PDA

View Full Version : English for beginners



Pages : [1] 2

FatsRedux
11-30-2006, 03:19 PM
English 101:

English is the application of sidespin to the cue ball. Anytime you stroke the cueball to either the left, or the right, of the center vertical axis, you are imparting english to the cueball. English can be combined with either follow (topspin) or draw (backspin). Neither follow, nor draw, are "english", although they are often mistakenly referred to as such.

Beginners should first make sure that they have practiced and are thoroughly acquainted with all the basics such as grip, stance, center ball aim, stroke, follow, draw and speed control before they move on to using english. This is because the use of english introduces variables such as curve, throw, and deflection, or squirt, and these must be compensated for.

While it is true that you cannot be a good player without knowing how to use english, it is also equally true, that english used improperly can create a heck of a lot more problems than it solves.

Learning to use english properly will demand a lot of effort on your part. You must be willing to spend lots of time at the practice table. Use it sparingly and only when needed. You can get shape or position on most shots using center ball. You can also look to play a safety, wait for a better opportunity, and let your opponent make the mistakes. Having said that, let's move on.

If you stroke the cueball with right english, the cueball will spin to the left (counterclockwise) as it travels down the table. If you stroke the cueball with left english it will spin to the right (clockwise) as it travels down the table.

English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw". Set up a cue ball and an object ball and shoot at the object ball while using left english. You will observe that the object ball will now veer to the RIGHT. The left english on the cueball has been converted to right english on the object ball. Although it is not entirely accurate, the easiest way to picture what is going on in a shot involving english induced throw is to picture two gears meshing. As one gear turns to the left, the other turns to the right. How much english induced throw is produced depends on how much english was applied to the cueball initially and the speed of the stroke. The effect will be more pronounced on a softer stroke than on a hard stroke.

English is most often used for purposes of obtaining good position for the next shot. It can also be used to help pocket a ball.

Effects of english on the cue ball after it contacts a rail:

"Natural" or "Running" english will:

* Add speed to the cue ball after it contacts the rail.
* Widen the angle after the cue ball contacts the rail.

"Reverse" or "un-natural" english will:

* Take speed off the cue ball after it contacts a rail.
* Narrow or close the angle after the cueball contacts the rail.

To know which english is natural or reverse, draw an imaginary line going through the center of the cueball straight to the other side of the table. If you are shooting to the left of this imaginary line then left english is "natural" or "running english" and right english is "reverse" or "un-natural" english. If you are shooting to the right of the line then right english is "natural" or "running" english and left english is "reverse" or "un-natural" english.

A cueball struck with running english will every adjoining cushion with running english. However, if that cueball strikes an opposing cushion the english that was once "running" or natural english will be reversed. It's important for newbies to remember this and understand it completely because it is very important for position play.

Inside and Outside English:

Outside English:

English is often referred to as "Inside" or "Outside" english. When a ball is cut to the right with left English, or to the left with right english, that is considered to be "outside" english. The most common reason for the use of outside english in cut shots is to help negate the effects of friction induced throw.

Friction induced throw occurs during the brief period of contact between the cue ball and the object ball. During this time, due to friction between the surfaces of the balls, there is a tendency for the object ball to remain in contact with the cue ball and be pushed forward from the planned line of aim.

When using outside english it is generally best to aim to hit the object ball a bit "thicker" or fuller than normal.

Inside English:

Cutting an object ball to the left with left english, or to the right with right english, is considered to be "Inside English". Inside english requires you to hit the object ball thinner. For a lot of players (beginners in particular) the thin hit required when using inside english seems to make aiming correctly quite a bit harder. Because of the thinner hit, inside english will not alter the path of the object ball as much, as the same amount of outside english would, on the very same shot.

Remember that after contact with the object ball, the cue ball still has english on it. Depending on what type, (right or left), and the angle of approach to the rail, that english will in turn, affect the path of the cue ball and the resulting position for you next shot.

Here's a shot where outside / running english is used to gain position on the nine ball, which is sitting by the middle of the short rail, at the other side of the table:

START( %FE4D9%Ir3O2%PG0G8%Wi5[0%XH2C3%Yq3U3%Zj4[4%[H3C2%\F0D7%]E9E1 %^F6F8%eC1`8
)END

Here is a shot where inside / reverse English is used to gain position on the nine ball which is sitting by the short rail, one diamond away, from the pocket you are shooting the object ball into:
START(%ED6D5%ID1I2%PF6H2%WG1C0%XE5D7%YK5R9%ZG2C2%[E3E4%\F2G5%eA7`6)END

Fats

dr_dave
11-30-2006, 04:52 PM
Fats,

Excellent summary ... nice and concise, but also complete. It is a good posting to refer people to in the future if they have basic questions about English. I've added a link to it as "basics and terminology" under "English" here (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/threads.html). The page (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/threads.html) also has links to other useful English-related postings.

Regards,
Dave
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> English 101:

English is the application of sidespin to the cue ball. Anytime you stroke the cueball to either the left, or the right, of the center vertical axis, you are imparting english to the cueball. English can be combined with either follow (topspin) or draw (backspin). Neither follow, nor draw, are "english", although they are often mistakenly referred to as such.

Beginners should first make sure that they have practiced and are thoroughly acquainted with all the basics such as grip, stance, center ball aim, stroke, follow, draw and speed control before they move on to using english. This is because the use of english introduces variables such as curve, throw, and deflection, or squirt, and these must be compensated for.

While it is true that you cannot be a good player without knowing how to use english, it is also equally true, that english used improperly can create a heck of a lot more problems than it solves.

Learning to use english properly will demand a lot of effort on your part. You must be willing to spend lots of time at the practice table. Use it sparingly and only when needed. You can get shape or position on most shots using center ball. You can also look to play a safety, wait for a better opportunity, and let your opponent make the mistakes. Having said that, let's move on.

If you stroke the cueball with right english, the cueball will spin to the left (counterclockwise) as it travels down the table. If you stroke the cueball with left english it will spin to the right (clockwise) as it travels down the table.

English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw". Set up a cue ball and an object ball and shoot at the object ball while using left english. You will observe that the object ball will now veer to the RIGHT. The left english on the cueball has been converted to right english on the object ball. Although it is not entirely accurate, the easiest way to picture what is going on in a shot involving english induced throw is to picture two gears meshing. As one gear turns to the left, the other turns to the right. How much english induced throw is produced depends on how much english was applied to the cueball initially and the speed of the stroke. The effect will be more pronounced on a softer stroke than on a hard stroke.

English is most often used for purposes of obtaining good position for the next shot. It can also be used to help pocket a ball.

Effects of english on the cue ball after it contacts a rail:

"Natural" or "Running" english will:

* Add speed to the cue ball after it contacts the rail.
* Widen the angle after the cue ball contacts the rail.
"Reverse" or "un-natural" english will:
* Take speed off the cue ball after it contacts a rail.
* Narrow or close the angle after the cueball contacts the rail.

To know which english is natural or reverse, draw an imaginary line going through the center of the cueball straight to the other side of the table. If you are shooting to the left of this imaginary line then left english is "natural" or "running english" and right english is "reverse" or "un-natural" english. If you are shooting to the right of the line then right english is "natural" or "running" english and left english is "reverse" or "un-natural" english.

A cueball struck with running english will every adjoining cushion with running english. However, if that cueball strikes an opposing cushion the english that was once "running" or natural english will be reversed. It's important for newbies to remember this and understand it completely because it is very important for position play.

Inside and Outside English:

Outside English:

English is often referred to as "Inside" or "Outside" english. When a ball is cut to the right with left English, or to the left with right english, that is considered to be "outside" english. The most common reason for the use of outside english in cut shots is to help negate the effects of friction induced throw.

Friction induced throw occurs during the brief period of contact between the cue ball and the object ball. During this time, due to friction between the surfaces of the balls, there is a tendency for the object ball to remain in contact with the cue ball and be pushed forward from the planned line of aim.

When using outside english it is generally best to aim to hit the object ball a bit "thicker" or fuller than normal.

Inside English:

Cutting an object ball to the left with left english, or to the right with right english, is considered to be "Inside English". Inside english requires you to hit the object ball thinner. For a lot of players (beginners in particular) the thin hit required when using inside english seems to make aiming correctly quite a bit harder. Because of the thinner hit, inside english will not alter the path of the object ball as much, as the same amount of outside english would, on the very same shot.

Remember that after contact with the object ball, the cue ball still has english on it. Depending on what type, (right or left), and the angle of approach to the rail, that english will in turn, affect the path of the cue ball and the resulting position for you next shot.

Here's a shot where outside / running english is used to gain position on the nine ball, which is sitting by the middle of the short rail, at the other side of the table:

START( %FE4D9%Ir3O2%PG0G8%Wi5[0%XH2C3%Yq3U3%Zj4[4%[H3C2%\F0D7%]E9E1 %^F6F8%eC1`8
)END

Here is a shot where inside / reverse English is used to gain position on the nine ball which is sitting by the short rail, one diamond away, from the pocket you are shooting the object ball into:
START(%ED6D5%ID1I2%PF6H2%WG1C0%XE5D7%YK5R9%ZG2C2%[E3E4%\F2G5%eA7`6)END

Fats

<hr /></blockquote>

Jal
12-01-2006, 12:00 AM
Just about everything you said is spot on in my opinion, and apparently in that of Dr. Dave's who is said to know something about the subject. I'll critique a couple of points while being aware that you did title it "English 101" and weren't trying to cover every nuance.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...While it is true that you cannot be a good player without knowing how to use english, it is also equally true, that english used improperly can create a heck of a lot more problems than it solves....Use it sparingly and only when needed. You can get shape or position on most shots using center ball.<hr /></blockquote>Excellent advice in my opinion.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw". Set up a cue ball and an object ball and shoot at the object ball while using left english. You will observe that the object ball will now veer to the RIGHT.<hr /></blockquote>An exception: on a cut shot a little greater than 30 degrees (half-ball hit), a small amount of left will throw the object ball to the left, and more so than if no english is used. At a larger cut angle, more left will do the same thing. This is mainly true when there is little draw or follow present.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...How much english induced throw is produced depends on how much english was applied to the cueball initially and the speed of the stroke. The effect will be more pronounced on a softer stroke than on a hard stroke.<hr /></blockquote>Good point. This is a thing which probably trips up a lot of players even after years of experience (don't I know). It is possible to get large amounts of throw at fast speeds at large cut angles if you get the spin just right, but this is generally unlikely since the spin window where this can occur shrinks with cut angle.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...The most common reason for the use of outside english in cut shots is to help negate the effects of friction induced throw.<hr /></blockquote>I think it might be for position, but you may be right.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...Friction induced throw occurs during the brief period of contact between the cue ball and the object ball. During this time, due to friction between the surfaces of the balls, there is a tendency for the object ball to remain in contact with the cue ball and be pushed forward from the planned line of aim.<hr /></blockquote>I don't think the friction extends the contact time, but I'm not absolutely sure of this either. At least the concept is not necessary up front to explain throw.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...When using outside english it is generally best to aim to hit the object ball a bit "thicker" or fuller than normal.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...Inside english requires you to hit the object ball thinner.<hr /></blockquote>Again, there are pesky exceptions, but overall I believe this is true.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...Because of the thinner hit, inside english will not alter the path of the object ball as much, as the same amount of outside english would, on the very same shot.<hr /></blockquote>It's not ver clear to me what you mean here.

Although I have some quibbles, it is a great summary and very well expressed.

Jim

Cornerman
12-01-2006, 08:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JAL:</font><hr><blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>
...Because of the thinner hit, inside english will not alter the path of the object ball as much, as the same amount of outside english would, on the very same shot.
<hr /></blockquote>

It's not ver clear to me what you mean here.<hr /></blockquote> I think this is actually one of the best statements about inside english, and why people think it's harder. Whether the details are correct may not be so important, but the spirit of the statement is important.

In a nutshell, I think FatsRedux is simply saying that the throw adjustments made for inside aren't the same as the adjustments for outside for the same shot.

BTW, the wording seems very familiar, like it's on a site by an RSB poster.

Fred

dr_dave
12-01-2006, 09:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr><blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...Friction induced throw occurs during the brief period of contact between the cue ball and the object ball. During this time, due to friction between the surfaces of the balls, there is a tendency for the object ball to remain in contact with the cue ball and be pushed forward from the planned line of aim.<hr /></blockquote>I don't think the friction extends the contact time<hr /></blockquote>Agreed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>At least the concept is not necessary up front to explain throw.<hr /></blockquote>
Agreed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>Although I have some quibbles, it is a great summary and very well expressed.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed.

Regards,
Dave

Billy_Bob
12-01-2006, 10:12 AM
I might add that there are problems with "cue ball deflection" when using english, especially long shots.

An easy way for a beginner to solve these problems is to use a low deflection shaft/cue like a Predator 314. Use "front hand english". Aim dead center, then move just your front hand left/right to apply english (while not moving your back hand). The cue ball will go to the same spot as a dead center hit. There are other things to learn like throw, but if the object ball is near a pocket, you should be able to use english and still make your ball.

As stated above, don't use english if you can avoid it. And for beginners using a low deflection shaft, I would suggest only using english when the object ball is near a pocket.

I have some observations with this...

-I have seen people tell beginners to use english and the beginners are using *regular* cues. The beginners suddenly start missing a *lot* of shots! I tell the beginners to *stop* using english, then they begin pocketing balls again.

-I have let a beginner friend of mine use a Predator cue of mine from the get go. He has been practicing seriously for 2 months now. He can now shoot some shots when using english and pocket his balls. So this is pretty amazing. I feel that using a low deflection shaft makes using english for a beginner much more easier.

Note for those with regular cues: There is a thing called "backhand english" to be used for regular cues. Search groups.google.com rec.sport.billiard for "backhand english" if you want to read tons of information about this.

For how throw can affect shots, watch the following video...
(Again, if the object ball is near a pocket, you don't need to worry about this. There is a lot of leeway in the pocket opening.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-xtzn4vbiQ

dr_dave
12-01-2006, 10:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr>As stated above, don't use english if you can avoid it. And for beginners using a low deflection shaft, I would suggest only using english when the object ball is near a pocket.<hr /></blockquote>
Did you mean to write regular (high defletion) shaft here?

Dave

Jal
12-01-2006, 12:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> I think this is actually one of the best statements about inside english, and why people think it's harder.<hr /></blockquote>I find it harder, because for some reason I tend to not compensate for squirt as well, I think?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>In a nutshell, I think FatsRedux is simply saying that the throw adjustments made for inside aren't the same as the adjustments for outside for the same shot.<hr /></blockquote>Ah, makes sense. Thanks Fred.

Jim

FatsRedux
12-01-2006, 11:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote JAL:</font><hr><blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>
...Because of the thinner hit, inside english will not alter the path of the object ball as much, as the same amount of outside english would, on the very same shot.
<hr /></blockquote>

It's not ver clear to me what you mean here.<hr /></blockquote> I think this is actually one of the best statements about inside english, and why people think it's harder. Whether the details are correct may not be so important, but the spirit of the statement is important.

In a nutshell, I think FatsRedux is simply saying that the throw adjustments made for inside aren't the same as the adjustments for outside for the same shot.

BTW, the wording seems very familiar, like it's on a site by an RSB poster.

Fred

<hr /></blockquote>

Yes it is like by an RSB poster because that poster and I are one and the same. And yes Fred, I still have my Tucker and no, I'm not letting go of it! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Gayle in MD
12-02-2006, 05:19 AM
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw". [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>


I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????

Gayle in Md.

Billy_Bob
12-02-2006, 09:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Did you mean to write regular (high defletion) shaft here? <hr /></blockquote>

No - low deflection shaft.

My feelings are that beginners should not use *any* english if using a regular shaft, and should only use english when the object ball is near a pocket when using a low deflection shaft.

With a regular shaft, you have the problem of cue ball deflection and throw. So best to not use english at all.

With a low deflection shaft, the cue ball will go to the same spot as a dead center hit when using "front hand english", so you have just the throw problem. And with the object ball close to the pocket, you don't need to worry about the throw problem (due to how wide the pocket opening is). So it is fairly easy for a beginner to pocket their ball and use english. If the object ball was further away, then they would need to learn about throw and adjust their aim. This is just too much stuff to learn and work on when they are still trying to learn to pocket balls (if you ask me).

FatsRedux
12-02-2006, 10:22 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw". &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>


I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Set up a shot where the cue ball and object ball centers are on a straight line approaching the cushion at an angle. Mark the position of the object ball and the cueball, so that you can repeat the shot. Now shoot the object ball into the rail at a medium speed using center ball on the cue ball (full on, no cut). Observe where the object ball goes.

Set up the shot again use the same speed and apply a tip of outside english along the centerline (no follow or draw)and note where the object ball goes.

Try the same thing again, using varying degrees of english. You will note that the rebound angle of the object ball changes depending on the type and amount of english used on the cue ball. This is due to english being transfered from the cue ball to the object ball.

English transfer is real and it is observable.

Fats

Gayle in MD
12-02-2006, 12:28 PM
That's what I thought, too. I used to say, ..."but, I know I've been able to make some tough shots, especially into the side pockets, by spinning the ball in, with a little side on the CB."

"No, Gayle, side english is not transferred from the CB, to the OB."

There's atleast one instructor, someone we all know and love, with whom I've argued about this for years, lol. I hope they see this thread, it will be interesting to see if the person/people in question, identify themselves... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

Stretch
12-02-2006, 01:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw". &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>


I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Set up a shot where the cue ball and object ball centers are on a straight line approaching the cushion at an angle. Mark the position of the object ball and the cueball, so that you can repeat the shot. Now shoot the object ball into the rail at a medium speed using center ball on the cue ball (full on, no cut). Observe where the object ball goes.

Set up the shot again use the same speed and apply a tip of outside english along the centerline (no follow or draw)and note where the object ball goes.

Try the same thing again, using varying degrees of english. You will note that the rebound angle of the object ball changes depending on the type and amount of english used on the cue ball. This is due to english being transfered from the cue ball to the object ball.

English transfer is real and it is observable.

Fats <hr /></blockquote>

Shhhhhh Fats, you might just give away my banking secret. I look for a full ball hit and see where that would naturaly go. That way i can lengthen or shorten the angle useing english to make the pocket...........DOU!!! St.

Chopstick
12-02-2006, 03:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> That's what I thought, too. I used to say, ..."but, I know I've been able to make some tough shots, especially into the side pockets, by spinning the ball in, with a little side on the CB."

"No, Gayle, side english is not transferred from the CB, to the OB."

Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>

That is not correct. Straight pool and one pocket players have been using this principle to make combinations forever. There are two ways to see it.

One way is to set up a striped ball with the stripe straight up and down pointed at the corner pocket. Shoot a easy speed stop shot no english. If you hit it square the stripe will roll forward like a tire with no wobble into the pocket. Shoot the same shot with side spin. The stripe wobbles. In fact you will find that it is impossible to hit the cue ball with side spin and not have the stripe wobble on it's way to the pocket. This is because at the moment of impact the friction of the spinning cue ball and the object ball pulls on the object ball and it trys to spin in the opposite direction. The dirtier the ball the more pronounced the effect.

Now, here's how to use it in a game. Take two balls and freeze them together. Point them in a combination at the corner pocket just a little off where the second object ball will not go. Set the cue ball behind the combination and shoot straight into it to confirm the ball will not go. You have to shoot dead center of the first object ball. If you hit it with any kind of glancing blow then you get into collision induced throw and that is another subject.

Here's the way you have to work it out. If the cue ball is spinning clockwise the first object ball will spin in the opposite direction, counter clockwise. If your frozen combination shot is just barely to the right of the pocket where it will not go then left english on the cue ball will transfer right english to the first object ball(the one you hit with the cue ball) and throw the second object ball into the pocket. This will work with 3 and 4 ball combinations as well.

And finally, my favorite one pocket shot. Two balls frozen on the spot. One on the spot and one frozen right behind it. I need one and I am shooting from the kitchen. I can shoot the ball on the spot straight into the corner pocket, no rails or banks. It will go straight in.

Set the cue ball down a few inches to the side of center, shoot straight into the head ball and draw the cue ball. Draw on the cue ball will translate into follow on the object ball. The back ball will bounce away and the ball on the spot will pick up the follow and go straight into the corner.

As far as spinning the ball into a pocket, I am not sure about that. What I will tell you is this. I took some lessons from Buddy Hall and he told me that he does it and told me to do it too. He said it makes the pocket bigger. Grady Matthews also said something similar about using english to "help the ball go".

Sid_Vicious
12-02-2006, 03:40 PM
Stop the press! I agree with Chopstick. With the trust in your contact point on the CB gripping with outside, importance being the stroke mechanics and belief, you can damn near make backcuts which defy physics, it takes touch and execution. Concerning the 1-P frozen spot shot...I've seen it done many times and had it explained ahead of time. Incidental throw with spin is real. It kind of breaks rules for fundamentalists, and that's why I call it "Liberalized" and fun...sid~~~couldn't help himself Chopster, You Liberal Pool Player

Cornerman
12-02-2006, 04:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> That's what I thought, too. I used to say, ..."but, I know I've been able to make some tough shots, especially into the side pockets, by spinning the ball in, with a little side on the CB."

"No, Gayle, side english is not transferred from the CB, to the OB."

<hr /></blockquote>Are you sure they didn't say "No, Gayle, attempting to curve an object ball is a folly"? or "using transferred spin to make the object ball spin into the cushion seems like a waste of energy."

I have to believe that all instructors know that spin does transfer. Where they disagree is how much spin and what the object ball does due to the transferred spin.

Fred &lt;~~~ think that spin transfers, but object balls don't curve due to it

Jal
12-02-2006, 05:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr>...And finally, my favorite one pocket shot. Two balls frozen on the spot. One on the spot and one frozen right behind it. I need one and I am shooting from the kitchen. I can shoot the ball on the spot straight into the corner pocket, no rails or banks. It will go straight in.

Set the cue ball down a few inches to the side of center, shoot straight into the head ball and draw the cue ball. Draw on the cue ball will translate into follow on the object ball. The back ball will bounce away and the ball on the spot will pick up the follow and go straight into the corner. <hr /></blockquote>I don't think that follow on the object ball is the main reason this happens in that you can do it without any draw on the cueball. In fact, I doubt that you can get much topspin on the first ball, even by ball/ball collision standards, because of the ball behind it...but I'm not sure about this.

It is a great shot and would be one of my favorites too if I could make it more often.

Jim

cushioncrawler
12-02-2006, 05:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> ...Now, here's how to use it in a game. Take two balls and freeze them together. Point them in a combination at the corner pocket just a little off where the second object ball will not go. Set the cue ball behind the combination and shoot straight into it to confirm the ball will not go. You have to shoot dead center of the first object ball. If you hit it with any kind of glancing blow then you get into collision induced throw and that is another subject. Here's the way you have to work it out. If the cue ball is spinning clockwise the first object ball will spin in the opposite direction, counter clockwise. If your frozen combination shot is just barely to the right of the pocket where it will not go then left english on the cue ball will transfer right english to the first object ball(the one you hit with the cue ball) and throw the second object ball into the pocket.
And finally, my favorite one pocket shot. Two balls frozen on the spot. One on the spot and one frozen right behind it. I need one and I am shooting from the kitchen. I can shoot the ball on the spot straight into the corner pocket, no rails or banks. It will go straight in.... <hr /></blockquote>
Chops -- with 2 balls touching....
Q1... Where would u place the qball to throw the 2nd ball to the max??
Q2... What contact would u make on the 1st ball??
Q3... What spin or screw would u put on the qball??
Q4... How hard would u hit (ie to get max throw)??

I have tested this stuff on a 12' table uzing billiards balls (2-1/16") -- i suspect that 2-1/4" balls etc would give the same rezults. madMac.

dr_dave
12-02-2006, 08:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> My feelings are that beginners should not use *any* english if using a regular shaft, and should only use english when the object ball is near a pocket when using a low deflection shaft.<hr /></blockquote>
Thanks for clarifying. Sounds reasonable to me.

Dave

PS: Where have you been? It seems like you have been away from the CCB for a while.

dr_dave
12-02-2006, 09:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw".

I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????<hr /></blockquote>
If there are still any disbelievers out there, HSV A.66 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-66.htm) should settle things. The camera doesn't lie.

Dave

Gayle in MD
12-02-2006, 10:36 PM
Hi,
The Statement was, that side spin on the cueball, had no affect on the object ball. /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

gayle

Gayle in MD
12-02-2006, 10:45 PM
Thank you. I will definately set up those shots, well described, also. Martin (Sid) just described the way I use CB to OB spin most often, backward cuts, like when the OB, is slightly past the where it looks like you can make it, and near the pocket,....the spin throws the object ball backwards.

Gayle

Gayle in MD
12-02-2006, 10:50 PM
Exactly what I'm talking about, Martin...backward cuts.

Gayle

Qtec
12-02-2006, 11:15 PM
I think he is saying that an IE shot will always be a thinner cut than the OE because of the throw.


Q

Sid_Vicious
12-03-2006, 12:05 AM
Guess I didn't follow this thread thoroughly Gayle,,,it seemed like you were resisting the theory of second-hand-induced-movement of the OB from the spin on the cueball. I didn't read much of the conversation before posting...sid

Cornerman
12-03-2006, 06:35 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> I don't think that follow on the object ball is the main reason this happens in that you can do it without any draw on the cueball. <hr /></blockquote>I wonder then if by using draw something else happens or doesn't happen compared to if you use stun. In my mind, there's no doubt that using draw on the cueball makes the shot easier. And maybe the little bit of follow transferred is all it needs to make things easier.

Maybe it's because the cueball simply gets out of the way, rather than trapping the object ball, impeding its forward roll?

Fred

Gayle in MD
12-03-2006, 07:27 AM
LOL, No, Martin. You're describing my very experience with the use of side, creating a backwards spin. I'm saying that I've been told, that spin on the CB, doesn't affect the object ball. Physics, not being one of my strong points, when I'm told this, I often feel like saying...gee, should I believe my instructor, or my lying eyes, LOL...

Here is my basic question, How can you shoot a ball which is close to the side pocket, but slightly past the opening, in other words, the ball looks like if you tried to make it, it would hit the far tip, past the pocket, use side spin, and see (with you're lying eyes, LOL) that OB spin backwards into the pocket, if there is no affect on the OB, from the spin on the CB?

Let's keep in mind here, those instructors, who tell me there's no affect, know their $**t. Nevertheless, to my lying eyes, it sure looks like the OB is being thrown backwards into the pocket in reaction to the spin on the CB. Is this an optical illusion? I don't think so, for how could the ball spin backwards. In spite of my relative ignorance compared to those respected instructors who are telling me I'm wrong, It still looks to me like CB, spinning OB backwards into the side pocket. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Gayle in Md.

dr_dave
12-03-2006, 08:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>The Statement was, that side spin on the cueball, had no affect on the object ball. /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif<hr /></blockquote>
Sometimes that is true because the effects of squirt and throw can sometimes cancel each other out. So for a given aiming line and cut angle, it is possible that a center ball hit will send the OB in the same direction as an off-center hit (although, there will still be some spin transfer to the OB with the off-center hit).

Dave

dr_dave
12-03-2006, 08:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> I don't think that follow on the object ball is the main reason this happens in that you can do it without any draw on the cueball. <hr /></blockquote>I wonder then if by using draw something else happens or doesn't happen compared to if you use stun. In my mind, there's no doubt that using draw on the cueball makes the shot easier. And maybe the little bit of follow transferred is all it needs to make things easier. ...<hr /></blockquote>
FYI, HSV A.90 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-90.htm) as compared with HSV A.91 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-91.htm) shows that the draw does help the first ball develop forward roll. (Note the CB is not shown in these clips.)

Dave

Gayle in MD
12-03-2006, 08:36 AM
Thank you Dr. Dave. So, may I ask, for clarification, specifically, is it possible, using side spin on the CB, to spin the OB slightly backwards? I take it, in your statements, you are saying that CB side english, does in fact, affect, or transfer, some spin on the OB? Pardon my redundancy, thick head spinning also. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Gayle in Md.

dr_dave
12-03-2006, 08:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Thank you Dr. Dave. So, may I ask, for clarification, specifically, is it possible, using side spin on the CB, to spin the OB slightly backwards?<hr /></blockquote>
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Could you explain a little more? If you mean: "Can sidespin alone transfer bottom spin to the OB?" then the answer is no.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>I take it, in your statements, you are saying that CB side english, does in fact, affect, or transfer, some spin on the OB?<hr /></blockquote>
Absolutely yes. The video clips I have referenced prove it inconclusively.

Regards,
Dave

Billy_Bob
12-03-2006, 09:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ...PS: Where have you been? It seems like you have been away from the CCB for a while. <hr /></blockquote>

I spent the summer building a fence, cutting firewood, and doing other projects which are best done during the dry season around here (summer). Now that it is raining and cold again, I am back to playing pool.

slim
12-03-2006, 09:39 AM
What I didn't see in the above posts, and beginners need to realize how important this is. When you wnat to strike the cue ball without any english, if you swing coming throught the cue ball is not straight, you have applied english without realizing it. Placing the cue ball on the spot and seeing if your swing once finished is still straight(over the spot) is an important concept to understand.

Sid_Vicious
12-03-2006, 10:13 AM
I think Dave himself stated in another thread that "If you believe" many things become possible. I am certain that over the years, I have hit back cuts beyond the realistic tangent line. Once I became more studied in the realities of what is possible, mostly due to instruction from others, I lost some of that personal belief and seemingly find it very difficult to even perceive that feat anymore. Bangers and shotmakers do things sometimes which I know in my mind at the time,,,"You can't do that!" and yet they don't know that themselves, so wonders hasppen. In the end I feel that each of us has "our own game" and we can actually be convinced that what we once could do, is fundamentally impossible, hence the creativity borne through blind faith, is "studied out of our game." I am not taunting the educated over pure physics mind you, yet the confident mind can create a magician in many situations. Besides, it just fun to test the experts with an individual attempt now and then...sid

Billy_Bob
12-03-2006, 10:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote slim:</font><hr> What I didn't see in the above posts, and beginners need to realize how important this is. When you wnat to strike the cue ball without any english, if you swing coming throught the cue ball is not straight, you have applied english without realizing it. Placing the cue ball on the spot and seeing if your swing once finished is still straight(over the spot) is an important concept to understand. <hr /></blockquote>

VERY good point! I am forever trying to drum it into beginners heads that they need to learn to be able to shoot dead center. Not 1 mm to the left or right, dead center!

The "Bank stroke practice" on the following page will demonstrate this to beginners. If they shoot these shots dead center and follow through leaving their tip pointing at where they were aiming. The ball will come back off the rail to the same spot each time.

If they hit off center in different spots each time (cue going up in air after shot), the ball will come back off the rail in varing directions. This is bacause they have applied english. The goal is to get down on your shot, follow through, and leave the tip of your cue touching the cloth pointing at where you were aiming. Then stay down on your shot after shooting until the ball stops moving or 3 seconds. Count one thousand one, one thousand two, one thousand three after shooting the shot. The ball should go to the same exact spot each time after shooting.

Bank (kick) stroke practice
http://www.geocities.com/billybobnospam/basic_daily_practice.html

Jal
12-03-2006, 11:52 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> I don't think that follow on the object ball is the main reason this happens in that you can do it without any draw on the cueball. <hr /></blockquote>I wonder then if by using draw something else happens or doesn't happen compared to if you use stun. In my mind, there's no doubt that using draw on the cueball makes the shot easier. And maybe the little bit of follow transferred is all it needs to make things easier. ...<hr /></blockquote>
FYI, HSV A.90 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-90.htm) as compared with HSV A.91 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-91.htm) shows that the draw does help the first ball develop forward roll. (Note the CB is not shown in these clips.)

Dave <hr /></blockquote>I looked at those clips last night (to see if I would need some foot'n mouth surgery) and my first impression was that I would have to retract my statement. I'm still not sure, but regarding the first clip, HSV A.90, if you calculate how much forward rotation the first object ball should undergo because of cloth friction alone, it comes out to about 1/8 of a complete rotation during the time shown (about .095 sec). In this clip, the ball rotates just a little bit more than this, so it appears to pick up considerably more topspin from the cueball than it actually does. But then there's the question of what sort of contact the ball is making with the cloth. And a comparison with the second clip does definitely show that the cueball's spin makes at least some difference, as Fred indicated.

We're discussing the "ten times fuller system" here, and the principle cause of the first ball moving forward so much has to do with, I think, the inelasticity of the collisions. The cueball, because it doesn't bounce back as enthusiastically as it would if the collision were 100% elastic, pushes the first object ball forward of the tangent line with the second object ball. And the inelasticity of the collision with the second object ball adds to this. But I don't really understand the physics of it all or how to derive the 10X factor. I wonder if you've looked at this and can shed some light on it at this time?

Jim

FatsRedux
12-03-2006, 01:24 PM
In the two shots diagrammed below you can see how english alters the path of the object ball (english throw). During the brief moment when the cue ball and the object ball are in contact the “gear effect” takes over and the object ball is thrown off the original line of aim (red arrow) and proceeds down the green line to the pocket.

Outside English:

START( %Aj6K1%Ph2S6%Wp2D0%Xj9J4%Yr4D3%Zk2J5%[i9L6%\h3R8%eA7a4 )END

Inside English:

START( %Am8J9%Pi4Q9%Wr8F1%Xn2J5%Yr6D4%Zn0J4%[l7L3%\i6Q4%eC1a4 )END

How much throw can be transferred is dependent upon a few things;

1.) How thickly or thinly the object ball is struck. English induced throw is greatest on full on shots and decreases from there as the cut angle increases.

2.) The speed of the stroke. A nice easy soft stroke will produce the most throw, while a fast (hard) stroke will produce the least. When using a very soft or hard stroke, you must take this into account and adjust the line of aim accordingly.

Tips on using outside / inside :

1.) Aim for a thicker hit when you are shooting with outside english.

2.) Inside english calls for a thinner hit, as a result inside english will yield less throw than an equal amount of outside english. It is the required thin-ness of the hit that makes inside english shots harder to aim.

Next up I will address the nastiest word in pool, a phenomenon which has nipped many a beginner’s pool playing “career” in the bud, and reduced grown men to tears. SQUIRT!

Fats

Jal
12-03-2006, 03:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...English induced throw is greatest on full on shots and decreases from there as the cut angle increases.<hr /></blockquote>Since you tend to increase cueball speed with increasing cut angle to get the object ball to the pocket, this is probably generally true. But the maximum throw you can get actually increases with cut angle, given the same cueball speed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>2.) The speed of the stroke. A nice easy soft stroke will produce the most throw, while a fast (hard) stroke will produce the least. When using a very soft or hard stroke, you must take this into account and adjust the line of aim accordingly.<hr /></blockquote>Absolutely.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...2.) Inside english calls for a thinner hit, as a result inside english will yield less throw than an equal amount of outside english.<hr /></blockquote>This is a little confusing. You need to hit thinner in those cases where inside does cause more throw. But hitting slightly thinner will not alter the amount of throw very much.

Instead of generalizations about inside versus outside english, I think it's less confusing when you consider what happens versus "gearing" or "roll-off" english. This is the sidespin which results in zero throw. On either side of this you have "relative inside" and "relative outside" english. It's easier to see what effect the sidespin will have when you compare this "relative english" against the exact roll-off value.

I hope you don't think I'm dogging you on this, but throw is fairly complicated and there aren't too many generalizations which hold true across the board, especially when you divide things up into "inside" and outside".

Jim

Fran Crimi
12-03-2006, 06:27 PM
That means that any of us instructors who have communicated with Gayle about her game are suspects in the eyes of the posters. Nice.

cushioncrawler
12-03-2006, 09:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> ....How much throw can be transferred is dependent upon a few things....
....2.) The speed of the stroke. A nice easy soft stroke will produce the most throw, while a fast (hard) stroke will produce the least. When using a very soft or hard stroke, you must take this into account and adjust the line of aim accordingly..... <hr /></blockquote>
Fats -- i reckon that a stun shot will produce the most throw -- the softer the "better" (but of course most stun shots are at the hi-speed end of the spectrum).

A soft rolling shot might give lots of throw if some of the "lost" friction is regained if a bit of "masse' throw" raises its ugly (or pretty) head -- but Bob Jewett mentions (months ago) that masse' throw (ie masse' swerve) is negligible.

FatsRedux
12-04-2006, 02:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...English induced throw is greatest on full on shots and decreases from there as the cut angle increases.<hr /></blockquote>Since you tend to increase cueball speed with increasing cut angle to get the object ball to the pocket, this is probably generally true. But the maximum throw you can get actually increases with cut angle, given the same cueball speed.

<font color="blue">I'm not so sure about that. The thicker the hit, the greater the area of contact. This larger area of contact allows for more "gear effect" or meshing ergo more throw.

As cut angle increases the hit becomes thinner, and as it does,..the contact patch becomes smaller.
</font color>
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>2.) The speed of the stroke. A nice easy soft stroke will produce the most throw, while a fast (hard) stroke will produce the least. When using a very soft or hard stroke, you must take this into account and adjust the line of aim accordingly.<hr /></blockquote>Absolutely.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...2.) Inside english calls for a thinner hit, as a result inside english will yield less throw than an equal amount of outside english.<hr /></blockquote>This is a little confusing. You need to hit thinner in those cases where inside does cause more throw. But hitting slightly thinner will not alter the amount of throw very much.

Instead of generalizations about inside versus outside english, I think it's less confusing when you consider what happens versus "gearing" or "roll-off" english. This is the sidespin which results in zero throw. On either side of this you have "relative inside" and "relative outside" english. It's easier to see what effect the sidespin will have when you compare this "relative english" against the exact roll-off value.

I hope you don't think I'm dogging you on this, but throw is fairly complicated and there aren't too many generalizations which hold true across the board, especially when you divide things up into "inside" and outside".

<font color="blue">I don't think you're out of line but I must warn you, I'm not mathematically gifted nor am I overly fascinated with physics. </font color>


Jim

<hr /></blockquote>

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 07:48 AM
Really Fran, as many accolades as I have written about each and every one of my instructors, I'm surprised that you would write such a thing. Please don't try to turn a friendly jab, with a wink, into some kind of veiled agenda. I have nothing but respect for my instructors.

Gayle in Md.

Deeman3
12-04-2006, 08:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> The video clips I have referenced prove it inconclusively.

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Dave,

Haven't seen you since PettyPoint. I hope all is well. Hey, why would your referenced video clips prove this inconclusively. I would think they do so conclusively....Just asking.... </font color>

DeeMan

Cornerman
12-04-2006, 08:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> Tips on using outside / inside :

1.) Aim for a thicker hit when you are shooting with outside english.

2.) Inside english calls for a thinner hit, as a result inside english will yield less throw than an equal amount of outside english. It is the required thin-ness of the hit that makes inside english shots harder to aim.
<hr /></blockquote>I wonder how much the above statements have hampered the progress of players trying to improve using english?

For most of my firm shots, the above is exactly opposite for normal cues.That is, for example, with inside english, I'm aiming thicker, not thinner. The final hit might be thinner, but that's not where I aim. I think this is true for 100% of players not using a low squirt cue. This is due to squirt which dominates most firmly struck shots with english. And I'm a fan of not babying the ball. The moment I understood this, my game leaped considerably.

That is, we learn things in this game that are true (like throw), but then we have to learn more things in this game that are more true. Most of the players I meet, they've stopped at throw. And they never understand firm english or inside english because of that stop.

Fred

Fran Crimi
12-04-2006, 08:27 AM
Joke or jab, it doesn't change the fact that we're all now suspects. According to you, one or more of us are the culprits who led you down the path of misinformation.

Stretch
12-04-2006, 08:37 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> Tips on using outside / inside :

1.) Aim for a thicker hit when you are shooting with outside english.

2.) Inside english calls for a thinner hit, as a result inside english will yield less throw than an equal amount of outside english. It is the required thin-ness of the hit that makes inside english shots harder to aim.
<hr /></blockquote>I wonder how much the above statements have hampered the progress of players trying to improve using english?

For most of my firm shots, the above is exactly opposite for normal cues.That is, for example, with inside english, I'm aiming thicker, not thinner. The final hit might be thinner, but that's not where I aim. I think this is true for 100% of players not using a low squirt cue. This is due to squirt which dominates most firmly struck shots with english. And I'm a fan of not babying the ball. The moment I understood this, my game leaped considerably.

That is, we learn things in this game that are true (like throw), but then we have to learn more things in this game that are more true. Most of the players I meet, they've stopped at throw. And they never understand firm english or inside english because of that stop.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Good point Fred. I learned what i needed to in order to make the shot using a lot of side spin. For me that was how to aim them up to compensate for squirt. Ball induced throw becomes a factor in my own mind only on shots that are full to 3/4 full shots at slow speed. The vast majority of spin shots are at an angle and thus produce negligible throw action. Therefore job one in my mind is to squirt the cue ball into the contact point.

PS. This thread is misleading. English for "beginners"?? hardly. I'd hate to see the advanced course. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 08:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> The video clips I have referenced prove it inconclusively.<hr /></blockquote>Haven't seen you since PettyPoint. I hope all is well.<hr /></blockquote>I remember the gathering at PettyPoint very well, and I hope I can visit again soon.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>Hey, why would your referenced video clips prove this inconclusively. I would think they do so conclusively....Just asking....<hr /></blockquote>
/ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif That is conclusive proof that Dr. Dave had a brain fart.

Catch you later,
Dave

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 09:15 AM
Why not just give your opinion, Fran, does spin on the CB transfer to the OB?

Gayle in Md.

randyg
12-04-2006, 10:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw".

I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????<hr /></blockquote>
If there are still any disbelievers out there, HSV A.66 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-66.htm) should settle things. The camera doesn't lie.

Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I'm sorry Dr Dave, but a camera will lie when the cause/result is not explained properly....randyg

Fran Crimi
12-04-2006, 11:07 AM
Nice try. You started it. Now you deal with it.

Why not just apologize for putting all of the instructors who ever worked with you in a difficult and unfair situation?

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 11:22 AM
Fran,
Everyone here knows you are a terrific instructor. I hope, they also know, that you're trying to blow a joke, with no malice intended, way out of proportion. For someone who professes to want more civility around here, you certainly seem to be on a rampage lately to try to stir things up. You have developed a personal vendetta against me, fine. Don't try to make your issues, my issues. They don't apply.

Gayle in Md.

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 11:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote randyg:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw".

I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????<hr /></blockquote>
If there are still any disbelievers out there, HSV A.66 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-66.htm) should settle things. The camera doesn't lie.

Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I'm sorry Dr Dave, but a camera will lie when the cause/result is not explained properly....randyg<hr /></blockquote>
Well, in this case, the camera is not lying.

The cause is sideways (tangent line direction) force between the CB and OB during impact due to relative motion and friction between the ball surfaces.

The result is OB throw and spin transfer.

How's that?
Dave

PS: subject line = "What You See Is What You Get"

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 11:57 AM
I thougtht this was the Holliday Season ... the time for spreading love and peace?

It seems clear what each person's perspective is. There was no need for the accusatory tone in either direction.

In search for world peace,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Fran,
Everyone here knows you are a terrific instructor. I hope, they also know, that you're trying to blow a joke, with no malice intended, way out of proportion. For someone who professes to want more civility around here, you certainly seem to be on a rampage lately to try to stir things up. You have developed a personal vendetta against me, fine. Don't try to make your issues, my issues. They don't apply.

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

FatsRedux
12-04-2006, 12:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> Tips on using outside / inside :

1.) Aim for a thicker hit when you are shooting with outside english.

2.) Inside english calls for a thinner hit, as a result inside english will yield less throw than an equal amount of outside english. It is the required thin-ness of the hit that makes inside english shots harder to aim.
<hr /></blockquote>I wonder how much the above statements have hampered the progress of players trying to improve using english?

For most of my firm shots, the above is exactly opposite for normal cues.That is, for example, with inside english, I'm aiming thicker, not thinner. The final hit might be thinner, but that's not where I aim. I think this is true for 100% of players not using a low squirt cue. This is due to squirt which dominates most firmly struck shots with english. And I'm a fan of not babying the ball. The moment I understood this, my game leaped considerably.

That is, we learn things in this game that are true (like throw), but then we have to learn more things in this game that are more true. Most of the players I meet, they've stopped at throw. And they never understand firm english or inside english because of that stop.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Fred,

I think you're getting ahead of me a bit. I haven't yet addressed the squirt issue. Yes, when aiming with english adjustments have to be made to compensate for squirt, i.e. when using right english you must aim slightly more to the right to compensate for squirt to the left and vice-versa.

Fats

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 12:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>... English induced throw is greatest on full on shots and decreases from there as the cut angle increases.
... A nice easy soft stroke will produce the most throw, while a fast (hard) stroke will produce the least.<hr /></blockquote>

These are good basic generalities, but the complete reality is much more interesting. My November '06 through January '07 instructional articles (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html) discuss and illustrate all factors that comtribute to the amount of throw for various cut angles, speeds, and amounts of English.

Happy viewing,
Dave

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 12:18 PM
I'm not sure what you're referring to, Dr. Dave. I'm simply in search of the answer, as to whether the CB, transfers spin to the OB. That was my interest in this thread. Mentioning that several instructors have been very insistant that it does not transfer, was really an inside joke, between myself, and another instructor, who posts here, and is a close friend of mine, and with whom I have had an on-going friendly disagreement about this very issue, over the years. I have no idea, why Fran took my post to be personally accusatory. It most certainly wasn't my intent. I thought my response was appropriate, sorry you don't agree.

Peace be with you also...and with us all.

Gayle in Md.

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 12:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> I don't think that follow on the object ball is the main reason this happens in that you can do it without any draw on the cueball. <hr /></blockquote>I wonder then if by using draw something else happens or doesn't happen compared to if you use stun. In my mind, there's no doubt that using draw on the cueball makes the shot easier. And maybe the little bit of follow transferred is all it needs to make things easier. ...<hr /></blockquote>
FYI, HSV A.90 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-90.htm) as compared with HSV A.91 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-91.htm) shows that the draw does help the first ball develop forward roll. (Note the CB is not shown in these clips.)

Dave <hr /></blockquote>I looked at those clips last night (to see if I would need some foot'n mouth surgery) and my first impression was that I would have to retract my statement. I'm still not sure, but regarding the first clip, HSV A.90, if you calculate how much forward rotation the first object ball should undergo because of cloth friction alone, it comes out to about 1/8 of a complete rotation during the time shown (about .095 sec). In this clip, the ball rotates just a little bit more than this, so it appears to pick up considerably more topspin from the cueball than it actually does. But then there's the question of what sort of contact the ball is making with the cloth. And a comparison with the second clip does definitely show that the cueball's spin makes at least some difference, as Fred indicated.

We're discussing the "ten times fuller system" here, and the principle cause of the first ball moving forward so much has to do with, I think, the inelasticity of the collisions. The cueball, because it doesn't bounce back as enthusiastically as it would if the collision were 100% elastic, pushes the first object ball forward of the tangent line with the second object ball. And the inelasticity of the collision with the second object ball adds to this. But I don't really understand the physics of it all or how to derive the 10X factor. I wonder if you've looked at this and can shed some light on it at this time?

Jim <hr /></blockquote>
Collisions involving more than two objects is very difficult to model accurately without lots of experimental data (or lots of assumptions). You cannot treat the collision as separate collisions between pairs of two balls.

Bob's Bob's April '96 article (http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1996-02.pdf) does a good job at summarizing his 2X and 10X aiming systems. I think they are based on empirical data (i.e., experimental data). FYI, in TP A.15 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-15.pdf), I present an alternative to the 2X system (the 2/3 angle system). It is based on trending of experimental data.

Regards,
Dave

Bob_Jewett
12-04-2006, 12:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Joke or jab, it doesn't change the fact that we're all now suspects. According to you, one or more of us are the culprits who led you down the path of misinformation. <hr /></blockquote>
I think it's essential for students to understand that instructors are human and fallible. I have seen instructors who had not the slightest clue about what was really happening on the table. Anything that an instructor says needs to be tested by the student just as anything the student might find in a book needs to be tested and understood on the table.

I know that I've told students things that were false, in retrospect. I think my percentage of falsehoods is way down, but how can I be sure? Mosconi lied to people too.

Any instructor who says that side spin can't be transferred to the object ball or that spin-induced throw doesn't exist is ignorant of the facts. If they teach such nonsense, they are doing both the student and other instructors a disservice.

wolfdancer
12-04-2006, 12:31 PM
Gayle, I'm not sure how your original reply here, got blown out of proportion.
To begin with, I figure that you know as much about pool as I do...collectively we know little... I'd therefore consider that any pool statement that you make, that looks questionable, may be something you did not understand correctly, or misinterpretted. It would in no way reflect back on any instructor..
Since we're both only amateurs here, on a pool board that has many instructors, others who's writings about pool are published, and many good players......I think they should cut us a little slack, when we post something here.
We don't have any declarative sentences to write about pool...We just ask questions, and comment on others who do add some useful info.
Gee, I came up here to get a little freah air, a little peace...from that smoke-filled, argumentative other forum...
and nothing's changed.
OK, to settle the issue once and for all.....I'll pose the
question to the master of spin.....Tony Snow
I'm going back down to the netherlands....I think just a few more posts, I can convince Deeman ..

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 12:32 PM
I agree that Fran might have over reacted, but I also think you might have been over-defensive, which might have made Fran overreact even more. I have been guilty of the same thing in the past, so I understand.

Like you, I'm also in search of answers, and differeing personalities can sometimes make that process interesting,
Dave
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> I'm not sure what you're referring to, Dr. Dave. I'm simply in search of the answer, as to whether the CB, transfers spin to the OB. That was my interest in this thread. Mentioning that several instructors have been very insistant that it does not transfer, was really an inside joke, between myself, and another instructor, who posts here, and is a close friend of mine, and with whom I have had an on-going friendly disagreement about this very issue, over the years. I have no idea, why Fran took my post to be personally accusatory. It most certainly wasn't my intent. I thought my response was appropriate, sorry you don't agree.

Peace be with you also...and with us all.

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 12:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Thank you Dr. Dave. So, may I ask, for clarification, specifically, is it possible, using side spin on the CB, to spin the OB slightly backwards?<hr /></blockquote>
If you mean: "If the impact line (line of centers) points to the left a little, and the CB has left English, can the OB be thrown to the right?", the answer is yes (as long as the cut angle is small and the amount of throw is larger). That's the short answer. For a more complete answer, see my recent instructional articles dealing with throw (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html). Also, I think my upcoming articles (February and March '07 to be released soon) will address your question (and many other topics in this thread) even more thoroughly.

Stay tuned,
Dave

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 12:54 PM
Thank you. I'll be interested in reading them.

Gayle in Md.

Fran Crimi
12-04-2006, 12:54 PM
I basically agree with your comments, Bob, but they have little to do with the point I was trying to make here.

Here's the problem with this particular situation: By making the comments she did, Gayle has put those of us who have worked with her on her game in a no-win situation. We're all suspects until one of us either confesses to the dirty deed or until we step up and yell out, "IT WASN'T ME!" To add insult to injury, she made things even more impossible by saying it might have even been more than one of us.

That's not exactly what I would call a nice thing to do. In fact, putting people in that situation is a pretty crummy thing to do. Either call somebody specific out for saying it and stop dragging everyone else through the mud, or keep quiet about it publically.

Fran

Jal
12-04-2006, 01:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...English induced throw is greatest on full on shots and decreases from there as the cut angle increases.<hr /></blockquote>Since you tend to increase cueball speed with increasing cut angle to get the object ball to the pocket, this is probably generally true. But the maximum throw you can get actually increases with cut angle, given the same cueball speed.

<font color="blue">I'm not so sure about that. The thicker the hit, the greater the area of contact. This larger area of contact allows for more "gear effect" or meshing ergo more throw.

As cut angle increases the hit becomes thinner, and as it does,..the contact patch becomes smaller.
</font color><hr /></blockquote>As far as in known, by me anyway, the size of the patch has no effect on throw, although some careful measurements should be done to verify or disprove it. One thing that is reasonably certain is that the size of the friction force is independent of the size of the patch. This is well known from basic physics. If we assume then that it doesn't matter, it follows inexorably from throw theory that you can get more throw at larger cut angles with the right amount of spin (outside english). The argument for this is rather longish, but essentially the object ball reacts the same as if the cueball was hit slower at a lesser cut angle.

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 01:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> Really Fran, as many accolades as I have written about each and every one of my instructors, I'm surprised that you would write such a thing. Please don't try to turn a friendly jab, with a wink, into some kind of veiled agenda. I have nothing but respect for my instructors.

Gayle in Md. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

I don't think my original response was defensive. Mentioning that some instructors teach otherwise, was not meant to be antagonistic, either. I regret that Fran took it that way, however, I don't have to accept being portrayed as having malicious intent, where non existed.

Gayle in Md.

Bob_Jewett
12-04-2006, 01:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> ... As far as in known, by me anyway, the size of the patch has no effect on throw, although some careful measurements should be done to verify or disprove it. One thing that is reasonably certain is that the size of the friction force is independent of the size of the patch. This is well known from basic physics. ... <hr /></blockquote>
I have heard that friction decreases with the pressure between the two surfaces. I haven't actually seen the research, but that seems to be a standard exception to the rules of thumb learned in high school physics classes. Marlow pointed out that friction also is observed to decrease with the speed of slipping, which also goes contrary to the HS simple teaching.

A larger contact patch means that there is both higher pressure at the contact patch and probably that the speed of slipping is higher (for a constant cut angle). This is complicated by the fact that the pressure is not constant over the whole area of the patch. In any case, I think it is really hard to differentiate between the effects of speed and pressure on the coefficient of friction.

Jal
12-04-2006, 01:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote randyg:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw".

I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????<hr /></blockquote>
If there are still any disbelievers out there, HSV A.66 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-66.htm) should settle things. The camera doesn't lie.

Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I'm sorry Dr Dave, but a camera will lie when the cause/result is not explained properly....randyg<hr /></blockquote>
Well, in this case, the camera is not lying.

The cause is sideways (tangent line direction) force between the CB and OB during impact due to relative motion and friction between the ball surfaces.

The result is OB throw and spin transfer.

How's that?
<hr /></blockquote>Explanatory!

Jim

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 01:23 PM
/ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gifthanks...it's always nice to be understood. I think a quick review of my posts over the years would surely show my utmost respect for each and every instructor I have ever worked with, and the great value of instruction, in and of itself.

Gayle...

wolfdancer
12-04-2006, 01:42 PM
I've never read a post where you weren't complimentary about your instructors.
Anyway,I believe you were referring to Scott....who's now retired from teaching and selling vitamin pills door-to door. (just kidding)
Speaking of Scott, last week I found my tape of the lesson i took with him...circa 2002.
Can't believe how bad my stroke/setup looks in that tape....and I'm hoping I've improved on that....if the table thaws out enough to play on....it's 40 degrees in the garage...I'm going to get the camera out, tape myself, pour me a strong drink....and view the results. (I may need a few more stiff ones afterwards.)
Lights, camera, action.....I'm ready for my close-up, Mr DeMille

SpiderMan
12-04-2006, 01:44 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw". &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>


I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Set up a shot where the cue ball and object ball centers are on a straight line approaching the cushion at an angle. Mark the position of the object ball and the cueball, so that you can repeat the shot. Now shoot the object ball into the rail at a medium speed using center ball on the cue ball (full on, no cut). Observe where the object ball goes.

Set up the shot again use the same speed and apply a tip of outside english along the centerline (no follow or draw)and note where the object ball goes.

Try the same thing again, using varying degrees of english. You will note that the rebound angle of the object ball changes depending on the type and amount of english used on the cue ball. This is due to english being transfered from the cue ball to the object ball.

English transfer is real and it is observable.

Fats <hr /></blockquote>

Fats,

While all you just said is true, the transferred-english effect on rebound angle is not an illustration of "english induced throw".

SpiderMan

bsmutz
12-04-2006, 01:55 PM
I, too, have seen in print where an instructor said that there was no transfer of english to the object ball. I don't have any books here handy nor do I know the thread or web site that I may have also read it on. So I guess I'm now guilty of slandering all instructors, too (except Scott Lee whom I'm sure never told me this and also is the only instructor I've paid to help me with my game). I forgive them for saying this (whoever they are) because I'm sure it was their belief at the time they said it and because I know differently and have pretty much always known differently from my own observations. I took it as "They must be wrong about that. Oh, well. I'm sure plenty of this other information is good." and not as "Those dirty, rotten scoundrels! They must be deliberately trying to undermine my success! A pox on all instructors that espouse theories that can be proven to be untrue!". (Mentally picturing thousands of instructors simultaneously racing to pore over their printed material to see if they are guilty of my heinous charge upon reading this post, teehee.)

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 01:59 PM
Maybe Gayle took comments from instructors out of context. I can see an instructor telling a beginning student: "You shouldn't use English to try to change the direction of the OB. English is for changing the direction of the cue ball off a rail." This is probably good advice for a beginner (and many other people that play pool). However, I can see a student misinterpreting this to mean: "English doesn't affect the direction of the OB."

Could something like this have happened?
Dave

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 02:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> ... As far as in known, by me anyway, the size of the patch has no effect on throw, although some careful measurements should be done to verify or disprove it. One thing that is reasonably certain is that the size of the friction force is independent of the size of the patch. This is well known from basic physics. ... <hr /></blockquote>
I have heard that friction decreases with the pressure between the two surfaces. I haven't actually seen the research, but that seems to be a standard exception to the rules of thumb learned in high school physics classes. Marlow pointed out that friction also is observed to decrease with the speed of slipping, which also goes contrary to the HS simple teaching.

A larger contact patch means that there is both higher pressure at the contact patch and probably that the speed of slipping is higher (for a constant cut angle). This is complicated by the fact that the pressure is not constant over the whole area of the patch. In any case, I think it is really hard to differentiate between the effects of speed and pressure on the coefficient of friction. <hr /></blockquote>
Agreed. The size of the contact patch is not relevant to the discussion. All that really matters is how the friction and throw changes with cut angle, speed, and English. These effects are well documented by experiments and theory.

Regards,
Dave

Fran Crimi
12-04-2006, 02:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Maybe Gayle took comments from instructors out of context. I can see an instructor telling a beginning student: "You shouldn't use English to try to change the direction of the OB. English is for changing the direction of the cue ball off a rail." This is probably good advice for a beginner (and many other people that play pool). However, I can see a student misinterpreting this to mean: "English doesn't affect the direction of the OB."

Could something like this have happened?
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I don't think so, Dave. I think Gayle was being very specific. The only thing she wasn't specific about was 'who.'

Fran

Deeman3
12-04-2006, 02:18 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> I'm going back down to the netherlands....I think just a few more posts, I can convince Deeman .. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Not a chance, leftie... /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

DeeMan
I thought squirt was an old age problem /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 02:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Maybe Gayle took comments from instructors out of context. I can see an instructor telling a beginning student: "You shouldn't use English to try to change the direction of the OB. English is for changing the direction of the cue ball off a rail." This is probably good advice for a beginner (and many other people that play pool). However, I can see a student misinterpreting this to mean: "English doesn't affect the direction of the OB."

Could something like this have happened?
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I don't think so, Dave. I think Gayle was being very specific. The only thing she wasn't specific about was 'who.'

Fran <hr /></blockquote>
I don't think it was Gayle's purpose to slander or embarrass an instructor. Also, I don't think the "who" is important. I have to admit, even though I am not an instructor, I paused to think if I ever said (or wrote) anything that could be misinterpreted to mean: "CB English never has any effect on the OB direction or spin" I probably have in the past. Therefore, I will speak up and admit guilt: "I am Spartacus (I mean, the stupid instructor)." /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Regards,
Dave

Cornerman
12-04-2006, 02:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> Fred,

I think you're getting ahead of me a bit. I haven't yet addressed the squirt issue. <hr /></blockquote>You're right, I'm getting ahead, but I can't help it. The discussion of throw has always been a big deal to me because like so many, I was stuck trying to "master throw." When I learned about squirt, that's when I realized that you can't master throw. Squirt is too strong to master throw. And, if other players are like me, they may not realize that in order to improve, they have to get out of throw mode, and into the next chapter (English 201?) to have a better handle on English 101.

I think Squirt should be part of English 101. Get that drilled in now so that future players don't think it's some kind of advanced knowledge.

Fred &lt;~~~ IMO

jjinfla
12-04-2006, 02:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> That's what I thought, too. I used to say, ..."but, I know I've been able to make some tough shots, especially into the side pockets, by spinning the ball in, with a little side on the CB."

"No, Gayle, side english is not transferred from the CB, to the OB."

There's atleast one instructor, someone we all know and love, with whom I've argued about this for years, lol. I hope they see this thread, it will be interesting to see if the person/people in question, identify themselves... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>

Well Gayle, I seem to recall an article written by Mike Sigel in BD a year or so ago stating the same thing.

I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now.

Jake

wolfdancer
12-04-2006, 02:51 PM
"Spartacus", will you be leading the uprising here?
I'd say that over the years here, I've seen more controversary amongst the instructors, questioning each other's posts...then some huge flap over Gayle's post. Besides, using a little deductive reasoning:

"There's at least one instructor, someone we all know and love, with whom I've argued about this for years, lol."

"Know and love"....there's only one person that fits the bill.....Fast Larry !!!

Bob_Jewett
12-04-2006, 03:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jjinfla:</font><hr>... Well Gayle, I seem to recall an article written by Mike Sigel in BD a year or so ago stating the same thing.

I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now.

Jake <hr /></blockquote>
It's not a matter of belief, it's a matter of test and observation. In a following issue of BD, I proposed a couple of tests for spin-induced throw and english transfer. A bunch of readers did the suggested experiment. The articles are available on-line at http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/BD_articles.html starting in December, 2002. I think the Sigel article was about June, 2002.

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 04:06 PM
Ha ha ha, no matter how distorted things may become, you always manage to make me howl!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Gayle

dr_dave
12-04-2006, 04:15 PM
Those were the good old days, when people argued in magazine print, documented in hard copy, instead of just bickering electronically on an internet forum.

Good job,
Dave

PS: Did Mike ever apologize and/or admit his errors?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote jjinfla:</font><hr>... Well Gayle, I seem to recall an article written by Mike Sigel in BD a year or so ago stating the same thing.

I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now.

Jake <hr /></blockquote>
It's not a matter of belief, it's a matter of test and observation. In a following issue of BD, I proposed a couple of tests for spin-induced throw and english transfer. A bunch of readers did the suggested experiment. The articles are available on-line at http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/BD_articles.html starting in December, 2002. I think the Sigel article was about June, 2002. <hr /></blockquote>

Jal
12-04-2006, 04:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>I have heard that friction decreases with the pressure between the two surfaces...
A larger contact patch means that there is both higher pressure at the contact patch...<hr /></blockquote>I think that also supports the idea that you can get more throw at greater cut angles, ie, less pressure ---&gt; greater coefficient of friction, surface speed considerations aside. And yes, my assertion that the friction force is completely independent of the size of the contact area was a bit naive.

Jim

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 04:19 PM
/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Thanks, I think your comments add some good perspective.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
12-04-2006, 04:21 PM
LOL, good thinking friend. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

jjinfla
12-04-2006, 05:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>
PS: Did Mike ever apologize and/or admit his errors?

<hr /></blockquote>

I kept waiting for a further comment, or some sort of clarification from Mike but I never saw one. I always thought that Mike was just pulling everyone's leg. Surely, a man with all his playing ability couldn't possibly believe what he wrote. Unless of course, what he wrote is not what he meant. Or what I read is not what I thought he meant.

Jake

Fran Crimi
12-04-2006, 05:42 PM
A lot of people thought that to be true. I read the same thing over 10 years ago in a book by Steve Davis.

Fran

Qtec
12-04-2006, 07:52 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Therefore job one in my mind is to squirt the cue ball into the contact point.
<hr /></blockquote>


Absolutely, but you have to know how much squirt you are going to get for any given shot. The only way to do this is to know your cue.
I bought my first cue, a Meucci Red Dot, on Ebay. After 15 years of playing with the same snooker Q, its taken me 4 years to get to the point where I am pretty confident on any shot with E with the Meucci, and I,ve been playing snooker/pool for 25 years! There is no way round it, playing proficiently with E requires time and practice.

Pool players who think "I,m missing those balls because my shaft squirts too much- I need to get a Predator" are on the wrong path IMO.

BTW, Any beginner reading this thread would be totally lost.


Q..


For Gayle - the Qball does transfer spin to the Oball. Its minimal but it does happen.
Spin on the Qball DOES throw the Oball,[ Side Induced Throw] but to varying degrees depending on speed and Qball spin.
What Fats said was, if you are using IE you have to OVERCUT the shot.
Like Bob said, all instructors have at some time , in good faith, might have said something that was not technically true.
IMo its very possible that this instructor didn't want to go into spin transfer and throw with a beginner and it was easier to just say no!

BTW, Steve Davis was an unbeliever up to a few years ago!

Q

Scott Lee
12-05-2006, 02:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> That's what I thought, too. I used to say, ..."but, I know I've been able to make some tough shots, especially into the side pockets, by spinning the ball in, with a little side on the CB."

"No, Gayle, side english is not transferred from the CB, to the OB."

There's atleast one instructor, someone we all know and love, with whom I've argued about this for years, lol. I hope they see this thread, it will be interesting to see if the person/people in question, identify themselves... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>

NO GAYLE...SIDESPIN is NOT transferred from the CB to the OB...at least not significantly enough to produce a viable result (max transfer will be appx. 2%). Putting right english on the CB will NOT put left english on the OB. We prove this over and over in pool school, even to skeptics.

Believe what you want, but if you want phyisical proof, I'll show you on your own table, the next time I see you.
Nuff said...

Scott Lee

Scott Lee
12-05-2006, 02:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>

Any instructor who says that side spin can't be transferred to the object ball or that spin-induced throw doesn't exist is ignorant of the facts. If they teach such nonsense, they are doing both the student and other instructors a disservice. <hr /></blockquote>

Well Bob...Any time you would like to come to pool school, Randy and I will be more than willing to allow you to demonstrate what you profess to be our ignorance. We have an empirical example that you can use.

Scott Lee

Jal
12-05-2006, 04:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>...(max transfer will be appx. 2%)....<hr /></blockquote>On slow straight shots (a little less than lag speed or about 3 mph), and using about half of maximum english to produce maximum throw, you can get 30-40% of the cueball's pre-impact spin on the object ball. This corresponds to a throw angle of about 3.7 degrees, and is relevant here because throw and spin transfer are intimately related. The only way this could not be true is if the amount of throw is badly overestimated by theory, which hardly seems to be the case (or I goofed on the math).

I'm afraid you're fighting a losing battle here. But if you can produce a demonstration on film which proves that you can get around this much throw, sans this amount of spin, I for one, will be very happy for you. And you might just have a trip to Sweden in your future.

Jim

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 08:55 AM
Hey, what's with the caps, /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif and the "nuff said" ????

It either transfers, or it doesn't, yes or no, chocolate or vanilla?

I'm still back to, "Do I believe my instructor, or do I believe my lying eyes?"

Man, are all BCA Instructors testy, or is it just the ones who post on here?

Scott...guess I'll just have to show you how to do this next time.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Gayle in Md. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 09:04 AM
Thank you,
I do watch a lot of billiards tapes, and matches on television. One regularly hears all, and I do mean all, the commentators, (pool pros)refer to spinning the ball into the pocket with right or left english. This seems to be such a basic principle of pool, it's surprising that the subject would engender so much controversy... /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

thanks...

Gayle

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 09:22 AM
My friend, you need to buy a couple boat heaters, and plug them in out there. They are the safest heaters of all, inexpensive to operate, and if situated properly, can be left on, to keep the chill out, without fire concerns, but check that out throughly for yourself...

Love,
Gayle

Stretch
12-05-2006, 10:01 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Thank you,
I do watch a lot of billiards tapes, and matches on television. One regularly hears all, and I do mean all, the commentators, (pool pros)refer to spinning the ball into the pocket with right or left english. This seems to be such a basic principle of pool, it's surprising that the subject would engender so much controversy... /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

thanks...

Gayle <hr /></blockquote>

Well i for one believe in side spin transfer. Just set up a ball in the jaws of a pocket with another ball a few inches away from it and in line, An easy combonation. Set the cue ball up about a foot away. Now try and pot both balls into the corner pocket. Easy, just hit a good solid draw stroke. The back spinning cue ball will transfer enough top spin on the first ball to follow the second ball down. Conversely if you were to put top spin on the cue ball, this will transfer slight backspin, or skid to the first ball. Not enough to actually draw it back after contact with second ball, but it will stick and will not go in. If these things are possible then sidespin transfer is also possible. Of course with new polished balls "any" transfer will become minimal but in the real world of dirty worn balls that everybody plays with down at the bar or club the transfer of english along with a throw factor is very real.

I know what i see and i know what i can do. So i don't give a fiddlers Fork who agrees or dosn't on that point. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif St.

dr_dave
12-05-2006, 10:20 AM
I think this is another example where great players don't always make great (or accurate) instructors or authors.

Just to be clear, I don't mean any disrespect to Mike as a player, because I know how great he was.

Regards,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jjinfla:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>
PS: Did Mike ever apologize and/or admit his errors?

<hr /></blockquote>

I kept waiting for a further comment, or some sort of clarification from Mike but I never saw one. I always thought that Mike was just pulling everyone's leg. Surely, a man with all his playing ability couldn't possibly believe what he wrote. Unless of course, what he wrote is not what he meant. Or what I read is not what I thought he meant.<hr /></blockquote>

Bob_Jewett
12-05-2006, 10:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> ... Well Bob...Any time you would like to come to pool school, Randy and I ... <hr /></blockquote>
Well, Scott, any time you would like to come to the San Francisco Billiard Academy, you might get a new perspective and a deeper understanding of the subject. Until your visit, I urge you to read the multiple articles I've written on the subject and put on-line.

Good luck with your education.

Deeman3
12-05-2006, 10:46 AM
I promised myself a couple of years ago I would not get into most of these billiard physics discussions as many out there seem to understand the basics and even some advanced physics involved in ball rotation, gear effect, etc. Some may be able to make practical application of this knowledge on a day-to-day basis. I know several here personally who can and cannot apply this to actually making balls and gaining position in a real pool game.

The only thing of value I want to add, if it has value, is that many can play this complex game for many years at quite a high level in 8 ball, straight pool and nine ball without a working knowledge of the interactions of balls, squirt, spin, throw or anything else. Many are, perhaps, better off not knowing and adding that complexity to their game. I do believe that the game of one pocket is the one place where it has value on a game-by-game basis between good players.

Once you start banking balls at slow and moderate speeds that must work themsleves and the cue ball around interfering balls in the short end of the table, your understanding of ball rotation and transfer of spin must be complete or somehow intuitive or you just can't compete.

I once said to Fred, "A good understanding of physics helps." His answer, "I am not so sure of that. Maybe it hurts." was one of the best answers I ever received. If you can't sort fantasy ("I spin the ball into the pocket.") from reality, ("balls rebound from a rail with changed direction due to spin induced by rotation from the cue ball") maybe you are just one of those intuitive players who does it by savantian feel ( I think I made that word up).

I encourge any of you who are confused to not take up the study of physics or to investigate Newton's Laws but to take two (2) striped object balls, a nine foot table and a well maintained cue and spend a few gentle hours tapping the balls around with spins, speed, angles and ears. This will teach you more than all the high speed cameras in the world. If most would just stop hitting balls at expressway speeds for a few weeks, their knowledge, skill and enjoyment of the game might overtake their wish to become a doctor of balls.

I bet most who worry about the advanced collision of plastic spheres won't those of us who keep our tip chalked too much of a game for us to handle. Present company excepted. of course... /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Louie Roberts had a word he would speak to me in tough matches that would take me from my thinking game to my intuitive game. I was shooting last week in the finals of a local tournament and swear I heard him say that word to me. I actually looked up from a shot to see him but, of course, he was not there proving, maybe, I'm not completely off my rocker. Tori saw my face and thought I was nuts. When I explained it to her later, she understood although I may not have! I had not though of Louie in months and he must have decided to rescue me that night. I shot lights out for days, even through last night!

DeeMan
I'm waiting for the assault now....

dr_dave
12-05-2006, 10:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>SIDESPIN is NOT transferred from the CB to the OB...at least not significantly enough to produce a viable result<hr /></blockquote>
Scott,

What about for a straight-on bank shot? Even a small amount of sidespin on the OB (e.g., from English transfer or from collision-induced spin from a cut angle), can have a significant effect on the rebound angle of the OB.

Also, to be clear, are you suggesting that throw is also insignificant? Spin-induced throw and English transfer come from the same effect (the friction force created by relative motion between the CB and OB surfaces during impact). My recent series of articles on throw (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html) show that throw can be quite significant, especially in certain situations.

Also, how do you explain HSV A.66 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-66.htm)?

Respectfully,
Dave

Billy_Bob
12-05-2006, 10:59 AM
Keep in mind that there are "clean" balls and "dirty" balls. Slick shiny surface new balls and old worn dull surface old balls. Also high humidity and low humidity.

dr_dave
12-05-2006, 11:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> ... Well Bob...Any time you would like to come to pool school, Randy and I ... <hr /></blockquote>
Well, Scott, any time you would like to come to the San Francisco Billiard Academy, you might get a new perspective and a deeper understanding of the subject. Until your visit, I urge you to read the multiple articles I've written on the subject and put on-line.

Good luck with your education. <hr /></blockquote>
Bob,

Please provide links to all of the pertinent articles so they will be easier to find and view. My recent series of articles (August '06 through January '07 currently available, and more to follow (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html)), verify and extend some of your previous work.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
12-05-2006, 11:12 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> Keep in mind that there are "clean" balls and "dirty" balls. Slick shiny surface new balls and old worn dull surface old balls. Also high humidity and low humidity. <hr /></blockquote>

Billy_Bob,

Good point. New, clean, and polished balls acting on a dry, slick cloth will not produce as much an effect (with the bank example) as with more typical (average) playing conditions.

Regards,
Dave

wolfdancer
12-05-2006, 11:29 AM
I'd suggest that you gentlemen meet at a more neutral venue. On Sept. 15, 1941....Life Magazine proved with photos, that a thrown baseball can be made to curve. Until then it was thought to be an illusion. Unfortunately the mag is no longer available to settle this controversy. Maybe the definitive answer lies somewhere in the pages of Ira Flatow's runaway best seller "Rainbows, Curveballs and other Wonders of the Natural World Explained"....now available at Thriftybooks.com for $.75
When I first began playing, I misread something from a book
(99 Shots, or?) and thought players added spin to pocket the balls ( I score low on reading comprehension ) so for a couple of years?? (and a slow learner) I aimed about an inch away from the pocket, and spun the ball in. It wasn't very scientific, but seemed to work....also at the time, I wasn't concerned with the mundane aspects of the game, like position play.
I hope you guys do get together, and "prove" that the other guy is wrong. Maybe Dr. Dave can serve as an impartial observer...to prevent this sort of thing from occurring:
In Nanyuki, Kenya, a town right on the equator, a local guy has tourists believe that if he drains a pan of water from spots about 10 metres apart, the water will spin in opposite directions due to the different Coriolis Effects, of the hemispheres. At a point halfway between the two the water drains straight down...it's supposedly right on the equator.
In truth the containing pans are curved differently, and produce the effect...
We wouldn't want any such chicanery to take place, as you both attempt to settle this, once and for all.

Scott Lee
12-05-2006, 11:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>...(max transfer will be appx. 2%)....<hr /></blockquote>On slow straight shots (a little less than lag speed or about 3 mph), and using about half of maximum english to produce maximum throw, you can get 30-40% of the cueball's pre-impact spin on the object ball. This corresponds to a throw angle of about 3.7 degrees, and is relevant here because throw and spin transfer are intimately related. The only way this could not be true is if the amount of throw is badly overestimated by theory, which hardly seems to be the case (or I goofed on the math).

I'm afraid you're fighting a losing battle here. But if you can produce a demonstration on film which proves that you can get around this much throw, sans this amount of spin, I for one, will be very happy for you. And you might just have a trip to Sweden in your future.

Jim <hr /></blockquote>

Jim...I disagree that transferring sidespin from CB to OB, and throw, are 'intimately related'. The question was directed at transfering sidespin (english) from CB to OB. Throw is something comepletely different. I believe many people are mislead by semantics. Cling, dwell-time,
C-I-T, and S-I-T, are real, and can be well documented, as you described. English, however, does not reverse from CB to OB, as I described (i.e.: Right spin on the CB will not produce left spin on the OB...at least not enough to have any real affect on the shot)! There are some physical situations that reflect a reasonable amount of transferred sidespin (or a "gearing" action). They are CB &amp; OB frozen together; OB frozen to a rail on a bank shot; and of course, very dirty object balls. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Scott Lee

Scott Lee
12-05-2006, 11:56 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> ... Well Bob...Any time you would like to come to pool school, Randy and I ... <hr /></blockquote>
Well, Scott, any time you would like to come to the San Francisco Billiard Academy, you might get a new perspective and a deeper understanding of the subject. Until your visit, I urge you to read the multiple articles I've written on the subject and put on-line.

Good luck with your education. <hr /></blockquote>

Bob...Nothing personal about your articles, but we both know that there is a lot of misinformation in print, on video, and on the internet. Both Randy and I will be in Vegas in May. Will you be attending the BCA nationals? If so, we already have a table, and room, set up, where you can "educate" us!...or maybe, just maybe, learn something new yourself. Hope to see you then.

Scott Lee

Scott Lee
12-05-2006, 12:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Some may be able to make practical application of this knowledge on a day-to-day basis. I know several here personally who can and cannot apply this to actually making balls and gaining position in a real pool game.

<hr /></blockquote>

Dee...A very astute statement! Some can, but most cannot...and NONE can all the time. We choose not to dwell on things are are not repeatable, and sustainable, in all situations...most especially related to "real" play on a table. Physics arguments can be substanciated with statistics of all kinds, and can be interpreted so that they "prove" whatever the author wants. What happens in a real-life situation, on a real pool table, is often something very different.

Since my comments were related to whether (or not) sidespin is transferred, and reversed, from CB to OB, here is an experiment that any reader here, with a pool table, can try for themselves:

Drop a chalkline across the table, on the foot string or head string. Place the CB and OB a foot apart, with the base of both balls on the chalkline. Stroke the CB with center right or left spin, and compensate for the squirt, so that you hit the OB full. The CB must remain on the chalkline, spinning in place (assuming there is no topspin or draw). The OB will then strike the cushion, at or near the diamond where the chalkline ends, and, if the physics posters are correct, the OB will rebound off the cushion at a considerably different angle. Our own research shows that this doesn't happen in real life...at least not predictably and repeatedly.

Scott Lee

wolfdancer
12-05-2006, 12:12 PM
feel ( I think I made that word up)

No, I found a reference to the word in Merriam-Webster's online dictionary.
Other then that, good post....
It would be nice if one could quantify the effects of spin and direction, at different speeds...but it may be better to just acquire "feel"
Studying ballistics won't help one catch a baseball...it ain't rocket science.
Are you going to reveal the one word Louie Roberts spoke to you....or you going to take it to your grave???
I'll share something that Tony Annigoni told me, when I asked his advice on what should I do in this situation. He said "unscrew your stick". I can't tell you how many times I think back and know I should have taken his advice....and took up Bowling instead.

Bob_Jewett
12-05-2006, 12:18 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> ... we both know that there is a lot of misinformation in print, on video, and on the internet. ... <hr /></blockquote>
And some of us work to point out that misinformation. Perhaps you can help.

As for throw and spin transfer being intimately related, that is something I didn't really understand until a couple of years ago. In fact the amount of throw is directly proportional to the side spin transferred to the object ball. One degree of throw implies X RPM of side spin for a given speed of the object ball. You cannot have one without the other.

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 12:21 PM
Thanks Deeman...interesting post. I have had a similar experience as you mention. My local pool mentor recently moved south. Sometimes, I can hear him clear as day telling me, "Don't be afraid to go for the bank!" /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 12:29 PM
Hi Stretch...

Hey, I feel the same. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Stick to your guns, friend.

Love,
Gayle

SpiderMan
12-05-2006, 01:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> NO GAYLE...SIDESPIN is NOT transferred from the CB to the OB...at least not significantly enough to produce a viable result (max transfer will be appx. 2%). Putting right english on the CB will NOT put left english on the OB. We prove this over and over in pool school, even to skeptics.
Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

Scott,

That's a really weak limb you're stepping out on /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Who are the other folks in that "we" you mentioned, who don't observe the effects of transferred english on rebound angle (relative to angle of incidence) when banking?

SpiderMan

Deeman3
12-05-2006, 01:22 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> feel ( I think I made that word up)

No, I found a reference to the word in Merriam-Webster's online dictionary.
Other then that, good post.... <font color="blue">O.K. Smart A**! I just had not seen that word, used in exactly that same form...It just came to me, a non-savant, if there ever was one... /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif </font color>
It would be nice if one could quantify the effects of spin and direction, at different speeds...but it may be better to just acquire "feel"
Studying ballistics won't help one catch a baseball...it ain't rocket science.
Are you going to reveal the one word Louie Roberts spoke to you....or you going to take it to your grave??? <font color="blue"> No reason to hide it other than someone at the Derby City will probably yell it out while I'm down on a tough shot...or one of Earl's railbirds will hit me with it the next time I pop the top on a Coke during his backstroke....

For reasons of hairspray and 5 Long Island Teas, the word was "Zoom". I will, however, take the hairspray story to my grave unless we see each other outside the internet one day..</font color>

I'll share something that Tony Annigoni told me, when I asked his advice on what should I do in this situation. He said "unscrew your stick". <font color="blue"> This only shows that Tony remains a good judge of horse flesh or in pool terms, he knows a banger when he sees one...LOL JK, JK, JK....</font color> I can't tell you how many times I think back and know I should have taken his advice....and took up Bowling instead. <hr /></blockquote> <font color="blue">The last guy who claims to have seen you play swears you did take up bowling. Something about the finess of a bull elephant... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Wolfdancer, you know I only kid you because I can't pick on someone close enough to threaten me. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif </font color>

DeeMan

Deeman3
12-05-2006, 01:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>Scott,

That's a really weak limb you're stepping out on /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Who are the other folks in that "we" you mentioned, who don't observe the effects of transferred english on rebound angle (relative to angle of incidence) when banking?

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Not defending anyone here but I think Scott's point was that most of us vastly overestimate the impact/amount of effect of the spin and confuse hitting the ball hard into the cushion, for instance, with closing down an angle purely with transfered spin. </font color>

DeeMan

SpiderMan
12-05-2006, 01:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> English can also be transferred from the cueball to an object ball. This phenomenon is referred to as "English induced throw". &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>


I've had more than one respected instructor tell me this isn't so....Wonder why????

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Need to get the terminology straight.

Transfer of english from cueball to object ball is easily demonstrated to the satisfaction of most observers.

Transfer of english from cueball to object ball is NOT exactly the same thing as "english-induced throw". Fats made a description error there. Not picking on Fats - I assume he knows the difference but was just typing quickly.

Anyway, english-induced throw is a related phenomenon which requires a more complex setup and careful observation/understanding to quantify.

SpiderMan

Snapshot9
12-05-2006, 01:31 PM
Not to be condescending, but wasn' the subject title, 'English for beginners'. All you English scientists and engineers have just overkilled the beginners reading this thread .... lol lor as we say in the computer field, information overload.

When dealing with beginners, it is best to use the KISS method, before you get to the DIRT (Do it right, Turkey) method. After all, the 'Devil is in the details', and the devil is hard to handle.... lol

I would simply tell a beginner to think about steering a car when driving, and then think about steering a cue ball. And let them think about that for awhile before progressing onto more indepth decussions regarding english.....
/ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 01:34 PM
Thanks, and ...OK, so next question...what's the difference between English Induced Throw between the CB and OB, and Transfer of Spin from the CB to the OB.

tee he he... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif can't wait to hear your answer... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

SpiderMan
12-05-2006, 01:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>Scott,

That's a really weak limb you're stepping out on /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Who are the other folks in that "we" you mentioned, who don't observe the effects of transferred english on rebound angle (relative to angle of incidence) when banking?

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Not defending anyone here but I think Scott's point was that most of us vastly overestimate the impact/amount of effect of the spin and confuse hitting the ball hard into the cushion, for instance, with closing down an angle purely with transfered spin. </font color>

DeeMan <hr /></blockquote>

Dee,

It's pretty easy to observe different results for inside vs outside, with equal speed into the rail. I'd bet most players figure that out on their own, but I could be mistaken.

SpiderMan

Deeman3
12-05-2006, 01:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> Dee,

It's pretty easy to observe different results for inside vs outside, with equal speed into the rail. I'd bet most players figure that out on their own, but I could be mistaken.

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Yep, I agree that it is there and most can figure it out pretty easy. However, there are a lot out there that believe the effect is much more than it is and some subconscienely make even bigger adjustments by regulating speed and thinking it is all spin. I know we are in agreement but I was just pointing out a symptom of the thought process for some players. It even gets to be a "slippery slope" when the spped cancells out some of the effect of spin and they don't know why. I see guys who simply pound the ball on banks and have them why. "It is more accurate." is a common answer... /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif</font color>

DeeMan

SpiderMan
12-05-2006, 01:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Thanks, and ...OK, so next question...what's the difference between English Induced Throw between the CB and OB, and Transfer of Spin from the CB to the OB.

tee he he... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif can't wait to hear your answer... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Transfer of english (spin) from cue ball to object ball refers to the fact (yes, I consider it a fact /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif) that right (counterclockwise) spin on the CB will result in left (clockwise) spin on the OB.

English-induced throw is a term used to note that the path of the object ball, when struck by a CB with spin, is not along their common centerline at contact. In other words, it is "thrown" to one side in a manner similar to collision-induced throw. It is a complex phenomenon to demonstrate. Bob Jewett, myself, and (I believe) Jal have all proposed experimental setups to demonstrate the effect.

SpiderMan

dr_dave
12-05-2006, 01:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>English-induced throw is a term used to note that the path of the object ball, when struck by a CB with spin, is not along their common centerline at contact. In other words, it is "thrown" to one side in a manner similar to collision-induced throw. It is a complex phenomenon to demonstrate. Bob Jewett, myself, and (I believe) Jal have all proposed experimental setups to demonstrate the effect.<hr /></blockquote>
Another name for it is spin-induced throw (SIT). If anyone wants to see illustrations, examples, demonstrations, and experimental results, see my most recent instructional articles. (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html)

Regards,
Dave

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 02:15 PM
Whoppie!! thanks ...OK, now...here's the next question, LOL, what is the difference???? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Gayle in Md.

dr_dave
12-05-2006, 02:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Whoppie!! thanks ...OK, now...here's the next question, LOL, what is the difference???? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif<hr /></blockquote>
Spin transferred to the OB affects only the rebound angle of the OB off rail cushions.

Spin-induced throw (SIT) throws the OB off its path. With throw (from CB English or cut angle), the OB ball does not head exactly in the impact line (line of centers) direction.

FYI, my August '06 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2006/aug06.pdf) has some nice illustrations, examples, and demonstrations of the types of throw.

Dave

jjinfla
12-05-2006, 02:52 PM
I watched Jerry Briesath's "How to play pool right" 1995 today. He states when you use side you have to compensate for deflection, curve and throw.

I believe he is a master, master, BCA instructor.

Jake

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 02:54 PM
Thank you, Dr. Dave. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

dr_dave
12-05-2006, 03:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Thank you, Dr. Dave. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif<hr /></blockquote>
Gayle,

You're very welcome. Are you ready for the quiz now? /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Dave

Paul_Mon
12-05-2006, 04:54 PM
Scott,
The shot shown below is made possible by the transfer of spin to the object ball. It is a common one pocket shot. If you've seen "Winning 1 pocket" they are called twisters and would be impossible without transfer of spin.

START(
%AO1D5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PG2F3%UD7D1%Vs4E7%W r7E7%XP1D6
%eB2a3
)END

Paul Mon

Scott Lee
12-05-2006, 06:35 PM
Paul...Please include the link to the wei table, when you post a shot. Some of us, when we are not on our own computers, cannot pull up the example table. As such, I can't see the shot, or comment on it. BTW, I'm very good friends with Willie Jopling, and quite aware of his "twister" shots. Most are done with a 'stun' type stroke, with a slightly elevated cue, rather than a lot of sidespin. However, I'll wait to comment further until I can see the shot you put up.

Scott Lee

Chopstick
12-05-2006, 06:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>
SIDESPIN is NOT transferred from the CB to the OB...at least not significantly enough to produce a viable result (max transfer will be appx. 2%).
Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

Well, I don't know much about stuff but I do know that the coefficient of friction between an object that is moving ie spinning and an object that is not, is never going to be zero.

Now some, but not all of this energy is going to translated into throw. Whether the amount left over that is transferred as spin is useful or not is a matter of opinion. Right now I am on the side of the fence that says that it is useful.

I am always open to learning new things. If we ever meet up, I hope you will show me what you are talking about.

Stretch
12-05-2006, 07:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Hi Stretch...

Hey, I feel the same. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Stick to your guns, friend.

Love,
Gayle <hr /></blockquote>

Thanks Gayle. I'm just thrilled somebody actually replyed to me. lol

I'm still hopeing to share a pool table with you some day. don't worry, it WILL happen.

Your friend, Stretch

SpiderMan
12-05-2006, 07:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> Paul...Please include the link to the wei table, when you post a shot. Some of us, when we are not on our own computers, cannot pull up the example table. As such, I can't see the shot, or comment on it. BTW, I'm very good friends with Willie Jopling, and quite aware of his "twister" shots. Most are done with a 'stun' type stroke, with a slightly elevated cue, rather than a lot of sidespin. However, I'll wait to comment further until I can see the shot you put up.

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

Scott,

Chopstick earlier proposed a very simple example to verity the presence or lack of spin transfer. I tried it at dinner tonight, and he is correct - the object ball picks up very noticeable spin upon contact.

SpiderMan

SpiderMan
12-05-2006, 08:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Some may be able to make practical application of this knowledge on a day-to-day basis. I know several here personally who can and cannot apply this to actually making balls and gaining position in a real pool game.

<hr /></blockquote>

Dee...A very astute statement! Some can, but most cannot...and NONE can all the time. We choose not to dwell on things are are not repeatable, and sustainable, in all situations...most especially related to "real" play on a table. Physics arguments can be substanciated with statistics of all kinds, and can be interpreted so that they "prove" whatever the author wants. What happens in a real-life situation, on a real pool table, is often something very different.

Since my comments were related to whether (or not) sidespin is transferred, and reversed, from CB to OB, here is an experiment that any reader here, with a pool table, can try for themselves:

Drop a chalkline across the table, on the foot string or head string. Place the CB and OB a foot apart, with the base of both balls on the chalkline. Stroke the CB with center right or left spin, and compensate for the squirt, so that you hit the OB full. The CB must remain on the chalkline, spinning in place (assuming there is no topspin or draw). The OB will then strike the cushion, at or near the diamond where the chalkline ends, and, if the physics posters are correct, the OB will rebound off the cushion at a considerably different angle. Our own research shows that this doesn't happen in real life...at least not predictably and repeatedly.

Scott Lee

<hr /></blockquote>

Scott,

Perform your experiment, but make the "chalk line" the length of the table to allow time for observation.

Use a striped object ball with the stripe oriented along the line of travel. You will easily be able to see, even before the object ball hits the end rail, that it is spinning. Repeat without sidespin and you'll see that the OB now rolls without wobble to the stripe. It will be like night and day.

SpiderMan

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 09:28 PM
Fran,
Since you won't get off this mud slinging tirade of yours, for the last time, first of all, YOU have never worked with me on my game. I have never paid you for a lesson, and when I came to your workshop, you didn't work with me, personally, privately, or otherwise. While you gave some valuable information that day, to the group, which I gave you credit for, Karen Corr, and Julie, were the only people there, who actually worked with me on my game. So, you are off the hook, ok???

Here's who told me spin won't transfer, Dick Cheny, and Donald Rumsfled, and we all know Cheney can't shoot, and Rumsfeld can't tell the truth! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif So, let's drop all the trumped up, fantasy accusations. I'm not trying to discredit anyone. That's not my bag.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
12-05-2006, 09:49 PM
Hey Stretch,
You have an open invitation, friend. I'm looking forward to it.

Love,
Gayle

Jal
12-06-2006, 01:31 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr>...Now some, but not all of this energy is going to translated into throw. Whether the amount left over that is transferred as spin is useful or not is a matter of opinion. Right now I am on the side of the fence that says that it is useful. <hr /></blockquote>The spin energy picked up is 2-1/2 times the throw energy, so there's plenty "left over". And the shots that people have been illustrating demonstrate that you are definitely on the right side of the fence. I don't think that "a matter of opinion" quite does it justice.

Jim

jjinfla
12-06-2006, 06:32 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>

Drop a chalkline across the table, on the foot string or head string. Place the CB and OB a foot apart, with the base of both balls on the chalkline. Stroke the CB with center right or left spin, and compensate for the squirt, so that you hit the OB full. The CB must remain on the chalkline, spinning in place (assuming there is no topspin or draw). The OB will then strike the cushion, at or near the diamond where the chalkline ends, and, if the physics posters are correct, the OB will rebound off the cushion at a considerably different angle. Our own research shows that this doesn't happen in real life...at least not predictably and repeatedly.

Scott Lee

<hr /></blockquote>

In order for an experiment to be valid it must be able to be duplicated by others. If there is a flaw in the setup then the outcome is not valid.

One thought that that comes to mind in your experiment is that there will be two forces associated with the CB. One would be the forward force and the other would be the horizontal force.

At impact then, in theory, two forces would be applied to the OB.

So I would think that the speed of the CB would be a determining factor as to which force would be greatest at impact.

Also, the short distance to the side rail might be too confining to see a true result.

I would think that a line down the length of the table would be a better indicator.

Ever think of sending this problem into myth busters?

Jake

CarolNYC
12-06-2006, 07:13 AM
Hey Gayle,
It was nice talking to you the other day and Im happy things are well with you /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I told you when I get a chance, I'll scan some of these posts, well, I did and all I can say is "carry on!"

Oh, I find this funny:
[ QUOTE ]
Here's who told me spin won't transfer, Dick Cheny, and Donald Rumsfled, and we all know Cheney can't shoot, and Rumsfeld can't tell the truth <hr /></blockquote>

Take care&amp;talk to you later!
Carol /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in MD
12-06-2006, 07:28 AM
Hey, If Cheney, and Rumsfeld are confused about Spin , how the heck could anybody else have a handle on it!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Take care Carol... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

SpiderMan
12-06-2006, 08:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jjinfla:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>

Drop a chalkline across the table, on the foot string or head string. Place the CB and OB a foot apart, with the base of both balls on the chalkline. Stroke the CB with center right or left spin, and compensate for the squirt, so that you hit the OB full. The CB must remain on the chalkline, spinning in place (assuming there is no topspin or draw). The OB will then strike the cushion, at or near the diamond where the chalkline ends, and, if the physics posters are correct, the OB will rebound off the cushion at a considerably different angle. Our own research shows that this doesn't happen in real life...at least not predictably and repeatedly.

Scott Lee

<hr /></blockquote>

In order for an experiment to be valid it must be able to be duplicated by others. If there is a flaw in the setup then the outcome is not valid.

One thought that that comes to mind in your experiment is that there will be two forces associated with the CB. One would be the forward force and the other would be the horizontal force.

At impact then, in theory, two forces would be applied to the OB.

So I would think that the speed of the CB would be a determining factor as to which force would be greatest at impact.

Also, the short distance to the side rail might be too confining to see a true result.

I would think that a line down the length of the table would be a better indicator.

Ever think of sending this problem into myth busters?

Jake <hr /></blockquote>

Jake,

If Scott's shot is directed down the centerline of the table, it will be an eye-opener for him. You can see the spin on the OB before it ever reaches the rail.

SpiderMan

SpiderMan
12-06-2006, 08:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> That's what I thought, too. I used to say, ..."but, I know I've been able to make some tough shots, especially into the side pockets, by spinning the ball in, with a little side on the CB."

"No, Gayle, side english is not transferred from the CB, to the OB."

There's atleast one instructor, someone we all know and love, with whom I've argued about this for years, lol. I hope they see this thread, it will be interesting to see if the person/people in question, identify themselves... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>

Gayle,

As Scott proposed it, the test does not offer adequate repeatability, precision, or ease of observation.

When he sets up the demo, have him run it the length of the table (instead of crosswise), as I note here: http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=239858&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;vc=1

Then buy him a scotch for comfort /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

SpiderMan

Gayle in MD
12-06-2006, 08:24 AM
I'll do that friend...he is usually more interested in a nice steak Dianne, but if he doesn't see the light, this time, I'll serve it with the mushrooms, lol... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Gayle in Md....

Fran Crimi
12-06-2006, 08:26 AM
I most certainly did work with you on your game, Gayle. But that's okay, say what you like. And while you're at it, feel free to ignore all the advice I gave you on your game in our many phone conversations as well as when I worked with you that day in straightening out your stroke, in person, of course, which you stated over and over again here. And you were a member of the workshop where I explained various things to the group. If you didn't hear what I said, and don't consider that as my helping you, that's not my problem. You were standing right there.

It seems like you can go around bullying people with your opinions and it's all okay until someone stands up to you. Then all hell breaks loose, huh? You have a nice day. I'm done here.

Gayle in MD
12-06-2006, 08:36 AM
Fran,
I have only one thing to say, and I'm saying it from my heart, so I can only hope, that you take it that way. I have nothing but good wishes for you, now, and always. I'm sorry, you don't seem to realize that. If you did, we'd never be at odds in the first place. I'm sorry you feel the way you do towards me.

All the best...

Gayle

DickLeonard
12-06-2006, 08:55 AM
Gayle I have been aiming most of my pool life using my method of the ghost ball. Centerball I aim at the center of the ghost ball. Righthand English I aim at same spot, in my mind the cueball moves left but the English makes the shot and lefthand I aim at the contact point and in my mind the cueball moves to the right and makes the shot.

Hit a shot hard with righthand English and the spin can cause a miss,hit the same shot with lefthand and the english spins the ball into the pocket.

Have I been mistaken all my life????####

Fran Crimi
12-06-2006, 09:20 AM
Thank you, Gayle. I appreciate that and I have only good wishes towards you too.

Fran

DickLeonard
12-06-2006, 09:23 AM
Fred Cueball 1950 had posted about talking with Johnny Ervolino about my play. Johnny told Mike that he never saw anyone who could cut balls backwards like I could on breakshots. I played shots that if he had the same shot he would have played safe. He had played me nearly forty years ago and still hadn't seen anyone who could compare with me cutting balls backwards.

After finishing 12 game series he said he was going back to NYC and practicing those shots. He said I always played safe on those shots but you make those shots and break the rack wide open and the cueball never gets loose. The cueball spreads the rack with no cueball movement.

I always aimed using my system of using lefthand English aiming at the contact point. Sometimes just aiming at a point on the outside edge of the objectball. It always worked for me so I took it to be nearly infallible.####

Deeman3
12-06-2006, 09:38 AM
Dick,

If it worked for you, it should be more than good enough for the rest of us. I'll stake a great shooter over a great scientist any day.........

DeeMan

jjinfla
12-06-2006, 09:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Gayle I have been aiming most of my pool life using my method of the ghost ball. Centerball I aim at the center of the ghost ball. Righthand English I aim at same spot, in my mind the cueball moves left but the English makes the shot and lefthand I aim at the contact point and in my mind the cueball moves to the right and makes the shot.

Hit a shot hard with righthand English and the spin can cause a miss,hit the same shot with lefthand and the english spins the ball into the pocket.

Have I been mistaken all my life????#### <hr /></blockquote>


Ah, but are you using a "zero" deflection cue?

dr_dave
12-06-2006, 10:01 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Thank you, Gayle. I appreciate that and I have only good wishes towards you too.<hr /></blockquote>

I'm glad this is finally settled. Good wishes all around during this wonderful Holiday Season.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
12-06-2006, 10:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Dick,

If it worked for you, it should be more than good enough for the rest of us. I'll stake a great shooter over a great scientist any day.........

DeeMan <hr /></blockquote>
My money would be on a great shooter with the knowledge of a great scientist. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

talent + experience + knowledge = excellence

Dave

Gayle in MD
12-06-2006, 10:32 AM
My dear friend, you know that in my eyes, you are perfect, and infallable! Now, here's some of the best advice I ever got from anyone on my pool game,

Dick ### Hold the cue like you're holding a bird in your hand, and make a J with your fingers.

Scott Lee... Keep it simple, stupid...(very appropriate in my case) and "Pocket Speed!!!!"

Fran Crimi When your stroke goes haywire, take your ... and ... and then ...
Well, can't give it away, You'll have to see Fran on that one, right Fran?

Hal Houle... It's the same damn shot, over and over..

Howie Perle... Gayle! Just roll the damn balls out on the table and keep shooting them! Gee, wonder how Howie's doing these days?

Carol Clarke... Gayle, You gotta see that ball going into the pocket before you shoot it!!!!

My hometown pool mentor...wow, so many, but probably the best one...just shoot your game, one shot at a time, and don't be afraid of the banks.

Chris Cass...Gayle! If ya can't make the damn shot, shoot a safety!!!

My Grand daughter, Emma, "Gee Gramama, you should put on some make up before you start shooting under all these lights!" /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Emma gets the most valuable advisor prize, LOL.

Love,
Gayle

9 Ball Girl
12-06-2006, 10:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> Hey Gayle,
It was nice talking to you the other day and Im happy things are well with you /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I told you when I get a chance, I'll scan some of these posts, well, I did and all I can say is "carry on!"

Oh, I find this funny:
&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Here's who told me spin won't transfer, Dick Cheny, and Donald Rumsfled, and we all know Cheney can't shoot, and Rumsfeld can't tell the truth <hr /></blockquote>

Take care&amp;talk to you later!
Carol /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

<hr /></blockquote>Me too! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif I just came out of a tedious boring meeting and this gave me the laugh I needed.

jjinfla
12-06-2006, 03:16 PM
This afternoon I tried it. Placed the OB on the spot and the CB about a foot behind it. I shot with just right english. To my amazement the OB went straight down table, struck the end rail and came straight back. (If I was trying to do that I probably couldn't).

I did it several times and got the same results each time.

I had someone else try it and he got the same results.

I even used a striped ball as the CB to ensure that I was getting plenty of spin on the CB and it spun like a top.

I was using a stop shot stroke.

I used a striped ball for the OB and as far as I could see the only force that took on the OB was forward momentum. In other words the OB did not spin. Clockwise in this example as I would have expected.

Tomorrow I will try it with different strokes and much slower speed.

I have to admit that it was not what I expected.

Could Mike, and Scott and Fran all be right?

Too much to think about. I used to be able to make the shots until I studied and learned so much.

I still believe I can throw a ball because I do it in situations where I want the CB to deflect less. However, in these situations I use very soft, slow shots. So maybe speed is the deciding factor.

Above a certain speed there is no throw?

Jake

PS I was using brand new Pro Arimuth balls.

jjinfla
12-06-2006, 03:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>
Howie Perle... Gayle! Just roll the damn balls out on the table and keep shooting them! Gee, wonder how Howie's doing these days?

Gayle <hr /></blockquote>

A name out of the past. How is Howie doing? Last I heard he was having bypass surgery. That was five years ago.

Jake

FatsRedux
12-06-2006, 04:06 PM
Squirt:

Squirt refers to the english induced alteration of the cue ball’s path.

When you stroke a cue ball with english it does not go straight down the line in which the cue was pointing at the moment of contact. If you use right english the cue ball will curve to the left, and if struck with left english the cue ball will curve to the right. This is known as squirt, (AKA deflection).

The amount of squirt generated for a given shot depends on how much english you are using, speed of stroke, length of the shot (distance), type of shaft-- low squirt i.e. Predator, OB-1, etc., or standard (higher squirt) shaft.

A soft stroke on a short shot will produce the least amount of squirt, while a long shot with a hard stroke will produce the most squirt. In addition, the greater the amount of english the greater the amount of squirt.

As I stated at the beginning – squirt is the english induced alteration of the cue ball’s path. And as I previously stated in my prior posts on english – throw is the alteration of the object ball’s path, right english on the cue ball throws the object ball to the left, and left english throws the object ball to the right. As the cut angle increases, the cue ball hits less of the object ball and less throw is produced, the more english you use, the greater the throw. Unlike squirt, throw is greatest on soft shots. With just the right speed of stroke you can use english yet aim as though you are not using english at all because the throw and squirt will cancel each other out. Now let’s recap this:

1.) Throw is a bigger factor than squirt on soft shots.
2.) Squirt is a bigger factor than throw on hard shots.
3.) At the right point squirt and throw cancel each other out.

Now that you have a basic understanding of squirt and throw just file this away in your head and don’t go driving yourself crazy thinking about all of the above when you’re playing. The best players I know don’t even think about compensating for squirt, or throw-- they just do it! How do they just know what to do? It’s easy, they’ve shot a bazillion shots, a bazillion different ways until the shots became second nature to them.

Here’s some parting advice:

Whenever possible—

1.)Use english on short shots and avoid it on long shots.
2.)Use a softer stroke
3.)Use no more than ½ tip to 1 tip of english.

Fats

dr_dave
12-06-2006, 04:31 PM
Here are some possible explanations for your results:

Right English causes squirt to the left, creating a small cut angle to the right. The CB English throws the OB to the left, counteracting the cut angle to the right. The result is that the OB heads straight down the table.

Because the CB throws the OB to the left, the OB exerts an equal and opposite force on the CB to the right that eliminates the small amount of the motion the CB would have had otherwise due to the cut angle. The result is that the CB sits in place spinning.

If you are using new and/or clean and/or polished balls, the amount of the throw will be small. Also, if you are using lots of English, the throw will be less than if you were to use less English (see my Nov '06 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2006/nov06.pdf)). Also, if you are hitting the shot hard, the amount of throw will be even smaller (see my December '06 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2006/dec06.pdf)). If the amount of throw is small, the amount of spin transferred from the CB to the OB will also be small (very small). Also, sidespin wears off as the OB travels down the table.

I think that fully explains what you have observed. Do you and other throw and/or spin transfer non-believers out there agree?

Regards,
Dr. Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jjinfla:</font><hr> This afternoon I tried it. Placed the OB on the spot and the CB about a foot behind it. I shot with just right english. To my amazement the OB went straight down table, struck the end rail and came straight back. (If I was trying to do that I probably couldn't).

I did it several times and got the same results each time.

I had someone else try it and he got the same results.

I even used a striped ball as the CB to ensure that I was getting plenty of spin on the CB and it spun like a top.

I was using a stop shot stroke.

I used a striped ball for the OB and as far as I could see the only force that took on the OB was forward momentum. In other words the OB did not spin. Clockwise in this example as I would have expected.

Tomorrow I will try it with different strokes and much slower speed.

I have to admit that it was not what I expected.

Could Mike, and Scott and Fran all be right?

Too much to think about. I used to be able to make the shots until I studied and learned so much.

I still believe I can throw a ball because I do it in situations where I want the CB to deflect less. However, in these situations I use very soft, slow shots. So maybe speed is the deciding factor.

Above a certain speed there is no throw?

Jake

PS I was using brand new Pro Arimuth balls. <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
12-06-2006, 04:34 PM
Spiderman and others,

FYI, the explanation I provide here (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=239932&amp;page =0&amp;view=&amp;sb=&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=) might explain the "throw-less" experiment described.

Regards,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> Paul...Please include the link to the wei table, when you post a shot. Some of us, when we are not on our own computers, cannot pull up the example table. As such, I can't see the shot, or comment on it. BTW, I'm very good friends with Willie Jopling, and quite aware of his "twister" shots. Most are done with a 'stun' type stroke, with a slightly elevated cue, rather than a lot of sidespin. However, I'll wait to comment further until I can see the shot you put up.

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

Scott,

Chopstick earlier proposed a very simple example to verity the presence or lack of spin transfer. I tried it at dinner tonight, and he is correct - the object ball picks up very noticeable spin upon contact.

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
12-06-2006, 04:36 PM
Scott,

Does the explanation I provide here (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=239932&amp;page =0&amp;view=&amp;sb=&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=) relate to your proposed demonstration?

Regards,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> That's what I thought, too. I used to say, ..."but, I know I've been able to make some tough shots, especially into the side pockets, by spinning the ball in, with a little side on the CB."

"No, Gayle, side english is not transferred from the CB, to the OB."

There's atleast one instructor, someone we all know and love, with whom I've argued about this for years, lol. I hope they see this thread, it will be interesting to see if the person/people in question, identify themselves... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>

NO GAYLE...SIDESPIN is NOT transferred from the CB to the OB...at least not significantly enough to produce a viable result (max transfer will be appx. 2%). Putting right english on the CB will NOT put left english on the OB. We prove this over and over in pool school, even to skeptics.

Believe what you want, but if you want phyisical proof, I'll show you on your own table, the next time I see you.
Nuff said...

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
12-06-2006, 05:38 PM
"Squirt" (AKA "cue ball deflection") refers only to the change in the initial CB direction to an off-center hit. Whether it depends on speed is debatable (or at least, the speed variance is a fairly small effect).

In your description below, you are combining "squirt" and "swerve." Swerve is the curving of the CB path due to masse action caused by an elevated cue stick. The cue stick is always elevated at least a couple of degrees due to the rails. You get more swerve at slower speeds and with more cue stick elevation.

"Squirt" changes the initial direction of the CB, "swerve" describes curving of the CB's path, and "throw" changes the direction of the OB.

For more info on squirt, see the links under "squirt" here (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/threads.html). See also: "whole story of squirt, swerve, and throw (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=200678&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;vc=1)" under "English (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/threads.html)."

Regards,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> Squirt:

Squirt refers to the english induced alteration of the cue ball’s path.

When you stroke a cue ball with english it does not go straight down the line in which the cue was pointing at the moment of contact. If you use right english the cue ball will curve to the left, and if struck with left english the cue ball will curve to the right. This is known as squirt, (AKA deflection).

The amount of squirt generated for a given shot depends on how much english you are using, speed of stroke, length of the shot (distance), type of shaft-- low squirt i.e. Predator, OB-1, etc., or standard (higher squirt) shaft.

A soft stroke on a short shot will produce the least amount of squirt, while a long shot with a hard stroke will produce the most squirt. In addition, the greater the amount of english the greater the amount of squirt.

As I stated at the beginning – squirt is the english induced alteration of the cue ball’s path. And as I previously stated in my prior posts on english – throw is the alteration of the object ball’s path, right english on the cue ball throws the object ball to the left, and left english throws the object ball to the right. As the cut angle increases, the cue ball hits less of the object ball and less throw is produced, the more english you use, the greater the throw. Unlike squirt, throw is greatest on soft shots. With just the right speed of stroke you can use english yet aim as though you are not using english at all because the throw and squirt will cancel each other out. Now let’s recap this:

1.) Throw is a bigger factor than squirt on soft shots.
2.) Squirt is a bigger factor than throw on hard shots.
3.) At the right point squirt and throw cancel each other out.

Now that you have a basic understanding of squirt and throw just file this away in your head and don’t go driving yourself crazy thinking about all of the above when you’re playing. The best players I know don’t even think about compensating for squirt, or throw-- they just do it! How do they just know what to do? It’s easy, they’ve shot a bazillion shots, a bazillion different ways until the shots became second nature to them.

Here’s some parting advice:

Whenever possible—

1.)Use english on short shots and avoid it on long shots.
2.)Use a softer stroke
3.)Use no more than ½ tip to 1 tip of english.

Fats
<hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
12-06-2006, 05:44 PM
Fats,

If you plan to post any more installments, please consider starting new threads. This thread is already too long and it contains too many topics. Posting your squirt and installments in new threads might invite more discussion.

Regards,
Dave

Chopstick
12-06-2006, 06:00 PM
<font color="blue"> Ok I think I have figured this out. I setup Scott's shot.</font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>

Drop a chalkline across the table, on the foot string or head string. Place the CB and OB a foot apart, with the base of both balls on the chalkline. Stroke the CB with center right or left spin, and compensate for the squirt,<font color="blue">and throw </font color> so that you hit the OB full. The CB must remain on the chalkline, spinning in place (assuming there is no topspin or draw). The OB will then strike the cushion, at or near the diamond where the chalkline ends, and, if the physics posters are correct, the OB will rebound off the cushion at a considerably different angle. Our own research shows that this doesn't happen in real life...at least not predictably and repeatedly.

Scott Lee
<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">And I got the result that Scott predicted. </font color>
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>
(max transfer will be appx. 2%).
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>

<font color="blue">Now the question is why. There is something unique about this shot that I think is being overlooked. The angle of incidence, of the object ball path, to the rail is 90 degrees. When the object ball goes straight into the rail there is a moment during the rail impact event when the object ball comes to a complete stop. This does not occur at any other angle. The other thing is that the rail is above the horizontal centerline of the ball. This has the net effect of neutralizing or deadening the spin of the object ball.

It is like throwing a ball straight into a catchers mitt and the catcher pushes the ball straight back at you. It may have been spinning when it went in there but it won't be spinning when it comes back out.

When the angle of incidence is not 90 degrees the ball does not stop. Motion continues. If the catchers mitt is turned at an angle, a ball that is spinning when it strikes the mitt will continue on and retain it's spin.

According to this line of thought, it is logical to say that as the angle of incidence approaches 90 degrees, the induced spin effect will decrease, approaching zero at 90 degrees. (I can hear Dr. Dave sharpening his pencil right now. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif)

So, why doesn't the same happen when you shoot the cue ball along the same path? The angular momentum of the cue is many times stronger than an object ball that has induced spin and it overcomes the catchers mitt effect. Even the cue ball will pickup or lose spin when striking a rail.

So, in conclusion, everybody is right. It is just that the observed results are not applicable to all situations.

</font color>

Jal
12-06-2006, 06:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...If you use right english the cue ball will curve to the left, and if struck with left english the cue ball will curve to the right. <hr /></blockquote>No, it doesn't curve, as per Dr. Dave's comments.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...The amount of squirt generated for a given shot depends on how much english you are using, speed of stroke, length of the shot (distance), type of shaft-- low squirt i.e. Predator, OB-1, etc., or standard (higher squirt) shaft.<hr /></blockquote>It doesn't depend on length of shot.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...A soft stroke on a short shot will produce the least amount of squirt, while a long shot with a hard stroke will produce the most squirt.<hr /></blockquote>The dependency on speed is there, but very minor...almost unmeasurable.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...As the cut angle increases, the cue ball hits less of the object ball and less throw is produced,<hr /></blockquote>Hardly. Just the opposite is true in many cases. The greatest throw occurs at the severest cut angles if the spin is right.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>... the more english you use, the greater the throw.<hr /></blockquote>This is true only for inside english and only if there is a fair amount of draw or follow on the cuball. There may be more exceptions to this than instances where it is true.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...Here’s some parting advice:

Whenever possible—

1.)Use english on short shots and avoid it on long shots.
2.)Use a softer stroke
3.)Use no more than ½ tip to 1 tip of english.<hr /></blockquote>Good advice in my opinion.

Jim

Jal
12-06-2006, 06:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr>...And I got the result that Scott predicted....Now the question is why.<hr /></blockquote>If you achieve a virtually perfect 90 deg angle of incidence (and you can't do this if you hit the object ball perfectly full), and if the object ball does not have a chance to pick up much follow on the way to the cushion, it should come off the cushion at an angle just about equal to the throw angle you would have gotten if you had hit it full. In other words, we're talking about only a few degrees, maybe 3 or 4 at best if you know how to produce max spin. The shot has to be executed with fairly high precision to detect this.

If it has time to pick up follow, as with Spiderman's length of the table version, the rebound angle will be greater because of somewhat arcane physics reasons that we won't go into here. And it's much harder to predict unless you have a very accurate model of the cushion.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr>The other thing is that the rail is above the horizontal centerline of the ball. This has the net effect of neutralizing or deadening the spin of the object ball.<hr /></blockquote>It has some effect but it's not that much. The cushion will take most of the spin away regardless of whether or not it's higher than the cueball's equator.

Jim

Gayle in MD
12-06-2006, 08:42 PM
I spoke with him about two years ago. Same ol' Howie! Seems to me, IIRC, he was having some problems with his legs. I'll have to give him a call, and I'll get back to you...

Gayle in Md.

Jal
12-07-2006, 12:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr>...When the angle of incidence is not 90 degrees the ball does not stop. Motion continues. If the catchers mitt is turned at an angle, a ball that is spinning when it strikes the mitt will continue on and retain it's spin.

According to this line of thought, it is logical to say that as the angle of incidence approaches 90 degrees, the induced spin effect will decrease, approaching zero at 90 degrees.<hr /></blockquote>I think your logic is fine, but the physics is slightly off, in my opinion. It says that because of friction with the cushion, at least some of the spin will will be removed, and as it does this the ball will be given a sideways velocity parallel to the rail. This velocity will increase while the spin is reduced until the ball rolls along the cushion. The same thing happens in a catchers mitt if the catcher doesn't clamp down on the ball immediately.

At this point the ball will have 2/7 of its incoming spin. It's expended 5/7 of it but gained the parallel velocity as a courtesy. When you account for bed friction and cushion height, it'll be a little less than this, but still pretty close. If you go on to figure out what its original spin rate was in terms of the throw angle, and the fact that the ball comes out of the cushion with about 3/4 of its perpendicular speed, it turns out that the rebound angle, measured from the perpendicular, is pretty close to the throw angle....at least this is true when the object ball has little or no topspin on the way in.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr>So, in conclusion, everybody is right.<hr /></blockquote>What are you, some kind of lefty pinko peacemaker? We don't need any of that around here.

Jim

Scott Lee
12-07-2006, 12:43 AM
Marty...I'll be more than happy to watch any of you shoot that shot down the centerline of the table...and observe the results.

Scott Lee

jjinfla
12-07-2006, 06:14 AM
Tell him Dave Ross is still Dave Ross and still playing a lot of pool but now he is enjoying himself playing in small tournaments where he is the favorite. Most of the times.

Jake

DickLeonard
12-07-2006, 06:53 AM
BillyBob tell that low deflection stuffto the Ghosts of Greenleaf and Mosconi, they never missed using shafts that deflected. Of course they were using hard rock maple shafts which have seemed to disappear from this earth.

I think that youth's body has a built in adjustment system that doesn't care about deflection or no deflection. We've probably screwed up their natural honing device by unnaturally tampering with their system.

Think no Bethoveen's,Mozart's,Bach's have come to replace the former Greats. You wonder why all the great advancements in musical instruments,recording equipment etc hasn't produced a flood of new talent.####

DickLeonard
12-07-2006, 07:28 AM
Deeman your Louie Roberts post brought me back to when I would play out of mind/body. My neurologist said your family has said at times they can talk to you and you seem to be far away. I told him as a poolplayer I always had the ability to go someplace else. He said I understand what your saying I am from Buffalo and I saw many great pool matches.

That was what I loved about pool, when you went to that place you knew you were someplace special. If I tried to explain what I felt most people would think its BS or I am crazy.####

MrLucky
12-07-2006, 07:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ..." differeing personalities can sometimes make that process interesting,"...
Dave

<font color="green"> Truer words were never spoken! </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Deeman3
12-07-2006, 09:24 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Deeman your Louie Roberts post brought me back to when I would play out of mind/body. My neurologist said your family has said at times they can talk to you and you seem to be far away. I told him as a poolplayer I always had the ability to go someplace else. He said I understand what your saying I am from Buffalo and I saw many great pool matches.

That was what I loved about pool, when you went to that place you knew you were someplace special. If I tried to explain what I felt most people would think its BS or I am crazy.#### <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">I understand. I wish I had been able to visit that place as often as you have. There is no feeling like it. I still can't sleep at night after playing at a zone level.

I know you saw many greats play but have had many great matches yourself. I have seen a few of the greats smile to themselves when they were hot. I think their opponent might as well have unscrewed their stick and walked out when they were in that tuned in (or tuned out) state.

DeeMan </font color>

SpiderMan
12-07-2006, 10:04 AM
The question posed is whether spin is transferred from CB to OB. Both "yes" and "no" cannot both be right /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Don't be misled by a shot which can't properly demonstrate the results. Your own proposition of a table-length straight-in shot, using an aligned stripe, is a far better example.

SpiderMan

SpiderMan
12-07-2006, 10:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> Marty...I'll be more than happy to watch any of you shoot that shot down the centerline of the table...and observe the results.

Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>

I don't know if my camcorder is good enough to capture it, but I may try this weekend and get someone to post it if possible. Or maybe Dr Dave has better facilities.

SpiderMan

dr_dave
12-07-2006, 10:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> Marty...I'll be more than happy to watch any of you shoot that shot down the centerline of the table...and observe the results.<hr /></blockquote>
I don't know if my camcorder is good enough to capture it, but I may try this weekend and get someone to post it if possible. Or maybe Dr Dave has better facilities.<hr /></blockquote>
I'm going skiing this weekend. That's what we do in Colorado. I'll try to post a video demo soon.

Dave

FatsRedux
12-07-2006, 10:58 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...If you use right english the cue ball will curve to the left, and if struck with left english the cue ball will curve to the right. <hr /></blockquote>No, it doesn't curve, as per Dr. Dave's comments.

<font color="blue">With all due respect to Dr. Dave, I think this is a matter of semantics.

If a cueball deviates from the line of aim and then eventually (as cloth friction exerts its influence) moves back towards the line of aim, the path of the cueball can be described as a gentle curve. That's the way I visualize it, and that's the way I teach it. I'm not alone in seeing it that way either.

Here's Joe Davis from page 62 of his 1954 book "Advanced Snooker":

"The Effects of Applying Side"

"The first problem arises from from the fact, not generally known, that when the cue ball is struck away from its central axis--that is, with side--it is initially driven off its path in the opposite direction. Thus, if left hand side is applied, the cue ball is first of all pushed out to the right, and if right hand side is used it starts its journey by going out to the left. How much to the left or right it goes, and for what distance this drift is continued depends on how much side is applied and at what speed. The more side, and the more power used, the father will the ball be pushed off its course. Given time and distance, the ball will recover; the driving force will fade, and then the spinning ball will react to the nap of the 'West of England' cloth and the ball will swing back. That is, if left hand side is employed, the ball will firstbe pushed out to the right, and will then spin to the left."

Also see "English-The Reason for The Mystery Miss" on page 198 of Ewa Laurance's "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Pool and Billiards"

Again I'm not a physics buff, and I see no reason to overcomplicate the matter when explaining squirt to a beginner. </font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...The amount of squirt generated for a given shot depends on how much english you are using, speed of stroke, length of the shot (distance), type of shaft-- low squirt i.e. Predator, OB-1, etc., or standard (higher squirt) shaft.<hr /></blockquote>It doesn't depend on length of shot.

<font color="blue"> Bullshit. See the chart at the bottom of page 93 of Phil Capelle's "Play Your Best Pool". </font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...A soft stroke on a short shot will produce the least amount of squirt, while a long shot with a hard stroke will produce the most squirt.<hr /></blockquote>The dependency on speed is there, but very minor...almost unmeasurable.

<font color="blue">Wrong again refer to Capelle's chart. </font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...As the cut angle increases, the cue ball hits less of the object ball and less throw is produced,<hr /></blockquote>Hardly. Just the opposite is true in many cases. The greatest throw occurs at the severest cut angles if the spin is right.

<font color="blue"> I disagree with you, so do Capelle, Joe Davis, Kanov and Stauch, and others. I stick by my original statement. </font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>... the more english you use, the greater the throw.<hr /></blockquote>This is true only for inside english and only if there is a fair amount of draw or follow on the cuball. There may be more exceptions to this than instances where it is true.

<font color="blue">I disagree, perhaps one of our luminaries would care to chime in. </font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...Here’s some parting advice:

Whenever possible—

1.)Use english on short shots and avoid it on long shots.
2.)Use a softer stroke
3.)Use no more than ½ tip to 1 tip of english.<hr /></blockquote>Good advice in my opinion.

<font color="blue">Gee thanks! </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Jim <hr /></blockquote>

BTW here are a couple of articles from Bob Jewett that you may find interesting:

http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/2002-08.pdf
http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/2002-09.pdf

Fats

Cornerman
12-07-2006, 01:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Right English causes squirt to the left, creating a small cut angle to the right. The CB English throws the OB to the left, counteracting the cut angle to the right. The result is that the OB heads straight down the table. <hr /></blockquote>A hundred years ago, when I posted about "spin throw doesn't do what people think it does," this explanation is exactly what I said. Circles are funny cuz they always go 'round.

All that's happening now is that everyone is getting a better look at this shot. Good. The results and explanation everyone gets will answer many questions.

For those that don't believe that spin transfers, of course it does, but not to the extent other people think it does. Which is what you guys have said. There will be one setup that shows the spin transfer. And the full length shot probably isn't it. And you'll need lasers and such to prove the shot was straight or not straight. And by the time you find and perfectly execute the one shot that will prove without a shadow of a doubt that spin transfer does indeed exist, it's going to be very difficult how to really use that knowledge.

For those that don't believe that spin doesn't transfer (spin to spin), well, it should be clear just why people might say this.


Fred

Jal
12-07-2006, 02:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...If you use right english the cue ball will curve to the left, and if struck with left english the cue ball will curve to the right. <hr /></blockquote>No, it doesn't curve, as per Dr. Dave's comments.<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">With all due respect to Dr. Dave, I think this is a matter of semantics.</font color><hr /></blockquote>Absolutely. But I think describing it as a curve is misleading and suggests that it's some sort of reaction to the cloth. I agree with the statements you quoted and obviously we both have the same phenomenon in mind.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...The amount of squirt generated for a given shot depends on how much english you are using, speed of stroke, length of the shot (distance), type of shaft-- low squirt i.e. Predator, OB-1, etc., or standard (higher squirt) shaft.<hr /></blockquote>It doesn't depend on length of shot.<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Bullshit. See the chart at the bottom of page 93 of Phil Capelle's "Play Your Best Pool". </font color><hr /></blockquote>Again, semantics. The effect of the squirt is greater for a longer shot (ignoring swerve), but the squirt angle itself doesn't change.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...A soft stroke on a short shot will produce the least amount of squirt, while a long shot with a hard stroke will produce the most squirt.<hr /></blockquote>The dependency on speed is there, but very minor...almost unmeasurable.<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">Wrong again refer to Capelle's chart. </font color><hr /></blockquote>Platinum Billiards tests found only a .2 - .3% increase over a range of speeds from, I think, 9 mph to 21 mph. Yes, when you include swerve and its tendency to cancel squirt, the effect of squirt is greater for harder shots. But the squirt itself isn't much different. Your view is that the net effect is the important thing and no one will argue with that. But keeping the causes separate from the effects is also important to some of us.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...As the cut angle increases, the cue ball hits less of the object ball and less throw is produced,<hr /></blockquote>Hardly. Just the opposite is true in many cases. The greatest throw occurs at the severest cut angles if the spin is right.<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> I disagree with you, so do Capelle, Joe Davis, Kanov and Stauch, and others. I stick by my original statement. </font color><hr /></blockquote>If Dr. Dave's throw theory is correct, they're wrong, But it depends, of course, on exactly what they said.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>... the more english you use, the greater the throw.<hr /></blockquote>This is true only for inside english and only if there is a fair amount of draw or follow on the cuball. There may be more exceptions to this than instances where it is true.<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">I disagree, perhaps one of our luminaries would care to chime in. </font color><hr /></blockquote>Well, I have to admit that there are exceptions to my statement. You will get more throw with more outside english, up to a point, in some cases.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote FatsRedux:</font><hr>...Here’s some parting advice:

Whenever possible—

1.)Use english on short shots and avoid it on long shots.
2.)Use a softer stroke
3.)Use no more than ½ tip to 1 tip of english.<hr /></blockquote>Good advice in my opinion.<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">Gee thanks! </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif<hr /></blockquote>You're apparently not taking too kindly to my remarks. I've been wrong plenty of times and been summarily corrected. That's the way it goes. If you turn out to be right (although most of our disagreements seem to be on the language), then I'll try to learn something. But it should go both ways.

Jim

Qtec
12-07-2006, 02:26 PM
English for beginners?

This thread is beginning to sound like a buch of scientists trying to make excuses why they can't run 3 friggin balls! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif LOL

/ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gifQtec

Rod
12-07-2006, 02:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> English for beginners?

This thread is beginning to sound like a buch of scientists trying to make excuses why they can't run 3 friggin balls! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif LOL

/ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gifQtec <hr /></blockquote>

Q, your ball count is a little high! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Deeman3
12-07-2006, 02:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote>

Q, your ball count is a little high! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote> <font color="blue">

I think we should have a challenge of teams of stupid players (me included) and scientists. If I get the first pick, I want Rod and Dick on my team, leaving me time to scribble and drool while they run balls. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif </font color>

DeeMan
It really hurts when your I.Q and high run are within 10 points of each other! /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Bob_Jewett
12-07-2006, 05:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> ... This thread is beginning to sound like a bunch of scientists trying to make excuses why they can't run 3 friggin balls! ... <hr /></blockquote>
I'm willing to bet (at least small amounts) that I can beat the ghost at 14.1 playing to 3. Give me reasonable odds and I'll bet on 10. I promise I won't try to transfer english to any object ball.

randyg
12-08-2006, 06:42 AM
Bob can play......SPF=randyg

Deeman3
12-08-2006, 08:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> ... This thread is beginning to sound like a bunch of scientists trying to make excuses why they can't run 3 friggin balls! ... <hr /></blockquote>
I'm willing to bet (at least small amounts) that I can beat the ghost at 14.1 playing to 3. Give me reasonable odds and I'll bet on 10. I promise I won't try to transfer english to any object ball. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> LOL, you and me both Bob. Hey, speaking of 14.1, I really look forward to watching your 14.1 challenge again this year. I had thought it might be unexciting with all the other things going on last year but I found it to be very entertaining and the format was excellent. I wish they would give you a little more room around the tables as it seemed we were all sort of squeezed in a bit and you may want to take cameras away from that one person... /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif. If you get a chance, you migbht want to tell people about it a little here for those who have not been to Derby City before.</font color>

DeeMan

Chopstick
12-08-2006, 09:22 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> English for beginners?

This thread is beginning to sound like a buch of scientists trying to make excuses why they can't run 3 friggin balls! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif LOL

/ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gifQtec <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">You read my mind. </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Chopstick
12-08-2006, 09:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>

What are you, some kind of lefty pinko peacemaker? We don't need any of that around here.

Jim <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">What's that about? You after Fast Larry's job? </font color>

Jal
12-08-2006, 01:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> English for beginners?

This thread is beginning to sound like a buch of scientists trying to make excuses why they can't run 3 friggin balls! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif LOL

/ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gifQtec <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">You read my mind. </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif <hr /></blockquote>Now just a gall-darn moment here. I seem to recall that you offered up a physics explanation too. That should cost you at least five balls on your next run.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>

What are you, some kind of lefty pinko peacemaker? We don't need any of that around here.

Jim <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">What's that about? You after Fast Larry's job? </font color> <hr /></blockquote>Just an attempt at humor. I'm not smart enough to take on FL's mantle. Yes, I happen to think he's very smart, in a bizarre but creative kind of way. It's just that the demons are in control much of the time. Besides, Qtec, Rod, and Deeman seem to want it more.

Jim

Deeman3
12-08-2006, 01:56 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> Besides, Qtec, Rod, and Deeman seem to want it more.

Jim <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Mentioning us in the same breath as FL can get you killed here. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Grave Yard Dead...</font color>

DeeMan

Chopstick
12-09-2006, 08:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> Besides, Qtec, Rod, and Deeman seem to want it more.

Jim <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Mentioning us in the same breath as FL can get you killed here. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Grave Yard Dead...</font color>

DeeMan <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">Now look what you went and done. Ya done set off Deeman. Ya'll help me put em out so he don't have to sleep in the garage again. DeeWoman done said I wuz gonna get a whoopin if I sent him home lit up agin. </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

http://www.worstpreviews.com/images/photos/ghostrider/ghostrider7.gif

Qtec
12-10-2006, 12:35 PM
[ QUOTE ]
It's just that the demons are in control much of the time. Besides, Qtec, Rod, and Deeman seem to want it more.

Jim
<hr /></blockquote>

Want what more????

Are you calling Deeman a Leftist?

Are you tired of living? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Do you know how many guns he has? LOL /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Jal
12-10-2006, 05:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
It's just that the demons are in control much of the time. Besides, Qtec, Rod, and Deeman seem to want it more.

Jim
<hr /></blockquote>

Want what more????<hr /></blockquote>FL's job. A major part of his energy is spent harassing those of us interesed in the physics of the game. Sound familiar?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>Are you calling Deeman a Leftist?<hr /></blockquote>Did you notice who I was replying to and the context?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>Are you tired of living? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif<hr /></blockquote>You guys poked some fun at us (or at least me), and I poked back. Nothing more. If there is some history between Deeman and FL, I wasn't aware of it.

You're using some strong language coupled with smiley faces. I don't know what that means. If you want this to escalate, that's your decision(s), not mine. As far as I'm concerned, the thread is over and done with...unless someone wants to add something pool related.

Jim

Qtec
12-11-2006, 12:21 AM
Lighten up Jal. I was not being serious. I thought that was obvious!

Qtec........geez!

jjinfla
12-11-2006, 06:29 AM
Who is FL?

Deeman3
12-11-2006, 08:04 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> and I poked back. Nothing more. If there is some history between Deeman and FL, I wasn't aware of it.

<font color="blue"> Jim,

No, there's no history there unless you count unwanted batches of e-mails and phone calls to me. Q and the rwst of us were just having a laugh. That's the reason for the smily faces and such. When crazed guys like Q and I strike, we don't wolf we do it without warning, right Q?
/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif </font color>

DeeMan

dr_dave
01-05-2007, 12:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>...(max transfer will be appx. 2%)....<hr /></blockquote>On slow straight shots (a little less than lag speed or about 3 mph), and using about half of maximum english to produce maximum throw, you can get 30-40% of the cueball's pre-impact spin on the object ball. This corresponds to a throw angle of about 3.7 degrees, and is relevant here because throw and spin transfer are intimately related. The only way this could not be true is if the amount of throw is badly overestimated by theory, which hardly seems to be the case (or I goofed on the math).<hr /></blockquote>
Jim,

Your numbers sounded a little high to me, so I also worked through the math and physics. The details can be found in TP A.27 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-27.pdf). I come up with a typical maximum possible spin transfer percentage of about 25%. This is lower than your numbers; however, it is still significant (e.g., enough to affect bank shots dramatically).

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
01-05-2007, 12:41 PM
Sorry it took so long. I've started a new thread (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=241601&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=) with the video posting, because this thread is already much too long.

Happy viewing,
Dave
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> Marty...I'll be more than happy to watch any of you shoot that shot down the centerline of the table...and observe the results.<hr /></blockquote>
I don't know if my camcorder is good enough to capture it, but I may try this weekend and get someone to post it if possible. Or maybe Dr Dave has better facilities.<hr /></blockquote>
I'm going skiing this weekend. That's what we do in Colorado. I'll try to post a video demo soon.

Dave <hr /></blockquote>

Jal
01-05-2007, 05:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Your numbers sounded a little high to me, so I also worked through the math and physics. The details can be found in TP A.27 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-27.pdf). I come up with a typical maximum possible spin transfer percentage of about 25%. This is lower than your numbers; however, it is still significant (e.g., enough to affect bank shots dramatically).<hr /></blockquote>I checked my numbers again and they seem to be okay. I don't have the time at the moment but I look forward to reading your TPA later and seeing where I may have made a slight error, or that perhaps you botched, mangled, pulverized and otherwise massacred the math, engineering and physics (as well as the laws of nature and God). /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Jim (...is he smiling?)

Ace
01-05-2007, 08:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Your numbers sounded a little high to me, so I also worked through the math and physics. The details can be found in TP A.27 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-27.pdf). I come up with a typical maximum possible spin transfer percentage of about 25%. This is lower than your numbers; however, it is still significant (e.g., enough to affect bank shots dramatically).<hr /></blockquote>I checked my numbers again and they seem to be okay. I don't have the time at the moment but I look forward to reading your TPA later and seeing where I may have made a slight error, or that perhaps you botched, mangled, pulverized and otherwise massacred the math, engineering and physics (as well as the laws of nature and God). /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Jim (...is he smiling?) <hr /></blockquote>



jal,
I believe you should mind your own numbers and figures and give dr. dave a little more respect.

Jal
01-05-2007, 09:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ace:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Your numbers sounded a little high to me, so I also worked through the math and physics. The details can be found in TP A.27 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-27.pdf). I come up with a typical maximum possible spin transfer percentage of about 25%. This is lower than your numbers; however, it is still significant (e.g., enough to affect bank shots dramatically).<hr /></blockquote>I checked my numbers again and they seem to be okay. I don't have the time at the moment but I look forward to reading your TPA later and seeing where I may have made a slight error, or that perhaps you botched, mangled, pulverized and otherwise massacred the math, engineering and physics (as well as the laws of nature and God). /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Jim (...is he smiling?) <hr /></blockquote>



jal,
I believe you should mind your own numbers and figures and give dr. dave a little more respect. <hr /></blockquote>I honestly can't imagine how you could interpret my post as a sign of disrespect. Or was it something else???

Jim

Jal
01-05-2007, 11:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>...(max transfer will be appx. 2%)....<hr /></blockquote>On slow straight shots (a little less than lag speed or about 3 mph), and using about half of maximum english to produce maximum throw, you can get 30-40% of the cueball's pre-impact spin on the object ball. This corresponds to a throw angle of about 3.7 degrees, and is relevant here because throw and spin transfer are intimately related. The only way this could not be true is if the amount of throw is badly overestimated by theory, which hardly seems to be the case (or I goofed on the math).<hr /></blockquote>
Jim,

Your numbers sounded a little high to me, so I also worked through the math and physics. The details can be found in TP A.27 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-27.pdf). I come up with a typical maximum possible spin transfer percentage of about 25%. This is lower than your numbers; however, it is still significant (e.g., enough to affect bank shots dramatically).

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>Dr. Dave,

I hope you didn't take any offense at my previous post, and my apology if you did.

I used essentially the same equation as in your TP A.27. Taking the maximum OB throw velocity (tangential) as (1/7)Vrel, where Vrel is the relative surface speed and equal to RW, then the tangent of the throw angle for a full hit stun shot is (1/7)RW/V. This yields a transfer of (5/2)(1/7) or 35.7% at, surprisingly, all cueball speeds. Of course, to get max throw the amount of applied english must be different at different speeds and surface conditions (coefficients of friction).

I had no idea this was the case until I tried different speeds and the numbers all came up the same.

Where our results disagree is with the figures we use for the spin/speed ratio that produces maximum throw. I agree that your figures are more probable in that you have to get the tip offset just right in order to obtain the most throw.

Jim

dr_dave
01-06-2007, 07:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Your numbers sounded a little high to me, so I also worked through the math and physics. The details can be found in TP A.27 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-27.pdf). I come up with a typical maximum possible spin transfer percentage of about 25%. This is lower than your numbers; however, it is still significant (e.g., enough to affect bank shots dramatically).<hr /></blockquote>I checked my numbers again and they seem to be okay. I don't have the time at the moment but I look forward to reading your TPA later and seeing where I may have made a slight error, or that perhaps you botched, mangled, pulverized and otherwise massacred the math, engineering and physics (as well as the laws of nature and God). /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Jim (...is he smiling?)<hr /></blockquote>Please let me know if you find any errors in my stuff.

Thanks,
Dave

dr_dave
01-06-2007, 08:02 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>I hope you didn't take any offense at my previous post, and my apology if you did.<hr /></blockquote>
No offense taken. I thought it was cute.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>Where our results disagree is with the figures we use for the spin/speed ratio that produces maximum throw. I agree that your figures are more probable in that you have to get the tip offset just right in order to obtain the most throw.<hr /></blockquote>
I guess I'm not delusional after all. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Thanks,
Dave

dr_dave
02-01-2007, 01:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>For those that don't believe that spin doesn't transfer (spin to spin), well, it should be clear just why people might say this.<hr /></blockquote>
Fred,

I am in the process of writing a second article on spin transfer for Billiards Digest, and I came across this remark of yours in my research. Could you explain to me what you mean by this? It is not obvious to me. Are you implying that they are just trying to keep the knowledge away from others?

Thanks,
Dave

bradb
02-01-2007, 02:03 PM
It looks to me what he is saying is that spin transfer is not obvious unless you are an experienced player so therefore some will be ignorant of its existence.

dr_dave
02-01-2007, 02:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> It looks to me what he is saying is that spin transfer is not obvious unless you are an experienced player so therefore some will be ignorant of its existence.<hr /></blockquote>That makes sense, but I thought he was trying to imply more than this.

Thanks,
Dave

bradb
02-02-2007, 01:43 PM
The throw video makes a clear demonstration what I have always done through plain instinct after years of play. To drill it to a beginner is not a good idea, it will just confuse them.They need to know the basics of leaving the center of the ball, but thats plenty to absorb to start out.
As to why a pro would deny QB spin transfer is confusing? Must be a question of terms. In Canada we have different terms than the U.S. and I get confused with some of the dialogue sometimes. This is an international forum thats read all over the world.
One last note: the hard top spin shot in the demo is very close to the OB, you might get called for a push up here.

dr_dave
02-02-2007, 02:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> The throw video makes a clear demonstration what I have always done through plain instinct after years of play. To drill it to a beginner is not a good idea, it will just confuse them.They need to know the basics of leaving the center of the ball, but thats plenty to absorb to start out.<hr /></blockquote>No disagreements here. Not all of my videos, articles, and book chapters are for beginners.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>As to why a pro would deny QB spin transfer is confusing?<hr /></blockquote>Agreed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>Must be a question of terms. In Canada we have different terms than the U.S. and I get confused with some of the dialogue sometimes. This is an international forum thats read all over the world.<hr /></blockquote>I think this is mostly a pool forum, so I think pool terms are appropriate. Although, it seems that most of the snooker and British-influence players on this forum know what everything means:
"side" = "English"
"screw" = "draw"
"pot a ball" = "sink a ball" = "make a ball" = "pocket a ball"
"plant" = "frozen ball"
"cannon" = "carom"

Maybe others can add some terms I missed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>One last note: the hard top spin shot in the demo is very close to the OB, you might get called for a push up here.<hr /></blockquote>You can try to call it a foul all you want, but I would refuse to honor your call. It is clear from the action of the CB that no foul was committed.

Regards,
Dave

bradb
02-02-2007, 06:27 PM
Dave, your terminology is correct and mostly but not always by players in the forum. When I first came up from Texas I had to relearn a lot. Here we NEVER say "apply spin," (Except for top spin) we would say "top left siding, bottom right" etc. And for force or speed its "stroke length, (soft, normal, hard) or weight," you know the rest. So when I hear the term "increase spin!"...does that mean lengthen the stroke (more power) or apply more siding (same stroke further from center?)
The ball probably is not as close as it looks on the video. I was being facetious about our rules here. I got called on a push when the QB was 1 inch from the OB. I struck down almost vertical with stun. My team mates jumped up and challenged the call but the old timer stood his ground. He said that only a glance at that proximity would be excepted. Don't even think about a hard top spin any where near the OB.

Morris183
02-03-2007, 01:56 PM
The Videos I seen so far, including Dr Dave and Joe Tucker are fabulous and exactly what I needed. I'm still hung up on Inside English, where I need to get a more basic understanding then what I've read so far. Moe

dr_dave
02-03-2007, 03:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Morris183:</font><hr> The Videos I seen so far, including Dr Dave and Joe Tucker are fabulous and exactly what I needed. I'm still hung up on Inside English, where I need to get a more basic understanding then what I've read so far. Moe<hr /></blockquote>My January '07 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2007/jan07.pdf) has some good diagrams and explanations of outside vs. inside English. Also, NV 4.25 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/normal_videos/NV4-25.htm) shows why you might want to use different types of English.

I hope that helps,
Dave

Cornerman
02-05-2007, 09:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>For those that don't believe that spin doesn't transfer (spin to spin), well, it should be clear just why people might say this.<hr /></blockquote>
Fred,

I am in the process of writing a second article on spin transfer for Billiards Digest, and I came across this remark of yours in my research. Could you explain to me what you mean by this? It is not obvious to me. Are you implying that they are just trying to keep the knowledge away from others?

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>Absolutely not.

What I was saying is that given some of the practical tests for spin transfer that the instructors are proposing, it is obvious why some people either don't think spin transfer exists, or that the little spin transfer is negligible. Trying to do isolated tests to just see the effect of spin transfer is very difficult. That should say something about its practical use.



For me, I always thought the spin transfer (spin to spin, not cut to spin) is miniscule, but has a profound effect on bank shots. I've recently done a few tests that's making me rethink that opinion.

Most of the tests that people have proposed can be confusing because of CIT. If you can shoot a shot straight down a line with spin (and that's tough enough) and isolate the reaction to just the spin being transferred, you can see just how much off line you can make the ball bank. And it's not anywhere near as much as I previously thought.

Fred

Cornerman
02-05-2007, 09:31 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Morris183:</font><hr> The Videos I seen so far, including Dr Dave and Joe Tucker are fabulous and exactly what I needed. I'm still hung up on Inside English, where I need to get a more basic understanding then what I've read so far. Moe <hr /></blockquote>Are you getting hung up on the term or are you getting hung up on how to execute Inside English, make the ball, and get postion.

If it's the latter, then I guarantee that an understanding of squirt (cueball deflection) is for you.

Fred

Deeman3
02-05-2007, 10:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Morris183:</font><hr> The Videos I seen so far, including Dr Dave and Joe Tucker are fabulous and exactly what I needed. I'm still hung up on Inside English, where I need to get a more basic understanding then what I've read so far. Moe <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Moe:

Inside english is by no means magical and is subjust to the same laws/rules which govern outside english. However, most people learn early about outside because it helps reduce the chance of skids and may be more predictable than loading up with inside. It also seems (to me) that effects of inside are a little morre sensitive to speed than outside. It may be that we just hit more shots with speed so that we can make the unconscience adjustments easier with outside but most people would find more of a challenge using it at disdance of at greater speeds. Like all skills, you just have to hit a lot of balls using it to get comfortable. It comes down to practicing what you don't do well or understand when its easier for most folks to practice those things they are already comfortable with.

40 years ago, I remember having a hard time with thin cuts down the rail when I used inside. If my memory is correct and that is typical with others, you may want to start there and work on it until you are hitting them pretty consistently. If you are deciding on inside or outside based on your confidence level rather than positional needs, you will still need more work. By the way, say hello to Curley and Larry for me.</font color>

DeeMan

bradb
02-05-2007, 10:25 AM
Dave, I will say that until I watched your video I did not place a lot of importance on how much the path of the ball was altered. As I mentioned before its always been a gut feeling. There are too many factors ...cloth ...siding ... cut... pace... (even humidity!) thats its almost impossible to measure except in the mind.
I usually lead the pocket when using siding for long difficult position shots. But I'm thinking now if I can still get a decent position with plain ball why increase the risk?
Its clear that this game is a constant learning process.

dr_dave
02-05-2007, 04:22 PM
Fred,

Thank you for the reply. I agree that spin transfer effects are smaller than some people think. But they are also more significant than many people think. If spin transfer is not accounted for in certain bank shots, the shots will be missed.

I know you don't need demos, but others might be interested. NV 6.12 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/normal_videos/NV6-12.htm) and NV 6.13 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/normal_videos/NV6-13.htm) show examples of collision-induced spin transfer for both outside and inside cut bank shots, and NV A.21 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/normal_videos/new/NVA-21.htm) shows an example of spin-induced spin transfer. Don't you agree that spin transfer plays a significant role in these shots (i.e., if you don't account for the effect, you will likely miss the shot)?

Thank you for your input,
Dave

PS: If you come up with some interesting results and conclusions from your testing, please share them.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>For those that don't believe that spin doesn't transfer (spin to spin), well, it should be clear just why people might say this.<hr /></blockquote>
Fred,

I am in the process of writing a second article on spin transfer for Billiards Digest, and I came across this remark of yours in my research. Could you explain to me what you mean by this? It is not obvious to me. Are you implying that they are just trying to keep the knowledge away from others?

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>Absolutely not.

What I was saying is that given some of the practical tests for spin transfer that the instructors are proposing, it is obvious why some people either don't think spin transfer exists, or that the little spin transfer is negligible. Trying to do isolated tests to just see the effect of spin transfer is very difficult. That should say something about its practical use.



For me, I always thought the spin transfer (spin to spin, not cut to spin) is miniscule, but has a profound effect on bank shots. I've recently done a few tests that's making me rethink that opinion.

Most of the tests that people have proposed can be confusing because of CIT. If you can shoot a shot straight down a line with spin (and that's tough enough) and isolate the reaction to just the spin being transferred, you can see just how much off line you can make the ball bank. And it's not anywhere near as much as I previously thought.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
02-05-2007, 04:32 PM
FYI, this example is illustrated and presented in detail in my April '07 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2007/april07.pdf). Please let me know if you have any feedback, disagreements, or recommendations. I still have a few weeks to make changes if necessary.

Thanks,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Here are some possible explanations for your results:

Right English causes squirt to the left, creating a small cut angle to the right. The CB English throws the OB to the left, counteracting the cut angle to the right. The result is that the OB heads straight down the table.

Because the CB throws the OB to the left, the OB exerts an equal and opposite force on the CB to the right that eliminates the small amount of the motion the CB would have had otherwise due to the cut angle. The result is that the CB sits in place spinning.

If you are using new and/or clean and/or polished balls, the amount of the throw will be small. Also, if you are using lots of English, the throw will be less than if you were to use less English (see my Nov '06 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2006/nov06.pdf)). Also, if you are hitting the shot hard, the amount of throw will be even smaller (see my December '06 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2006/dec06.pdf)). If the amount of throw is small, the amount of spin transferred from the CB to the OB will also be small (very small). Also, sidespin wears off as the OB travels down the table.

I think that fully explains what you have observed. Do you and other throw and/or spin transfer non-believers out there agree?

Regards,
Dr. Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jjinfla:</font><hr> This afternoon I tried it. Placed the OB on the spot and the CB about a foot behind it. I shot with just right english. To my amazement the OB went straight down table, struck the end rail and came straight back. (If I was trying to do that I probably couldn't).

I did it several times and got the same results each time.

I had someone else try it and he got the same results.

I even used a striped ball as the CB to ensure that I was getting plenty of spin on the CB and it spun like a top.

I was using a stop shot stroke.

I used a striped ball for the OB and as far as I could see the only force that took on the OB was forward momentum. In other words the OB did not spin. Clockwise in this example as I would have expected.

Tomorrow I will try it with different strokes and much slower speed.

I have to admit that it was not what I expected.

Could Mike, and Scott and Fran all be right?

Too much to think about. I used to be able to make the shots until I studied and learned so much.

I still believe I can throw a ball because I do it in situations where I want the CB to deflect less. However, in these situations I use very soft, slow shots. So maybe speed is the deciding factor.

Above a certain speed there is no throw?

Jake

PS I was using brand new Pro Arimuth balls. <hr /></blockquote> <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
02-05-2007, 04:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> Dave, I will say that until I watched your video I did not place a lot of importance on how much the path of the ball was altered.<hr /></blockquote>
I'm not sure which video you mean (DVD (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/cd_dvd/dvd_description.html) or NV A.21 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/normal_videos/new/NVA-21.htm) or NV 6.12 and 6.13 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/normal_videos/index.html) or HSV A.66 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-66.htm) or other), but I'm glad it was helpful?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>As I mentioned before its always been a gut feeling. There are too many factors ...cloth ...siding ... cut... pace... (even humidity!) thats its almost impossible to measure except in the mind.<hr /></blockquote>
I agree that it is one thing to understand all of the effects, and it is another thing to know how much to adjust. The "knowing how much to adjust" part requires practice and "calibration" for specific playing conditions (i.e., its different on every table, and you need to try some shots to get a "feel" for the table and ball conditions). However, if you don't know that you need to adjust, or if you do know but don't know which direction to adjust, you will be worse off than if you did know. Intuition is great if it is backed up by confidence created by knowledge, lots of practice, and lots of successful play; but many people have not put in enough table time to have perfect intuition. That's where I think a little knowledge can go a long way in helping the player build intuition faster.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>I usually lead the pocket when using siding for long difficult position shots.<hr /></blockquote>I have never heard of the term "siding." I have never seen it in any book or article, and I have never heard it spoken, and I have lived in many places and I know pool players from many areas, and I have read countless books and articles. Please use terminology that most people would understand. Didn't Fran already lecture you on this? /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>But I'm thinking now if I can still get a decent position with plain ball why increase the risk?<hr /></blockquote>Agreed! One should not use English unless it is absolutely required for the shot and position. Why deal with squirt, swerve, throw, speed, and distance effects if there are better alternatives?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>Its clear that this game is a constant learning process.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed, 100%!!!

Regards,
Dave

bradb
02-05-2007, 05:31 PM
I can't believe you've never heard of siding (side)...bottom left, top right.

Fran never heard of a plant either but then she may not be into gardening. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Morris183
02-05-2007, 08:26 PM
From what I observed via a writeup, I was confused when the cb was moved to 2 different locations and in both cases it was refferred to as Inside English. Perhaps a video would help me. Moe

Deeman3
02-06-2007, 07:10 AM
Moe,

For simplicity, inside is when you apply side (or english) to the same side that the object ball will be cut to. If you are cutting a ball to the left, inside english would be applied to the left side fo the cue ball.

DeeMan

bradb
02-06-2007, 08:14 AM
Deeman, you seem fairly savy to British terms, Dave toook me to task for using the word "siding," is that a rare use of the term down there? -Brad

Deeman3
02-06-2007, 08:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> Deeman, you seem fairly savy to British terms, Dave toook me to task for using the word "siding," is that a rare use of the term down there? -Brad <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Brad,

Aside (excuse that) from the fact I'm a redneck in Southern Alabama, I spent a considerable portion of my life in Europe (Germany, France, Great Britian and am accustomed to those terms via snooker and pool. Side, along with soap, toothbrush and dictionary are not often used down here. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif You have to be from the beltway and personally know all the senators and rub elbows with the elite to use those terms with impunity on this forum. JK /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

DeeMan </font color>

dr_dave
02-06-2007, 09:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I can't believe you've never heard of siding (side)...bottom left, top right.

Fran never heard of a plant either but then she may not be into gardening. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif<hr /></blockquote>
Regardless of what you believe, if you keep using words like "siding" on pool forums, most people will not know what you are talking about. Top-right and bottom-left is OK, but "siding" is not. "Side" is referred to as English ... and this usually implies sidespin only (although, as an example, people will sometimes refer to a combination of right English and follow as top-right English). Generally, the spins corresponding to follow and draw are called topspin and bottom spin. Again, if you want to see definitions of generally accepted pool terms, see my online glossary (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/resources/glossary.pdf).

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
02-06-2007, 09:31 AM
FYI, my January '07 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2007/jan07.pdf) and Section 4.05 in my book contain good illustrations, descriptions, and examples of the differences between inside and outside English.

Regards,
Dave
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Morris183:</font><hr> From what I observed via a writeup, I was confused when the cb was moved to 2 different locations and in both cases it was refferred to as Inside English. Perhaps a video would help me. Moe <hr /></blockquote>

bradb
02-06-2007, 09:43 AM
Dave its not a question of what I believe, do you think I'm making this up? Its how we describe a shot here...i.e. "what kind of siding did you use?"

Dave here's the proper terminology for a plant. (Its also called a "wired" shot.)

(Quote Cushion Crawler) When 2 balls are touching (nearnuff), if u hit the 1st ball and pot the 1st ball, then that shood be called a "plant". If u pot the second ball, then that shood be called a "set". That woz the original terminology. Nowadayz all seem to call either/both a "plant". madMac.

So a "plant" is really a combo that is dead on the pocket.

dr_dave
02-06-2007, 09:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> Dave its not a question of what I believe, do you think I'm making this up? Its how we describe a shot here...i.e. "what kind of siding did you use?"<hr /></blockquote>Sorry, I didn't mean to be so judgemental. I can believe that people might use such a term. Many people in different pool halls, bars, and regions use various "local" terms. I just think we should try to limit ourselves to generally accepted terms on wide-audience forums. Otherwise, there will be much miscommunication.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>Dave here's the proper terminology for a plant. (Its also called a "wired" shot.)

(Quote Cushion Crawler) When 2 balls are touching (nearnuff), if u hit the 1st ball and pot the 1st ball, then that shood be called a "plant". If u pot the second ball, then that shood be called a "set". That woz the original terminology. Nowadayz all seem to call either/both a "plant". madMac.

So a "plant" is really a combo that is dead on the pocket.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you for sharing that. Like Fran, I don't think I fully understood the snooker term "plant." Although, you and madMac seem to disagree. From what I understand, a "plant" would be called a dead-on frozen carom (or kiss) shot, and a "set" would be called a dead-on frozen combo shot. When you use the word combo (combination), it implies you are hitting one object ball into a second with the goal of pocketing the second.

Regards,
Dave

bradb
02-06-2007, 10:06 AM
Dave here's the proper billiard term. Side is a noun, siding the verb


www.allwords.com/word-siding.html (http://www.allwords.com/word-siding.html) ---(go to #18)

Looks like Deeman gave me the skinny, I've never hob nobbed with senators but I've played here and there. OK... I'll stick with the Merican. Spent some time in New orleans... got some Cajun lingo!!!

PS, don't ever say English to a French Canadian /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

bradb
02-06-2007, 10:17 AM
No, Crawler and I are in agreement. Its usually two (all most touching or touching balls.) If the near ball is hit the far ball is an automatic pot. Crawler pointed out that the term "set" is rarely used for what was is now a plant.

It can also be a whole series of balls in the rack which offer an automatic red pot. Thats how Ronnie got one of his many 147's

dr_dave
02-06-2007, 10:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> Dave here's the proper billiard term. Side is a noun, siding the verb
www.allwords.com/word-siding.html (http://www.allwords.com/word-siding.html) ---(go to #18)<hr /></blockquote>I repeat: "siding" is not a generally accepter pool term.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>Looks like Deeman gave me the skinny, I've never hob nobbed with senators but I've played here and there. OK... I'll stick with the Merican. Spent some time in New orleans... got some Cajun lingo!!!<hr /></blockquote>
I grew up in New Orleans, and my entire family still lives there, so bring on the cajun lingo ... but not on this public forum.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>PS, don't ever say English to a French Canadian /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote>OK ... I won't, but I don't curl, ice fish, or play hockey, so when would I have the opportunity to use the word anyway? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Regards,
Dave

Deeman3
02-06-2007, 10:31 AM
Dave,

Curling is an old billiard term that is best described as what happens when you plop a $100 bill on the table and say, "I'll play any fool in the place for this!" Then Efren walks up and your private parts "curl up." /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

DeeMan
don't care what they call it, its still rock and roll to me....

dr_dave
02-06-2007, 10:40 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Dave,

Curling is an old billiard term that is best described as what happens when you plop a $100 bill on the table and say, "I'll play any fool in the place for this!" Then Efren walks up and your private parts "curl up." /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

DeeMan
don't care what they call it, its still rock and roll to me.... <hr /></blockquote>I learn something new every day.

You might want to "curl up" with Efren, but I don't. I'd rather change the siding on my house. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Dave

bradb
02-06-2007, 10:42 AM
("I'll play any fool in the place for this!")


Deeman...we definitely gotta "fish" there! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Deeman3
02-06-2007, 12:54 PM
Remember the old saying, "If you look around the room and can't spot the sucker, it's you.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif

DeeMan
been there, done that

cushioncrawler
02-06-2007, 02:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> No, Crawler and I are in agreement. Its usually two (all most touching or touching balls.) If the near ball is hit the far ball is an automatic pot. Crawler pointed out that the term "set" is rarely used for what was is now a plant. It can also be a whole series of balls in the rack which offer an automatic red pot. Thats how Ronnie got one of his many 147's <hr /></blockquote> Yes, putting it (the snooker terminology) a pool-way, if the one iz nearnuff frozen to the nine, and u hit the one and it flyz off (allmost at 90dg) into a pocket, then that iz a (snooker) "plant", and if the nine goze in (at allmost 00dg) then that iz a (snooker) "set". U can of course change the nine's say 00dg "set-angle" in the "set-shot" by up to plus or minus 6dg depending on which side of the one u hit and how much english or draw u uze, and i woz really impressed by one of Byrne's books where he changes the "plant-angle" (he called it something else, or nothing) by up to plus or minus say 6dg by uzing draw or follow. madMac.

bradb
02-06-2007, 03:12 PM
A friend of mine is a master at getting a "not on set" (for want of a better term) to pot... I usually can get it up to 5 or 6 dg throw with a fairly simple angle off... but he bends it like Beckman. Adding spin as well as a sharp cut is getting into the realm of the super natural.
I'll have to check out Byrnes book on the subject. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

cushioncrawler
02-06-2007, 03:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> A friend of mine is a master at getting a "not on set" (for want of a better term) to pot... I usually can get it up to 5 or 6 dg throw with a fairly simple angle off... but he bends it like Beckman. Adding spin as well as a sharp cut is getting into the realm of the super natural. I'll have to check out Byrnes book on the subject. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote> Looking throo my old praktis notes, i noted that if simple qball to objectball throw (ie simple-throw) is say 5dg, then, if u hit a set the best way, u can get allmost double that figure, ie say 9dg of "set-throw". There was a thread or posting a month ago about how to get max "set-throw" (but didnt use that term). And there was some sort of thread a long time ago about Byrne's "plant-throw". madMac.

bradb
02-06-2007, 03:55 PM
I've been trying to practise hitting the "set throw" on my Simonis and found that calculation is fairly close. The challenge then becomes angle off control. Thats where adding spin can compensate and of course the distance becomes a factor. When I get on the 12' napped, its back to the drawing board. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Morris183
02-06-2007, 09:11 PM
Even I can understand that. Thanks. Moe

bradb
02-06-2007, 10:30 PM
Actually its a fairly simple shot Moe it just sounds complicated. Put two balls together and point them not quite to a pocket. If you hit the back ball on an inside angle it will spin the front ball into the pocket. I'm just a good old boy who shoots it on gut feeling. madMac is the guy who can figure this out.

-Brad

Qtec
02-07-2007, 04:50 AM
Sidsiding
noun

1. A short dead-end railway line onto which trains, wagons, etc can be shunted temporarily from the main line.ing is not a verb and in does not mean to apply sidespin or a ball with spin, any kind!


Your link does not support your argument one iota! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif I have never heard of siding in the way you are using it. A bal has spin or side but not siding.

Qtec........give it up.

pooltchr
02-07-2007, 06:22 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> Actually its a fairly simple shot Moe it just sounds complicated. Put two balls together and point them not quite to a pocket. If you hit the back ball on an inside angle it will spin the front ball into the pocket. I'm just a good old boy who shoots it on gut feeling. madMac is the guy who can figure this out.

-Brad <hr /></blockquote>

Actually, it will throw the front ball into the pocket rather than "spin" it into the pocket.
Steve

randyg
02-07-2007, 07:10 AM
Good point Steve. Angle not spin......randyg

DickLeonard
02-07-2007, 07:14 AM
Dave pool knowledge was a well kept secret till Ray Martin"s 99 critical shots. Mosconi"s book was a nice book for young children.

Most of the advice given in the old days was to sabotage your play. ####

bradb
02-07-2007, 10:43 AM
The side action of striking the first ball off angle imparts spin (rotation) onto it which in turns imparts counter spin on the second ball making it veer towards the pocket. I'm not sure if its forced that way or the actual spin of the ball on the cloth rotates it off line. I suspect a bit of the latter as its different on napped felt.. All I know is more cut...more spin. more angle. madMax and Dave are the experts on this.

bradb
02-07-2007, 10:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
Sidsiding
noun

1. A short dead-end railway line onto which trains, wagons, etc can be shunted temporarily from the main line.ing is not a verb and in does not mean to apply sidespin or a ball with spin, any kind!


Your link does not support your argument one iota! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif I have never heard of siding in the way you are using it. A bal has spin or side but not siding.

Qtec........give it up.

<hr /></blockquote>
Obviously you did not follow the link. See #18!!!!!

What are you saying I'm lying and made it up?

bradb
02-07-2007, 12:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
Sidsiding
noun

1. A short dead-end railway line onto which trains, wagons, etc can be shunted temporarily from the main line.ing is not a verb and in does not mean to apply sidespin or a ball with spin, any kind!


Your link does not support your argument one iota! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif I have never heard of siding in the way you are using it. A bal has spin or side but not siding.

Qtec........give it up.

<hr /></blockquote>
Dr Dave....Help!!! ....Qtec is accusing me of using Railroad terminology!!!

I've been known to shoot a ball on the rail now and then. OK I've switched cues a few times, ran out of steam once. But that "siding" was for my house!!!...Honest!!!,
I think Qtecs just trying to throw me off track! -Brad

pooltchr
02-07-2007, 12:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> The side action of striking the first ball off angle imparts spin (rotation) onto it which in turns imparts counter spin on the second ball making it veer towards the pocket. I'm not sure if its forced that way or the actual spin of the ball on the cloth rotates it off line. I suspect a bit of the latter as its different on napped felt.. All I know is more cut...more spin. more angle. madMax and Dave are the experts on this. <hr /></blockquote>

Pure side rotational spin is not going to alter the direction of a ball. The directional energy from the cue ball will transfer in some part to an object ball it hits, causing it to deviate from a path that would have been along the line of centers upon contact. This directional energy transfer constitutes collision induced throw, which is how it is possible to pocket an object ball, even when the line of centers does not lead directly to the pocket.
Steve

bradb
02-07-2007, 12:19 PM
Post deleted by bradb

Jal
02-07-2007, 01:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> The directional energy along with the rotational energy applys enough force to alter the path of the ball. With two balls together that energy is transferred. Its slight near the pocket but down table it widens. Thats why I mentioned napped cloth, that rotation is less pronounced on it.

In conclusion: if rotation has nothing to do with it then why must the off angle be inside spin which rotates the second ball towards the pocket?

You are correct the proper term is "throw" and I should have used that. <hr /></blockquote>Brad, you're right that the second ball can be thrown off-line using cueball spin alone. But the spin induced on the second ball, whether acquired from spin on the cueball and/or from hitting the first ball off-center, does next to nothing to alter its path, as pooltchr said. It's the throw (from friction) that occurs during impact that does the trick.

This isn't quite the same as applying sidespin to the cueball, which causes it to curve because of the stick's elevation. There the cueball has a spin component about an axis pointing in the forward (or backward) direction in addition to the pure sidespin. That's what causes it to curve.

Jim

dr_dave
02-07-2007, 04:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
Sidsiding
noun

1. A short dead-end railway line onto which trains, wagons, etc can be shunted temporarily from the main line.ing is not a verb and in does not mean to apply sidespin or a ball with spin, any kind!


Your link does not support your argument one iota! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif I have never heard of siding in the way you are using it. A bal has spin or side but not siding.

Qtec........give it up.

<hr /></blockquote>
Dr Dave....Help!!! ....Qtec is accusing me of using Railroad terminology!!!

I've been known to shoot a ball on the rail now and then. OK I've switched cues a few times, ran out of steam once. But that "siding" was for my house!!!...Honest!!!,
I think Qtecs just trying to throw me off track! -Brad
<hr /></blockquote>
Brad,

Congratulations!!! It looks like you have finally given up with your quest to teach the pool world "siding." I am glad to see humor in your resignation. I respect someone who can poke fun at themselves (and others at the same time). Nice touch.

Dave

dr_dave
02-07-2007, 04:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> The side action of striking the first ball off angle imparts spin (rotation) onto it which in turns imparts counter spin on the second ball making it veer towards the pocket. I'm not sure if its forced that way or the actual spin of the ball on the cloth rotates it off line. I suspect a bit of the latter as its different on napped felt.. All I know is more cut...more spin. more angle. madMax and Dave are the experts on this. <hr /></blockquote>

Pure side rotational spin is not going to alter the direction of a ball. The directional energy from the cue ball will transfer in some part to an object ball it hits, causing it to deviate from a path that would have been along the line of centers upon contact. This directional energy transfer constitutes collision induced throw, which is how it is possible to pocket an object ball, even when the line of centers does not lead directly to the pocket.
Steve <hr /></blockquote>Steve,

Nice summary. If people want more information, see my August '06 through April '07 instructional articles (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html), with more to come.

Dave