Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[vmax]

I have to plead guilty to using running side on balls frozen on the cushion as I've found it's much easier to pot then with the side. I really don't believe there is any spin transfer helping this out but rather it's just as vmax has explained it. No doubt we'll see a couple of hundred videos and comments from those who disagree.

Too true Tel, there is always a little slide of the cue ball when it contacts a cushion at an angle so plain ball striking would use this natural slide and running side exaggerates this slide to make the pot easier, check side would decrease it making the pot more difficult.

[blahblah01]

Well, they did take that plane from down Australia way....

[jonny66]

If you add this one to the original Rot Chisholm thread, it's over 100 pages. Still no end in sight, I think it was aliens.

There's a typo in there which I am going to leave, no offence to Roy himself.

[jonny66]

If you add this one to the original Rot Chisholm thread, it's over 100 pages. Still no end in sight, I think it was aliens.

[blahblah01]

If there is any spin transferred to the OB then it will cause a sliding effect on the cushion, rather than gripping?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9AN8SyWynM

[Terry Davidson]

I have to plead guilty to using running side on balls frozen on the cushion as I've found it's much easier to pot then with the side. I really don't believe there is any spin transfer helping this out but rather it's just as vmax has explained it. No doubt we'll see a couple of hundred videos and comments from those who disagree.

[vmax]

Why is it easy to pot a ball touching the cushion with running side and virtually impossible with check side?

Because with running side the cue ball can contact the cushion just before the correct contact point on the OB and the sidespin will grip the cushion and run along the cushion a very short distance to contact the OB at the exact cushion and ball contact needed to pot it before it leaves the cushion.
It can also contact the cushion at the exact cushion and ball contact point for the same result, but with check side you definitely need the absolute exact contact point but seeing as playing with side is not as accurate as playing centre line on the cue ball striking then you can be a little bit out with running side, you have a margin of error as long as the cushion contact is just before and not OB first, but must be exact with check side and centre cue ball striking.

That's what I believe anyway but I'm sure there are those on the forum who believe that the side is transfered to the OB so that it hugs the cushion.

[Terry Davidson]

Well I have had another email discussion with Dr Dave about my theory , that you are actually reducing " natural throw" and not inducing or creating any throw on these shots, he said that is correct and directed me to this video, which surely shows everything you wanted to see.
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threa...h.html#outside

It appears that OB throw only occues on very thin cuts and only this can be altered by SIT, which is quite different to that which some people on here are advocating from their interpretation of Dr. Dave's videos. This one is from Colorado State and includes a reference to Dr. Dave. In addition to just thin cuts they also say you need to be at top professional level in order to use it consistently. Here is a quote from the site:

The problem with using this "smooth rolling across the object ball's surface" technique is that it requires a lot of skill and experience to get right. The amount of outside required depends on the cut angle, the distance to the ball, and the amount of draw/follow. As has been pointed out by Dr. Dave, Ron Shepard and others, if you get it wrong by a little the shot can go wrong by a lot.

I think the main factor is on skids. This is also called "cling" and in snooker-playing regions "kick." I think the best name for it is "bad contact." In any case, it seems to be due to chalk at the contact point of cue ball on object ball and it causes large amounts of throw. Some players don't even realize that skid exists and think that when people complain about getting a skid/kick/cling/bad contact they are just trying to make excuses. Skids can happen on maybe 1 shot in 50 to 500 depending on conditions and the sort of shots taken.

So, where is this all going? If a player just flat out misses 30% of the shots he shoots at, he's got no reason to take special, complicated precautions to avoid a 1% problem. At that level he should be working on bringing his stick straight through the middle of the cue ball with maybe a little follow or draw. Nice and smooth and not too hard. Such a player has only a dim notion of squirt, swerve and throw, and probably no knowledge of skid.

On the other hand, if you're Rempe or Sigel or Hohmann, and on a good day you miss only one time in 200 shots attempted, you can't afford to have the object ball skidding off randomly one time in 100.

So the bottom line is that whether you should try to use outside english on the fraction of shots that allow the freedom to use it may well depend on how well you play.

So all these sarcastic and insulting quotes we've been seeing from all the OB Throw advocates has all been bollocks. What they are really doing is just what vmax and I said, they are curving the cueball into the correct potting point and there is NO effect on the object ball and this is according to BOTH Dr. Dave and Colorado State. Perhaps these people should try and get a better understanding of exactly what's happening, but it sure looks like it only applies to very thin cuts at the top professional level. I doubt there is any CIT or SIT going on in any of these videos or photos because they are not thin cuts.

[Terry Davidson]

Camara was right behind the CB. Best possible angle to view the shot.
Bare in mind the shot was played with a little top spin which is not the best shot to throw the OB.
Little soft screw with side will throw the OB even more.
So holding the spot on a 3/4 black off its own spot is easy and I'm sure JK knows this already but wanted to see what your opinion was.

If the damned camera was right behind the cueball then where were you? Did you have the camera sitting on your head?

[Terry Davidson]

Haha what a load of rubbish.

Just one look at Ramon's still pics of the pink will tell you how wrong you are.
The CB hits the pink full ball and moves it by at least 15 degrees by the time it reaches the pocket, which would be more then enough to pot a 3/4 black full ball because a 3/4 black off it's spot is around 15 degrees and not 45 degrees like you said!
Use your Kinovia app on the pink if you dare!

You have no understanding of what I'm saying here Travis> j6uk said he can alter the course of the OBJECT BALL by 1/4-ball by using side and drag. 1/4 of the OB is a 30* change in direction. I know this is being technical but try to keep up please!

[vmax]

I really don't know where you are coming from vmax!

Look at the second shot on the first vid. Pause the vid just before I play the shot, get a A4 piece of paper then put it on the right hand edge of the CB/OB. You will see the pink is sticking out just like Wilson's shot. Play the vid, watch the CB closely, it doesn't swerve and contacts the red further to the left then before it was struck, hence no swerve!
Now pause the vid when CB/OB make contact then look closely at the angle,red clearly heading to the right hand side of the pocket, now play vid and you can clearly see the red thrown to the left hand side of the pocket.

To play the shot the other way round is impossible because the left hand side would just push the CB on to the pink.

Jesus wept man you can't see the pocket so that red could be going anywhere, now how many more times do I have to point that out to you.

You say it's impossible to make the same contact point with left hand side because the cue ball would push into the pink, that's incorrect as you can compensate your aiming to allow for the deflection/push of the cue ball and just miss the pink and therefore you should be able to make the same contact carrying left hand side if the ball doesn't swerve.

I say the ball will swerve the other way despite compensating your aiming and therefore you will not be able to make the same contact, in fact I say you won't be able to contact the red at all.

I say that you can play the shot with right hand side without compensating your aiming because the cue ball naturally deflects just a tad to the left and comes back onto a line of aim that's enough make a good enough contact to pot the ball into the side of the pocket because it's carrying right hand side, spinning in the same direction as the nap, making the cue ball swerve around the pink from left to right as the spin changes from horizontal to the 30 degree axis.

[cole46]

Why is it easy to pot a ball touching the cushion with running side and virtually impossible with check side?

[travisbickle]

The cue ball approaches the red from a different line because it's swerved slightly so the contact isn't the same as it would be if the pink wasn't in the way and it could be hit direct. The contact made doesn't throw the red at all, and we can't see the pocket so have no idea of the correct line of aim, if the red was potted into the centre of the pocket, the side of the pocket or even if it was potted at all.

If you don't believe the cue ball swerves then set up exactly the same shot but use left hand side to make the same contact on the red to throw it the other way. If the cue ball goes straight to the contact point with no swerve then at the very least you should be able to make the same contact point shouldn't you.

I'm betting you can't, I'm betting that left hand side will deflect the cue ball into the pink and in order to miss the pink you'll need to offset your aiming and with the left hand side also swerving the cue ball the other way you'll miss the red altogether.

I really don't know where you are coming from vmax!

Look at the second shot on the first vid. Pause the vid just before I play the shot, get a A4 piece of paper then put it on the right hand edge of the CB/OB. You will see the pink is sticking out just like Wilson's shot. Play the vid, watch the CB closely, it doesn't swerve and contacts the red further to the left then before it was struck, hence no swerve!
Now pause the vid when CB/OB make contact then look closely at the angle,red clearly heading to the right hand side of the pocket, now play vid and you can clearly see the red thrown to the left hand side of the pocket.

To play the shot the other way round is impossible because the left hand side would just push the CB on to the pink.

[travisbickle]

Can't really tell from your video as the camera was on the side and there would still be a bit of the pink ball showing in front of the cueball even if the cueball hit BOB. Place the camera over the pocket so it takes in the pocket, pink and cueball but have the camera direcly facing the pink and try the shot again.

Camara was right behind the CB. Best possible angle to view the shot.
Bare in mind the shot was played with a little top spin which is not the best shot to throw the OB.
Little soft screw with side will throw the OB even more.
So holding the spot on a 3/4 black off its own spot is easy and I'm sure JK knows this already but wanted to see what your opinion was.

[vmax]

What the hell ????


Vmax,

The reason why I haven't responded to your post is because you said in your post :

,, I'm not going through this again,,

I took it you no longer want to talk about it and decided to respect your choice and your privacy.

I'm not going through the video again as I explained everything I was doing, then you had a dig at me using that travis video that shows nothing as you can't see the pocket and therefore the line of aim.


As i mentioned in my previous post in other thread, in som of the shots you played
the CB did change it's path.
except those which I made a screenshots from .
I did downloaded your vid. the problem is i can'nt play it at 10s/c. I could do this with travis vid.

On those Ramon I'm playing the shots hard with stun and screw so there's almost no swerve, all was explained and yet once again you use these to back up travis.

take a look at those pictures and compar the direction ( the line ) the cue is heading in your pic to the one Travis posted.
What do you see my friend?
You hold the butt abit higher than normal and you put the cue not stright.
Well, what you are doing here is playing a swerve shot.
of cours, this way you gonna push the CB off it's path and CB approaches the OB from a diff angle.

I don't play with my chin on the cue Ramon, the cue isn't as high as it looks, in fact it's touching the cushion and you can see my grip hand under my chin, thought you would have seen that on the line up I finished with. And a side shot is a swerve shot, just a very small one that you can hardly see which is the thing that you're not getting.

By no means I'm saying that you can'nt cue stright. Of cours you can!!
I think you did it here to show us the CB can change it's path.
And in most of the shots you played (not all of them), that's what happened.
If you want to test the effect of the side, it's very important your cue stright (not putting the cue across the CB) and keep the cue as low as possible.
Otherwise , you never find out .

Then make a screen shot of one of the shots I played slowly with the cue level and parallel to the line of aim then if you want a true comparison.


[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]

I now ask you, the same as I asked travis, to set up the same shot but play the cue ball with left hand side to make the OB red throw the other way on contact. If, as you say, the cue ball does not swerve at such a low speed struck with a level cue at 9 or 3 o'clock then you should be able to make the same contact point.

Well I have had another email discussion with Dr Dave about my theory , that you are actually reducing " natural throw" and not inducing or creating any throw on these shots, he said that is correct and directed me to this video, which surely shows everything you wanted to see.
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threa...h.html#outside

All these shots show the cue ball spinning horizontally and not on the 30 degree axis that I showed happens when the initial skidding stops and the cue ball grips the cloth and rolls forward. Either these shots are played at a very close distance, struck very hard or the 30 degree axis spin doesn't happen on a napless cloth, which I very much doubt.

Maybe you could ask the good doctor if this happens on a napped snooker table cloth only, and if not why he hasn't captured it on any of his videos and what difference it would make to the contact of the two balls with the cue ball spinning on a 30 ish degree axis.
This is a snooker forum after all and we don't play on napless cloths.