30 Jan 2008 22:50:36
John Black
True or False?

Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
Seems true in my experience...

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



30 Jan 2008 23:30:15
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com >,
John Black <jblack@texas.net > wrote:

> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
> Seems true in my experience...

I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?

$.02 -Ron Shepard


30 Jan 2008 22:10:55
sittingduck
Re: True or False?

Ron Shepard wrote:

> I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
> wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
> The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?

Isn't the whole idea of a wrist snap to get more stick speed?

--
http://improve-usenet.org


30 Jan 2008 23:59:35
Mail Man
Re: True or False?


"sittingduck" wrote:
>
> Ron Shepard wrote:
>
> > I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
> > wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
> > The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?
>
> Isn't the whole idea of a wrist snap to get more stick speed?
>

Agree with both. Additionally, since the intent of using the wrist snap is
to make CB contact at or very near the end of the snap, this slightly
depresses cue angle (raises the back of the cue as the grip hand is going
upward at CB contact, and NOT directly toward the CB, at the end of the
snap), thereby slightly lowering the actual tip contact point on the CB.

Lower contact point = more back-spin (if there's no miscue)

I think Ron and the 'duck are getting at this: If you employ a piston
straight stroke directly to the contact point you would have realized as a
result of a wrist snap, identical results will be achieved if the cue speeds
at CB contact in both instances is equal.

This being said, the wrist snap is UNNECESSARY! -- the same results can be
more consistently achieved by disciplining one's self to good PSR and stroke
mechanics; especially a dead straight and as level as possible stroke at the
proper contact point on the CB. I have also found that a light grip and
deliberate stroke, rather than a tight grip and power stroke, produce far
better, more consistent, more controlled and more duplicatable (new word?)
results.

However, I must confess that I habitually, comfortably and consistently
employ the wrist snap. I have a LOT of bad habits -- BUT, I never had any
competent instruction, had to learn everything on my own and have been
playing for 54+ years. I have at times tried to correct these bad habits.
I have had some success on a few, but most are so second nature to me that
attempting to correct them destroyed any pretense I had of shooting an
effective game of pool. That is to say, my style sucks, but I consistently
get away with it.

In spite of this, when I teach students how to draw, I teach the DIRECT
STROKE, and NOT the wrist snap! I am fully capable of properly and
consistently drawing a ball with the direct stroke, and I feel, for
simplicity and repeatability of mechanics, this is what students need to
learn -- and NOT my old bad habits ... ;- >.

Mike Collier
Oak Harbor, WA



31 Jan 2008 13:12:24
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

I have noticed, through the years of my pool playing life, that there
are times when the CB is more "alive" than others, particularly on draw
shots. It seems that when I'm playing well, the ball sticks quicker on
stop shots and just springs back when I hit just a smidge below center.
It's hard to describe, but like I said, sometimes it's just noticeably
livelier.

Lately, I've been paying a lot of attention to my grip hand and it's
position in relation to my body and alignment with my arm. And one of
the things I've done is to go to a PSR that produces a grip that cocks
my wrist back, just a tad.

The results have been pretty good and the CB is definitely awake. I
attribute this, at least in part, to this new grip position, which, I
believe is introducing a bit of wrist snap to my stroke. I believe it's
because it's adding a bit more speed, with less arm movement and general
effort.

Lou Figueroa


John Black wrote:
> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
> Seems true in my experience...
>
> John Black
>


31 Jan 2008 09:23:08
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <ron-shepard-B21B30.23301530012008@comcast.dca.giganews.com >,
ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net says...
> In article <MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com>,
> John Black <jblack@texas.net> wrote:
>
> > Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
> > Seems true in my experience...
>
> I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
> wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
> The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?

Ok, I admit I haven't done a controlled experiment, keeping records etc.
Last night I was playing on my table at home and I was not getting the
amount of draw I needed on some shots. I put the wrist snap (doesn't
have to be a major amount) back into my stroke and walla, I was getting
plenty of draw (sometimes too much). This has happened many times
before -- not just last night. If I'm having difficulty with draw, its
usually because I'm not employing a little wrist action.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



31 Jan 2008 09:26:38
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <Xns9A35E1A60B71Cduckrulestheuniverse@invalid.quakefour.net >,
duck@nomail.afraid.org says...
> Ron Shepard wrote:
>
> > I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
> > wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
> > The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?
>
> Isn't the whole idea of a wrist snap to get more stick speed?

Yes, that is probably the only result as far as the cue ball is
concerned but what it allows you to do is keep your arm speed is a more
natural range (say in the vacinity of a stop shot speed) but use the
wrist to add some extra power at the end to get the draw. For me
anyway, this is more consistent and easier than using 100% arm speed to
get the extra stick speed.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



31 Jan 2008 09:31:19
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <YOjoj.182449$MJ6.158423@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net >,
lfigueroa@att.net says...
> I have noticed, through the years of my pool playing life, that there
> are times when the CB is more "alive" than others, particularly on draw
> shots. It seems that when I'm playing well, the ball sticks quicker on
> stop shots and just springs back when I hit just a smidge below center.
> It's hard to describe, but like I said, sometimes it's just noticeably
> livelier.
>
> Lately, I've been paying a lot of attention to my grip hand and it's
> position in relation to my body and alignment with my arm. And one of
> the things I've done is to go to a PSR that produces a grip that cocks
> my wrist back, just a tad.
>
> The results have been pretty good and the CB is definitely awake. I
> attribute this, at least in part, to this new grip position, which, I
> believe is introducing a bit of wrist snap to my stroke. I believe it's
> because it's adding a bit more speed, with less arm movement and general
> effort.

Yes, this is what I was getting at in my reply to sittingduck. The
wrist snap techique allows you to keep your arm speed and movement down
in a more natural range, improving consistency.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



31 Jan 2008 09:41:59
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <oKqdnTv-RtVY4jzanZ2dnUVZ_h6hnZ2d@comcast.com >, not.here@too-
long-gone.com says...
>
> "sittingduck" wrote:
> >
> > Ron Shepard wrote:
> >
> > > I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
> > > wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
> > > The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?
> >
> > Isn't the whole idea of a wrist snap to get more stick speed?
> >
>
> Agree with both. Additionally, since the intent of using the wrist snap is
> to make CB contact at or very near the end of the snap, this slightly
> depresses cue angle (raises the back of the cue as the grip hand is going
> upward at CB contact, and NOT directly toward the CB, at the end of the
> snap), thereby slightly lowering the actual tip contact point on the CB.
>
> Lower contact point = more back-spin (if there's no miscue)
>
> I think Ron and the 'duck are getting at this: If you employ a piston
> straight stroke directly to the contact point you would have realized as a
> result of a wrist snap, identical results will be achieved if the cue speeds
> at CB contact in both instances is equal.
>
> This being said, the wrist snap is UNNECESSARY! -- the same results can be
> more consistently achieved by disciplining one's self to good PSR and stroke
> mechanics; especially a dead straight and as level as possible stroke at the
> proper contact point on the CB. I have also found that a light grip and
> deliberate stroke, rather than a tight grip and power stroke, produce far
> better, more consistent, more controlled and more duplicatable (new word?)
> results.
>
> However, I must confess that I habitually, comfortably and consistently
> employ the wrist snap.

Mike, I think this is revealing. You claim to know that "in theory" it
is unnecessary to do this. Yet when you play you "consistently" do it.
I think you are using it for a reason whether you realize it or not.

> I have a LOT of bad habits -- BUT, I never had any
> competent instruction, had to learn everything on my own and have been
> playing for 54+ years. I have at times tried to correct these bad habits.
> I have had some success on a few, but most are so second nature to me that
> attempting to correct them destroyed any pretense I had of shooting an
> effective game of pool. That is to say, my style sucks, but I consistently
> get away with it.

Perhaps, or perhaps your 54 years of experience taught you some things
that are valid even though you have convinced yourself that they are
wrong.

> In spite of this, when I teach students how to draw, I teach the DIRECT
> STROKE, and NOT the wrist snap! I am fully capable of properly and
> consistently drawing a ball with the direct stroke,

If this were true, then I don't think you would "consistently" do it
another way.

> and I feel, for
> simplicity and repeatability of mechanics, this is what students need to
> learn -- and NOT my old bad habits ... ;->.

Simplicity is good as long as it is doesn't leave out something
important. Lou uses it and doesn't consider it a "bad habit". Perhaps
it has some merit?

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



31 Jan 2008 09:41:56
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"John Black" <jblack@texas.net > wrote in message
news:MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com...
> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
> Seems true in my experience...
>

IMO, it's a "loose" wrist that is necessary to play pool at higher levels.
"Loose" on all shots. I have no clue how the mechanics of that work, but
the results - a smooth efficient stroke, more predictable cue ball control,
more accurate speed control, more action on the cue ball with less effort,
etc. - are clear, IMO.

Bob Keller




31 Jan 2008 09:03:30
Re: True or False?

As another RSB-er who's been playing for over 50 years (56) I'll share
two draw tips gleaned from 40 years of attending professional 14.1 and
9-ball tournaments. Slightly off the wrist-flick topic but quite
germane to greatly improving drawback skills. Many longtime players
never notice some of these tiny but transformative details:

1) The first critical draw stroke change that separates many pros from
the average player: with your closed bridge, shift the middle finger
as far away as possible from the two cue-encircling fingers. This
automatically allows you to aim very low on the cue ball *while
keeping the shaft completely level* rather than self-defeatingly
pointed downward (the cause of almost all miscues when back spinning,
even with a well-chalked tip).

2) The next professional difference is to deliberately have the cue
tip *touch the cloth* near the cue ball, then raise it about a half-
tip (1/4 inch) off the cloth. You'll be amazed how many pros
routinely do this, for a time-tested reason: this guarantees you'll be
at the exact maximally effective contact level to easily apply
drawback. (Average players simply don't strike low enough and level
enough when back spinning.)

-- Carlton





31 Jan 2008 14:59:23
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <e574890f-d2a9-4934-8876-411ac836fcd3@
1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com >, carlton-redford@usa.net says...
> As another RSB-er who's been playing for over 50 years (56) I'll share
> two draw tips gleaned from 40 years of attending professional 14.1 and
> 9-ball tournaments. Slightly off the wrist-flick topic but quite
> germane to greatly improving drawback skills. Many longtime players
> never notice some of these tiny but transformative details:
>
> 1) The first critical draw stroke change that separates many pros from
> the average player: with your closed bridge, shift the middle finger
> as far away as possible from the two cue-encircling fingers. This
> automatically allows you to aim very low on the cue ball *while
> keeping the shaft completely level* rather than self-defeatingly
> pointed downward (the cause of almost all miscues when back spinning,
> even with a well-chalked tip).
>
> 2) The next professional difference is to deliberately have the cue
> tip *touch the cloth* near the cue ball, then raise it about a half-
> tip (1/4 inch) off the cloth. You'll be amazed how many pros
> routinely do this, for a time-tested reason: this guarantees you'll be
> at the exact maximally effective contact level to easily apply
> drawback. (Average players simply don't strike low enough and level
> enough when back spinning.)

Much appreciated, Carlton. The first one is a new one on me -- I'm
looking forward to experimenting with it tonight. And now that you
mention it, I have seen pros do the second one quite a bit.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



31 Jan 2008 15:04:44
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <TNGdnfVO9v7EZzzanZ2dnUVZ_rmjnZ2d@comcast.com >, rjk1962
@comcast.net says...
>
> "John Black" <jblack@texas.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com...
> > Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
> > Seems true in my experience...
> >
>
> IMO, it's a "loose" wrist that is necessary to play pool at higher levels.
> "Loose" on all shots. I have no clue how the mechanics of that work, but
> the results - a smooth efficient stroke, more predictable cue ball control,
> more accurate speed control, more action on the cue ball with less effort,
> etc. - are clear, IMO.

I'm beginning to discover (more like re-discover) this. I started this
thread talking about draw but I played a bit today and employed the
technique on pretty much all shots and WOW. More control, more
accuracy, more action when I need it, less effort. Its kind of been one
of those ah-ha moments! Perhaps what I am calling wrist flick, others
just call "loose" wrist. Whatever it is, its very important.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



31 Jan 2008 14:52:09
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"John Black" <jblack@texas.net > wrote in message
news:MPG.220bf3e491d7ef098997d@free.teranews.com...
> In article <TNGdnfVO9v7EZzzanZ2dnUVZ_rmjnZ2d@comcast.com>, rjk1962
> @comcast.net says...
>>
>> "John Black" <jblack@texas.net> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com...
>> > Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
>> > Seems true in my experience...
>> >
>>
>> IMO, it's a "loose" wrist that is necessary to play pool at higher
>> levels.
>> "Loose" on all shots. I have no clue how the mechanics of that work, but
>> the results - a smooth efficient stroke, more predictable cue ball
>> control,
>> more accurate speed control, more action on the cue ball with less
>> effort,
>> etc. - are clear, IMO.
>
> I'm beginning to discover (more like re-discover) this. I started this
> thread talking about draw but I played a bit today and employed the
> technique on pretty much all shots and WOW. More control, more
> accuracy, more action when I need it, less effort. Its kind of been one
> of those ah-ha moments! Perhaps what I am calling wrist flick, others
> just call "loose" wrist. Whatever it is, its very important.
>
> John Black

Yah. Without a doubt.
Now I wonder if we want to get into the physics of it????
What does a "loose wrist" or a "wrist flick" do to the movement of the cue?
Ron? (Please don't tell us it's another myth!)
Anyone?

Bob Keller




31 Jan 2008 17:40:12
eddie
Re: True or False?


I also use a bit of wrist snap on my draw. I always have.

But one thing I have noticed about my technique over the years...

I am a pretty experienced player. I have played long enough (20 years) and
gambled high enough that I have missed or choked in every way possible by
now. Pressure changes things. By now I am pretty immune to pressure for the
most part, but if I ever do get tight and let pressure change my game one of
the only ways I can ever succumb to it is to come up a bit short with my
draw when I go to my bread and butter snappy feely wrist type of draw. I
think I have a great control with this stroke and I still don't plan to get
away from it but occasionally when I get a bit tight over a $400 shot or out
or whatever I will come up a bit shy with that touchy feely wrist snap of a
draw stroke. This is one of the only ways I can still "choke" or succumb to
intense pressure.

Something to think about.




Eddie in Detroit












"John Black" <jblack@texas.net > wrote in message
news:MPG.220ba4ad283fef0d989978@free.teranews.com...
> In article <Xns9A35E1A60B71Cduckrulestheuniverse@invalid.quakefour.net>,
> duck@nomail.afraid.org says...
>> Ron Shepard wrote:
>>
>> > I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
>> > wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
>> > The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?
>>
>> Isn't the whole idea of a wrist snap to get more stick speed?
>
> Yes, that is probably the only result as far as the cue ball is
> concerned but what it allows you to do is keep your arm speed is a more
> natural range (say in the vacinity of a stop shot speed) but use the
> wrist to add some extra power at the end to get the draw. For me
> anyway, this is more consistent and easier than using 100% arm speed to
> get the extra stick speed.
>
> John Black
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>




31 Jan 2008 22:06:01
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



John Black wrote:

> Yes, this is what I was getting at in my reply to sittingduck. The
> wrist snap techique allows you to keep your arm speed and movement down
> in a more natural range, improving consistency.
>
> John Black
>

Sorry John, but I disagree on the wrist snap thingy. I learned, as
Mailman did, on my own, and used a wrist snap thinking I had discovered
the "secret" superstroke technique to draw.

However I was always inconsistent, miscuing often or just producing a
stop shot.

After reading here on RSB what really causes draw (low and hard) I
started working on just stroking low and smoothly. This works much
better than trying to control a wrist snap.

I'm not saying it can't work for those who can master it but I think it
much better to learn to simply stroke low and accurate. You will achieve
a much better draw stroke and it is exactly the same stroke you use on
all shots. Accurate is the key. The tip must hit where you want it to.
Relying on a wrist snap to lower your tip hit is a poor technique in my
opinion, and it is the one I used for a few years so I do have
experience with it.

Ed

--
mccune@standardab.ca


31 Jan 2008 22:08:52
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



John Black wrote:
> In article <ron-shepard-B21B30.23301530012008@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net says...
>> In article <MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com>,
>> John Black <jblack@texas.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
>>> Seems true in my experience...
>> I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
>> wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
>> The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?
>
> Ok, I admit I haven't done a controlled experiment, keeping records etc.
> Last night I was playing on my table at home and I was not getting the
> amount of draw I needed on some shots. I put the wrist snap (doesn't
> have to be a major amount) back into my stroke and walla, I was getting
> plenty of draw (sometimes too much). This has happened many times
> before -- not just last night. If I'm having difficulty with draw, its
> usually because I'm not employing a little wrist action.
>
> John Black
>

I think maybe you're just afraid to aim your contact point lower, John,
and the wrist snap allows you the security of aiming higher (the mental
security that is) while still allowing your tip to hit lower. The wrist
snap almost always drops your tip a bit from my experience.

Try to just force yourself to aim lower and stroke clean and smooth
through the ball. Fear of miscuing will make you want to pull the tip up
and if you do you get a stop shot. I do this at times too.

Ed

--
mccune@standardab.ca


31 Jan 2008 22:19:32
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



Bob Keller wrote:
> "John Black" <jblack@texas.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com...
>> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
>> Seems true in my experience...
>>
>
> IMO, it's a "loose" wrist that is necessary to play pool at higher levels.
> "Loose" on all shots. I have no clue how the mechanics of that work, but
> the results - a smooth efficient stroke, more predictable cue ball control,
> more accurate speed control, more action on the cue ball with less effort,
> etc. - are clear, IMO.
>
> Bob Keller
>
>
I'd agree with you there Bob, and this was one of the first things I
figured out a few years ago. Just try locking your wrist and shooting
pool. You will swerve your cue all over the place trying to stroke. This
is not so much about a wrist flick, I don't think, so much as just the
necessity of being able to stroke without swooping your cue. A tense
wrist causes swoops.

When I started playing I felt I had to keep my stroke short and simple
and kept my wrist locked and my stroke short.

This worked as a beginner but I soon found that my range of shots was
very limited. I watched the pros play and realized they all had loose
wrists and longer strokes.

However I do believe that most beginners need to start with a more
locked wrist. Most simply don't have the small muscle control
development required for a longer looser stroke. That comes with
practice and play, though.

I've stated many times my belief that there are different techniques
needed depending on the level of play that a player is at and that
teaching pro technique to most beginners is a bad practice. This is one
of those cases IMO.


Ed

--
mccune@standardab.ca


31 Jan 2008 21:33:53
Bambu
Re: True or False?

On Jan 31, 12:03=A0pm, carlton-redf...@usa.net wrote:
> As another RSB-er who's been playing for over 50 years (56) I'll share
> two draw tips gleaned from 40 years of attending professional 14.1 and
> 9-ball tournaments. =A0Slightly off the wrist-flick topic but quite
> germane to greatly improving drawback skills. =A0Many longtime players
> never notice some of these tiny but transformative details:
>
> 1) The first critical draw stroke change that separates many pros from
> the average player: with your closed bridge, shift the middle finger
> as far away as possible from the two cue-encircling fingers. =A0This
> automatically allows you to aim very low on the cue ball *while
> keeping the shaft completely level* rather than self-defeatingly
> pointed downward (the cause of almost all miscues when back spinning,
> even with a well-chalked tip).
>
> 2) The next professional difference is to deliberately have the cue
> tip *touch the cloth* near the cue ball, then raise it about a half-
> tip (1/4 inch) off the cloth. =A0You'll be amazed how many pros
> routinely do this, for a time-tested reason: this guarantees you'll be
> at the exact maximally effective contact level to easily apply
> drawback. =A0(Average players simply don't strike low enough and level
> enough when back spinning.)
>
> -- Carlton

I noticed alot of the pro phillipino players stroking into the cloth,
but never understood why. This explains alot, thanks carlton.


01 Feb 2008 13:48:24
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

A loose wrist, or relaxed fingers, or both?

Lou Figueroa
gonna start his own
endless thread :-)


Bob Keller wrote:
> "John Black" <jblack@texas.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com...
>> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
>> Seems true in my experience...
>>
>
> IMO, it's a "loose" wrist that is necessary to play pool at higher levels.
> "Loose" on all shots. I have no clue how the mechanics of that work, but
> the results - a smooth efficient stroke, more predictable cue ball control,
> more accurate speed control, more action on the cue ball with less effort,
> etc. - are clear, IMO.
>
> Bob Keller
>
>


01 Feb 2008 13:49:19
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

hmmm, I shall have to try the first one -- sounds interesting.

Lou Figueroa
not so sure
about #2


carlton-redford@usa.net wrote:
> As another RSB-er who's been playing for over 50 years (56) I'll share
> two draw tips gleaned from 40 years of attending professional 14.1 and
> 9-ball tournaments. Slightly off the wrist-flick topic but quite
> germane to greatly improving drawback skills. Many longtime players
> never notice some of these tiny but transformative details:
>
> 1) The first critical draw stroke change that separates many pros from
> the average player: with your closed bridge, shift the middle finger
> as far away as possible from the two cue-encircling fingers. This
> automatically allows you to aim very low on the cue ball *while
> keeping the shaft completely level* rather than self-defeatingly
> pointed downward (the cause of almost all miscues when back spinning,
> even with a well-chalked tip).
>
> 2) The next professional difference is to deliberately have the cue
> tip *touch the cloth* near the cue ball, then raise it about a half-
> tip (1/4 inch) off the cloth. You'll be amazed how many pros
> routinely do this, for a time-tested reason: this guarantees you'll be
> at the exact maximally effective contact level to easily apply
> drawback. (Average players simply don't strike low enough and level
> enough when back spinning.)
>
> -- Carlton
>
>
>


01 Feb 2008 09:05:19
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <zrFoj.528936$kj1.496258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net >,
lfigueroa@att.net says...
> hmmm, I shall have to try the first one -- sounds interesting.
>
> Lou Figueroa
> not so sure
> about #2

I tried it last night. I didn't know where to shift that finger in a
way that would help.

John Black

> carlton-redford@usa.net wrote:
> > As another RSB-er who's been playing for over 50 years (56) I'll share
> > two draw tips gleaned from 40 years of attending professional 14.1 and
> > 9-ball tournaments. Slightly off the wrist-flick topic but quite
> > germane to greatly improving drawback skills. Many longtime players
> > never notice some of these tiny but transformative details:
> >
> > 1) The first critical draw stroke change that separates many pros from
> > the average player: with your closed bridge, shift the middle finger
> > as far away as possible from the two cue-encircling fingers. This
> > automatically allows you to aim very low on the cue ball *while
> > keeping the shaft completely level* rather than self-defeatingly
> > pointed downward (the cause of almost all miscues when back spinning,
> > even with a well-chalked tip).

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



01 Feb 2008 09:18:19
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <fnu9l0$bdq$1@registered.motzarella.org >,
mccune@telusplanet.net says...
> Bob Keller wrote:
> > "John Black" <jblack@texas.net> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com...
> >> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
> >> Seems true in my experience...
> >>
> >
> > IMO, it's a "loose" wrist that is necessary to play pool at higher levels.
> > "Loose" on all shots. I have no clue how the mechanics of that work, but
> > the results - a smooth efficient stroke, more predictable cue ball control,
> > more accurate speed control, more action on the cue ball with less effort,
> > etc. - are clear, IMO.
> >
> > Bob Keller
> >
> >
> I'd agree with you there Bob, and this was one of the first things I
> figured out a few years ago. Just try locking your wrist and shooting
> pool. You will swerve your cue all over the place trying to stroke. This
> is not so much about a wrist flick, I don't think, so much as just the
> necessity of being able to stroke without swooping your cue. A tense
> wrist causes swoops.
>
> When I started playing I felt I had to keep my stroke short and simple
> and kept my wrist locked and my stroke short.
>
> This worked as a beginner but I soon found that my range of shots was
> very limited. I watched the pros play and realized they all had loose
> wrists and longer strokes.

Perhaps then this is all I am talking about. Perhaps my wrist was too
ridged before? When you stroke with a looser wrist, the wrist comes
forward at the end naturally which is probably what I am calling a wrist
snap. It can be exaggerated to get more action but even just the
natrual amount makes a big difference.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



01 Feb 2008 09:16:17
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



John Black wrote:
> In article <fnu9l0$bdq$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
> mccune@telusplanet.net says...
>> Bob Keller wrote:
>>> "John Black" <jblack@texas.net> wrote in message
>>> news:MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com...
>>>> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
>>>> Seems true in my experience...
>>>>
>>> IMO, it's a "loose" wrist that is necessary to play pool at higher levels.
>>> "Loose" on all shots. I have no clue how the mechanics of that work, but
>>> the results - a smooth efficient stroke, more predictable cue ball control,
>>> more accurate speed control, more action on the cue ball with less effort,
>>> etc. - are clear, IMO.
>>>
>>> Bob Keller
>>>
>>>
>> I'd agree with you there Bob, and this was one of the first things I
>> figured out a few years ago. Just try locking your wrist and shooting
>> pool. You will swerve your cue all over the place trying to stroke. This
>> is not so much about a wrist flick, I don't think, so much as just the
>> necessity of being able to stroke without swooping your cue. A tense
>> wrist causes swoops.
>>
>> When I started playing I felt I had to keep my stroke short and simple
>> and kept my wrist locked and my stroke short.
>>
>> This worked as a beginner but I soon found that my range of shots was
>> very limited. I watched the pros play and realized they all had loose
>> wrists and longer strokes.
>
> Perhaps then this is all I am talking about. Perhaps my wrist was too
> ridged before? When you stroke with a looser wrist, the wrist comes
> forward at the end naturally which is probably what I am calling a wrist
> snap. It can be exaggerated to get more action but even just the
> natrual amount makes a big difference.
>
> John Black
>

This is what I think. A loose wrist allows you to hit your spot with the
cue tip more consistently and accurately. I do not believe that it
intrinsically creates more action, other than being more accurate does.
Really attempting to get extra wrist snap in, other than just keeping
the wrist loose, can actually cause less action as you will (without a
huge amount of practice) be more likely to miss your tip position for
the worse and thus get less tip offset.

That said I do on occasion, when I really need to move the cue ball,
attempt a massive wrist snap and if I hit my tip position, does seem to
accelerate the cue ball with more action. I don't know if it really does
it from a physics viewpoint. It seems to me Ron and Pat had a discussion
about this some years ago and Ron disagreed with the wrist
snap/acceleration theory at the time.

It does seem to work in some situations though.

Ed - and maybe objects balls curve and pigs fly too.
--
mccune@standardab.ca


01 Feb 2008 11:26:22
Michael Richardson
Re: True or False?


"Ed McCune" <mccune@telusplanet.net > wrote in message
news:fnu9l0$bdq$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
>
> Bob Keller wrote:
>> "John Black" <jblack@texas.net> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.220b0f9bc75eb6c2989976@free.teranews.com...
>>> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
>>> Seems true in my experience...
>>>
>>
>> IMO, it's a "loose" wrist that is necessary to play pool at higher
>> levels. "Loose" on all shots. I have no clue how the mechanics of that
>> work, but the results - a smooth efficient stroke, more predictable cue
>> ball control, more accurate speed control, more action on the cue ball
>> with less effort, etc. - are clear, IMO.
>>
>> Bob Keller
>>
>>
> I'd agree with you there Bob, and this was one of the first things I
> figured out a few years ago. Just try locking your wrist and shooting
> pool. You will swerve your cue all over the place trying to stroke. This
> is not so much about a wrist flick, I don't think, so much as just the
> necessity of being able to stroke without swooping your cue. A tense wrist
> causes swoops.
>
> When I started playing I felt I had to keep my stroke short and simple
> and kept my wrist locked and my stroke short.
>
> This worked as a beginner but I soon found that my range of shots was very
> limited. I watched the pros play and realized they all had loose wrists
> and longer strokes.
>
> However I do believe that most beginners need to start with a more locked
> wrist. Most simply don't have the small muscle control development
> required for a longer looser stroke. That comes with practice and play,
> though.
>
> I've stated many times my belief that there are different techniques
> needed depending on the level of play that a player is at and that
> teaching pro technique to most beginners is a bad practice. This is one of
> those cases IMO.
>
>
> Ed
>
> --
> mccune@standardab.ca

Never teach a habit that will later have to be broken, that is a given. Keep
the cue relaxed hanging between the thumb and the index finger loosely
slightly behind the balance point of the cue and allow the wrist to swivel
and only grip the cue when following thru with your shot for most medium
speed shots. Never over grip the shaft with a closed bridge but keep the
bridging fingers firm in the stance by not letting the other fingers to
offer support allowing for the cue to move erratically in the bridge. The
modern cues that have a constant taper avoids alot of the bridging problems
that you would not encounter with a billiards taper.
Thanks,
Mike R.




01 Feb 2008 12:30:53
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article
<Xns9A35E1A60B71Cduckrulestheuniverse@invalid.quakefour.net >,
sittingduck <duck@nomail.afraid.org > wrote:

> Ron Shepard wrote:
>
> > I assume you want to compare the draw results with and without the
> > wrist snap. If so, what are you keeping constant in the two shots?
> > The tip-ball contact point? The stick speed? Both? Neither?
>
> Isn't the whole idea of a wrist snap to get more stick speed?

Not for some people. They think that a wrist snap somehow imparts
some extra "power" or "energy" to the ball, so that even with the
same stick speed and tip-ball contact point, the cue ball will draw
back farther.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


01 Feb 2008 12:46:14
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <MPG.220ba3d244bb502d989977@free.teranews.com >,
John Black <jblack@texas.net > wrote:

> Ok, I admit I haven't done a controlled experiment, keeping records etc.
> Last night I was playing on my table at home and I was not getting the
> amount of draw I needed on some shots. I put the wrist snap (doesn't
> have to be a major amount) back into my stroke and walla, I was getting
> plenty of draw (sometimes too much). This has happened many times
> before -- not just last night. If I'm having difficulty with draw, its
> usually because I'm not employing a little wrist action.

There are dozens of possible reasons for this. The basic problem
with the wrist snap is that it introduces some extra, and
unnecessary, motion into the stroke, and if the timing is not right,
it causes problem with both tip-ball accuracy and shot speed.

Have you tried shooting the shots with slightly more tip offset?
Maybe what is happening is that your "wrist snap" (which I'll put in
quotes because your wrist may not be snapping at all) causes you to
setup or stroke slightly differently. Maybe you are gripping the
butt in a slightly different place, or maybe you are holding your
elbow in place rather than dropping it during the stroke, and that
is causing you to hit the ball in the wrong spot.

Have you tried shooting with a looser grip? Maybe your "wrist snap"
is really just changing how tight you grip the butt. When you grip
the butt too tight this causes your stroke motion to be less fluid
(fluent, is the British word for this), and this in turn slows down
the cue speed. You can see this if you exaggerate the grip. Grip
your cue as tight as you can, shoot a few shots, and see what I'm
talking about. A too-tight grip also causes swoops in your stroke,
so there are other reasons why you don't want to do this.

The thing you don't want to do is to introduce one fault (wrist
snap) into your mechanics in order to compensate for some other
fault (wrong stance, dropping your elbow, too-tight grip, etc.).
You really want to figure out what is the problem in the first place
and just fix it.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


01 Feb 2008 12:57:12
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <MPG.220cf1287e26191d98997e@free.teranews.com >,
John Black <jblack@texas.net > wrote:

> I tried it last night. I didn't know where to shift that finger in a
> way that would help.

I think he is talking about the kind of closed bridge where the
middle finger is folded underneath the hand rather than being
straight. Players with thick fingers seem to use this kind of
bridge.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


01 Feb 2008 13:03:18
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <fnvg4b$sjb$1@registered.motzarella.org >,
Ed McCune <mccune@telusplanet.net > wrote:

> It seems to me Ron and Pat had a discussion
> about this some years ago and Ron disagreed with the wrist
> snap/acceleration theory at the time.

Yes, Pat likes the technique, and I don't.

One outstanding question though is whether the advocates of the
wrist snap really snap their wrist at all. What you tell yourself
you are doing is often different from what really happens. It might
be possible to determine this by viewing frame by frame videos of
strokes, or by having accelerometers embedded in the butt of the
pool cue. As far as I know, this has never been done.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


01 Feb 2008 12:02:23
David The Hamster Malone
Re: True or False?

On Feb 1, 1:46=A0pm, Ron Shepard <ron-shep...@NOSPAM.comcast.net > wrote:

> Have you tried shooting with a looser grip? =A0Maybe your "wrist snap"
> is really just changing how tight you grip the butt. =A0When you grip
> the butt too tight this causes your stroke motion to be less fluid
> (fluent, is the British word for this), and this in turn slows down
> the cue speed. =A0

As a beginner, when I was having trouble with draw I had a tendency to
'stab' at the ball. I usually hit the cue ball low enough but I was
afraid it would jump and instinctively stopped the stroke before
following through to try to avoid that happening. It was becoming a
habit and a bad one at that...

An advanced player at a VNEA playoff saw me doing this and told me to
try actually 'throwing' the cue at the ball ie. let go of it
altogether except for one supporting finger beneath it. My draw stroke
immediately improved and I've modified this over time to a looser
stroke without actually letting go of the stick.

I see lots of players trying to get more draw by hitting harder - what
happens is they tend to hit higher on the cue ball as a result and end
up stunning it and getting less.

David "The Hamster" Malone



01 Feb 2008 13:03:10
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net > wrote in message
news:ron-shepard-33596E.12461401022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...

> You can see this if you exaggerate the grip. Grip
> your cue as tight as you can, shoot a few shots, and see what I'm
> talking about. A too-tight grip also causes swoops in your stroke,
> so there are other reasons why you don't want to do this.

Possibly this is where the I advantage see in having a loose wrist comes
from. Maybe it keeps the cue more level, IOW it levels out even minor
"swoops" in the stroke? That oughta increase consistency, etc.

Bob Keller




01 Feb 2008 12:22:28
sittingduck
Re: True or False?

Ron Shepard wrote:

> Not for some people. They think that a wrist snap somehow imparts
> some extra "power" or "energy" to the ball, so that even with the
> same stick speed and tip-ball contact point, the cue ball will draw
> back farther.

I suppose some find it entertaining to debate with magical thinkers, I prefer
not to. <G >
A more realistic discussion would be how limp one's wrist and/or grip is at
contact, and how THAT effects the action on the ball.

--
http://improve-usenet.org


01 Feb 2008 21:11:20
Bambu
Re: True or False?

On Jan 30, 11:50=A0pm, John Black <jbl...@texas.net > wrote:
> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw. =A0
> Seems true in my experience...
>
> John Black
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

I dont think there is a right or wrong answer to this. If someone told
me they felt it helped them to use "wrist action' to get better draw,
I wouldnt advise against it. I dont think the cueball knows how much
wrist went into the shot, but if it somehow helps to deliver a lower
hit without a miscue, or faster cue speed without sacrificing
accuracy....I'd say go for it. I dont consciously use much wrist
myself, but have heard a few good players recommend it.
My opinion is, its mostly in the cue speed, with accuracy being a
given. Not to say the low hit is not important, it is.
But to me, I want RPM's on the cueball, and that takes cue speed. Many
players make the mistake of hitting too hard, including myself. For
draw its not hard that you want, (the power will be there) its quick.


02 Feb 2008 10:45:59
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Bambu wrote:

> My opinion is, its mostly in the cue speed, with accuracy being a
> given.

With accuracy being a given, it's all in the cue speed.

Not to say the low hit is not important, it is.

For a draw shot, hitting below the equator is a given.

> But to me, I want RPM's on the cueball, and that takes cue speed.

and a hit above or below the equator.

> Many
> players make the mistake of hitting too hard, including myself. For
> draw its not hard that you want, (the power will be there) its quick.

I assume hard and power are the same thing but quick and speed are
different things? This sounds ominous to me, like bent and curved
being different things... Is "quick different than "speed" and if so,
what's the difference?

I think the power that "will be" is because of ball characteristics,
that you can't change, stick characteristics, that you can't change and
stick speed, which you can change. If flicking your wrist gives you more
stick speed, then you get more power. What happens to that power is
determined by where the stick hits the ball, which is a given if
accuracy is a given.

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


02 Feb 2008 11:10:00
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Ron Shepard wrote:

>>Isn't the whole idea of a wrist snap to get more stick speed?

> Not for some people. They think that a wrist snap somehow imparts
> some extra "power" or "energy" to the ball, so that even with the
> same stick speed and tip-ball contact point, the cue ball will draw
> back farther.

It would seem to me that if your arm is moving at speed x, a wrist snap
would increase the speed of the cue, every time. Increased speed means
increased power. You would have to slow your arm speed down to get the
same speed with a wrist snap.

I think most people can hit with enough speed to do most anything useful
on a pool table in a pool game, so the only real issue is accuracy.
Speed and power is, for most people playing pool, the enemy.

I can't see a wrist snap improving accuracy much, and more speed than
you can deliver w/o a snap is seldom if ever needed, so it serves little
purpose far as I can see. On the other hand, if you use it and it works
...

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


02 Feb 2008 09:41:33
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



Michael Richardson wrote:

> Never teach a habit that will later have to be broken, that is a given.

Why is that a given? What is so difficult about changing a technique?

I had no trouble and I have changed many over the years. Using one
technique to build a solid foundation for a more advanced technique
makes a whole lot more sense than attempting a technique your body/mind
is not ready for.


That would be like building a housing foundation out of fancy woodwork
instead of concrete.

Ed


--
mccune@standardab.ca


02 Feb 2008 12:50:03
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <fo25vl$ev5$1@registered.motzarella.org >,
Ed McCune <mccune@telusplanet.net > wrote:

> Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> > Never teach a habit that will later have to be broken, that is a given.
>
> Why is that a given? What is so difficult about changing a technique?
>
> I had no trouble and I have changed many over the years. Using one
> technique to build a solid foundation for a more advanced technique
> makes a whole lot more sense than attempting a technique your body/mind
> is not ready for.
>
>
> That would be like building a housing foundation out of fancy woodwork
> instead of concrete.

I think teaching a habit that will later have to be broken is like
trying to build a house with fancy woodwork without having the sound
foundation to begin with; eventually, you will have to tear all that
down and put in the foundation that you needed all along. It would
be like trying to teach someone how to shoot fancy draw shots
without them first learning the basics (bridge, stance, stroke,
etc.).

I have had to unlearn many things over time, and every time I go
trough that painful process, I think back and imagine how nice it
would have been if I had just learned the right technique in the
first place. Sometimes that is not possible, of course, it seems
that you have to go down a few dead ends first, but in many cases it
is basically just a coin toss which way you learn something in the
beginning, and it would have been just as easy to learn the right
way.

For example, it is just as easy to learn a preshot routine that
allows your eyes plenty of time to refocus on the object ball. You
may not need that when you are 15 or 20, but you will eventually
need to do that as you age. Maybe when you are 30, or 40, or
whenever, but it is inevitable. This was a change that I had to
make, one of those coin toss things in the beginning, and I think it
took me about a year to break my old habits and get comfortable with
the new routine. If you have too many bad habits like that, then
you won't have enough years in your life to fix them all. And if
you are a pro, rather than an amateur like me, then that year of
adjustment means a year when you aren't cashing as often in
tournaments, and ultimately whether or not you are successful in
your career.

In the wrist snap case, that will cause eventually problems with
both speed control and tip-ball accuracy. In the beginning, your
speed control is so bad and your tip-ball accuracy so poor that you
may not notice the extra errors due to the wrist snap. But
eventually, as you improve, you will need to improve both, and then
it becomes yet another thing that you need to unlearn, and learn the
right way, in order to advance. Or, you just keep that technique
and do as well as you can, despite its shortcomings, because you
can't afford to take the time off to change.

In the case of a wrist snap, you can sort of figure out how much
error it might introduce into the process in the following way. As
far as speed control, take your stance with the cue tip touching the
cue ball. Hold your forearm still (maybe you can get someone to
stand behind you and hold your arm) with your standard grip, and
with just your wrist motion cock your wrist back and forward and hit
the ball. You can probably get the ball to roll a couple of
diamonds distance, maybe even four or five diamonds, depending on
how flexible is your wrist in your grip direction. That is an
estimate of the potential error that is introduced into your stroke
mechanics by a wrist snap. If the snap occurs at the wrong time,
then you might come up this far short even though your forearm was
moving at the right speed to give the correct result with the
correctly timed snap. Or if your forearm was moving at the right
speed in the first place, then the wrist snap would give you this
much extra distance on the ball. Or if your snap happened, but it
was not timed perfectly, then you would get some random fraction of
that distance on every shot. Not even an amateur player can stand a
diamond or two of random distance on the cue ball on every shot.
And when you combine the wrist snap with the arm motion (rather than
using a still forearm as described above), the variation in distance
due to timing of the wrist snap is even larger because the energy
increases as the square of the speed, not linearly with the speed.

You can do the same thing for the tip-ball contact spot. Look at
how much variation is introduced in the tip-ball contact spot by
moving your wrist. It is probably about 5 mm (it again depends on
how you grip the butt). When you are a beginner, 5mm of random
variation is not a big deal because everything else is moving around
that much anyway. But after you play a while, 5mm is a big
difference, and an incorrectly timed snap would give you some
fraction of that offset error in the tip-ball placement on every
shot.

In the real situation, both aspects work together. In the
particular case of a draw shot, the maximum speed from the wrist
snap also occurs at the maximum downward offset, so these things
both work against the accurate control of the cue ball on a draw
shot. For a follow shot, the two effects somewhat cancel, and it
isn't so bad. For a stun shot, it is again particularly bad because
you would get a slightly harder slight draw shot with one error, or
a slightly softer slight follow shot with the other error, and
qualitatively, not just quantitatively, those are two very different
outcomes.

Once you have developed the bad technique, you will eventually be
faced with two difficult choices in order to advance. Either change
the technique, or continue to struggle with it and do as well as you
can despite it. You have to choose your poison, the lesser of the
two evils. But if you don't develop the bad technique in the first
place, you won't have to make that choice, and when it comes to
teaching technique, that is really the goal of the teacher.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


02 Feb 2008 11:25:36
Ratchet
Re: True or False?

On Jan 30 2008 11:50 PM, John Black wrote:

> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
> Seems true in my experience...
>
> John Black
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com




I use wrist snap , sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse !

Tom S.-

_______________________________________________________________________ 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




02 Feb 2008 11:37:08
Ratchet
Re: True or False?

On Jan 31 2008 12:03 PM, carlton-redford wrote:

> As another RSB-er who's been playing for over 50 years (56) I'll share
> two draw tips gleaned from 40 years of attending professional 14.1 and
> 9-ball tournaments. Slightly off the wrist-flick topic but quite
> germane to greatly improving drawback skills. Many longtime players
> never notice some of these tiny but transformative details:
>
> 1) The first critical draw stroke change that separates many pros from
> the average player: with your closed bridge, shift the middle finger
> as far away as possible from the two cue-encircling fingers. This
> automatically allows you to aim very low on the cue ball *while
> keeping the shaft completely level* rather than self-defeatingly
> pointed downward (the cause of almost all miscues when back spinning,
> even with a well-chalked tip).
>
> 2) The next professional difference is to deliberately have the cue
> tip *touch the cloth* near the cue ball, then raise it about a half-
> tip (1/4 inch) off the cloth. You'll be amazed how many pros
> routinely do this, for a time-tested reason: this guarantees you'll be
> at the exact maximally effective contact level to easily apply
> drawback. (Average players simply don't strike low enough and level
> enough when back spinning.)
>
> -- Carlton


I recently went back to work on my bridging as I had gotten away from the
closed loop method a great deal why ? I dont't know but I can tell you
this , When I returned to my closed loop bridges my accuracy went through
the roof . Now that I am doing this I will try out what you say here when
I practice tonite and see how I do , I do also know that when I staarting
using my old Meucci Cue again after a 2 years lay off I seem to be drawing
quite well once more , I do think that its mainly because of the whippy
shaft on the Meucci !

Tom S.-

------- 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



02 Feb 2008 11:39:22
Ratchet
Re: True or False?

On Jan 31 2008 4:52 PM, Bob Keller wrote:


> Now I wonder if we want to get into the physics of it????
>
>
> Bob Keller


No No ! Anything but that !!!!! lolololol ...................


Tom S.-

----- 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



02 Feb 2008 15:08:00
Michael Richardson
Re: True or False?


"Jack Stein" <jbstein2@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:65GdnVpaMZdECDnanZ2dnUVZ_umlnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Ron Shepard wrote:
>
>>>Isn't the whole idea of a wrist snap to get more stick speed?
>
>> Not for some people. They think that a wrist snap somehow imparts some
>> extra "power" or "energy" to the ball, so that even with the same stick
>> speed and tip-ball contact point, the cue ball will draw back farther.
>
> It would seem to me that if your arm is moving at speed x, a wrist snap
> would increase the speed of the cue, every time. Increased speed means
> increased power. You would have to slow your arm speed down to get the
> same speed with a wrist snap.
>
> I think most people can hit with enough speed to do most anything useful
> on a pool table in a pool game, so the only real issue is accuracy. Speed
> and power is, for most people playing pool, the enemy.
>
> I can't see a wrist snap improving accuracy much, and more speed than you
> can deliver w/o a snap is seldom if ever needed, so it serves little
> purpose far as I can see. On the other hand, if you use it and it works
> ...
>
> --
> Jack
> http://jbstein.com

When driving a nail with a hammer you would always hold your wrist locked,
that's where the power comes from. The muscles in your arm is what supplies
the power, there are only ligaments in the wrist.
Thanks,
Mike R.




02 Feb 2008 13:50:47
Re: True or False?

Message to John Black and Ron Shepard re the three posts Quoted below:

"1) The first critical draw stroke change that separates many pros
from
the average player: with your closed bridge, shift the middle finger
as far away as possible from the two cue-encircling fingers. This
automatically allows you to aim very low on the cue ball *while
keeping the shaft completely level* rather than self-defeatingly
pointed downward (the cause of almost all miscues when back spinning,
even with a well-chalked tip)." -- Carlton

"I tried it last night. I didn't know where to shift that finger in
a
way that would help." -- John Black
--------------------------------------------

"I think he is talking about the kind of closed bridge where the
middle finger is folded underneath the hand rather than being
straight. Players with thick fingers seem to use this kind of
bridge." -- Ron Shepard
--------------------------------------------------
Carlton here, John and Ron. Sorry I couldn't get back to the board
for a few days. I could and should have been clearer about precisely
how a number of pros shift the middle finger as mentioned above. For
a right-handed player's left bridge hand, simply move the middle
finger (and the ring finger and pinky) about an inch or slightly more
to the left -- away from the two cue-encircling fingers. This
automatically allows the shaft to easily drop an inch lower -- a
seemingly small move the makes a great difference in almost
effortlessly drawing the cue ball a full table length or any smaller
distance.

Your shaft still has the 3 points of support on the 3 fingers guiding
it, but it simply rides well *below* the middle finger's knuckle
instead of just above it. I always enjoy the look of amazement when a
student tries this little known bridging change and their cue ball
sails smoothly backwards with only a medium power stroke (but quite
low and level on the cue ball and a good follow through -- shooting
*through* the cue ball, not *at* the cue ball).

Be sure to have a well-domed and Tip-Pik (or equivalent) roughened
tip. A nickel shape is fine. I use a dime shape on my Predator
shaft. A good dome ensures more cue ball surface area grab during
those milliseconds of impact contact.

Many European players like Orttmann and Souquet prefer an open bridge
when drawing but their strokes and repeatable cue ball contact points
are exceptionally precise; I don't recommend that approach until the
stroking mechanics are very confident and sure, and have been well
seasoned over many hundreds of hours of play. In any case they also
get extremely low on the cue ball as recommended previously.

-- Carlton





02 Feb 2008 15:03:27
sittingduck
Re: True or False?

Michael Richardson wrote:

> When driving a nail with a hammer you would always hold your wrist
> locked, that's where the power comes from. The muscles in your arm is
> what supplies the power, there are only ligaments in the wrist.

Not true, and not relevant. (IMO)

--
http://improve-usenet.org


02 Feb 2008 18:03:51
Michael Richardson
Re: True or False?


"sittingduck" <duck@nomail.afraid.org > wrote in message
news:Xns9A38992C4534Fduckrulestheuniverse@invalid.quakefour.net...
> Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>> When driving a nail with a hammer you would always hold your wrist
>> locked, that's where the power comes from. The muscles in your arm is
>> what supplies the power, there are only ligaments in the wrist.
>
> Not true, and not relevant. (IMO)
>
> --
> http://improve-usenet.org

Both true and relevant to the post in which the statement was repling to.
There are no muscles in the wrist itself that I'm aware of and I've driven
plenty of nails in my life.
Thanks,
Mike R.




02 Feb 2008 22:09:45
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



Ron Shepard wrote:

> I think teaching a habit that will later have to be broken is like
> trying to build a house with fancy woodwork without having the sound
> foundation to begin with; eventually, you will have to tear all that
> down and put in the foundation that you needed all along. It would
> be like trying to teach someone how to shoot fancy draw shots
> without them first learning the basics (bridge, stance, stroke,
> etc.).
>
> I have had to unlearn many things over time, and every time I go
> trough that painful process, I think back and imagine how nice it
> would have been if I had just learned the right technique in the
> first place.
cut stuff

> Once you have developed the bad technique, you will eventually be
> faced with two difficult choices in order to advance. Either change
> the technique, or continue to struggle with it and do as well as you
> can despite it. You have to choose your poison, the lesser of the
> two evils. But if you don't develop the bad technique in the first
> place, you won't have to make that choice, and when it comes to
> teaching technique, that is really the goal of the teacher.
>
> $.02 -Ron Shepard

This is hard to respond to, Ron, as our thought processes seem to be
quite different at times.

Firstly I was saying that I started with NO wrist at all. Very stiff
wrist and a very short stroke to minimize tip errors. Once I became more
proficient at just stroking in general I loosened my wrist up. No-where
was I really speaking of wrist snap at all.

Stroking a pool cue is not a natural action. Many of you long time
players forget this. It is like learning to throw a baseball. Not
natural at all for 90% of the kids I've seen. When learning people need
to go through stages. It is not "bad technique" as you say nor is it
really "unlearning" technique either. Look at it rather as layers of
technique. You have to master one in order to build the proper physical
(and mental) foundation for the next.

Trying to teach a kid (for example) to pitch curve balls at an age when
the muscles aren't developed properly will blow his elbow. There are
many ideas like this in the sporting world. In fact only in pool have I
encountered the idea that even beginners should be taught essentially
pro technique right from the get go.

In soccer I taught many interim techniques because the kids just don't
have the knowledge base for at lot of more advanced stuff. They will
eventually have to ...not unlearn...but re-evaluate much of that early
technique in years to come but without the early stuff I have taught
them they would never have been able to last long enough to have a
chance at that re-evaluation.

When the student is ready..... (zencrap but with a true ring)

Ed

--
mccune@standardab.ca


02 Feb 2008 21:26:59
sittingduck
Re: True or False?

Michael Richardson wrote:

> Both true and relevant to the post in which the statement was repling to.
> There are no muscles in the wrist itself that I'm aware of and I've driven
> plenty of nails in my life.

Tape up your wrist and get a nice firm grip on your cue. Play a few racks
that way, and get back to us.

--
http://improve-usenet.org


03 Feb 2008 05:09:00
Michael Richardson
Re: True or False?


"sittingduck" <duck@nomail.afraid.org > wrote in message
news:Xns9A38DA3346FF4duckrulestheuniverse@invalid.quakefour.net...
> Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>> Both true and relevant to the post in which the statement was repling to.
>> There are no muscles in the wrist itself that I'm aware of and I've
>> driven
>> plenty of nails in my life.
>
> Tape up your wrist and get a nice firm grip on your cue. Play a few racks
> that way, and get back to us.
>
> --
> http://improve-usenet.org

I'm not impling that I shoot with a stiff wrist. I shoot with a loose wrist
and the cue held loosely between my thumb and middle finger but when at the
last part of the stroke I firm my grip on the cue. My point is that there
isn't much to be gained in trying to flick or snap the wrist in shooting any
billiard shots. It just introduces more variables that are not neccessary or
desirable. try just shooting a ball with just your wrist action and then
tell me that you can shoot a ball forcefully enough to even pocket a ball
and you'll find out that will be about all the force that a wrist snap will
accomplish other than misdirecting the cue from its intended contact point.
I believe that there are others who would agree with this as being correct
and also have stated the same in this thread. Again, I should point out that
there are no muscles in the wrist proper. All the power that you will ever
impart to a cue comes from the forearm, upper arm and the shoulder region of
your body. You know, the funny thing about a bridge hand is that when you
set your bridge it actually helps to lock those ligaments down by lifting
your little finger out like a hard on dog dick. I'm sure everyone here on
RSB has seen a shooter do this and wondered why they do that but it in
effect does lock your wrist and some of the fingers in place.
Thanks,
Mike R.




03 Feb 2008 07:27:43
Bambu
Re: True or False?

On Feb 2, 10:45=A0am, Jack Stein <jbste...@comcast.net > wrote:
> Bambu wrote:
> > My opinion is, its mostly in the =A0cue speed, with accuracy being a
> > given.
>
> With accuracy being a given, it's all in the cue speed.
>
> Not to say the low hit is not important, it is.
>
> For a draw shot, hitting below the equator is a given.
>
> > But to me, I want RPM's on the cueball, and that takes cue speed.
>
> and a hit above or below the equator.
>
> > Many
> > players make the mistake of hitting too hard, including myself. For
> > draw its not hard that you want, (the power will be there) its quick.
>
> I assume hard and power are the same thing but quick and speed are
> different things? =A0 This sounds ominous to me, like bent and curved
> being different things... =A0Is "quick different than "speed" and if so,
> what's the difference?

Yeah, jack, speed and quickness are the same. I just mean cue speed.
>
> I think the power that "will be" is because of ball characteristics,
> that you can't change, stick characteristics, that you can't change and
> stick speed, which you can change. If flicking your wrist gives you more
> stick speed, then you get more power. =A0What happens to that power is
> determined by where the stick hits the ball, which is a given if
> accuracy is a given.

I dont think the power comes from just the ball, though I suppose it
factors in . Power to me is a combination of the weight of the cue,
and the the force which drives it....the player.

> --Cue speed is deterimined by the time it takes to deliver the hit, and is=
determined by the players ability to deliver a quick stroke. As opposed to =
speed, much of the cue power lies within the cue. But the player does contri=
bute to that as well, at least to some degree. To some extent, a cue is not=
unlike a baseball bat, where cue or bat speed is the most important variabl=
e. However, it is important to note that much more power comes from physical=
strength when it comes to hitting a baseball, as opposed to a cueball. Perh=
aps there is a minumum strength requirement to deliver say, a 22 MPH stroke.=



>


03 Feb 2008 09:18:59
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



Michael Richardson wrote:

> I'm not impling that I shoot with a stiff wrist. I shoot with a loose wrist
> and the cue held loosely between my thumb and middle finger but when at the
> last part of the stroke I firm my grip on the cue. My point is that there
> isn't much to be gained in trying to flick or snap the wrist in shooting any
> billiard shots. It just introduces more variables that are not neccessary or
> desirable. try just shooting a ball with just your wrist action and then
> tell me that you can shoot a ball forcefully enough to even pocket a ball
> and you'll find out that will be about all the force that a wrist snap will
> accomplish other than misdirecting the cue from its intended contact point.
> I believe that there are others who would agree with this as being correct
> and also have stated the same in this thread. Again, I should point out that
> there are no muscles in the wrist proper. All the power that you will ever
> impart to a cue comes from the forearm, upper arm and the shoulder region of
> your body. You know, the funny thing about a bridge hand is that when you
> set your bridge it actually helps to lock those ligaments down by lifting
> your little finger out like a hard on dog dick. I'm sure everyone here on
> RSB has seen a shooter do this and wondered why they do that but it in
> effect does lock your wrist and some of the fingers in place.
> Thanks,

Do you mean you lift the little finger of your bridge hand or grip hand?
I'll have to try this and see. Sounds interesting.

As for the wrist snap, I agree with you on this. I think it best to just
keep a loose wrist but forget the snap, which, for me at least, has a
strong tendency to throw the tip off line a touch.

As I have said I will wrist snap to get more cue speed if I really need
to spin a ball but I suspect that the wrist snap technique simply causes
me to create more true arm speed over a short distance...much like a
karate punch technique.

Regardless, for me, loose wrist but little wrist snap=more accurate tip
contact point.


Ed

--
mccune@standardab.ca


03 Feb 2008 10:49:29
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <fo3hqh$g9m$1@registered.motzarella.org >,
Ed McCune <mccune@telusplanet.net > wrote:

> Ron Shepard wrote:
>
> > I think teaching a habit that will later have to be broken is like
> > trying to build a house with fancy woodwork without having the sound
> > foundation to begin with; eventually, you will have to tear all that
> > down and put in the foundation that you needed all along. It would
> > be like trying to teach someone how to shoot fancy draw shots
> > without them first learning the basics (bridge, stance, stroke,
> > etc.).
> >
> > I have had to unlearn many things over time, and every time I go
> > trough that painful process, I think back and imagine how nice it
> > would have been if I had just learned the right technique in the
> > first place.
> cut stuff
>
> > Once you have developed the bad technique, you will eventually be
> > faced with two difficult choices in order to advance. Either change
> > the technique, or continue to struggle with it and do as well as you
> > can despite it. You have to choose your poison, the lesser of the
> > two evils. But if you don't develop the bad technique in the first
> > place, you won't have to make that choice, and when it comes to
> > teaching technique, that is really the goal of the teacher.
>
> This is hard to respond to, Ron, as our thought processes seem to be
> quite different at times.
>
> Firstly I was saying that I started with NO wrist at all.

I was not replying to your comment about your own technique, I was
only replying to your comment about teaching beginners.

> Stroking a pool cue is not a natural action. Many of you long time
> players forget this.

I am starkly reminded of this every time I try to shoot left handed.

> It is like learning to throw a baseball. Not
> natural at all for 90% of the kids I've seen.

I would say that throwing a baseball is more of a natural motion
than stroking a pool cue. I can imagine a million years of natural
selection to tune the ability to throw rocks at small animals in
order to eat, but I cannot see any reason why a pool stroke motion
would be particularly useful over that period of time.

> When learning people need
> to go through stages. It is not "bad technique" as you say nor is it
> really "unlearning" technique either.

I put the wrist snap stuff in the category of bad technique. It is
not a beginner technique that you need to learn in the beginning, it
is not an advanced technique that players aspire to learn, it is
just a bad technique. Many players do this, but they play as well
as they do despite their fault, not because of it.

> Trying to teach a kid (for example) to pitch curve balls at an age when
> the muscles aren't developed properly will blow his elbow. There are
> many ideas like this in the sporting world. In fact only in pool have I
> encountered the idea that even beginners should be taught essentially
> pro technique right from the get go.

A wrist snap is not a pro technique. As far as I know, there is no
physical damage that results from either the use of a wrist snap or
the lack of use of a wrist snap. There is no natural progression
due to physical maturity that suggests that young players should or
shouldn't use wrist snaps or that older players should or shouldn't
use wrist snaps.

There are other things like this that are related to age and
maturity, but I don't think wrist snap is one of them. These
include the time it takes for your eyes to change focus as you age
and its effect on PSR, and it includes the flexibility in your arms,
elbows, neck, and shoulders in relation to your grip and stance.
But wrist snap itself is not like this.

> When the student is ready..... (zencrap but with a true ring)

As far as I can tell, there is very little technique that needs to
change from beginner level to pro level in pool. There are advanced
techniques, such as elevated cue techniques (masse shots, nip shots,
jump shots, etc.), and things like fouette shots, but these things
are just things that beginners don't learn in the beginning, it
isn't like they need to learn them one way and then later switch.
But that is not the way most people learn to play pool. Instead,
they learn all kind of bad stuff, bad stances, bad bridges, bad
strokes, and all of these things hold them back eventually unless
they have exceptional natural ability to play well despite these
faults, or unless they change their technique and get on the right
track. But if they just learned the right technique in the
beginning, they would not have to make that choice between the
lesser of two evils. But this simply is not going to happen anytime
soon. Baseball, basketball, football, soccer, tennis, golf, and
other sports are taught by trained professionals to children in
schools, community recreation programs, and specialized camps all
over the country, and this instruction continues for the
participants from the beginning all the way through their adult
professional careers as long as they keep playing. But that does
not happen in pool, this kind of instruction is rare for us. That's
just the way it is.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


03 Feb 2008 11:08:02
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <1eKdnU7AxdMcPTjanZ2dnUVZ_qmlnZ2d@comcast.com >,
mrichardson@comcast.net says...
> Again, I should point out that
> there are no muscles in the wrist proper. All the power that you will ever
> impart to a cue comes from the forearm, upper arm and the shoulder region of
> your body.

The muscles that control the wrist are in the forearm. If you've ever
do wrist curls in the gym, that is where you feel the burn from lifting
with only your wrist. You can actually do quite a bit of weight so I
would not say it is an insignificant amount that can be added to a pool
stroke. There is definitely something here as this new techique has
improved my game. I need more experimenting to find out what exactly it
is -- i.e. if I am really adding something with my wrist or if by
loosening my grip sufficiently, my wrist comes forward at the end and
helps that way.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



03 Feb 2008 12:20:01
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Michael Richardson wrote:

>>I can't see a wrist snap improving accuracy much, and more speed than you
>>can deliver w/o a snap is seldom if ever needed, so it serves little
>>purpose far as I can see. On the other hand, if you use it and it works

> When driving a nail with a hammer you would always hold your wrist locked,
> that's where the power comes from. The muscles in your arm is what supplies
> the power, there are only ligaments in the wrist.

I think the power comes from the weight of the hammer and the speed at
which it hits the nail. If a wrist snap increases the speed of the
hammer hitting the nail any amount, then, it increases the power
transfer to the nail. There is no doubt most of the speed from a hammer
swing, or a ball pitch, or a pool stroke comes from the arm muscles, but
that does not mean a wrist snap does not increase the speed of any of them.

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


03 Feb 2008 12:30:38
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Ron Shepard wrote:

> I would say that throwing a baseball is more of a natural motion
> than stroking a pool cue. I can imagine a million years of natural
> selection to tune the ability to throw rocks at small animals in
> order to eat, but I cannot see any reason why a pool stroke motion
> would be particularly useful over that period of time.

I think a pool stroke is more natural than a baseball pitch. I think a
pool stroke is closer to an underhand pitch and an underhand toss is
much easier than an overhand toss. I remember when I was a little kid
playing ball in the back yard we would always make the pitcher pitch
underhanded because little kids could naturally get the ball over the
plate better.

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


03 Feb 2008 12:22:55
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <VdCdnWWewqyhZzjanZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@comcast.com >,
Jack Stein <jbstein2@comcast.net > wrote:

> Ron Shepard wrote:
>
> > I would say that throwing a baseball is more of a natural motion
> > than stroking a pool cue. I can imagine a million years of natural
> > selection to tune the ability to throw rocks at small animals in
> > order to eat, but I cannot see any reason why a pool stroke motion
> > would be particularly useful over that period of time.
>
> I think a pool stroke is more natural than a baseball pitch. I think a
> pool stroke is closer to an underhand pitch and an underhand toss is
> much easier than an overhand toss.

In an underhand pitch (which I agree is a natural motion), you stand
upright, you pivot from the shoulder and not the elbow, and your
hand faces forward, not sideways or backwards. Imagine taking a
pool stance, holding your shoulder fixed, pivot at your elbow only,
with your hand facing backwards, and trying to throw a ball. That
approach would give you neither speed nor accuracy for throwing a
ball compared to the usual approach.

I do agree that an underhand throwing motion is more natural than an
overhand motion. We have probably been throwing rocks and spears
underhanded for hundreds of thousands of generations.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


03 Feb 2008 13:49:27
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Ron Shepard wrote:

> Jack Stein <jbstein2@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>Ron Shepard wrote:

>>I think a pool stroke is more natural than a baseball pitch. I think a
>>pool stroke is closer to an underhand pitch and an underhand toss is
>>much easier than an overhand toss.

> In an underhand pitch (which I agree is a natural motion), you stand
> upright, you pivot from the shoulder and not the elbow, and your
> hand faces forward, not sideways or backwards. Imagine taking a
> pool stance, holding your shoulder fixed, pivot at your elbow only,
> with your hand facing backwards, and trying to throw a ball. That
> approach would give you neither speed nor accuracy for throwing a
> ball compared to the usual approach.

I think swinging my arm at the elbow with my hand facing sideways is
extremely natural movement. To pitch a ball underhanded I have to twist
my hand so it faces forward instead of sideways as my hands face
naturally.

> I do agree that an underhand throwing motion is more natural than an
> overhand motion. We have probably been throwing rocks and spears
> underhanded for hundreds of thousands of generations.

At any rate, I agree that an underhand pitch is more natural movement
than an overhand pitch, but I also think a pool stroke is just as
natural, if not more so than an underhand pitch. Learning to make a
closed bridge is far more unnatural than a pool stroke. Whether any of
it has anything to do with throwing rocks and spears at animals I can't
say but can imagine endless arguments over which came first, or that's
why wimmin can't play pool, and so on. I also suspect early man threw
rocks and spears overhand early on, but always shot pool underhand[ed]:-)

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


03 Feb 2008 12:00:34
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"John Black" <jblack@texas.net > wrote in message
news:MPG.220fb0eaf84f57dd989986@free.teranews.com...
> In article <1eKdnU7AxdMcPTjanZ2dnUVZ_qmlnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> mrichardson@comcast.net says...
>> Again, I should point out that
>> there are no muscles in the wrist proper. All the power that you will
>> ever
>> impart to a cue comes from the forearm, upper arm and the shoulder region
>> of
>> your body.
>
> The muscles that control the wrist are in the forearm. If you've ever
> do wrist curls in the gym, that is where you feel the burn from lifting
> with only your wrist. You can actually do quite a bit of weight so I
> would not say it is an insignificant amount that can be added to a pool
> stroke. There is definitely something here as this new techique has
> improved my game. I need more experimenting to find out what exactly it
> is -- i.e. if I am really adding something with my wrist or if by
> loosening my grip sufficiently, my wrist comes forward at the end and
> helps that way.
>
> John Black
>


OK, yes, so this brings up a theory I have. Many say that there shouldn't
be any reason that women can't compete with men at pool because there is no
strength issue - other than the break shot. My theory is that this is false
for the above mentioned reason. I've noticed when giving lessons to women,
they always have a very, very difficult time with some of the more powerful
stroke shots. Here's three examples:
http://tinyurl.com/2frq8t


Those are somewhat extreme examples. But, IMO, strength does play a role,
and women will generally have a tougher time with a litany of shots that
require more power. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not gonna go ask Allison
Fischer to play even because they are many others issues involved in playing
good pool at which she's just plain better than me. I just think that the
strength issue IS a critical factor that makes it harder for women to excel
than men.

Am I stating the obvious? Whaddya think?

Bob Keller




03 Feb 2008 12:09:11
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"Bob Keller" <rjk1962@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:nrOdnXaexaDJkjvanZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@comcast.com...

> Here's three examples:
> http://tinyurl.com/2frq8t

Ha, ha! Switch the 7 and 8 around in the 3rd example.
Dang pool dislexia!

Bob Keller




03 Feb 2008 14:01:59
Michael Richardson
Re: True or False?


"Jack Stein" <jbstein2@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:uuydnfvevbBfajjanZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>>>I can't see a wrist snap improving accuracy much, and more speed than you
>>>can deliver w/o a snap is seldom if ever needed, so it serves little
>>>purpose far as I can see. On the other hand, if you use it and it works
>
>> When driving a nail with a hammer you would always hold your wrist
>> locked, that's where the power comes from. The muscles in your arm is
>> what supplies the power, there are only ligaments in the wrist.
>
> I think the power comes from the weight of the hammer and the speed at
> which it hits the nail. If a wrist snap increases the speed of the hammer
> hitting the nail any amount, then, it increases the power transfer to the
> nail. There is no doubt most of the speed from a hammer swing, or a ball
> pitch, or a pool stroke comes from the arm muscles, but that does not mean
> a wrist snap does not increase the speed of any of them.
>
> --
> Jack
> http://jbstein.com

Actually, where it concerns the swinging of a hammer, if you use your wrist
you will just wear your wrist out plus you will prabably strike your fingers
more often which never feels very good! A wrist snap when using a hammer
isn't suggested and it's been told to me by my grandfather many years ago
how to use a hammer properly, he was a master cabinet maker specializing in
staircasings and mantles, he also built alot of the alters in some of the
old churchs aruond the area. He also would get really pissed if you made a
mitre that wasn't damn near perfect, where it was perfectly mated and true.
I know this doesn't quite fit the thread and is just a bunch of blather on
my part.
Thanks,
Mike R.




03 Feb 2008 14:04:15
Michael Richardson
Re: True or False?


"Ed McCune" <mccune@telusplanet.net > wrote in message
news:fo4p1a$fv$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
>
> Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>> I'm not impling that I shoot with a stiff wrist. I shoot with a loose
>> wrist and the cue held loosely between my thumb and middle finger but
>> when at the last part of the stroke I firm my grip on the cue. My point
>> is that there isn't much to be gained in trying to flick or snap the
>> wrist in shooting any billiard shots. It just introduces more variables
>> that are not neccessary or desirable. try just shooting a ball with just
>> your wrist action and then tell me that you can shoot a ball forcefully
>> enough to even pocket a ball and you'll find out that will be about all
>> the force that a wrist snap will accomplish other than misdirecting the
>> cue from its intended contact point. I believe that there are others who
>> would agree with this as being correct and also have stated the same in
>> this thread. Again, I should point out that there are no muscles in the
>> wrist proper. All the power that you will ever impart to a cue comes from
>> the forearm, upper arm and the shoulder region of your body. You know,
>> the funny thing about a bridge hand is that when you set your bridge it
>> actually helps to lock those ligaments down by lifting your little finger
>> out like a hard on dog dick. I'm sure everyone here on RSB has seen a
>> shooter do this and wondered why they do that but it in effect does lock
>> your wrist and some of the fingers in place.
>> Thanks,
>
> Do you mean you lift the little finger of your bridge hand or grip hand?
> I'll have to try this and see. Sounds interesting.
>
> As for the wrist snap, I agree with you on this. I think it best to just
> keep a loose wrist but forget the snap, which, for me at least, has a
> strong tendency to throw the tip off line a touch.
>
> As I have said I will wrist snap to get more cue speed if I really need to
> spin a ball but I suspect that the wrist snap technique simply causes me
> to create more true arm speed over a short distance...much like a karate
> punch technique.
>
> Regardless, for me, loose wrist but little wrist snap=more accurate tip
> contact point.
>
>
> Ed
>
> --
> mccune@standardab.ca

Lifting of the pinky on the bridging hand is what I meant. I think everybody
has seen this at some point while playing and it does help stabilize the
bridge hand somewhat.
Thanks,
Mike R.




03 Feb 2008 15:18:52
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <ron-shepard-FBAF26.10492903022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com >,
ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net says...
> and things like fouette shots

Like what??

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



03 Feb 2008 23:23:45
pltrgyst
Re: True or False?

On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 10:49:29 -0600, Ron Shepard <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net >
wrote:

>I would say that throwing a baseball is more of a natural motion
>than stroking a pool cue. I can imagine a million years of natural
>selection to tune the ability to throw rocks at small animals in
>order to eat, but I cannot see any reason why a pool stroke motion
>would be particularly useful over that period of time.

Think masturbation coupled with an instinct for self-preservation...

-- Larry


04 Feb 2008 11:30:05
JakartaDean
Re: True or False?

Bob Keller wrote:

> Those are somewhat extreme examples. But, IMO, strength does play a role,
> and women will generally have a tougher time with a litany of shots that
> require more power. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not gonna go ask Allison
> Fischer to play even because they are many others issues involved in playing
> good pool at which she's just plain better than me. I just think that the
> strength issue IS a critical factor that makes it harder for women to excel
> than men.
>
> Am I stating the obvious? Whaddya think?
>
> Bob Keller
>
I've become convinced, through one of those pop psychology books called
"Why men don't talk and women can't read maps" or something like that,
that men and women's brains have evolved differently over time, to suit
different situations. The successful man, who passed his genes on, was
one who could throw a spear at lunch, rewarding male brains with good
spacial skills. The successful woman had to multitask (watch the kids,
cook, keep an eye on the camp boundary for enemies/predators, etc.
Women's brains evolved to reward those with communication skills, whilst
men's evolved to reward those with good spacial skills. This is why,
IMO, women don't, on average, play as well as men. Or read maps and
arallel park, for that matter.

BTW, I know we're all well-adjusted adult males with no problems in our
personal lives, but I'd recommend the book anyway. It had me thinking
quite a bit, and is written is a very easy-to=read style.

Dean


03 Feb 2008 23:43:31
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <nrOdnXaexaDJkjvanZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"Bob Keller" <rjk1962@comcast.net > wrote:

> I just think that the
> strength issue IS a critical factor that makes it harder for women to excel
> than men.
>
> Am I stating the obvious? Whaddya think?

I agree. With ample strength, the shots you diagramed are at the
extreme edges of the speed comfort zone. But with a little less
strength, they are outside of the comfort zone.

I have a little arthritis (or something) in my shoulder. It rarely
bothers me, but when it does it affects all of my high-speed shots.
It isn't that they come up short necessarily, it is that I start
missing them much too often.

I expect the same thing is true for weaker players in general, which
statistically includes women and children. It isn't that they can't
shoot hard enough to execute those kinds of shots, it is that they
start to lose control at those shot speeds.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


03 Feb 2008 23:53:44
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <J7idnW4hpKIdgDvanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"Michael Richardson" <mrichardson@comcast.net > wrote:

> Actually, where it concerns the swinging of a hammer, if you use your wrist
> you will just wear your wrist out plus you will prabably strike your fingers
> more often which never feels very good! A wrist snap when using a hammer
> isn't suggested and it's been told to me by my grandfather many years ago
> how to use a hammer properly, he was a master cabinet maker specializing in
> staircasings and mantles, he also built alot of the alters in some of the
> old churchs aruond the area. He also would get really pissed if you made a
> mitre that wasn't damn near perfect, where it was perfectly mated and true.
> I know this doesn't quite fit the thread and is just a bunch of blather on
> my part.

In this political season, I wonder if anyone has a link to the video
of George W. Bush trying to hammer a nail. This is the only related
thing I found on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24pdu7xzXJw

but it doesn't actually show the video clip. If you haven't seen it
before, it was clear that he had never held a tool in his hand
before in his life. Suffice it to say, G. W. Bush is no Jimmy
Carter.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


03 Feb 2008 23:17:32
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



Ron Shepard wrote:

> I am starkly reminded of this every time I try to shoot left handed.

Then why don't you understand that beginners need to start with a
different technique? Before you can even teach them stance and stroke
you have to get them accustomed to just stroking the cue levelly. I'm
not talking wrist snap here at all as, if you read my other posts, I
don't and never have advocated that technique.

I find there are many things, like using a long flowing stroke or even
using certain aiming techniques, that are just not useful for beginners
because they don't have any consistency. Even bridging is difficult at
first. Attempting to force a "proper bridge" and stance is not a good
recipe for success with a beginner. You simply have to work with what
they are able to do and attempt to build a foundation so that they can
become acclimatized to stroking. There is plenty of time to alter these
things and it is not near as hard to do so as you seem to think.

At least it wasn't for me or any of the teenagers I've helped.

Ed


--
mccune@standardab.ca


03 Feb 2008 23:23:13
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



Michael Richardson wrote:

> Lifting of the pinky on the bridging hand is what I meant. I think everybody
> has seen this at some point while playing and it does help stabilize the
> bridge hand somewhat.
> Thanks,
> Mike R.
>
>

Can't say as I've seen it and it seems a bit awkward to me but I'll give
it a shot anyway.

Ed

--
mccune@standardab.ca


04 Feb 2008 00:18:26
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <MPG.220febb7cf7f0c0989987@free.teranews.com >,
John Black <jblack@texas.net > wrote:

> > and things like fouette shots
>
> Like what??

This was about advanced techniques, things that beginners don't
learn.

A fouette shot is a combination of draw and sidespin that you can
use when the cue ball is very close to the object ball. Here is a
shot diagram of one of the standard trick shots that uses this
stroke.

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3AHEy3BCnB1IaUb3PFQk3kFQk3kHMS3kGmt3kERO1kYON
@

This shot would be a straightforward draw shot with no sidespn if
the cue ball were not so close the 1-ball. The balls should be
separated by 2-4 mm in the above setup. You shot this shot with low
left, you use a level cue stick, and you aim the cue ball almost,
but not exactly, straight into the 1-ball. The sidespin doesn't
really serve any propose on the cue ball, but it allows the tip to
avoid double-hitting the cue ball.

Here is another trick shot that uses this same stroke.

http://CueTable.com/P/?@1AQse4IaMd1PRyu1UQse3UaMc1kRyu1kOPv1kKQS1kAni
2kasC4kXxN@

You hit this also with low left and with a level cue. This version
does need the sidespin in order to succeed because of the rails in
the cue ball trajectory.

There is also a topspin version of fouette, and I think it has its
own French name.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


04 Feb 2008 05:08:34
Ed Chauvin IV
Re: True or False?

Mere moments before death, Ron Shepard
<ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net > hastily scrawled:

>Suffice it to say, G. W. Bush is no Jimmy Carter.

Thank god.


--
DISCLAIMER : WARNING: RULE # 196 is X-rated in that to calculate L,
use X = [(C2/10)^2], and RULE # 193 which is NOT meant to be read by
kids, since RULE # 187 EXPLAINS homosexuality mathematically, using
modifier G @ 11.

"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin


04 Feb 2008 06:51:22
Mark0
Re: True or False?

On Feb 3 2008 1:49 PM, Jack Stein wrote:

snip
>Whether any of
> it has anything to do with throwing rocks and spears at animals I can't
> say but can imagine endless arguments over which came first, or that's
> why wimmin can't play pool, and so on. I also suspect early man threw
> rocks and spears overhand early on, but always shot pool underhand[ed]:-)
>
> --
> Jack
> http://jbstein.com

I've got a 5 yr old with a pretty dandy one-handed rest the cue butt on
the shoulder, rest the shaft on the rail overhand (and wristy) pool
stroke....


--Mark0 <--mythbuster :)




Author of Secrets to a Perfect Pool Table Recovering Job
http://www.mccauleyweb.com/secrets.htm

-------- 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




04 Feb 2008 10:18:37
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <ron-shepard-FBE56C.23433103022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com >,
ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net says...
> I agree. With ample strength, the shots you diagramed are at the
> extreme edges of the speed comfort zone. But with a little less
> strength, they are outside of the comfort zone.
>
> I have a little arthritis (or something) in my shoulder. It rarely
> bothers me, but when it does it affects all of my high-speed shots.
> It isn't that they come up short necessarily, it is that I start
> missing them much too often.
>
> I expect the same thing is true for weaker players in general, which
> statistically includes women and children. It isn't that they can't
> shoot hard enough to execute those kinds of shots, it is that they
> start to lose control at those shot speeds.

Yep, I learned this lesson back when I was a teen playing basketball.
My foul shot percentage could use some improvement and my range for
other shots was not stellar outside of the key. I practiced and
practiced foul shots. But the thing that made a tremendous difference
in my percentages was when I started lifting weights, especially working
chest. This was not even for basketball as I didn't realize the impact
it would have. When I got back to basketball, I was amazed at how much
more effortless foul shots and other similarly ranged shots felt to
shoot. My percentage went way up even though I hadn't been practicing
lately. The difference was that I was now operating much farther from
the top range of those muscles. Previously I could defintely shoot the
ball that far and farther, but doing so was closer to the top range of
the muscles and that limited consistency.

And to bring this back to the original topic of wrist flick: VERY
IMPORTANT in basketball. It is an essential part of the shooting
motion. It would be silly to argue that it is an extra movement at the
end of the shot that can only add error because of possibly mis-timing
it or getting "extra" muscles involved. Practice nails the timing of
the arm+wrist motion, just like it should in pool.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



04 Feb 2008 11:22:53
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Michael Richardson wrote:

> Actually, where it concerns the swinging of a hammer, if you use your wrist
> you will just wear your wrist out plus you will prabably strike your fingers
> more often which never feels very good!

But, if accuracy is a given, as it was in Bambu's post to which I
responded, you will not hit your fingers unless trying to do that.

A wrist snap when using a hammer
> isn't suggested and it's been told to me by my grandfather many years ago
> how to use a hammer properly,

It also isn't suggested in pool for much of the same reason, increased
power however is not one of them. Decreased accuracy, if not a given,
is one.

he was a master cabinet maker specializing in
> staircasings and mantles, he also built alot of the alters in some of the
> old churchs aruond the area. He also would get really pissed if you made a
> mitre that wasn't damn near perfect, where it was perfectly mated and true.
> I know this doesn't quite fit the thread and is just a bunch of blather on
> my part.

Interesting to me non-the-less. I am always impressed by the work of
old school craftsman and the level of perfection they could achieve over
long periods of toil. Today, a perfect joinery is a machines job,
something few humans can work out...

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


04 Feb 2008 10:25:58
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <ron-shepard-D73795.00182604022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com >,
ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net says...
> Here is another trick shot that uses this same stroke.
>
> http://CueTable.com/P/?@1AQse4IaMd1PRyu1UQse3UaMc1kRyu1kOPv1kKQS1kAni
> 2kasC4kXxN@
>
> You hit this also with low left and with a level cue. This version
> does need the sidespin in order to succeed because of the rails in
> the cue ball trajectory.

That's one crazy shot. I never would have thought you could avoid the
double hit there, let alone get the cueball to follow that path. Thanks
for the explanation.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



04 Feb 2008 11:38:00
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Mark0 wrote:

> I've got a 5 yr old with a pretty dandy one-handed rest the cue butt on
> the shoulder, rest the shaft on the rail overhand (and wristy) pool
> stroke....

There was an old guy around here that would shoot anyone one handed, and
he didn't shoot with the cue laying on the table, he held the cue like a
dart, shooting overhand. He never used his own cue, always used a house
cue even when playing regular pool for cash. I guess your son is
destined to become a great overhanded one handed hustler, instead of a
side armer like Willie Hoppe:-)

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


04 Feb 2008 11:56:02
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Bob Keller wrote:

> OK, yes, so this brings up a theory I have. Many say that there shouldn't
> be any reason that women can't compete with men at pool because there is no
> strength issue - other than the break shot. My theory is that this is false
> for the above mentioned reason. I've noticed when giving lessons to women,
> they always have a very, very difficult time with some of the more powerful
> stroke shots. Here's three examples:
> http://tinyurl.com/2frq8t
>
>
> Those are somewhat extreme examples. But, IMO, strength does play a role,
> and women will generally have a tougher time with a litany of shots that
> require more power. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not gonna go ask Allison
> Fischer to play even because they are many others issues involved in playing
> good pool at which she's just plain better than me. I just think that the
> strength issue IS a critical factor that makes it harder for women to excel
> than men.

I think it might be a critical factor very, very rarely. I think the
shots you show are within the strength limit of most women. What I
think the problem with most wimmin is something very different. For
example, the ob is sitting right in front of the pocket, the money ball
is in the middle of the rail, right beside the ob. All it needs is a
soft hit. Instead, the woman hits the ball so hard it goes 2 rails down
to the opposite rail. This is cool, but the shot just before that where
she had to hit the ball exactly hard enough to go just two rails to the
opposite side, she hit so soft it laid on the first rail, to which she
screamed at you that she is not strong enough to go two rails... In
other words, there is so much going on with wimmin and pool that
strength is about issue 1000 out of 1000.

For men, strength is probably issue number 2 out of a 1000 and it is
always they hit them too hard too often.

When anyone asks me to help them with pool, I tell them it's all in your
feet, and your hitting them too hard... That's about all I can do for
them and I don't have to watch them shoot a ball to tell them that.

Pool is not a power game, period. It is a finesse game more than
anything. When I see people talk about more power, more powerful
strokes, more powerful tips and all that rot, I generally cringe, as
from what I see, power is 99 times out of 100 a players enemy. A
players and above have learned to control themselves, most everyone else
it's a struggle.

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


04 Feb 2008 12:10:14
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

John Black wrote:

> And to bring this back to the original topic of wrist flick: VERY
> IMPORTANT in basketball. It is an essential part of the shooting
> motion. It would be silly to argue that it is an extra movement at the
> end of the shot that can only add error because of possibly mis-timing
> it or getting "extra" muscles involved. Practice nails the timing of
> the arm+wrist motion, just like it should in pool.

It does in pitching a baseball as well. The thing with pool is it isn't
needed. Pool isn't a power game, and very, very few shots require more
power than is easily available to most players, including wimmin. I
said this even for breaks when the soft break was not in vogue. As a
matter of fact, I think wimmin should be BETTER at pool than men,
because historically they have been better in general at small motion
tasks, like pool. I am constantly amazed at how poorly wimmin (in
general) are at pool. There is more to it than meets the eye, and no, I
don't think it has anything to do with numbers. (More men play pool so
the pool is larger type stuff.) I don't buy that at all, for a lot of
reasons.

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


04 Feb 2008 14:22:10
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <58Gdnd1WEJZp2zranZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@comcast.com >, jbstein2
@comcast.net says...
> John Black wrote:
>
> > And to bring this back to the original topic of wrist flick: VERY
> > IMPORTANT in basketball. It is an essential part of the shooting
> > motion. It would be silly to argue that it is an extra movement at the
> > end of the shot that can only add error because of possibly mis-timing
> > it or getting "extra" muscles involved. Practice nails the timing of
> > the arm+wrist motion, just like it should in pool.
>
> It does in pitching a baseball as well. The thing with pool is it isn't
> needed. Pool isn't a power game, and very, very few shots require more
> power than is easily available to most players

I have no experience with pitching but in basketball the purpose of the
wrist is not power. Its accuracy. There is plenty of power in the arms
alone but for some reason we have much finer and more accurate control
over the wrist than we do the arm. You use the same wrist flick motion
on short low power shots as you would taking three pointers. So given
that, the fact that pool is a finesse rather than a power game would
argue for rather than against some wrist component. Reminds me of that
expression: "its all in the wrist"...

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



05 Feb 2008 13:04:18
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

yeah, didn't really work for me either. Sounded good though :-)

Lou Figueroa


John Black wrote:
> In article <zrFoj.528936$kj1.496258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> lfigueroa@att.net says...
>> hmmm, I shall have to try the first one -- sounds interesting.
>>
>> Lou Figueroa
>> not so sure
>> about #2
>
> I tried it last night. I didn't know where to shift that finger in a
> way that would help.
>
> John Black
>
>> carlton-redford@usa.net wrote:
>>> As another RSB-er who's been playing for over 50 years (56) I'll share
>>> two draw tips gleaned from 40 years of attending professional 14.1 and
>>> 9-ball tournaments. Slightly off the wrist-flick topic but quite
>>> germane to greatly improving drawback skills. Many longtime players
>>> never notice some of these tiny but transformative details:
>>>
>>> 1) The first critical draw stroke change that separates many pros from
>>> the average player: with your closed bridge, shift the middle finger
>>> as far away as possible from the two cue-encircling fingers. This
>>> automatically allows you to aim very low on the cue ball *while
>>> keeping the shaft completely level* rather than self-defeatingly
>>> pointed downward (the cause of almost all miscues when back spinning,
>>> even with a well-chalked tip).
>


05 Feb 2008 13:10:28
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

good grief! How can you say it'll eventually cause problems as a fact?!
I use it and it works just fine. And I'm shooting more accurately and
with more action and draw than in a long time.

I think the problem is that you think this is some big wrist flick --
it's not. It's just a very natural movement, that comes from a relaxed
wrist, and is part of the whole stroke. It's no different than your
wrists being part of a golf or tennis swing.

Lou Figueroa


Ron Shepard wrote:
>
> In the wrist snap case, that will cause eventually problems with
> both speed control and tip-ball accuracy.


05 Feb 2008 11:20:50
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

John Black wrote:

> I have no experience with pitching but in basketball the purpose of the
> wrist is not power. Its accuracy. There is plenty of power in the arms
> alone but for some reason we have much finer and more accurate control
> over the wrist than we do the arm. You use the same wrist flick motion
> on short low power shots as you would taking three pointers. So given
> that, the fact that pool is a finesse rather than a power game would
> argue for rather than against some wrist component. Reminds me of that
> expression: "its all in the wrist"...

Excellent points, but for some reason when you mention flicking your
wrist in pool I think of an exaggerated flick for the purpose of
increasing cue speed. I think there is a normal amount of wrist flick
in most peoples stroke, sort of the same thing with hammering nails.
Someone mentioned hammering nails and that your wrist should not be
moving. I thought about this and after over 50 years of nail hammering,
I "think" my wrist does move and is not locked in any way. I think the
same thing happens with my pool stroke, but I really don't know. I
truly do not try to think about all that stuff anymore. I know in
hammering nails, after a certain number of nails, you pretty much hit
the nail on the head every time:-) I also think people often think
their stroke sucks in pool, but in reality, they are stroking straight,
but aiming at the wrong spot, and unfortunately, hitting it perfectly.

Bottom line to me is your stroke should be comfortable and relaxed, not
trying to flick your wrist, or not flick your wrist, or pause, or put
your left eyeball over the cue, or anything else, just a nice normal
(for you) stroke. Just let it happen and focus on lining up your shots
the same way and eventually everything will fall into place. Your time
is better spent learning how the CB will react after hitting the OB and
rails. I didn't always feel this way, and spent lots of time trying out
many of the RSB gimmicks over the years, so perhaps my ideas are not so
good for beginners, or even me, but hey, it's all I got left, nothing
else seemed to work very well:-)

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


05 Feb 2008 11:07:22
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article
<8fZpj.550801$kj1.179876@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net >,
lfigueroa <lfigueroa@att.net > wrote:

> good grief! How can you say it'll eventually cause problems as a fact?!

I explained that.

> I use it and it works just fine.

And you play very well despite of it. Many good players do.

> I think the problem is that you think this is some big wrist flick --
> it's not.

Snap, flick, jerk, whatever you want to call it. It is a quick
motion that supposedly occurs right at the moment the tip hits the
ball. If the timing is even a little off, and it occurs a little
too early or a little too late, disaster can happen.

> It's just a very natural movement, that comes from a relaxed
> wrist, and is part of the whole stroke.

If you have a relaxed wrist, then there is no snap. A relaxed wrist
and a smooth motion is exactly what I advocate, and it is the
opposite of a snap (flick, jerk, etc.).

> It's no different than your
> wrists being part of a golf or tennis swing.

I took some tennis lessons once, and the first thing I learned there
was to eliminate my wrist motion and to make the racket more of an
extension of my forearm. I don't play golf, so I don't know about
that, but it seems unlikely that you can snap your wrists during the
middle of a golf swing. Someone else mentioned basketball, and I'm
not sure about that either. I know there is finger motion involved
when shooting, and the goal is to have the ball roll smoothly off of
your finger tips. That does not seem to be consistent with a wrist
snap either. It seems that any time smoothness, accuracy, and
fluidity is required, you don't want to encourage jerky or snappy
motions.

This is all just my opinion of course. If we could see some slow
motion video of some good pool strokes, maybe we could actually see
if a wrist snap does anything useful. I don't think it does, I
think it is mostly just detrimental in most situations.

There are some exceptions however, but these are not normal pool
strokes with a normal stance or normal grip. For example, when you
do those little rail nurse things in straight rail billiards, those
can be done accurately with wrist motion. The motion here is to
hold your arm perfectly still, and move your wrist only. The cue is
held almost perfectly vertical with the finger tips using a dart
grip. The cue ball moves somewhere between 1/8 and 1/4 inch on each
shot, hitting both balls and masseing back to the starting position.
However, even this is a smooth motion, not really a snap.

If someone wants to experiment with wrist snaps a little, to
determine the pros and cons, it is useful to know when and how much
your wrist moves. You don't get much feedback about this normally,
so you need to do something special to get it. One thing I've tried
is to use a cheap vinyl bowling wrist support on your grip hand. It
does not stop your wrist from moving, but it gives you feedback when
your wrist does move. Wrap this thing around your wrist and shoot
various kinds of shots with a wrist snap, and also with the kind of
motion I advocate (no snap, loose wrist, smooth motion). Shoot some
power draw shots, and some delicate little position shots (like
Mosconi's circle drill) and everything in between. My conclusions
from this is that I don't need the wrist snap for even the power
draw shots, and the wrist snap hurts the position shots. YMMV, of
course, but that is the basis for my recommendations.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


05 Feb 2008 11:18:35
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net > wrote in message
news:ron-shepard-930639.11072205022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...

> This is all just my opinion of course. If we could see some slow
> motion video of some good pool strokes, maybe we could actually see
> if a wrist snap does anything useful.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6sKPP9nuis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INzRX2mf2nw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGs5cF9oE1A

Bob Keller




06 Feb 2008 02:42:41
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

THAT'S what I'm talkin' about.

It's a loose wrist motion. -- not some big wrist flick.

It makes all the difference in the world.

Lou Figueroa
needs to buy Bob
another beer


Bob Keller wrote:
> "Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ron-shepard-930639.11072205022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>
>> This is all just my opinion of course. If we could see some slow
>> motion video of some good pool strokes, maybe we could actually see
>> if a wrist snap does anything useful.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6sKPP9nuis
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INzRX2mf2nw
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGs5cF9oE1A
>
> Bob Keller
>
>


05 Feb 2008 20:56:54
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"lfigueroa" <lfigueroa@att.net > wrote in message
news:B89qj.200971$MJ6.47443@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> THAT'S what I'm talkin' about.
>
> It's a loose wrist motion. -- not some big wrist flick.
>
> It makes all the difference in the world.
>
> Lou Figueroa
> needs to buy Bob
> another beer
>

That's all it would take? I got more video links...........how much beer ya
got? ;-)

Bob Keller



>
> Bob Keller wrote:
>> "Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:ron-shepard-930639.11072205022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>>
>>> This is all just my opinion of course. If we could see some slow
>>> motion video of some good pool strokes, maybe we could actually see
>>> if a wrist snap does anything useful.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6sKPP9nuis
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INzRX2mf2nw
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGs5cF9oE1A
>>
>> Bob Keller
>>



05 Feb 2008 23:17:47
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <5sKdneb1aOB-ETXanZ2dnUVZ_uCinZ2d@comcast.com >, jbstein2
@comcast.net says...
> John Black wrote:
>
> > I have no experience with pitching but in basketball the purpose of the
> > wrist is not power. Its accuracy. There is plenty of power in the arms
> > alone but for some reason we have much finer and more accurate control
> > over the wrist than we do the arm. You use the same wrist flick motion
> > on short low power shots as you would taking three pointers. So given
> > that, the fact that pool is a finesse rather than a power game would
> > argue for rather than against some wrist component. Reminds me of that
> > expression: "its all in the wrist"...
>
> Excellent points, but for some reason when you mention flicking your
> wrist in pool I think of an exaggerated flick for the purpose of
> increasing cue speed. I think there is a normal amount of wrist flick
> in most peoples stroke,

I think we are getting to the bottom of this now. Its just that
different people call it different things. This "normal amount" was
missing from my stroke until recently. Adding it (or rather allowing it
to happen) has made a big difference for me. Previously my wrist was
too rigid -- I think because of advice I've heard that the *only* thing
that should move during the stroke is the forearm hinging at the elbow.
This is what probably caused me to try to keep my wrist straight.

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



05 Feb 2008 23:30:01
John Black
Re: True or False?

In article <B89qj.200971$MJ6.47443@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net >,
lfigueroa@att.net says...
> THAT'S what I'm talkin' about.
>
> It's a loose wrist motion. -- not some big wrist flick.
>
> It makes all the difference in the world.

Yep, that is what I am talking about too I guess. Notice how far
forward his wrist ends up at the end of the stroke. I was previously
not doing this. Now that I am, I play exactly like Efren. (not the
Efren in the video -- another Efren that plays my speed...)

John Black

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



06 Feb 2008 13:03:56
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

I dan't know about you, but I'm feeling a little sorry for Efren, seeing
as how he's going to have to unlearn that somewhere down the road :-)

Lou Figueroa


John Black wrote:
> In article <B89qj.200971$MJ6.47443@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> lfigueroa@att.net says...
>> THAT'S what I'm talkin' about.
>>
>> It's a loose wrist motion. -- not some big wrist flick.
>>
>> It makes all the difference in the world.
>
> Yep, that is what I am talking about too I guess. Notice how far
> forward his wrist ends up at the end of the stroke. I was previously
> not doing this. Now that I am, I play exactly like Efren. (not the
> Efren in the video -- another Efren that plays my speed...)
>
> John Black
>


06 Feb 2008 10:06:57
Jack Stein
Re: True or False?

Bob Keller wrote:

> "Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ron-shepard-930639.11072205022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>
>
>>This is all just my opinion of course. If we could see some slow
>>motion video of some good pool strokes, maybe we could actually see
>>if a wrist snap does anything useful.

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6sKPP9nuis
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INzRX2mf2nw
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGs5cF9oE1A

I didn't notice much of a wrist snap, but did notice that he has little
pause in his back stroke, while Allison Fisher has a major pause in her
back stroke. I mention this because last week someone told me they
didn't like my stroke because of the pause. I've been told this before
but last time I had no idea whatsoever that I had a pause in my back
stroke. Thanks to Fisher, I ain't too worried about it either. Thanks
to Efren, nothing else matters much either, just let it happen and worry
about something else, hopefully that dammed PSR...

--
Jack
http://jbstein.com


06 Feb 2008 10:52:36
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <b7-dnQjFe8CMUDTanZ2dnUVZ_ournZ2d@comcast.com >,
Jack Stein <jbstein2@comcast.net > wrote:

> Bob Keller wrote:
>
> > "Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:ron-shepard-930639.11072205022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> >
> >
> >>This is all just my opinion of course. If we could see some slow
> >>motion video of some good pool strokes, maybe we could actually see
> >>if a wrist snap does anything useful.
>
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6sKPP9nuis
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INzRX2mf2nw
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGs5cF9oE1A
>
> I didn't notice much of a wrist snap,

The Corey Deuel clip shows no wrist movement at all, and he plays
pretty well too, doesn't he?

> but did notice that he has little
> pause in his back stroke, while Allison Fisher has a major pause in her
> back stroke.

In Allison's case, this was something that she was taught, not
something that necessarily came natural to her. In this classical
snooker technique, that is the time when the eye focus shifts for
the final time from the cue ball to the object ball. Young eyes
don't need that time, but older eyes do. Because she learned a PSR
that accounts for that, she will not have to change her PSR as she
ages.


> I mention this because last week someone told me they
> didn't like my stroke because of the pause.

Many good players have that pause. Those who were taught formally
often have it because it is the classical snooker instruction
approach. Other players just do it naturally. IMO, there is
certainly nothing wrong with that pause, and it probably just shows
a lack of perspective of the local players giving you advice.

I tried that pause for a while, and I personally don't like it. I
like a slow backstroke, but a pause at the end throws off my timing.
This means that I have to use some other way to allow my eyes to
change focus. For me, it is best if I pause before the backstroke,
not after.


> Thanks to Fisher, I ain't too worried about it either. Thanks
> to Efren, nothing else matters much either, just let it happen and worry
> about something else, hopefully that dammed PSR...

Efren is a good player, but he has many habits that other players
should not try to emulate. For example, in the above video it is
clear that he has a swoop in his backstroke. I personally think the
wrist snap is another one of these technical faults.

It does make you wonder how good he would be if he had learned
correct technique in the beginning. He obviously has a tremendous
amount of natural ability, he shows wide knowledge of many shots,
and he is very creative in his play. These things all help to
compensate for his technical faults. But you have to wonder, if he
had good technique, along with all his other other attributes, just
how good would that guy be?

$.02 -Ron Shepard


06 Feb 2008 11:02:12
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net > wrote in message
news:ron-shepard-46DA3C.10523606022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...


> It does make you wonder how good he would be if he had learned
> correct technique in the beginning. He obviously has a tremendous
> amount of natural ability, he shows wide knowledge of many shots,
> and he is very creative in his play. These things all help to
> compensate for his technical faults. But you have to wonder, if he
> had good technique, along with all his other other attributes, just
> how good would that guy be?
>


Well, Ron, we are going to really disagree here. I think the reason Efren
is so much better than others is because he ISN'T so technical in his
approach. How much better would he be? He would be worse! Efren
understands that good pool is not science, it is music and art that flows
from your soul.

The wrist needs to be loose and the pause should be AT the cue ball, not in
the middle of your backstroke. I've talked about Efren's rythmn before -
you can see how he pauses at the cue ball when everything is a "GO", then
there are two or three rythmic strokes that seem to kind of build up a
momentum and everything FLOWS from the pause through the delivery of the
cue.

Efren could have been better with traditional fundamentals!? PLEASE!!

Bob Keller




06 Feb 2008 10:56:32
Mark0
Re: True or False?

On Feb 6 2008 1:02 PM, Bob Keller wrote:

> "Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ron-shepard-46DA3C.10523606022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>
>
> > It does make you wonder how good he would be if he had learned
> > correct technique in the beginning. He obviously has a tremendous
> > amount of natural ability, he shows wide knowledge of many shots,
> > and he is very creative in his play. These things all help to
> > compensate for his technical faults. But you have to wonder, if he
> > had good technique, along with all his other other attributes, just
> > how good would that guy be?
> >
>
>
> Well, Ron, we are going to really disagree here. I think the reason Efren
> is so much better than others is because he ISN'T so technical in his
> approach. How much better would he be? He would be worse! Efren
> understands that good pool is not science, it is music and art that flows
> from your soul.
>
> The wrist needs to be loose and the pause should be AT the cue ball, not in
> the middle of your backstroke. I've talked about Efren's rythmn before -
> you can see how he pauses at the cue ball when everything is a "GO", then
> there are two or three rythmic strokes that seem to kind of build up a
> momentum and everything FLOWS from the pause through the delivery of the
> cue.
>
> Efren could have been better with traditional fundamentals!? PLEASE!!
>
> Bob Keller

And just think how good that Arnold Palmer guy could have been at golfing
if he had the "right" fundamentals....

I'm with you BK -- that nukular scientist Ron is being just plain dumb on
this one!!!


--Mark0 <--SSS :O)




Author of Secrets to a Perfect Pool Table Recovering Job
http://www.mccauleyweb.com/secrets.htm

------- 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




06 Feb 2008 23:08:22
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



Bob Keller wrote:
> "Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ron-shepard-46DA3C.10523606022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>
>
>> It does make you wonder how good he would be if he had learned
>> correct technique in the beginning. He obviously has a tremendous
>> amount of natural ability, he shows wide knowledge of many shots,
>> and he is very creative in his play. These things all help to
>> compensate for his technical faults. But you have to wonder, if he
>> had good technique, along with all his other other attributes, just
>> how good would that guy be?
>>
>
>
> Well, Ron, we are going to really disagree here. I think the reason Efren
> is so much better than others is because he ISN'T so technical in his
> approach. How much better would he be? He would be worse! Efren
> understands that good pool is not science, it is music and art that flows
> from your soul.
>
> The wrist needs to be loose and the pause should be AT the cue ball, not in
> the middle of your backstroke. I've talked about Efren's rythmn before -
> you can see how he pauses at the cue ball when everything is a "GO", then
> there are two or three rythmic strokes that seem to kind of build up a
> momentum and everything FLOWS from the pause through the delivery of the
> cue.
>
> Efren could have been better with traditional fundamentals!? PLEASE!!
>
> Bob Keller
>
>

And I have to agree with your disagreement. Technique, I think, as in
fundamentals, are a learning tool in all sports. They help train your
muscles and mind in the quickest and most efficient way. Once that
training process is well advanced proper technical fundamentals are no
longer so important and, indeed , could even hold you back a bit.

This is because fundamental techniques are designed with the average
"joe" in mind. In reality we are all a bit different. Not just
physically but mentally and the lowest common denominator fundamentals
are not really quite right for anyone in the long run.

In all sports learning fundamentals are critical to improvement but
there comes a time that they must be sloughed off or altered to suit the
player. Not unlearned, as Ron would have it, but tailored to the player
a bit more. Retuned as it were.

This is my belief anyway. I know at least Ron and Pat disagree and
perhaps, for them, they are correct too.

Ed

--
mccune@standardab.ca


07 Feb 2008 13:06:36
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

I think one of the keys to Efren's success is that he plays pool the way
his body wants to play pool. At least it looks totally natural and
organic. Beyond that, I think he's fractionated the whole thing down to
a level most of us couldn't even begin to imagine.

Lou Figueroa


Bob Keller wrote:
> "Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ron-shepard-46DA3C.10523606022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>
>
>> It does make you wonder how good he would be if he had learned
>> correct technique in the beginning. He obviously has a tremendous
>> amount of natural ability, he shows wide knowledge of many shots,
>> and he is very creative in his play. These things all help to
>> compensate for his technical faults. But you have to wonder, if he
>> had good technique, along with all his other other attributes, just
>> how good would that guy be?
>>
>
>
> Well, Ron, we are going to really disagree here. I think the reason Efren
> is so much better than others is because he ISN'T so technical in his
> approach. How much better would he be? He would be worse! Efren
> understands that good pool is not science, it is music and art that flows
> from your soul.
>
> The wrist needs to be loose and the pause should be AT the cue ball, not in
> the middle of your backstroke. I've talked about Efren's rythmn before -
> you can see how he pauses at the cue ball when everything is a "GO", then
> there are two or three rythmic strokes that seem to kind of build up a
> momentum and everything FLOWS from the pause through the delivery of the
> cue.
>
> Efren could have been better with traditional fundamentals!? PLEASE!!
>
> Bob Keller
>
>


07 Feb 2008 13:07:53
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

Well, that is one fine post.

Lou Figueroa


Ed McCune wrote:
> And I have to agree with your disagreement. Technique, I think, as in
> fundamentals, are a learning tool in all sports. They help train your
> muscles and mind in the quickest and most efficient way. Once that
> training process is well advanced proper technical fundamentals are no
> longer so important and, indeed , could even hold you back a bit.
>
> This is because fundamental techniques are designed with the average
> "joe" in mind. In reality we are all a bit different. Not just
> physically but mentally and the lowest common denominator fundamentals
> are not really quite right for anyone in the long run.
>
> In all sports learning fundamentals are critical to improvement but
> there comes a time that they must be sloughed off or altered to suit the
> player. Not unlearned, as Ron would have it, but tailored to the player
> a bit more. Retuned as it were.
>
> This is my belief anyway. I know at least Ron and Pat disagree and
> perhaps, for them, they are correct too.
>
> Ed
>


07 Feb 2008 11:26:49
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article <foe6o7$avt$1@registered.motzarella.org >,
Ed McCune <mccune@telusplanet.net > wrote:

> > Efren could have been better with traditional fundamentals!? PLEASE!!
> >
> > Bob Keller
>
> And I have to agree with your disagreement.

Well, as far as I know, you guys are safe with your claim. Efren
isn't going to spend the next 10 years of his life unlearning his
bad technique and learning good technique just so the rest of us can
compare his runlengths both ways. I gave my opinion, you guys have
yours.

But there is one other comment that I think should be made. Having
a good technique in no way at all means that you cannot be creative
and play as an "organic whole". That is simply a "false choice"
argument. When it comes to wrist snaps and other jerky movements, I
think a smooth stroke is better, that's all. You guys disagree, I
understand that. And there certainly are many good players who have
good technique to support my point of view, especially in the past
10 years (look at the strong European players, for example).

$.02 -Ron Shepard


07 Feb 2008 11:22:40
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


"Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net > wrote in message
news:ron-shepard-E34430.11264907022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <foe6o7$avt$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
> Ed McCune <mccune@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>
>> > Efren could have been better with traditional fundamentals!? PLEASE!!
>> >
>> > Bob Keller
>>
>> And I have to agree with your disagreement.
>
> Well, as far as I know, you guys are safe with your claim. Efren
> isn't going to spend the next 10 years of his life unlearning his
> bad technique and learning good technique just so the rest of us can
> compare his runlengths both ways. I gave my opinion, you guys have
> yours.
>
> But there is one other comment that I think should be made. Having
> a good technique in no way at all means that you cannot be creative
> and play as an "organic whole". That is simply a "false choice"
> argument. When it comes to wrist snaps and other jerky movements, I
> think a smooth stroke is better, that's all. You guys disagree, I
> understand that. And there certainly are many good players who have
> good technique to support my point of view, especially in the past
> 10 years (look at the strong European players, for example).
>
> $.02 -Ron Shepard

OK, but let's just be very clear here. I DO NOT advocate a wrist snap. I
DO advocate a "loose wrist", which is what I think Efren and many other
players, including the good European players that you mention, all
incorporate. There is nothing jerky about a loose wrist, and I think it
contributes tons to creating that smooth stroke. In fact, players who have
a stiff wrist seem "jerky" to me.

Bob Keller




07 Feb 2008 13:04:53
Thyme3421
Re: True or False?

Before I read any of the replies... I vote FALSE!!!!
Sorta.

True that it would add acceleration, but false that's it's useful/would
help.
The snap, IMO, adds too many variables to the exact spot I'm hitting the
cue ball. It seems (in my head) that it would also shorten the stroke
length. Like, my arm would stroke shorter to compensate for the snap...
thus, shortening the stroke.
To control the snap just perfect... on top of keeping a perfect
stroke..... forget about tit.

-Duane Edwards << hehe, I said tit
"Good enough to win money, not good enough to make it."
http://diamondstopockets.blogspot.com



On Jan 30 2008 9:50 PM, John Black wrote:

> Wrist flick or wrist snap is a useful technique to getting big draw.
> Seems true in my experience...
>
> John Black

------- 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




07 Feb 2008 19:26:51
Ed McCune
Re: True or False?



Bob Keller wrote:
> "Ron Shepard" <ron-shepard@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ron-shepard-E34430.11264907022008@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>> In article <foe6o7$avt$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
>> Ed McCune <mccune@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Efren could have been better with traditional fundamentals!? PLEASE!!
>>>>
>>>> Bob Keller
>>> And I have to agree with your disagreement.
>> Well, as far as I know, you guys are safe with your claim. Efren
>> isn't going to spend the next 10 years of his life unlearning his
>> bad technique and learning good technique just so the rest of us can
>> compare his runlengths both ways. I gave my opinion, you guys have
>> yours.
>>
>> But there is one other comment that I think should be made. Having
>> a good technique in no way at all means that you cannot be creative
>> and play as an "organic whole". That is simply a "false choice"
>> argument. When it comes to wrist snaps and other jerky movements, I
>> think a smooth stroke is better, that's all. You guys disagree, I
>> understand that. And there certainly are many good players who have
>> good technique to support my point of view, especially in the past
>> 10 years (look at the strong European players, for example).
>>
>> $.02 -Ron Shepard
>
> OK, but let's just be very clear here. I DO NOT advocate a wrist snap. I
> DO advocate a "loose wrist", which is what I think Efren and many other
> players, including the good European players that you mention, all
> incorporate. There is nothing jerky about a loose wrist, and I think it
> contributes tons to creating that smooth stroke. In fact, players who have
> a stiff wrist seem "jerky" to me.
>
> Bob Keller
>
>

Me too.

No I mean I don't advocate anything jerky or wrist snappy either and I
don't see Efren snapping his wrist so much as just letting it flex in
the direction of the shot. Nothing jerky at all.

I also appreciate the Euro's as well and have tied to model my stroke ,
a bit, after Steve Davis.

Ed

--
mccune@standardab.ca


08 Feb 2008 12:59:53
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

Why is it bad technique? Spend some time at a tournament and just watch
the wrists, hands, and fingers of the top players. I think it's more
likely to be a good technique than bad.

And I think we're saying smooth is better too. No one said anything
about jerky movements.

Lou Figueroa
geez, talk about
false choices


Ron Shepard wrote:
> In article <foe6o7$avt$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
> Ed McCune <mccune@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>
>>> Efren could have been better with traditional fundamentals!? PLEASE!!
>>>
>>> Bob Keller
>> And I have to agree with your disagreement.
>
> Well, as far as I know, you guys are safe with your claim. Efren
> isn't going to spend the next 10 years of his life unlearning his
> bad technique and learning good technique just so the rest of us can
> compare his runlengths both ways. I gave my opinion, you guys have
> yours.
>
> But there is one other comment that I think should be made. Having
> a good technique in no way at all means that you cannot be creative
> and play as an "organic whole". That is simply a "false choice"
> argument. When it comes to wrist snaps and other jerky movements, I
> think a smooth stroke is better, that's all. You guys disagree, I
> understand that. And there certainly are many good players who have
> good technique to support my point of view, especially in the past
> 10 years (look at the strong European players, for example).
>
> $.02 -Ron Shepard


08 Feb 2008 10:05:14
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article
<dnYqj.567156$kj1.72415@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net >,
lfigueroa <lfigueroa@att.net > wrote:

> Why is it bad technique?

I have explained it as well as I can. A wrist snap introduces a
new, and unnecessary, kind of coordination and timing that is
required into the stroke process. If the snap does not occur at
precisely the right time, then two kinds of disaster occurs, the tip
doesn't hit the ball at the right spot, and it hits with the wrong
speed. I have explained a process you can use to estimate the size
of the effect on the cue ball distance due to this mistiming.

> Spend some time at a tournament and just watch
> the wrists, hands, and fingers of the top players.

I also already addressed this. Sure, some good players play with
all kinds of bad technique, but many of the very best players play
with very good technique too. Someone already posted a video of
Corey Deuel, and he plays very well with no wrist snap. Look at
some of the good European players who seem to be winning all the big
tournaments lately (e.g. Hohmann, Immonen, Ortmann, Feijen), they
play without wrist snaps too.

Instead of just looking at the best players, you need also to look
at the normal league players over a period of time. Which ones are
the ones that are held back the most by their technique, which ones
seem to advance the fastest because of their good technique, and
which ones manage to overcome their bad habits and play well despite
their bad technique. It seems to me that that that first group is
the largest, and the last group is much smaller than the first two.
The main difference between the first two groups is a little
instruction at the right time in their learning process.


> And I think we're saying smooth is better too. No one said anything
> about jerky movements.

For a pool stroke a wrist snap must be a quick movement, otherwise
it is not a snap. The choice between a smooth motion and a motion
with a snap or jerk is not a false choice. Of course, you can still
have a jerky stroke without a wrist snap, but that is a different
problem. I find often when I am in a slump that it is due to some
kind of bad technique that has crept into my mechanics. It might be
a wrist snap, a wrist twist, an elbow drop, a shoulder movement, a
head raise, or any of a million other things. It seems that the
same things happen to other players too; sometimes it is very
obvious what someone is doing differently when they are in a slump
than they were doing a month ago when they weren't.

This is all my opinion, of course. YMMV.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


10 Feb 2008 19:00:07
lfigueroa
Re: True or False?

Why is it unnecessary? Maybe it's essential to a good pool stroke?

Maybe there's a disconnect between the term we're using "wrist snap" and
what at least I think most of us on this particular bench are trying to
articulate: more of a loose, relaxed grip and wrist, which allows a
flowing movement and acceleration of the wrist during the stroke. Like
I've said, it's not a flick, so maybe we should stop calling it a wrist
snap...

Lou Figueroa


Ron Shepard wrote:
> In article
> <dnYqj.567156$kj1.72415@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> lfigueroa <lfigueroa@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Why is it bad technique?
>
> I have explained it as well as I can. A wrist snap introduces a
> new, and unnecessary, kind of coordination and timing that is
> required into the stroke process. If the snap does not occur at
> precisely the right time, then two kinds of disaster occurs, the tip
> doesn't hit the ball at the right spot, and it hits with the wrong
> speed. I have explained a process you can use to estimate the size
> of the effect on the cue ball distance due to this mistiming.
>
>> Spend some time at a tournament and just watch
>> the wrists, hands, and fingers of the top players.
>
> I also already addressed this. Sure, some good players play with
> all kinds of bad technique, but many of the very best players play
> with very good technique too. Someone already posted a video of
> Corey Deuel, and he plays very well with no wrist snap. Look at
> some of the good European players who seem to be winning all the big
> tournaments lately (e.g. Hohmann, Immonen, Ortmann, Feijen), they
> play without wrist snaps too.
>
> Instead of just looking at the best players, you need also to look
> at the normal league players over a period of time. Which ones are
> the ones that are held back the most by their technique, which ones
> seem to advance the fastest because of their good technique, and
> which ones manage to overcome their bad habits and play well despite
> their bad technique. It seems to me that that that first group is
> the largest, and the last group is much smaller than the first two.
> The main difference between the first two groups is a little
> instruction at the right time in their learning process.
>
>
>> And I think we're saying smooth is better too. No one said anything
>> about jerky movements.
>
> For a pool stroke a wrist snap must be a quick movement, otherwise
> it is not a snap. The choice between a smooth motion and a motion
> with a snap or jerk is not a false choice. Of course, you can still
> have a jerky stroke without a wrist snap, but that is a different
> problem. I find often when I am in a slump that it is due to some
> kind of bad technique that has crept into my mechanics. It might be
> a wrist snap, a wrist twist, an elbow drop, a shoulder movement, a
> head raise, or any of a million other things. It seems that the
> same things happen to other players too; sometimes it is very
> obvious what someone is doing differently when they are in a slump
> than they were doing a month ago when they weren't.
>
> This is all my opinion, of course. YMMV.
>
> $.02 -Ron Shepard


10 Feb 2008 23:41:25
Ron Shepard
Re: True or False?

In article
<XQHrj.213909$MJ6.6256@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net >,
lfigueroa <lfigueroa@att.net > wrote:

[on wrist snaps...]

> Why is it unnecessary? Maybe it's essential to a good pool stroke?

I can think of dozens of good players who have good strokes and
don't have wrist snaps. So no, I don't think it is essential. Do
you know any players who don't have wrist snaps who have good
strokes?

> Maybe there's a disconnect between the term we're using "wrist snap" and
> what at least I think most of us on this particular bench are trying to
> articulate: more of a loose, relaxed grip and wrist, which allows a
> flowing movement and acceleration of the wrist during the stroke. Like
> I've said, it's not a flick, so maybe we should stop calling it a wrist
> snap...

I don't know. You will have to talk to Bambu about redefining
normal English words. :-)

One thing that might settle this is to view some high speed video of
someone who uses a wrist snap to see what it actually does. What we
would need to see is the difference in the speed of the cue stick
and of the forearm right above the wrist. If there is a wrist snap
at the moment the tip hits the ball, then the stick would be moving
faster than the forearm; if there is no wrist snap, then they would
be moving the same speed.

$.02 -Ron Shepard


11 Feb 2008 08:56:41
Bob Keller
Re: True or False?


Ron, please, noone is advocating a wrist snap, we are advocating a loose
wrist. Lou is the third or so person to point that out, yet you ignore it
again. Will you please acknowledge. whether you agree or even understand it
or not, that our opinion is:

wrist snap = bad
loose wrist = good

Bob Keller