What do people think of Roy Chisholm's Snooker Secrets?

[jonny66]

It's a half drag shot, the sound of the shot seems ok and the ball has traveled well over an inch, if you played a stop shot, you would be left roughly a half ball black, the cue ball has run through to a thick three quarter ball. Just my opinion of course but in no way is that a full blown kick for me. I couldn't get that other pic upload site to work so it has to be this little picture

That would be right if he had hit the red full in the face, but he couldn't and he didn't, so the cue ball should have run further. It's not a massive kick, but it's a bad contact (same thing as far as I'm concerned) The main giveaway is the very thing were talking about, look how far the red gets thrown off line. When the white hits it it's lined up to miss to the left as we look at it, and it only just goes in off the opposite knuckle.

The "set it up, you will pot it" thing is irrelevant, I know I will and I have done many times.

My challenge to you is to hit the red that far off line of the pocket and pot it off the opposite jaw, because I can't do it, every time I pot these ones the white turns back before contact and the red goes nowhere near the opposite jaw. It's not a normal contact.

Is it impossible that someone who has played that shot a million times more than any of us have might be able to spot that?

[itsnoteasy]

If you watch , DT says " oh what a shot that is by the way" no mention of a bad contact or a kick, he then see KW point to the ball and ask for it to be cleaned, then after DT has seen this he says " he got a kick" . If that had been a kick I'm guessing he would have said that immediately, to me it looks like he changed his stance after the fact of KW pointing to the cue ball, his first impression of the shot was " what a shot that is by the way" I do admit it turns a lot but I have never played on slick cloths with table heaters and very hot tv light on them, I know Throtts has his table set up as close to pro specs as you can get and he doesn't see anything wrong with it, but to me it just sounds ok even thick contacts you can hear, kicks you can see and hear( on our club cloths).

[itsnoteasy]

I was trying to add a bit of humour - don't get the hump with me I do see your point but was just adding a bit extra to this tired debate myself. We call that shot a soft swerve over here in UK. Anyway ....I was just making a few points but what the hell you would argue with yourself I think. Snooker players are not blind to the effects of side/throw or deflection. The decent/half decent players know all about it when it comes to playing the shots even if they cant describe it they can do it and at the end of the day that is all that matters. I can talk all day long about my love of France, I love going and embroil myself in the culture of the place but I cant speak the language.

It does not matter what you read or what you do. It is just about making the pot and making the ball do what you want. For you to say 7 time world champion does not know what he is talking about is quite ludicrous really - I think you lost the argument from that moment onwards.

Ps I never noticed anyone playing pool on that video I posted - was she? Oh yes sorry she was ....my eyes were elsewhere forgive me.

I'm off to watch a film now its called Trolls ... Have you seen it?

Byrom, what on earth is that film all about, folk SPIN then THROW something what gave you that idea

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

Agreed Throtts and Byrom, snooker players KNOW what happens, it's just they learn by observation and trial and error not out of a text book, I do think a lot of them don't know theoretically what's happening but it doesn't stop them playing and knowing the results of shots. Jesus we are on here telling the seven times world champion at snooker he's a bozo, or whatever he was called, well I wish I was as much of a bozo as him. As the old saying goes, those that can ,do, those that can't , come on here and talk about it

Don't you think it's kinda important? Isn't it amateur hour to say "and he's hit the white roundy thing with the pointed wooden thing and played a half draggy thing, which caused the red roundy thing to sort of magically turn to the left and fall into that stringy thing"?

Time for snooker to leave the dark ages.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

That would be right if he had hit the red full in the face, but he couldn't and he didn't, so the cue ball should have run further. It's not a massive kick, but it's a bad contact (same thing as far as I'm concerned) The main giveaway is the very thing were talking about, look how far the red gets thrown off line. When the white hits it it's lined up to miss to the left as we look at it, and it only just goes in off the opposite knuckle.

The "set it up, you will pot it" thing is irrelevant, I know I will and I have done many times.

My challenge to you is to hit the red that far off line of the pocket and pot it off the opposite jaw, because I can't do it, every time I pot these ones the white turns back before contact and the red goes nowhere near the opposite jaw. It's not a normal contact.

Is it impossible that someone who has played that shot a million times more than any of us have might be able to spot that?

Have you actually been following the discussion?

[jonny66]

At least cockwomble had a mild charm, this guy is just being a dick for the sake of it.

[Catch 22]

I think and I hope you will agree with this Biggie ,and Vmax if I'm honest, it feels you two are that busy having a ding dong you aren't seeing that on a lot of these shots both things are happening, there is a bit of swerve and there is no doubt cut/ spin throw happening when the balls collide(just for Jonny) I have used it on balls I couldn't quite see, and they have been just behind the blocking ball so you couldn't swerve it enough for it to be swerve only, so the side had to have had an effect, but that doesn't mean there was no swerve, to me it means both things happened.

This. .

[DeanH]

I think and I hope you will agree with this Biggie ,and Vmax if I'm honest, it feels you two are that busy having a ding dong you aren't seeing that on a lot of these shots both things are happening, there is a bit of swerve and there is no doubt cut/ spin throw happening when the balls collide(just for Jonny) I have used it on balls I couldn't quite see, and they have been just behind the blocking ball so you couldn't swerve it enough for it to be swerve only, so the side had to have had an effect, but that doesn't mean there was no swerve, to me it means both things happened.

This. .

This.......

[jonny66]

You are both wrong. It was that

[Byrom]

I disagree about this and that .....I think

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

Three elements to every shot.

1. Deflection
2. Swerve
3. Throw.

I've never said otherwise. Some people have ALWAYS said otherwise.

[itsnoteasy]

You are both wrong. It was that

This........

[Byrom]

The real answer to everything in snooker is definitely almost positively maybe quite possibly probably perhaps just might be a combination of a few things

!. This
2. That
3. The other

maybe

[guernseygooner]

I'm interested to know the highest breaks of the people on this thread who are creaming over the physics of said shots as opposed to the ones who have put the work in over years and just know what do do.

Don't be shy

[Byrom]

I have had a few 20's

More regular 8 and 16 breaks