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

[Catch 22]

Slowed the shot down to .25speed and also paused it at the contact point and the cueball is almost perfectly behind the red from the pocket and in fact he actually over-cut the red a bit but to give you your due it appears as if he 'threw' the red into the right jaw. Every player uses this type of shot all the time but I still didn't see the red alter course but it may have had a slight gear effect as there was a slight cut at point of impact so one could argue there's either a gear effect which takes the object ball off at an angle or else whatever you mean by the term 'kick' which shouldn't be used in this context unless you really believe Wilson played a kick to pot the ball.

This is what people have been trying to say for most of this thread .. At the point of impact the spinning cueball will cut the OB at a different angle than it would if there was no spin on the CB

Nobody is saying the OB swerves ....and I don't think anyone thinks the red is carrying any type of spin on it while traveling to the pocket

It's just at the very moment the white contacts the red ...the spin on the white sends the red off on a different line (no spin transfer or anything ...the red is not spinning at all ...it was simply sent along a different path due to the spin on the white )

[Little Reggie]

If the OB had transferred side on it then it would have curved with that transferred LH side as he hit the cueball with RH. That OB went directly in a straight line to the pocket whereas if there was such a thing as transferred side it should have curved, however slightly, to the left. It wasn't transferred side that made that red ball but he did over-cook the side on the cueball a bit and almost missed the pot to the right. So even at the pro level you have to be careful using tons of side.

You don't believe in side xfer but then insist it should make the OB swerve if it does exist; bizarre! What are you on about? Barry Stark talks about extreme side kicking the OB over in his video when he pots the unpottable blue; that's the whole point of side xfer. He does not claim the OB should then swerve. It's a deliberate kick to make the OB behave in a non-normal way.

Left hand side on the Cb = a kick of the object ball to the right and vice-versa.

[travisbickle]

If the OB had transferred side on it then it would have curved with that transferred LH side as he hit the cueball with RH. That OB went directly in a straight line to the pocket whereas if there was such a thing as transferred side it should have curved, however slightly, to the left. It wasn't transferred side that made that red ball but he did over-cook the side on the cueball a bit and almost missed the pot to the right. So even at the pro level you have to be careful using tons of side.

I really dont know what to say.
You surely can see the red is heading for the far jaw and probably missing, then ends up hitting the near jaw, and you say it was due to him over doing the side!!

[itsnoteasy]

Slowed the shot down to .25speed and also paused it at the contact point and the cueball is almost perfectly behind the red from the pocket and in fact he actually over-cut the red a bit but to give you your due it appears as if he 'threw' the red into the right jaw. Every player uses this type of shot all the time but I still didn't see the red alter course but it may have had a slight gear effect as there was a slight cut at point of impact so one could argue there's either a gear effect which takes the object ball off at an angle or else whatever you mean by the term 'kick' which shouldn't be used in this context unless you really believe Wilson played a kick to pot the ball.

Well that was a hell of a load of pages to come to an agreement.

[jonny66]

Keep thinking this thread is about another Roy

[Ramon]

Well that was a hell of a load of pages to come to an agreement.

agreement ??

How about Vmax than??? He's still out there and keeps an eye on us.

[Ramon]

This is what people have been trying to say for most of this thread .. At the point of impact the spinning cueball will cut the OB at a different angle than it would if there was no spin on the CB

Nobody is saying the OB swerves ....and I don't think anyone thinks the red is carrying any type of spin on it while traveling to the pocket

It's just at the very moment the white contacts the red ...the spin on the white sends the red off on a different line (no spin transfer or anything ...the red is not spinning at all ...it was simply sent along a different path due to the spin on the white )

Lol , unless you're David Copperfield , of cours !!

On another note, Looks like Terry is deadly serious and pretty sure about his case.

I'm start to thinking we may be wrong. :snooker:

[Ramon]

Keep thinking this thread is about another Roy

Good post !!

[Ramon]

I really dont know what to say.
You surely can see the red is heading for the far jaw and probably missing, then ends up hitting the near jaw, and you say it was due to him over doing the side!!

Neither do I my friend !!

But i enjoy reading your posts .

[Ramon]

Sorry, I missed that '3:06' the first time. I'll fall on my sword later as it's suppertime

Take your time Terry ,

No rush !!

[itsnoteasy]

agreement ??

How about vmax than??? He's still out there and keeps an eye on us.

shhhhhh !!

[Ramon]

shhhhhh !!

Good point !!

And good night guys .

Saturday night ,So , careful with using side. !! :snooker:

[sealer]

So to sum up:

1. Kick is a result of incidental increased friction between 2 balls
2. Wilson shot is kick - no way he played this
3. Selby shot is swerve
4. On an occasion due to increased friction(kick) there is a magnified throw effect on the object ball that is caused by side on cue ball
5. All other times due to really small contact point between balls and very little friction side induced throw can be discarded as negligible even if it means everything for some really funny guys
6. Pool players are a bit scruffy so their balls are usually dirty and are not polished properly so they throw a bit more
7. Experiments are being carried out by snooker experts to put this to bed but the methodology is a joke so we need more time
8. Some people have zero understanding of what they read which makes the discussions lively and enjoyable to read

[jonny66]

so to sum up:

1. Kick is a result of incidental increased friction between 2 balls
2. Wilson shot is kick - no way he played this
3. Selby shot is swerve
4. On an occasion due to increased friction(kick) there is a magnified throw effect on the object ball that is caused by side on cue ball
5. All other times due to really small contact point between balls and very little friction side induced throw can be discarded as negligible even if it means everything for some really funny guys
6. Pool players are a bit scruffy so their balls are usually dirty and are not polished properly so they throw a bit more
7. Experiments are being carried out by snooker experts to put this to bed but the methodology is a joke so we need more time
8. Some people have zero understanding of what they read which makes the discussions lively and enjoyable to read

but what happens when balls collide?

[Byrom]

but what happens when balls collide?