Sidespin on a snooker table both with and against the nap

[vmax]

If you don't believe the cue ball swerves then set up exactly the same shot but use left hand side to make the same contact on the red to throw it the other way. If the cue ball goes straight to the contact point with no swerve then at the very least you should be able to make the same contact point shouldn't you.

Put an intervening ball in the way of the OB, about 3mm and play the cue ball at the OB with the opposite sidespin to what's needed for the alledged throw into the pocket and see if you can make it throw the other way.
I'm betting you can't, I'm betting you won't even be able to contact the OB at all.

Camara angle was bad, but all balls were potted, you can clearly see that.

As clear as mud, now don't get sunburn and watch out for those rip tides that spin you the other way

[Terry Davidson]

so logically it seems some are arguing that the idea of missing a ball because of unintentional side is a fiction, and that would mean the term is miss leading and all the pros and pundits have it wrong. but if side has no affect on the ob why do the top players work on center ball striking so much, or is it obvious? is ti that their simply avoiding the dreaded swerve shot?

Definitely not j6. There are 2 factors to consider here. When you apply side to the cueball, even unintentional side, the cueball is pushed off the line of aim initially and if you play with power it keeps going off-line. In a shot with lower power the cueball has time to recover the line of aim as the side induces it to curve slightly.

If, like me, you put unintentional left side on the cueball when potting a long blue and trying to screw back into baulk I find the blue ball hits the left side of the pocket jaw or may not even hit the jaw at all. This is the result of me pushing the cueball to the right on strike. If I played the shot with less power besides the fact I would have less of a left-to-right delivery it will also give the cueball time to contact the blue at the correct line-of-aim (otherwise BOB).

Unintentional side, especially on high power shots, is the problem all players will try and control. You have to admit that for some reason more long shots are missed when the player uses a lot of power. This usually induces some upper body movement which in turn results in an off-centre strike of the cueball and a missed pot.

[j6uk]

Definitely not j6. There are 2 factors to consider here. When you apply side to the cueball, even unintentional side, the cueball is pushed off the line of aim initially and if you play with power it keeps going off-line. In a shot with lower power the cueball has time to recover the line of aim as the side induces it to curve slightly.

If, like me, you put unintentional left side on the cueball when potting a long blue and trying to screw back into baulk I find the blue ball hits the left side of the pocket jaw or may not even hit the jaw at all. This is the result of me pushing the cueball to the right on strike. If I played the shot with less power besides the fact I would have less of a left-to-right delivery it will also give the cueball time to contact the blue at the correct line-of-aim (otherwise BOB).

Unintentional side, especially on high power shots, is the problem all players will try and control. You have to admit that for some reason more long shots are missed when the player uses a lot of power. This usually induces some upper body movement which in turn results in an off-centre strike of the cueball and a missed pot.

so in your book what is happening when i play a simple 3/4 ball pot, hit it full ball with side and bottom, pot it and hold the spot for position? the cb had no time to push out and come back n on another line, iv watched it contact full ball hence the cb held the spot and i used bottom to hold the line of the shot.

[travisbickle]

so in your book what is happening when i play a simple 3/4 ball pot, hit it full ball with side and bottom, pot it and hold the spot for position? the cb had no time to push out and come back n on another line, iv watched it contact full ball hence the cb held the spot and i used bottom to hold the line of the shot.

I'd like to hear TD's thoughts on this too.
The pink I played was heading 3 inches to the right of the pocket when it made contact with the CB.
So how did I manage to pot the pink when he says all that's happening is the CB swerving back onto the correct line (BOB) and it's just your eyes playing tricks, when clearly this isn't the case!

[Terry Davidson]

I'd like to hear TD's thoughts on this too.
The pink I played was heading 3 inches to the right of the pocket when it made contact with the CB.
So how did I manage to pot the pink when he says all that's happening is the CB swerving back onto the correct line (BOB) and it's just your eyes playing tricks, when clearly this isn't the case!

I never said it was the eyes playing tricks. The one photo that was put up with the lines drawn from pocket through the centre of both balls shows everything lined up but of course B.S. said the line did not go through the centre of the balls.

[Terry Davidson]

so in your book what is happening when i play a simple 3/4 ball pot, hit it full ball with side and bottom, pot it and hold the spot for position? the cb had no time to push out and come back n on another line, iv watched it contact full ball hence the cb held the spot and i used bottom to hold the line of the shot.

In order to hold the black spot you couldn't possibly have hit the black ball in the pure 3/4-ball position and I can only conclude that the black ball moved in a direction 180* from the cueball so the CB must have been directly behind the black towards the pocket in the full-ball position rather than the 3/4-ball position.

Can you put up a video showing the cueball actually contacting the 3/4-ball position and yet holding the spot?

[travisbickle]

I never said it was the eyes playing tricks. The one photo that was put up with the lines drawn from pocket through the centre of both balls shows everything lined up but of course B.S. said the line did not go through the centre of the balls.

So was my pink lined up at the point of contact in your opinion?

[j6uk]

so in your book what is happening when i play a simple 3/4 ball pot, hit it full ball with side and bottom, pot it and hold the spot for position? the cb had no time to push out and come back n on another line, iv watched it contact full ball hence the cb held the spot and i used bottom to hold the line of the shot.

In order to hold the black spot you couldn't possibly have hit the black ball in the pure 3/4-ball position and I can only conclude that the black ball moved in a direction 180* from the cueball so the CB must have been directly behind the black towards the pocket in the full-ball position rather than the 3/4-ball position.

Can you put up a video showing the cueball actually contacting the 3/4-ball position and yet holding the spot?

i dont get what your on about talking about this black ball.. but am ii to take from this reply that the shot i outlined above is not possible n your book then?

[Terry Davidson]

So was my pink lined up at the point of contact in your opinion?

Can't really tell from your video as the camera was on the side and there would still be a bit of the pink ball showing in front of the cueball even if the cueball hit BOB. Place the camera over the pocket so it takes in the pocket, pink and cueball but have the camera direcly facing the pink and try the shot again.

[Terry Davidson]

i dont get what your on about talking about this black ball.. but am ii to take from this reply that the shot i outlined above is not possible n your book then?

If you hit the black dead-on in order to hold the spot then in my opinion the black ball would hit the top cushion about 6" from the pocket assuming the 3/4 pot with cueball above the black towards the pink. According to the laws of physical properties when the 2 spheres collide the black ball has to take off at 180* from the point of contact. If you used side and drag (bottom stuff) to pot the black then I believe if you can pot it your cueball must have curved into the black and at the point of contact made a perfect plant directly at the pocket or at least the far jaw just like Karnham's did, although he wasn't trying to hold the spot.

I agree that in order to hold the spot you have to hit the black straight on to stop the cueball as otherwise from the 3/4 position the cueball would still have some energy left in it and would travel off the spot towards the cushion but in order to pot the black you have to hit it in that plant position and your bottom stuff would hold the cueball.

This is only my opinion based on the laws of physics that dictates the black has to leave at 180* to the contact point. If what you are saying is true you would have to change the direction of the black ball by 45* which is something I don't believe. I do believe you can change the point of contact though by using side on the cueball, especially with drag. But you tell me what are the exact mechanics involved in changing the direction of the object ball at or shortly after contact.

On the other hand, who cares? As long as you can pot the black and hold the spot using this throw effect some seem to believe in, and can use it consistently then it just doesn't matter. I haven't tried this specific shot of holding the spot on an angled pot but maybe I will see if I can do it. I wouldn't like the shot a lot because it means for your next shot if the cueball slipped a little you would have a chinese snooker on your next pot.

[Ramon]

Well I can't see the red ball throw to the left like it did with that Wilson kick, cue ball takes a very slight swerve around the pink and the contact made is what's needed to pot the red naturally, or did it as we don't know do we as we can't see the pocket. Deliberately unclear travis ?

At least I used balls where the spin could be seen, the pocket was in view, the line of aim was clear and you could see all the effects. What they were was there to be debated, you've shown nothing either for or against.



You're picking up where you left off before your ban splasher; your motivation is clear, and it's clear to anyone with any sense that what travis has posted proves nothing contrary to what was in my video. I played the same shots and got the same reaction, and I also played many too hard, too soft and without compensating my aiming to show just what's needed to be done to pot the ball in that situation and a few others as well.

Now where's yours ?

Ramon

You haven't answered my treatise on my video have you, choosing instead to snipe at me once again; your screen shots from my video don't show contact but the ones with travis' do, deliberate to keep face ?

What the hell ????


Vmax,

The reason why I haven't responded to your post is because you said in your post :

,, I'm not going through this again,,

I took it you no longer want to talk about it and decided to respect your choice and your privacy.



As i mentioned in my previous post in other thread, in som of the shots you played
the CB did change it's path.
except those which I made a screenshots from .
I did downloaded your vid. the problem is i can'nt play it at 10s/c. I could do this with travis vid.

take a look at those pictures and compar the direction ( the line ) the cue is heading in your pic to the one Travis posted.
What do you see my friend?
You hold the butt abit higher than normal and you put the cue not stright.
Well, what you are doing here is playing a swerve shot.
of cours, this way you gonna push the CB off it's path and CB approaches the OB from a diff angle.

By no means I'm saying that you can'nt cue stright. Of cours you can!!
I think you did it here to show us the CB can change it's path.
And in most of the shots you played (not all of them), that's what happened.
If you want to test the effect of the side, it's very important your cue stright (not putting the cue across the CB) and keep the cue as low as possible.
Otherwise , you never find out .


[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]

[j6uk]

so in your book what is happening when i play a simple 3/4 ball pot, hit it full ball with side and bottom, pot it and hold the spot for position? the cb had no time to push out and come back n on another line, iv watched it contact full ball hence the cb held the spot and i used bottom to hold the line of the shot.

If you hit the black dead-on in order to hold the spot then in my opinion the black ball would hit the top cushion about 6" from the pocket assuming the 3/4 pot with cueball above the black towards the pink. According to the laws of physical properties when the 2 spheres collide the black ball has to take off at 180* from the point of contact. If you used side and drag (bottom stuff) to pot the black then I believe if you can pot it your cueball must have curved into the black and at the point of contact made a perfect plant directly at the pocket or at least the far jaw just like Karnham's did, although he wasn't trying to hold the spot.

I agree that in order to hold the spot you have to hit the black straight on to stop the cueball as otherwise from the 3/4 position the cueball would still have some energy left in it and would travel off the spot towards the cushion but in order to pot the black you have to hit it in that plant position and your bottom stuff would hold the cueball.

This is only my opinion based on the laws of physics that dictates the black has to leave at 180* to the contact point. If what you are saying is true you would have to change the direction of the black ball by 45* which is something I don't believe. I do believe you can change the point of contact though by using side on the cueball, especially with drag. But you tell me what are the exact mechanics involved in changing the direction of the object ball at or shortly after contact.

On the other hand, who cares? As long as you can pot the black and hold the spot using this throw effect some seem to believe in, and can use it consistently then it just doesn't matter. I haven't tried this specific shot of holding the spot on an angled pot but maybe I will see if I can do it. I wouldn't like the shot a lot because it means for your next shot if the cueball slipped a little you would have a chinese snooker on your next pot.

im saying hold the spot of any ob not the color spots on the table.. anyway i will take this as a dunno.

[Terry Davidson]

What does it matter whether it's a coloured ball on its spot or not on its spot or a red ball sitting in the middle of the table. There is no physical way you can alter the path of the object ball by 45*. If you think you can then put up a video as I would love to see it. Place the camera over the pocket and show pocket, object ball and cueball in the frame.

I'll eat crow if you can alter the path by up to 45* for sure. In order to hold the spot of anothr ball you have to hit it dead-on, don't you?

[itsnoteasy]

What does it matter whether it's a coloured ball on its spot or not on its spot or a red ball sitting in the middle of the table. There is no physical way you can alter the path of the object ball by 45*. If you think you can then put up a video as I would love to see it. Place the camera over the pocket and show pocket, object ball and cueball in the frame.

I'll eat crow if you can alter the path by up to 45* for sure. In order to hold the spot of anothr ball you have to hit it dead-on, don't you?

Terry have you been in touch with the university yet to tell them their understanding of physics is wrong . Here's a wee bit of evidence you could give them, along with , I can't do it and turn it the other way, you could include this
https://youtu.be/nfZ12UGiisM

[Byrom]

yeah bu to fair to scotty he always found a way