PDA

View Full Version : Just the Stance please!



JCSuperstar
06-30-2008, 01:11 PM
In thought today on the major and minor leg/feet positions of the stance. How much attention do you place on it while approaching the shot and getting into set? Are you making sure it is the same every time or just going at it any 'ol way? Interested to know the specific thoughts here of what you do individually and why. Thanks

DSAPOLIS
06-30-2008, 02:14 PM
I follow Jimmy Reid's advice. I won't steal his thunder - get his instructional material - he covers this topic very well!

Fran Crimi
06-30-2008, 03:18 PM
How much attention? IMO, Stance is as important as it gets in pool. Many people make the mistake of thinking that pool is played only from the waist-up. Anyone who thinks that way won't get past intermediate level play.

While there are some basic premises of stance, it is a very individual thing, depending on things like your dominant eye and how strong it is. One thing for sure, it's not something to be taken lightly and don't buy into the old saying "If it feels comfortable, it's probably right." 'Comfort,' when relating to stance, is nothing more than a habit, and sometimes a habit can be good and sometimes not.

Fran

JCSuperstar
06-30-2008, 09:19 PM
Mr Crimi,

I agree. I have found that my stance is very important as in so many other things humans do standing. Well, we aren’t exactly standing or sitting, kind of somewhere in between. I see the waist up as horizontal and the waist down as vertical.

As for the legs. I agree 100% on your statement “comfort is important”, however I must be comfortable in the correct position. I see so many different ways people stand at the shot and I don’t think anyone has any clue as to what they are doing. So….what that correct position is would have to be based on the feet placements based on some science not opinion, correct? Would you agree? Am I looking for specific feet placements, most importantly or leg or knee , that is all I think there would be in the legs section.

mike60
07-01-2008, 02:26 AM
One of the first lessons was to position the feet to allow full bend at the waist but
not to lean on the arms. Cantilever position.

Bambu
07-01-2008, 07:35 AM
A good stance is important, but I have seen plenty of unconventional approaches that work for the particular player. Shorter players often find themselves in stretched or angled, compromising positions. I often stretch or use the cue extension, or both. At that point, all the form goes out the window. Its tough to have good form standing on one toe. For that reason, I imagine taller players having an advantage in the stance category.

JCSuperstar
07-01-2008, 08:13 AM
Mike,

Good point!

Our son attends Yale and last weekend he was at our home for a visit on his way to Nubia. He is currently studying palaeopathology. Saturday evening his Professor (Scott) stopped by to review trip details. Before they left we had time for a few games of 8 ball.

One thing I asked myself, after the first shot, was to pay attention to the different ways each of them were standing. My son didn’t know that Scott had never played the game before and it was immediately apparent.

My son played soccer in High School and is in great physical condition. On the other hand his professor had clearly let his diet get the best of him. He is at least 100 lbs. overweight. As I watched the consistent athletic positions my son was making in his stance I noticed the complete confusion and painstaking forms Scott attempted to create.

Scott had eventually settled in with his feet pointing approx. 90 degrees away from the line of the shot. I am quite sure it was due to his weight problem because he could not bend down over the cue.

This observation led me to spending the next 6 days categorizing different stances of 263 players. These included 37 professional players, 172 league players and 54 casual players. I made 3 body structure categories; athletic, mid or non -athletic. My findings are below.

- 49% (high level) athletic body structure in players stood relatively facing the shot
- 37% (med level) mid body structure stance was close to 45 degrees with the feet
- 14% (low level) overweight body structure stance was feet facing 80-90 degrees away from the shot line.

I also created a line graph and a bar graph based on the skill in each according to the body structure. It’s median shows a direct cross correlation between the two showing that the higher the skill level the more athletic the stance.


Hopefully this will give some insight into the high level demand for athletics in billiards as in sports.

Fran Crimi
07-01-2008, 05:47 PM
You'd be surprised, Bambu, that there is an approach to stretching that makes your percentage of making the shot higher. You may be on one toe at times but the direction of your hips on the table is a big deal. Turn your hips away from the shot when you don't have to and you're fighting your own anatomy. That will lesson your percentages of success when stretching.

There are other things involved in stretching as well but hip direction happens to be a pretty big deal.

Fran

JoeW
07-02-2008, 06:23 AM
Neat stuff JCSuperstar. Apparently facing the shot is the preferred method used by good players.

From prior observations it may also be true that high level players use a flat footed stance for consistent shot making. This rifle stance where one sets their hips and redistributes their weight around the center of gravity is probably a natural tendency foir some people. I suspect that tennis players and basketball players have a more difficult time converting their stance to a pool player's position. Standing on the balls of one's feet is probably not good.

The other day I noticed that several of the high level players appear to play with the bridging arm nearly straight on most shots. There is little bend in the bridging elbow. Apparently, this is another technique that can improve one's consistency. I suspect that it leads to the same sight picture from roughly the same place on the length of the cue stick.

Bambu
07-02-2008, 07:13 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fran Crimi</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You'd be surprised, Bambu, that there is an approach to stretching that makes your percentage of making the shot higher. You may be on one toe at times but the direction of your hips on the table is a big deal. Turn your hips away from the shot when you don't have to and you're fighting your own anatomy. That will lesson your percentages of success when stretching.

There are other things involved in stretching as well but hip direction happens to be a pretty big deal.


Fran</div></div>

Thanks Fran. I suppose I havent noticed anyone fighting their bodies to stretch for a shot. I will remember about the hips, in case I see someone stretching inefficiently.

Fran Crimi
07-02-2008, 09:02 AM
I'm not kidding about this. People fight their anatomy all the time in this game.

Think about players leaning over the side of the table to stretch for a shot. Which way are their hips facing? Put a leg up on the table during certain stretch shots, and voila, suddenly they're facing the shot again.

Cisero Murphy was one of the best leg-up players I've ever seen. The man really had a sense about that.

Fran

JCSuperstar
07-02-2008, 02:42 PM
Fran,

I completely agree. So many are fighting their own anatomy in standing with precision.

Over the past month I have been watching very closely analyzing every piece of the anatomy of players of all levels. This is a game of precision and one must approach it as such. Even with players that are overweight they seem to want to move their belly out of the way to the side and shoot sideways completely changing the natural physical. This neglect in their diet shows a progression of neglect towards furthering the sport and should not be tolerated in the professional world. Today’s experts should represent all public interests with positive reflections in all areas.

Fitness in a precise game, such as billiards, is just as important with other sports. Watching tennis this week is a further example of a direction of players in shape. The way one stands in position for shooting should follow basic human anatomy with precision. There is no reason why experts in the billiard world should strive for anything less.

ObeOne
07-02-2008, 03:57 PM
I think as long as you are comfortable and consistent most any stance will do. A guy here in town is a little slow (like autistic and OCD or something) and stands very funny. He has his legs completely together and bends at his knees sort of standing sideways. I don't know if any of you have met Ace or not, but he's a very solid player and he has a horrible stance.

JCSuperstar
07-02-2008, 04:11 PM
Obe,

Glad to know you feel the same, that this "sideways stance" is a horrible thing. Being a "solid" player is one of reference. Athletic it may not be, however this stance I am sure was not taught to him. Do something long enough any way and it will eventually become comfortable, doesn't make it correct. Think that is called a "bad habit"

No, I do not know him, new to the billiard world. I am curious as to what body type he fits into for my stats. Thanks,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ObeOne</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think as long as you are comfortable and consistent most any stance will do. A guy here in town is a little slow (like autistic and OCD or something) and stands very funny. He has his legs completely together and bends at his knees sort of standing sideways. I don't know if any of you have met Ace or not, but he's a very solid player and he has a horrible stance.</div></div>

spiderwebcomm
07-02-2008, 04:51 PM
There's no one way to get into a stance because everyone's bodies are totally different. Different height, different weight, "boobs" (hey, don't laugh-- it's a factor). A lot figures into good position.

One thing is for sure, I strive to eliminate variation in every aspect of pool. If you can control your stance through a good pre-shot routine, do it.

For me, aiming and my stance are nearly one and the same. I envision my sight-line extended, make sure my right in-step is on the line and step into the shot.

You can't always be the same because of the CB positioning, but I try to be.

Fran Crimi
07-02-2008, 05:35 PM
Yes, that's a very interesting study you're doing. I hope you keep taking stats as you go along. The more information you accumulate, I'd guess the more accurate your results.

When we call somebody a "natural", I've always felt that it defines someone who naturally gets into the optimal stance because it feels like the right thing to do to them, and that they don't fight their anatomy like so many others do.

Fran

Bambu
07-02-2008, 06:03 PM
I didnt mean to be sarcastic. Its just that I havent paid enough attention to the way a beginner might stretch poorly for a shot. Not yet anyway. Its the better players I usually study more closely.
For JC: Not to underestimate the value of fitness, but there have been many successful unathletic, frail, and/or overweight pool players. Some dont have youth, vision, or a textbook stroke. Others are handicapped, and still play well in a wheelchair.

JCSuperstar
07-02-2008, 06:14 PM
Spiderweb,

All the players I used in my stats were the same; 2 Feet, 2 Legs, 2 Hips, 2 “boobs” yes M & F, and one belly, yes different size bellies, however, I am talking about the stance which in my observational analysis only includes the legs, knees, gluteus and feet, nothing more… thank you.

As for my observations, 2 of my recent player observations I noticed were in the overweight category and were in the facing forward stance, so the weight issue doesn’t solidify the bearing on the configuration of the legs, feet, etc. I would have to say, imagine a pair of mannequin legs, feet, hips, gluteus, nothing more. How would you position them at the table for a shot? Remove the upper torso from your visual.

My research is helping me understand the anatomy issue more clearly with respect to what one sees as an upper body stature feeling determining the lower body position. As mentioned earlier from Mike, the Cantilever position.

To ponder a question regarding the gluteus on women, is this an issue in the stance? Psychological of Physical?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: spiderwebcomm</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There's no one way to get into a stance because everyone's bodies are totally different. Different height, different weight, "boobs" (hey, don't laugh-- it's a factor). A lot figures into good position.

One thing is for sure, I strive to eliminate variation in every aspect of pool. If you can control your stance through a good pre-shot routine, do it.

For me, aiming and my stance are nearly one and the same. I envision my sight-line extended, make sure my right in-step is on the line and step into the shot.

You can't always be the same because of the CB positioning, but I try to be.</div></div>

DeadCrab
07-03-2008, 06:41 AM
**************
To ponder a question regarding the gluteus on women, is this an issue in the stance? Psychological of Physical?
*****************

Women have an advantage in this regard, as they have a lower center of gravity than men, and are more stable in the cantilever position.

Back in the 70's, there was a popular parlor-trick that demonstrates this. Place a straight-back chair against a wall. Bend forward over the chair (cantilever position) so that the top of your head is a couple of inches from the wall. While in this position, reach down and grasp the sides of the chair seat, and lift the chair. Men will fall forward and hit their head on the wall. Women can lift the chair without falling forward.

Rail Rat
07-06-2008, 01:08 PM
For years I played snooker with a more sideways stance, but since I've started playing pool I found a more straight on stance works better for me. But then I found my stroking arm was off line, so I had to shift my head over my hip more to compensate. Its been a trial adapting to another style, so I go through my set routine a lot.

I have talked this over for years with experienced players and pros and there seems to be opinions all over the map on this. But I think that what ever fits your body style or comfort zone is correct, as long as your arm is alined to the shot and your stance is solid thats most important.

-brad

JCSuperstar
07-07-2008, 07:16 AM
Brad,

Thanks for the reply. However, the research I have done and information I have gathered from a Master Instructor, there is a scientific fundamental correct stance. As I said before, taking a look at the many different “body styles”, common guideline to follow; they all have 2 feet, 2 legs, 2 knees and 2 hips. This is constant with all players I have charted. The size and shape or the upper body didn’t have a bearing on the position of the lower, (Stance).

This past week, I have been experimenting with different players. I have been asking them the simple question when they get into their stance, “Are you comfortable”? I asked 74 players. Guess what the response was?

26 players said only “Yes”.
31 players said a little bit, somewhat, kinda, etc. (somewhere in the middle)
17 players said “No”

Again these were male and female players from all different levels of play and all different body styles as in my previous.

One thing I did ask of 39 of these players was to have them stand considerably different than how they were standing before. I let them shoot 2 games like this and then asked them their comfort level. Amazingly after the 2 games, the comfort level was still at 78% based on their previous comfort level. This shows that one can become comfortable in many different positions (Stances) if trained to do so.

So, the key here is to establish a set scientific standard of key leg, feet, knee and hip positions. If I was to receive personal instruction and the teacher told me to stand however you are comfortable, I would suggest they not teach anymore.

Scientific correct positions first, then stance becomes comfortable in time.
Not the reverse, which is why players are all over the map as you stated and I agree.

JoeW
07-07-2008, 12:31 PM
JCSuperstar said,"
- 49% (high level) athletic body structure in players stood relatively facing the shot
- 37% (med level) mid body structure stance was close to 45 degrees with the feet
- 14% (low level) overweight body structure stance was feet facing 80-90 degrees away from the shot line."

Would you show the graphs (joint plots) of these findings. You have given the percentages for athletic and high level player. I would like to see the joint plots because there are high level players who are not athletic. BTW, how did you define "athletic" from your observations. Your findings are interesting and I would like to study the data. I trust you understand I am not challenging your findings, to the contrary, I find them intriguing and would like to study them.

Rail Rat
07-07-2008, 07:15 PM
What I meant is: if your stance is comfortable to you and is also correctly in line to the shot, then it is correct! Try and tell Reyes his stance is no good!

You must keep in mind that different body styles are very important, if you are tall, as I am, then you need a different variation than a short person as the tables don't adjust to our height. Some people are looser in their joints, some have stiffer backs, some have dominate eye... the list goes on.

I would think that If anyone is not comfortable in their stance then they have a problem and need to work on it.

Also just because someone is a master instructor doe'st always mean they are always right, as you can see there different views all over this forum from pros.
And if you read the many instructional books out there you will also notice different views. Whats good for some players is not for another.

The only constant is the stroke basics and even in that there are variations. Some take a long pause, some take none at all, etc.

If you are attempting to come up with scientific parameters, you must remember that we're not machines.

-Brad

JoeW
07-08-2008, 05:01 AM
The body may not be a machine but there are scientific disciplines devoted to the study of the body and how it functions, these include Kinesiology, and Psychology among othes. I think that Colin Colenso is an Olympic coach and has some excellent insights into how to develop a very powerful break. These ideas are based on a scientific analysis of body mechanics as shown in his video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW1tsONEI_U.

It makes sense to me that there are best practices for many ways to use your body to accomplish a task. One can learn to break a rack of pool balls using any of several techniques. Colenso shows quite vividly that with appropriate attention to a study of human movement the break can be substantially enhanced.

The same principles apply to stance. There are many areas of sports that have not been studied in depth and while there are not yet sufficient, definitive studies in these areas it does not mean that these areas would not benefit from a scientific analysis. The place to begin such an analysis is with the data that JCSuperstar presents. Contrasting the techniques used by high level players with less successful players is the beginning of learning about the best practices to use that can enhance one’s game.

One can get from here to there by crawling, skipping, walking or running. There are better ways depending on one’s needs and abilities. Some of these ways are not easily identified. When playing pool one seeks consistency in shot making and position and there may be techniques that improve on the ability to reach this goal which is different than simply pocketing a ball.

I have maintained for many years that using a pool cue like a rifle is a "better" practice. Many people disagree with me though there are data to support this idea. JCSuperstar's observation support this notion. Consider the idea that 50% of the high level players face the shot. The remainder must be using one of the other two ways he presents. Thus, it would appear that twice as many high level players face the shot and by definition they are more successful. That is sufficient information to conclude that there must be something useful in this approach.

One may not agree with JCSuperstar's definitions or the way in which he arrived at his findings. None-the-less, in the sciences, his data hold the day until someone can come up with better information. From a scientific perspective, facing the shot is currently the "better" way. When we think in this "scientific" way we have made substantial progress in many areas. I think that one of the reasons for this progress lies inthe idea that JCS's findings encourage others to conduct more refined studies.

I have maintained for many years, watch what they do not what they say and your game will get better.

JJFSTAR
07-08-2008, 10:31 AM
Railrat with all due respect you just can’t say “As long as …. and you are comfortable it is correct, were not machines you know” The chances are I know more about how the human body is aligned and how it moves than anyone on this board and I have to tell you we are machines we are not inanimate but we are machines; all made up of the same stuff and we all respond similarly.

I am not saying that there is “The correct stance” that’s foolish. There are perfect stances, ideal stances, less than ideal stances and poor stances. JC’s study is valuable to our understanding of those parameters and what the differences are and what defines those categories.

That also isn’t to say that you can’t play great pool with a poor stance or any other of the 50,000,000 other physical obstacles that we may have to overcome because of the differences in our bodies and our limitations. I have been teaching competition pool for over 15 years and I have yet to have a student arrive with their ideal stance.

So as I said with all due respect you can’t discount this study. The pool world needs stuff like this; it is what has gotten us into the golden age of pool that we are in.

Rail Rat
07-08-2008, 10:43 AM
Of course there are scientific principles that govern any sport in the proper application of technique. We have the Iron Byron golf robot that duplicates a perfect swing from one of golf's masters. I think we can all agree on accepted practice and move on to my point.

There are variations of these practices that take into account different player abilities based on the physical makeup of the human body. Also every sport is different and I don't believe you can make comparisons to keenly from one to another. I was a master sharpshooter in the service and I don't see that many similarities between a rifle and a cue stick other that you must sight accurately. You don't move a rifle back and forth, etc.

I see the value for an accurate, scientifically tested manual, and I support you on that, but once again I believe all variables must be factored in to any scientific study in that endeavour and anybody reading it should apply it only as a general guideline.

I have changed my stance many times over the years when it became clear that I could improve it, but I still stand by this statement, if you are in a stable 3 point stance and its on line to the shot, then it's correct for you.

I looked at your posted address Joe and the only thing I saw there close was Adam and Joes big Jabba?

JJFSTAR
07-08-2008, 11:15 AM
And I am saying that you can’t say.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rail Rat</div><div class="ubbcode-body">if you are in a stable 3 point stance and its on line to the shot, then it's correct for you.</div></div>

I am saying that people have specific common problems that do not allow them to shoot the best pool that they can shoot; by using the term “correct” that is what I mean by it.

There are common problems that people have in their stance i.e. they are too erect, their back is too hunched, they have too much weight on their bridge hand, they are not perfectly balanced etc. etc. so your one line statement doesn’t cover this and at the same time discounts studies like this as being valuable when it is my humble opinion that they are.

So I am saying that the quote above is just too simple an assertion. Unless you mean something other than your stance allowing you to shoot pool as well as your natural ability will allow you to when you use the term “correct” but I can’t imagine that that would be true.

JoeW
07-08-2008, 11:20 AM
RailRat said, " I looked at your posted address Joe and the only thing I saw there close was Adam and Joes big Jabba?"

I am not sure what you mean here RailRat? If you click on the link in my signature it should take you to "Pocket Billiards Review" a site within the SunburstSelect family of web sites

If you Google Pocket Billiards Review it is one of the first listings.

A few of the comparisons to rifle shooting and pool playing are as follows:

The need for a highly stable stance on one's heels with the need to set one's hips or the center of gravity for off hand shooting, if one is to be consistent over many shots.

Sighting the length of the barrel, lining up the rear and front of the rifle and the need to line up the front and the rear of a cue stick.

The intent to strike a very small contact point and shooting at a bullseye from 500 yards.

The need to control one's breathing.

The need to be relaxed and focused.

My experience was with an M - 1 many many years ago and later transferred to the use of a 30 caliber Winchester. There is a similarity between calculating environmental effects with a rifle bullet and the effects of english on a cue ball, at least in so far as one needs to learn to compensate for the shot.

BTW Do you think that someone who chose to stand at a 45 degree angle to their rifle would be able to achive the same accuracy as those who learn to use the tried and true techniques.

Rail Rat
07-08-2008, 03:25 PM
Joe, I clicked on the video address you provided in your post and it took me to a unrelated site, I'll try you're signature address.

On comparing rifles with pool, I agree that sighting and a stable stance are very important in both events, however thats where it ends. You sight along a rifle barrel at eye level and move nothing, with a cue you look down on the stick and move your arm back and forth. I don't believe breathing is a major factor in pool, you don't have windage blowing across your aim. We could go on here but I think its a moot point. My comments were to those who try and compare golf or even a base ball swing to pool and it has little merit, pool is a different animal than any other sport. I think it only confuses students when we do this.

With all due respect to your in-depth technical knowledge I just can't totally agree that we can improve by applying scientific manuals and charts. It can help but its not a be all to end all solution.

-brad

Rail Rat
07-08-2008, 03:45 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JJFSTAR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Railrat with all due respect you just can’t say “As long as …. and you are comfortable it is correct, were not machines you know” The chances are I know more about how the human body is aligned and how it moves than anyone on this board and I have to tell you we are machines we are not inanimate but we are machines; all made up of the same stuff and we all respond similarly.

I am not saying that there is “The correct stance” that’s foolish. There are perfect stances, ideal stances, less than ideal stances and poor stances. JC’s study is valuable to our understanding of those parameters and what the differences are and what defines those categories.

That also isn’t to say that you can’t play great pool with a poor stance or any other of the 50,000,000 other physical obstacles that we may have to overcome because of the differences in our bodies and our limitations. I have been teaching competition pool for over 15 years and I have yet to have a student arrive with their ideal stance.

So as I said with all due respect you can’t discount this study. The pool world needs stuff like this; it is what has gotten us into the golden age of pool that we are in.
</div></div>

I agree with much of what you say here, and of course there is always room for improvement in playing this difficult to master game. As I note in my reply to Joe I just would'nt place to much faith in any scientific journal to make us the perfectly standing stroking machine. Will it help, yes, any knowledge is valuable as long as it is correct.

My statement on stance was over simplefied but the essence of it is true, you see it working in players who are successful in the game. It works for Reyes, and for Hopkins and others who have unorthodox styles. It's what is correct for them. Should we teach it, no! Should we teach a beginner the basics as it is understood, yes! But at some point the individual takes over. -brad

HALHOULE
07-08-2008, 10:24 PM
YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT ANY PRO DOES.
HAL HOULE

av84fun
07-09-2008, 12:14 AM
1. Pointing to the technique that any particular championship player utilizes for ANYTHING...including the stance is a prescription for disaster.

Trying to emulate Bustamante's "loopy" stroke and his technique of practice stroking with the cue tip literally dragging on the cloth...and then striking the CB with...say...high left would ruin most player's games.

Keith McCready's side arm stroke is another example among many.

In attempting to learn from watching top pros, the student should focus on how MOST players play not any ONE player.

2. Regarding stance while body size, type and flexibility are certainly major issues, there are a few important matters that are NEARLY universal.

A. The back foot should be positioned on a line extended from the aim line out to where the player is standing. Most top players "walk into the shot" being CERTAIN to have their back foot "step on the line."

B. The forearm and upper arm (grip arm) should form a 90 degree angle with the forearm perpendicular TO THE CUE....NOT TO THE FLOOR.

C. The "traditional" front leg position is at about a 45 degree angle from the aim line but the snooker converts open that angle up somewhat which, among other things, makes the shoulders more square to the shot. Either method is fine and is a matter of personal choice based on extensive experimentation. HOWEVER, avoid at all costs placing your front leg much narrower to the shot line...i.e. placing the front leg much less than 45 degrees to the line. Doing so is a VERY unbalanced position that risks overall body movement during the stroke...especially harder strokes.

Most people walk naturally with the center of their feet slightly inside their shoulders. That would be MAXIMUM NARROW for a pool stance. Drunks tend to walk with their feet at about shoulder width...and for good reason...they NEED the wider stance for stability. So do pool players.

As I walk into the shot, my LAST step (left foot since I shoot righty) angles out slightly to the left so that my left foot is place slightly outside my left shoulder.

As Spiderwebcomm stated, whatever you do...do it CONSISTENTLY.

When Allison Fisher was in her teens, she famously PAINTED foot markes on her CARPET so that when she practiced a default shot, her feer would be in EXACTLY the same place...every time.

ABOVE ALL...the stance should be "athletic." When quarterbacks take their stance behind the center, some have their feet parallel to the line of scrimage and some drop a foot back but they are ALL positioned in a highly athletic and balanced fashion and NONE of them place one foot directly in front of the other or anything close to that.

When I work with beginners and see them place their front foot too close to the shot line, I'll stand near their shoulders and push them from the side which nearly makes them fall over.

Then I invite them to do the same to me and I stay steady as a rock.

Regards,
Jim

DeadCrab
07-10-2008, 10:30 AM
I just received a Jimmy Reid instructional video yesterday and he had some interesting things to say regarding varying the stance and head height depending on the distance of the shot.

Hadn't heard that before. I'll keep a closer eye on the pros to see if any of them do this.

JCSuperstar
07-11-2008, 07:06 AM
I have compiled many bits of information on the stance subject and would like to thank you all for the valuable input. I sat down with a kinesiology professor and surgeon Monday and discussed my findings in depth. We discussed the science with other sports analysis such as my reports. A complete comparable findings will be published in my new sports book arriving in stores in November.

I would like to personally thank Master Instructor Tim White of the Academy of the Cueing Arts for his diligent work with the study of the sport. His knowledge has proven to be right on track with my extended research. I highly recommend his study materials.

Fran Crimi
07-11-2008, 08:06 AM
Sorry to hear that.

pooldude
07-11-2008, 09:36 AM
Did you really say, Mr???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JCSuperstar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mr Crimi,

I agree. I have found that my stance is very important as in so many other things humans do standing. Well, we aren’t exactly standing or sitting, kind of somewhere in between. I see the waist up as horizontal and the waist down as vertical.

As for the legs. I agree 100% on your statement “comfort is important”, however I must be comfortable in the correct position. I see so many different ways people stand at the shot and I don’t think anyone has any clue as to what they are doing. So….what that correct position is would have to be based on the feet placements based on some science not opinion, correct? Would you agree? Am I looking for specific feet placements, most importantly or leg or knee , that is all I think there would be in the legs section.

</div></div>

Rail Rat
07-11-2008, 08:05 PM
JC, Fran is a female pro!

There are tons of articles, books and web sites addressing the proper stance in billiards, all have slight variations depending on the writer. But most agree in the basics. I have found the biggest differences are in snooker as compared to pool.
For instance:

My first snooker instructor said to put my weight on the front foot.
My second (who reached the top 15 in the world championships) said to put my weight even on both feet. He also faced the table more head on, where as the other had me place my back foot further back.

I have observed a lot of snooker players and I can see this is a common difference for many players. brad

av84fun
07-15-2008, 12:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JCSuperstar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have compiled many bits of information on the stance subject and would like to thank you all for the valuable input. I sat down with a kinesiology professor and surgeon Monday and discussed my findings in depth. We discussed the science with other sports analysis such as my reports. A complete comparable findings will be published in my new sports book arriving in stores in November.

I would like to personally thank Master Instructor Tim White of the Academy of the Cueing Arts for his diligent work with the study of the sport. His knowledge has proven to be right on track with my extended research. I highly recommend his study materials.

</div></div>

Sorry, I just can't let that go. Was Tim White naked when he did all his diligent work for you...as he appears in some of his instructional DVDs?

The man is an embarrassment!

Regards,
Jim

JCSuperstar
07-15-2008, 05:53 PM
Jim, - av84fun

No, he was not and I can’t believe you would post that opinion here.

I do have the DVD’s and I feel they are absolute brilliant material.

Jim, with all due respect, you should check your facts. He does not appear naked in “some” (meaning 2 or more) videos as you stated. The health scene you are referencing is about 5 seconds long in Volume 10, which is only viewed by accepting the disclaimer prior to the scene. This health scene is solely directed at the disgrace of the image of the sport with smoking, which I agree with. To make the statement you made more accurate, the DVD’s are over 46,800 seconds long with a 5 second creative nude segment, that is less than a tenth of 1 percent. If nudity offends you, as I see it does, you are surly welcome to skip the segment and still gain all the knowledge. Smoking is the true embarrassment to the sport, not one who has devoted his life and passion to make positive changes helping others.

I would suggest looking in the mirror before making statements like this about others. I am sure you are not perfect. If anyone of us ever become afraid of being wrong or criticized, new greatness would cease. The world has enough negative criticisms to go around, we don’t need them here as well.

The DVD’s from the Academy of the Cueing Arts have provided me with a magnitude of awesome knowledge, which has taken my game to a level I never could have imagined in a very short time.

Regards,
JC

av84fun
07-16-2008, 02:18 AM
What does the length of time have to do with anything? If he only kicked a dog for 5 seconds does that make it acceptable in your mind?

And are you in favor of the FACT that he posted unflattering pictures of one of the greatest female champions of all time solely for the purpose of embarrassing her?

As for appearing naked in "some" videos, you are incorrect. You state that "some" means "2 or more." Do you think that there is only ONE copy of Volume 10 in existence? I suggest that there are "2 or more" of them and therefore, my comment stands without correction and you were splitting hairs in any event.

Regards,
Jim



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JCSuperstar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim, - av84fun

No, he was not and I can’t believe you would post that opinion here.

I do have the DVD’s and I feel they are absolute brilliant material.

Jim, with all due respect, you should check your facts. He does not appear naked in “some” (meaning 2 or more) videos as you stated. The health scene you are referencing is about 5 seconds long in Volume 10, which is only viewed by accepting the disclaimer prior to the scene. This health scene is solely directed at the disgrace of the image of the sport with smoking, which I agree with. To make the statement you made more accurate, the DVD’s are over 46,800 seconds long with a 5 second creative nude segment, that is less than a tenth of 1 percent. If nudity offends you, as I see it does, you are surly welcome to skip the segment and still gain all the knowledge. Smoking is the true embarrassment to the sport, not one who has devoted his life and passion to make positive changes helping others.

I would suggest looking in the mirror before making statements like this about others. I am sure you are not perfect. If anyone of us ever become afraid of being wrong or criticized, new greatness would cease. The world has enough negative criticisms to go around, we don’t need them here as well.

The DVD’s from the Academy of the Cueing Arts have provided me with a magnitude of awesome knowledge, which has taken my game to a level I never could have imagined in a very short time.

Regards,
JC

</div></div>

Fran Crimi
07-16-2008, 09:37 AM
JCSuperstar seems to know an awful lot about Tim White and his dvd.

Eric.
07-16-2008, 10:16 AM
Fran,

I suspect this is Tim White under an alias too.

Tim White got the ban at AZ Billiards, along with his many aliases. He has even gone as far as to "buy" the domain name of landonshuffett.com, a former student of his and Tim is suspected of posting under Landon's name to shill for the Vermont Oyster's Pool School.


Eric

av84fun
07-16-2008, 05:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Eric.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fran,

I suspect this is Tim White under an alias too.

Tim White got the ban at AZ Billiards, along with his many aliases. He has even gone as far as to "buy" the domain name of landonshuffett.com, a former student of his and Tim is suspected of posting under Landon's name to shill for the Vermont Oyster's Pool School.


Eric </div></div>

In addition, JCSuperstar (who definitely isn't) elected not to mention when he launched his thread that he was gathering information for a new book!

The proper thing to do would have been to disclose the upcoming book and THEN ask for contributions from the forum membership.

FINALLY, on this subject, his statement..."However, the research I have done and information I have gathered from a Master Instructor, there is a scientific fundamental correct stance. l...is not only poor grammar, it is utterly and demonstrably FALSE.

Many of the greatest champions throughout pool history and today have RADICALLY different stances and they play JAM UP!

Save your snake oil sales pitch for your new book...it won't work for many on this forum or elsewhere.

Jim

Fran Crimi
07-16-2008, 05:52 PM
This isn't the first time members of the CCB were duped into shelling out information for someone else to steal and take credit for. I've seen it here on a regular basis for a couple of years now, unfortunately.

Fran

1Time
07-19-2008, 09:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JCSuperstar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In thought today on the major and minor leg/feet positions of the stance. How much attention do you place on it while approaching the shot and getting into set? Are you making sure it is the same every time or just going at it any 'ol way? Interested to know the specific thoughts here of what you do individually and why. Thanks </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fran Crimi</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Stance is as important as it gets in pool.</div></div>
Can't agree more with Fran Crimi.

For me and as I tell others, the shot begins before assuming the stance and the mechanics of the shot begin with the stance. My reminder here is to "aim with your feet", which is to suggest the stance is part of the aiming process, its physical foundation. I liken the stance to the large wheel on a microscope that brings the image roughly into focus. The smaller sized wheels on the microscope would be analogous to aspects of the aiming processes that take place after assuming the stance.

Imagine where your feet need to be so you can execute good shot mechanics to make the shot. Then assume that stance. At first it will take time and a few attempts to get this right. With a little practice you should notice an improvement in your game. With more practice you should find this process comes as second nature, kind of like learning to dance.

Snapshot9
07-21-2008, 11:55 AM
I am old school and this is the general basic stance.

1) Feet just a little wider than your shoulders.
2) Stand at a 45 degree angle to your cue.
3) Turn your front foot slightly forward some.
4) 60 percent of weight on back locked leg, 40% on front leg that is slightly bent.
5) Bend at the waist keeping your back straight. Your chin should be directly over the cue, if not adjust feet away or closer to the cue.
6) Upper grip arm is parallel to the floor. Lower arm is perpendicular to the floor.
7) Bridge hand is 7-10" behind the tip. Grip hand should keep wrist straight, and grip with 2 fingers and thumb (other variations to this also).

This stance provides straight body lines, and weight is on joints, and not muscles. If unsure about stance, go from a
standing rifle position down into a Pool stance bending at the waist keeping back straight.

Bambu
07-21-2008, 02:12 PM
Disclaimer or not, and regardless of the length: I'd rather smoke than watch some dudes nads on a pool video, any day.