Wrist Action in Stroke
Bob Olson
I'm just getting back into playing pool after quite a few years in
hibernation. I've been reading Byrne's "Standard Book of Pool and
Billiards", and Phil Capelle's "Play Your Best Pool". Both of the
books talk about using wrist action in the stroke. My question is how
much wrist action should be used? When I use a light grip and relaxed
wrist, I get some wrist action naturally. Is this the wrist action
that the books are talking about, or should I be actively trying to
snap my wrist more than what naturally occurs?
Thanks,
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
| Bob Olson | "Reality is only for those |
| (nors...@goodnet.com) | who lack imagination." |
-------------------------------------------------------------
snook...@aol.com
#My question is how
#much wrist action should be used? When I use a light grip and relaxed
#wrist, I get some wrist action naturally. Is this the wrist action
#that the books are talking about, or should I be actively trying to
#snap my wrist more than what naturally occurs?
#Thanks,
I think you are in the wrong forum.... you want alt.sex.hands, :O)
Mark.
PS: Definately don't <Yikes> snap your wrist.
Bob Jewett
Bob Olson (nors...@goodnet.com) wrote:
: ... My question is how much wrist action should be used?
None to speak of. It is sufficient for the wrist to simply
act as a hinge and to get most of the power from the movement
of the forearm. In my opinion, snapping the wrist is an
unnecessary complication of the mechanics that gets little
benefit, similar to dropping the elbow.
Bob Jewett
Dave Young
Wrist action must be confined to the vertical plane which contains the
cue's direction of motion. Any other motion will destroy your game.
Dave
nors...@goodnet.com (Bob Olson ) wrote:
>I'm just getting back into playing pool after quite a few years in
>hibernation. I've been reading Byrne's "Standard Book of Pool and
>Billiards", and Phil Capelle's "Play Your Best Pool". Both of the
>books talk about using wrist action in the stroke. My question is how
>much wrist action should be used? When I use a light grip and relaxed
>wrist, I get some wrist action naturally. Is this the wrist action
>that the books are talking about, or should I be actively trying to
>snap my wrist more than what naturally occurs?
>Thanks,
Ron Shepard
There may be some very soft shots that are more accurate with wrist motion
than with arm motion, but on "normal" strokes there should be no wrist
motion. Try playing pool sometime with a bowler's wrist support. It
doesn't hold your wrist still so much as provide feedback as to how and
when your wrist might be trying to move.
You will hear all kind of strange claims about how a wrist snap or wrist
twist at the right time can improve things, but when you think about it
they just don't seem to make sense. One claim is that you can get more
speed or spin on the ball than otherwise. First, the magnitude of such an
effect is questionable; just think about how fast (i.e. in mph) you can
cock your wrist -- even without the cue stick weight that is a small
number. Secondly, since the snap occurs over such a small distance it
must be timed very precisely, just before the tip-ball contact, for it to
have any effect. Wouldn't it be better just to stroke a tiny bit harder,
or farther, to achieve the same results? That approach is more consistent
than any wrist snap motion. Another claim is that you can get masse
motion from the cue ball by twisting the cue stick in your hand at the
right time. But if you set up obstacle balls carefully that can be passed
only with masse, the cue ball never seems to curve; the effect seems to
vanish right when you need it.
The "Test Draw Shot" that I posted in another thread (regarding shaft
flex) is a good one to try this wrist-snapping stuff on. Wrist-snap
proponents claim that they can get more spin with the snap than without
it. Let them measure the difference, post the results, and see if others
can duplicate them. Try doing the "Test Draw Shot" with the bowling wrist
support on to make sure that you aren't snapping something unaware. BTW,
you should be miscueing about half the time when you do that test shot;
the idea is that you are right at the edge of what is possible.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Gina Perez
>
> I think you are in the wrong forum.... you want alt.sex.hands, :O)
>
A couple of different people have tried to help me with my jump
shot. And they say you gotta snap the wrist real good. And when I
try and fail, they say 'more wrist, more wrist'. I still can't jump
reliably. So I decided the reason I can't and a lot of guys can is
that they've had all those years exercising their wrist muscles on a
regular basis. ;)
(As for you gals that can jump .. I chalk it up to talent)
Jim Meador
>So I decided the reason I can't and a lot of guys can is
> that they've had all those years exercising their wrist muscles on a
> regular basis. ;)
>
> (As for you gals that can jump .. I chalk it up to talent)
No, No! And I will stand firm on this one. Forget all that wrist stuff.
In fact, wrist snap could be the reason you are having trouble, although
a little wrist with some jump shots may be helpful.
Consider the physics of a legal jump shot: you are driving the cue ball
into the table. If you do not hit the cue ball in the right place to
drive it into the table, it will scoop or just slip from under the tip.
The proper contact point depends on the verticle angle of the stick, as
related the amount of jump needed.
My guess? You are not relaxed, and you are trying to force the issue.
Like the massŽ, most people are too "violent" with their jump stroke. It
is an "art" stroke. Be sensitive and ....oooops. Better be careful here.
Just stroke the damn th....oooops. I give up.
Jim Meador
jenz...@aol.com
Wrist action is not needed. The game is simplicity. Do not complicate
matters. The cue ball can not tell if you use your wrist or not.
Mikey J.
A Player
Michael O'Hair
In article <19961201084...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
<jenz...@aol.com> wrote:
>Wrist action is not needed.
Not always so. The "nip" shot and various jump shots require some wrist
action. But in general, you're right.
>The game is simplicity. Do not complicate matters.
"Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler." -- Albert Einstein
Rich C--Chicago
Ridiculous.
What do you play, marbles?
Bob Jewett
Rich C--Chicago (S...@Cebbs.com) wrote:
: jenz...@aol.com wrote:
: > Wrist action is not needed. ...
: Ridiculous. What do you play, marbles?
While it is true that some ridicule the idea that wrist is not
necessary, there are fewer capable of explaining why wrist is
necessary. Michael O'Hair pointed out some situations in which it
might help, although I would argue that there are more reliable
ways to shoot nip draw, depending on the separation.
Do you have anything other than ridicule to contribute?
Bob Jewett
White Lightning
>> matters. The cue ball can not tell if you use your wrist or not.
>>
>> Mikey J.
>> A Player
>
>
>
>
>
>What do you play, marbles?
A friend of mine swears by this "wrist action" stuff. Kinda funny how handy
that wrist action is when he's racking ;-)
T.
jenz...@aol.com
In article <32A2D1...@Cebbs.com>, Rich C--Chicago <S...@Cebbs.com>
>
>jenz...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> Wrist action is not needed. The game is simplicity. Do not complicate
>> matters. The cue ball can not tell if you use your wrist or not.
>>
>> Mikey J.
>> A Player
>
>
>Ridiculous.
>
>
>
>What do you play, marbles?
Please give more info on the need of wrist action.
From my Knowledge wrist action gives the cue stick more speed at the point
of contact. If you can maneuver your cue ball without a lot of cue stick
speed IMHO is the best possible way to go.
By no means do I leave out my ablity to generate cue stick speed with my
wrist. I hope I play good enough I don't have to use that tool in my bag.
I have used a lot of wrist action in the past. I used to think getting a
lot of juice on the ball was neat. I didn't win a lot. I now believe
that less is best. Less juice gives me higher % of position accuracy and
higher % of shot success.
I do know if one is playing day in and day out with wrist action, then
he/she would be able to play position at a high % rate. For the most of
us who have limited time to play this great game, we have to learn the
easiest way. If we learn the easiest way IMHO it is much easier to play
at a high level without the day in and day out of playing.
I wish I could play all the time. I need my family first, pool second.
Thank you,
Mikey J.
A Player
Jim Meador
> Please give more info on the need of wrist action.
> From my Knowledge wrist action gives the cue stick more speed at the point
> of contact.
> Mikey J.
> A Player
It is simply a matter of choice, or shooting style. If you believe the
snap achieved with wrist action will help, by all means learn and
practice it. It does come in handy for any number of shots when full
follow-through is not possible or advisable. It can also create
problems. For example, a lot of players snap "short".
I believe it does strengthen the break.
Jim
Tom Bellhouse
jenz...@aol.com wrote:
(snip)
> I wish I could play all the time. I need my family first, pool second.
>
Obviously a misplaced sense of priorities here. A real pool player would
say, "I need my family first, pool second, but not necessarily in that
order."
Tom
Rich
I certainly do, Bob.
It's virtually impossible to *NOT* use your wrist when stroking
the cue ball. If someone would care to put one of those bowling
wrist-braces on, and hit a few balls around, I believe my point
would be made. Besides that, with a stiff wristed motion, it's
not possible to use the downthrough/check/straighthrough strokes
with accuracy. How can you generate subtle differences in cue speed
with any accuracy whatsoever, with a stiff wrist?
The exception to this ruls is the upthrough stroke, which needs
a stiff wrist.
I know you've seen the best players in the world, how many of them
don't use any wrist action?
Look at Sang Lee...look at Blomdahl, these guys are absolute magicians
with their cues. They also know the importance of the role the wrist
plays in their games. Blomdahl is also a world class 9-Ball player,
and he doesn't noticably change his mechanics between games.
By the way...
It's good to talk to you again..we haven't spoken since the USBA National
Tournament in San Jose...back in 90, I think.
Have a great day!
Rich Conboy/Chicago
Rich
jenz...@aol.com wrote:
>
> In article <32A2D1...@Cebbs.com>, Rich C--Chicago <S...@Cebbs.com>
> writes:
>
> >
> >>
> >> Wrist action is not needed. The game is simplicity. Do not complicate
> >> matters. The cue ball can not tell if you use your wrist or not.
> >>
> >> Mikey J.
> >> A Player
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >What do you play, marbles?
>
> From my Knowledge wrist action gives the cue stick more speed at the point
> speed IMHO is the best possible way to go.
YOu're forgetting that, sometimes, cue-speed does not equal cue-ball speed.
It is necessary to be able to hit the cueball slowly, but with a significant
amout of english. Especially in 3-cushion billiards.
> By no means do I leave out my ablity to generate cue stick speed with my
> wrist. I hope I play good enough I don't have to use that tool in my bag.
>
> I have used a lot of wrist action in the past. I used to think getting a
> lot of juice on the ball was neat. I didn't win a lot. I now believe
> that less is best. Less juice gives me higher % of position accuracy and
> higher % of shot success.
>
> I do know if one is playing day in and day out with wrist action, then
> he/she would be able to play position at a high % rate. For the most of
> us who have limited time to play this great game, we have to learn the
> easiest way. If we learn the easiest way IMHO it is much easier to play
> at a high level without the day in and day out of playing.
I agree with what you're saying here, and am not trying to be argumentative.
Pool/Billiards is one of the easiest sports to play mediocre. But, in order
to move to the next level of play, you need to move beyone what seems "easiest"
and explore the more intricate dynamics of the game. That's where the good
players become great players. Sometimes....what seems easy, isn't necessarily
correct.
> I wish I could play all the time. I need my family first, pool second.
Hahah! FINALLY!! One of us who has their priorities straight!
> Thank you,
>
> Mikey J.
> A Player
Godd Stroking to you!
Rich
po...@pioneerplanet.infi.net
In one of last years issues of Billiard Digest there was a profile on
some of the best players in past years, dont recall which issue but one
of the players consistanly used a slip stroke and for him it was quite
successful. Occassionally I have found myself doing it but not
conciously (?) when I have deliberately used it I went quickly back to
my normal as I felt I lost some control so maybe it's a case of if it
works do it and if it doesnt work do something different. I have seen
many players use techniques I consider unorthodox but for them it works.
Dick
Jim Meador
Rich wrote:
>
> I know you've seen the best players in the world, how many of them
> don't use any wrist action?
>
>
> Rich Conboy/Chicago
Are we talking about the same thing? I would think most players (30 or
better in the RSB tournament) would know that a certain amount of wrist
snap is a natural. I don't believe the original question was about
anything this subtle.
For most shots, I use a soft grip. At the end of my stroke I squeeze the
butt a little tighter to keep from throwing the stick across the room.
The result is a small amount of snap on MOST strokes. It is not
something I think about.
However, there is a "wrist snap" that I do think about, because it is
the snap itself that I am counting on to achieve a specific effect. I
believe it is this "contrived" snap that the question was about, not the
natural wrist action most all of us have to some degree.
Correct me if I am wrong Bob (Jewett), but I believe you were refering
to the exagerrated snap many advanced players use to shorten
follow-through for specific reverse, curve, jump and masse shots. And I
agree. It is not a necessary action to learn since the same effects can
be achieved without snap. Isn't it a matter of choice?
Am I wrong, or do we all agree on many points, but somehow find our
differences in the dialog itself. We all play a lot of pool...obviously.
Most of us have many years of experience shooting against expert
players, and we pay attention to how we are being beat. A dynamic like
wrist action is so obvious and fundamental that I can't see how it can
escape our attention. I don't understand how we can disagree, unless
there is simply a misunderstanding, or unless, as could well be the
case, I am missing something. Are there players who have absolutely no
wrist action?
Jim Meador
jenz...@aol.com
In article <32A388...@Cebbs.com>, Rich <S...@Cebbs.com> writes:
>YOu're forgetting that, sometimes, cue-speed does not equal cue-ball
speed.
>It is necessary to be able to hit the cueball slowly, but with a
significant
>amout of english. Especially in 3-cushion billiards.
I have not been able to play a lot of 3-cushion billiards. I wish the
chance will come to learn that game. So I am not knowledgable on the
strokes needed for that beautiful game.
>
I do apoligize for my first statement of "wrist action is not needed",
that statement is false. It is needed in some areas. There will always
be some wrist action in the stroke. If playing loose and not concerned
about the wrist, your wrist will move.
IMHO if you think of not using your wrist or using your wrist you will be
at the extreme. I think you should look at the natural movement of your
wrist while stroking the ball, then try to remember how it feels.
Your wrist will do different things if you hold the cue with your fingers
or palm. You might even crank your wrist in or out which will cause more
wrist action.
>I agree with what you're saying here, and am not trying to be
argumentative.
>
I don't think of you or any being argumentive. I take all that people say
with hopes of improving myself as a player and instructor of this game.
Thank you!
>Pool/Billiards is one of the easiest sports to play mediocre. But, in
order
>to move to the next level of play, you need to move beyone what seems
>"easiest"
>and explore the more intricate dynamics of the game. That's where the
good
>players become great players. Sometimes....what seems easy, isn't
>necessarily
>correct.
I agree with "what seems easy, isn't necessarily correct."
IMHO when good player become great players is when they have the knowledge
and skill to use the intricate dynamics of the game when called to do so.
Their bread and butter of the game has to be the simple things and
deciding the simpliest way to get the maximum benifit with minimum risk.
I thank all for your responses. I keep growing with all of your thoughts.
Mikey J.
A Player
Tom Bellhouse
Bob Jewett wrote:
>
> Rich C--Chicago (S...@Cebbs.com) wrote:
> : jenz...@aol.com wrote:
> : > Wrist action is not needed. ...
>
> : Ridiculous. What do you play, marbles?
>
> While it is true that some ridicule the idea that wrist is not
> necessary, there are fewer capable of explaining why wrist is
> necessary. Michael O'Hair pointed out some situations in which it
> might help, although I would argue that there are more reliable
> ways to shoot nip draw, depending on the separation.
>
> Do you have anything other than ridicule to contribute?
>
> Bob Jewett
I'd suggest damping as a function of the wrist, as well as its acting as a sort of
fine-tunable "booster" on some shots. Muscles and nerves of the hand and wrist are very
complex, and are capable of much finer movements (adjustments) than those of the forearm
or upper arm. For that reason, tension or rigidity should probably be avoided. Relax.
Imagine a break shot, with the wrist being able to add acceleration by "kicking in" at
the optimum spot just before impact. For the oposite image, think about hitting a
7-iron with your wrists held rigidly throughout the swing. Or hitting a tennis ball
with a wrist that never cocked. There's both touch and power in the movement of the
wrist.
I'm sure one can learn to hit a cueball with a locked wrist, in an effort to minimize
extraneous movements. But I think that choice would be costly in terms of "feel" and
ability to make the cueball dance. Good strokes are fluid things, not a jerk to the
back and a jerk to the front.
Best,
Tom Bellhouse
Scott McFarlane
No offense intended, but I can't think of even one time when I have paid
the slightest bit of attention to what my wrist is doing when I stroke
the ball. I can't think that it isn't important (double negative used
to confuse myslef and hopefully others who have caught on to me) that
wrist action be a contributing factor (are you confused by this sentence
yet?), yet I don't think that I can bring myself to attempt to
concentrate on what my wrist might be doing when shooting.
I'll bet there is some action.......How much and what it is....do I
really want to know? Perhaps Bob J. has some insight?
Just my thoughts,
Scott McFarlane
sc...@opone.com
some pretty good stuff snipped
> However, there is a "wrist snap" that I do think about, because it is
> the snap itself that I am counting on to achieve a specific effect. I
> believe it is this "contrived" snap that the question was about, not the
> natural wrist action most all of us have to some degree.
>
Ron Shepard
In article <32A385...@Cebbs.com>, Rich <S...@Cebbs.com> wrote:
>[...] If someone would care to put one of those bowling
>wrist-braces on, and hit a few balls around, I believe my point
>would be made. [...]
If you want to learn to play without a limp wrist, this is a good way to
start. The brace doesn't stop the wrist movement itself, but it gives you
good feedback as to when it moves. You can then make the necessary
modifications in your grip and stroke to stop this movement. However,
don't expect to make such a change to your game without experiencing some
period of reduced performance. The long term benefits may be worth it,
but there will be a short term downside, as there is with almost every
technique change.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Ron Shepard
In article <32A46E...@billiardworld.com>, Jim Meador
<pst...@billiardworld.com> wrote:
>[...] I don't understand how we can disagree, unless
>there is simply a misunderstanding, or unless, as could well be the
>case, I am missing something. Are there players who have absolutely no
>wrist action?
I think that there are players who have no wrist motion during their
stroke and up to the time that the tip hits the ball. There may be some
wrist motion afterwards as the grip is tightned to stop the cue stick from
flying across the table as you say. If by "absolutely" you mean
measurable with lasers and micrometers, then perhaps not. But I think
that "absolutely" no wrist action is the goal, whether it can be achieved
in practice or not being a separate issue.
In contrast, there are many players who believe, and who teach others as
they are first learning the game, that you _must_ have some kind of wrist
snap or twist or jab in order to put spin on the ball. For some reason,
beginners always seem to want to get lots of draw, but the same thing
would hold in principle for getting any kind of spin on the cue ball. As
a result, beginners develop all kinds of wierd pump-handle strokes with
wrist snaps and twists. Later on they might learn that the important
thing all along was a precise hit of the tip on the ball, but in the
meantime they have learned all kinds of bad habits that work in exactly
the opposite direction. And not only does all the jabbing and snapping
hurt the ability to put the tip on the ball at the right point, it also
destroys speed control, which ultimately is at least just as important as
spin in playing pool.
So when the original poster asked the question about wrist action, he has
heard these two conflicting points of view and is interested in additional
discussions in order to choose which approach to take in the future. It
is difficult for beginners to pick out the grain from the chaff. Everyone
seems to know what they are talking about, everyone is an "authority". If
you look at the pros on TV, or even the players in your local pool rooms,
you will see all kinds of strokes and playing styles, so perhaps it
doesn't really make a difference?
I personally think it _does_ make a difference, but it is difficult to
describe in words what I think the mechanics of a good stroke should look
like. The most important thing is that it is straight. I think that the
upper arm should not move, even during the followthrough. The butt should
be held tightly against the palm of the hand by the thumb and first finger
(this tightness precludes any wrist motion, thereby eliminating a big
source of errors). The other fingers should touch the butt lightly during
the stroke for tactile feedback, but should not be applying any forward
force during the stroke. The cue stick should sort of "pivot" about the
point on the sides of the butt where it is held by the thumb and first
finger, leading to a smooth and relaxed motion. The tip should hit the
ball at the moment of zero acceleration and maximum velocity. The tip
should hit the ball when the forearm is perpendicular to the stick in
order to achieve maximum accuracy of the tip on the ball. The stroke and
bridge should not be too long because it affects the accuracy of the tip
contact point, and it should not be too short because it affects the speed
control. After the tip/ball impact, the other fingers should tighten
pressing the butt against the palm, stopping the cue stick's forward
motion in a smooth and relaxed manner. All this applies to a "normal"
stroke and shot; break shots, jump shots, shots with nearby balls and
cushions, masse shots with elevated cue sticks, and so on, are special
cases and compromises in the above goals are required.
These are just my opinions, so take them with a grain of salt.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Bob Jewett
Tom Bellhouse (alt...@cyberhighway.net) wrote:
> I'm sure one can learn to hit a cueball with a locked wrist, in an
> effort to minimize extraneous movements. But I think that choice
> would be costly in terms of "feel" and ability to make the cueball
> dance. Good strokes are fluid things, not a jerk to the back and a
> jerk to the front.
I'm not proposing that the wrist act as if in a plaster cast, just that
it move no more than necessary. I think if the wrist does not snap,
the stroke has a much better chance to be smooth. Without a specific
test, this is all speculation and philosophizing, of course.
Bob Jewett
Ryan M. Hanson
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
WRIST ACTION 'MOVEMENT' --
I claim to be no expert, but from what I have read, heard, picked up from
Jerry B. Wrist 'movement' is common ... and almost needed. However
wrist 'snap' more then likely is not. (most cases, you can always justify
some means).
Anyways, in ones stroke the elbow pivots, as does the wrist. Its this
wrist snap/movement that must be in perfedt timing and alignment w/ the
elbow pivot to create a perfect stroke.
To sum it up ... individual wrist snap/movement it ok, as to how much is
is as individual as ones stroke. Like I said it had to correspond to alot
of other things (idividual strength, body composition, etc...timing).
its when you over empisize it that it will probably start to cause
problems...and can be done in much better/correct ways.
Use, never overendulge.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
EMAIL+WWW: "hec...@yar.cs.wisc.edu" "http://ducat.cs.wisc.edu/~hector"
PGP KEY: "finger hec...@yar.cs.wisc.edu"
FINGER PRINT: "3E 9D B3 5D B7 66 68 8E 35 C4 64 60 68 D0 51 0C"
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Running Linux 2.0.26 ... Anything else would be a waste!"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMqWbs3WoyRqtpA7dAQHKzQP+Mkr8egVuQTQPGR8zAJSyvRBjP/HlT6XN
JPakP0QQDAqqVd8Vo72ZxpKeYoeIrayYIiZ1oJ8RNhYIqBSVxaUbA1xsytpZPA/I
gXlqeAD6RtYd/0omBBc6mS/AyRhBJhHyhWdtDKHI1GJj33bIdoSTkPRgvHrsETRa
AtTXP5isCSI=
=RVjd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Steve MacMullin
: > I'm sure one can learn to hit a cueball with a locked wrist, in an
: > effort to minimize extraneous movements. But I think that choice
: > would be costly in terms of "feel" and ability to make the cueball
: > dance. Good strokes are fluid things, not a jerk to the back and a
: > jerk to the front.
: I'm not proposing that the wrist act as if in a plaster cast, just that
: it move no more than necessary. I think if the wrist does not snap,
: the stroke has a much better chance to be smooth. Without a specific
: test, this is all speculation and philosophizing, of course.
I am a regular (4 nights/week) snooker player. 50 is a great run for me.
Now that we all know what calibre of shooter I am, here's my thoughts on this
subject.
When I first took up the game, I played at a great pool hall with really high
calibre players. (One has two 147's, many others with many centuries) All
of the players there that helped me along with my stroke hammered into my
head that the wrist must remain straight.
To clarify, and to make sure that I'm talking in the same terms, I mean
straight in the sense that the angle of the wrist along the plane of the cue
remains straight, (thumb always points vertically), as opposed to the angle
perpendicular to the plane of the cue. I probably made no sense with this
paragraph.
Last winter I broke my thumb on my butt hand, and when it was set in a cast,
my wrist was in what the aforementioned players would call an ideal position.
I played through the injury (being the tough fella that I am :) ) and my play
was brilliant in comparison to my normal play. Really, I couldn't believe it,
especially on shots requiring lots of pace, this is where the improvment was
most evident.
Since this experience, my wrist being straight is the first problem I look for
if I'm not playing well.
Opposing viewpoints welcome. Non-opposing viewpoints more welcome :)
-steve
snook...@aol.com
I use wrist SNAP as in "On-the-snap-Vinny".
After that, I really am not all that conscious.
Sometimes, I forget what color I'm on..........
it gets so bad. In the world Amateurs,
I actually shot two colors in.... lol.... that gave
the crowd something to hoot at. What the
heck, I'm here for amusement purposes only.
God said so.
My advice to you all, learn to laugh at yourselves, or do
what I did... make people laugh at me.... it works.
Regards,
-=Mark>...--- - - - -o
snook...@aol.com
PS Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays to you all.
Bob Jewett
Rich (S...@Cebbs.com) wrote:
: You're forgetting that, sometimes, cue-speed does not equal cue-ball speed.
: It is necessary to be able to hit the cueball slowly, but with a significant
: amout of english. Especially in 3-cushion billiards.
But is there any shot where "wrist snap" is required? Perhaps shoot
the cue ball straight at a rail and to see how much angle can be taken
off the rail. For example, shoot straight up the middle of the table,
and see how far up the side rail you can hit.
Would this shot be a good one to test the "wrist snap" theory?
Bob Jewett
Loren A. Evey
In Article<jewettE1...@netcom.com>, <jew...@netcom.com> writes:
>
> But is there any shot where "wrist snap" is required? Perhaps shoot
> the cue ball straight at a rail and to see how much angle can be taken
> off the rail. For example, shoot straight up the middle of the table,
> and see how far up the side rail you can hit.
>
> Would this shot be a good one to test the "wrist snap" theory?
>
> Bob Jewett
>
Is this a trap? I think this would be a good test. I suspect you already
have an opinion.
Here is another test. Place an object ball 1" off the side rail at the foot
string. Place the cue ball on the head spot. Sink the object ball in the
near foot corner pocket. The cue ball comes to rest on the foot rail at the
diamond nearest the *same* corner pocket. The cue ball path (after contact
with the rail) runs nearly parallel to the object ball path.
The cue ball action requires drag draw with a bunch of inside English. The
drag draw has to be overcome just at contact with the object ball. The inside
English has to be the sole source of rotation at contact. The cue ball speed,
at contact, has to be the slowest possible.
I doubt this shot could be made with a stiff wrist. A variation of this shot
is shown (but not explained) in Martin's 99 shots. Rather than drag draw, the
cue ball could skid to the object ball. This could be achieved with a
relatively stiff wrist. However, because of increased speed, I suspect the
cue ball would cross the table toward the other foot corner pocket.
RichChicago
Bob Jewett wrote:
>
> Rich (S...@Cebbs.com) wrote:
>
> : You're forgetting that, sometimes, cue-speed does not equal cue-ball speed.
> : It is necessary to be able to hit the cueball slowly, but with a significant
> : amout of english. Especially in 3-cushion billiards.
>
> the cue ball straight at a rail and to see how much angle can be taken
> off the rail. For example, shoot straight up the middle of the table,
> and see how far up the side rail you can hit.
>
> Would this shot be a good one to test the "wrist snap" theory?
>
> Bob Jewett
There are many shots in billiards which require a slowly moving
cue ball, but a great deal of english.
A wrist snap is required to achieve this action.
Rich
Bob Jewett
RichChicago (S...@Cebbs.com) wrote:
: There are many shots in billiards which require a slowly moving
: cue ball, but a great deal of english.
Is there a specific one that I could try with a stiff wrist to convince
myself you're onto something? I hate to badger, but without a clear,
specific example, your belief is untestable, like the color of God's
beard.
: A wrist snap is required to achieve this action.
What's the shot?
Bob
Bob Jewett
Loren A. Evey (la...@psu.edu) wrote:
: Is this a trap? I think this would be a good test. I suspect you already
: have an opinion.
No, I have already done the test, or one very similar. Unfortunately,
both this test and the following one are table dependent, so it is
no good to compare your cue ball path with mine.
: Here is another test. Place an object ball 1" off the side rail at the foot
: string. Place the cue ball on the head spot. Sink the object ball in the
: near foot corner pocket. The cue ball comes to rest on the foot rail at the
: diamond nearest the *same* corner pocket. The cue ball path (after contact
: with the rail) runs nearly parallel to the object ball path.
So the diagram is:
___________ ____________
| |
| |
| q |
| |
| | <-- Leave the cue ball here.
___________ _____o______ "o" is an inch off the rail
Bob Jewett
Loren A. Evey
In Article<jewettE1...@netcom.com>, <jew...@netcom.com> writes:
Yes, this is exactly the shot. I can't think of a way that a
meaningful comparison could be made between two players regardless
of the tables involved. However, an individual interested in
*feeling* their stroke change as a function of the desired result
might benefit from this shot. They could start with the cue ball
located on the head string 1/2 diamond from the side rail. Then,
while achieving the same resting cue ball position, they could move
the cue toward the head spot on successive shots. Depending on the
rails, felt, balls, etc,, a more reasonable cue ball resting
position might be 1.5 diamonds on the short rail. Part of making
this shot (with position) is the early squirt and late masse. The
complexity might convince a few that focusing on micromechanics is
futile. Then again -- maybe not. I am convinced.
My bet is that anyone who does this (or any similar task involving
drag draw with extreme English) will feel changes in their wrist
movement as the cue ball is moved closer to the head spot.
Furthermore, they may notice that focusing on cue ball position is
more effective in accomplishing the desired result than is focusing
on controlling wrist movement.
The cortical input in terms of verbal command stops at "I need
maximum drag draw while imparting maximum inside English." Beyond
this, it could be harmful to focus on controlling wrist movement.
Focusing on the desired outcome might allow someone to "let out" a
stroke that could otherwise never surface (ie, escape cortical
scrutiny). This stroke might be the one that keeps the cue ball
traveling along the side rail.
I believe Mizerak wrote that all strokes should be of equal
*intensity* regardless of cue ball speed. This suggestion might
appear contradictory to those who insist on controlling their
stroke. It is difficult to convince anyone that a wide range of
strokes can generate a feeling of equal intensity. However, on rare
occassions, when in a zone, that is my perception. The feeling of
intensity can be consistent, but the specific movement of any
particular stroke might never by repeated in a lifetime of playing
the game.
Ps. Achieving the goal of a 50 ball run would be adequate for
Gallwey to write IGP (from the "concentration" thread).
RichChicago
Sure thing!
I assume you're familiar with the Japanese Diamond System ( which is what
I use), which divides the diamonds into 1/10 instead of 1/4.
I'll give 2 examples...
1st object ball: Laying at the 2nd diamond from head of the table, 1 diamond
<or so> out.
2nd object ball: Laying at the foot of the table 1/2 diamond either side of
the corner, on the same side of the table as the 1st ball.
The calculation for this shot would be 45 - 25 <give or take a couple of .10's>
If your cue ball is laying on the same side of the table as the others, say,
within the 1st diamond, shooting this "natural" would result in a kiss.
In order to beat this particular kiss <and a majority of others>, you need to
change the speed of the cue ball. By hitting the 1st object ball a tad fuller
than normal, with 8 O'clock english and a "check" stroke, the cue ball will strike
object ball, quickly pushing the kiss ball out of the way, while floating to the
rail slowly, picking up the lost speed upon contact <from the high amount of english>,
and proceed on to the score zone. Shooting the shot this way also gives you better
position, as you're driving the object ball 3-4 rails back to a favorable zone.
2nd example:
On "short-angle" shots. Notice how often after shooting a short angle, that the 1st
object ball winds up in the middle of the opposite short rail? This is a terrible
position for the ball to be in. To solve this problem, simply strike the 1st object
ball fuller than normal with a "down-through" stroke <which requires an extremely loose
wrist>, and this will bank the ball into the opposite corner <instead of the middle of
the short rail>, while holding the cue ball on the correct track.
I've seen many top pro's use these techniques, including: Junichi Komori, Dick Jaspers, and
George Ashby <who taught me how to play>.
Let me know the results of your testing.
Rich
Jim Meador
> There are many shots in billiards which require a slowly moving
> cue ball, but a great deal of english.
>
>
I don't agree. In fact, wrist snap might make it more difficult to judge
speed if a slow shot is required. Maybe certain players have developed a
snap technique that works in this situation. I would not advise it for
most.
Jim Meador
RichChicago
Jim Meador wrote:
> I don't agree. In fact, wrist snap might make it more difficult to judge
> speed if a slow shot is required. Maybe certain players have developed a
> snap technique that works in this situation. I would not advise it for
> most.
>
> Jim Meador
Show me another way to get the desired effect, and I'll be more than happy
to give it a try.
Besides, it really isn't that difficult to control the speed on these shots...
..at least not for me or any of the people I've taught.
Carl M. Pearson
RE: Wrist Snap
You guys are making me craxy!
I have tried for hours and have only accomplished
a very sore wrist. Try, try, try as I might,
I have yet to be able to snap my wrist. I do
not think it can be done. GOK where the cue ball
is going to go, too.
Next I'll try snapping my grip hand wrist, instead
of my bridge hand. That has more potential.
Carlo
.
I think wrist action is not needed, do you know how hard it is to
actually snap your wrist at the exact moment of contact with the cue
ball? Even if you practice it everyday it's hard to do. Wrist action
happens automatically. As long as you don't have a "death grip" let the
wrist relax and the rest will happen naturally!
Mark the Shark
Pat Greenwald
Jim Meador <pst...@billiardworld.com> wrote in article
<32A7E3...@billiardworld.com>...
> > There are many shots in billiards which require a slowly moving
> > cue ball, but a great deal of english.
> >
> > A wrist snap is required to achieve this action.
> >
> > Rich
> I don't agree. In fact, wrist snap might make it more difficult to judge
> speed if a slow shot is required. Maybe certain players have developed a
> snap technique that works in this situation. I would not advise it for
> most.
>
> Jim Meador
The Billiards players that I've seen that snap their wrist, do so most
every stroke. They also virtually do not use their forearm at all in the
stroke. This allows for a very short bridge and therefore a lot of
accuracy. Their stroke comes from the wrist almost exclusively. I've seen
some of them use slip strokes too. IMHO This is quite a functional stroke.
I'm sure there's other strokes that players snap their wrist, this is just
one I've noticed that worked quite well.
Different Strokes for Different Folks....and I believe different
disciplines too.
Pat Greenwald
Pgree...@Lucent.Com
Loren A. Evey
In Article<jewettE2...@netcom.com>, <jew...@netcom.com> writes:
> Loren A. Evey (la...@psu.edu) wrote:
>
> : > ___________ ____________
> : >
> : > b| |
> : > | |
> : > | q |
> : > | |
> : > | a| <-- Leave the cue ball here.
> : > ___________ _____o______ "o" is an inch off the rail
> : >
The shot is to shoot "o" into the pocket by a, and
> see how close to or below "a" the cue ball can land at a speed that >
stays within six inches of "a".
>
> I played with four grips: minimum movement but relaxed wrist, all wrist
> snap with little arm movement, "white-knuckled death grip", on the tips
> of the thumb and middle finger. The shot is difficult, since it is
> long with as much spin as available, so I was mostly looking for the
> best I could do with each grip, rather than an average. The best
> result was achieved with a slightly undercut ball (object ball was hit
> too full). The hardest technique was the death-grip one, since there
> was tremendous tension in my hand but the shot is soft.
>
> The best I could do with the "minimum movement" technique was to land
> on the top of the object ball such that it remained in place. My best
> results with all of the other techniques were within a half-inch of
> that, which is to say practically identical. My conclusion is that
> grip style makes no significant difference to the spin/speed ratio.
>
I am a bit confused (yeah I know -- no big surprise). Were you pocketing
the object ball (o)? Are you referring to "a" as an object ball? The
cue ball was coming to rest "on top" of "a" after pocketing o?
Usually, I don't stroke with the intention of controlling grip
characterics. I am acutely aware of my grip and stroke, but as a passive
observer. I don't intentionally prime my stroke beyond feeling the
warmup strokes. Thus, for me, a conscious effort to modulate grip
parameters is "unnatural." In fact, I strive to not influence my stroke
with preconceived restraint.
When shooting variations of the shot described above, my perception is
that the feel of the stroke changes while the intensity remains nearly
constant. Your findings indicate that my perceptions might not reflect
causal (or neccessary) events in achieving the desired goal. My thoughts
are that, although there are many ways to skin a cat, the complexities of
this shot narrows the technique. Perhaps my thoughts are wrong.
When shooting the most extreme version of this shot, I usually toss the
cue. At least it feels that way. I will observe any changes in grip
position before and after the stroke. Perhaps like you, I can also
achieve the same result with a "death grip." I hope testing this does
not set back my play. :)
I just need to find time at the hall without someone immediately wanting
into my pocket.
Thanks for your time and effort in giving feedback -- Loren
Bob Jewett
Loren A. Evey (la...@psu.edu) wrote:
: > ___________ ____________
: >
: > b| |
: > | |
: > | q |
: > | |
: > | a| <-- Leave the cue ball here.
: > ___________ _____o______ "o" is an inch off the rail
: >
: > Bob Jewett
: >
: Yes, this is exactly the shot.
I tried the shot with the following details (this level of detail is
needed for any such test, most people get bored at this point and leave):
Ball "o" is off the rail enough so that if a ball is frozen to both it and
the rail, their line of centers will point at the edge of the corner pocket
at "b". The cue ball is not exactly on the spot but is moved towards "o"
half a ball diameter to avoid sitting in a crater on the foot spot. This
direction of the shot was chosen to have most of the shot on cleaner felt.
A ball was placed at "a" with its center half a ball past the first diamond
to serve as a goal. The shot is to shoot "o" into the pocket by a, and
see how close to or below "a" the cue ball can land at a speed that stays
within six inches of "a".
I played with four grips: minimum movement but relaxed wrist, all wrist
snap with little arm movement, "white-knuckled death grip", on the tips
of the thumb and middle finger. The shot is difficult, since it is
long with as much spin as available, so I was mostly looking for the
best I could do with each grip, rather than an average. The best
result was achieved with a slightly undercut ball (object ball was hit
too full). The hardest technique was the death-grip one, since there
was tremendous tension in my hand but the shot is soft.
The best I could do with the "minimum movement" technique was to land
on the top of the object ball such that it remained in place. My best
results with all of the other techniques were within a half-inch of
that, which is to say practically identical. My conclusion is that
grip style makes no significant difference to the spin/speed ratio.
Incidently, Ron Shepard's paper tells where to hit this shot for max
english after smooth roll sets in.
Bob Jewett
Bob Jewett
Loren A. Evey (la...@psu.edu) wrote:
: I am a bit confused (yeah I know -- no big surprise). Were you pocketing
: the object ball (o)? Are you referring to "a" as an object ball? The
: cue ball was coming to rest "on top" of "a" after pocketing o?
I had said:
: > The shot is to shoot "o" into the pocket by a, and
: > see how close to or below "a" the cue ball can land at a speed that >
: > stays within six inches of "a".
by which I meant that I was shooting ball "o" into the pocket by "a",
and "a" was the target for position play. When you are trying to
achieve a precise hit on the rail, or trying to determine exactly where
on a rail you can make the cue ball hit, it is useful to put an object
ball on the rail where you think the cue ball might land. You can do
this very precisely ahead of time, so you can measure within a few
millimeters where the cue ball is landing on the rail. Most people are
satisfied with, "well, I hit somewhere by the third diamond, sort of,"
but for the test above, a little more precision is needed.
Bob Jewett
Ron Shepard
In article <jewettE2...@netcom.com>, jew...@netcom.com (Bob Jewett) wrote:
[...]
> The best I could do with the "minimum movement" technique was to land
> on the top of the object ball such that it remained in place. My best
> results with all of the other techniques were within a half-inch of
> that, which is to say practically identical. My conclusion is that
> grip style makes no significant difference to the spin/speed ratio.
>
> Incidently, Ron Shepard's paper tells where to hit this shot for max
> english after smooth roll sets in.
It is described in the APAPP paper, but the idea came from postings here
in r.s.b by Bob Jewett and others. I also asked lots of local players to
see how many players knew of this, and surprisingly most didn't, even old
timers who seemed to have seen everything at least once (and with a story
to go with it, at that :-). Many players did have a vague idea of "hit
low with draw" to achieve increased natural roll side spin to speed ratio,
but only a few knew the precise technique to maximize the ratio: "aiming
on the small circle".
Why is this? In the old days most everyone would have wasted their
practice time trying to snap their wrist or pump their elbow at the right
time to get more spin. Here on the information superhighway, we can more
quickly get to the real issue, which is the contact point of the tip on
the ball. Get on a table and practice this shot. It is useful. You can
do it with a stiff wrist (try practicing with a bowling wrist support to
make sure) if you want, and some of us think this is the best way to do
it. No voodoo, just plain ol' good technique.
$.02 -Ron Shepard