PDA

View Full Version : Are there any SYSTEMS for SPEED CONTROL ?



bigbro6060
11-20-2002, 12:30 PM
my opinion is that speed control is what separates very good players from the pack.

I practice it in some form or other every time i play now, i determined to 'master' it.

now in pool there does seem to be a lot of systems around. From aiming systems to banking and kicking systems

are there any systems for speed control ?

Fred Agnir
11-20-2002, 12:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bigbro6060:</font><hr>

are there any systems for speed control ? <hr /></blockquote>
BCA Instructors teach an analytical method for speed control. Short of natural ability, it's the best method I've seen. It's the only method I've seen.

Fred

TonyM
11-20-2002, 02:55 PM
"are there any systems for speed control ?"

You are right that speed control is often what seperates players in skill level. But is there a system? Not that I know of.

There are some tidbits of knowledge that can help you decide on how much speed to use.

For example, if you strike an object ball dead-on with a stun shot (no spin about the horizontal axis), then the final object ball speed will be equal to the initial cue ball speed (at the moment of impact) and the final cue ball speed will be zero (the technical definition of a stop shot).

In other words, the object ball will leave the cue ball at the same speed that the cue ball arrived at!

Now, as the cut angle increases, the final object ball speed decreases and the final cue ball speed doesn't decrease as much.

For example, a 90 degree cut shot would (in theory) leave the cue ball speed unchanged, and the object ball speed at zero.

So very thin cuts remove very little of the initial cue ball speed, while very thick cuts remove all of it (for dead on shots).

A 45 degree cut angle (a bit thinner than a half ball hit) would result in the final cue ball speed and the final object ball speed being 1/2 the initial cue ball speed.

A similar relationship can be given for the rolling distance of either the cue ball after impact or the object ball.

So knowing how thin or thick the cut angle is, can give you some information on both the relative speeds of the two balls after a collision, and the relative rolling distances.

You can get a good feel of the rolling distance for a cue ball only by shooting just the cue ball up and down the table at various speeds. See how much (or how little!) speed is required to move the cue ball a certain distance.

For very thin cuts, estimating the cue ball rolling distance is very similar to estimating the rolling distance of the cue ball alone (for the reasons outlined above).

Ron Shepard's APAPP has further info on this (get the download from playpool.com) and Jack Koehler's book: "The Science of pocket Billiards" has some tables and graphs.

What do good players do?

Without realizing it, they get a "feel" for the above relationships over time. They know that if they want to kill the cue ball after a thin hit, that the initial cueball speed must be much less than it would be for a thick hit.

And they know that if they want the cue ball to travel a long distance after a thick hit on the object ball, that they need plenty of speed and/or spin to acheive this.

You can practice this skill. A good game to practice speed control using various cut angles and spin is Target Pool (as discussed on another thread).

Bryne's tapes also show some good drills as well.

Lastly, start becoming more aware at the table. Begin to start anticipating what you think will happen (this is called a hypothesis) and compare it to what actually happened (this is called an experiment).

Start memorizing the results from these "experiments". Thus every shot becomes an opportunity to learn something new about speed control.


Good players almost always have good memories. Become more aware about what is happening, and you will too.

Good luck!

Tony

bigbro6060
11-20-2002, 05:01 PM
Fred , could you possibly expand on the Analytical method ?

and Tony, thanx for the tips /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif


thanx for both of you for the replies

Scott Lee
11-20-2002, 06:44 PM
The first step in learning speed control, is to teach your arm what a soft, medium, and hard swing are. A soft swing is a lag, or shooting the CB two lengths of the table. A hard shot is break speed, or shooting the CB 4-5 lengths of the table. A medium speed shot is in between, but closer to soft than it is to hard...the CB travels 3 lengths of the table. On each of these shots, your CB must come to a rest within 1 diamond of the end rail. This gives you a margin of error of 18-28", depending on table size. When you can do this with the CB consistently (10x in a row, or 'on demand'), you can start shooting shots at these speeds. A ball pocketed at lag speed falls off the end of the slate, without hitting the back of the pocket. A medium speed shot hits the back of the pocket, but not hard...and a break speed shot slams into the pocket. By learning this exercise, you will begin to understand speed control, both in relation to rolling the CB (as Tony was describing...which is what I call speed tradeoff), and pocketing shots at the correct speed for the situation.

Scott Lee

PQQLK9
11-20-2002, 06:49 PM
I know that... /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Ludba
11-20-2002, 08:27 PM
After learning to consistently hit soft, medium, and hard, is the next chapter simply to divide in half and hit medium soft (2.5 rails) and medium hard (3.5 rails)? And then is further speed conrol a matter of continually dividing until we are able to hit a certain speed (as many rails and portions thereof) at will? Or is there a more efficient system?

CarolNYC
11-21-2002, 03:23 AM
Wouldnt playing straight pool help out speed control?
Carol

bluewolf
11-21-2002, 05:24 AM
WTG scott. Scott is the first pool instructor I went to.Then I went to randy gs pool school and learned some more about softer speeds. When I do speed control drills, about twice a week, I pretty much combine the two methods, starting with scott's. so i do the 2 rail, 3 rail, one rail speeds and try to go 4, which is still hard for me. then i go 1/2 rail (2-3 diamonds) 1/4 rail, half way to side pocket and then practice only hitting the cb 2 inches.

Of course when ob and rails are added into this equation, ie, how much of the cb energy is transferred to the ob or rail etc.other variables come into play. i am working on these too but think ultimate speed control is a fine art and takes lots of practice.

blu

11-21-2002, 08:04 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> Wouldnt playing straight pool help out speed control?
Carol <hr /></blockquote>

Shhhh!! thats a big secret.. nobodys suppose to know that! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif


I think the first thing I learned about pool, was that it doesn't take a whole lot of effort to get a ball to go 8 or 9 feet and drop into a pocket. Alot of the great players I see play exactly like I do, except their speed control on certain shots is better than mine.. I somtimes miss the run-out because I accidentally leave myself a cut shot, rather than an "almost strait in" shot. Alot of times I play for a certain angle, but I get too much or too little angle to do what I want to do.

I think thats the difference between great players, and mediocre players.. great players almost always have the perfect angle.. and that requires quite a bit of speed control sometimes.

Fred Agnir
11-21-2002, 08:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bigbro6060:</font><hr> Fred , could you possibly expand on the Analytical method ?<hr /></blockquote>
And give away the BCA Instructors livelihood?

Well, basically, with the instructor, you define your "natural stroke speed" measured in distance. That's the key. From there, you can put a numerical value of speed using the diamonds and referencing your natural speed. A speed like "natural speed plus 2 diamonds" then means something to your body. That's the teaser basics of it.

Fred &lt;~~~ tease

CarolNYC
11-21-2002, 08:27 AM
Okay Seattle-kid,
I'll shhhhhhhhh! But can I say,being on the right angle of the ball for natural flow could help?ha ha ha ha ha
Carol~will shhhhshhhhh!:)

dave
11-21-2002, 09:10 AM
"I think thats the difference between great players, and mediocre players.. great players almost always have the perfect angle.. and that requires quite a bit of speed control sometimes." <hr /></blockquote>

I think the difference between a great player and a mediocre player is that they can make the shot work even when they DON'T get a perfect angle; and BECAUSE they make the shot work, you can't always tell that that wasn't their original intention.

Scott Lee
11-21-2002, 09:22 AM
Ludba...As you recall, part of the exercises to teach you about your stroke, involve learning to draw the ball, at a few speeds in between soft and medium...and doing it within a very small margin of error. Once you have "taught" your arm the basics of soft, medium and hard, it becomes more of a "sensation". It really is more "feel", and it comes with being able to hit the four speeds on "demand". This knowledge is what takes you to the next level, as you will possess confidence and control in the speed and delivery of your stroke through the CB.

Scott

Ludba
11-21-2002, 01:40 PM
But assuming that a person is putting his or herself through a course to become a professional pool player in a relatively short amount of time, say five to ten years, wouldn't it make sense to take your drill for discovering the four basic speeds of stroke to the extreme?

Because the advantage I see in that drill is exactly the one you have named: that the student is putting a "feel" and a "name," that is, he/she is teaching his/herself to recognize physically and mentally a particular motion that will need to be recalled at a later time in different situations. I would argue further that in professional play there are much more than four speeds used for positioning the cue ball. I may be wrong about this, but from what matches I have seen, there are a wide variety of speeds that must be recalled on demand. This is of course only one skill that a pro must use precisely.

The part I'm getting at is that just as one drill progresses to another, so too should each drill progress to a more precise version of itself. For instance, after being able to shoot one, two, three, and four rails consistently to a one foot by four feet area, we reduce the amount of area for a successful stroke. Instead of one diamond away from the rail, the objective is a half diamond away from the rail. And gradually, we refine the speed of the stroke, which makes further drills more precise, (especially the two-,three-, and four-foot draw drill).

Am I totally off-base in thinking this way?

Ludba
11-21-2002, 01:58 PM
I think that's what most people would guess, and I disagree. That places too much emphasis on shotmaking ability. Certainly pros are better at making tough shots under pressure, but more importantly they have conditioned themselves so that they don't end up in those situations in the first place. That is what bigbro is getting at and I definitely agree.

If you had to shoot 9 balls in a row, would you rather rely on your amazing shotmaking ability on each shot? You'd be crazy to do that. Pro play means shooting a string of high percentage shots. If you're in a jam, you have to be able to pull an amazing shot out of thin air, but the routine is to keep those to a minimum. Even pros miss difficult shots, and even pros crack under the pressure of shooting several difficult shots in a row. It's the law of averages.

bigbro6060
11-21-2002, 02:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bigbro6060:</font><hr> Fred , could you possibly expand on the Analytical method ?<hr /></blockquote>
And give away the BCA Instructors livelihood?

Well, basically, with the instructor, you define your "natural stroke speed" measured in distance. That's the key. From there, you can put a numerical value of speed using the diamonds and referencing your natural speed. A speed like "natural speed plus 2 diamonds" then means something to your body. That's the teaser basics of it.

Fred &lt;~~~ tease
<hr /></blockquote>

Thanx Fred /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Trust me, if i had access to any BCA instructor, i'd be there every weekend!

But here in australia (well where i am), there are no Pool schools, no proper instructors, it sucks, thats why i have to teach myself. Most of the people i've seen who do teach lessons know less than i do!

Fred, don't suppose you could private message me the details of how i determine my natural stroke speed ? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

bigbro6060
11-21-2002, 02:11 PM
Your totally right Ludba, when a pro is playing well, it looks ridiculously easy because he's always giving himself easy shots!

For me, i can attribute 90% of my missed runouts to speed control. I'm pretty good at reading angles, predicting the behavour of the cueball, but the amount of times that a few inches stuffs up my position for a planned runnout is frustrating

I should add that i play 8ball on a 7ft table mostly and trust me, 7ft doesn't mean easier ! with 15 balls on a 7ft table, there is a LOT of traffic and positioning really for the most part is measured in inches, not zones. On the occasions i do get to play nine ball, i find the space an absolute luxury, 9 balls or a 9ft table V 15 or a 7ft table. I have so many fewer problems with position on the bigger table

TonyM
11-21-2002, 03:06 PM
"Wouldnt playing straight pool help out speed control?"

Yes, for shots that require straight pool like speed control.

Shots come up in 9 ball, that you just wouldn't play very often in straight pool. that's because you have an option over which ball to shoot and (often more importantly) an option over which ball you chose to shoot next.

Thus the 3 rail with inside english to get just the right angle on the next ball shots don't come up that often in straight pool.

I think that a series of drills are a good way to learn speed control for the different games. Also, playing different games can help with different types of speed controls.

Tony

TonyM
11-21-2002, 03:19 PM
"I would argue further that in professional play there are much more than four speeds used for positioning the cue ball."

It sounds reasonable, but you are missing something.

Position is really about controlling the final resting place of the cueball relative to the next shot, not neccessarily controlling the initial speed of the cueball.

So there are several ways to get a cueball to a given location. You can change the angle, go extra, or fewer rails, and even kill, or enhance the speed of the ball off a cushion with english.

In fact, it may surprise you to learn that many proffesional players use nearly a constant stroke speed for a majority of common position shots.

They change the TIP POSITION, to change the cue ball speed and angle for position. This is a completely different way of playing position.

Some might say it's more advanced, others might say it adds extra complexity, but regardless it is another way to play position that does work.

So it's possible to learn only a few arm speeds (or cue speeds iif you like) and then fine tune the cue ball speed (and angle) with a small change in tip location.

Thus the pro player doesn't just think of the tip locations in terms of Top, Bottom, Middle, and Top/Bottom/Middle with side. They think of a continuum of tip positions between each of those basic locations.

So, for example, if you want to use a medium stroke for most shots, how do you get the cue ball to roll forward just a few inches (after striking an object ball) without resorting to rolling the ball softly?

You adjust the tip height. If the cue ball is relatively close to the object ball, then you might use just a few mm above center. And if the cue ball is farther away from the object ball, then you might actually use center ball, or even just a bit below center.

The same can be done with draw, and side spin.

It's another way of looking at the problem.

Instead of memorizing a multitude of arm speeds, and only a few tip positions, you perfect a few arm speeds, and learn what a fine adjustment to tip position can do.

Tony
-there's always another way....

Ludba
11-21-2002, 06:54 PM
"Position is really about controlling the final resting place of the cueball relative to the next shot, not neccessarily controlling the initial speed of the cueball."

I realize this is true, but speed is a component of controlling the final resting place just as english is. But I would argue just as you do that "there are several ways to get a cueball to a given location." And there are advantages and disadvantages of using english just as there are advantages and disadvantages of using speed to achieve this. But I think it's self-evident that professional pool players are masters at using english, speed, and angle to get them where they want to go.

"In fact, it may surprise you to learn that many proffesional players use nearly a constant stroke speed for a majority of common position shots."

You're right. I would be surprised. In Capelle on 9-ball: Archer vs. Reyes, he records various speeds of 131 position plays. "Speed of stroke was derived in most cases by measuring the cue ball's speed from contact with the tip to contact with the object ball (p122)." Therefore his measurements do not take into account the effect of tip position on speed which occurs after contact with the object ball or a rail. The speeds of stroke are distributed from 2 mph to 10 mph in increments of 1 mph. Obviously the most frequent speeds are from 3 and 6 mph, but there is still quite a bit of variety here. I don't know for sure that this same pattern would occur when measuring all professional players' stroke speeds, but these were the two best nine-ball players at the time the match was recorded, and it is likely that we would find similar information on measurements of many pros. Of the various speeds, no particular speed takes up more than 23% of the total number of shots. The players needed to be able to produce 8 different speeds of stroke within this one match.

Furthermore, Capelle had to use the video itself to determine the speeds of these strokes. I suggest that if he were able to use more accurate measuring devices while the match were taking place, the results would indicate greater variation from stroke to stroke, e.g. a 2.32mph stroke that has substantially different results than a 2.56mph stroke.

"Thus the pro player doesn't just think of the tip locations in terms of Top, Bottom, Middle, and Top/Bottom/Middle with side. They think of a continuum of tip positions between each of those basic locations."

I agree. They are very precise about tip position. This is along the same lines as I am thinking about the need for precision in speed control, which is equally important as (if not more important than) tip position.

"Instead of memorizing a multitude of arm speeds, and only a few tip positions, you perfect a few arm speeds, and learn what a fine adjustment to tip position can do."

It seems foolish to me NOT to learn a multitude of arm speeds, even if you CAN produce similar results with tip position. It would make more sense to me not to rely on one or the other exclusively, but to be able to call up either one or both at will depending on the requirements of the shot. I'm suggesting that we learn a multitude of speeds AND tip positions. This is of course over 5 to 10 years, so it is definitely feasible.

It may be that Efren and Johnny didn't learn to play well in this way that I'm suggesting, but it seems to me that it is a more analytical (and consequently more efficient) way of learning than spending 30 years trying to learn by experience. My point is about reducing the learning curve and perhaps more importantly reducing the components of pool down to its simplest terms.

The idea is that you divide a task into its various parts and deal with each individually, which is easier and more productive than dealing with the entire task at once. Several books do this by dividing pool into fundamentals, shotmaking, position, and strategy. Position can be further broken down into tip position, speed, angle. I'm suggesting that we break down speed even further to its smallest building blocks. What I say may sound excessive, but I don't believe it is.

I would suggest that even if Archer and Reyes themselves learned to play pool another way, that doesn't necessarily mean it is the preferrable way to learn. I'm suggesting a precise system for learning speed control that does not stop at basic speed control (which is of course extremely important), because it may be advantageous to have such a precise system if one does not already exist.

Scott Lee
11-21-2002, 07:56 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ludba:</font><hr> But I think it's self-evident that professional pool players are masters at using english, speed, and angle to get them where they want to go.

Scott:<font color="red"> Yes, they are! But just like playing 3rd ball position, they are first thinking "Soft, medium, or hard?" </font color>

The speeds of stroke are distributed from 2 mph to 10 mph in increments of 1 mph. Obviously the most frequent speeds are from 3 and 6 mph, but there is still quite a bit of variety here. The players needed to be able to produce 8 different speeds of stroke within this one match.

Scott: How do you quantify the strokes? How are they different from the four I showed you? I think if you looked at the video again, from the perspective of what I was showing you, that being soft, medium and hard shots, you would find a majority in the soft and medium range, and few hard shots.

Furthermore, Capelle had to use the video itself to determine the speeds of these strokes. I suggest that if he were able to use more accurate measuring devices while the match were taking place, the results would indicate greater variation from stroke to stroke, e.g. a 2.32mph stroke that has substantially different results than a 2.56mph stroke.

Scott: The difference here would similulate drawing the CB another foot, using a lag-speed stroke.



Tony: "Thus the pro player doesn't just think of the tip locations in terms of Top, Bottom, Middle, and Top/Bottom/Middle with side. They think of a continuum of tip positions between each of those basic locations."

I agree. They are very precise about tip position. This is along the same lines as I am thinking about the need for precision in speed control, which is equally important as (if not more important than) tip position.

Scott: Speed control is relatively easy to perfect, imo, and once you have perfected the four speeds I teach in the first lesson, you have all the "speed" skills necessary to become a pro. How you apply the stroke to tip placement on the CB makes the difference in whether or not, and how quickly a person can move up skillwise as a player. This is the same thing I talk about, when I demonstrate the 1/8 inch/3mm area of contact between the tip and the CB. The variability in contact on the CB is immense. Therefore, learning "basic" speed control becomes enough, when you compound it with the ability to hit the CB within a couple millimeters of where you want to. Besides I delve into more complex speed control right there in the first lesson.

Tony: "Instead of memorizing a multitude of arm speeds, and only a few tip positions, you perfect a few arm speeds, and learn what a fine adjustment to tip position can do."

Scott: I have to agree with Tony here! KISS!

It seems foolish to me NOT to learn a multitude of arm speeds, even if you CAN produce similar results with tip position. It would make more sense to me not to rely on one or the other exclusively, but to be able to call up either one or both at will depending on the requirements of the shot. I'm suggesting that we learn a multitude of speeds AND tip positions. This is of course over 5 to 10 years, so it is definitely feasible.

Scott: Ludba, if you can "call up" just the basics of soft, medium, hard, and "super soft" on demand, you are way ahead of the game. Remember, just hitting the shots isn't the whole enchilada...you must hit them using a proper stroke, and preshot routine!

My point is about reducing the learning curve and perhaps more importantly reducing the components of pool down to its simplest terms.

Scott: I think you are looking at this backwards. The things I have shown you are a direct path to doing exactly that: reducing the learning curve, and reducing the components of pool down to it's simplest terms!

I'm suggesting that we break down speed even further to its smallest building blocks. What I say may sound excessive, but I don't believe it is.

Scott: A lag IS the basic building block, Ludba! You cannot pocket a ball with a stroke any softer than a lag, regardless of distance to the pocket (unless the OB is sitting in the pocket).

I would suggest that even if Archer and Reyes themselves learned to play pool another way, that doesn't necessarily mean it is the preferrable way to learn. I'm suggesting a precise system for learning speed control that does not stop at basic speed control (which is of course extremely important), because it may be advantageous to have such a precise system if one does not already exist. <hr /></blockquote>

What I showed you requires extreme precision to fulfull all five exercises...most especially "on demand"...which basically means on the first try. When you can perform these as described and demonstrated to you, you will be well on your way to a higher level of all-around play.

Scott Lee

Ludba
11-21-2002, 08:03 PM
well, I'll accept it as true if scott lee tells me I'm wrong.

Scott Lee
11-21-2002, 08:09 PM
Ludba...It's not that I'm trying to tell you that you are wrong! One of the important things to understand about pool, is that there is no "right" or "wrong"! There are only choices, and which one you make! It's more like I'm trying to tell you that the "easy" way is just that...the most direct, most consistent, quickest way to achieve a measure of increase in ability. That doesn't mean you cannot continue to improve once you master these simple things...it just means you really MUST master them first...to get there the quickest route!

Scott

Ludba
11-21-2002, 10:59 PM
"It's not that I'm trying to tell you that you are wrong!"

I understood that. I just meant that your experience holds more weight than any reasonable argument I could make about a more efficient system of learning how to become a great pool player. I'm just trying to see the entire picture, trying to gain a perspective on the whole of the learning curve, not just a view from where I am at right now.

TonyM
11-21-2002, 11:28 PM
""Speed of stroke was derived in most cases by measuring the cue ball's speed from contact with the tip to contact with the object ball (p122).""

But there is an error there isn't there? The cue ball's speed is determined by two factors:

1) the cue sticks speed immediately before impact

and

2) the spin on the cue ball (determined by the tip position on the ball).

If we assume that the natural roll tip position is the default position to measure cue ball speed, then any tip positoin below that will reduce the cue ball speed, and any tip positoin above that will increase the speed.

He has a good idea, but it would be far more interesting to know the cue stick speeds used, not the cue ball speeds.

Tony
-I think they would be more consistent than shown...

TonyM
11-21-2002, 11:36 PM
"It seems foolish to me NOT to learn a multitude of arm speeds, even if you CAN produce similar results with tip position. It would make more sense to me not to rely on one or the other exclusively, but to be able to call up either one or both at will depending on the requirements of the shot."

Certainly, I agree with all of this. Top players can do either (control speed or tip position) very well. No argument there.

"The idea is that you divide a task into its various parts and deal with each individually, which is easier and more productive than dealing with the entire task at once."

This is the same approach that I use with my students, on every aspect of the game. Whether it be potting, position, speed control etc.

I think it's a more efficient way of learning for some.

The argument over using tip position or cue speed to control the rolling distance of the cue ball is an old one indeed. Geroge Fels refers to it in his book : "Advanced Pool".

He calls it: "Tip players versus Speed players".

It's also a question of efficiency as well. Some players may be better off to use a smaller range of arm speeds and adjust the tip position, because the stroke speeds fall right into their most consistent and accurate range of motion.

While others might be better off using primarily speed.

Certainly, it makes sense to be able to call upon whatever is most appropriate for the situation at hand!

Tony
-and have the wisdom to know when that is!...

bigbro6060
11-21-2002, 11:57 PM
guys, a big thanx to everyone who has contributed to this thread

I've got some invaluable information from it /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

keep the info comin

Ludba
11-22-2002, 12:37 AM
"If we assume that the natural roll tip position is the default position to measure cue ball speed, then any tip positoin below that will reduce the cue ball speed, and any tip positoin above that will increase the speed."

Hmm, I agree, because I've seen this effect on the cue ball, but I don't know how much of an impact it has on speed. This is just my ignorance, not a dispute with your argument. If I could label the effect as "this much below center causes this much of a difference in speed," I might have something meaningful to contribute. As it is, I can tell only vaguely what a 5mph cue ball speed looks like.

This is the real problem for me: I need something quantifiable, and the more specific, the better.

dave
11-22-2002, 09:54 AM
My contention was with the idea of " perfect position", not shot making versus good position play. I agree with both you on the importance of good cue ball control. What I AM saying though, is that it is not necessary to have "perfect" position as long as you land in a certain zone. Too many good players will screw up a run trying to get perfect instead of sometimes accepting a shot with a little greater distance than they would prefer but with a good line on the ball. A pro recognizes that having a good angle on the ball is better than trying to get perfect and risking missing your target zone. (just one example) Take a look at Mike Sigel's article in the November issue of BD. He talks about selecting the option that gives you the correct line on the next object ball which allows for a greater margin of error (he recognizes the NEED for a margin of error, not the expectation of a "perfect" position) I quess I am simply questioning what is meant by the term perfect. Have a good one!

Ludba
11-22-2002, 01:25 PM
"Too many good players will screw up a run trying to get perfect instead of sometimes accepting a shot with a little greater distance than they would prefer but with a good line on the ball."

That also falls in line with what scott lee was telling me about eighty-twenty players, i.e. those who are focusing so much on the position that they flub the shot.

CarolNYC
11-25-2002, 10:52 AM
Thanks Tony,
Speed control was one of my faults-after learning straight pool(still learning)ha ha ha-Ive had more control to sought of "finesse" the shots in, in 9-ball,ya know what I mean? I may get out of line and have to play a billiard shot,but Ive learned just two rails with a little speed control gets you JUST closer to the next ball-ha ha ha-instead of 10000 feet away,which is where I use to be! But Thank you!
Happy Thanksgiving!
Carol

11-25-2002, 05:01 PM
I have an old book called "The Art Of Position Play For High Runs" by Johnny Holiday, it was/is published by "Golden Touch Enterprises". This is a book intended to teach 14.1 break shots and getting to them but I have not found anything that comes close to teaching perfect cueball control.
A word of caution- learn to shoot these shots exactly as shown. There is always "another way" to get the same result but the stroke control is in these lessions, don't cheat yourself or fool yourself that this can't be done the way it is being described or think, "my style is better served doing it another way".
If it sounds like I learned the hard way, you are right! I wasted a lot of time "inventing" other ways of getting the same position. Good luck.

#### leonard
11-26-2002, 08:11 AM
In the 60s I played Luther Lassiter an afternoon and evening exhibition match at the room I managed in Troy. Luther wasn't hitting the balls in his normal fashion. So I was missing to help his play along. The referee was racking the balls and Luther said to me I know your missing on purpose to get me going but in the other rack you played a tough shot then every other shot was just stop,stop. Now I would have work my way around shooting the easy shots. I want to watch you play I think I can learn from you.
For the CCBers, Don Willis would always tell me Jimmy Moore always said if he knew what Joe Canton knew about straight pool Mosconi would never beat him a game. So there is a way the choose the right shot and path to make the game look simple.
I always show the cut shots with a 2,4,6,8,inch follow thru and how the cueball travels farther with each longer follow thru and no appreaciable cue speed.####