Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[Terry Davidson]

Of course BOB is the correct shot most of the time, I've never said it wasn't.

But there is not a snooker/pool player in the world who can consistently put the CB where he wants all the time.
That's where the subtle version of this shot is very handy and I can't imagine any top player who doesn't use it.

Plus if you find yourself semi snookered like Selby/Wilson were I'd much rather play the shot they were playing then trying to swerve the CB onto the correct BOB that's for sure.

But hey each to their own I guess.
Like you keep saying to us, whatever works for you is good.

No one was talking to you Travis but you have to butt in don't you?

[pottr]

He makes those pockets look massive. Class act.

[Ramon]

@ Vmax

You can also contact this guy and ask him about this matter.
He may be able to tell you more than you imagine .
Do it for your own sake my friend , not mine !!

BTW , His H break is : 24

[pottr]

Never seen that before... That's funny.

[j6uk]

Up to one and a half, lol...

I made a fake maximum (frame against myself from the first long red) and then had one against my lad months later... Apart from the nervy feeling around 3/4 reds left I felt fine... Pink kicked slightly and looked like it might rest in the jaw but it had enough pace.

The one in the frame against myself had a few tricky shots including an in and out of baulk... I know it doesn't count, but I have played hundreds of frames against myself before and never made a maximum so I was still thrilled to bits.


I am starting to get the time, life is settling down... but my right leg is literally weaker and weaker every day... Managing my pain dictates the amount I can play.

I did take 8/9 reds and blacks against Wakelin on his table once, only to chip the white over the next red and off the table playing a screw shot.

My best chance of a really special one was against TSF's very own Tom Walker.
I missed an easy pink into the corner for 100 with 3 reds left... Nailed the free ball brown into the middle pocket and smashed into the pack to split them.

The frame before, Tom had taken 8/9 reds with blacks and then decided to play up for the blue to secure the frame... He genuinely had no idea he was on the maximum break! Very funny session... Was high quality stuff.

i know this is only a 146 but this is how i imagine terrys mad max in that muckabout sesh with the chaperon. sprightly tel at 40+ letting his arm go and owning the match table, smashing them in with contempt.

[Ramon]

You can hardly see the red, outline of both balls are very obscure and as a regular century break maker you know the difference between making a ball and missing is very fine. Nice try though travis and if your lines weren't placed off the line of aim on an angled pot to deliberately deceive then I'd take you seriously, but you're proving to be a shyster.



The swerve means the cue ball is approaching BOB from a slightly different line, that and the reaction of the spin on the cue ball gripping the cloth makes it look like the OB is throwing. It's very small at low pace and compensating your aiming on a straight shot means choosing one jaw of the pocket or another to make the pot and hold the cue ball better, you're simply altering the angle of the line of aim. A tiny bit too hard or soft and it doesn't happen.
Take a look at the predator shaft video I linked to and see how the cue ball first deflects, the spin then grips the cloth and cue ball travels forward on a different line before curving slightly as it slows down. You compensate your aiming to allow for this and you have to judge the pace on a pocket weight shot so that the cue ball curves onto BOB or near enough to BOB to make the OB into the side of the pocket.



a) & c) and you compensate your aiming to allow for the slight curve differently, it's probably subconscious for you by now.
b) is when you get a bad contact



What is your standard Ramon ? You have described yourself as a poor player, and by what you have posted above it looks like you are the one who doesn't understand what happens when side is applied to the cue ball. The cue ball swerves every single time that side is applied, saying that a swerve shot and a side shot are different really shows your ignorance, one is simply more extreme than the other. You can play an extreme swerve by striking harder and raising the butt of the cue but then the cue ball will end up somewhere you don't want it to be so instead you play it softly at pocket weight to stay in control of the cue ball. With the Wilson shot, he could have compensated his aiming to miss the pink by more than he did, played it harder and swerved it more but the cue ball would have ended up on the top cushion with no colour to go for. As it was he played the shot poorly, didn't swerve the cue ball enough and got lucky with a kick.
To take this as a perfect example is what's keeping this argument going, he got a kick plain as day, Hendry saw it and heard it and called it correctly and Wilson himself had the cue ball cleaned because of it.

Unfortunately, what you do not understand is what somebody's standard is or doing it without been aware of it , completely irrelevant to this topic
. Your logic is, like someone who says, I can not play the scrwback shot the way JT does, so therefor it can'nt be done. Well, this is just about the biggest nonsense I've ever heard of .

And yeah , i'm a very very very poor player .
HB : 16

[pottr]

Up to one and a half, lol...

I made a fake maximum (frame against myself from the first long red) and then had one against my lad months later... Apart from the nervy feeling around 3/4 reds left I felt fine... Pink kicked slightly and looked like it might rest in the jaw but it had enough pace.

The one in the frame against myself had a few tricky shots including an in and out of baulk... I know it doesn't count, but I have played hundreds of frames against myself before and never made a maximum so I was still thrilled to bits.

two more one against a top pro in a muck about sesh and youll be up there with ye ol mate tel. got the table have you got the time

I am starting to get the time, life is settling down... but my right leg is literally weaker and weaker every day... Managing my pain dictates the amount I can play.

I did take 8/9 reds and blacks against Wakelin on his table once, only to chip the white over the next red and off the table playing a screw shot.

My best chance of a really special one was against TSF's very own Tom Walker.
I missed an easy pink into the corner for 100 with 3 reds left... Nailed the free ball brown into the middle pocket and smashed into the pack to split them.

The frame before, Tom had taken 8/9 reds with blacks and then decided to play up for the blue to secure the frame... He genuinely had no idea he was on the maximum break! Very funny session... Was high quality stuff.

[j6uk]

Pretty interesting way to analyse it...

I guess the honest answer for me is that I don't really know whilst I'm doing it. Naturally, desired position governs how you might want to take the shot, but assuming there was no positional concern I would likely play the black with a trace of side.

But I put that trace of side on the white out of habit, to help control the white into the area of the table I want it to land in. That doesn't mean that it doesn't help the black shift into the sweet spot of the pocket.

It's got me thinking a bit now... the long and short of it is that I've played the shot thousands of times to the desired effect so what happens doesn't really give me any cause to think about it... Bit like the stance and grip, etc... it's just unconscious.

P.S I love the hate I'm getting for my ONE maximum break... Was on this forum for years with a high break of 144 and no one ever used it as a means to attack me... Add three points to that total and it's grounds for ridicule x

didnt now you maxed, nice one.. two more one against a top pro in a muck about sesh and youll be up there with ye ol mate tel. got the table have you got the time.

[pottr]

a. so high on a 1/2b black using helping side do you still make the pot if you actually contact bob at 1/2b?
b. or do you aim and contact a little thicker?
c. or maybe you aim thick but it curves onto bob at 1/2b?

Pretty interesting way to analyse it...

I guess the honest answer for me is that I don't really know whilst I'm doing it. Naturally, desired position governs how you might want to take the shot, but assuming there was no positional concern I would likely play the black with a trace of side.

But I put that trace of side on the white out of habit, to help control the white into the area of the table I want it to land in. That doesn't mean that it doesn't help the black shift into the sweet spot of the pocket.

It's got me thinking a bit now... the long and short of it is that I've played the shot thousands of times to the desired effect so what happens doesn't really give me any cause to think about it... Bit like the stance and grip, etc... it's just unconscious.

P.S I love the hate I'm getting for my ONE maximum break... Was on this forum for years with a high break of 144 and no one ever used it as a means to attack me... Add three points to that total and it's grounds for ridicule x

[j6uk]

The swerve means the cue ball is approaching BOB from a slightly different line, that and the reaction of the spin on the cue ball gripping the cloth makes it look like the OB is throwing. It's very small at low pace and compensating your aiming on a straight shot means choosing one jaw of the pocket or another to make the pot and hold the cue ball better, you're simply altering the angle of the line of aim. A tiny bit too hard or soft and it doesn't happen.
Take a look at the predator shaft video I linked to and see how the cue ball first deflects, the spin then grips the cloth and cue ball travels forward on a different line before curving slightly as it slows down. You compensate your aiming to allow for this and you have to judge the pace on a pocket weight shot so that the cue ball curves onto BOB or near enough to BOB to make the OB into the side of the pocket.

so is this a yes then helping side is actually swerve?
or every shot with side is a swerve onto bob, and then helping side is simply the reaction to the cushion and not the ob? its always a two in one scenario when theres an ob an cushion involved right?

a) & c) and you compensate your aiming to allow for the slight curve differently, it's probably subconscious for you by now.
b) is when you get a bad contact

and your book says a,b,c all pot?

reminder:
a. so high on a 1/2b black using helping side do you still make the pot if you actually contact bob at 1/2b?
b. or do you aim and contact a little thicker?
c. or maybe you aim thick but it curves onto bob at 1/2b?


-

[vmax]

Still a full ball contact in your picture.

You can hardly see the red, outline of both balls are very obscure and as a regular century break maker you know the difference between making a ball and missing is very fine. Nice try though travis and if your lines weren't placed off the line of aim on an angled pot to deliberately deceive then I'd take you seriously, but you're proving to be a shyster.

so theres no such thing as helping side then? its actually called swerve, and all players/im dong is swerving onto bob? and holding the cb is some odd swerve reaction?

The swerve means the cue ball is approaching BOB from a slightly different line, that and the reaction of the spin on the cue ball gripping the cloth makes it look like the OB is throwing. It's very small at low pace and compensating your aiming on a straight shot means choosing one jaw of the pocket or another to make the pot and hold the cue ball better, you're simply altering the angle of the line of aim. A tiny bit too hard or soft and it doesn't happen.
Take a look at the predator shaft video I linked to and see how the cue ball first deflects, the spin then grips the cloth and cue ball travels forward on a different line before curving slightly as it slows down. You compensate your aiming to allow for this and you have to judge the pace on a pocket weight shot so that the cue ball curves onto BOB or near enough to BOB to make the OB into the side of the pocket.

a. so high on a 1/2b black using helping side do you still make the pot if you actually contact bob at 1/2b?
b. or do you aim and contact a little thicker?
c. or maybe you aim thick but it curves onto bob at 1/2b?

a) & c) and you compensate your aiming to allow for the slight curve differently, it's probably subconscious for you by now.
b) is when you get a bad contact

*What you and Vmax are describing ( in many of your posts ) , is happening when you play a swerve shot.
Playing a shot with side is no diff shot comperd to playing any other shot .
You gonna have to cue stright and effortless .
*the less power / the better timing / the more spin you create. and the effect would be more noticeable.

What is your standard Ramon ? You have described yourself as a poor player, and by what you have posted above it looks like you are the one who doesn't understand what happens when side is applied to the cue ball. The cue ball swerves every single time that side is applied, saying that a swerve shot and a side shot are different really shows your ignorance, one is simply more extreme than the other. You can play an extreme swerve by striking harder and raising the butt of the cue but then the cue ball will end up somewhere you don't want it to be so instead you play it softly at pocket weight to stay in control of the cue ball. With the Wilson shot, he could have compensated his aiming to miss the pink by more than he did, played it harder and swerved it more but the cue ball would have ended up on the top cushion with no colour to go for. As it was he played the shot poorly, didn't swerve the cue ball enough and got lucky with a kick.
To take this as a perfect example is what's keeping this argument going, he got a kick plain as day, Hendry saw it and heard it and called it correctly and Wilson himself had the cue ball cleaned because of it.

[Ramon]

Ramon:

I'm not following you here. How do myself and vmax talk about using side 'like that'? All I've ever said is you can use side to kill the cueball on a thickish cut or you can go around an intervening ball to make the pot. Is that 'like that' to you? What do you understand this discussion to be about?

I think the CB curves into BOB (or at least within the margin for error on the pocket) and others believe placing side on the CB causes the 2 balls to stick together longer and this alters the path of the OB from 180* opposite contact to some other angle and up to 15*, which I find amazing and I don't understand how this is possible given the amount of time the balls would have to cling together to cause this. It would have to be some sort of mini-kick but I never see the OB kick when I curve around an intervening ball.

Remember Occhamh's Razor.

Good morning Terry ,

Sometimes there is no room for CB to curve . Hence using side can be useful.
( see the vid J6 and travis uploaded ).

*What you and Vmax are describing ( in many of your posts ) , is happening when you play a swerve shot.
Playing a shot with side is no diff shot comperd to playing any other shot .
You gonna have to cue stright and effortless .
*the less power / the better timing / the more spin you create. and the effect would be more noticeable.

*Unfortunately, you consider this as sum kind of attack towards your knowledge and experience. believe me, it's not .

Even pros have sometimes struggled with playing this kind of shots. especially during the match under pressure.

let me ask you a question , is every scrwback shot you play , a perfect shot ?
Well , it's the same with using side .

[travisbickle]

In my experience my answers would be:
a. as long as you contact BOB correctly or within the pocket's margin for error you will make the pot.
b. you have to aim a little thicker to compensate for CB throw unless of course you are playing very slow and over a distance which allows the CB to recover and hit BOB.
c. if you shoot slow enough, but try it with using a lot of power to get on the yellow ball say and you would aim even thicker as you get more CB throw from the side. At any rate, one way or another you must hit the correct potting spot on the OB.

Now remember please, this is just my opinion of what I have experienced and how I play shots with side. Travis and Biggy will undoubtedly have lots of heartache with my theory BUT somehow without considering the effects of SIT it works for me. (When you're standing behind a shot like this do you even think about SIT? I know I don't.)

Of course BOB is the correct shot most of the time, I've never said it wasn't.

But there is not a snooker/pool player in the world who can consistently put the CB where he wants all the time.
That's where the subtle version of this shot is very handy and I can't imagine any top player who doesn't use it.

Plus if you find yourself semi snookered like Selby/Wilson were I'd much rather play the shot they were playing then trying to swerve the CB onto the correct BOB that's for sure.

But hey each to their own I guess.
Like you keep saying to us, whatever works for you is good.

[Terry Davidson]

a. so high on a 1/2b black using helping side do you still make the pot if you actually contact bob at 1/2b?
b. or do you aim and contact a little thicker?
c. or maybe you aim thick but it curves onto bob at 1/2b?

In my experience my answers would be:
a. as long as you contact BOB correctly or within the pocket's margin for error you will make the pot.
b. you have to aim a little thicker to compensate for CB throw unless of course you are playing very slow and over a distance which allows the CB to recover and hit BOB.
c. if you shoot slow enough, but try it with using a lot of power to get on the yellow ball say and you would aim even thicker as you get more CB throw from the side. At any rate, one way or another you must hit the correct potting spot on the OB.

Now remember please, this is just my opinion of what I have experienced and how I play shots with side. Travis and Biggy will undoubtedly have lots of heartache with my theory BUT somehow without considering the effects of SIT it works for me. (When you're standing behind a shot like this do you even think about SIT? I know I don't.)

[Terry Davidson]

There is no point.

You would still say I was hitting BOB or my balls were too dirty :biggrin-new:

You and vmax are beyond any help.

I'm quite happy to let you both live in your SIT free little bubble

Well, through all this discussion there's been one thought in the back of my head, maybe 2 thoughts regarding SIT. I am making the assumption that on an angled pot with no intervening ball to go around and if you play it harder you should get more SIT. So if we use the pink and make it 3/4-ball (maximum energy transfer) with extreme side with the higher power there should be more spin on the CB and logically more SIT affecting the OB. When I play a shot like this I choose my aim-off to contact BOB the same as if I was using centre-ball with no aim-off. According to the SIT theory all the side spin should alter the path the pink takes off from that extra-cling contact point and I should miss the pot or maybe catch the side of the pocket. Are you saying that since I've been doing this for so long that I unconsciously adjust my aim-off to compensate for SIT?

Second thought is...you have a frozen plant aimed directly into a pocket 4ft away but you need to have the cueball come off the first OB at a different angle for position and you need a lot of power again. So you put on extreme side and aim-off to compensate for CB throw but hit BOB correctly. There should be some SIT on the first OB which should then be transferred to the second OB in the plant and this should cause the pot to go off-line. The problem is I tried this one this afternoon and as long as I hit BOB accurately there was NO deviation in the pot. Can you explain the lack of a SIT effect in this situation because you can't pick and choose whether SIT happens or not when you use side.

I would think the maximum spin SIT effect would take place on a high power shot using maximum spin but in my experience it doesn't unless there's something like an unconscious adjustment to compensate for all the induced SIT but as far as I can tell there isn't. Why does SIT disappear when you use more power when logically it should be increased because the CB is spinning more rapidly? I've tried these 2 shots and I don't think about SIT and never have but I still pot them.

A quite common shot is a 3/4-black off the spot where you use extreme top and side to get the CB around 2 cushions and up past the pink. On a slow table this requires a lot of power and every good player has this shot mastered but as far as I know not one of them has said 'Oh yeah, you also have to compensate for the spin induced throw when you attempt this pot'. I think if we had to compensate for SIT we would all go crazy and quit the game. Just hit BOB and you'll pot the ball is my thought and don't worry about some mini-kick which only apparently happens with very low power shots which are fairly thick cuts.

Actually, I don't think vmax or myself require any help but you keep consciously calculating that SIT for every shot with side, but please concentrate on the higher power shots.