The Quickest & Most Accurate Shooting Release in College Basketball - You Should Study This Technique

Spencer,

Curry lets his upper arm hang down naturally. I don't believe he tucks his elbow in towards his body. Everything about his shooting motion is relaxed.

Hope this answered your question.

Rick Penny
www.onemotionbasketball.com

Like

Carlo,

Melissa uses a Jump Stop quite often. And yes, she bypasses the Tuck as it's only used when stepping into the shot either from a pass or off the dribble.

Jump Stops call for the shooter to be at SET when both feet hit the floor. In certain situations the Jump Stop is quicker than the 1-2 step. Being able to perform both gives the player an advantage.

As far as Stephen Curry goes, I would say his shooting mechanics are most in line with what I teach. He's so much fun to watch, especially for those that love excellence!

Like

Vay,

My experience with the One Motion Technique (one-piece shot) is that it performs exceedingly well in all situations: 1.) spot up, 2.) off the dribble (left & right), and 3.) in traffic.

With the One Motion Technique, there is a way to transition from the dribble into the shot. It's called the TUCK and it allows the shooter to seamlessly step into the shot without pausing and losing momentum...still a very quick release!

As for shooting in traffic, I teach students to start the SET a bit higher since defenders & the basket are closer. From there, the mechanics of the shot are basically the same. In some cases, you have to lean back to get the shot off which happens in tight quarters.

Like

Dusty,

Thanks for your comments about the article.

You mentioned the "Dip" and how it's a vital component to shooting (my thoughts on the subject are detailed above in my response to Nele). In my opinion, getting to the SET position is the most important component of shooting as it's the foundation of the shot. For discussion purposes, SET is defined as the "position of the body & ball prior to the start of the actual shooting motion" (see response to Nele above for more details).

No matter where the pass is received (high, low, right, or left), the shooter must get to SET in order to begin the shooting motion. So, the difference in our views is not whether a player should or should not "dip", how much they "dip", or even what the definition of a "dip" is. It comes down to this question: "What is the best location for the ball when the shooter arrives at SET?" I don't speak for you, but I believe you are a proponent of the Pro Shot System and it teaches the ball needs to be at waist level or below based on all the examples put forth by them. One Motion believes the ball is better located at chest level.

You state that "dipping" has no bearing on the speed of the shot ... I agree somewhat. The "dip" is nothing more than a component of the pre-shot set up and has nothing to do with the actual shooting motion. What the Pro Shot "dip" does however is situate the ball at waist level or lower when arriving at SET and that is what leads to a Two-Piece shot which is slower and less efficient in movement compared to One Motion (see response to Nele above for the reason why).

All things being equal, e.g., quickness of the jump, shooters with a SET position that has the ball waist level or below can't possibly get their shot off as quick as those with a SET position that locates the ball at chest level. Add the fact that a Two-Piece shooter must loop the ball up & back (away from the basket), slow down or stop, and then start the ball towards the basket vs. a One-Piece shooter taking the ball straight up the shot line in a non-stop manner with no direction change.

Now I ask, which of the two has the quickest/smoothest release from start to finish? Which is the most efficient in terms of movement? In my opinion, it's One Motion. However, that doesn't mean everyone shares my view on shooting. There are many ways to shoot a basketball and each player must decide which technique is best for them. I simply make the case for One Motion and let the chips fall where they may.

Also, you stated Ray Allen has the 2nd quickest release time according to Sports Science. That differs from the Sports Science clip I viewed which indicated the following: 1.) Stephen Curry has the fastest release time of .4 seconds, 2.) Average NBA release time is .54 seconds, and 3.) Ray Allen's release was timed at .73 seconds. That means Stephen Curry's ball travels 16.2' in the air before Ray Allen's ball ever leaves his hand.

By watching Curry and Allen shoot, one quickly notices that Allen has the more pronounced "Dip" of the two. He also loops the ball up & back to a higher degree than Curry which takes up valuable time and causes his shooting motion to be less efficient.

Like

Nele, we've learned quite a bit from people like you who post on our website, so we always enjoy different perspectives! Thank you.

I actually went away from teaching "the dip", a few problems were occurring.

1. Timing and coordination were off... players would start to jump when the ball was around their waist via "the dip" rather than already starting the ball path upwards prior to jumping.

I call it the Shawn Marion effect. It looked rushed.

2. When told to dip, the dip was exaggerated and less purposeful and used in situations that it should be not be used.

3. It worsened the catapulters problems even worse... when you bring the ball behind the shot motion. With the exaggerated motion downwards, it created more momentum to sling the ball behind the head, thus worsening the catapulting effect.

Instead, I teach what Rick Penny, the author of the article, teaches... "The Tuck".

The tuck is defined and has a purpose and solves all of the problems above.

It helps my one-motion and two-motion shooters.

It improves their arc, reduces catapults, fluidity, rhythm, etc.

It also prevents excessive dipping with the ball.

With the tuck, is there a "dip"... yes, but it has a specific purpose and the ball is between the waist and stomach.

Teaching the tuck and the timing of how the ball should move to the "set" position as you jump has tremendously improved my ability to help develop shooters.

I'm writing an article about my experience with this and the specific steps to teach your shooters.

Far and none, Rick Penny's teaching involving Tuck, Set, and the timing between the two has been the best piece of shooting instruction that I've ever seen and has had the biggest impact on shooters I work with.

As for the one-motion versus two-motion, if shot preparation is equal, one motion will always be quicker. However, I don't have an issue with a two-motion shot. I just want the path of the shot to be up and out versus back then out.

And the tuck fixes this problem... this is something that I've seen very few coaches address.

Like

Nele,

Thanks for your comments about the article.

Before responding, let me first define a term called SET. It is the "position of the body & ball prior to the start of the actual shooting motion".

With that said, I want to address the "Dip". It is a term describing the process of how Two-Piece shooters arrive at SET. When "dipping", the ball is taken to a location somewhere between the waist and knee area. At this point, they are at SET and ready to shoot.

To me, the "dip" is merely one component of the overall pre-shot set up and has nothing to do with the actual shot. In reality, "dipping" is a code word that simply says ... start the ball at waist level or lower before shooting.

In essence, all shooters have a SET position and how it ends up determines the efficiency of the shot. One-Piece shooters locate the ball at chest level when arriving at SET. This allows for greater efficiency because the ball is able to travel straight up the shot line in a non-stop manner. Momentum/ball takes the "path of least resistance" by going UP & AT the basket.

Two-Piece shooters locate ("dip") the ball at waist level or lower when arriving at SET. From here, the ball loops up & back (negative movement) along the shot line, then slows down or stops, and finally changes direction towards the basket. This creates a start/stop/start process for momentum.

My own experience using One Motion and after working with thousands of students has shown that both boys & girls can flourish using this method. Girls aren't pre-disposed to needing a One-Piece shot due to their body bio-mechanics, as you stated. It boils down to proper timing between the legs and arms/ball instead of being male or female. The One Motion Technique is blind. It's all about timing and efficient movement.

I agree with Joe's comments about your post regarding how players get to SET. That is a whole different subject matter for another time.

Last thought, the One Motion Shooting Video touches on a term called the S-Curve. It determines the efficiency of a shot as it traces the ball path (viewed from the shooting hand side) from start to finish. To learn more about the S-Curve, go to my YouTube channel (search Rick Penny) where you'll find two short videos on that deal with this subject.

Like

Dusty Holbrook says: 4/7/2015 at 2:23:46 PM I have tried to respond to the message below 3 times but my phone either dies, or my computer freezes, or something else happens to erase my 1000 word essay I keep writing so I'm just going to leave it alone lol... But as much as I am not trying to seem argumentative on here I have to respectfully disagree strongly with a comment made in this previous reply about the "dip" 1st off.. the dipping motion is not defined as a bringing the ball below your waist. It is any movement that brings the ball down before the release to establish rhythm and strength. It has nothing to do with 1 or 2 motion shooters. 1 motion shooters have a shot that starts from the "set" position and goes up (and only up) to the peak of their shot and towards the hoop. A 2 motion shooter has a slight pause at the top of their shot to wait for the peak of their jump usually. Neither of which have any relation to a dip. Which is why 1 motion shooters (Steph Curry, Steve Kerr) and 2 motion shooters (Ray Allen, Kobe Bryant) all dip the ball. Not just 2 motion shooters. My 2nd RESPECTFUL disagreement is the statement that was made saying the dip has nothing to do with the shot. I would challenge any player check their range by trying a dip shot vs a non dip shot. The dip is arguably the most important component to gain rhythm and POWER into a shot. To say that a dip has nothing to do with a shot would be like saying a pitcher's windup has nothing to do with his pitch. The law of inertia is at play here by saying that a body in motion tends to stay in motion. If the windup in pitching wasn't important than pitchers should be able to throw a ball the same way people shoot darts and expect the same power and rhythm... not possible. The dip is a natural shooting motion because the human body knows that is a way to gain power. Nobody coach will ever complain about a shooter ONLY shooting 45% from 3 lol and as much as I think Melissa Dixon is an amazing shooter, she is limiting herself without dipping more. Maybe not in comparison to others, but her range isn't nearly as good as it could be. The rest of her mechanics are sound and she is disciplined enough to pretty much do the same thing over and over again (which in all actuality is the main importance of the recipe for a great shooter) but I'd be willing to bet the majority of her misses were because she lacked power on a lot of shots and was too tense at the top of her shot to finish smoothly. She, and every other 1 motion shooter, can and should be using the dip. The top 4 girls ranked higher than her in NCAA Women's D1 3FG percentage all dip the ball. And if I'm not mistaken there are both 1 and 2 motion shooters in that group. There are very very few QUALITY shooters that don't dip the ball. For every 1 that someone can show me I will gladly show them 50 dippers to match it. Manu Ginobili is the only player I have seen in the NBA who can knock down 3's without consistently using the dip. But then again he's only shooting 34% right now and only eclipsed the 40% mark twice in his career. So I could argue that he is not a quality shooter and not worthy of being in the conversation. I stated below that my whole team shot 46% from 3 for the season. The WHOLE TEAM. So to see one player shoot 45% isn't something that I find strong enough to change my shooting beliefs for. I teach the dip religiously for my players. When I get transfers that are only shooting 35-40% from 3 it's usually because they were TAUGHT to not dip. As soon as I fix that their power increases tremendously and they feel more comfortable shooting. For a coach to purposely not teach the dip is mind-boggling to me. Watch every great shooter... Bird, Jordan, Curry, Allen, KD, Korver, Klay Thompson, JJ Redick, Jimmer, Dell Curry, Steve Kerr, Chris Mullen, Pistol Pete, Mark Price, Diana Tarausi, Maya Moore, etc... they ALL dip the ball. Whoever came up with the idea that dipping is bad for the shot and should be stopped was only thinking in theory (which kind of makes sense) about keeping the shot high and minimal movement, but it wasn't logical. Again.. not trying to start an argument. Just trying to educate. This isn't based on MY opinion, but on what every great shooter has always done. Most players naturally dip the ball. So as a coach I strongly recommend that you do not tell players to not dip the ball. If you're fear is that the ball can be swiped out of their hands by a defender when they dip the ball low...then the odds are that defender is probably way too close to be shooting a perimeter shot anyway. Do the research yourself coaches. Watch pros, watch college, watch the next opponent that lights you up for 30... they all dip. It is vital to the shot and has more to do with the shot than some give it credit for. I've always been a teacher of the dip. I did not get my views from Pro Shot, but they are exactly right. Like   2 replies   login   register Jeff Haefner says: 4/7/2015 at 4:27:37 PM Bottom line is there are lots of different ways to teach shooting. You, Rick Penny, Tom Nordland, Don Kelbick, Dave Hopla and hundreds (if not thousands) of other shooting coaches have excellent approaches to teaching and developing shooters. Each coach has different terminology and a different way to teach, just like you see thousands of great players all with different looking shots. What they teach works for them. Doesn't make one way right or one way wrong. Each player is somewhat unique. Dipping is not a requirement but probably a good thing for a lot of players... in fact most do it naturally. Maybe most great shooters do it, but it's not a requirement. I in fact know a player shooting over 50% that absolutely does not dip unless he catches the ball above his head. I certainly would not change him but take another kid and I might suggest he/she dips (I just use different terminology). One motion is not a requirement. Teaching Set and Go is not a requirement. The only requirements that I know of are... - you have to shoot straight consistently (control left and right) - you have to develop distance control - you need sufficient arc - you need to shoot the same way every time - you need to practice a ton - and you might argue developing a good rhythm is a requirement - and if you want to be able to make shots in a game, you need to be able to release the ball before a defender can block it (quickness of release, height of release are factors) Arm position, follow through, dip, bend, jump, quick jump, stance, hips, elbow, etc... none of that is required to shoot straight and do the things above. You will always be able to find great shooters that defy those techniques. The human body is a complex kinetic chain that I doubt anyone on the website understands. I'm not sure anyone in the world really understands all the aspects of the kinetic chain involved in shooting. You make one subtle change and that change always affects something else in the kinetic chain. It is interesting to analyze what other great shooters do. That's why this article was written. However none of this is scientific. Lots of variables to consider. I also think you have to be very careful about trying to emulate NBA players. Most of them are much taller, stronger, and more athletic than any high school player will hope to be. I feel pretty confident there are much better shooters than what you find in the NBA but they did not make it because of lack of height, quickness, athleticism, defensive ability, ballhandling, and so on. Maybe it makes more sense to study those that are truly the best and fastest? Not the ones that had the height and what not to make it to college or the NBA. Too bad there wasn’t an easy way to perform a more scientific study. We might find a much better technique than player use in the NBA? And they might change their technique just like the did years ago when all the best players in the world used to shoot with two-hands? I’m glad someone was able to think out of the box and break away from the two handed shooting technique. I will say that I do believe Melissa Dixon is an excellent player to learn from. It says she is 5-8 on her profile but I doubt she is that tall. She is generally undersized and not exactly beating anyone with raw athleticism. I do not know those 4 players mentioned that ended up with a higher 3pt shooting percentage than her. I do know they are all taller and they made fewer 3s than her. And that Dixon took more 3pt shots than all of them, considerably more than several of them. I see Melissa Dixon shoot and I think that I can teach youth or high school players to do that. I see other college or NBA players and I know most of the high school kids I coach will never be that athletic or tall. I have watched at least half of Melissa Dixon's games this year. Several of them have been in person, which is even more impressive. When she misses, it is almost always because she is shooting too fast (you might say it's poor shot selection but her coach might be happy with those shots because she is so incredibly good at shooting). I have not seen a player with a faster release. She just needs a shade of space. And this is an undersized guard that has a scouting report of... make her drive... NO 3's. The way she is able to prepare before the ball gets to her, pop her feet into the ground (I heard one coach call this stab-squat), time her legs, arms, and entire body to shoot extremely fast and accurately... it is just incredible!!! Watching youtube video does it no justice. But if you look close at the right clips you can see how she prepares. Right around 35 seconds into the second video you can see a decent example. From what I have seen, range is not an issue for her. Her biggest challenges are lack of height, going up against more athletic players each night, limited ability to finish at the basket against taller players, and every opponent shading her to make sure she doesn't get open outside shots. Maybe those other shooters mentioned are great examples too. I don't know. I can only say Dixon is an incredible example that both coaches and players can learn from. You may not want to use her technique, but I do think everyone can learn from it. In my opinion, that is the big take away from all this. Like     login   register Rick Penny says: 4/8/2015 at 10:24:01 AM Dusty, I very much appreciate and respect your knowledge of shooting. I believe in the Free Market of ideas where coaches, parents, and players have the opportunity to decide what works best for them. We certainly have differing opinions as to what constitutes a one motion shot and we could argue all day long about the definition of the "dip". In my mind, it all comes down to ball placement. "What SET point achieves optimal rhythm & strength?" The One Motion Technique and other one-piece shots have been UNFAIRLY labeled as not generating enough rhythm & strength because they start the ball too high. Nothing could be further from the truth! I speak from first-hand experience as range, rhythm, or strength was never a problem during my playing days. My students (boys & girls) are able to make shots effortlessly from well beyond the arc with more than enough power. How can that be since we all start the ball at chest level? Yes, one can generate rhythm & strength by "dipping" lower than what I teach, but starting the ball at chest level can do the same; just quicker and more efficiently! And I RESPECTFULLY disagree that Melissa Dixon is limiting her range by not "dipping" more. The key component of the One Motion Technique is timing. It's what Dixon does so well. She has incredible timing between her legs & arms/ball...completely in sync. Her leg action (down & up) is quicker than those using the "dip" method. That Quick Hop (leg action) is where rhythm & power come from. That is why it's a total MYTH to indicate that starting the ball at chest level limits range. You stated in your last post, "I'd be willing to bet the majority of her misses were because she lacked power on a lot of shots and was too tense at the top of her shot to finish smoothly". Again, I go back to actual experience and feedback from students. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing tense about a One Motion shot, especially the shoulders. Not sure where this idea comes from, but it seems to be one of the default arguments against one-piece shots. Like   1 reply   login   register Dusty says: 4/9/2015 at 9:42:50 PM I hope other coaches and players read this convo. No matter which way someone prefers to shoot I know they would be more educated by reading this debate. Yall both know your stuff and I love it. Good luck to yall and I'm sure we'll talk again. For the record.. I'm a huge fan of the one motion shot.. Coupled with the dip! Lol Like     login   register

Curry dips the ball, end of discussion.

Like