drop, you can bet your life that I'll be here to make sure others know that there are other opinions out there besides yours.

Fran
<hr /></blockquote>

You toot your horn, and I'll toot my horn, and I'll be in Scotland afor ye! LOL /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Seriously though, Fran, there are more BCA instructors (including most master instructors) who believe in the pinned elbow concept for any shot, than those that don't!

Scott Lee

Fran Crimi
12-22-2007, 07:46 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>
Fran, suddenly I think I'm loving the H**L out of you and your insights. Now I see why you were rated so high among respondents about the Top Teacher Award. <hr /></blockquote>

Thanks Artemus. I guarantee that you just made a few people very unhappy with that comment. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

A few months ago, I ran into Tony Robles who was teaching a student. We always go over to each other to say hello during lessons. We have that rapport with each other and our students. I noticed that they were practicing power topspin shots, shooting long tough shots and then trying to bring the cue all the way back down table.

Tony knows about elbow-dropping, even though he doesn't use it often (But he DOES use it). I offered to demonstrate the extreme elbow drop power topspin shot to him and his student. They loved it! His student's accuracy immediately improved and started pocketing shot after shot with less effort and better results.

One thing you have to develop with the elbow drop is the trust of letting go. That's a difficult thing to do for some people, particularly those who are control addicts. For some people, (including myself at times, due to previous training) this may not be the best choice if you have trouble letting go of control. But when you DO let go.....oh baby! Lookout!!

It's very similar to a golf swing. You have to let go of control in order to get it.

The reason why I'm telling this story about Tony is because anyone who knows him can ask him. He will tell you that what I wrote here is exactly what happened.

Fran

Artemus
12-22-2007, 07:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>

Yes, yes, we all know about your challenge to everyone. Do you honestly think I'm going to learn something by watching you draw the ball with no elbow drop?

<font color="red">You just might! </font color>
Don't you think I've seen it all before?
<font color="red">Apparently not, or you'd realize that there is validity to this teaching concept! </font color>

<font color="blue"> Well, to use your way of phrasing it, when and where did Fran ever state that it was invalid? My take on her stance is (and I could be wrong) either way is just an OPTION. For you, it's ONE WAY ONLY! </font color>

I'm perfectly fine with the concept that you have your opinion and I have mine. That's what makes the world go around. But keep in mind that when a group of you get on here and start tooting your horns about no elbow drop, you can bet your life that I'll be here to make sure others know that there are other opinions out there besides yours.

Fran
<hr /></blockquote>

Seriously though, Fran, there are more BCA instructors (including most master instructors) who believe in the pinned elbow concept for any shot, than those that don't!

<font color="red"> When was this study done and can you show the document that corroborates these findings? See Scott, you're tripping over your own tongue again. It's etched in concrete and YOU KNOW IT. </font color>

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

Scott Lee
12-22-2007, 07:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>

It must have been Mike Davis, right? If it wasn't, I'll bet you can't wait to change his game around to make him a better player.

<font color="red">Hmmm...I thought Mike was from Maryland! He's a great player, and I wouldn't change a thing about what he does! </font color>

Scott, you speak with a forked tongue. You say to Fran to show where you ever said an elbow drop is wrong and that it's unnecessary, but in the next sentence you're stating that it IS WRONG and how you've done this, that, and the other with somebody to improve their game by getting rid of an elbow drop. <font color="red">What is it about the difference between "unnecessary" and "wrong" that you don't understand? </font color>

Forget about a draw contest with Fran or anybody else. Here's your challenge. Go on youtube and find a two table length power draw from ANYONE and post the link on here for us to see. Better yet, take a video of yourself doing a two table length power draw and post it. <font color="red">Why would I do that? That shot never EVER comes up in a game. I teach people how to use things that will help them play better! </font color>

For some reason I keep smelling something baking in the oven.
http://www.thecookiecuttershop.com/ <font color="red">I think that's covered under the "a dog smells his own sh*t first" clause /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

Artemus...You would argue that the sun is blue and the sky is yellow...just to argue. I have never once said that anything in this entire thread was wrong. It's just different strokes for different folks. I happen to be a proponent of KISS. If you want to pursue drawing two table lengths, using whatever technique, go ahead.

Scott Lee

Artemus
12-22-2007, 08:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr>

It must have been Mike Davis, right? If it wasn't, I'll bet you can't wait to change his game around to make him a better player.

<font color="red">Hmmm...I thought Mike was from Maryland! He's a great player, and I wouldn't change a thing about what he does! </font color>

<font color="blue"> Then why do you have this neurotic obsession to change everyone else with your cookie cutter version of the elbow? I think the no elbow drop is what should be taught, but not to the point it's in concrete like YOU keep preaching. There are OPTIONS at different times.</font color>

Scott, you speak with a forked tongue. You say to Fran to show where you ever said an elbow drop is wrong and that it's unnecessary, but in the next sentence you're stating that it IS WRONG and how you've done this, that, and the other with somebody to improve their game by getting rid of an elbow drop. <font color="red">What is it about the difference between "unnecessary" and "wrong" that you don't understand? </font color>

<font color="blue"> And what part of "acceptable at times" don't you understand? </font color>

Forget about a draw contest with Fran or anybody else. Here's your challenge. Go on youtube and find a two table length power draw from ANYONE and post the link on here for us to see. Better yet, take a video of yourself doing a two table length power draw and post it. <font color="red">Why would I do that? That shot never EVER comes up in a game. I teach people how to use things that will help them play better! </font color>

<font color="blue"> Here we go, the crawfishin', backpeddling, and weasling. I showed 4 links to the elbow drop. Surely you can come up with 2. How would you like me to post MORE elbow drops, I can quite easily. At least post your own video with the maximum draw length from no elbow drop. C'mon Scott, be a MAN, be a MAN. Don't be a wuss. Post something. Post anything instead of empty words. Remember, a picture is worth a thousand words. </font color>

For some reason I keep smelling something baking in the oven.
http://www.thecookiecuttershop.com/ <font color="red">I think that's covered under the "a dog smells his own sh*t first" clause /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> No, it was this dog going out for a walk and smelling another big pile of sh*t from another pooch. </font color>

Artemus...You would argue that the sun is blue and the sky is yellow...just to argue.

<font color="red"> You have me mixed up with the guys in the NPR. I don't go there and it's their whole bag. Maybe you should place yourself in the arguement category also. You can't seem to get a grip on yourself. </font color>

I have never once said that anything in this entire thread was wrong. It's just different strokes for different folks. I happen to be a proponent of KISS. If you want to pursue drawing two table lengths, using whatever technique, go ahead.

<font color="red"> Great, then I guess you won't be posting in this thread about the subject any more. KISS is great. So do you only teach "angle in = angle out" on all banks? That's as simple as it gets. I guess you include nothing about speed and english because it complicates things. Do you teach one stroke only, hit the CB and make sure the tip touches the cloth, right? That's also as simple as it gets. I guess there's no sense in going into a slip stroke, stroke-slip-stroke or throw stroke, drag draw, pump stroke. How about teaching a player tuck and roll? Ooops, I guess that's too complicated also and doesn't have any benefits even though many pros do it. And I guess you would never consider showing the shot that Fran did to the students of Tony Robles. That's too bad for them. </font color>

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

pooltchr
12-22-2007, 09:01 AM
Come on, guys...give it a break!
Scott is a great instructor. What he teaches can be used by the great majority of players. His point seems to be that dropping the elbow creates the OPPORTUNITY for things to go wrong. Eliminating that opportunity can benefit most students.
Fran, also a great instructor, as well as a very accomplished player, sees a benefit to dropping the elbow for some shots. If done correctly, it is effective. I think she sees it as a good trade off...benefit vs opportunity for possible problems.
Art...a pretty sporty player in his own right...although to the best of my knowledge, not an instructor. He sees things from a players perspective...but maybe not so much from a student's perspective.
Instructors present information to students. It's up to the student whether or not they apply it in their own game.

I have taught with Scott, and can say that I have never heard him tell a student that his is the only way to do anything. What he does do is show his students how to simplify the mechanics to bring consistancy to every shot. My personal teaching style is probably closer to Scott's than Fran's, but there is nothing wrong with either. We have all had some pretty good success with helping students improve. I could name at least one student who has worked with both Fran and myself, and was very pleased with what she learned from both of us. Any player who thinks that one instructor will give them everything they need is probably mistaken. It is the differences that are the reason I personally hope to work with as many different instructors as possible. I'm planning a trip to Massachusetts soon to spend a few days with a couple of instructors I have never met, and I can't wait! Even if I only learn one new thing, it will be worth it.

This isn't a matter of "choosing sides". It's a matter of embracing the differences to increase our knowledge.

Steve

Cornerman
12-22-2007, 10:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> This isn't a matter of "choosing sides". It's a matter of embracing the differences to increase our knowledge.

Steve <hr /></blockquote>Often times Steve, the SPF teachers don't come across as embracing this statement. I certainly understand trying to emphasize to the common player the idea of pinning the elbow. But, these forums are beyond that, IMO.

There ought to be discussion by instructors (SPF or otherwise) on why the elbow droppig works, if for nothing else just for meaningful discussion.

There's no denying that it works for people, so why bother denying or refocusing? It works. Let's start there.

In fact, we've had this discussion. Sometimes, less movement isn't always better. Anyone who's done any sport study understands this. Better players are better because they CAN coordinate several muscles, in effect making for less effort, not more effort. I wish all instructors in pool would understand this.

This doesn't preclude or erase the importance of SPF teaching. Most of us get the feeling that if other methods are touched upon, those of you who make a living at SPF get too defensive. It shouldn't be that way.

Fred

Artemus
12-22-2007, 11:37 AM
Here's a match that is being played between Mike Davis and John DiToro and we don't even have to worry about power draw shots hit with break speed. Let's look at elbow drop and the hinging from the shoulder just on REGULAR SOFT shots. Click the arrow to access the match.

http://propoolvideo.com/florida-pro-tour/fl-pro-tour---m.-davis-v.-j.-di-toro.html

You'll have to look at this closely and can play it back in instant replay just by grabbing the timer bar with your mouse and going back and forth to the desired shot or time.

First, look at the elbow drop of John DiToro somewhere between the 1:50 -1:55 time on the 3 ball.

At 2:o6 you can see his elbow not necessarily drop, but it flys away from his body when he makes the one shot where you look at him head on at the 5 ball.

At 2:15 - 2:20 the camera is right along side of him up close for a shot at the 6 ball and the elbow drop BEFORE CONTACT with the CB is so obvious that even a blind man couldn't miss it. The stroke EMANATES from the SHOULDER and HINGES there. The elbow can do nothing else but DROP.

At 11:38 you couldn't possibly get a better view from behind/side of Davis to see the elbow drop and shoulder hinge before contact.

Is it right? Is it wrong? Are they hack players? Do they need lessons? I think it's just another way to do it and an option, not necessarily best for a beginner or average Joe. But something that should be acknowledged AND taught by all teachers to certain select students that have the potential or skills. Why not help them shorten the learning curve? Sooner or later they'll figure it out by themselves, from other good players, or different instructors.

I'm still anxiously waiting for Scott, Steve or anyone to post a link to a site giving some examples of a power draw or power break that's explosive with NO elbow drop in order that we can compare power indexes and results.

av84fun
12-22-2007, 05:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> This isn't a matter of "choosing sides". It's a matter of embracing the differences to increase our knowledge.

Steve <hr /></blockquote>Often times Steve, the SPF teachers don't come across as embracing this statement. I certainly understand trying to emphasize to the common player the idea of pinning the elbow. But, these forums are beyond that, IMO.

There ought to be discussion by instructors (SPF or otherwise) on why the elbow droppig works, if for nothing else just for meaningful discussion.

There's no denying that it works for people, so why bother denying or refocusing? It works. Let's start there.

In fact, we've had this discussion. Sometimes, less movement isn't always better. Anyone who's done any sport study understands this. Better players are better because they CAN coordinate several muscles, in effect making for less effort, not more effort. I wish all instructors in pool would understand this.

This doesn't preclude or erase the importance of SPF teaching. Most of us get the feeling that if other methods are touched upon, those of you who make a living at SPF get too defensive. It shouldn't be that way.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

I understand where you are coming from. The only SPF instructor I have studied with is Scott Lee.

He detected that to the extent my elbow dropped, it did so after cb contact. His opinion, therefore, was that there was no particular "flaw" in that portion of my stroke but just said that the movement was unnecessary, so why do it.

He was not "passionate" about the elbow drop issue.

IMHO, the issue of whether player X does drop or player Y does not, should not even be discussed. As you wisely point out, the great players have "gifts" that the rest of us can only dream about.

No one should (or does to my knowledge) suggest that we all adopt the "Bustamante Loop" in his stroke or to do almost ANYTHING McCready does.

IMHO, dropping the elbow prior to cb contact creates the potential for an unintended up move in the cue angle which would be a negative for us "mortals" and should be avoided.

But dropping after the shot for the purpose...or as a result of...facilitating a lengthened follow through cannot be proven to cause harm because the shot is over (in a millisecond) and the cb has no idea and does not care whether the elbow is then dropped or not.

I am reasonably confident that Scott would not take issue with that.

Regards,
Jim

Fran Crimi
12-22-2007, 09:53 PM
Actually, this is all about dropping the elbow prior to contact, not after. It isn't necessarily a bad thing to do and it doesn't always have to be done by experts. I have had beginner students who do it naturally and with great timing and results, and they don't even think of it as an advanced techinque, because nobody told them so yet. It's just something that comes naturally to them. Should we change them? I wouldn't.

Fran

pooltchr
12-22-2007, 10:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> This isn't a matter of "choosing sides". It's a matter of embracing the differences to increase our knowledge.

Steve <hr /></blockquote>Often times Steve, the SPF teachers don't come across as embracing this statement. I certainly understand trying to emphasize to the common player the idea of pinning the elbow. But, these forums are beyond that, IMO.
<font color="red"> There are players of all skill levels that participate in the forums. We teach SPF as the correct method of developing a consistant repeatable stroke. While there are exceptions to every rule, we believe this is the best method of bringing consistancy to our students. A table length shot to draw the cue ball 9 feet is not a shot most of us encounter in anything other than rare instances. Our advanced course focuses on SOP or Standard Operating Proceedure. For the high level players, we offer the Expert class, where we cover XOP (eXtraordinary Operating Proceedure). We don't even offer that class to anyone who hasn't already completed the SOP class, and for a good reason. We believe if a player doesn't have a grasp on the fundamentals, there isn't much reason to be working on the exceptional aspects. It's the walk before you run mentality. </font color>

There ought to be discussion by instructors (SPF or otherwise) on why the elbow droppig works, if for nothing else just for meaningful discussion.
<font color="red"> I wouldn't have a problem with that, although I tend to agree with the thinking that it probably isn't necessary to drop the elbow for very many shots. Since I learned SPF, I don't even drop my elbow on my break, which is probably the most powerful shot I ever make. </font color>

There's no denying that it works for people, so why bother denying or refocusing? It works. Let's start there.
<font color="red"> I think it is more accurate to say that some players are able to make it work. Keith makes a sidearm work, but I wouldn't recommend it to any of my students. </font color>

In fact, we've had this discussion. Sometimes, less movement isn't always better. <font color="red"> But most of the time, it is. </font color> Anyone who's done any sport study understands this. <font color="red"> There has been a lot of hours of study that went into developing the things we teach. </font color> Better players are better because they CAN coordinate several muscles, in effect making for less effort, not more effort. <font color="red"> sorry, but I disagree. Anytime you have to coordinate extra muscle movement, it's going to take more effort. Better players might make it seem easy, but it isn't. Better players make this whole game seem easy...but it took an awful lot of energy and effort to get to that point. I do believe that simple is better, and SPF is as simple as it gets. It has done more for my personal game than anything I ever encountered in pool. </font color> I wish all instructors in pool would understand this.

This doesn't preclude or erase the importance of SPF teaching. Most of us get the feeling that if other methods are touched upon, those of you who make a living at SPF get too defensive. It shouldn't be that way. <font color="red"> If I get defensive, it is only to the extent that says SPF is wrong. It isn't! The elbow drop AFTER CONTACT has nothing to do with SPF. The problem I see with the elbow drop is that the timing has to be perfect so as to not cause the tip to deviate from the intended contact point on the cue ball. Not many of us can be consistantly perfect. </font color>

Fred <hr /></blockquote>
<font color="red"> I have been an SPF instructor for several years, and I believe in what we teach. I've seen it work personally, and have seen it work for hundreds of students. Are there other ways to shoot? Of course there are. Is there a better way to teach the game? I haven't seen one yet.
Steve </font color>

Qtec
12-22-2007, 11:24 PM
A bash, a go, a whack at it, ie I would give it some welly! LOL
Actually, I just watched it again and I could play that shot easy. I thought he was shooting from the first diamond but I see now he's shooting from the middle pocket.
No problem. Piece of piss.

Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif....

wolfdancer
12-23-2007, 01:00 AM
Scott, I think you're in a discussion that you can't win....(but you can't lose either). As I understand it, the SPF teachers believe, and teach, that little or "no" elbow drop is the preferred method for the "avg player"....end of story.
But a very good, excellent, or pro player, may get more action out of a stroke with considerable elbow drop.
From my little bit of understanding about pool...it seems to me that allowing the elbow to drop, would be a freer stroke, but more prone to error maybe, and the timing would have to be spot on.
"Pinning" the elbow which is more my style has it's own little problem...the cue has to dip near the end of the stroke...I used to miscue a lot doing that...but a tip from Fast Larry, about shortening my bridge resolved that problem.
No I can't draw the ball two rails, not even if I'm playing downwind. You won't see me in any Artistic pool tournaments, in the near future, either....
I'm still unclear what all the **** is about here...I know that Fran is a great instructor, and teaches one way....you seem to be in demand yourself, and teach another way, and since you both seem to be gainfully employed.....
Rather then time some pro player...I'd like to see an average player learn first one method, then try the other, and compare results( or use two avg players)...besides distance though, you would have to factor in their balls made percentage.
I guess both methods work well...and you'll never resolve which one is better, on a message board.
I have my own method of measuring a draw stroke...I add the distance to the OB, to the draw distance....on a 9 ft'r.
I think if you have a shot length of 6 diamonds, and can get 8 diamonds of draw from that....you can play a little....

Ralph_Kramden
12-23-2007, 07:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>I have my own method of measuring a draw stroke...I add the distance to the OB, to the draw distance....on a 9 ft'r.
I think if you have a shot length of 6 diamonds, and can get 8 diamonds of draw from that....you can play a little....
<hr /></blockquote>You could start a whole new thread with that one.. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Artemus
12-23-2007, 07:21 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr>
A table length shot to draw the cue ball 9 feet is not a shot most of us encounter in anything other than rare instances.

<font color="red"> I wouldn't say that at all. A 3/4 length, 1 or more table length shot can come up regularly. Sometimes it's from our own stupidity by continuing to get out of line and at other times it's just the lay of the balls and you have no choice. But forget about table length draw. What do you have to say about elbow drop prior to contact in the John DiToro/Mike Davis match for both of them in regular play while hitting softly? </font color>

Our advanced course focuses on SOP or Standard Operating Proceedure. For the high level players, we offer the Expert class, where we cover XOP (eXtraordinary Operating Proceedure). We don't even offer that class to anyone who hasn't already completed the SOP class, and for a good reason. We believe if a player doesn't have a grasp on the fundamentals, there isn't much reason to be working on the exceptional aspects. It's the walk before you run mentality.
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> So at any point in the advanced classes, do you ever introduce elbow drop or is the "no elbow drop" rule still in concrete? I don't even know why the discussion is on elbow drop because it should be on shoulder hinge usage where the elbow is controlled.
Here's a question for you, how many hinges are there in the stroking arm and where are they? </font color>

Artemus
12-23-2007, 07:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Actually, this is all about dropping the elbow prior to contact, not after. It isn't necessarily a bad thing to do and it doesn't always have to be done by experts. I have had beginner students who do it naturally and with great timing and results, and they don't even think of it as an advanced techinque, because nobody told them so yet. It's just something that comes naturally to them. Should we change them? I wouldn't.
Fran <hr /></blockquote>

When the acronym KISS keeps coming up, I don't know how it becomes any more simple than this approach. Unfortunately all instructors/teachers don't have the experience and knowledge to evaluate whether something needs to be changed or left alone with a particular student. It really just kinda "depends". Other teaching philosophies incorporate change to EVERYONE as long as a flaw is detected regardless of their skill level and experience.
Personally, I'm a big proponent of the Fran method. Robots or trying to build robots doesn't work in this game, but a super teacher can take a player to heights a lot faster than just beating balls around on their own.

I always love to hear someone say in a very proud bragging fashion, "I ain't EVER had a lesson at this game." My response is normally, "I was thinking the same thing".

pooltchr
12-23-2007, 08:02 AM
The only hinge joint in the shooting arm is the elbow. The shoulder and wrist are ball &amp; socket joints. Hinge joints only move back and forth, ball &amp; socket joints allow movement in many different directions.
Since the goal of our stroke is to move the cue forward in a straight line, using only the hinge joint (elbow) makes that happen every time, although you still have to be aligned to the shot properly. Once movement in a ball &amp; socket joint is introduced, the opportunity for movement other than straight forward is a possibility. This is the reason we recommend the pendilum stroke...less chance to screw up.
If you choose to drop your elbow, by all means, have at it.
(There...it's not in concrete...you are welcome to use any stroke you like)
Steve

Artemus
12-23-2007, 08:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> The only hinge joint in the shooting arm is the elbow. The shoulder and wrist are ball &amp; socket joints. Hinge joints only move back and forth, ball &amp; socket joints allow movement in many different directions.
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

Please reevaluate the stroke of Mike Davis again and tell me he doesn't use the shoulder as a hinge. Please reevaluate the video of Hohmann breaking and tell me he doesn't use the shoulder as a hinge.

Are you stating that the wrist CANNOT move back and forth on it's own independently of anything else, wtf? Are you stating that the arm can't be moved back and forth, up and down from the shoulder independently? Wtf once again.

pooltchr
12-23-2007, 08:25 AM
This is getting out of control. Of course you can use the shoulder as a hinge...but that doesn't make it one. The steering wheel on your car is able to cause your car to turn, but if you are able to hold it steady, the car goes straight.
Art, I know you better than this. Why you seem to be determined to argue the point to no end is beyone me. I'm not interested in arguing, I'm interested in teaching people how to become better pool players. If what we teach accomplishes that, then I am happy. If you want to do it differently, and it works for you, that's fine too.

And there is still only one hinge joint in the shooting arm.
Steve

Artemus
12-23-2007, 08:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> This is getting out of control. Of course you can use the shoulder as a hinge...but that doesn't make it one.

<font color="red"> If you can use the shoulder as a hinge, how does it not make it one? If you can use it as one, it has to BE one. You can't use your sternum or shin as a hinge because they aren't. And that's not what you stated in the previous post, now you're changing your tune.</font color>

Art, I know you better than this. Why you seem to be determined to argue the point to no end is beyone me. I'm not interested in arguing,

<font color="red"> I regret that you feel it's arguing. I don't nor do I feel that we are. I look at it as debating some points and clarifying thoughts and ideas that I and others don't see in the same light as you or Scott.</font color>

And there is still only one hinge joint in the shooting arm.
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> If you lock the shoulder down and lock the wrist movement down and ONLY USE the elbow, there's one hinge.

Here's a question for you or anyone that cares to jump in. How many different ways can the wrist/hand move and how many positions can it get into?

Is it possible to take your stance and set up to the CB with the OB about a foot or less away, COMPLETELY and TOTALLY lock the shoulder and elbow from ANY movement and make the shot just by using the hand and wrist?? The answer is YES, therefore it's a HINGE. It's not the most powerful one, but it does add to the other two. (and remember, you did correct yourself and state that the shoulder can work as a hinge) There are no long formulas that need to go on the blackboard to figure it out. If you have a table at home, try it for yourself. </font color>

Cornerman
12-23-2007, 08:46 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr>There's no denying that it works for people, so why bother denying or refocusing? It works. Let's start there.
<font color="red"> I think it is more accurate to say that some players are able to make it work. </font color><hr /></blockquote>Even this statement is misleading, Steve. It works for more than "some." And if we look at every advanced player (that's above a C, basically the best players of no particular area) that has never taken SPF lessons, I'll guess that over 95% drop their elbow. I won't bother arguing the percentage that drop it before contact.



<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr><font color="red"> Keith makes a sidearm work, but I wouldn't recommend it to any of my students. </font color> <hr /></blockquote> Again, this an extremely bogus argument. If 95% of the advanced players you see shoot with a McCready sidearm, then it should be studied. But, today's game, that's not the case, therefore there's little need to study it. Compare that to the elbow drop that so many (not 'some', not 'a few', but rather 'every top player you've ever seen').


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>In fact, we've had this discussion. Sometimes, less movement isn't always better. <font color="red"> But most of the time, it is. </font color> Anyone who's done any sport study understands this. <font color="red"> There has been a lot of hours of study that went into developing the things we teach. </font color> Better players are better because they CAN coordinate several muscles, in effect making for less effort, not more effort. <font color="red"> sorry, but I disagree. Anytime you have to coordinate extra muscle movement, it's going to take more effort. </font color><hr /></blockquote>

I won't apologize for saying that you are unequivocally incorrect here. Or you're trying to answer the SPF study on pool shooting to what I just said. And that's a non sequitur at best.

Name a sport that requires any kind of motion, and attempt to show "less is better" approach compared to the number that shows advancement with cordinated motion of more not less muscles. And remember, we're talking about power draw, not soft shooting.

Name one, I'll name two for every one of yours. Darts. Free throw shooting. Throwing a ball back to the pitcher. None of these require strength, just coordinated motion. And the best coordinate their motion. Hell, even pool players: the best coordinate the motions. The absolute fact is that the more muscles you can coordinate together, the less effort/energy/force is expended. IMO, there's not enough study of the physiology of our sport, and compare it to other sports that require motion. You say you've studied it. Show me.

I understand the need to keep things consistent for the common man. But, goodness, at what point do the instructors just let us talk about the guys who power draw the best and study them? The fact that these top players do what they do prove what I'm saying: those that coordinate the motion can perform these things with less effort. Let's not try to single out one definition of "effort" just to make your side of the argument correct. If a player has the talent to coordinate the motions, does the result action come with less effort? Observation says "of course." Not much of a physiological study says, "of course." Dropping the elbow is more natural. Surely your "study" of the body in motion has shown this by now. If not, you need to have another study. It's called gravity and center of mass. Map it out; you'll see why the elbow wants to drop all on its own. I can show anyone on a table if they want.

Whether you or anyone thinks that using more muscles or dropping the elbow are detrimental to the COMMON PLAYER in the short run, long run, time on a table, etc. isn't the point of these threads.

Fred &lt;~~~ proponent of SPF, but stress the importance of understanding why better players are better

Cornerman
12-23-2007, 11:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> <font color="red">I have been an SPF instructor for several years, and I believe in what we teach. I've seen it work personally, and have seen it work for hundreds of students. Are there other ways to shoot? Of course there are. Is there a better way to teach the game? I haven't seen one yet.
Steve
</font color> <hr /></blockquote>This is what it all boils down to for you and other SPF teachers, and this is where you've got problems. This thread wasn't about SPF nor was it about how effective SPF teaching is. Of course SPF teaching is effective, and it is easily the best teaching method for gaining consistency and improving.

But, that's NOT what this thread is about. And therein lies the problem. You and Scott keep on bringing up SPF as if it is directly being questioned. It's not.

There are and always be two distinct areas of study for power draw:

How to hit low.
How to hit hard/fast.

With the power draw, the method to gain consistency of one is often contradictory to the method of gaining consistency of the other.

SPFF does a great job at gaining consistency to hitting that low spot repeatedly. The study (my study?) of coordinating natural motion (elbow drop, shoulder pivot, wrist snap) to gain consistency to stroking fast/hard with THE LEAST EFFORT does a great job for the latter. It's not something I just came up with. It's a result of various athletic studies I did when I was younger. Pool is no different, since it is in essence, a motion sport.

And another note on least effort. If the cueball only cares about Force and offset (which is all it needs for spin), then what I mean by least effort is that if you divide the force required to several muscle parts, that's less effort. Like having 5 gorillas pick up a 500 lb weight as opposed to 1 gorilla doing it. The problem is the ability to coordinate the gorillas. Some people will never be able to do it; others will.

What we CANNOT SAY FOR THOSE WHO ARE ASKING THE ADVICE is to simply shrug it off with some BS about never having to shoot a super power draw. God, that's such a copout.

Fred

Fran Crimi
12-23-2007, 12:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
What we CANNOT SAY FOR THOSE WHO ARE ASKING THE ADVICE is to simply shrug it off with some BS about never having to shoot a super power draw. <hr /></blockquote>

For sure. I hope that people realize that there are reasons to use the power draw shot than just to achieve distance with the CB. Depending on the game you're playing, the layout of the table and how creative the player is, there are tons of ways to take advantage of the power draw shot. For example: breaking up clusters of balls when there is no other way, or intentionally running into a ball, or even shooting a backwards combination shot or kiss or carom shot.

Fran

Qtec
12-23-2007, 10:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
What we CANNOT SAY FOR THOSE WHO ARE ASKING THE ADVICE is to simply shrug it off with some BS about never having to shoot a super power draw. <hr /></blockquote>

For sure. I hope that people realize that there are reasons to use the power draw shot than just to achieve distance with the CB. Depending on the game you're playing,[ QUOTE ]

In snooker, the power draw is usually a safety shot. Faced with a long difficut straight red, a player will go for the pot but try to draw the QB back to the rail. If he happens to make the ball, he can gain an advantage by rolling up to a color.

ie the layout of the table <font color="red"> or how quick the cloth is </font color>and how creative the player is, there are tons of ways to take advantage of the power draw shot. For example: breaking up clusters of balls when there is no other way, or intentionally running into a ball, or even shooting a backwards combination shot or kiss or carom shot.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

Its not a shot you would deliberately play for- unless you are MM - so its a shot you are left with after a miss by your opponent or your own mistake.
On a normal worn cloth with club balls I would probably be looking for a good safety. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Q

Scott Lee
12-24-2007, 05:13 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>. You and Scott keep on bringing up SPF as if it is directly being questioned. It's not. <font color="red">Excuse me Fred, but I don't believe I have even once mentioned SPF in this thread... </font color>

There are and always be two distinct areas of study for power draw:

How to hit low.
How to hit hard/fast.

<font color="red">I agree...and the fastest muscle movement involves just ONE muscle...the bicep. Any additional muscle group additions serve to slow down the result. </font color>

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

As has been mentioned, there are several 'methods' of achieving a power draw stroke. Not all will work for everyone. Since the best stroke effect comes from using the weight of the cue and timing to create the stroke speed, a tight grip will serve to limit the ability to do this efficiently and consistently. IMO almost all amateur players who use an elbow collapse technique, do so as a result of gripping the cue too tightly. Ramming the cuestick through the CB will not produce a superior result...probably as a result of innaccurate aiming and inconsistent timing for the most part, but an inferior result nonetheless. What we teach is designed to benefit the greatest number and range of players (it will benefit experts too). IMO this thread is not about what a very small select group of elite players can accomplish (while the majority of people wanting learn this technique will struggle with it)...but more about how the stroke can be consistently accomplished by anyone with an accurate, repeatable stroke, which SPF undeniably helps create.

Scott Lee

Artemus
12-24-2007, 08:31 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>. You and Scott keep on bringing up SPF as if it is directly being questioned. It's not. <font color="red">Excuse me Fred, but I don't believe I have even once mentioned SPF in this thread... </font color>

<font color="blue"> You have stated "what WE TEACH". (you, Steve, Randy, and others) Isn't "what you teach" SPF? Don't all of you stand for SPF? Don't hide from it Scott, if that's what you really believe in be proud of it. Shout I out, "I BELIEVE IN SPF"!!! </font color>

There are and always be two distinct areas of study for power draw:

How to hit low.
How to hit hard/fast.

<font color="red">I agree...and the fastest muscle movement involves just ONE muscle...the bicep. Any additional muscle group additions serve to slow down the result. </font color>

<font color="blue"> That is absolutely, 100% an UNTRUE CLAIM AND STATEMENT! Scott, if you thought through the question I asked on this thread and the other one about wrist positions, you would have quickly seen that there in an INCLUSION of the smaller muscles in the wrist and hand that promote ADDITIONAL speed to the stroke. Even with SPF the wrist and hand come into play to uncock and release the stored power in that area. A lighter grip actually promotes it. If it DIDN'T happen, the tip of the cue couldn't go through the CB and touch the cloth, It would continue it's "pendulum rise" and the tip would be going on an upward arc or straight forward.

Take your stance without a cue and the upper arm horizontal to the ground and the forearm hanging straight down in a vertical position. Curl your fingers into a very light fist and independently of anything else, move the hand straight back and straight forward like a metronone. The pinky finger and and back of the hand lead it rearward, the thumb and forefinger lead it forward. - tick-tock-tick-tock-tick-tock. Now place a cue in the very tips of your fingers and thumb and you can do the same thing. Tick-Tock-tick-tock. It IS CLEARLY EVIDENT in the Mike MASSEY video from behind when he RELEASES the wrist/hand and the butt of the cue SLAPS back hard into the rear of his hand. You CANNOT do that without engaging the muscles in the wrist, fingers, and hand! And ALL OF THEM IN THE VIDEOS use the muscles in their SHOULDER to power the shot, hence the elbow drop!</font color>

What we teach is designed to benefit the greatest number and range of players.

<font color="blue"> I would wholeheartedly agree with this statement and nobody has said anything differently. </font color>

IMO this thread is not about what a very small select group of elite players can accomplish (while the majority of people wanting learn this technique will struggle with it)

<font color="blue"> This thread was and is about POWER DRAW. You promote one way and one way only. What this thread has pointed out and PROVEN BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT is that there are OTHER WAYS that may be more effective than what you teach to some and definitely ARE MORE EFFECTIVE for those skilled or coordinated enough and they're not just a select few. There are PLENTY of talented, coordinated pool players out there who are non-pro. I'm still waiting for a couple of VIDEOS on youtube or elsewhere that show your style being just as effective. Here's why you didn't post anything, it ain't out there. IT doesn't exist! </font color>

...but more about how the stroke can be consistently accomplished by anyone with an accurate, repeatable stroke, which SPF undeniably helps create.

<font color="blue"> There you go Scott, didn't that make you feel much better to let it all hang out. SPF, SPF, SPF.
(don't take this the wrong way, I'm NOT knocking it.) </font color>

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

You know Scott, you guys seem to approach this elbow drop with the fervor of religious fanatics that think there's only one God, THEIRS. ALLAH IS GOD AND THE ONLY GOD, I KEEELL ANYBODY WHO THINK OTHERWISE!! NO, BUDDHA IS GOD AND THE ONE AND ONLY GOD, I KEEELL YOU!!
NO, JESUS CHRIST IS THE ONE AND ONLY GOD, I KEEELL BOTH OF YOU!! NO, JESUS CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD, GOD IS GOD, I KEEELL ALL OF YOU!!

Cornerman
12-24-2007, 08:31 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>. You and Scott keep on bringing up SPF as if it is directly being questioned. It's not. <font color="red">Excuse me Fred, but I don't believe I have even once mentioned SPF in this thread... </font color> <hr /></blockquote> Details, details.

[ QUOTE ]
There are and always be two distinct areas of study for power draw:

How to hit low.
How to hit hard/fast.

<font color="red">I agree...and the fastest muscle movement involves just ONE muscle...the bicep. Any additional muscle group additions serve to slow down the result. </font color>

Fred <hr /></blockquote>I think this is a good point where you (and anyone who wants to talk about fast muscle movements) need to do additional study. That's not a "I know better than you" statement. That's a "we're discussing different ideas" statement.

That fastest muscles have nothing to do with how to get the cuestick to the fastest speed. Let's do an analogy on speed. Take a sprinter. Should it be obvious to everyone that a sprinter who only uses his leg muscles has zero chance against the same sprinter who adds his arms? He's adding more muscles, yet he easily goes faster. Biomechanics isn't just a one statement study based on intuition. It's a real science with real applications. What you're saying may sound intuitively correct, but in a biomechanical study, it has little truth.

Also, if you walk 4 mph on a still train at compared to walking at a moving train that's going, say, 1 mph in the same direction, is it obvious that you'd be going faster relative to the ground on the moving train? There's a further study for you on how all of the arm can work together to gain more speed with less effort.


[ QUOTE ]
IMO almost all amateur players who use an elbow collapse technique, do so as a result of gripping the cue too tightly.<hr /></blockquote>Then we're at an impasse if this is one of the bases for your reasoning. The best strokers in the world have both loose grips and elbow drops. Surely you're watching the same matches I watch. One of the tighter grips I've seen: Allison Fisher.

Additionaly, I agree on loose wrists, but it doesn't agree with your reasoning of "less is better." It's contradictory to your statements. I think you need to resolve that. My "more isn't necessarily better" resolves it for you. There are more reasons why "loose wrist" work well than what you've posted. I'd think that you would want to know those reasons as well. Your mentor touched on it on his book.

Fred

Fran Crimi
12-24-2007, 09:36 AM
<font color="blue"> Now wait a minute....I may be getting older but I still have half a mind left. I know I didn't post that stuff about snooker, although it does sound interesting. Have you been celebrating New Year's a bit early, Q?

Fran</font color>




Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In snooker, the power draw is usually a safety shot. Faced with a long difficut straight red, a player will go for the pot but try to draw the QB back to the rail. If he happens to make the ball, he can gain an advantage by rolling up to a color.

ie the layout of the table or how quick the cloth is and how creative the player is, there are tons of ways to take advantage of the power draw shot. For example: breaking up clusters of balls when there is no other way, or intentionally running into a ball, or even shooting a backwards combination shot or kiss or carom shot.

Fran
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

pooltchr
12-24-2007, 09:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Artemus:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>. You and Scott keep on bringing up SPF as if it is directly being questioned. It's not. <font color="red">Excuse me Fred, but I don't believe I have even once mentioned SPF in this thread... </font color>

<font color="blue"> You have stated "what WE TEACH". (you, Scott, Randy, and others) Isn't "what you teach" SPF? Don't all of you stand for SPF? Don't hide from it Steve, if that's what you really believe in be proud of it. Shout I out, "I BELIEVE IN SPF"!!! </font color>

There are and always be two distinct areas of study for power draw:

How to hit low.
How to hit hard/fast.

<font color="red">I agree...and the fastest muscle movement involves just ONE muscle...the bicep. Any additional muscle group additions serve to slow down the result. </font color>

<font color="blue"> That is absolutely, 100% an UNTRUE CLAIM AND STATEMENT! Steve, if you thought through the question I asked on this thread and the other one about wrist positions, you would have quickly seen that there in an INCLUSION of the smaller muscles in the wrist and hand that promote ADDITIONAL speed to the stroke. Even with SPF the wrist and hand come into play to uncock and release the stored power in that area. A lighter grip actually promotes it. If it DIDN'T happen, the tip of the cue couldn't go through the CB and touch the cloth, It would continue it's "pendulum rise" and the tip would be going on an upward arc or straight forward.

Take your stance without a cue and the upper arm horizontal to the ground and the forearm hanging straight down in a vertical position. Curl your fingers into a very light fist and independently of anything else, move the hand straight back and straight forward like a metronone. The pinky finger and and back of the hand lead it rearward, the thumb and forefinger lead it forward. - tick-tock-tick-tock-tick-tock. Now place a cue in the very tips of your fingers and thumb and you can do the same thing. Tick-Tock-tick-tock. It IS CLEARLY EVIDENT in the Mike MASSEY video from behind when he RELEASES the wrist/hand and the butt of the cue SLAPS back hard into the rear of his hand. You CANNOT do that without engaging the muscles in the wrist, fingers, and hand! And ALL OF THEM IN THE VIDEOS use the muscles in their SHOULDER to power the shot, hence the elbow drop!</font color>

What we teach is designed to benefit the greatest number and range of players.

<font color="blue"> I would wholeheartedly agree with this statement and nobody has said anything differently. </font color>

IMO this thread is not about what a very small select group of elite players can accomplish (while the majority of people wanting learn this technique will struggle with it)

<font color="blue"> This thread was and is about POWER DRAW. You promote one way and one way only. What this thread has pointed out and PROVEN BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT is that there are OTHER WAYS that may be more effective than what you teach to some and definitely ARE MORE EFFECTIVE for those skilled or coordinated enough and they're not just a select few. There are PLENTY of talented, coordinated pool players out there who are non-pro. I'm still waiting for a couple of VIDEOS on youtube or elsewhere that show your style being just as effective. Here's why you didn't post anything, it ain't out there. IT doesn't exist! </font color>

...but more about how the stroke can be consistently accomplished by anyone with an accurate, repeatable stroke, which SPF undeniably helps create.

<font color="blue"> There you go Steve, didn't that make you feel much better to let it all hang out. SPF, SPF, SPF.
(don't take this the wrong way, I'm NOT knocking it.) </font color>

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

You know Steve, you guys seem to approach this elbow drop with the fervor or religious fanatics that think there's only one God, THEIRS. ALLAH IS GOD AND THE ONLY GOD, I KEEELL ANYBODY WHO THINK OTHERWISE!! NO, BUDDHA IS GOD AND THE ONE AND ONLY GOD, I KEEELL YOU!!
NO, JESUS CHRIST IS THE ONE AND ONLY GOD, I KEEELL BOTH OF YOU!! NO, JESUS CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD, GOD IS GOD, I KEEELL ALL OF YOU!! <hr /></blockquote>

Art,
You quoted Scott, and then repeatedly addressed me throughout the post. If you have issues with what Scott said, perhaps you would do better to address them with him.
Steve

Artemus
12-24-2007, 10:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr>
Art,
You quoted Scott, and then repeatedly addressed me throughout the post. If you have issues with what Scott said, perhaps you would do better to address them with him.
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

LMAO Sorry about that Steve. It gets kinda confusing after a while. As long as it's "All for one and one for all" it's still OK though, right?

Btw, Merry Christmas to you and all of you guys.

Court Reporter, Ms. Court Reporter, can you please change all references from STEVE to SCOTT in my preceeding
post(s) wherever applicable. Let this go on record. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Qtec
12-24-2007, 08:51 PM
Have you been celebrating New Year's a bit early, Q?

Fran



Sorry Fran, I was tired [ long shift] and I must confess I did partake in some Christmas 'spirit' after closing time at the club.......but you did say......."Depending on the game you're playing,' /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif.

Q.......just got home..12 hour shift.....2 beers.

/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Qtec
12-24-2007, 09:02 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The best strokers in the world have both loose grips and elbow drops. <hr /></blockquote>

I don't see how anyone could argue against that absolute fact.

Q