Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

Again you see only what you wish to see. I don't pivot, I compensate my aiming, the cue is parallel to the line I'm aiming down to allow for the initial deflection and subsequent swerve.
For a lot of the time in that video I'm showing how not to do it, not compensating, hitting too hard or too soft and also trying to get that same contact that Wilson got and time and again. It didn't happen until I hit one too soft that swerved too much and got a bad contact at 25:30 but that shot was hit too slow to reach the pocket as was the one that followed it that was hit at the same pace but with a tad more compensation.

Those played at the pace to reach the pocket either missed or went into the side of the pocket with no throw on the OB at all, and the cue (10) balls trajectory after contact was due to approaching the OB from off the original line of aim.
The ball doesn't deflect off the line of aim, come back on and then go straight to the correct contact point to make the pot, it makes the right contact point coming from another direction, hence the cue pointing down a line of aim that compensates for the initial deflection and subsequent swerve.
This is what you constantly fail to understand and think that it's all about throw and spin on the OB.



So you're back again splasher with the same axe to grind, somebody do something about this jerk once and for all.

Funny how you quit when you started to hit the shot well enough to get a little throw, huh? Maybe the highly polished balls started to lose their sheen, and pick up a little dirt?

But what are you talking about with where the CB ends up? How can it finish to the right of the OB when, as you claim, it is swerving to make the potting angle?

[Terry Davidson]

Yes I do because as Mr Starks says, the better you time and execute the shot, the less side you have to put on to get the same result as someone with poorer timing. Kyren put a load of side on at low pace to achieve a lot of spin. You play it slowly to allow it to bite. A lot of ams would have miscued or whacked it but Kyren knows better. This will seem counter intuitive to many players and coaches, especially those that hate and can't play side, and don't understand side xfer. Nothing personal meant.

Who hates side? I hope you're not pointing at me as I use it all the time and I do know how to swerve around an intervening ball, and masse, and reverse side off the black or red to get to blue and gee I've even done those shots the pros were doing on baulk colours into the middle, although not as consistently I suspect.

[Little Reggie]

Just another point re the Wilson shot. There is around 4 foot between CB and OB and he plays it softly. Do you think the CB is still spinning by the time it connects? If so it must be marginally if at all.

Yes I do because as Mr Starks says, the better you time and execute the shot, the less side you have to put on to get the same result as someone with poorer timing. Kyren put a load of side on at low pace to achieve a lot of spin. You play it slowly to allow it to bite. A lot of ams would have miscued or whacked it but Kyren knows better. This will seem counter intuitive to many players and coaches, especially those that hate and can't play side, and don't understand side xfer. Nothing personal meant.

*Above you will see a post mentioning too much side and a slight kick, the coach still not realising that Kyren was after a deliberate kick, to turn the unpottable ball over. That's a lack of understanding of side xfer right there. Shocking.

[Terry Davidson]

Just another point re the Wilson shot. There is around 4 foot between CB and OB and he plays it softly. Do you think the CB is still spinning by the time it connects? If so it must be marginally if at all.

He did put a ton of side on that shot and almost over-cooked it but it looks like he got a bit of a bounce on contact with the red, so maybe a slight kick? At that pace there shouldn't have been any bounce on the cueball at all and I think there was still a bit of side on the cueball when it hit the red but too hard to see with snooker balls.

[Terry Davidson]

I agree about vmax. He doesn't have the magic in his fingers to do these shots. I might have to do a vid myself sometime

Gee Travis, I can hardly wait but I won't be holding my breath. Same goes for BS and slasher.

[Terry Davidson]

Well, some of his comments do seem fruity but so do Terry's. They would not be my choice of words suffice to say. But personal feelings shouldn't get in the way of truth and apart from understanding 'timing and follow through', BS is mostly right w.r.t. spin and understanding it. Side xfer has been proven by Dr. Dave who is an expert in this field (even though as a snooker player it pains me to write that!), backed up by Mr Stark and many good players on here. Then we have others doubting the proven who actually wear a pool glove and whack the ball like a pool player; huge irony, given their criticism of a pool player and a pool expert (BS and Dr Dave). I don't mean it to sound rude and mean but those who are probably struggling to hit 50s with grips and cue actions like this should concentrate on the basics, such as developing centre-line cue ball control and efficient and effective cue power. If you can't get position in line-up from one ball to the next (after decades of play) but choose instead to smack it and land on the top rail with no pot, well, I just don't know what to say. Is there any hope for those missing easy 3ft pots to the middle bag? Again, I don't wish to cause hurt or offence but sometimes, truth can be unavoidably brutal. Fair play and hats off to the author for doing a video and devoting much time but it may be better if a player with more acumen explores this topic because side is subtle and intricate and something to be avoided until one can make a 50 consistently (or so the general advice goes). It does require a deft touch. As the author mentions I believe, perhaps BS can do a video?

This is just unbelievable! It wasn't about vmax's technique is was about the BALLS. I don't know if vmax used 2-1/16" balls but I damn well have and yes, on a snooker table and those pool balls were Aramith. Just ignore the technique and watch the object ball. There is nothing there and even if these balls are 2-1/8" IT DOESN'T MATTER.

big shot and splasher (reggie) don't know what they're talking about although it's obvious BS has done some research. BS...have you ever run 10 straight racks of 9-ball in a tournament or have you ever run one lousy century on a snooker table? Same goes for you slasher. Throtts has, I have, j6uk has and we do know what were talking about. I think there is no video proof of all this xfer side or if there is then is has to be explained another way. I have never seen any xtfr side which was of any use even when I did put chalk on the OB.

[guernseygooner]

Just another point re the Wilson shot. There is around 4 foot between CB and OB and he plays it softly. Do you think the CB is still spinning by the time it connects? If so it must be marginally if at all.

[Terry Davidson]

Ok well put the cue ball on the opposite side and make the pot - that way the white is not pushing into the red - you still have to hit on that plant in the same spot away from the back of the ball to make it - I don't know about the physics like others do but do think something must be imparted here pat - I have also played the shot where you need to thicken up the angle to make the pot - it cant be done without using side which is transferred - only a tad - but that can be the difference between keeping a break going or not.

some players clearly not comfy aiming anywhere but centre ball that's fine I think you can use it to your advantage in many situations at the table - from the soft swerve to holding the cue ball on a narrower line for position - and of course the best effects are when using the cushion - but I also use a trace of helping side on certain shots...and cue all over the white on others...what is there to be afraid of - nothing - try a few shots out - experiment. its fun....the centre of the white is home - when you had a bit of fun you can always return there.

Ps if you cue on a white centre ball and hit an angled shot - you are the one imparting throw when it hits and you will hit the cut shot thick - helping side just sets the OB ball out on the right path more easily as the ball is spinning in the direction of the pocket - hitting it straight you are more likely to make it hit thick as that spinny ball thing is going rolling in a different line and to make the pot you have to hit thinner than you would normally = Guess. which is fine as long as you understand - and you only gain the understanding by spending countless hours at the table as you and everyone else knows.

I used to play pool and billiards too - I think some of the shots do come into play and use of side should be worked on. Less maybe more at snooker simply for the need to be more precise to become consistent at potting but its still important. Especially for position.

How did we start discussing plants? Totally different cause.

[Terry Davidson]

Why didn't you use snooker balls?

How do you explain where the CB ends up, pretty much every time? It ends up on the right of the OB as we are looking at it - how can that be if you are merely bending the ball to hit the contact point, (which I'm presuming is dead straight). Logically, for a swerve shot, the CB must either follow straight, or, more likely, continue on iis path towards the left. Wilson's shot does the same thing btw. A stationary OB also has an effect on a spinning CB.

The last few shots show ample evidence of SIT.

I would have preferred to see you use snooker balls with a snooker cue (or a pool cue with pool balls).

What make of balls are they?

This statement here absolutely proves big shot hasn't a clue what he's talking about. He doesn't understand the cueball is cutting across the object ball and end up on the same side of the path as what the applied side to the cueball was. Now he says use snooker balls but doesn't realize you can't see any side on snooker balls unless you use 2 spotted whites. Aramith makes a set of pool balls at 2-1/16", same composition as 1Gs.

Too bad big shot knows how to type because if he didn't we would all feel relief from the insults like 'some ramdon bozo on the internet "says".'

[Little Reggie]

I agree about vmax. He doesn't have the magic in his fingers to do these shots. I might have to do a vid myself sometime

Good, good. That sounds an idea as you understand the concepts well. Maybe Byrom and tedisbill as well. I see no point in those who dislike side and and don't believe in side xfer, doing videos about side! It's a simple truth that one has to be of a certain standard to demonstrate the basics. I wouldn't ask a colour belt to demonstrate a black belt pattern even if they could learn and remember it, they wouldn't have the skills to do it justice. Master the basics first, side is an advanced topic. There's a few in league with this action, perhaps heavy hitters is kinder, but that cue action isn't going to chop the mustard finely.

Again, fair play to the author for having a go, as Throtts has said as well.

[throtts]

Okay, thats put better Reggie.

At the end though i am sure Steve was just having a ""whack about"" and knows his CB was running lose and knows that better played stun run throughs etc etc would have kept him tighter and nearer the line up balls.

Fair play to you Steve for putting up that vid. Its very commendable, buddy..Nice one..

[travisbickle]

The video demonstrates how not to cue. How not to grip and bridge, and how not to 'hit' the CB. Fist-pumping the CB results in lost position, missed pots and 30 breaks. Sorry to say this but the standard of player needs to be higher to explore the subtleties of side on video. As Mr Stark says, it's intricate and certainly not whackaday. Byrom or tedisbill need to remake this video and demonstrate side xfer, or we could just watch Mr Stark again. :biggrin-new:
* The man who criticises Mr BS wears a pool glove and whacks pool balls on a snooker table. You couldn't make it up. :disgust:

I agree about vmax. He doesn't have the magic in his fingers to do these shots. I might have to do a vid myself sometime

[Little Reggie]

I have no idea how you can back BS up. His one obnoxious, rude individual....

Well, some of his comments do seem fruity but so do Terry's. They would not be my choice of words suffice to say. But personal feelings shouldn't get in the way of truth and apart from understanding 'timing and follow through', BS is mostly right w.r.t. spin and understanding it. Side xfer has been proven by Dr. Dave who is an expert in this field (even though as a snooker player it pains me to write that!), backed up by Mr Stark and many good players on here. Then we have others doubting the proven who actually wear a pool glove and whack the ball like a pool player; huge irony, given their criticism of a pool player and a pool expert (BS and Dr Dave). I don't mean it to sound rude and mean but those who are probably struggling to hit 50s with grips and cue actions like this should concentrate on the basics, such as developing centre-line cue ball control and efficient and effective cue power. If you can't get position in line-up from one ball to the next (after decades of play) but choose instead to smack it and land on the top rail with no pot, well, I just don't know what to say. Is there any hope for those missing easy 3ft pots to the middle bag? Again, I don't wish to cause hurt or offence but sometimes, truth can be unavoidably brutal. Fair play and hats off to the author for doing a video and devoting much time but it may be better if a player with more acumen explores this topic because side is subtle and intricate and something to be avoided until one can make a 50 consistently (or so the general advice goes). It does require a deft touch. As the author mentions I believe, perhaps BS can do a video?

[j6uk]

would like to see a set of tc snooker balls used on a snooker table to prove a point. but interesting to see how those amercan pool balls react looked exhausting.. good show vmax

[vmax]

It's not the white that's doing the pushing though, it's the first ball of the plant which pushes the 2nd, so no matter what angle you hit that first ball from, as long as you hit the right spot it'll push into the second ball.

-

It's the cue ball that stops the first OB from bouncing off the second OB at the moment of contact enabling the push/sqeeze effect to happen. No side required for that to happen Byrom, make a thicker or thinner contact to get a different push and the second OB will take a different line again.

When there's a dead set plant of two or more touching balls, if you don't hit the first OB at the right spot the push/squeeze will make the pottable OB miss the pocket for the same reason.