Allowing for side

[vmax4steve]

Do you think it won't? But loading with side is difficult where both balls are on the cushion because of deflection and swerve. I'll have to try it out.

As for your swerve thing, if that was case, why don't players just play the swerve shot instead? When commentators say someone is making the potting angle with side or using side to turn the red over, or whatever, they're describing throw, as those shots aren't played as conventional swerve shots ie with cue jacked up in air. There might be swerve as well, but it is not just a case of swerving around a ball to hit the spot on the OB to put it in the pocket. A further problem with the swerve hypothesis is distance. Most of these shots are played around the black spot, and are short shots. There is no time for the CB to deflect away and then bend back again within a matter of a few inches.

Basically, if you don't know SIT exists, you've not been paying attention.

There's plenty of time for the ball to swerve and come back, especially if the cue ball is spinning in the same direction as the nap, you'll notice this on your cushion experiments. The swerve shot where the butt is jacked up in the air just accentuates the swerve effect that happens every time the cue ball is struck off centre.
In the shot shown here the aim is offset to completely miss the object ball in order to go around the blocking ball, and the cue ball deflects to the right and comes back onto the correct line about a foot past the blocking ball and from that point it then goes straight to hit the object ball.
In normal shots with side the offset is minimal as the swerve is minimal but enough to miss the pot if you don't allow for it, so you aim a bit thicker or thinner and not to miss the object ball completely, but sometimes it's neccessary to aim to miss the pot to make the pot.

Do you play billiards VMax ? I was being shown some billiards by an older gent at the club .

He was showing me nursery cannons . Was interesting to see how if you play the shots with side the balls start to drift apart or come together depending on which side you play .

He said this is because the side will transfer to the object balls . Do you have a different theory on why this happens ?

Nursery cannons are played along the cushion and mainly use little double kisses to keep the balls together. Ain't no side going on here

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

Unbelievable, he should be thrown out immediately, did his mates not say anything to him ??

And who the hell prefers to eat crisps off a snooker table?

[jrc750]

And who the hell prefers to eat crisps off a snooker table?

Maybe he prefers chalk to salt ?

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

There's plenty of time for the ball to swerve and come back, especially if the cue ball is spinning in the same direction as the nap, you'll notice this on your cushion experiments. The swerve shot where the butt is jacked up in the air just accentuates the swerve effect that happens every time the cue ball is struck off centre.
In the shot shown here the aim is offset to completely miss the object ball in order to go around the blocking ball, and the cue ball deflects to the right and comes back onto the correct line about a foot past the blocking ball and from that point it then goes straight to hit the object ball.
In normal shots with side the offset is minimal as the swerve is minimal but enough to miss the pot if you don't allow for it, so you aim a bit thicker or thinner and not to miss the object ball completely, but sometimes it's neccessary to aim to miss the pot to make the pot.

Nursery cannons are played along the cushion and mainly use little double kisses to keep the balls together. Ain't no side going on here

Thanks for telling me how to swerve a ball - i had no idea.

You can also make balls go when you can't quite get to the potting angle eg when two balls are frozen together. You catch aim slightly thicker or thinner, as the side changes the potting angle.

[itsnoteasy]

Unbelievable, he should be thrown out immediately, did his mates not say anything to him ??

Worst thing of all he was in with someone older , even older than me, who should know better.

[itsnoteasy]

Firstly, no, that is not what is being discussed. Secondly, one of the videos i linked yesterday shows both SIT and spin transference quite clearly.

Not off cushions Biggie, I did type that, come on now, jeez it's hard work . Put up a link of anyone , doesn't have to be your hero, showing side being played, the object ball getting hit square on and then it taking up the opposite spin of the cue ball, one video and it's done, just one, it's not much to ask and you have proved it. I don't know how you can resist that offer. What ever you think of the video I put up, even though a couple weren't hit square on, there was still no spin transfer, why was that? Can you explain that to me please you seem to know the answer so let's have it.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

Not off cushions Biggie, I did type that, come on now, jeez it's hard work . Put up a link of anyone , doesn't have to be your hero, showing side being played, the object ball getting hit square on and then it taking up the opposite spin of the cue ball, one video and it's done, just one, it's not much to ask and you have proved it. I don't know how you can resist that offer. What ever you think of the video I put up, even though a couple weren't hit square on, there was still no spin transfer, why was that? Can you explain that to me please you seem to know the answer so let's have it.

Did you actually watch the video?

#Speechless.

But you don't need video, it's obvious to anyone who plays. Balls spin into pockets, balls get spat out by pockets. Balls cling to cushions if you play with inside.

We really shouldn't be having this conversation mate. If you're going to start probing dr dave, you should do him the courtesy of learning some of this stuff before you do.

[golferson123]

so you can save any attitude crap for someone who cares. well mbs i do care and it hurts that i dont insult you but do understand you! its not hard to disagree and not insult others me included. i love the back and forth but insults are not the answer it just kills the topic. please dont reply to my post if it offends as i have no wish to sour our relationship lol

[vmax4steve]

Thanks for telling me how to swerve a ball - i had no idea.

You can also make balls go when you can't quite get to the potting angle eg when two balls are frozen together. You catch aim slightly thicker or thinner, as the side changes the potting angle.

It's quite clear I'm showing how side spin works along the cloth and all you do is sarcasm. And you don't need any side to squeeze a touching offset plant either, another thing that Dr. dave is wrong about as all his videos showing all this throw is with balls that are touching and striking the first ball at the wrong angle plain ball is ensuring squeeze and making sure the pot is missed and then with side the ball swerves to contact at the right angle and lo and behold the ball goes in.
Do your own experiments rather than go on and on and on about Dr. Dave's video evidence using side to prove squeeze and getting it all tits up.
He and you are confused about the squeeze effect and how balls that are touching move together and push the last ball in the set offline before they actually break apart, you both think it's all to do with side when it isn't.

[Ramon]

the shot is called a cheat shot, terminology used in the 70s so called because you can create an angle that does not exist although the transfer of side is somewhat debatable the spin on the cue ball coupled with the friction pulls the ob one way or the other, there is no swerve effect as the accuracy is mainly for close in shots and the cb would not have time to recover, sorry but mbs is correct but his attitude is not, sorry mbs but i implored mb to calm it is i feared his valuable contributions would be lost and i fear you are on the same track

excellent post !!

[Ramon]

I get the feeling that this entire argument may be just a simple difference in semantics. I think anyone who has read my posts has likely inferred my position on the matter, but just to be clear about that...

I believe that when side is played on the cue ball, that side will have an effect on the object ball such that the trajectory of the object will be different than it would have been if exactly the same contact point had been struck and the same stroke had been played but for hitting centerball instead. I have seen no evidence that the object will swerve from this "transferred side" (my term, you may use another if you see fit) in a similar manner to a cue ball swerving in its path when it has been struck with side.

The effect is there...the object ball will travel to a different place than it would have if it had been struck centerball and hit in the same contact point, but there will be no noticeable "swerve" in the path that the object ball takes.

I further believe that some of the "transferred spin" (again, my term) may be retained within the object ball so as to have an effect as to how the object ball will bounce off the jaw of a cushion. The duration of this spin retention is likely only mere fractions of a second so as an example, the black ball struck from off spot must travel to the pocket within the short span of perhaps one-quarter second for this effect to have any significance....i.e., this small effect can make the difference between a stroke "rattling the jaws" and bouncing out of a pocket, or "wiping its feet" and going into the pocket when the Black strikes exactly the same point of the jaw of the pocket in both cases.

I have attempted to be as clear in that definition as possible. You are welcome to agree or not.

Players (in this forum/in the club/everywhere/even some coaches) have always different opinions when it comes down to this topic, tbh.
Which makes it so interesting.

Although , there is always some natural deflection there (depending on player's technique and the cue he's using/ and the conditions). Vmax already mentioned this btw .
Not to mention , the distance between CB an OB . which is very important, imo.

At the end , I think everyone should find his own way in his game . Specially when it coems to useing side.
by hard work and practice, i do believe that player is able to make the necessary adjustments.

S Hendry's cue deflected like hell. But he won 7 world title with it.

just my 2cnts. :snooker:

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

so you can save any attitude crap for someone who cares. well mbs i do care and it hurts that i dont insult you but do understand you! its not hard to disagree and not insult others me included. i love the back and forth but insults are not the answer it just kills the topic. please dont reply to my post if it offends as i have no wish to sour our relationship lol

Relax mate. Bantz innit?

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

It's quite clear I'm showing how side spin works along the cloth and all you do is sarcasm. And you don't need any side to squeeze a touching offset plant either, another thing that Dr. dave is wrong about as all his videos showing all this throw is with balls that are touching and striking the first ball at the wrong angle plain ball is ensuring squeeze and making sure the pot is missed and then with side the ball swerves to contact at the right angle and lo and behold the ball goes in.
Do your own experiments rather than go on and on and on about Dr. Dave's video evidence using side to prove squeeze and getting it all tits up.
He and you are confused about the squeeze effect and how balls that are touching move together and push the last ball in the set offline before they actually break apart, you both think it's all to do with side when it isn't.

Yikes!

So, me, dr dave and millions of players worldwide are confused about what happens when balls collide. On the other hand, is vmax, and his swerve and billiards videos.

Wow, this could change the game of pocket billiards forever!



Ps can i have a translator for vmax's post please? And someone to explain how it relates to the discussion? Ta.

[Catch 22]

There's plenty of time for the ball to swerve and come back, especially if the cue ball is spinning in the same direction as the nap, you'll notice this on your cushion experiments. The swerve shot where the butt is jacked up in the air just accentuates the swerve effect that happens every time the cue ball is struck off centre.
In the shot shown here the aim is offset to completely miss the object ball in order to go around the blocking ball, and the cue ball deflects to the right and comes back onto the correct line about a foot past the blocking ball and from that point it then goes straight to hit the object ball.
In normal shots with side the offset is minimal as the swerve is minimal but enough to miss the pot if you don't allow for it, so you aim a bit thicker or thinner and not to miss the object ball completely, but sometimes it's neccessary to aim to miss the pot to make the pot.

Nursery cannons are played along the cushion and mainly use little double kisses to keep the balls together. Ain't no side going on here

He was showing me nursery cannons away from the cushion ...it was just a demonstration . But there is definetly something in it because having the three balls in the same position and playing the cannons with left or right side made a big difference on how the object balls moved .

Was like voodoo

[itsnoteasy]

When I first saw this I thought it looked ok, but the more I look at it, is the blue ball checking off the cushion? I've gone all cock eyed watching videos about balls with side I can hardly see, I will let the younger crowd with decent eyes decide.
https://youtu.be/xehWEG6ofac
I should add if it isn't it bloody well should be if side is transferred lol.