BHE & Aim/Pivot Question
Ken Bour
bridge," (a.k.a. aim/pivot), but I am confused about the term "shift
parallel." It seems to me that, in order to shoot any cueball with exterme
sidespin, a PIVOT must take place with respect to a center ball aim line and
cue position (assuming, of course, that squirt exists). Let's take the
following example on the "wei" table:
START(
%Hq1I2%Pg6Q6%Qs3B0%Wp3J4%Xh0Q1%Yf3R7%Z\8Z0%]f1R3%^]4Z2%_p1J4
%`k7M1%ah1P9
)END
Assumptions: aim on cueball's equator, normal stick elevation, straight
stroke.
The red line is aiming for a center ball hit on the cueball to pocket the
8-ball in corner A. The green line is intended to be a straight extension
of the red for a center ball trajectory and represents the cuestick's
required position. Now, if I shift the cue parallel to impart extreme left
english and leave the cue parallel to green (not illustrated), the cueball
will squirt right and the 8-ball will be overcut to the left of pocket A.
To make the 8-ball, I must compensate by aiming further to the left as
indicated by the black line. If I make this adjustment properly,
considering the cue's particular squirt characteristics, the cueball will
take the approximate path of the yellow curve to the 8-ball. So far, so
good. But notice that the black line has crossed the green line at the
approximate center spot (coincidence?). Is that not a "pivot"? When we
talk about a "parallel" shift, followed by a compensation for squirt, do we
necessarily imply pivoting around some point of the original cue position?
--
Ken Bour
Sterling, VA
http://www.erols.com/kbour
Mike Page
> I think I understand what is meant by the terminology, "pivot about the
> bridge," (a.k.a. aim/pivot), but I am confused about the term "shift
> parallel." It seems to me that, in order to shoot any cueball with exterme
> sidespin, a PIVOT must take place with respect to a center ball aim line and
> cue position (assuming, of course, that squirt exists). Let's take the
> following example on the "wei" table:
>
> START(
> %Hq1I2%Pg6Q6%Qs3B0%Wp3J4%Xh0Q1%Yf3R7%Z\8Z0%]f1R3%^]4Z2%_p1J4
> %`k7M1%ah1P9
> )END
>
> Assumptions: aim on cueball's equator, normal stick elevation, straight
> stroke.
>
> The red line is aiming for a center ball hit on the cueball to pocket the
> 8-ball in corner A. The green line is intended to be a straight extension
> of the red for a center ball trajectory and represents the cuestick's
> required position. Now, if I shift the cue parallel to impart extreme left
> english and leave the cue parallel to green (not illustrated), the cueball
> will squirt right and the 8-ball will be overcut to the left of pocket A.
> To make the 8-ball, I must compensate by aiming further to the left as
> indicated by the black line. If I make this adjustment properly,
> considering the cue's particular squirt characteristics, the cueball will
> take the approximate path of the yellow curve to the 8-ball. So far, so
> good.
So far not so good. The cueball does not curve like your yellow line suggests.
If the black line is the correct aim, then the cueball will follow the red line.
But notice that the black line has crossed the green line at the
> approximate center spot (coincidence?). Is that not a "pivot"? When we
> talk about a "parallel" shift, followed by a compensation for squirt, do we
> necessarily imply pivoting around some point of the original cue position?
>
Yes. With my predator for example, I will move parallel about a third of
the way to the desired offset and then pivot the rest about my 10-inch
bridge. This is equivalent to simply pivoting about the thirty inch
spot. It's just less awkward to do.
--
mike page
fargo
Patrick Johnson
> ... With my predator for example, I will move parallel about a third of
> the way to the desired offset and then pivot the rest about my 10-inch
> bridge. This is equivalent to simply pivoting about the thirty inch
> spot.
Given a certain bridge length and PP, how do you calculate how much of the offset to
do parallel and how much to pivot?
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Patrick Johnson
After thinking about it a minute, I think I figured it out (bridge/PP =
pivot/parallel). But I think your example might be backwards (parallel 2/3, then
pivot?). In other words, you should move the stick parallel the same fraction of the
offset as the fraction of the PP length that's *behind* the bridge. This is a cool idea
("corrected" BHE).
I have a concern even with this correct BHE: it doesn't (explicitly) use a distant
target for aiming, and I think that means a greater proportion of your aiming accuracy
must be unconscious adjustment. I think every method has some mix of conscious and
unconscious application -- I like the ones that are most conscious (in case you haven't
picked up on that yet). But since this one is at least "correct", I might try and see
if I can use it as part of a distant target method.
BTW, have you tried moving your back hand up to 30" and moving the bridge hand over?
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Tony Mathews
Ken Bour wrote:
> I think I understand what is meant by the terminology, "pivot about the
> bridge," (a.k.a. aim/pivot), but I am confused about the term "shift
> parallel." It seems to me that, in order to shoot any cueball with exterme
> sidespin, a PIVOT must take place with respect to a center ball aim line and
> cue position (assuming, of course, that squirt exists).
Parallel aiming is often used in many instruction books to describe one method
of squirt compensation. However, in practice this works when the cue stick has
extremely low squirt characteristics such as a Predator or a Billiard cue. Oh,
and by the way squirt definitely exists!
It is not neccessary that a pivot must take place with respect to a center ball
aim line. Many fine players use judgement and experience to establish their aim
when using english. I discussed this very topic at length yesterday with
Canadian Pro Paul Thornley. He told me that in his early twenties he used BHE
(the aim center ball but swerve on the last stroke method) to aim with sidespin
on the Snooker table. But later he used aim and pivot, and now (after hitting a
trillion balls with english!) he comes into the shot with the correct offset and
then strokes straight. But he does credit the BHE with getting him started with
aiming with english.
Tony
Patrick Johnson
> [adjusted for squirt] the cueball will
> take the approximate path of the yellow curve to the 8-ball.
Mike is right that the cue ball will travel the straight path to the object
ball, *assuming a level stick*. But since a level stick is mostly theoretical,
I think you're right that the cue ball will curve -- but it will curve the
opposite way: first squirting and then swerving back, like this:
START(
%Hq1I2%Pg6Q6%Qs3B0%Wp3J4%Xh0Q1%Yf3R7%Z\8Z0%]f1R3%^]4Z2%_p2J6
%`k1O1%ah1P9
)END
So you mostly have to aim with a little less than complete squirt compensation,
"leaving a little squirt on" the cue ball and expecting it to curve back to the
target because of the slight masse. How much squirt to "leave on" is a function
of how much spin, elevation, shot length, speed, and ball and cloth dirtiness.
Nuttin' to it.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Ron Shepard
This is usually true, but if the distance is far enough between the cue ball
and the object ball, then the cue ball can roll past the original line.
Effectively, this means that the swerve effect larger than squirt effect on
such a shot. It is not because the cue ball curves that much during the
parabolic slide, it is because it later rolls in a straight line long enough,
and that straight line crosses the original target line.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Patrick Johnson
> ... (bridge/PP = pivot/parallel)
This should be "bridge/PP = pivot/offset".
pj
chgo
Ken Bour
of my question!!! Forget the yellow curved line. I indicated that it was
"approximate." That trajectory was absolutely incidental to my question.
I KNOW that the ball does not curve like that due to squirt and I KNOW that
the swerve would be in the opposite direction.
I would surely appreciate folks addressing themselves to my question about
the nature of "shifting parallel" as, essentially, pivoting about some other
point other than the bridge hand -- as Patrick is attempting to do.
Ken Bour
"Ken Bour" <kb...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:93pqt8$sgk$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Patrick Johnson
> All of you, except Patrick, have missed (or intentionally ignored) the point
> of my question!!!
Actually, I think I ignored it, too. I was only correcting your diagram of the
squirt/swerve shot.
> > It seems to me that ... a PIVOT must take place
Of course this is true, and it's so obvious that I wonder what you're asking.
The only exception would be when swerve exactly corrects for squirt. Otherwise,
shifting parallel (or pivoting on the wrong point) will make you miss the shot.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Mike Page
> All of you, except Patrick, have missed (or intentionally ignored) the point
> of my question!!! [...]
> I would surely appreciate folks addressing themselves to my question about
> the nature of "shifting parallel" as, essentially, pivoting about some other
> point other than the bridge hand -- as Patrick is attempting to do.
>
Ken I was the first to respond, and near as I can tell I both understood
and answered your question. Here is your question followed by my answer.
Patrick then pointed out correctly that I meant to say two thirds instead
of one third.
******************
But notice that the black line has crossed the green line at the
> approximate center spot (coincidence?). Is that not a "pivot"? When we
> talk about a "parallel" shift, followed by a compensation for squirt, do we
> necessarily imply pivoting around some point of the original cue position?
>
Yes. With my predator for example, I will move parallel about a third of
the way to the desired offset and then pivot the rest about my 10-inch
bridge. This is equivalent to simply pivoting about the thirty inch
barenada
Mike Page wrote...
> Yes. With my predator for example, I will move parallel about a third of
> the way to the desired offset and then pivot the rest about my 10-inch
> bridge. This is equivalent to simply pivoting about the thirty inch
> spot. It's just less awkward to do.
For the record, I do pretty much the same thing. I have not, however, done any
calculations to determine the proper amount to parallel shift before pivoting.
Perhaps someone can provide us with a formula that we can plug our pivot points
and bridge lengths into.
--
Dave
Mike Page
<da...@removethispart.barenada.com> wrote:
> Mike Page wrote...
> > Yes. With my predator for example, I will move parallel about *two
thirds* of
> > the way to the desired offset and then pivot the rest about my 10-inch
> > bridge. This is equivalent to simply pivoting about the thirty inch
> > spot. It's just less awkward to do.
>
> For the record, I do pretty much the same thing. I have not, however,
done any
> calculations to determine the proper amount to parallel shift before pivoting.
> Perhaps someone can provide us with a formula that we can plug our pivot
points
> and bridge lengths into.
>
> --
> Dave
I think Pat did this. (bridge length)/(pivot point) is the fraction of
the tip offest you should achieve by pivoting (backhand english). So if
your bridge length is 10 inches and the cue's pp is 15 inches, then 10/15
(two thirds) of the offset should be achieved by pivoting. One way to do
this is to move parallel one third of the way and then pivot the rest.
--
mike page
fargo
Bob Jewett
> I think I understand what is meant by the terminology, "pivot about the
> bridge," (a.k.a. aim/pivot), but I am confused about the term "shift
> parallel."
So far as I know, parallel aiming means to shoot with the stick parallel
to where the stick would be for a shot without side spin. In other
words, the axis of the stick will be parallel to the line joining the
cue ball and the ghost ball. This system ignores squirt and swerve and
maybe even throw.
--
Bob Jewett
Tony Mathews
Bob Jewett wrote:
> So far as I know, parallel aiming means to shoot with the stick parallel
> to where the stick would be for a shot without side spin. In other
> words, the axis of the stick will be parallel to the line joining the
> cue ball and the ghost ball. This system ignores squirt and swerve and
> maybe even throw.
And so many books use it to describe the best way to aim when using english.
But it does allow for some squirt Bob, just not very much.
Deno J. Andrews
> cue ball and the ghost ball. This system ignores squirt and swerve and
> maybe even throw.
These things should be thought of when lining up initially. They are
not really ignored, but instead, are part of the aiming equation. Once
an aim line is established which is parallel to the center ball aim
line, that aim point is already adjusted for these factors.
Deno J. Andrews
Patrick Johnson
> ... [parallel aiming] does allow for some squirt Bob, just not very much.
How does it allow for any?
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Patrick Johnson
> ... Once an aim line is established which is parallel to the
> center ball aim line, that aim point is already adjusted for
> [squirt, swerve and throw] factors.
You're saying you choose an aim point that's adjusted for
squirt/swerve/throw and then shift parallel to apply sidespin.
Although I do the aiming with the shaft already shifted sideways [the
tip already pointing at the sidespin contact point], I use an adjusted
aim point like you, and I think it's much more accurate than using an
unadjusted aim point and then pivoting the stick.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Fred Agnir
Patrick Johnson wrote in message <3A645B5D...@21stCentury.net>...
>Tony Mathews wrote:
>
>> ... [parallel aiming] does allow for some squirt Bob, just not very much.
>
>How does it allow for any?
I don't think that parallel aiming "compensates" for squirt. And I don't
think Tony meant that it did either. I could be wrong. I think he meant
that "a little squirt" can still result in a made shot. A little more than
a little can result in a miss.
Fred
Mike Page
Agnir" <oha...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Or he could mean that the spin-induced throw cancels out some of the squirt
--
mike page
fargo
Deno J. Andrews
aim with the cue...so that the point on the object that you are looking at
is the same point the cue tip is aiming at- through the desired spin point
on the cue ball. So imagine there is a line extending from the cue that
goes through the cue ball at the desired offset for english and all the way
to the OB to the point you are looking at when aiming. I think it is crazy
to be looking at one point on a ball and aiming at another.
Most people get this confused with contact point aiming. While the point
on the OB may sometimes be the actual contact point, most of the time it is
not. The aim point does not have to be the contact point, but it does have
to be consistent. So I like to find the point on the OB that I can aim at
with the desired english on the cue ball. This is not hard to do and
anyone who would spend an hour or so woule be able to take notes and learn
where the aim points are on the OB for all sorts of english. The answers
are readily available for those who seek it out. Once learned, these aim
points should be burned into the subconscious through practice for later
use. A close examintaion of speed and cue elevation will expose all the
onfo regarding swerve, and throw is simple to determine and can be
calculated depending on the condition of the balls.
Deno J. Andrews
----------
In article <3A645D6A...@21stCentury.net>, Patrick Johnson
Frank
> I don't think that parallel aiming "compensates" for squirt. And I don't
> think Tony meant that it did either. I could be wrong. I think he meant
> that "a little squirt" can still result in a made shot. A little more
than
> a little can result in a miss.
If you miss often enough, after a while your brain wakes up and realizes you
will miss the ball if you keep aiming at the pocket so it aims a little to
one side. It doesn't tell you it is doing this. Life goes on, and your game
improves a little. Then you try to shoot with a friends cue and all of a
sudden you can't make a ball and give the cue back to whoever loaned it to
you and tell them their cue sux. In reality you forgot to tell your brain to
compensate differently for this cue. This makes you even. If you don't have
your own cue for your brain to get used to, then I advise you not to shoot
with a lot of spin. If you do and change cues (or tips, or use a different
shaft {like the P shaft}) remember that it will take your brain a while to
figure this out. The better players (what you call A++ or Pro) adjust very
quickly. Whether this is a conscious adjustment or an unconscious adjustment
is unclear, and may vary from person to person. Of course, this is just my
opinion, but an unconscious adjuster will probably say squirt is a figment
of your imagination.
Frank
Patrick Johnson
> ... I think the most exact way to aim is to
> aim with the cue...so that the point on the object that you are looking at
> is the same point the cue tip is aiming at- through the desired spin point
> on the cue ball.
This is the way I do it, too, except I aim the cue at a point on the
"ghost ball" rather than the object ball (is this what you meant?).
And for spin shots, I mentally move the ghost ball to compensate for
squirt/swerve/throw (sqswth).
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Deno J. Andrews
----------
In article <3A64A61A...@21stCentury.net>, Patrick Johnson
<REMO...@21stCentury.net> wrote:
> This is the way I do it, too, except I aim the cue at a point on the
> "ghost ball" rather than the object ball (is this what you meant?).
> And for spin shots, I mentally move the ghost ball to compensate for
> squirt/swerve/throw (sqswth).
Not really, I personally don't like the ghost ball. I actually pick a spot
on the OB to aim at.
Deno
Patrick Johnson
What do you do for less than a half ball hit with outside english?
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Deno J. Andrews
----------
In article <3A64C050...@21stCentury.net>, Patrick Johnson
<REMO...@21stCentury.net> wrote:
> What do you do for less than a half ball hit with outside english?
Pray! :)
Just kidding...well, not really...but I do more than that. I actually pick
a spot on the table to aim at that would be about the same as the aim point
would be if the ball were to be there. I have a firm belief that the cue
stick should be aimed at something you can see over something you need to
imagine. It's hard to imagine a ghost ball that happens to be the exact
same size as the real ball.
Deno J. Andrews
RWMCT
but entrancing when it happens) I often hardly consider the pocket at all. The
relationship between the rails and the balls provides the information necessary
for pocketing. And then there are the old timers with poor eyesight who still
manage to pocket ok if they can see the ball alright, even if the other end of
the table where it is going is not so clear.
Frank
don't think I have ever missed when the balls look like that, but it comes
and goes. I cannot "make it happen", it just does. Usually I am very relaxed
and not thinking about anything in particular when it happens.
Frank
"RWMCT" <rw...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010116215307...@ng-fp1.aol.com...
Ron Shepard
This happens to me too, the balls turn into basketballs or something. I'm sort
of the opposite of the "pockets dissapearing" however -- for me they get
bigger. I can aim to the left side, the right side, down the middle, or
wherever I need. I know how much the cue ball will swerve, how much the stick
will squirt, how much object ball throw there will be, and where all the balls
are going to stop at the end of the shot. I know how the whole run is going to
occur before I take the first shot. Everything seems clear and obvious and I
wonder why I don't see things so well all the time.
When I'm out of stroke, the balls seem like little marbles, and the best I can
do when aiming is know that I'm "pretty close" to a pocket. For this, all I
need to do is to look at the nearby cushions with my peripheral vision and
imagine where the pockets are. The details of the pocket opening don't matter
because I can't get the ball there anyway. I'm lucky to get the cue ball to
stop at the right end of the table, my speed control will be so far off. I'm
thinking only one or two balls ahead because I expect to get out of line by
then anyway.
Most of the time, I'm in between these extremes, but it is surprising how those
two extremes are so different. To be honest, I have fun both ways, but I have
to set my goals very differently in the two cases. I wish I were in stroke
more often so I could understand it better, but that's the challenge of the
game. I've managed to win matches, and even tournaments, when I'm out of
stroke, and it is always surprising when something like that happens. And,
I've lost first round when I've been in stroke before, and that is surprising
too. Your opponents are going through the same kinds of cycles, so weird stuff
happens.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
RWMCT
And none of it depends upon systems or special shafts, or anything. Just what
lies between your ears.
Patrick Johnson
All of it depends on systems, special shafts, and everything.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
RWMCT
of squirt until I got on this newsgroup, and I have still had the (very)
occasional clairvoyant night. I really believe that all you need to play well
is right there in your head. The trick is to get it out. Then you can play
well, even with those high squirt Balabushkas and Szambotis!
Tony Mathews
RWMCT wrote:
> How so Pat? I am as ignorant of aiming systems as can be, and I never heard
> of squirt until I got on this newsgroup, and I have still had the (very)
> occasional clairvoyant night. I really believe that all you need to play well
> is right there in your head. The trick is to get it out. Then you can play
> well, even with those high squirt Balabushkas and Szambotis!
>
>
I can remember a night when I stopped into a small poolroom on a whim, picked up
the first housecue I saw and played at a level that I never thought I was capable
of! The best way that I can describe the feeling of deadstroke is that I felt like
a jazz musician. I could do anything that I could think of. If I could imagine the
shot, then I could do it. I didn't need to think about where to hit the cue ball,
about adjusting for squirt or swerve, or even about potting the ball. I just
imagined where I wanted the cueball to be, what the shot would look like, took 2
warm up strokes and fired! Everything went in and the cueball stopped just where I
imagined it would. When they finally kicked me out about 6 hours later (time had
stopped!), I relalized that the house cue was badly warped, had a lousy tip and
squirted like crazy! Didn't seem to matter a bit! The brain is a weird and
wonderful thing!
Tony
Tony Mathews
Mike Page wrote:
> > >> ... [parallel aiming] does allow for some squirt Bob, just not very much.
> > >
> > >How does it allow for any?
> >
> >
> > I don't think that parallel aiming "compensates" for squirt. And I don't
> > think Tony meant that it did either. I could be wrong. I think he meant
> > that "a little squirt" can still result in a made shot. A little more than
> > a little can result in a miss.
> >
> > Fred
>
> Or he could mean that the spin-induced throw cancels out some of the squirt
>
Actually both. But it depends on you definition of parallel aiming. Some take it
to mean: line up for center ball, and then shift the bridge hand and back hand
over to the desired tip offset. You are actually aiming at a point that is the tip
offset away from the original aiming point. This does allow for a small amount of
squirt. However, if you still point the tip at the original aiming point, then
yes, there is no squirt compensation allowed for.
Tony
Tony Mathews
RWMCT wrote:
> How so Pat? I am as ignorant of aiming systems as can be, and I never heard
> of squirt until I got on this newsgroup, and I have still had the (very)
> occasional clairvoyant night. I really believe that all you need to play well
> is right there in your head. The trick is to get it out. Then you can play
> well, even with those high squirt Balabushkas and Szambotis!
>
>
I think that Pat meant (but I may be wrong) that if you have mastered your system,
and you are using your own cue, then the special feeling of deadstroke will
encompass all of the things that you use and have learned so far. I don't think
that he meant that a special shaft or system is required for this to happen.
At least I hope that is what he meant!
>
Patrick Johnson
> I think that Pat meant (but I may be wrong) that if you have mastered your system,
> and you are using your own cue, then the special feeling of deadstroke will
> encompass all of the things that you use and have learned so far. I don't think
> that he meant that a special shaft or system is required for this to happen.
Exactamundo.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Patrick Johnson
> How so Pat?
I mean that your success is made up of all these things, even if you
never consciously think about them. Dead stroke or "feel" playing
isn't the absence of technical information, it's the effortless
combining of all of it, and what your body knows, into a smoothly
functioning whole.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Patrick Johnson
> ... line up for center ball, and then shift the bridge hand and back hand
> over to the desired tip offset. You are actually aiming at a point that is the tip
> offset away from the original aiming point. This does allow for a small amount of
> squirt.
You've confused me all over again. Are you saying this *compensates*
for a small amount of squirt (which I wouldn't agree with) or that on
lots of shots a small amount of squirt won't matter (as Mike
suggested)?
Pat Johnson
Chicago
nhoop
Which raises the old question: Are Predator shafts that much easier to
shoot with? I've been thinking of buying one.
Nat Hooper
Oxford, Arkansas
Patrick Johnson
> Are Predator shafts that much easier to
> shoot with?
How much is "that much"? You have to aim off the mark to some degree
with every shaft. Here's some comparisons:
For a 2-foot shot with 1/2 inch of tip offset (sidespin):
PP = 8 inches AIM ADJUSTMENT = 1.5 inches
PP = 24 inches AIM ADJUSTMENT = 1/2 inch
PP = 48 inches AIM ADJUSTMENT = 1/4 inch
[in real life, these adjustments are all reduced some by cueball
"swerve"]
No matter which shaft you use, you eventually get used to making the
adjustment, whether it's 1/4 inch or 1.5 inches. I think it's easier
(and more accurate in the long run) to adjust a smaller amount.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Ron Shepard
>For a 2-foot shot with 1/2 inch of tip offset (sidespin):
>
>PP = 8 inches AIM ADJUSTMENT = 1.5 inches
>PP = 24 inches AIM ADJUSTMENT = 1/2 inch
>PP = 48 inches AIM ADJUSTMENT = 1/4 inch
>
>[in real life, these adjustments are all reduced some by cueball
>"swerve"]
>
>No matter which shaft you use, you eventually get used to making the
>adjustment, whether it's 1/4 inch or 1.5 inches. I think it's easier
>(and more accurate in the long run) to adjust a smaller amount.
The other part of the question is how accurate do you have to be in order for
the ball to be pocketed. When the ball is close to the pocket, all you have to
do is hit it in order for it to be pocketed, so you have about a 1 inch margin
of error (ignoring scratches and the need to position the cue ball afterwards).
If the ball is in the middle of the table and you are shooting into a corner
pocket, then you must be accurate to within about a millimeter in order to
succeed.
So, is it easier to estimate (either consciously or subconsciously, it doesn't
matter) 1/4 inch to within 1 millimeter, or 1.5 inches to within 1 millimeter.
The answer should be obvious.
Here is another way to answer the question. Next time you are at a trade show
or something where Jim Buss is around, ask him if you can hit some shots with
his brass-weighted cue. This is an experimental cue he made specifically to
test some of these squirt ideas. This thing has a huge amount of squirt. You
must adjust 6 or 8 inches on a shot like the one above, and for the above shot
to succeed you must make that adjustment correctly to within 1 millimeter. No
matter how good someone is, or whether they make the adjustment consciously or
subconsciously, they are more accurate adjusting 1/4 inch than they are
adjusting 6 or 8 inches. Shoot some with his cue, you will see what I mean.
It is not a question of whether Earl Strickland can adjust better than you, it
is a question of what is best for you.
$.02 -Ron Shepard