Terry's Videos Showing SIT or No SIT?

[jonny66]

How is that "Terrible syntax?"

Say it out loud. How does it sound?

I'm not arguing about the English language, it's not snooker. I suppose it could be considered on topic seen as Americans call side spin "English"

[gpfan]

Okay. You know what? I've tired of the lot of you. As one may see, I've made about twentyfive posts in seven years. Why? Because most here are typical interweb gits. No sense of fun. A complete lack of joy. And as "Jonny" has shown, completely vengeful towards Her Majesty's language.

Time I left. Enjoy. And, to most? I suggest English lessons should be a greater priority.

[ADR147]

Okay. You know what? I've tired of the lot of you. As one may see, I've made about twentyfive posts in seven years. Why? Because most here are typical interweb gits. No sense of fun. A complete lack of joy. And as "Jonny" has shown, completely vengeful towards Her Majesty's language.

Time I left. Enjoy. And, to most? I suggest English lessons should be a greater priority.

you messaged me, I only delete spammers etc, there is nothing stopping you from not returning.

[throtts]

Her Majesty's language

""On yer bike"", mucker.

Just kidding.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

I wish they allowed swearing on here because you deserve. Impact throw has been known and discounted as a minor effect and is cause on angled pots by the ball/cloth friction. If you knew as much as you continuously say you do. In your opinion 50yrs of playing and I haven't learned anything yet I managed to win titles but of course at snooker which doesn't count for you I guess. Why don't you bog off and emigrate to the States. They would love you over there I imagine.

100yrs of snooker on top of 100yrs of English Billiards and no one except your Frenchman came up with this? You are insulting your own British heritage. I don't remember Walter Lindrum or Joe Davis ever mentioning CIT and SIT which are 2 American terms by the way.

Such bitterness towards your nearest neighbours. Sad.

You still haven't clarified when you knew about CIT, and congratulations at now introducing the ball to your extraordinary 'cloth friction' claim. This is important because our eyes deceive us: Joe Davis didn't know spin transferred from the CB to the OB, which, due to high speed camera work, we now know happens routinely. And you can bet your life WL knew all about this stuff - all billiard players did. They may not have known the physics but they sure knew how and when to use it.

Everyone is on a learning curve here - you and vmax are at the bottom of it, is all.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

I never said I could explain it just that it seems to be happening. Maybe try it out yourself if you can get a cue.

What 'seems to be happening' is, you're getting SIT and failing to see it. Your stubbornness prevents.

[OmaMiesta]

Alright so my buddy and I messed around with a couple of SIT shots before playing some frames. We tried to show a few different angles, none of these went plain ball and only with insane amounts of side could I get some of them to go. A couple close rattlers as well that probably would have dropped with brand new cloth..... obviously some of these shots are very difficult to judge (Hence the foul) but the point is that only with side and decent timing could any of these shots be potted. I think SIT 100 percent exists in billiard physics ....the proof is in the pudding. That being said....just from messing around today I also think that the effects are way more prominent on pool tables for whatever reason...wether its because of the cloth or balls I dont know.

[Terry Davidson]

Such bitterness towards your nearest neighbours. Sad.

You still haven't clarified when you knew about CIT, and congratulations at now introducing the ball to your extraordinary 'cloth friction' claim. This is important because our eyes deceive us: Joe Davis didn't know spin transferred from the CB to the OB, which, due to high speed camera work, we now know happens routinely. And you can bet your life WL knew all about this stuff - all billiard players did. They may not have known the physics but they sure knew how and when to use it.

Everyone is on a learning curve here - you and vmax are at the bottom of it, is all.

If you think so little of snooker and snooker players then why the hell are you on here all day long and not chatting with your superior cue sportsters on Pool forums such as AZ billiards. Although the Forum is open to all I don't think we are looking for a person who always criticizes our sport and insults other members as you continuously do.

I have to admit I love snooker and wouldn't play pool unless it was the only thing available so I'm likely biased. Try and keep your negative comments to yourself or keep your trap ****...or even go on AZ and moan and complain that us snooker players aren't listening to your common sense given by a guy who doesn't own a cue and doesn't even play ANY cue sport.

[Terry Davidson]

Alright so my buddy and I messed around with a couple of SIT shots before playing some frames. We tried to show a few different angles, none of these went plain ball and only with insane amounts of side could I get some of them to go. A couple close rattlers as well that probably would have dropped with brand new cloth..... obviously some of these shots are very difficult to judge (Hence the foul) but the point is that only with side and decent timing could any of these shots be potted. I think SIT 100 percent exists in billiard physics ....the proof is in the pudding. That being said....just from messing around today I also think that the effects are way more prominent on pool tables for whatever reason...wether its because of the cloth or balls I dont know.

Oma...your red ball is set up nowhere near 6" down from the yellow pocket but yet again the pro-Sit crowd has failed to show the ACTUAL set-up. If you are playing in the OBSA ranking tourney on Oct 7th I will show you the set-up and then ask you to try and pot the black. If you're not in the tournament then get your ass up here for the coaching session you talked about and I will show you and I might drop one hour's woth of coaching fee if you can pot the black with my set-up.

[Terry Davidson]

I have put up the 'final solution' on the other string from vmax. Each person should allow himself to be influenced by either myself or Travis (and most definitely not Biggie). You should set up the 3 balls all touching and ensuring BOB to the slop-in point is covered and see if you can pot the black with your skill level. As Oma showed, he even fouled a couple of times.

Ask yourself first of all is this shot worth the risk and secondly do I have the required skill-set to pot it.

Decide for yourselves rather than just reading the propaganda from either side of the argument because in the end you should decide something when you have all the facts. Mr. Big Shot has just read and watched a bunch of videos and has never played, doesn't even own a cue apparently (I don't know him, but then again none of us does). At least Travis tried the shots and is satisfied SIT exists (for him). I tried my shot and am satisfied SIT doesn't exist (for me). Be smart and do your own test because only you know what you're capable of.

[Terry Davidson]

Okay. You know what? I've tired of the lot of you. As one may see, I've made about twentyfive posts in seven years. Why? Because most here are typical interweb gits. No sense of fun. A complete lack of joy. And as "Jonny" has shown, completely vengeful towards Her Majesty's language.

Time I left. Enjoy. And, to most? I suggest English lessons should be a greater priority.

Well, I guess we've been told!!! 25 posts in 7 years so a real contributor then.

[OmaMiesta]

Oma...your red ball is set up nowhere near 6" down from the yellow pocket but yet again the pro-Sit crowd has failed to show the ACTUAL set-up. If you are playing in the OBSA ranking tourney on Oct 7th I will show you the set-up and then ask you to try and pot the black. If you're not in the tournament then get your ass up here for the coaching session you talked about and I will show you and I might drop one hour's woth of coaching fee if you can pot the black with my set-up.

Terry, I literally spent like 5 minutes on this and the conclusion was enough for me to confirm what I already knew. Of-course the set up wasn't exactly the same as yours but how is that relevant?...I dont doubt that your set up is harder or maybe even impossible to do. The whole point of me making this video was to show that there are certain shots that dont go plain ball that do go with side. Did not claim that SIT would make impossible shots pot lol. But I clearly showed the angles on the shots that I missed and potted, none of them went plain ball.

[Terry Davidson]

Terry, I literally spent like 5 minutes on this and the conclusion was enough for me to confirm what I already knew. Of-course the set up wasn't exactly the same as yours but how is that relevant?...I dont doubt that your set up is harder or maybe even impossible to do. The whole point of me making this video was to show that there are certain shots that dont go plain ball that do go with side. Did not claim that SIT would make impossible shots pot lol. But I clearly showed the angles on the shots that I missed and potted, none of them went plain ball.

No one was arguing about that. There are tons of videos out there showing pots while getting past an intervening ball. This is done by bringing the cueball to the potting point, with or without side. The argument was does SIT exist or not? What you were doing is bringing the CB into the black at a different attack angle. My set up totally eliminates that by having the red ball cover the potting point for the inside edge of the far jaw.

I couldn't move the OB over but maybe someone can.

[travisbickle]

No one was arguing about that. There are tons of videos out there showing pots while getting past an intervening ball. This is done by bring the cueball The argument was does SIT exist or not? What you were doing is bringing the CB into the black at a different attack angle. My set up totally eliminates that by having the red ball cover the potting point for the inside edge of the far jaw.

I couldn't move the OB over but maybe someone can.

I think we are going about it the wrong way here.
It's not up to us to prove to you it exists, it's up to you to disprove it.
You are always going on about CB swerving back on to BOB and that's all that's happening.
So you have all this slow motion tech that you use all the time, so try and prove my shot hits correct BOB.
If you can't this arguement is dead.

[travisbickle]

Alright so my buddy and I messed around with a couple of SIT shots before playing some frames. We tried to show a few different angles, none of these went plain ball and only with insane amounts of side could I get some of them to go. A couple close rattlers as well that probably would have dropped with brand new cloth..... obviously some of these shots are very difficult to judge (Hence the foul) but the point is that only with side and decent timing could any of these shots be potted. I think SIT 100 percent exists in billiard physics ....the proof is in the pudding. That being said....just from messing around today I also think that the effects are way more prominent on pool tables for whatever reason...wether its because of the cloth or balls I dont know.

Nice cueing Oma.
Top tunes as well.
Music blasting in the background is the only way to play snooker