PDA

View Full Version : Zero bridge.



cushioncrawler
10-07-2009, 10:20 PM
The shortest bridge length that one can hav iz to hav the fingers allmost touching the Qball -- we can call this "zero" bridge.
Aktually, with my Vee-bridge, i can go even shorter -- if i open the first 2 fingers i can create space for the Qball to sit tween the fingers.

Anyhow, standard theory sez that the longer the bridge the better the sighting'n'aim -- and that the shorter the bridge the more akurat the kontakt on the Qball and the more akurat the delivery (at least when not uzing english).

But, iz sighting really badly affekted by uzing zero'bridge???
Duz zero'bridge help u -- for some shots at least????
Giv it a try.
And, its amazing how much power u can still get -- but probly not enuff for good draw.
madMac.

Chopstick
10-08-2009, 07:28 AM
I use what is called a nip draw bridge. You don't spread your fingers at all. You make a fist and just have the tip and bit of ferrule stiking out. It is used to radically shorten the angle of kiks when u r close to the rail. I can also draw the ball with it when the keu ball and object ball are klose together.

I had a guy call a foul on me once cuz I have hairy fingers. He said one of the hairs on tha back of my fingers touched the keu ball. Made me mad. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/mad.gif

cushioncrawler
10-08-2009, 08:07 PM
Chops.
Yes, good one -- a fist bridge -- no fingers at all -- i tryd it just then -- u can get real'real close to the Qball.
In fakt it iz probly too close for me -- ie for my billiards -- ie for ordinary shots -- ie at all ranges and separations.

Similar to fist'bridge -- u just tuck your 1st finger under -- leaving other 3 fingers sticking out forward -- givs a similar rezult -- but take care that 2nd finger stays clear of the Qball.

Funny thing -- i just then tryd my fingers'spread'wide'bridge -- and, with Qball say 10mm from ObjektBall, i could aktually foul the ObjektBall with the tip of my 2nd finger.

Anyhow, i am uzing a very short bridge length for most of my billiards shots on my 12' table.
Sighting (ie accuracy of aim) duznt really seem to be affekted -- alltho it might seem strange or diffikult at first.
But, the main thing iz -- delivery iz very very konsistent (ie accurat).
And, there iz more power available than u might think -- but u might need to lengthen up for long skrews.
madMac.

Chopstick
10-09-2009, 10:10 AM
Never used first finger down. I use the American style closed bridge. I have used second finger down to add height the a short bridge position. Another short bridge I use all the time close to the rails is a billiards bridge I saw in a Hoppe book. It is a stand up bridge. The second and third finger are forward and the third finger is back making a tripod. The close the loop with the first finger and thumb. You can turn it to the side and slide your third finger under the rail.

The works when you get into those weird spots when the cue ball is close to the rail at an angle and the only firm rail bridge spot is way back up the rail. You can drop that tripod in there close and get better kontact than trying to go off the rail with a two foot bridge length.

I know what you mean about having a short back stroke. It all comes out as forward stroke. I saw Grady Matthew doing that one time when I was playing him. Some shots he didn't take any back stroke at all. He just set the cue behind the ball and fired forward like shooting a rifle.

I have been having a good result with long skrews by taking a shorter back stroke and short follow stroke. Like spearing a frog. You can get a lot of explosive power with that stroke but the trouble with it is, if you have any elevation the cue ball will want to rise off the bed of the table. It makes the shot come out thin so I have to aim a little thicker on that shot to compensate for the rise of the cue ball.

You won't see the rise because it happens to fast. You will just hit the shot thin every time.

dr_dave
10-09-2009, 02:26 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">standard theory sez that the longer the bridge the better the sighting'n'aim -- and that the shorter the bridge the more akurat the kontakt on the Qball and the more akurat the delivery (at least when not uzing english).</div></div>There's more to it than that. For more info, see:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/bridge.html#length

Regards,
Dave

wolfdancer
10-09-2009, 02:48 PM
Mac, I read some of Fast Larry's ideas Re: pool....and shortened my bridge, which helped my game considerably. In theory,It probably shouldn't make a difference, except that most of us do not have that secure a bridge, so we don't have a "fixed" fulcrum.
Along those lines, I just recently purchased Don Trehan's Golf DVDs (he lists himself as a master instructor, and is the father of pro D.J. Treahan)....Don teaches a 3/4 swing, claiming little loss of power, and I like it....I can get the club face squared up more often now.
In fact I am heading out now to set a new course record, hopefully, or maybe not, WD

cushioncrawler
10-09-2009, 03:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dr_dave</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">standard theory sez that the longer the bridge the better the sighting'n'aim -- and that the shorter the bridge the more akurat the kontakt on the Qball and the more akurat the delivery (at least when not uzing english).</div></div>There's more to it than that. For more info, see:
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/bridge.html#length
Regards, Dave</div></div>Dr Dave -- I havta run now, to melbourne, to get my new billiards glasses -- so i will reply in a couple of days.
But i felt the need to go to a short bridge koz i am uzing a sharp domed shape to my new soft tip, instead of the flattish (more akurat) hard tips that i allways uze.
madMac.

cushioncrawler
10-10-2009, 11:03 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">standard theory sez that the longer the bridge the better the sighting'n'aim -- and that the shorter the bridge the more akurat the kontakt on the Qball and the more akurat the delivery (at least when not uzing english).</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dr_dave</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There's more to it than that. For more info, see.... Regards, Dave</div></div>Dr Dave -- Thems are 2 very good articles -- i agree 100% i think. Very good comments by spiderman and Bob J and Colin C etc.
Me, myself, i particularly like the dumbing'down of FrontHandPivot and BackHandPivot that i get (with a short bridge) -- i uze BHP and FHP for minor aim adjustment mostly, not so much for english.
Az i sayd -- my going back to a short bridge woz due mainly to the sharper domed softish Qtip that i am prezently uzing -- compared to the flat hard tip that i uzed for months.

Re a shorter bridge being good for reducing stroke error -- the articles deal mainly with angular errors etc.
This iz ok, but i think most players hav a nonIntentional hoik (swoop) on their stroke, and this hoik too will often be magnyfyd when uzing a longish bridge.
I like to uze an intentional hoik to modyfy the Qball trajektory, and i like the dumbing down of this intentional hoik allso.

Anyhow, it iz amazing how far u can send a Qball off'line, with an intentional hoik, ie with allmost zero bridge. This shows that one must still take care -- a short bridge aint foolProof.

But the sighting aspekt iz my main point. We all accept that a longish bridge givz more accurat aim -- but duz it -- it duznt seem to help me nowadays -- i aim allmost 1/4ball left of where i think (when ObjektBall iz a long way away), with all bridge lengths.

I agree with what spiderman sez about a short bridge giving a jerky action when asking for more power. But ignoring that for the moment -- its amazing how i can get say 3 lengths of a table with a 1" backswing, but only say 4-1/2 lengths with 9" backswing.
madMac.

cushioncrawler
10-10-2009, 11:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mac, I read some of Fast Larry's ideas Re: pool....and shortened my bridge, which helped my game considerably. In theory,It probably shouldn't make a difference, except that most of us do not have that secure a bridge, so we don't have a "fixed" fulcrum. Along those lines, I just recently purchased Don Trehan's Golf DVDs (he lists himself as a master instructor, and is the father of pro D.J. Treahan)....Don teaches a 3/4 swing, claiming little loss of power, and I like it....I can get the club face squared up more often now. In fact I am heading out now to set a new course record, hopefully, or maybe not, WD</div></div>Woofly -- Just before winter set in i hit a few buckets of balls in the back paddock. I tryd a half'swing, but my brother told me that in fakt i woz going all the way back to parallel.
Anyhow, the theory iz not important -- some golfers will be more accurat and konsistent with a swing like Don January -- some with a swing like Moe Norman -- pool aint much different i reckon.
madMac.

DeadCrab
10-12-2009, 06:49 AM
Is a markedly short bridge not the recipe for maximizing squirt?

Taking a fulcrum 8-10" off the cue's pivot point seems like an invitation for disaster if the cue tip impact point is at all off center.

bradb
10-12-2009, 02:17 PM
Hi Mac, long time no talk.

I've been playing so long now at the same bridge distance that any deviation does'nt seem to affect my accuracy. I do use a tight bridge when shooting from a narrow space... say just big enough to get my hand in.

In these situations you must look down more on the shot with less aiming, so its more of a "feel shot" for accuracy.

But In fact most of us can make a length of the table shot once we are down on it with out even looking down the table at the pocket. The angle is locked from when we first looked at it before the stance. Once down we sense the direction needed.

On another note I was studiing Dr Dave's visuals on squirt (very well done) and thought about how I aim for these shots...

When lining up I aim the tip of the cue at the contact point on the OB from the set point of the QB. Then stroke forward as if the QB was'nt even there and I'm stroking to hit the OB contact point. This seems to allow for the offset produced from the top side english. This provides a good visual refernce, the rest is just from years of playing experience. Brad

cushioncrawler
10-12-2009, 03:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DeadCrab</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is a markedly short bridge not the recipe for maximizing squirt? Taking a fulcrum 8-10" off the cue's pivot point seems like an invitation for disaster if the cue tip impact point is at all off center.</div></div>Krusty -- Yes i suppoze that adding the wt of one's bridge to the wt of the nose of the shaft must add to squirt, when asking for english.
But, i am talking about my shots where i want to hit the Qball dead'center, dead'straight, ie with zero side. Really, if the problem woz bad sighting, ie bad eye'sight, ie if u could stroke straight with any length bridge, then the length of the bridge wouldnt make any difference.
But, i am talking about when u karnt stroke straight, ie when u hav an nonintentional hoik.
When u hav a nonintentional hoik, a shorter bridge must giv u a more accurat kontakt on the Qball, ie less nonintentional english -- and, less hoik, ie a straighter shot -- thats what i am looking for.

But i dissagree about the squirt being a disaster. I reckon that if i hoik (nonintentionally) say to the left, i will send the Qball a bit left of the intended line -- but, if then the kontakt on Qball iz left of center, the Qball will squirt right a bit -- the hoik and squirt tending to negate.
So, the wt of the bridge might help, not hurt -- a win'win situation.

I just then noticed that u were referring to the short bridge being 8" to 10" short of the natural pivot point for the cue. This duznt change the above reasoning.
If i adopted a very long bridge, ie longer than the natural pivot length, then this would probly giv more squirt plus more hoik -- hoik and squirt once again negating.
I suppoze that u can hav a situation where for some players the "negating" works best for a long bridge rather than the short bridge that i am pushing -- probly 1% of players, versus 66% for short bridge, versus 33% for medium bridge.
madMac.

cushioncrawler
10-12-2009, 04:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bradb</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hi Mac, long time no talk. I've been playing so long now at the same bridge distance that any deviation does'nt seem to affect my accuracy. I do use a tight bridge when shooting from a narrow space... say just big enough to get my hand in. In these situations you must look down more on the shot with less aiming, so its more of a "feel shot" for accuracy.
But In fact most of us can make a length of the table shot once we are down on it with out even looking down the table at the pocket. The angle is locked from when we first looked at it before the stance. Once down we sense the direction needed.
On another note I was studiing Dr Dave's visuals on squirt (very well done) and thought about how I aim for these shots...
When lining up I aim the tip of the cue at the contact point on the OB from the set point of the QB. Then stroke forward as if the QB was'nt even there and I'm stroking to hit the OB contact point. This seems to allow for the offset produced from the top side english. This provides a good visual refernce, the rest is just from years of playing experience. Brad</div></div>Brad -- When uzing side i sort of feel-imagin the (initial) line to be taken by the Qball -- based on years of experience. I dont know or care where the stikk iz pointing.
But of course the initial'line that i imagin iznt the initial'line at all -- it iz sort of an imaginary line taken by the Qball untill it iz perhaps a quarter of the way to the Oball -- and then the Qball duz a bit more swerving and kurving and kontakts the Oball ok az planned.

Which raises a good point. I dont need to uze a short bridge when uzing side. After all, when uzing side, nothing iz "straight", everything iz kurv and swerv and squirt and feel.
Best just uze your old favorit bridge length -- the one where u learnt most of your feel.
madMac.

bradb
10-13-2009, 12:31 PM
Exactly right Mac. Its all a "sense" of where to aim. You can imagine the line and shoot down it knowing that the curve will be correct at contact.

I will add that if I'm forced to use a tight bridge for a long down the table shot and I'm stricking downward more on the ball it starts out in a curve for about 2 feet then holds the line to the contact point on the OB. This may be an optical illusion but I think in this instance the top side spin is more of a punch shot than a spin shot. BB

cushioncrawler
10-13-2009, 06:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bradb</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Exactly right Mac. Its all a "sense" of where to aim. You can imagine the line and shoot down it knowing that the curve will be correct at contact.
I will add that if I'm forced to use a tight bridge for a long down the table shot and I'm stricking downward more on the ball it starts out in a curve for about 2 feet then holds the line to the contact point on the OB. This may be an optical illusion but I think in this instance the top side spin is more of a punch shot than a spin shot. BB</div></div>On a 12' table (billiards and snooker) u wouldnt dare try uzing side when the Qball iz on or near the rail, unless very short range, or the risk woz needed. Hell i know snooker players who spend their whole life hitting on the central vertical axis, ie near rail or not.
But i think that on a pool table u can see much more of a frozen Qball than we can with our highish 12' rails.
madMac.

bradb
10-14-2009, 12:56 PM
I've been speaking of play on pool tables, snooker is a whole different game.

Last night I went over to the snooker table to do a bit of practice and found I could still shoot ok but only if I left the english alone. The ball behaves completely different on the wool cloth. I would probably have to quit pool and just focus on snooker to get back into that game. I found I like the action better on the snooker table though as the shaved cloth on pool tables does weird things. Brad

cushioncrawler
10-14-2009, 04:06 PM
Brad -- I think its the direktionally napped woollen cloths that are weird -- especially when newish and well ironed, ie very slippery.

But i hav gone off the short (zero) type bridge -- i am back to a very long bridge -- but i still maintain that (my) sighting/aiming iz just az good with zero'bridge. But u (me) still havta take great care with delivery -- a short bridge aint foolproof.

Anyhow, my stikk iz pretty straight now -- i hav been getting rid of the (natural) bend by uzing wts overnite.
I love the bend -- it helps my accuracy, az we all know -- but it rezults in an oval shaped tip, koz u hold the stikk the same way up every shot (unless uzing side) -- and tips dont last very long -- and i want to go back to having a circular tip (like everybody else).

So, now, koz of zero bend -- the Qball goze left too far -- short bridge and long bridge.
Plus, this morning, with 2 windows on the left of my room, and only one on the right, the light bias made the Qball go left even moreso -- short bridge and long bridge. So i closed some curtains to even up the lighting and sure'nuff the Qball behaved better.

Anyhow, seeing az the short'bridge duznt cure all ills -- i hav gone back to a long'bridge -- in fakt a very'long'bridge.
madMac.

bradb
10-16-2009, 12:23 PM
Mac, that uneven light can be a killer. When that occurs you have to rely more on the "feel shots. In fact a good test would be to turn the lights out completely... draw the curtains and shoot in semi darkness. Once you acclimate yourself you may find the balls dropping the way they should.

On that tip wear I know what you mean. I used to have a snooker cue that had a beveled butte so that you hold it the same way every shot. I was constantly replacing the tip on that thing. But when I went to a roundish butte cue I really missed the feel of the bevel in my grip.

I'm very happy with a roundish butte now. Thats what my second wife says anyway. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

-Brad

1Time
11-18-2009, 04:52 PM
Shooting good requires imagination. The shaft / cue can be used as a tool to assist with this.

An open bridge arguably makes it easier to do this, as opposed to a closed bridge which obscures partial view of the shaft.

The length from the bridge hand to the tip of the cue affects the behavior of the CB when struck, and it potentially affects use of the shaft as a tool to assist with imagination.

Pool players often find it beneficial to adjust this length depending on the shot.

cushioncrawler
11-18-2009, 05:21 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1Time</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Shooting good requires imagination.....</div></div>Yes -- and even something az simple az aiming, ie lining up a stick and a ball(s) iz i reckon in fakt 100% imagination.
My original contention woz that our imagination (ie aim) woznt necessaryly much better with a long bridge -- talking about zero english here.
At prezent i am uzing a short bridge -- but not zero'bridge.
madMac.

cushioncrawler
11-18-2009, 05:34 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bradb</div><div class="ubbcode-body">........When lining up I aim the tip of the cue at the contact point on the OB from the set point of the QB. Then stroke forward as if the QB was'nt even there and I'm stroking to hit the OB contact point........</div></div>Brad -- The rails on my 1971 12' Duke are very narrow -- playing direktly away from the rail when the Qball iz frozen needs a short bridge.
I found that instead of aiming at a point on the OB i went best when aiming at a point on the far rail, ie a part of the pocket, ie on the aim line.
I get down and look at the needed line -- and look to see if there iz any feature on the pocket or rail on that line -- and i aim to hit the Qball at that feature.
Here i am really only talking about shots that are dead straight -- ie a part of the pocket iz allways on line.
My potting success rate iz allmost say 9 in 10, in praktis -- ie instead of say 5 in 10 -- but i havnt uzed it in a match yet.

Anyhow this here talk sort of disproovs my original contention.
But i think that it dont -- shots off the rail are different -- my original contention referred to shots out in the table.
madMac.

wolfdancer
11-18-2009, 06:55 PM
Zero bridge?....I thought you were talking 'bout Sarah's idea again... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

cushioncrawler
11-18-2009, 07:46 PM
Woofly -- Thats exaktly what i mean.
Once u hav decided on your bridge, u must not change your position, nor exaggerate anything, and, u must not stop the follow through -- otherwize u will end up nowhere -- Plain common sense.
madMac.

..........Many media groups in the U.S., says the Sydney Morning Herald, have noted that Palin changed her position regarding the bridges, and concluded that she exaggerated her claim that she stopped the proposals from going through.[45].........