Where do you get your kicks?

[Strickimicki]

Sorry Moglet,

I just realised where both sceptical on vmax4steve's theroy!

I just got a bit over excited and my dinner was ready!

Nice drawings!

Brian

[moglet]

Strickimicki, assuming the chalk spot has not been removed by the cloth, most likely this will happen quickly with the centre bottom shot, less likely if played with top especially if the object ball is a six inches or a foot away from the cueball and not at all likely if played with side, also assuming the contact is full ball, if the chalk spot is 5mm diameter there is a 1 in 30 or so chance the spot will fall somewhere in the contact area, I would argue as per my earlier post that the odds are the same if the shot is played with side. As you move away from full ball the spot will not be in the right plane to be a risk, this does not mean that you won't get a kick, the other one may rear its ugly head or there may already be a chalk spot on the cueball you haven't seen.

If your cueball has hit a cushion before reaching the object ball the plane of the chalk spot will have shifted position and to all intents and purposes the chance then becomes the more random one, 1 in 435 or so.

It does sometimes happen that the chalk spot can be rubbed off on the cushion, usually this will cause a "ping". The odds here are angle dependent.

I'm not sure I follow your last question?

Hope you enjoy your dinner

PS. Just reread your question about coming off the cushion, can you be more specific about the angles and distances involved?

[Strickimicki]

Hi moglet, thanks for bearing with me on this!

There is no specific distance or angle involved!

Just the open question, if the kicks where (which they're not), only due to chalk marks. Then why have I never seen one where the cueball came of the cushion!

I've only ever seen kicks where the cueball has directly hit the objectball, never on account of a second contact.

If this is getting tedious, just let me know!

Thanks,

Brian.

[moglet]

Just the open question, if the kicks where (which they're not), only due to chalk marks. Then why have I never seen one where the cueball came of the cushion!

I've only ever seen kicks where the cueball has directly hit the objectball, never on account of a second contact.

The first paragraph begs another question, if the kicks are not only due to chalk what do you think is causing the "other one" as I put it, as distinct from from the "Dambuster" one?

In English Billiards we sometimes get a kick during a half-ball cannon, half ball off the first ball to make a full contact on the second ball, no kick on the first ball but sometimes on the second object ball. It is very frustrating, however I wouldn't want to give away any secrets but, if vmax4steve tries the experiment and then tries a half ball cannon he will be surprised at the result.

[Strickimicki]

Please explain "the other one" and "Dambuster"!

The kicks I'm talking about are a mix of a bad contact where only the sound and maybe a little on pace is lost!

The kicks that cause the big problems are the ones where seemingly the white tries to climb up the objectball, getting only as far up as your cueing pace allows for! The mentioned kick here is played with top, if played with bottom then the objectball will be lifted a little from the table! I see this rarely!


Found on FCsnooker
So what causes the problem? What can be done about it? Do we accept the 'Kick' as part and parcel of the game?

Up to now, all that seems to be offered as an explanation for the possible cause of kicks are;

1) Static Electricity

2) Chalk

3) Humidity in the atmosphere

4) Dust or foreign particles on the balls and,

5) Changes in room temperature

The problem is not a new one. In the modern age however, with so much at stake it is imperative that something is done to address this issue. It is hard to believe that we can build stations in space but cannot resolve the 'kick' issue in snooker.

After reading this it brought back to mind, I think the Irish open last year!

The top players where getting an extreme amount of kicks, this was mentioned during a broadcast of the BBC!

If it is only due to chalk marks! Then why were the amount of kicks here extremely high? They were using the same chalk, balls, cloth and cues as they always do!

About 20 years ago a major University were looking into this, if I recall correctly!

But I'll be damned if I can find anything on the web!

Like I've mentioned if this is getting tedious, just let me know

Brian.

[moglet]

The Dambuster one is the bouncing bomb, or the cueball that bounces on its way to the object ball.

The "other one" is the kick that is not caused either by chalk or vertical misalignment but by something else. These can be variable in severity, sometimes so mild they pass unnoticed but still have a measurable effect on the outcome of a shot.

There isn't anything conclusive on the internet, just untested theories.

[vmax4steve]

I beg to differ, this diagram may explain what I am driving at. Addressing the ball at 10.30 (clock face), if you align your stripe at 45º so the stripe passes through the point on the ball surface closest to you and the point where you are going to strike it, play the shot and you will see the stripe remain in that orientation as the ball moves away from you, gradually it will decay as true forward roll takes effect. It is more difficult to show the effect if the shot is played with drag and side spin, but the plane of the stripe will remain in the direction of the ball's linear motion. It is the axis of rotation that varies in relation to the bed but always remains at right angles to the direction of linear motion.

Try marking an equator or great circle on a ball and set it up as I described.

[ATTACH]2175[/ATTACH]

Intriguing theory moglet, don't think I would be allowed to mark the balls in my club, but I will steal a striped pool ball from somewhere and try it out.

[moglet]

Good luck vmax4steve, one thing to remember is that when the cue strikes the cueball it sets up its own "circle" the aim is to make your circle line up with the generated one.

I showed one of the professionals this "trick" and he uses a marked ball now to check on the accuracy of his cuing, the most difficult is the centre bottom strike, if you have set up the circle accurately only if you strike the line spot on will you get "your" circle line to translate through the flip point when the ball rotation changes from back spin to forward rolling.

[1lawyer]

Was going to say in the Casino!

I always seem to get a kick playing a slow roll. Or imaginary ones when I miss something easy to hide my embarresment.

[vmax4steve]

Good luck vmax4steve, one thing to remember is that when the cue strikes the cueball it sets up its own "circle" the aim is to make your circle line up with the generated one.

Take my hat off to you moglet, my theory regarding side spin is totally canned. The stripe does rotate on the axis of where the tip strikes the cue ball. Of course this means that the chalk mark will always be on the centre line of the cue ball as it rotates and thus the chances of getting a kick when playing side on a straight pot are no different to centre ball striking.

I am not a physics major so my theory did seem logical to me, glad to have learned from you, but, I hardly ever get a kick when playing with top side, have you got an explanation for this ? Could it be that I strike the cue ball at either 3 o'clock or 9 o' clock and never above centre ?

[moglet]

I am not a physics major so my theory did seem logical to me, glad to have learned from you, but, I hardly ever get a kick when playing with top side, have you got an explanation for this ? Could it be that I strike the cue ball at either 3 o'clock or 9 o' clock and never above centre ?

Strange that. I would have expected most players to have had a chalk kick with the full ball contact when the cueball is fairly close to the object ball, there not being much chance of the cueball rotating enough to lose the mark on the bed cloth. Just been rechecking the contact point, my ball has two lines 5mm apart the great circle falling midway between the two, I shade a small area, again about 5mm diameter, on the object ball with a soft lead pencil and aim the cue ball directly at it, this leaves a tell-tale mark on the cue ball showing where it contacted the object ball, several tries with varying amounts of side and the transferred pencil mark always falls between the two lines.

I'm no physics graduate either, I was trying to find the reason for something else altogether and found that a marked ball was the easiest way of seeing what was happening. It is fine in theory but not entirely infallible!

[vmax4steve]

Here's a different theory on maybe why the tournament champions kick so frequently. One would expect the material used to be of uniform consistency regarding density, weight and elasticity O.K.
When the balls come out of the mould and are then machined to size and polished, they are then matched for weight O.K.
If certain balls are too heavy, is it possible that these balls are then machined down to make the weight so to speak, and are then therefore undersized.
Balls of varying size will kick and bounce when contacting each other, being the same weight will not stop this happening.
Just a few thou could make a difference in the contact point being either below or above centre.

[alex_5525]

from dust on the table

[moglet]

One would expect the material used to be of uniform consistency regarding density, weight and elasticity O.K.

Just a few thou could make a difference in the contact point being either below or above centre.

Haha, if it was only that easy. Unfortunately the density of the material does vary, so you can find balls that are 52.40mm weighing heavier than balls that are 52.50mm. In any case if there were two balls of sufficient* difference in diameter a difference that would be quite visible, say a large white and a small colour, they would kick every time they meet, this is not what we usually see in practice - sometimes they do kick sometimes they don't.

* A two inch ball seems quite happy against a 2 1/16 one and vice versa in a normal rolling contact, I don't have any that are more different in size to check.

It would be interesting to hear what Saluc said to WS/WPBSA when they asked for help, they did approve the ball after all and it is in their TV conditions that the problem seems worst.

alex_5525 (after your edit, LOL) dust from the table doesn't help of course, especially if the balls are too clean this can increase the amount of accumulated static charge.