Allowing for side

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

Not smart but the best so we must know something.



Deflection isn't cancelled at all, as the cue isn't parallel to the line of aim the shot is played from a slightly different line and therefore the cue ball deflects onto the correct line.
And Trump doesn't do this at all, his body movement on the delivery stroke takes the cue onto the correct line of aim, he offsets for this reason alone.



The squeeze effect is the pushing action of balls that are touching and moving together before they break apart thus the angle can change. A spinning cue ball isn't needed to achieve this at all.

Take a look again at the video that itsnoteasy posted, no transfer of side to the object ball on a ball that is free and not touching others or a cushion. Dr. Dave uses the squeeze effect to prove his transfer of side theories, it's he who doesn't understand and thinks it spin that's causing all these effects. It's not, it's squeeze and the arcing of the cue ball along the cloth. He can only demonstrate transfer of side on a ball that comes of a cushion, far more contact friction between cloth and ball than two balls contacting. A ball coming off a cushion at an angle will collect a little spin, it only comes off at the angle it contacts at dead full on with no spin on it, otherwise it collects a little side as it digs into the cloth covered rubber.
I've done this with a striped pool ball, hit it into the cushion at an angle with centre striking and the stripe stays vertical, but after contact with the cushion the stripe goes sideways.

See reply to neil and stop making a fool of yourself.

[acesinc]

This debate has gone on practically forever (at least probably since Mingaud invented the leather cue tip), and every time I see it come up on TSF, there is always an "us against them" attitude about it (or perhaps, "us against him" is the more accurate phrase). I am a long time snooker player, but I am fairly a new timer to the forum, member of TSF since 2012, but rarely posted until more recently and truthfully, only started to follow with regularity six or eight months ago. I certainly have not taken the time to go through archives of the "spin transfer or not" debate so perhaps it has been done ad nauseum and needs no further resurrection. On the other hand, if anyone is actually interested in a coherent case for the belief why a small amount of spin is transferred to the object ball and potentially may have an effect on object ball trajectory, I would be happy to provide that. I tend to get lengthy in my explanations though and it is quite a technical topic so I certainly won't waste my time or anyone else's pontificating on a topic better left quiet. Hint: Mr. Shot is right about many things, not accurate about some, but he very much does tend to put his emphasis in completely the wrong place. My points of contention tend to side much more with Mr. Stark or the late, great Mr. Karnehm.

[acesinc]

Someone with 22 contributions to this site in nearly 5 years - wow, thanks for your commitment to the cause.

I was not going to honor this retort with a further reply but I will say one more thing. As I own and operate an economically priced snooker parlour in order to promote the game at an international level, I think it is fair to say that in all likelihood, I demonstrate more "commitment to the cause" in my sleep (while my club members may be pursuing their passion) than you are liable to demonstrate in your lifetime.

[bolty]

Firstly, i rarely visit this forum, it's terrible. Where do you get your hours and hours a day from? Secondly, what drivel? Prove what i say is incorrect. Hurry up. Thirdly, when have i ever said pool is superior to snooker? You clearly haven't been paying attention if you think I've said one game is better than the other. I've been at pains to point out they are different games.

I neither have the time nor the need to be bothered answering these questions. You're lucky I have 15 minutes left of my work day to burn to type this reply.

All I will say, is that you have a habit of rubbing people up the wrong way. So much so that I'm pretty certain it's a game to you, and you're probably better at that than snooker, so fair play.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

This debate has gone on practically forever (at least probably since Mingaud invented the leather cue tip), and every time I see it come up on TSF, there is always an "us against them" attitude about it (or perhaps, "us against him" is the more accurate phrase). I am a long time snooker player, but I am fairly a new timer to the forum, member of TSF since 2012, but rarely posted until more recently and truthfully, only started to follow with regularity six or eight months ago. I certainly have not taken the time to go through archives of the "spin transfer or not" debate so perhaps it has been done ad nauseum and needs no further resurrection. On the other hand, if anyone is actually interested in a coherent case for the belief why a small amount of spin is transferred to the object ball and potentially may have an effect on object ball trajectory, I would be happy to provide that. I tend to get lengthy in my explanations though and it is quite a technical topic so I certainly won't waste my time or anyone else's pontificating on a topic better left quiet. Hint: Mr. Shot is right about many things, not accurate about some, but he very much does tend to put his emphasis in completely the wrong place. My points of contention tend to side much more with Mr. Stark or the late, great Mr. Karnehm.

Where am i 'not accurate'? And what does 'puts emphasis in completely the wrong place mean'?

Be specific, please.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

I neither have the time nor the need to be bothered answering these questions. You're lucky I have 15 minutes left of my work day to burn to type this reply.

.

Then retract and apologise.

[Cue crafty]

Then retract and apologise.

I remember hearing a good joke once about a hunter who kept trying to kill a bear but failed each time and got buggered my the bear.... after several failed attempts the bear says " you're not here for the hunting are you"?

You're not here for the snooker are you Biggie? Lol.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

I was not going to honor this retort with a further reply but I will say one more thing. As I own and operate an economically priced snooker parlour in order to promote the game at an international level, I think it is fair to say that in all likelihood, I demonstrate more "commitment to the cause" in my sleep (while my club members may be pursuing their passion) than you are liable to demonstrate in your lifetime.

Lol. You promote the game at an international level?

Do you mean you run a club with one snooker table, that 'aims to be like a British working man's club'?

Rather grandiose claims, huh Ace?

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

I remember hearing a good joke once about a hunter who kept trying to kill a bear but failed each time and got buggered my the bear.... after several failed attempts the bear says " you're not here for the hunting are you"?

You're not here for the snooker are you Biggie? Lol.

Lol.

........

[Cue crafty]

So you did golfy lad, i missed it. But the question was about the effect side has on the ob, not how to negate the effects of deflection.

When's yer mate coming back anyway? Getting tired of insulting these idiots alone lol.

Gone but not forgotten, bring ol Splasher back to juice things up. ; )

[acesinc]

There is one thing to his credit, he truly does treat all with equal disdain whether they agree with him or not. I am sure that Ronnie O'Sullivan and the rest of those idiots are clueless as well. Personally, I do resolve non-response no matter what. I will just sit back and be entertained.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

There is one thing to his credit, he truly does treat all with equal disdain whether they agree with him or not. I am sure that Ronnie O'Sullivan and the rest of those idiots are clueless as well. Personally, I do resolve non-response no matter what. I will just sit back and be entertained.

Good. Before you go, and let's face it, few of us had realised you'd arrived, would you care to answer one more question?

Do you know Patrick Johnson? A long shot, i know, but he'd clear this up in no time.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

There is one thing to his credit, he truly does treat all with equal disdain whether they agree with him or not. I am sure that Ronnie O'Sullivan and the rest of those idiots are clueless as well. Personally, I do resolve non-response no matter what. I will just sit back and be entertained.

Oh, one more thing on your disdain point.

This ain't our first rodeo. There's a limit to how many times you can keep your cool explaining things to the willfully ignorant.

Many around here still think the earth is flat, you know.

[itsnoteasy]

https://youtu.be/4B4f_IDFips

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

https://youtu.be/4B4f_IDFips

Lol! So that's where vmax gets his, ahem, information from.

Good god.