Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[Terry Davidson]

I'll pass. Quite why Terry is making this so complicated is anyone's guess. Vmax makes it complicated to save face - he's the SIT equivalent of a conspiracy theorist- no matter how much evidence is provided, there's always another red herring to throw into the mix.

Easier to forget all about bonkers bob and think of SIT as exactly the same as any other shot: hit the CB with the right side at the right speed with the right timing and you'll get a predictable result. Ditto screw. Ditto follow. Ditto running or check side.

That's not an explanation Biggy. All you're saying is 'right side at the right speed with the right timing'...well WHAT IS 'the right spin, pace and timing? How do you teach SIT and how do you teach the parameters of when it happens because it certainly doesn't happen all the time when you use side like some of the experts on here are claiming.

If tou're such an expert then explain it in a way that can be taught to students and quit with all the insults please. You claim to be an expert so show your expertise.

[Terry Davidson]

TD, a few weeks ago: throw doesn't exist! It's all lies! It's religion! You're Donald trump!
TD, a few minutes ago: stop making my life more complicated!

So what? I didn't believe it and now I want to learn all the parameters so I can explain those effects to students and how they would go about using them but not one of you experts has been able to fully explain just how much pace and spin is too much. Maybe one of Dr. Dave's videos can explain the limits but none that I've seen.

[Terry Davidson]

Hi Terry!

I'm not much in this discuss about SIT, however I wanted to show some videos, but not saying You are right or wrong. I was just curious about the result I was going to find. One thing bothers me still, and I hope to get a clear answer from You: What was wrong with my first SIT video (not a fake one, but the dead fly one) and setup there as you seem to ignore my result? I had the balls aligned as You wished in Your video (or even a bit more hidden BOB), the balls were frozen (touching all each other) and I really potted the ball using very low pace. This video was not a fake, but successful shot in first attempt.

I'm not here asking You to admit that SIT exist or anything like that, but just what was the factor which made You (and vmax) discard my effort in this subject.

p.s. I've allways really appreciate Your helpful presence here in this forum. And I do not enjoy people writing in a harsh manner seeding insults to each other.

I found nothing wrong in your first video and it spurred me to experiment more to try and generate SIT, which I did. I didn't ignore your first video at all although I thought you said it took you a few practice shots to get it right. I also thought as you are so good with video editing that you might have just cut out any missed attempts. Sorry about that.

I have been forced to admit SIT exists under certain circumstances however I still wait for an explanation of exactly how it is generated with answers from the experts on exactly how much pace and side to use so you can be guaranteed to generate it and also some kind of explanation which would help me explain SIT to any students I hae although most of my students aren't ready for this.

In addition I believe the SIT believers are claiming SIT effects on shots where curving the cueball is the only factor potting the ball because a lot of the videos show too much pace.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

It has to be the correct weight for the amount of swerve you need to contact BOB, too hard and it's not enough, too slow and it's too much.
They will tell you that maximum SIT happens at low pace with trace side and cue ball sliding on contact with OB, yet the evidence for this comes from Dr. Dave's site where the player playing the shots pivots his cue (addressing centre cue ball first) to apply sidespin with cue ball and object ball only a couple of inches apart. Do this yourself using differing amounts of sidespin and power and see what happens and then play the same shots applying side with cue parallel to the line of aim and then both methods with the balls a couple of feet apart giving time for the swerve effect to take place, and with that pivot shot at low pace with trace side and the cue ball not sliding but rolling on the 30 degree axis you'll find it's different.

And the physics vmax? The Fizz-Icks! Ever gonna discuss that? That's where the *evidence* comes from mate. Real, provable, peer reviewed evidence.

Your evidence is, in comparison, a little thin.

[vmax]

I don't understand the physics and I obviously try to avoid side when playing snooker but with pool I was subconciously doing this and it took this thread for me to realise what I was doing and I can only get a reaction when it is pocket weight, any more and I only get minimal reaction and not enough to throw it.

I can also get the throw with or without drag.

Travis or big shot may be able to explain it properly but for me it absolutely has to be pocket weight.

It has to be the correct weight for the amount of swerve you need to contact BOB, too hard and it's not enough, too slow and it's too much.
They will tell you that maximum SIT happens at low pace with trace side and cue ball sliding on contact with OB, yet the evidence for this comes from Dr. Dave's site where the player playing the shots pivots his cue (addressing centre cue ball first) to apply sidespin with cue ball and object ball only a couple of inches apart. Do this yourself using differing amounts of sidespin and power and see what happens and then play the same shots applying side with cue parallel to the line of aim and then both methods with the balls a couple of feet apart giving time for the swerve effect to take place, and with that pivot shot at low pace with trace side and the cue ball not sliding but rolling on the 30 degree axis you'll find it's different.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

okey,

Tbh , i thought :

The less power and effort , the better results in snooker.

Looks like i was wrong .
Many thanks for info

Terry is desperately trying to find ways to make this shot fail.

He doesn't even use much side so why he's so keen to do this is questionable.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

I see what you mean Terry.

I couldn't really answer as like I said it's centre of the cueball pretty much all the time when playing snooker (apart from safety).

With pool the distances between the balls are very short so the most you are going to get is the equivalent of a black of it's spot.

I'm sure Travis or Big Shot will try to answer your question.

I'll pass. Quite why Terry is making this so complicated is anyone's guess. Vmax makes it complicated to save face - he's the SIT equivalent of a conspiracy theorist- no matter how much evidence is provided, there's always another red herring to throw into the mix.

Easier to forget all about bonkers bob and think of SIT as exactly the same as any other shot: hit the CB with the right side at the right speed with the right timing and you'll get a predictable result. Ditto screw. Ditto follow. Ditto running or check side.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

For both the SIT believers and the regular players on here I have some questions for the SIT experts who say I don't understand anything so I'm asking them to educate me. First of all a wish: I wish Ramon would use English in a way we can all understand because I'm having a difficult time seeing what he's trying to say.

So far we have had videos from Travis, vmax, Terry, Jason, runningside and Oma. EVERY ONE of us missed some shots when attempting to display object ball throw which will throw in an otherwise unpottable ball. Think about that, EVERY ONE missed shots. So if you don't understand SIT then don't use it until you do.

The SIT experts say it disappears with too much power and/or too much spin. My question is, 'how much is too much'? It appears as far as power goes and looking at Travis's shots it has to dead weight to the pocket and no more. Jason's and Oma's shots used a lot more than pocket weight but both have claimed it was SIT that potted the ball and not one of the experts mentioned pace of the shots however the did say my pace was too much because my ball went further than dead weight. That leaves side spin...is it no more that 2 tip widths from centre, does it always have to be coupled with drag?

As Travis is the resident expert, please Travis, would you educate us all in exactly how to play using SIT so we can all learn, including obviously vmax and myself who are new to this thing and haven't yet learned how to deal with and understand object ball throw even though both of us have demonstrated it but of course not to your satisfaction. To Biggy I can say no I don't understand the physics of it and can't be arsed to learn.

Thank you lord for all these SIT experts making my life more complicated.

TD, a few weeks ago: throw doesn't exist! It's all lies! It's religion! You're Donald trump!
TD, a few minutes ago: stop making my life more complicated!

[RunningSide]

Hi Terry!

I'm not much in this discuss about SIT, however I wanted to show some videos, but not saying You are right or wrong. I was just curious about the result I was going to find. One thing bothers me still, and I hope to get a clear answer from You: What was wrong with my first SIT video (not a fake one, but the dead fly one) and setup there as you seem to ignore my result? I had the balls aligned as You wished in Your video (or even a bit more hidden BOB), the balls were frozen (touching all each other) and I really potted the ball using very low pace. This video was not a fake, but successful shot in first attempt.

I'm not here asking You to admit that SIT exist or anything like that, but just what was the factor which made You (and vmax) discard my effort in this subject.

p.s. I've allways really appreciate Your helpful presence here in this forum. And I do not enjoy people writing in a harsh manner seeding insults to each other.

[throtts]

Oh and Throtty lass... you'll never get into my thong talking to my boyfriend like that xx

Oh you slapper

[Ramon]

Trevor's Axiom!

Still waiting for Ramon to name a venue...

Had a knock tonight with young Edge tonight... I'm not as rusty as first thought

it's not fair to selby. I'm sure he was waiting in the waiting room ?


Well, next time than.

[Ramon]

OK Ramon, let's call it 'pace'. Will that do? By the way almost everyone refers to 'power' and an example would be Nic Barrow's training documentation where he divides cueball control into H for height on the cueball and P1-10 for power of the stroke. Timing is a lot different than power and timing is critical for any amount of power. But of course you knew that didn't you.

okey,

Tbh , i thought :

The less power and effort , the better results in snooker.

Looks like i was wrong .
Many thanks for info

[dan_ormerod]

Trevor's Axiom!

Still waiting for Ramon to name a venue...

Had a knock tonight with young Edge tonight... I'm not as rusty as first thought

I thought Ramon's high break is 16 or are people exaggerating?

[dan_ormerod]

I found that too but pocket weight for a pink would have more pace than pocket weight for the black, so I really don't understand where the demarcation line is. How do I and the other players on here know exactly what to do when attempting to use SIT?

I see what you mean Terry.

I couldn't really answer as like I said it's centre of the cueball pretty much all the time when playing snooker (apart from safety).

With pool the distances between the balls are very short so the most you are going to get is the equivalent of a black of it's spot.

I'm sure Travis or Big Shot will try to answer your question.

[travisbickle]

For both the SIT believers and the regular players on here I have some questions for the SIT experts who say I don't understand anything so I'm asking them to educate me. First of all a wish: I wish Ramon would use English in a way we can all understand because I'm having a difficult time seeing what he's trying to say.

So far we have had videos from Travis, vmax, Terry, Jason, runningside and Oma. EVERY ONE of us missed some shots when attempting to display object ball throw which will throw in an otherwise unpottable ball. Think about that, EVERY ONE missed shots. So if you don't understand SIT then don't use it until you do.

The SIT experts say it disappears with too much power and/or too much spin. My question is, 'how much is too much'? It appears as far as power goes and looking at Travis's shots it has to dead weight to the pocket and no more. Jason's and Oma's shots used a lot more than pocket weight but both have claimed it was SIT that potted the ball and not one of the experts mentioned pace of the shots however the did say my pace was too much because my ball went further than dead weight. That leaves side spin...is it no more that 2 tip widths from centre, does it always have to be coupled with drag?

As Travis is the resident expert, please Travis, would you educate us all in exactly how to play using SIT so we can all learn, including obviously vmax and myself who are new to this thing and haven't yet learned how to deal with and understand object ball throw even though both of us have demonstrated it but of course not to your satisfaction. To Biggy I can say no I don't understand the physics of it and can't be arsed to learn.

Thank you lord for all these SIT experts making my life more complicated.

Yes you demonstrated it, but you didn't recognize it, neither did vmax.
Watch your 3rd video again closely and watch what happens to the black on nearly every shot you played.
After you have watched the video go and play the shots again, but adjust your aim accordingly (forget about hitting BOB) and see what happens.