PDA

View Full Version : Note to corner man

02-14-2007, 12:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> Its true that the easiest shot is slight inside top because QB spins inside making OB spin outside (slightly) so when OB hits pocket jaws the spin helps to feed it in.<hr /></blockquote>
Dr. Dave's HSV 4.10 proves this to be untrue. Outside spin is not transferred to the object ball. Inside English helps due to other reasons. They were detailed by Fran Crimi and myself.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>But the answer is: use only if it will keep you in shape. <hr /></blockquote> Please read my post on the the two position paths using inside-english on the frozen cushion shot. It might be helpful to understand all the position possibilities and why you would use them.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>
a) contact the cushion first and then hit the object ball as the cue ball rebounds off the cushion, or
b) you can contact the cushion first and then hit the object ball while the cueball is driving into the cushion. Virtually all the ranges in between have a good shot at making the balls.

a) might look like this:

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3AbpJ3PPkw3UbpJ3UcYs3kPkw3kbgq4kaym4kTNe4uAQS@

and

b) might look like this.

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3Abgx3PJXb3Ubgx3UcYt3kJXb3kboi3kFlj4kbHU1kBnl4uA IU@

Understanding the subtle difference in a) vs. b) gives you all options. IMO a) has the higher margin of error, which is important the farther the ball gets from the pocket. Either way, you're contacting the cushion first. a) is a short kick. b) is an overcut (ed: not a short kick) adjusting for throw.
<hr /></blockquote>

Fred &lt;~~~ it's almost impossible to hit the ball and cushion at the same time.
<hr /></blockquote>

For the transfer comment, I've had a lot of top players tell me there is some transfer when you hit ball/rail same time. Now don't tell me you can't do it as I just came from my table and did just that! again and again and it went! I'm sure if you put a micrometer on it its not perfect, but who cares, it goes!

For your example on extreme inside left to return to mid table...Why? Thats a common shot If there are balls blocking the simple path yes, but it increases the margin for error. So other wise take the simple route.

For hitting the ball to rail first as shown. Again... Why? that increases the difficulty of the shot. Yes thats a good shot to employ (even way up the rail) when fairly straight on to the shot to achieve position but thats about the only reason.

I can pot a ball at a 90 dg or even more with strong top inside spin and clipping the rail first to kick it over. But extreme is the key here. I'm one of the best in my league at that shot, but the bank shot is about the same in risk.

In snooker if you hit the rail (even slightly first) your sitting down, unless your'e trying the kick and thats a tall order on that table.

I'm sure I may have missed something here and maybe misunderstood an example but thats why we have a forum...to share knowledge.. Brad

Cornerman
02-14-2007, 01:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> For the transfer comment, I've had a lot of top players tell me there is some transfer when you hit ball/rail same time.<hr /></blockquote> English transfers. You misunderstood me. The explanation is too long. If you misunderstood me the first time, more words won't make it clearer. That's simply a fact of words trying to convey something that's easier discussed on a table. Short and sweet: the english that transfers is opposite of what people think they're getting.

[ QUOTE ]
For hitting the ball to rail first as shown. Again... Why? that increases the difficulty of the shot. Yes thats a good shot to employ (even way up the rail) when fairly straight on to the shot to achieve position but thats about the only reason.
<hr /></blockquote>The moment you say things like "that increases the difficulty of the shot," when other people are saying that it actually makes the shot easier, you really need to step back and examine it. You can't just try to give a "that's the only reason" today.

Bob Byrne put in his first video two decades ago the reason why you would go rail first on these shots. Players decades before that have been saying the using inside on these shots make them easier. A bit of thought can give the reason as to why both are correct. I think I've adequately conveyed why that is.

Fred

Deeman3
02-14-2007, 01:39 PM
Not meaning to bump in here but: Fred made a statement that is so important. Standing at the table with a group, he would clear this up in 5 minutes. Fred and I did just this a few weeks ago in Kentucky with Jerry B. Both of us learned something, or at least I, had not considered. However, if Jerry had come on here and explained it, it may have taken a thousand words to get the true message across.

DeeMan
planning to steal Cornerman's Case when he's not looking..Nicest Justis I've seen....

02-14-2007, 02:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> For the transfer comment, I've had a lot of top players tell me there is some transfer when you hit ball/rail same time.<hr /></blockquote> English transfers. You misunderstood me. The explanation is too long. If you misunderstood me the first time, more words won't make it clearer. That's simply a fact of words trying to convey something that's easier discussed on a table. Short and sweet: the english that transfers is opposite of what people think they're getting.
___________________________________________

BRAD---You are saying left side spin transfers left side spin to OB? I'll hunt around for the example you are talking about, having a hard time getting around that but I'll shut up until I take a look at all you have described.

For hitting the ball to rail first as shown. Again... Why? that increases the difficulty of the shot. Yes thats a good shot to employ (even way up the rail) when fairly straight on to the shot to achieve position but thats about the only reason.
<hr /></blockquote>The moment you say things like "that increases the difficulty of the shot," when other people are saying that it actually makes the shot easier, you really need to step back and examine it. You can't just try to give a "that's the only reason" today.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

BRAD---The sample you showed me does increase the difficulty for me because it requires guessing where to hit the rail on many different angles. So again, I question that?

---------------------------------------

Bob Byrne put in his first video two decades ago the reason why you would go rail first on these shots. Players decades before that have been saying the using inside on these shots make them easier. A bit of thought can give the reason as to why both are correct. I think I've adequately conveyed why that is.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

BRAD---I don't thinkl you have adequately explained to me completely anything at all. But as afore mentioned I will look into all the material cited before any further comment. That would be prudent as I'm giving you the benefit of my doubt. <font color="blue"> </font color> <font color="blue"> </font color> <font color="blue"> </font color> <font color="blue"> </font color> <font color="blue"> </font color>

Cornerman
02-14-2007, 02:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> The sample you showed me does increase the difficulty for me because it requires guessing where to hit the rail on many different angles. So again, I question that?<hr /></blockquote> Sigh... Okay, the whole idea is that by going rail first and using inside, the margin of error is increased. Therefore, less guessing is required.

Surely you and everyone else has hit what you thought would be a miss on a ball frozen to the cushion by hitting the cushion prior to hitting the object ball, and the object ball hugged the rail merrily down into the hole, much to your surprise. Hasn't everyone seen this in their travels?

[ QUOTE ]
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>

Bob Byrne put in his first video two decades ago the reason why you would go rail first on these shots. Players decades before that have been saying the using inside on these shots make them easier. A bit of thought can give the reason as to why both are correct. I think I've adequately conveyed why that is.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

I don't think you have adequately explained to me completely anything at all. <hr /></blockquote> See my previous comments on words on a screen vs. descriptions on a table.

But, here goes another short and sweet.

Bob Byrne says rail first is best margin of error.

Others without the dedicated experimentation say that inside english is best for margin of error.

However... inside english -&gt; squirt to the outside -&gt; ends up rail first -&gt; running short kick -&gt; ball goes in pocket over a relatively large margin of aimpts.

That is, the use of inside english has created a rail-first shot for years upon years upon years for those trying to hit the rail and cushion at the same time.

They most likely had/have no idea that squirt exists. Doesn't matter. The ball goes in the hole.

Fred

02-14-2007, 02:50 PM
/quote] Sigh... Okay, the whole idea is that by going rail first and using inside, the margin of error is increased. Therefore, less guessing is required.

Surely you and everyone else has hit what you thought would be a miss on a ball frozen to the cushion by hitting the cushion prior to hitting the object ball, and the object ball hugged the rail merrily down into the hole, much to your surprise. Hasn't everyone seen this in their travels?

_____

Yes of course, but I must add that the ball will come off the rail about an 1/8" at pocket, unless that margin of "rail first" is very minute.

As I sight over my cue tip (which is large compared to the tiny place I must hit) that margin looks awful small, so I sight right at the crease where ball and rail meet.

If I apply inside I don't change that sight and the ball hugs nicely. If I widen the shot so rail first it becomes a crapshoot whether I hit the right place on the rail. That's just to much guess when I'm in a game.

Maybe over the years I've learned to hit rail first out of instinct but I don't think so as I can adjust that hit fairly well.

All I know Fred, is I brought that over from Snooker and it works here to.

Still have not read material yet, I may not be reading you right yet.

02-14-2007, 03:20 PM
I'm replying to my own post here because something just occured to me.

When I aim at that crease I adjust to just barely hit the rail side first. This is insurance because if you hit the OB first you sit down!

But the sample shown had the QB hitting a good 1/2' up the rail.

cushioncrawler
02-14-2007, 03:30 PM
Fred -- When i mentioned that "pocket-side" helps a ball to drop, i didnt mean this to sound as if i agreed with players who use this theory to try to explain why hitting cushion-first with "running-side" makes the "frozen-rail-shot" eezyr. This sort of "pocket-side" explanation is given in many snooker books -- but it iz bullkrap. Sure, any pocket-side would help, but (az u pointed out) the large margin-for-error iz more to do with the favourable throw, it is mainly this throw which allows one to hit the cushion a long way before the objectball yet still get the shot, ie the good object-ball-angle is more important here than any good object-ball-spin.

But, i do uze pocket-side to help pot a ball that iznt touching the cushion -- i am talking about tight 12' tables here. Its no good trying this if u arent experienced in allowing for squirt and throw etc, but it definitely helps a lot, especially on a very tight table. I have played on a 12' table where, with the objectball say 1/8" off the cushion, a fast shot was allmost impossible ( a say 5% proposition), yet was a say 90% proposition if using sidespin on the qball to give the objectball pocket-side. And, i sometimes play this sort of spin-shot when tables arent tight allso, koz my potting is poor, and i need all the help i can get (not talking about frozen-rail shots here).

Re video 4-10 -- Yes, i made a note to myself when i watched this the other day that, as u say, the objectball acquires left-hand-side, rather than the right-hand-side (pocket-side) that one might expect. I think i agree with Jim that this might be explained by the collizion-induced-side winning the battle over the tranzmitted-side.

Interesting thing -- On a 12' table, with a frozen-rail shot, if u uze the max of check-side or running-side, the pot along the cushion iz impossible (it might be possible if the ball is close to the pocket). Alltho, it could be pointed out that in the case of check-side u can still get the pot if u hit the ball first.

Years ago, i spent some time examining all of this sort of stuff, uzing a striped pool-ball to help tell me what was going on.

As a further aid, i placed another ball (frozen) on the rail and frozen to the frozen striped ball. With the 2 balls frozen together, and hitting the nearer ball allmost full, the pot was impossible. If u mooved the balls apart a bit, the pot became possible. At very high speed, the pot wasnt possible untill the gap was about 15mm. This might be an indication of how far in advance u can (or have to) hit the cushion (at least for a stun shot with zero sidespin). madMac.

Cornerman
02-14-2007, 03:50 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I'm replying to my own post here because something just occured to me.

When I aim at that crease I adjust to just barely hit the rail side first. This is insurance because if you hit the OB first you sit down!<hr /></blockquote> And so we agree.

[ QUOTE ]
But the sample shown had the QB hitting a good 1/2' up the rail.

-Brad <hr /></blockquote>Yes, we're talking about barely hitting the cushion first. I'll need to look again, but I didn't think that HSV 4-10 was hitting that far up the cushion. Maybe it's just that the closeup magnifies the situation. Nevertheless, that long distance should illustrate the margin of error. Most of us would be hitting closer to the object ball.

Fred

Cornerman
02-14-2007, 03:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr>Years ago, i spent some time examining all of this sort of stuff, uzing a striped pool-ball to help tell me what was going on.

As a further aid, i placed another ball (frozen) on the rail and frozen to the frozen striped ball. With the 2 balls frozen together, and hitting the nearer ball allmost full, the pot was impossible. If u mooved the balls apart a bit, the pot became possible. At very high speed, the pot wasnt possible untill the gap was about 15mm. This might be an indication of how far in advance u can (or have to) hit the cushion (at least for a stun shot with zero sidespin). madMac. <hr /></blockquote>Yes, yes yes!!!! This is definitely one of the tests anyone can do test out the rail first idea, and how much margin of error there is and what happens with different speeds. It's been a long time for me as well, but this was pretty much the same setup I did to convince myself.

Fred

cushioncrawler
02-14-2007, 04:24 PM
Fred-- I agree with what u said (somewhere back there) that players are told to use running side to help pot a ball frozen to the cushion, and in reality the suppozed use of running side is firstly and mainly ensuring that they (weaker players) do in fact hit the cushion first. The running side helps allso, but hitting the cushion first is paramount. Snooker books say a lot about using running side, but dont ever mention hitting the cushion first -- but perhaps someone out there might know of a snooker book that duz mention it -- i karnt remember one.

And it is all very problematical. Even now i struggle with cushion shots (tight 12' table here). Sometimes i go best with running, sometimes i go best with check-side. One time, i went great by using deep draw (zero spin), couldnt miss. Later in the year i tried uzing deep-draw again, and couldnt not-miss. Hitting the cushion first sure is difficult (small balls, big table). madMac.

02-14-2007, 04:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I'm replying to my own post here because something just occured to me.

When I aim at that crease I adjust to just barely hit the rail side first. This is insurance because if you hit the OB first you sit down!<hr /></blockquote> And so we agree.

&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
But the sample shown had the QB hitting a good 1/2' up the rail.

-Brad <hr /></blockquote>Yes, we're talking about barely hitting the cushion first. I'll need to look again, but I didn't think that HSV 4-10 was hitting that far up the cushion. Maybe it's just that the closeup magnifies the situation. Nevertheless, that long distance should illustrate the margin of error. Most of us would be hitting closer to the object ball.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

To me Fred the video was a kick shot, and a kick shot is much tougher then a straight on hit. There is a margin but I keep it down.

When I explain the shot to most people I say "both same time" because it is almost that. If the shot is a mile down table thats to far for splitting hairs.

I think as we get experience it just comes natural.

cushioncrawler
02-15-2007, 03:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> .....As I sight over my cue tip (which is large compared to the tiny place I must hit) that margin looks awful small, so I sight right at the crease where ball and rail meet. If I apply inside I don't change that sight and the ball hugs nicely. If I widen the shot so rail first it becomes a crapshoot whether I hit the right place on the rail. That's just to much guess when I'm in a game. Maybe over the years I've learned to hit rail first out of instinct but I don't think so as I can adjust that hit fairly well. All I know Fred, is I brought that over from Snooker and it works here to. Still have not read material yet, I may not be reading you right yet... <hr /></blockquote> Brad -- I remember Keith or Scott or Deeman saying a year ago that the way to hit and aim and judge the cushion-first frozen-rail shot is to ignore the cushion (rail) and just try to hit the object-ball az if to make the OB hit the far-jaw of the pocket (ie az if to hit so wide that the OB couldnt possibly drop). The harder u hit then the further out on the jaw u havta "aim".

But the most surprizing shot that i sometimes come across is when (in billiards) the red is on the cushion, and a halfball shot would probably pot the red (along the rail). But i try for a 3/4 ball skrewy cannon, with draw and outside english, ie to score a cannon (2 pts) onto the yellow ball nearbye, the red (suppozedly) coming back softly off 2 cushions for a nice "gather". But, sometimes, the red hugs the cushion and drops into the corner pocket. This fluke is worth 3pts but u have missed getting your gather and the pozzy (the leave) mightnt be much good. Anyhow, u just gaze at the table and think..... "how in hell did the red do that ???"...... "i aimed 3/4 ball, and i thort i contacted the red 3/4 ball, yet i lost it". I guess that here there is more unintentional swerve than i thort, and i didnt hit 3/4 ball, and of course the throw can be much larger than we think at times. Just thort i would mention it -- nowadayz nothing on a table surprises me any more -- but this shot never fails to amaze me. In billiards (12' table) it is a shot that i am learning to better avoid. But in pool it (the ball-first pot along the rail uzing lots of outside english) might be very eezy, and a good shot to have in your repertoire. madMac.

02-15-2007, 06:43 PM
<hr /></blockquote> Brad -- I remember Keith or Scott or Deeman saying a year ago that the way to hit and aim and judge the cushion-first frozen-rail shot is to ignore the cushion (rail) and just try to hit the object-ball az if to make the OB hit the far-jaw of the pocket (ie az if to hit so wide that the OB couldnt possibly drop). The harder u hit then the further out on the jaw u havta "aim".

But the most surprizing shot that i sometimes come across is when (in billiards) the red is on the cushion, and a halfball shot would probably pot the red (along the rail). But i try for a 3/4 ball skrewy cannon, with draw and outside english, ie to score a cannon (2 pts) onto the yellow ball nearbye, the red (suppozedly) coming back softly off 2 cushions for a nice "gather". But, sometimes, the red hugs the cushion and drops into the corner pocket. This fluke is worth 3pts but u have missed getting your gather and the pozzy (the leave) mightnt be much good. Anyhow, u just gaze at the table and think..... "how in hell did the red do that ???"...... "i aimed 3/4 ball, and i thort i contacted the red 3/4 ball, yet i lost it". I guess that here there is more unintentional swerve than i thort, and i didnt hit 3/4 ball, and of course the throw can be much larger than we think at times. Just thort i would mention it -- nowadayz nothing on a table surprises me any more -- but this shot never fails to amaze me. In billiards (12' table) it is a shot that i am learning to better avoid. But in pool it (the ball-first pot along the rail uzing lots of outside english) might be very eezy, and a good shot to have in your repertoire. madMac. <hr /></blockquote>

I do use a similar technique. On the down the rail sighting I treat the shot as if its a cut. I aim to just barely catch the rail first as insurance from not hitting OB first. But its so slight I always say both same time (bad idea). its so little I can't help but feel its not a kick.

I've tried placing a striped ball for spin indication...its not too noticable but there is some.

Tried that shot for carom as you mentioned, but booted it out, must not be setting it up right, How much angle you talking about to strike red?

One perplexing shot for me in Snooker is a straight on bank to side with 1/2 ball using 1/2 tip outside bottom to scoot back for Black. On rare occasions the damn QB zips down the rail and scratches in the corner pocket? Theres no indication of a double kiss? Its clean as a whistle? I've never been able to duplicate this shot in practise. My playing partner says...why you do that? And I say damned if I know?. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

cushioncrawler
02-15-2007, 07:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> ....Tried that shot for carom as you mentioned, but booted it out, must not be setting it up right, How much angle you talking about to strike red?

One perplexing shot for me in Snooker is a bank to side with 1/2 ball using 1/2 tip outside bottom to scoot back to for Black. On rare occasions the damn QB zips down the rail and scratches in the corner pocket? Theres no indication of a double kiss? Its clean as a whistle? My playing partner says...why you do that? And I say damned if I know?. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote> The angle to the red is a bit less than 30dg, ie a genuine 1/2 ball contact on red shood take it directly along the rail, but this is impossible here koz of the cushion. So, here, a red-first contact with lots of outside english, about 5/8th ball perhaps, will sink the red. And i guess that i get this 5/8th contact when i try for a 3/4 skrewy shot (with outside english).

That zippy scratch u mention. I know of a ricochet in-off in billiards on a 12' table. It involves a double kiss (OB frozen on rail) and the qball then ends up hugging the rail all the way to the pocket (after one or two minibouncebacks) -- this is best with lots of topspin, leftspin or right spin are both ok allso. And another similar scratch is where the qball followz throo the red, hugging the rail all the way to the pocket (after one or two minibouncebacks) -- leftsidespin and rightsidespin on the qball are ok here allso -- but, funny thing, the scratch karnt necessarily be avoided by hitting (contacting) the red on the "wrong" side. I havnt worked out the physics here.

But, it sounds like u are talking about simply overskrewing.

Or, are u are getting a bit of (invisible) kiss, plus more topspin than u think, ie a ricochet. Ricochet scratches are hard to avoid on a new (slippery) cloth. madMac.

Stretch
02-15-2007, 07:16 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote> Brad -- I remember Keith or Scott or Deeman saying a year ago that the way to hit and aim and judge the cushion-first frozen-rail shot is to ignore the cushion (rail) and just try to hit the object-ball az if to make the OB hit the far-jaw of the pocket (ie az if to hit so wide that the OB couldnt possibly drop). The harder u hit then the further out on the jaw u havta "aim".

But the most surprizing shot that i sometimes come across is when (in billiards) the red is on the cushion, and a halfball shot would probably pot the red (along the rail). But i try for a 3/4 ball skrewy cannon, with draw and outside english, ie to score a cannon (2 pts) onto the yellow ball nearbye, the red (suppozedly) coming back softly off 2 cushions for a nice "gather". But, sometimes, the red hugs the cushion and drops into the corner pocket. This fluke is worth 3pts but u have missed getting your gather and the pozzy (the leave) mightnt be much good. Anyhow, u just gaze at the table and think..... "how in hell did the red do that ???"...... "i aimed 3/4 ball, and i thort i contacted the red 3/4 ball, yet i lost it". I guess that here there is more unintentional swerve than i thort, and i didnt hit 3/4 ball, and of course the throw can be much larger than we think at times. Just thort i would mention it -- nowadayz nothing on a table surprises me any more -- but this shot never fails to amaze me. In billiards (12' table) it is a shot that i am learning to better avoid. But in pool it (the ball-first pot along the rail uzing lots of outside english) might be very eezy, and a good shot to have in your repertoire. madMac. <hr /></blockquote>

I do use a similar technique. On the down the rail sighting I treat the shot as if its a cut. I aim to just barely catch the rail first as insurance from not hitting OB first. But its so slight I always say both same time (bad idea). its so little I can't help but feel its not a kick.

I've tried placing a striped ball for spin indication...its not too noticable but there is some.

Tried that shot for carom as you mentioned, but booted it out, must not be setting it up right, How much angle you talking about to strike red?

One perplexing shot for me in Snooker is a bank to side with 1/2 ball using 1/2 tip outside bottom to scoot back to for Black. On rare occasions the damn QB zips down the rail and scratches in the corner pocket? Theres no indication of a double kiss? Its clean as a whistle? My playing partner says...why you do that? And I say damned if I know?. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote>

I think that's actually a double kiss when that happens. The ob gets momentarily trapped then springs loose. It can even sound clean but definitely a double kiss. This nifty little double kiss comes up all the time. Place an ob about a half a diamond from the side pocket just off the rail. Now place your cue ball out to a position that will obviously jam the ob in a cross side attempt. This happens a lot and most people will try and get that cross side with a lot of english either by doubling or tripling the rails. Mostly though it's a sellout to attempt. Here's wut i do. I play an "intentional" double kiss by hitting the ball full with a medium follow stroke. Call the cross corner pocket cause that's where it's going on the double kiss. I make this shot maybe 1 in 5 times but the nice part of this choice especially in 9 ball is that the ob ends up near the corner pocket or hopefully up near the end rail while the cue ball gets kicked back to the opposite short rail. Good separation and with other balls lying around good odds at landing safe or at the very least long difficult angle.

There's a lot of shots with a built in safety factor. On long thin cuts on balls just off the end rail it's sometimes better to play cushion first with running english and kick them down because should you miss playing this way the tendency for the ob is to bounce back to the middle of the short rail while the cb comes back down table at lag weight for a leave. Missing on the pro side i think they call it. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif St.

02-15-2007, 08:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Stretch:</font><hr> I think that's actually a double kiss when that happens. The ob gets momentarily trapped then springs loose. It can even sound clean but definitely a double kiss. This nifty little double kiss comes up all the time. Place an ob about a half a diamond from the side pocket just off the rail. Now place your cue ball out to a position that will obviously jam the ob in a cross side attempt. This happens a lot and most people will try and get that cross side with a lot of english either by doubling or tripling the rails. Mostly though it's a sellout to attempt. Here's wut i do. I play an "intentional" double kiss by hitting the ball full with a medium follow stroke. Call the cross corner pocket cause that's where it's going on the double kiss. I make this shot maybe 1 in 5 times but the nice part of this choice especially in 9 ball is that the ob ends up near the corner pocket or hopefully up near the end rail while the cue ball gets kicked back to the opposite short rail. Good separation and with other balls lying around good odds at landing safe or at the very least long difficult angle.

There's a lot of shots with a built in safety factor. On long thin cuts on balls just off the end rail it's sometimes better to play cushion first with running english and kick them down because should you miss playing this way the tendency for the ob is to bounce back to the middle of the short rail while the cb comes back down table at lag weight for a leave. Missing on the pro side i think they call it. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif St. <hr /></blockquote>

Yes, I suspect it has to be some form of kiss, but its a fairly well straight forward bank that angles the QB back away to the top rail. I add bottom side just to give it a bit more angle and pace to the black. I would think that the outside bottom would help to clear it even more.

I'm wondering if the OB is burying slightly into the snooker style rail and simultaneiously catching it coming out even though its angled off. I have not been able to even close to this shot on my 9'.

bsmutz
02-16-2007, 09:24 AM
I see this happen on bank shots off the short rails on the pool table (not so much on the snooker table). It always drives me nuts when it happens because it doesn't seem like it should happen. Kind of like when the cue ball goes into the side pocket from a pretty steep angle off the end rail. What I've been doing to counter act it is to put some inside or outside top on the cue ball to force it into the cushion after contact with the object ball. Of course, if you're trying to stay on the black, juicing up the cue ball may not be the best decision. I would prefer to use inside spin on that shot and try to take some speed off.

02-16-2007, 12:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bsmutz:</font><hr> I see this happen on bank shots off the short rails on the pool table (not so much on the snooker table). It always drives me nuts when it happens because it doesn't seem like it should happen. Kind of like when the cue ball goes into the side pocket from a pretty steep angle off the end rail. What I've been doing to counter act it is to put some inside or outside top on the cue ball to force it into the cushion after contact with the object ball. Of course, if you're trying to stay on the black, juicing up the cue ball may not be the best decision. I would prefer to use inside spin on that shot and try to take some speed off. <hr /></blockquote>

Yes, inside spin will work, but on the slow napped Snooker table a bank about midrail with inside needs a fairly good hit, so the QB will check side and stay there a bit of distance fron the black (harder bank too.) Usually outside top works fairly well to cross over to the other side of the black but its more travel.- Brad

Stretch
02-16-2007, 12:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Stretch:</font><hr> I think that's actually a double kiss when that happens. The ob gets momentarily trapped then springs loose. It can even sound clean but definitely a double kiss. This nifty little double kiss comes up all the time. Place an ob about a half a diamond from the side pocket just off the rail. Now place your cue ball out to a position that will obviously jam the ob in a cross side attempt. This happens a lot and most people will try and get that cross side with a lot of english either by doubling or tripling the rails. Mostly though it's a sellout to attempt. Here's wut i do. I play an "intentional" double kiss by hitting the ball full with a medium follow stroke. Call the cross corner pocket cause that's where it's going on the double kiss. I make this shot maybe 1 in 5 times but the nice part of this choice especially in 9 ball is that the ob ends up near the corner pocket or hopefully up near the end rail while the cue ball gets kicked back to the opposite short rail. Good separation and with other balls lying around good odds at landing safe or at the very least long difficult angle.

There's a lot of shots with a built in safety factor. On long thin cuts on balls just off the end rail it's sometimes better to play cushion first with running english and kick them down because should you miss playing this way the tendency for the ob is to bounce back to the middle of the short rail while the cb comes back down table at lag weight for a leave. Missing on the pro side i think they call it. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif St. <hr /></blockquote>

Yes, I suspect it has to be some form of kiss, but its a fairly well straight forward bank that angles the QB back away to the top rail. I add bottom side just to give it a bit more angle and pace to the black. I would think that the outside bottom would help to clear it even more.

I'm wondering if the OB is burying slightly into the snooker style rail and simultaneiously catching it coming out even though its angled off. I have not been able to even close to this shot on my 9'. <hr /></blockquote>

Just a suggestion, but you could always set this shot up on a different table and see what happens. At least that way you could rule out this being specific to your equipment or it being more of a universal phenomena. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif St.

02-16-2007, 02:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Stretch:</font><hr> Just a suggestion, but you could always set this shot up on a different table and see what happens. At least that way you could rule out this being specific to your equipment or it being more of a universal phenomena. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif St. <hr /></blockquote>

Just noticed Max's explaination above. Could be the reason. Bsmutz says its happened to him, but I've yet to duplicate it on either table.