Myths and lies

[trying]

He'll be getting a knock on his door very soon by the Boys in Blue if he carries on ...........as you say . ....It's all in writing and i have an abusive and threatening message saved on my phone .

I actually like listening to the different point of views , and agree with the majority of his comments in relation to Cuemakers . [ We all remember ' Thaigate ' !!! ]

But for the life of me , i've no idea why he has to be continually rude . I'm sure he's educated enough to put his point across without resulting in this behaviour .

Is the original thaigate thread still on here?

[Gomaomine]

What a deranged person he is …

……he’s just threatened me on Facebook messenger , and offered to smack me round the head with a piece of desert ironwood whilst calling me a cxxx!

How charming

he claims you called him a pedo so that evens it out i guess! 🤣

[Neil Taperell]

Didn't use that exact word but something similar ......not my proudest moment , but i don't like being threatened and called a ' See you next Tuesday '


As you can see from all my posts , there was nothing threatening or abusive in them ..........Clearly , he doesn't like being told what to do and took offence to me asking him from refraining from using bad language or derogatory remarks to other TSF Members .

And this has been borne out by a few subsequent posts from Members where he has been abusive for no reason .

[Neil Taperell]

This is what i received last night on Facebook Messenger TSF.png

[Delphi]

Is the original thaigate thread still on here?

Found it https://www.thesnookerforum.co.uk/bo...ues/36030-hand

[akofb]

New member here

I'm a member of a club with only 3 tables and a membership of about 80 people and the tables are always busy which is good and bad I guess. Not enough room in my house for a full-size but would definitely get one if I could. I did go to a 12 table club 2 weeks ago and all but 2 of the tables were being played on so I wouldn't say it's dying. I know the traffic in clubs goes up when there are tournaments on TV so that would have played a part. Another social club last night, just 2 tables but 12 people rotating and mixing in playing each other. I am lucky in that I have access to a table every day so I usually get half hour in at least. I should be better really

I've recently switched to Taom after using triangle for 25+ years. I'm not someone that miscues very much but after 1 month I've had 3 miscues using the Taom chalk so I'm still on the fence as to the quality of it. I shall persevere until I drop it and it rolls away from me under a table

[trying]

Found it https://www.thesnookerforum.co.uk/bo...ues/36030-hand

Thanks Delphi

[potters off with a cup of tea]

[itsnoteasy]

Found it https://www.thesnookerforum.co.uk/bo...ues/36030-hand

I have just re read that thread, jeez it was exciting but the ending was all a bit tame, 8/10 would read again.
Things I found interesting
1,Trevor White, what a guy!
2, GeordieDS, some great posts
3, Seeing some of the members who are no longer with us, a couple in particular, brought a tear to my eye.
4, Miss Terry D, the man had the patience of a saint, I hope he's well.
5,Did anything really change? As far as I know all the cue makers are still plying their trade. I think Jason was true to his word and changed his badges.
6, Was that Andy Travis cue riddle ever solved?

[vmax]

New member here

I'm a member of a club with only 3 tables and a membership of about 80 people and the tables are always busy which is good and bad I guess. Not enough room in my house for a full-size but would definitely get one if I could. I did go to a 12 table club 2 weeks ago and all but 2 of the tables were being played on so I wouldn't say it's dying. I know the traffic in clubs goes up when there are tournaments on TV so that would have played a part. Another social club last night, just 2 tables but 12 people rotating and mixing in playing each other. I am lucky in that I have access to a table every day so I usually get half hour in at least. I should be better really

I've recently switched to Taom after using triangle for 25+ years. I'm not someone that miscues very much but after 1 month I've had 3 miscues using the Taom chalk so I'm still on the fence as to the quality of it. I shall persevere until I drop it and it rolls away from me under a table

I feel it's a sad state that people can't handle being called a muppet or a goon when having a discussion with someone who clearly believes he knows the score. The best thing is to do a little digging and refute any claims with hard evidence, and that doesn't include a manufacturers advertising narrative. If that doesn't work then you've said your piece and just stay out of the discussion when you know for sure that your view won't be recognised. We have too few members on here that simply log on and stay silent or simply ask questions that cannot be answered and dissapear

Wity said that it's static that causes kicks, yet back in the day with 100% woollen cloth there were very few kicks and no static at all because the balls don't pick up any, if they did there would be sparks between them on contact when the charge is released. Modern cloths have man made fibres included in the weave, if this is in fact carbon than there also will be no static and there isn't because even though aramith balls have their deficiencies they also do not pick up any static, they would be even less fit for purpose if they did and all throughout billiard history the search for a substitute for ivory was for a material that didn't pick up any static because the game would be impossible otherwise.

I distinctly remember Steve Davis in the 80's on tv doing tests on balls trying to discover what caused kicks, in one test he spun up a polishing mop on a drill and applied it to a snooker ball, tested the ball with a multimeter afterwards and it registered no voltage at all. The tests concluded that chalk dust or dirt on the contact point between the two balls was to blame but this was pre aramith and things changed a lot when these balls became the ball of choice when super crystalate balls were no longer made.
The aramith ball is made from a phenolic resin that is softer, it therefore can't be so highly polished, so therefore it's surface is rougher and liable to not only pick up more chalk and dirt but also when squeaky clean a patch that isn't as polished as the rest of the ball will give a poor contact due to increased friction. You can't see it with the naked eye but under an electron microscope it would be clear and obvious.
We must also wonder why a phenolic resin has differeing densities leading to balls that are heavier than others, Premier Balls as opposed to Tournament Champion balls, both made by aramith, both the same regulation size and yet different weights This was never the case with super crystalate as all sets were within a three gramme tolerance, my own personal set is within a two gramme tolerance. My conclusion is that the resin was of a higher standard because there were never any sets on the market that were lighter or heavier and I don't think that the Composite Ball Company threw away thousands of substandard snooker balls every year, once made they can't be unmade as it's a poured resin that sets due to a chemical reaction.

This is why the cloths became so much finer, to cut down the resistance between the balls, there was a slight improvement, this is why table heaters became the norm to remove as much moisture from the cloth as possible, again a slight improvement, they started using a certain polish on the balls, another slight improvement and the latest thing is taom chalk, an improvement once again and all these things put together make these balls tolerable rather than the kick fest they were when first introduced.
They're still crap though

[Cue crafty]

New member here

I'm a member of a club with only 3 tables and a membership of about 80 people and the tables are always busy which is good and bad I guess. Not enough room in my house for a full-size but would definitely get one if I could. I did go to a 12 table club 2 weeks ago and all but 2 of the tables were being played on so I wouldn't say it's dying. I know the traffic in clubs goes up when there are tournaments on TV so that would have played a part. Another social club last night, just 2 tables but 12 people rotating and mixing in playing each other. I am lucky in that I have access to a table every day so I usually get half hour in at least. I should be better really

I've recently switched to Taom after using triangle for 25+ years. I'm not someone that miscues very much but after 1 month I've had 3 miscues using the Taom chalk so I'm still on the fence as to the quality of it. I shall persevere until I drop it and it rolls away from me under a table

Hello, welcome to TSF - I'm not sure VMAX meant to reply to you with his post so don't worry, I think your hello could easily be lost in this thread and probably worth cut n pasting it into the new members section which is under the forums headers, "newbies & introductions. Cheers.

[itsnoteasy]

I feel it's a sad state that people can't handle being called a muppet or a goon when having a discussion with someone who clearly believes he knows the score. The best thing is to do a little digging and refute any claims with hard evidence, and that doesn't include a manufacturers advertising narrative. If that doesn't work then you've said your piece and just stay out of the discussion when you know for sure that your view won't be recognised. We have too few members on here that simply log on and stay silent or simply ask questions that cannot be answered and dissapear

Wity said that it's static that causes kicks, yet back in the day with 100% woollen cloth there were very few kicks and no static at all because the balls don't pick up any, if they did there would be sparks between them on contact when the charge is released. Modern cloths have man made fibres included in the weave, if this is in fact carbon than there also will be no static and there isn't because even though aramith balls have their deficiencies they also do not pick up any static, they would be even less fit for purpose if they did and all throughout billiard history the search for a substitute for ivory was for a material that didn't pick up any static because the game would be impossible otherwise.

I distinctly remember Steve Davis in the 80's on tv doing tests on balls trying to discover what caused kicks, in one test he spun up a polishing mop on a drill and applied it to a snooker ball, tested the ball with a multimeter afterwards and it registered no voltage at all. The tests concluded that chalk dust or dirt on the contact point between the two balls was to blame but this was pre aramith and things changed a lot when these balls became the ball of choice when super crystalate balls were no longer made.
The aramith ball is made from a phenolic resin that is softer, it therefore can't be so highly polished, so therefore it's surface is rougher and liable to not only pick up more chalk and dirt but also when squeaky clean a patch that isn't as polished as the rest of the ball will give a poor contact due to increased friction. You can't see it with the naked eye but under an electron microscope it would be clear and obvious.
We must also wonder why a phenolic resin has differeing densities leading to balls that are heavier than others, Premier Balls as opposed to Tournament Champion balls, both made by aramith, both the same regulation size and yet different weights This was never the case with super crystalate as all sets were within a three gramme tolerance, my own personal set is within a two gramme tolerance. My conclusion is that the resin was of a higher standard because there were never any sets on the market that were lighter or heavier and I don't think that the Composite Ball Company threw away thousands of substandard snooker balls every year, once made they can't be unmade as it's a poured resin that sets due to a chemical reaction.

This is why the cloths became so much finer, to cut down the resistance between the balls, there was a slight improvement, this is why table heaters became the norm to remove as much moisture from the cloth as possible, again a slight improvement, they started using a certain polish on the balls, another slight improvement and the latest thing is taom chalk, an improvement once again and all these things put together make these balls tolerable rather than the kick fest they were when first introduced.
They're still crap though

I'm not in the static camp, I think it's just a simple fact of chalk off the tip or collected from the bed while rolling gets between the two balls and causes a bad contact. Chalk from the tip could be due to overloading the tip so that when the cue ball is struck, chalk gets compacted between tip and ball and some may stick to the ball. In the pro game it could be what Vmax says. In clubs and home tables balls handled by fingers will be easily sticky enough to pick up a lot of chalk and cause kicks. Why taom reduces these and it does, I don't know, maybe it's so much finer and that's why you don't see the streaks and the table looks cleaner, it would be really interesting to know what, if anything, is in taom compared with "normal" chalk.

[strobbekoen]

I've been playing with the same set of Aramith Tournament Champion balls for +10 years on my home table, on a thin cloth. I experienced more kicks on a new cloth/new balls than with a used one that hasn't been cleaned much at all. Which leads me to believe that a kick happens when the difference in the friction coefficient of the surfaces of the balls at point of contact are big. e.g. a polished super clean smooth surface making contact with a slightly contaminated surface.

edit: i should add that all is with the same chalk. so i dont believe its the type of chalk making a difference. in the end the purpose of chalk is to create grip (friction), so i think kick is a different friction between the balls. if a ball carrying chalk, or any contaminant, hits a ball with a low friction coefficient, the balls dont transfer the energy of motion equally.

[Cue crafty]

I have just re read that thread, jeez it was exciting but the ending was all a bit tame, 8/10 would read again.
Things I found interesting
1,Trevor White, what a guy!
2, GeordieDS, some great posts
3, Seeing some of the members who are no longer with us, a couple in particular, brought a tear to my eye.
4, Miss Terry D, the man had the patience of a saint, I hope he's well.
5,Did anything really change? As far as I know all the cue makers are still plying their trade. I think Jason was true to his word and changed his badges.
6, Was that Andy Travis cue riddle ever solved?

God bless Fred England and Hotpot. Had a message from Throtts the other week (hope you don't mind me saying mate) he's doing well and still playing. Byrom why am I still here? Can someone rub the lamp and let the Geni escape please.

[Starsky]

I have been playing with Taom for about 2 years now and since changing over I rarely get a kick , in fact I can’t even remember my last one . That’s after playing at different clubs with different cloths and tables . Some have radiators and some have wall heaters to add to the different conditions .
It makes no difference I still only get kicks on very rare occasions . The only time that changes is when I play anybody who uses traditional chalk .
Most of the players I play are a good to excellent standard and they have all changed for the same reasons .
Whatever it is what Taom has used in their chalk is working and for me it has nothing to do with friction or balls etc but just down to what residue is left on the balls from traditional chalks.

[Starsky]

I've been playing with the same set of Aramith Tournament Champion balls for +10 years on my home table, on a thin cloth. I experienced more kicks on a new cloth/new balls than with a used one that hasn't been cleaned much at all. Which leads me to believe that a kick happens when the difference in the friction coefficient of the surfaces of the balls at point of contact are big. e.g. a polished super clean smooth surface making contact with a slightly contaminated surface.

edit: i should add that all is with the same chalk. so i dont believe its the type of chalk making a difference. in the end the purpose of chalk is to create grip (friction), so i think kick is a different friction between the balls. if a ball carrying chalk, or any contaminant, hits a ball with a low friction coefficient, the balls dont transfer the energy of motion equally.

Maybe you’ve got a point , your theory adds up if you look at the pro game and all the kicks they used to get . New polished balls and new cloths are and were a matter of course but the only contaminant that would have been introduced would be chalk.
It’s no coincidence that since nearly all players on the pro tour have changed over to Taom kicks are nearly non existent to when Triangle was used .
So while I part agree I don’t agree that chalk isn’t making a difference .

Maybe you should try Taom to test your theory 😉