Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[travisbickle]

If you hit the black dead-on in order to hold the spot then in my opinion the black ball would hit the top cushion about 6" from the pocket assuming the 3/4 pot with cueball above the black towards the pink. According to the laws of physical properties when the 2 spheres collide the black ball has to take off at 180* from the point of contact. If you used side and drag (bottom stuff) to pot the black then I believe if you can pot it your cueball must have curved into the black and at the point of contact made a perfect plant directly at the pocket or at least the far jaw just like Karnham's did, although he wasn't trying to hold the spot.

I agree that in order to hold the spot you have to hit the black straight on to stop the cueball as otherwise from the 3/4 position the cueball would still have some energy left in it and would travel off the spot towards the cushion but in order to pot the black you have to hit it in that plant position and your bottom stuff would hold the cueball.

This is only my opinion based on the laws of physics that dictates the black has to leave at 180* to the contact point. If what you are saying is true you would have to change the direction of the black ball by 45* which is something I don't believe. I do believe you can change the point of contact though by using side on the cueball, especially with drag. But you tell me what are the exact mechanics involved in changing the direction of the object ball at or shortly after contact.

On the other hand, who cares? As long as you can pot the black and hold the spot using this throw effect some seem to believe in, and can use it consistently then it just doesn't matter. I haven't tried this specific shot of holding the spot on an angled pot but maybe I will see if I can do it. I wouldn't like the shot a lot because it means for your next shot if the cueball slipped a little you would have a chinese snooker on your next pot.

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!

[blahblah01]

that you are actually reducing " natural throw" and not inducing or creating any throw on these shots,

Yep as above, in my rambling Post.

It's a shame Nic can't get the CB spinning out of his contraption that shows Natural Kick, as I called it; but then I doubt he visits here anymore.....

I'm not sure going on about the OB spinning, though as it is either insignificant and\or of no use?

[itsnoteasy]

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

[Terry Davidson]

So can we transfer side to the object ball or not?

I say 'NO', not enough to matter and certainly nowhere near the spin required to alter the path of the OB by 45* or even 5*. If you were able to alter the path of the OB then we all would be missing every pot because of unintentional side since as has been said by Chisholm 'no one can hit centre-ball perfectly so we might as well use side on every shot'.

I don't think I could get even 10* on the cueball itself unless it was a masse shot, certainly not drag with side.

[Terry Davidson]

Terry have you been in touch with the university yet to tell them their understanding of physics is wrong . Here's a wee bit of evidence you could give them, along with , I can't do it and turn it the other way, you could include this
https://youtu.be/nfZ12UGiisM

I haven't done any scholarly research on this but maybe I'll send an email to a physics professor at MIT and ask what the laws of physics are with two smooth spheres colliding, one stationary and one spinning with a miniscule amount of friction between the balls but more friction with the bed of the table. I'm sure they'll spend thousands of dollars to prove if there is a way to alter the object ball's course. Just to see Mr. B.S. reaction we could task them to try the experiment in the vacuum of space where there's no friction on the bed.

Or maybe I'll email Scotty but of course he's dead, so that won't work. Maybe the new Scotty in the new Star Trek movies?

[tedisbill]

So can we transfer side to the object ball or not?

[Terry Davidson]

So a side-spinning ball reacts from a cushion the same as a non-spinning one? Nope: so an OB does not react the same from a side-spinning CB and a non-side-spinning CB.....

If I remember I will get vid's taken on Tuesday, to show it: and without bottom to try and lose the swerve of CB argument from this.....

An OB will react the same way from either a CB with no side or with side. The only ball we can alter the path of is the CB.

[Terry Davidson]

So a side-spinning ball reacts from a cushion the same as a non-spinning one? Nope: so an OB does not react the same from a side-spinning CB and a non-side-spinning CB.....

If I remember I will get vid's taken on Tuesday, to show it: and without bottom to try and lose the swerve of CB argument from this.....

Any side,whether top or bottom will curve the path of the cueball. Otherwise what's the point of masse? Of course the cueball curves with any side but as to the effect with cushions that is completely different as no effect is transmitted to the cushions which definitely don't throw unless they're not bolted down I guess.

[blahblah01]

So a side-spinning ball reacts from a cushion the same as a non-spinning one? Nope: so an OB does not react the same from a side-spinning CB and a non-side-spinning CB.....

If I remember I will get vid's taken on Tuesday, to show it: and without bottom to try and lose the swerve of CB argument from this.....

[Byrom]

yeah bu to fair to scotty he always found a way

[itsnoteasy]

What does it matter whether it's a coloured ball on its spot or not on its spot or a red ball sitting in the middle of the table. There is no physical way you can alter the path of the object ball by 45*. If you think you can then put up a video as I would love to see it. Place the camera over the pocket and show pocket, object ball and cueball in the frame.

I'll eat crow if you can alter the path by up to 45* for sure. In order to hold the spot of anothr ball you have to hit it dead-on, don't you?

Terry have you been in touch with the university yet to tell them their understanding of physics is wrong . Here's a wee bit of evidence you could give them, along with , I can't do it and turn it the other way, you could include this
https://youtu.be/nfZ12UGiisM

[Terry Davidson]

What does it matter whether it's a coloured ball on its spot or not on its spot or a red ball sitting in the middle of the table. There is no physical way you can alter the path of the object ball by 45*. If you think you can then put up a video as I would love to see it. Place the camera over the pocket and show pocket, object ball and cueball in the frame.

I'll eat crow if you can alter the path by up to 45* for sure. In order to hold the spot of anothr ball you have to hit it dead-on, don't you?

[j6uk]

so in your book what is happening when i play a simple 3/4 ball pot, hit it full ball with side and bottom, pot it and hold the spot for position? the cb had no time to push out and come back n on another line, iv watched it contact full ball hence the cb held the spot and i used bottom to hold the line of the shot.

If you hit the black dead-on in order to hold the spot then in my opinion the black ball would hit the top cushion about 6" from the pocket assuming the 3/4 pot with cueball above the black towards the pink. According to the laws of physical properties when the 2 spheres collide the black ball has to take off at 180* from the point of contact. If you used side and drag (bottom stuff) to pot the black then I believe if you can pot it your cueball must have curved into the black and at the point of contact made a perfect plant directly at the pocket or at least the far jaw just like Karnham's did, although he wasn't trying to hold the spot.

I agree that in order to hold the spot you have to hit the black straight on to stop the cueball as otherwise from the 3/4 position the cueball would still have some energy left in it and would travel off the spot towards the cushion but in order to pot the black you have to hit it in that plant position and your bottom stuff would hold the cueball.

This is only my opinion based on the laws of physics that dictates the black has to leave at 180* to the contact point. If what you are saying is true you would have to change the direction of the black ball by 45* which is something I don't believe. I do believe you can change the point of contact though by using side on the cueball, especially with drag. But you tell me what are the exact mechanics involved in changing the direction of the object ball at or shortly after contact.

On the other hand, who cares? As long as you can pot the black and hold the spot using this throw effect some seem to believe in, and can use it consistently then it just doesn't matter. I haven't tried this specific shot of holding the spot on an angled pot but maybe I will see if I can do it. I wouldn't like the shot a lot because it means for your next shot if the cueball slipped a little you would have a chinese snooker on your next pot.

im saying hold the spot of any ob not the color spots on the table.. anyway i will take this as a dunno.

[Ramon]

Well I can't see the red ball throw to the left like it did with that Wilson kick, cue ball takes a very slight swerve around the pink and the contact made is what's needed to pot the red naturally, or did it as we don't know do we as we can't see the pocket. Deliberately unclear travis ?

At least I used balls where the spin could be seen, the pocket was in view, the line of aim was clear and you could see all the effects. What they were was there to be debated, you've shown nothing either for or against.



You're picking up where you left off before your ban splasher; your motivation is clear, and it's clear to anyone with any sense that what travis has posted proves nothing contrary to what was in my video. I played the same shots and got the same reaction, and I also played many too hard, too soft and without compensating my aiming to show just what's needed to be done to pot the ball in that situation and a few others as well.

Now where's yours ?

Ramon

You haven't answered my treatise on my video have you, choosing instead to snipe at me once again; your screen shots from my video don't show contact but the ones with travis' do, deliberate to keep face ?

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.



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.

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.

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 .


[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]

[Terry Davidson]

i dont get what your on about talking about this black ball.. but am ii to take from this reply that the shot i outlined above is not possible n your book then?

If you hit the black dead-on in order to hold the spot then in my opinion the black ball would hit the top cushion about 6" from the pocket assuming the 3/4 pot with cueball above the black towards the pink. According to the laws of physical properties when the 2 spheres collide the black ball has to take off at 180* from the point of contact. If you used side and drag (bottom stuff) to pot the black then I believe if you can pot it your cueball must have curved into the black and at the point of contact made a perfect plant directly at the pocket or at least the far jaw just like Karnham's did, although he wasn't trying to hold the spot.

I agree that in order to hold the spot you have to hit the black straight on to stop the cueball as otherwise from the 3/4 position the cueball would still have some energy left in it and would travel off the spot towards the cushion but in order to pot the black you have to hit it in that plant position and your bottom stuff would hold the cueball.

This is only my opinion based on the laws of physics that dictates the black has to leave at 180* to the contact point. If what you are saying is true you would have to change the direction of the black ball by 45* which is something I don't believe. I do believe you can change the point of contact though by using side on the cueball, especially with drag. But you tell me what are the exact mechanics involved in changing the direction of the object ball at or shortly after contact.

On the other hand, who cares? As long as you can pot the black and hold the spot using this throw effect some seem to believe in, and can use it consistently then it just doesn't matter. I haven't tried this specific shot of holding the spot on an angled pot but maybe I will see if I can do it. I wouldn't like the shot a lot because it means for your next shot if the cueball slipped a little you would have a chinese snooker on your next pot.