Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[Terry Davidson]

What a great advert for the IBSF you are. And you wonder why they never get back to you?

Thank goodness we have great, gentlemanly WS coaches in these isles, who understand snooker philosophy and etiquette. You are NOT snooker. No wonder we never see a Canadian pro.

Now you are showing everyone how ignorant you are of all things snooker. I am in good company in being ignored by the IBSF. Nic Barrow is being ignored, Alex Borg, a great master coach in Pakistan, one in China, a few in North America and yes even some in your 'isles' too. If you were on FB and Twitter you would be up to speed on what's going on with the IBSF and WS with regards to amateur snooker. The IBSF can no longer offer pro tour tickets to their tournament winners of world amateur champs.

Also, I've never been accused of being a gentleman although officially I am 'an officer and a gentleman'. Besides which I have never been an 'advert' for the IBSF only a representative for my country. Players are not members of the IBSF, nor are coaches except for Nic and PJ Nolan.

As to why there are no Canadian pros on the tour it's more a money thing that anything else since the only way for a Canadian to turn pro is via Q School now. Floyd Ziegler joined the WPBSA but couldn't afford to live in Britain for 2 years because the 'isles' have it locked up. Also, Alex Pagulayan (Canadian from Toronto) has recently played in some pro tournaments from his Q School record although he didn't do too well. Marco Fu learned his snooker in Vancouver before he returned to Hong Kong. A Canadian would need 50,000GBP in order to get a sports visa from British Immigration.

You might know all that if you bothered to rise out of your ignorance and do some research before you spout off with incorrect innuendos.

[Neil Taperell]

Reggie , once again you come on here under yet another alias and continue to wind up members .

I've now had a couple of complaints , and before you ask , NOT from the members who you are constantly baiting .


Everyone needs to calm down . The whole point of the Forum is to debate , chat , gain knowledge etc but it needs to be done in a civil way .

You are driving members away , and preventing others from posting .

[Terry Davidson]

Reggie , once again you come on here under yet another alias and continue to wind up members .

I've now had a couple of complaints , and before you ask , NOT from the members who you are constantly baiting .


Everyone needs to calm down . The whole point of the Forum is to debate , chat , gain knowledge etc but it needs to be done in a civil way .

You are driving members away , and preventing others from posting .

Hear, Hear!

[Little Reggie]

Now you are showing everyone how ignorant you are of all things snooker. I am in good company in being ignored by the IBSF. Nic Barrow is being ignored, Alex Borg, a great master coach in Pakistan, one in China, a few in North America and yes even some in your 'isles' too. If you were on FB and Twitter you would be up to speed on what's going on with the IBSF and WS with regards to amateur snooker.

Also, I've never been accused of being a gentleman although officially I am 'an officer and a gentleman'. Besides which I have never been an 'advert' for the IBSF only a representative for my country. Players are not members of the IBSF. As to why there are no Canadian pros on the tour it's more a money thing that anything else since the only way for a Canadian to turn pro is via Q School now. Floyd Ziegler joined the WPBSA but couldn't afford to live in Britain for 2 years because the 'isles' have it locked up. Also, Alex Pagulayan (Canadian from Toronto) has recently played in some pro tournaments from his Q School record although he didn't do too well. Marco Fu learned his snooker in Vancouver before he returned to Hong Kong.

You might know all that if you bothered to rise out of your ignorance and do some research before you spout off with incorrect innuendos.

The Sheikh will not be impressed! If you don't understand what is the expected standard of behaviour or that coaches are meant to set good examples; no shock. Your words towards HMBS are dreadful and as a coach you should know better than to bite. My conclusion from all you have written is that you are a poor coach. In all honesty, I'm actually quite sad and disappointed Terry. You used to be much better than this and I had a lot of respect for you as a coach and person. Time has not been a kind friend to you mate. I don't know if it's age, illness or whatever but you're not the old Terry. The forum needs a coach to come forth, free of personal politics.

[Neil Taperell]

Reggie , Terry's post is how he feels . I see nothing wrong in it .

Illness or Age ......come on Reggie . Poor for you that .

[ace man]

What proved CIT to me was Nic Barrow's video on a snooker table with a decent cloth and clean balls and on the long 1/2-ball cut he got 1 or 2 degrees of CIT however he got more separation between ball and plank from the roll on the table.

Not much practical application except when avoiding intervening balls or trying to hold the cueball movement down. Those shot come up very rarely as I can only remember 1 time that I wanted to hold a colour spot but that was when I was in the colours and I purposely played position so I could hold it for the next colour. As for curving the cueball around an intervening ball these are more frequent but not very often either.

I there another use for SIT and curving cueballs other than these?

Not sure about any further applications, doubles or cross doubles come to middle pockets come to mind. One can "widen the angle" with the right kind of spin.
For the life of me, I couldn't use those 3 letter acronyms in my mind. English is not my native language.
To elaborate further, terms like "collision induced throw" and "spin induced throw"...even with knowing exactly what they mean, I simply could not translate those to my native language. I wonder how other non English speaking players feel? My guess probably the same.
Terminology that commentators use which may be factually wrong, like "bending the cue ball with side", now that one I can almost translate to something meaningful.

[Terry Davidson]

Here's another wind-up. I imagine Reggie believes himself to be the perfect example of gentlemanly conduct on this Forum. I have no excuses for my decline in my snooker abilities except old age and it's attendant illness which recently caused me to have to take a year off. At 72yrs this is not a good thing to have happen. Oh, woe is me! As to ungentlemanly conduct on my part I don't remember me insulting BS even though he called me ignorant and retarded(?-never been accused of that before!) for not agreeing with him regarding CIT & SIT and I seem to remember he started it just as Reggie has done. Let's listen to Neil and bring all this back to a civil discussion where perhaps some members may learn something valuable for their game.

I myself have learned via Nic Barrow's video which was posted here that CIT does occur although we're talking very little deviation even on a 1/2-ball cut over 9ft or so and in fact the roll on the table turned the cueball more than the CIT. However as for SIT, I think the effects shown by Barry Stark with the camera showing the whole shot has more to do with curving the cueball with a spin/drag shot that with the 2* or 3* gained by any SIT present. My belief is when commentators refer to 'throwing the ball in' they are actually saying the cueball was 'thrown in' to either the correct potting angle or else very close to it. I'm willing to admit SIT does exist, at least on a poor quality home 4x8 table with regular pool balls. I have yet to see a definitive video which would convince me otherwise as I have tried the Barry Stark shot and also the j6uk black ball and have been able to pot both of them but perhaps Travis will put up a good video which might convince me otherwise. The Wilson shot is iffy because it appeared there was a slight kick which even Dr. Dave acknowledges happens with SIT because CB and OB 'cling' together a bit longer with spin on the CB. Wilson almost over-cooked that shot.

I would like to see Davis and Parrot do a study on this using that 10,000fps camera they have used at the World Champs during the intervals. I remember seeing them do a study on cushion bounce using a ramp for the ball (stimp meter in golf) and then chalking the area on the cushion and seeing that same ball travel another 6" or so. I now clean the face of my cushions on my table.

I think I shall ignore Reggie's wind-ups from now on and not rise to the bait, as much as that bothers me as I like to set the record straight. I see the same thing with Trump supporters in the States where they criticize Obama for not visiting the Katrina devastation in New Orleans or 9/11 and he wasn't even the president on those 2 occasions. Ignoring facts or truth seems to be their mantra.

[Terry Davidson]

Not sure about any further applications, doubles or cross doubles come to middle pockets come to mind. One can "widen the angle" with the right kind of spin.
For the life of me, I couldn't use those 3 letter acronyms in my mind. English is not my native language.
To elaborate further, terms like "collision induced throw" and "spin induced throw"...even with knowing exactly what they mean, I simply could not translate those to my native language. I wonder how other non English speaking players feel? My guess probably the same.
Terminology that commentators use which may be factually wrong, like "bending the cue ball with side", now that one I can almost translate to something meaningful.

I think it's actually 'cut induced throw'. Yes, I agree that you can narrow or widen the angle on a double (a bank as I call them) using side on the cueball and I believe this is due to the OB being trapped a little longer in contact due to the cushion. Also, I have yet to understand what's happening with a frozen plant where you cut the first OB in a different direction to make the pot. I find it hard to believe the 'squeeze effect' the commentators use but with the mass of 2 balls present it might be again similar to the bank shot where the cueball remains in contact with the first OB (or squeezed somehow). I can do it but I can't explain it which is frustrating as an Engineer.

[itsnoteasy]

I think it's actually 'cut induced throw'. Yes, I agree that you can narrow or widen the angle on a double (a bank as I call them) using side on the cueball and I believe this is due to the OB being trapped a little longer in contact due to the cushion. Also, I have yet to understand what's happening with a frozen plant where you cut the first OB in a different direction to make the pot. I find it hard to believe the 'squeeze effect' the commentators use but with the mass of 2 balls present it might be again similar to the bank shot where the cueball remains in contact with the first OB (or squeezed somehow). I can do it but I can't explain it which is frustrating as an Engineer.

I will agree with you on that Terry, the cushion does play a part in those shots as they do impart spin .
If you look on Nics video, I think it's the quarter ball cut, the two black balls are lined up around three inches outside the pocket, yet he pots the black,remember this is the whole reason he invented his aim frame, to help people who can't figure out how to compensate for the throw, this is why you can't aim for the middle of the pocket all the time,( I know I'm not wording this correctly) on Nics video if you lined the balls up to centre pocket you would miss every shot thick to varying degrees, this is what I meant by everyone having to compensate for the throw, also remember all these shots are played plain ball no spin but there is still cut throw , I hope that makes it a bit clearer.There is a roll on his table you can see it on one of the finer cuts but I think it rolls back towards the bar not away from it, ( although that's from memory I haven't gone back and checked it).

[ace man]

I think it's actually 'cut induced throw'. Yes, I agree that you can narrow or widen the angle on a double (a bank as I call them) using side on the cueball and I believe this is due to the OB being trapped a little longer in contact due to the cushion. Also, I have yet to understand what's happening with a frozen plant where you cut the first OB in a different direction to make the pot. I find it hard to believe the 'squeeze effect' the commentators use but with the mass of 2 balls present it might be again similar to the bank shot where the cueball remains in contact with the first OB (or squeezed somehow). I can do it but I can't explain it which is frustrating as an Engineer.

Not sure myself, but that shot was shown to me some 15 years ago. And every time I show this one to somebody else, it is funny to see their reaction. Exactly like mine was a long time ago. Complete surprise.
It is one of those rare shots that are harder to actually recognize than to execute.

[itsnoteasy]

On another note, Terry do you think your trouble with the IBSF is linked with their fallout with the WPBSA?

[Byrom]

I know the feeling of not being able to win an argument ....trust me

not nice when you believe or know you are right - stubbornness does play a part and eventually when one side or the other does not bend it can get worse - I wonder is the best option to give up on everything or keep fighting for what is right?

End of the day its a just a beautiful but silly game that has given all of us joys and woe and there are more important things in life - Terry my advice to you is your own advice you have a comp coming up you said 765 pages ago you need to practice for - go pick your lovely cue up and do some - get a nice drink forget about this put the smile back on your face kiss the Mrs goodbye and go and enjoy doing what you love - I hope you do well and knock in a few nice breaks, compete well and enjoy it because life is too short and you should never worry about the small things.

My advice for V max hey you make a great cue you love snooker and like debate carry on with what you love

Everyone else - show that you can be humble even if you are right and you have proved it what does it prove to push the point like this? Lets just call it a draw - give everyone a break, change the topic and start a new thread about the price of tips/cues/fish or something I don't know. Myself included - life is too short and you never know when you reach the end till it is staring you in the face

Maybe lets go off this topic and thread try and be more civil about things and give everyone a break - I say lets pic up our lovely cues and - who knows maybe for the last time in our lives lets go make some ourselves?
-

[Ramon]

,, Sometimes if you can'nt* agree with each other, the best option is to bury the discussion and respect each other's opinion.,,

Winston Churchill

[Terry Davidson]

On another note, Terry do you think your trouble with the IBSF is linked with their fallout with the WPBSA?

I don't think so as Nic, myself and all my students have been emailing Vivek for the past 8 years trying to get him to put up our profiles on their website. I even met with him face-to-face at the World Champs in India and he promised to put up the profiles but he never has and has never even responded to Nic who is supposed to be their Head Coach.

It just doesn't seem right that we all paid 200GBP to have them recognize us and nothing has ever happened. I know Nic had some problems with them too but when the IBSF and WS negotiated their MOU Nic was supposed to develop the coach training but then WS went their own way and canceled the MOU and started their own coaching scheme. Under the MOU all the IBSF Master Coaches were recognized as Level III WS or WPBSA coaches and as an Examiner I was supposed to be a Level IV.

[Terry Davidson]

,, Sometimes if you can'nt* agree with each other, the best option is to bury the discussion and respect each other's opinion.,,

Winston Churchill

Ramon & Byrom:

All I have been doing is asking for some video proof to convince me that CIT & SIT actually exist. The Nic Barrow video with the board on the table convinced me there was some CIT factor and I've admitted this. As for SIT, Dr. Dave's videos are nice but they never show the whole shot and are done on an old cloth on a home 4x8 table with dirty balls and I would like to see something done on a snooker table with a good cloth and clean balls and perhaps Travis will produce one.

The other problem is I've tried the shots here at home (at least the Barry Stark one) and I can always do it but it looks to me as if the cueball curls into the potting position but it all happens fast. Pehaps I'll get ambition and video a shot myself and then run that through Kinovea and see if I can take a screen shot with the blue and CB just contacting and then post the video to youtube although I have never done that it must be fairly user-friendly.

Everyone got upset with me because I won't accept the videos from Dr. Dave but I am a snooker coach and player and I want to see definitive proof done on a snooker table with a shiny new nap and clean balls because I figure there are probably about 3* of SIT (maybe) and the other 12* or so is attributable to CB curl.

But you are right, I can't agree with some of the negative people on here so I've decided to not rise to their bait.