using side when not necessary

[hotpot]

No im talking about open play without using the cushions .

[Malachi-b]

The cueball path is not changed at all with using side there is not enough contact area between the white and the object ball for side to have any affect on the white after impact the area between the white and object ball is too smooth in comparison to for example the cushion which has loads of friction.

[hotpot]

Put an object ball on the left hand black pocket near the cush and try to screw up three table avoiding the cush . Its possible with right hand side , where it wont be centre ball or with left hand side .

[Malachi-b]

thats because it touches a cushion which then the contact area is large enough for the side to work. the white is not affected until it hits the cushion

[jrc750]

Ide like to hear Terry's opinion on Willie's shot, because surely Willie cant be wrong especially with Steve Davis hanging around

[Malachi-b]

he cant be wrong i mean how many titles did he win... hmmm.... what hes saying there is not true the white is NOT affected until it hits a cushion the contact area between the white and object ball are just not large enough to have any affect on the white.

[hotpot]

I mean screwing back and avoiding the cushion muck .

If the white is spinning after the cush then it must be spinning before it hits it .

In my opinion you can definitely alter the path of the white when using side in open play . And by trying the shot i mentioned it proves it .

[Malachi-b]

your just making the shot more difficult for yourself by using side in open play why use side when you can use center ball striking it makes no sense, and yeah the white is spinning before it hits the cushion but the contact time between the white and object ball is not enough to alter the white balls path where as the contact area between the white and the cushion is enough for the side to take affect. read any snooker book and it will tell you the exact same thing.

[hotpot]

Well Malachi i dont want to argue muck , but just go and try some half ball pinks and screwing up avoiding the side cushions and you will see that you can create angles using one side that you cant with the other .

No ones saying its easier of course its more difficult , the argument is can you create angles and widen or narrow the cue ball in open play by using side , and i will stick by my opinion that you can , whether the side is transferred to the object ball or not .

[Nugget]

Side can have an effect on the path of the cue ball without hitting the cushion. I think it's in the Jimmy White Masterclass book, Jimmy talks about screwing a straight red in down the side cushion into one of the black pockets. Into the left corner (as the player would be looking), screwing with left hand side will cause the white to drift to the right, towards the middle of the table against the nap.

I would like to hear some other opinions on Willie's shot, though.

[Acrowot]

Side does make the cue ball go offline, with the help of the nap, but does not transfer to the object ball.

This is video to show it does not transfer to object ball and also, Steve Davis has a video, which I cannot find at the moment, show it does not transer to the object ball.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B4f_...20DA7&playnext
:snooker:

[Terry Davidson]

Unfortunately, a lot of players (some of them very good) believe side is transferred to the object ball and obviously Willie Thorne is one of them.

However, I've proven to myself that there is no side transferred unless the balls are very sticky and dirty and even then it's minimal.

Now, that said, if you set up a 3/4 blue ball into the middle and pot that blue AT THE EXACT SAME SPOT (centre pocket exactly) using right and left siding alternately and let the cueball travel about 3ft after contact, you will note a very slight difference in where the cueball ends up. Nic, myself and Alex Borg experimented with this the last time I was over on a slow table with a heavy nap and we got just under 2" difference. (It's absolutely vital the blue hits the exact same spot on the pocket every time)

We came to the conclusion the difference was because of the very slight difference the cueball was approaching BOB when using side, just the same as when a player cannot quite see the object ball to pot it and 'throws' the object ball into the pocket.

In the case of Willie here, confirm he is hitting the exact same spot of the pocket every time (I didn't bother to watch the video as I've practiced with Willie in his prime quite a few times and I know what he does, and he doesn't pocket the ball centre pocket every time).

Then, ask yourself this question...if using side around the black when the cueball is not hitting a cushion is the correct way to go then how come Willie only ever won one ranking tournament whereas players who don't use side (Steve Davis, Stephen Hendry, Ronnie, etc. etc.) win them ALL?

Using side when it's not necessary just complicates the shot (even an easy one) and is a fool's errand and it will cause you to miss more pots.

To get the exact same effect it's a heck of a lot easier to use centre-ball and use one side or the other of the pocket just as the pros do in most cases.

One other point...with extreme bottom or top with a touch of side IT IS possible to alter the course of the cueball without it hitting a cushion as Jimmy demonstates when he curves the cueball in an arc, but this shot takes a lot of power and is the effect of the nap on a cueball that is spinning rapidly. BUT, even Jimmie doesn't use this type of shot in a serious match since, to quote Ray Reardon, 'if you have to use a lot of power on a shot then you've either made a mistake or else you're choosing the wrong shot'.

Terry

[bongo]

Effect of cue-ball side spin on object and cue-ball.

This is a very complicated subject and one which I have posted on before, and I actually disagree with what I have posted a couple of years ago when there was a big thread. However, here is what I think and certainly I won't be changing my mind again as I feel I have the experience to answer this question properly.

On dead straight shots where you strike the object ball perfectly centrally then however much side spin you put onto the cue-ball will have no effect on the direction of the cue-ball (proved in Nic Barrow's DVD).

On angled shots there certainly won't be a marked difference in the cue-ball angle of travel away from the object ball if you strike at EXACTLY the same pace in two shots, both of which are from the exact same position, one perfect centre ball on the cue-ball NO side spin at all (almost impossible to to but we will assume it happens) and then on the second shot only side is applied (no stun which could affect the shot).

However, as Nic Barrow points out I think in one of his books, there is a very slight difference, and I mean very slight, in the cue-ball's angle of travel off the object ball between no side and playing with side, if playing with running side off a particular angled shot, the cue-ball's angle off the object ball will be slightly wider then normal. This will be of no use really to snooker players but in billiards it can be very useful were certain shots, such as in-offs which are just a little wide, can be made by using running side and good billiard players will understand what I mean. Also, for billiard players when playing close cannons (nursery cannons) the use of side on the cue-ball can very slightly alter the angle of either red or object white to keep the perfect cannon sequence going.

Now then, what Willie Thorne was doing in the video was most probably throwing the object ball into the pocket. On angled shots by playing with running side (whether that is right of left side will depend on the shot) you can strike the object ball THICKER and you will still pot the ball. Here is an example. Put the blue on its spot and cue-ball on brown spot, this is a difficult shot to pot it into the top left pocket (as viewed from baulk) but still will demonstrate what I mean. By striking the blue thicker (as the two balls are touching at contact they will probably be contacting each other too thick for the pot), you can still pot the blue by playing with running side as the cue-ball throws the object ball back into the pocket, even when without side it would be much too thick. This is achieved WITHOUT swerve on the cue-ball. This is useful for holding the cue-ball for position by playing thicker with running side. The opposite also is true, check side can throw the object ball into the pocket when you strike the object ball thinner than normal. This all needs experimenting as difference cues and cue actions, table conditions, balls and even the shots played and how they are played can have different effects on the amount object ball is thrown into the pocket.

I will make clear that this doesn't mean that side is imparted to the object ball, as that, in 99% of cases is impossible. But what you can do is alter the direction of the object ball by imparting side to the cue-ball.

So no, side cannot be applied to the object ball (in 99% of shots) but the object ball's direction can be altered through side on the cue-ball.

However, read this and understand it but don't get too worried about the theories about it. It is useful to be able to alter the object ball's direction through cue-ball side but don't get all tangled up in theory.

I hope this makes things clearer for you, and your comments will be appreciated.

bongo :snooker:

[Mike P]

I agree that the last thing you should use is side on the CB. Most positioning, even when playing off a cushion can be accomplished with hitting the cue ball along the centre axis. When using running side you can contact a red thicker, so that you don’t cause the CB to collide with another ball. Also sometimes contacting the red thicker (with side) helps eliminate the CB running away from the desired position. I am not certain if I have explained this properly, but in both cases you have to be accurate with the amount of throw transferred to the object ball. Sometimes while watching a match, I hear the commentator mention that they are amazed at the amount of bounce off the top cushion. I attribute this to the CB having side on it. I could be wrong but I believe that a rolling CB that also has side spin on it, seems to travel a little further. Perhaps this is what Willie inadvertently is trying to describe. Although on the shot he is attempting, I don’t think side is necessary.

Mike

[craigian]

hey guys, the first shot in this video has always confused me. to me, side doesnt affect the cue ball without hitting a cushion at all, so i don't understand what willie thorne is on about here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMKZoPxAX2k

thanks for this clip! this is a perfect exactly of why i posted this blog in the first place