3/4 pink

[barrywhite]

I'm with Leo on this, just seems pointless thinking is this a 3/4 or half ball shot, just get down and pot the thing !!
If you are half decent you will just know the potting angle, all this just seems totally unnecessary

All of it is pointless unless you're a beginner. After five years you should have banked every angle including the really acute pot into the fall of the middle bag or the black off it's spot with the cue ball in the D. As for the reaction angle of the CB, that will depend on what mustard you put on it, so there are countless reaction angles or points of rebound off the cush. I get the whole let's see what happens in general using diagrams but if you are an experienced player and don't know what happens in general and need diagrams, lordy.

[barrywhite]

Ray Reardon's book Classic Snooker, he uses what he calls his 'rectangle theory', where he visualises smaller rectangles within the large rectangle of the table when escaping snookers and plays the cue ball along those lines.
There are many diagrams in the book that explain it.

I use this method and can escape from all sorts of snookers using three or four cushions quite well, although the one cushion escape I find really difficult.

That's because rectangles rarely come up, but diamonds do. The time when a rectangle or quad comes up is when the angle of incidence and reflection are 45 degrees; the path of the CB then makes a square or ninety degrees, i.e. if it should make a quad if it comes off three cushions and rolls over it's first path to first cushion. And if you think in rectangles, no wonder you are missing a simple reflection angle one cushion escape. Symmetry, it's all about symmetry. If you're going to image a shape, use a diamond and think reflection (unless you're imparting side). The trick to escaping a snooker using just one cushion and no side is to image a line to the cushion whose angle created to the cushion by the CB is exactly the same as that angle off the cushion to the OB. This contact point is the point of symmetry. Hit this point and you should always escape off neutral cushions. Unless your cushions throw or square up (as J6 hinted). Then you have to accomodate this effect by hitting the cushion slightly before the symmetry point (sliding cushions/blocks) or slightly after the symmetry point (squaring cushions/blocks). I may have got this the wrong way round; J6 can correct if so.

[DeanH]

rectangle/diamond maybe we should say parallelograms

Reardon called it the rectangle, if only that vid worked
If I recall, Reardon did say it does not worked with one-cush angles, but for two+

[barrywhite]

rectangle/diamond maybe we should say parallelograms

Reardon called it the rectangle, if only that vid worked
If I recall, Reardon did say it does not worked with one-cush angles, but for two+

Diamonds should work with one cushion unless the cushions aren't neutral because a CB off one cushion creates two sides of the diamond. hehe! The angle of incidence (CB to cushion) is still the same as the angle of reaction (cushion to OB). Diamonds lad!

[j6uk]

I'm with Leo on this, just seems pointless thinking is this a 3/4 or half ball shot, just get down and pot the thing !!
If you are half decent you will just know the potting angle, all this just seems totally unnecessary

All of it is pointless unless you're a beginner. After five years you should have banked every angle including the really acute pot into the fall of the middle bag or the black off it's spot with the cue ball in the D. As for the reaction angle of the CB, that will depend on what mustard you put on it, so there are countless reaction angles or points of rebound off the cush. I get the whole let's see what happens in general using diagrams but if you are an experienced player and don't know what happens in general and need diagrams, lordy.

i know many an odd 70+ breaker who dont know what iv been showing so far. and ten years on their subconscious is still missing these shots, loosing the white and cueing off the cush most of the time..
plenty of time to play but no time to study

[barrywhite]

i know many an odd 70+ breaker who dont know what iv been showing so far. and ten years on their subconscious is still missing these shots, loosing the white and cueing off the cush most of the time..
plenty of time to play but no time to study

A lot of folk didn't twig geometry in maths or maths at all, so fair play mate. I was a bit negative and dismissive. Your advice is sound.

[DeanH]

Diamonds should work with one cushion unless the cushions aren't neutral because a CB off one cushion creates two sides of the diamond. hehe! The angle of incidence (CB to cushion) is still the same as the angle of reaction (cushion to OB). Diamonds lad!

yep simple, law of reflection, never said it wasn't.
as you say as long as the cushions are neutral and you apply no side
where Reardon is talking about the two cushions, the line you send the CB to the first cushion is repeated and paralleled after the second cushion return; he calls it rectangle, you call it diamond, shrug shoulders

[jrc750]

... he calls it rectangle, you call it diamond, shrug shoulders

Only a rectangle if 90 degree corners

[DeanH]

Only a rectangle if 90 degree corners

of course, basic geometry

:wink:

[j6uk]

A lot of folk didn't twig geometry in maths or maths at all, so fair play mate. I was a bit negative and dismissive. Your advice is sound.

me too b, i was just lucky to be around some of the old faces of the past who showed me a few moves, not that it really sunk in at the time cus i was too busy trying to be good. but i remembered what they said
its not my info or advice, just moves and a way of seeing the table

[avruga]

i would be more than happy to get into it and see some of your diagrams, but id like to know what you see as a 3/4 ball. the image above, how do you see it?

Yep, that is how I see a 3/4 ball. The centre of the CB is aimed half-way between the centre and edge of the OB.

[j6uk]

Yep, that is how I see a 3/4 ball. The centre of the CB is aimed half-way between the centre and edge of the OB.

yeah thats what i see too, but when you line it up on the table you don't see 3/4 as my pic illustrates?
do you really see this shot as 2/3 like the pics bellow?

[barrywhite]

Only a rectangle if 90 degree corners

Yep, and the cue ball is only round if it's not oval. Although round is a special case of oval or vice-versa?

Hang on, perfectly round balls don't exist, so when folk talk about 3/4 pinks are they really talking about 3/4 ovals? The exact shape of each being unique and indeterminate?

[j6uk]

Hi J6.

Thanks for starting a great thread and for the videos - I look forward to more on the other balls and angles.

However like a few others have commented on this thread I don't think the positioning of the 1/2 and 3/4 ball pinks is quite right - the cuts all appear to be too thin for me. Shouldn't the pink be on a grid of thirds rather than quarters? Looking at the ghost ball over the table a third of the way between pink and blue along the cushion is right for 1/2 ball - similarly two thirds of the way to the blue pocket for 3/4 ball. The maths for this are almost perfectly a third and two thirds too given that the deflection of a 3/4 ball is 14.5 degrees and 1/2 ball is 30 degrees. Please try it and let me know if you think I've misunderstood.

Cheers.

hi avruga,

just to address your original post again.
iv taken a still from the first video on this thread with a pic of an actual 3/4 ball.
then the next two pics iv moved the white over 1/2 ball from the 3/4 in my video still to give you a more realistic view of what a 2/3 ball shot would look like on the table

3/4


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2/3



i can only think that you may have miss placed the white when setting up the shot

[vmax4steve]

That's because rectangles rarely come up, but diamonds do. The time when a rectangle or quad comes up is when the angle of incidence and reflection are 45 degrees; the path of the CB then makes a square or ninety degrees, i.e. if it should make a quad if it comes off three cushions and rolls over it's first path to first cushion. And if you think in rectangles, no wonder you are missing a simple reflection angle one cushion escape. Symmetry, it's all about symmetry. If you're going to image a shape, use a diamond and think reflection (unless you're imparting side). The trick to escaping a snooker using just one cushion and no side is to image a line to the cushion whose angle created to the cushion by the CB is exactly the same as that angle off the cushion to the OB. This contact point is the point of symmetry. Hit this point and you should always escape off neutral cushions. Unless your cushions throw or square up (as J6 hinted). Then you have to accomodate this effect by hitting the cushion slightly before the symmetry point (sliding cushions/blocks) or slightly after the symmetry point (squaring cushions/blocks). I may have got this the wrong way round; J6 can correct if so.

Who on earth can think of all this when faced with a snooker, I've not studied Euclid but I was pretty handy at technical drawing. Rather than pooh pooh a six time world champion about what a rectangle actually is, visualise a four sided geometric shape within the confines of the rectangle of the table, where one of the lines is intersected by the ball on, and play the shot, side may be needed to make the shape but this is all explained in his book, that I no longer have but read cover to cover many years ago.

Does one have to explain every single little thing on this forum or can I just give general advice and let people experiment and find out for themselves.