Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[Cue crafty]

and if anything you are insulting us buy trying to batter us with 15.000 words of nonsense. tel your doing it to yourself cus your not responding to logic, reason, and evidence.. maybe pride and status are your barriers.

More of this logic please. Your vid potting that black with the red making the angle impossible said it all for me. Not sure there is anything left to prove. You can't swerve into the black with the red in that position. Enjoyed the thread but you've nailed it as far as I am concerned. Cheers.

[j6uk]

https://youtu.be/_V54JIWi2Zg

cant see them making the main tour

[throtts]

Hahaha..It really is fitting..:snooker:

[rimmer10]

https://youtu.be/_V54JIWi2Zg

[j6uk]

Tbh, J, thats no excuse to call Terry a fool or bring out insults regarding his age. Not saying you have but points can be still put across without the poor form shown by some.

thanks for not saying i have cus it wouldnt be true.. but yeah the level of tsf coaching seems to be taking a dip, hope it dosent go any further.
i will stay away for this part of the forum if straight forward ideas backed up by logic, reason and video evidence cant be grasped

[throtts]

tel your doing it to yourself cus your not responding to logic, reason, and evidence.. maybe ego, pride, status are your barriers.

Tbh, J, thats no excuse to call Terry a fool or bring out insults regarding his age. Not saying you have but points can be still put across without the poor form shown by some.

[throtts]

All that matters, Tel, is that you can play the shots. I use to work with lots of guys at a previous job and jeeps they were worse than a load of bitchy women..

Stick around for sure because you make so many valid pointers that help so many out.

[Terry Davidson]

The thread is going absolutely nowhere. I can understand both sides of the coin and have done so a long while back but at the same time it does not matter one bit what side of that fence your on because both sides claim they can make the shots in question. Purely its a ego thing then.

I agree with Tel about the disrespect and names his been called. Pretty cringe worthy guys..

I agree, not worth discussing anymore because there are too many insults flying. I asked for a civil argument so I could really understand the argument for SIT because I disagreed with it and got called everything in the book. I getting off of here and watching some snooker on TV with youtube, at least it doesn't insult my intelligence.

[Terry Davidson]

Terry.

I know you admire nic barrow, as do i, so here's a thread from a couple of year's ago, in which nic said this "Dr Dave is an incredible asset to the cue sports community. I respect him extremely highly".

http://www.thesnookerforum.co.uk/board/threads/54659-The-Ghost-Ball-Myth-And-A-Potting-Robot/page5"

If you're genuinely interested in all this, and genuinely want to learn about the mysteries of the game, you should spend some time on his site. It really is amazing, once you get past the big pockets, robotic delivery and cheesy presentation. There are some great minds behind this, and we should be grateful for what they have discovered.

PS I'll gloss over your comment on cloth friction causing CIT!

I haven't talked to Nic but I know he doesn't like to offend anyone and when I was over there about 8 years ago we did experiments on his match table, trying to induce spin or get some impact throw. At the time neither one of us had heard of SIT so I don't know what Nic believes in now.

If I said CIT was due to friction it must have been a typo. I believe if SIT exists then it has something to do with the friction of the cloth on the OB holding it in place however as you say if you use more power SIT disappears for some reason. I haven't sorted that reason out to somewhere logical that I can believe. To me, more power and consequently more spin should get you more SIT but it doesn't.

[throtts]

The thread is going absolutely nowhere. I can understand both sides of the coin and have done so a long while back but at the same time it does not matter one bit what side of that fence your on because both sides claim they can make the shots in question. Purely its a ego thing then.

I agree with Tel about the disrespect and names his been called. Pretty cringe worthy guys..

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

Terry.

I know you admire nic barrow, as do i, so here's a thread from a couple of year's ago, in which nic said this "Dr Dave is an incredible asset to the cue sports community. I respect him extremely highly".

http://www.thesnookerforum.co.uk/board/threads/54659-The-Ghost-Ball-Myth-And-A-Potting-Robot/page5"

If you're genuinely interested in all this, and genuinely want to learn about the mysteries of the game, you should spend some time on his site. It really is amazing, once you get past the big pockets, robotic delivery and cheesy presentation. There are some great minds behind this, and we should be grateful for what they have discovered.

PS I'll gloss over your comment on cloth friction causing CIT!

[Terry Davidson]

I thought I had placed the red ball exactly where Jason's was, but the placement of the red ball is not crucial to potting the black as we're talking millimeters here and it's very hard to see. What I can confirm is the black/red dplant is lined up to the left side of the green pocket as shown in one of the photos and with that set-up the black can reach BOB (for the far jaw) and slop the red into the pocket.

There would be no reason NOT to use side on this shot as it would get you nearer to the centre of the pocket. Arguing over this shot is a non-starter because we cannot say exactly where everything was we can only estimate and by moving the balls slightly just a 1mm move to the green side of the table on the red took away some of the ability to pot it from cut-back with no side.

In fact, you could move Jason's CB further towards the pink area (or lower on the black) and still pot it with side so there's lots of room for error on the positional side.

It's painful to see the SIT fans call me stupid and a fool and an old man well past it and all the rest of that garbage they've been typing.I don't believe in SIT and you all don't believe in the CB curving because of the side or else believe BOB to the far jaw was not available and SIT is the only reason Jason potted the ball. We disagree, let's leave it at that until. We are only confusing people with this esoteric argument regarding SIT or not.

Either theory works for different players and all of them can still play the shot. The one thing I disagree with is that you can get up to 15* of SIT. If it exists then around maximum of 3* on a snooker table because we are talking millimeters here.

[Ramon]

So are you saying Jason had the red in different positions for the 3 shots?

No, in 2 shots .

In one of them he it was SIT , and he did pot it . ( missed once i think )
In other one 3/4 ball he did pot it and used side ( 3/4 ball ) . Center striking and he woulda hit the red first .

Good night Terry ,

sorry on my way to work .

[Ramon]

On my way to work ,

Good night TSF !!! :snooker::snooker:

[Terry Davidson]

So are you saying Jason had the red in different positions for the 3 shots?