Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Snooker Research (Relative Shot Difficulty)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Snooker Research (Relative Shot Difficulty)

    I'm doing some academic research on the game of snooker and part of this involves giving a numerical approximation to how difficult a shot is compared to other shots. It'd be really useful if I could get some answers and information from members of this forum as to which of the following factors (and any other factors) impact the difficulty of a shot, ranging from most impacting to least impacting.

    The factors we have so far are:

    - Distance between cue ball and object ball.
    - Distance between object ball and pocket.
    - Distance between cushion and cue ball.
    - Distance between cushion and object ball.
    - Angle of attempted pot (with a higher angle or 'thinner' shot thought to be harder).

    To keep things a bit simpler, for the moment we are assuming that all shots are hit without spin (or back/top), and that all shots are played at the same pace. The table also is assumed to be flat!

    If each person who replies could rate between 1 (no impact) and 10 (extremely high impact) the factors mentioned above, as well as any others that spring to mind, it would be most appreciated.

    Thank you for your time .

  • #2
    You may want to factor in the decreasing pocket opening in relation to the angle of attack and also the sight line of the pocket ie blind pocket, these are major factors in degree of difficulty.

    Comment


    • #3
      You may also need to factor in how drunk you are when attempting the shot or if your cue is shaped like a banana.

      On a serious note: if you have to use the jigger or the long stuff. Plus, some shots are easier for lefties and other shots for right handers because they can lean over the table to play the shot rather than get a jigger for example.
      My favourite players: Walter Lindrum (AUS), Neil Robertson (AUS), Eddie Charlton (AUS), Robby Foldvari (AUS), Vinnie Calabrese (AUS), Jimmy White, Stephen Hendry, Alex Higgins, Ronnie O'Sullivan, Dominic Dale and Barry Hawkins.
      I dream of a 147 (but would be happy with a 100)

      Comment


      • #4
        Snooker Research (Relative Shot Difficulty)

        some people find certain shots hard and others find them easy,its not a constant

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by SnookerScience View Post
          I'm doing some academic research on the game of snooker and part of this involves giving a numerical approximation to how difficult a shot is compared to other shots. It'd be really useful if I could get some answers and information from members of this forum as to which of the following factors (and any other factors) impact the difficulty of a shot, ranging from most impacting to least impacting.

          The factors we have so far are:

          - Distance between cue ball and object ball.
          - Distance between object ball and pocket.
          - Distance between cushion and cue ball.
          - Distance between cushion and object ball.
          - Angle of attempted pot (with a higher angle or 'thinner' shot thought to be harder).

          To keep things a bit simpler, for the moment we are assuming that all shots are hit without spin (or back/top), and that all shots are played at the same pace. The table also is assumed to be flat!

          If each person who replies could rate between 1 (no impact) and 10 (extremely high impact) the factors mentioned above, as well as any others that spring to mind, it would be most appreciated.

          Thank you for your time .
          Are you trying to generate cross sectional data? I can't help but feel that a model built on such data would be very poor for inference.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by barrywhite View Post
            Are you trying to generate cross sectional data? I can't help but feel that a model built on such data would be very poor for inference.
            lolololololol
            #jeSuisMasterBlasterBarryWhite2v1977Luclex(andHisF ictiousTwin)BigSplash!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by bolton-cueman View Post
              lolololololol
              Well some would say spambot! You know who. But I'm trying to understand the data they're collecting and the model they will build from it which then leads to inference. It's not going to work is my hunch.

              Golf, we'd need a list of about a hundred shots and that's just plain ball. Cut shot to the middle, cut shot to the fall of the middle, cut to the corner cut into a blind pocket, cut down a rail, cut just off a rail, cut in the middle of the table long, cut on short shot. And so on.
              Last edited by barrywhite; 29th January 2016, 08:59 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by barrywhite View Post
                Well some would say spambot! You know who. But I'm trying to understand the data they're collecting and the model they will build from it which then leads to inference. It's not going to work is my hunch.
                of course its not going to work.

                Ridiculous non-research..... each shot would be viewed, psychologically, differently by each player - based on their pre-cognition of of the currently presented shot and their relative prior success rate / personal experience with that shot.

                thats why you get some folk who always say 'i never get the long straight blues' while some can pot them with their eyes shut.

                you couldn't even model it in sterile lab conditions, using some form of mechanical device - Barrows £20,000 (lol) snooker shot device - as once you'd set the correct line on ANY shot you would get the shot with a 100% success rate.
                #jeSuisMasterBlasterBarryWhite2v1977Luclex(andHisF ictiousTwin)BigSplash!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bolton-cueman View Post
                  of course its not going to work.

                  Ridiculous non-research..... each shot would be viewed, psychologically, differently by each player - based on their pre-cognition of of the currently presented shot and their relative prior success rate / personal experience with that shot.

                  thats why you get some folk who always say 'i never get the long straight blues' while some can pot them with their eyes shut.

                  you couldn't even model it in sterile lab conditions, using some form of mechanical device - Barrows £20,000 (lol) snooker shot device - as once you'd set the correct line on ANY shot you would get the shot with a 100% success rate.
                  If you interviewed enough folk (say 120) you could generate an average difficulty for the average player. And tha;'s what they're interested in, the average person from a sample.

                  But yeah, they could just pay Barrow 20 grand for his opinion, forget the machine. I have this image in my head of lots of researchers nodding off when he diatribes into 'Do you know which is your dominant eye and which is your strongest eye. I have found they're not always the same, let me explain.............'

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by barrywhite View Post
                    If you interviewed enough folk (say 120) you could generate an average difficulty for the average player. And tha;'s what they're interested in, the average person from a sample.

                    But yeah, they could just pay Barrow 20 grand for his opinion, forget the machine. I have this image in my head of lots of researchers nodding off when he diatribes into 'Do you know which is your dominant eye and which is your strongest eye. I have found they're not always the same, let me explain.............'
                    ahhh so its not science, basically a customer survey.

                    as we all know, 63% of the population don't trust statistics
                    #jeSuisMasterBlasterBarryWhite2v1977Luclex(andHisF ictiousTwin)BigSplash!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bolton-cueman View Post
                      ahhh so its not science, basically a customer survey.

                      as we all know, 63% of the population don't trust statistics
                      yes but 59% of the population dont trust the 63% of the population that dont trust the statistics

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        8 out of 10 snooker players do it in their sleep!
                        Up the TSF!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X