Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

The only explanation I've seen is from Dr. Dave who says because of the spin the 2 balls cling together for a longer time and that would mean the explanation for SIT would be because they are together longer the CB pushes the OB along the direction it was traveling. But spin is spin and it doesn't happen with top spin or screw and you can't have it both ways. Your explanations leave a lot to be explaned yet. Travis can't explain it and neither can you so jesus ain't weeping.

I still think it has to do with a curving cueball because it only happens with side and no one can tell me if with LH on cuball does the OB throw right? With screw does the OB jump up? With top spin does it dig into the cloth and bounce? If you can't explain it better so people can understand what is happening (if they want to) then go away.

Lol.

You're understanding leaves a lot to be explained mate.

You're just not getting it.

[travisbickle]

Lol.

You're understanding leaves a lot to be explained mate.

You're just not getting it.

He has lost a lot of credibility the way he thinks side works in the last couple of days.
So it's no surprise he is not getting SIT one little bit.

[throtts]

""RH Side hitting at 9 o'clock"", thats what the ""Snooker Pro Tips"" dude said above at around 2 mins..

Hahaha, he knows a super secret shot then...:snooker:

[throtts]

""RH Side hitting at 9 o'clock"", thats what the ""Snooker Pro Tips"" dude said above at around 2 mins..

Hahaha, he knows a super secret shot then...:snooker:

throtts, his one BS mates..

[travisbickle]

""RH Side hitting at 9 o'clock"", thats what the ""Snooker Pro Tips"" dude said above at around 2 mins..

Hahaha, he knows a super secret shot then...:snooker:

I think vmax could probably pull that shot off :biggrin-new:

[Terry Davidson]

Lol.

You're understanding leaves a lot to be explained mate.

You're just not getting it.

Exactly...as a coach I want to understand what you and Travis are saying but it seems asking either of you questions just leads to insults and abuse. Is it that bad to want to understand something or to see if it's actually happening? I'm sick and tired of you never answering a direct question.

[Terry Davidson]

swerve curve onto what exactly?? can you break this all down for me tel vmax? its obvious for you two but im finding it very difficult to understand. if you could prevent from dragging me through the bushes and keep it succinct id appreciate it.



-

I have never had a problem explaining to one of my advanced students (they're not too many though) exactly how you can pot a ball that has a slightly intervening ball in the direct path of the pot. What I say is this...the ball is 2-1/16" and the pocket is somewhere near 3.5" which leaves around 1.5" of room for error on the pot but this is reduced a bit when potting to a closed pocket, for example the black off the spot (I go on to explain making pots off the far cushion with closed pockets).

I then take an old object ball (I have an old set of balls) and draw a short line on that OB with felt tip. The line is a little longer than 1/4" and represents BOB or near BOB because it isn't a spot considering the amount of error a player has on an open pocket. I then set up the basic shot Barry Stark did with the Blue ball and an intervening red and explain beforehand what I was going to do is push the CB out to the left a bit with RH side and very slow, just enough weight to get the blue to the pocket. I then perform the demo and explain the CB is actually pushed out a bit initially with RH side and then curls or curves back onto the potting line and about halfway through the distance to blue the spin dies away and the CB strikes at some point along the line of BOB and will make the pocket but normally on one side or another. I use the middle pocket like Barry did as there's more room for error.

Students are then asked to see if they can do it themselves and most are successful right away with a few hitting the shot too hard as it's difficult to control and very soft strike such as this.

This is the way I learned it and this is the way I teach it. It's easy to understand for the student and doesn't involve trying to explain the particulars of SIT where it's difficult to control and depends on the amount of power used. My way it's as much side and drag or even maximum side with no drag because all you have to do is get the CB back on the potting line. Trying to understand SIT would be very difficult for a student and even on here Travis says he is an expert at using it but he himself doesn't understand what's happening at contact. I think a student learns something quicker if he understands what's actually happening. Someone like Mr. Big Shot would (I think) confuse the hell out of a student just learning about side. In the end my way gives the player an understanding on how to control this 'throw' thing whether it's CB or OB.

With your video the best shot (I thought) was your first one where the direct potting line was obviously covered but it was very close. If you can believe (because without a super slow motion camera you can't see) that your CB was initially pushed out to the left from your RH side then the spin digs in and curves the CB so it's attacking the OB at a different angle and ends up contacting an edge of BOB as your black was potted to the outside of the far jaw.

One more point for you to think about. You have a red frozen behind the pink but sticking out a bit. (I just saw this last night in fact) When you look from directly behind the red it won't pot into the top pocket but if you look at it from up nearer the middle pocket it appears to be pottable. This has happened to me and BS would say it's CIT (or impact throw as we called it) that is cutting the ball that extra couple of degrees you need but that you wouldn't get with a dead-in pot. Perhaps that is the right explanation, I don't know but I think it's more the eyes deceiving you because you have to remember it's the LEADING EDGE of the CB that makes contact with the OB and that leading edge is sticking out a bit.

I hope this has helped you understand what's happening or at least have an understandable method to teach your students how to control swerve and curve. Talk to an old-time billiards player who will understand a lot of this.

If you want to really understand SIT I would suggest you get Mr. Big Shot to explain it as Travis says he doesn't know. I am still at a loss to understand just how spin on the CB causes the balls to 'cling' together longer and force the OB in the opposite direction. To my understanding this is just not believable.

[travisbickle]

Done a couple of short vids. The pool table (hold) for TD and a black to hold the spot. Hopefully up today but if not definitely up tomorrow.

[travisbickle]

Exactly...as a coach I want to understand what you and Travis are saying but it seems asking either of you questions just leads to insults and abuse. Is it that bad to want to understand something or to see if it's actually happening? I'm sick and tired of you never answering a direct question.

You keep saying this stuff doesn't exist and it's all in our heads.
How do you expect us to react?

[j6uk]

I have never had a problem explaining to one of my advanced students (they're not too many though) exactly how you can pot a ball that has a slightly intervening ball in the direct path of the pot. What I say is this...the ball is 2-1/16" and the pocket is somewhere near 3.5" which leaves around 1.5" of room for error on the pot but this is reduced a bit when potting to a closed pocket, for example the black off the spot (I go on to explain making pots off the far cushion with closed pockets).

I then take an old object ball (I have an old set of balls) and draw a short line on that OB with felt tip. The line is a little longer than 1/4" and represents BOB or near BOB because it isn't a spot considering the amount of error a player has on an open pocket. I then set up the basic shot Barry Stark did with the Blue ball and an intervening red and explain beforehand what I was going to do is push the CB out to the left a bit with RH side and very slow, just enough weight to get the blue to the pocket. I then perform the demo and explain the CB is actually pushed out a bit initially with RH side and then curls or curves back onto the potting line and about halfway through the distance to blue the spin dies away and the CB strikes at some point along the line of BOB and will make the pocket but normally on one side or another. I use the middle pocket like Barry did as there's more room for error.

Students are then asked to see if they can do it themselves and most are successful right away with a few hitting the shot too hard as it's difficult to control and very soft strike such as this.

This is the way I learned it and this is the way I teach it. It's easy to understand for the student and doesn't involve trying to explain the particulars of SIT where it's difficult to control and depends on the amount of power used. My way it's as much side and drag or even maximum side with no drag because all you have to do is get the CB back on the potting line. Trying to understand SIT would be very difficult for a student and even on here Travis says he is an expert at using it but he himself doesn't understand what's happening at contact. I think a student learns something quicker if he understands what's actually happening. Someone like Mr. Big Shot would (I think) confuse the hell out of a student just learning about side. In the end my way gives the player an understanding on how to control this 'throw' thing whether it's CB or OB.

With your video the best shot (I thought) was your first one where the direct potting line was obviously covered but it was very close.
1/4 ball covered is not close
If you can believe
no i cant believe
(because without a super slow motion camera you can't see) that your CB was initially pushed out to the left from your RH side
hardly
then the spin digs in and curves the CB so it's attacking the OB at a different angle
er no but even if it did the black didnt go
and ends up contacting an edge of BOB
its was straight and i just about managed to get close to 3/4 ball
as your black was potted to the outside of the far jaw.
i think i said it about six times on the video but its worth repeating, the black didnt go.



One more point for you to think about. You have a red frozen behind the pink but sticking out a bit. (I just saw this last night in fact) When you look from directly behind the red it won't pot into the top pocket but if you look at it from up nearer the middle pocket it appears to be pottable. This has happened to me and BS would say it's CIT (or impact throw as we called it) that is cutting the ball that extra couple of degrees you need but that you wouldn't get with a dead-in pot. Perhaps that is the right explanation, I don't know but I think it's more the eyes deceiving you because you have to remember it's the LEADING EDGE of the CB that makes contact with the OB and that leading edge is sticking out a bit.

I hope this has helped you understand what's happening or at least have an understandable method to teach your students how to control swerve and curve. Talk to an old-time billiards player who will understand a lot of this.

If you want to really understand SIT I would suggest you get Mr. Big Shot to explain it as Travis says he doesn't know. I am still at a loss to understand just how spin on the CB causes the balls to 'cling' together longer and force the OB in the opposite direction. To my understanding this is just not believable.

i take it this attack of words means you don't actually know how this happens? and its difficult to enplane how your theory works in general but in this case particular?

[Terry Davidson]

You keep saying this stuff doesn't exist and it's all in our heads.
How do you expect us to react?

I'm sorry Travis if I said that, but I haven't seen a clear explanation of what's happening so I can in turn explain it clearly to a student so he will understand what's happening. The videos can all be explained clearly using my theory but you have said you don't understand exactly what is happening.

If a coach doesn't understand what's happening all he can do is like you're doing and use a video to show what's happening. The student will soon suss out the coach doesn't really understand. It's been my experience students learn something quicker if they truly understand how it's happening. I am trying to get an understanding of the phenomenon but all the videos are subject to interpretation or could be the result of Impact Throw and not SIT.

Biggy says there is no transferred side in snooker and in the videos by the time the CB reaches the object ball the spin has dissipated so in my mind if the spin is gone then there can be no spin-induced throw. We never used a spotted CB to see if the spin is gone although I have one here and I will give it a try and see how much spin, if any, is present at contact. I may also video the shot with the camera right over the contact point so see if anything different than 180* is taking place with the OB.

Dr. Dave said the balls 'cling together longer when spin is present on the CB'. This says to me the OB must spin at least a couple of degrees while the 2 balls are in contact since that has to happen somehow to change the direction of the OB. Problem is, we're talking microseconds here and without on of those 10,000fps cameras it's very hard to absolutely prove either theory. You have faith in yours and I have faith in mine because I understand it but you don't understand your theory, you just have faith that it exists. Dr. Dave's theory is in the same category as he hasn't used a very hi-speed camera to good effect. It might be easier to induce SIT on a pool table but he never showed an angled pot with his hi-speed camera.

If Dr. Dave has a Ph.D. from the University of Colorado then he has a Doctorate in Philosophy, not Billiards, but my question is...if he is on staff at the uni why is he doing all his camera work on a 4x8 home table with a worn cloth and poor lighting. Surely at the uni he could set up a 4.5x9ft table with some good lighting to show what's happening with his hi-speed camera. I might see something I can understand.

[jonny66]

I'm trying to think of something particularly long that doesn't go anywhere to compare it to this thread, I'm pretty much stumped.

[Neil Taperell]

Good video that Jason

[Terry Davidson]

i take it this attack of words means you don't actually know how this happens? and its difficult to enplane how your theory works in general but in this case particular?

First of all Jason, when you showed the black and red together from directly behind it was not 1/4-ball, it was less (on both shots). Secondly for true 1/4-ball your CB needed to be about 3" to the right of where it was, or in other words where the camera was. A fill quarter of the black should be covered and it isn't. In these types of videos the eyes are being deceived by the camera angle and that's why I keep asking to have the camera placed behind the pocket as pottr did but you and Travis keep putting it behind the CB. Thirdly you did pot the black off the far jaw.

The CB with the RH side HAD TO push out to the left and then the RH side gripped and sent the CB at a steeper angle into the black and red where it contacted the very right side of BOB and went to the pocket off the far jaw. With no RH side gripping you would have over-cut the black. You potted the black on both shots though. If you can be bothered place the camera directly behind the pocket so we can see the pocket, OB, CB and your cue.

I looked again and stopped your video where the camera was directly behind the shot and if that's 1/4-ball I'll eat it. The red ball needs to be moved into the black another 1/4" at least. This is why the eyes can be fooled. You don't see the actual contact point to pot the black can be hit from a different angle. Set up exactly the same black and red and move the cueball down towards the top cushion about 8" and you'll see that black is pottable without fouling the red.

[Terry Davidson]

i take it this attack of words means you don't actually know how this happens? and its difficult to enplane how your theory works in general but in this case particular?

I believe I do understand what's happening. As I suggested put the CB nearer the top cushion and try the shot. It's pottable from there so it's also pottable if you have the CB approach the black at a slightly steeper angle from the left side.