PDA

View Full Version : Compensations on cut shots



silverbullet
12-18-2002, 09:26 PM
I noticed that when I aim a cut dead center and the cb was striking on the left ob, the ob ball frequently bounced off the left tip or in some caes i missed it to the left by a couple of inches. In the exact same scenario, I started aiming to the right side of the pocket. My cut shot % went up dramatically. WW puts oe on all his cuts and claimed his method was better. This did not work as consistently for me. I am also aware that some players have played similar shots so many times, that they appear to just know how to hit it to pot the ball.

A ccb friend of mine has doubts that these methods are valid but i am using this possibly due to stroke problems or an aim that isnt perfect.

Just throwing this out to see what others think. to see if i am all wet, according to others with more experienc.

blu

12-18-2002, 11:13 PM
What you are describing is called "throw". Dependent on how much off center you are required to cut a ball throw will begin to affect the path your object ball takes on it's way to your original point of aim due primarily to friction.

Many beginning and intermediate players compensate for throw with outside english, as you mentioned, and it is quite effective. There are two problems using only OE to compensate. One is that it narrows down your options on acquiring position on your next shot. Another is that you must now also compensate for the amount of english applied as well as velocity.

Personally I recommend you simply set up several hundred cut shots at different angles, shoot them all with center english and learn at what angles throw begins and ends. Then compensate by changing the spot you aim for on the object ball and practice some more until you are comfortable from any angle. Then do it all over again and vary the speed at which you strike the cue ball, notice the subtle differences, compensate accordingly and practice some more.

Or you could just start using OE and forget 90% of the practice! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Jimbo

This was my first post to this forum, sorry it was so lenghty. Hello to all the other pool fans here. I hope I am able to add some substance and fun for your pleasure as well as mine.

silverbullet
12-19-2002, 06:30 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> What you are describing is called "throw". Dependent on how much off center you are required to cut a ball throw will begin to affect the path your object ball takes on it's way to your original point of aim due primarily to friction.

Many beginning and intermediate players compensate for throw with outside english, as you mentioned, and it is quite effective. There are two problems using only OE to compensate. One is that it narrows down your options on acquiring position on your next shot. Another is that you must now also compensate for the amount of english applied as well as velocity.

Personally I recommend you simply set up several hundred cut shots at different angles, shoot them all with center english and learn at what angles throw begins and ends. Then compensate by changing the spot you aim for on the object ball and practice some more until you are comfortable from any angle. Then do it all over again and vary the speed at which you strike the cue ball, notice the subtle differences, compensate accordingly and practice some more.

Or you could just start using OE and forget 90% of the practice! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Jimbo

This was my first post to this forum, sorry it was so lenghty. Hello to all the other pool fans here. I hope I am able to add some substance and fun for your pleasure as well as mine.

<hr /></blockquote>

Well, I thoroughly enjoyed your words. My APA 7 husband is a big proponent of the OE method.I tried this. it worked to a degree on some shots but like you say, knowing how much english to use requires skill and experience and it does explain my lack of success in that endeavor.

When I started using the below method, my potting % on cuts improved dramatically. While standing (unless it is obvious) I look at the angle of the ob to the center of the pocket. I then consider the side of the ob which will be struck by the cb. if the ob is being struck by the cb on the right, i aimed to strike the ob to the left of the pocket and vice versa. this seemed to work on 79-80% of easy to med cuts. now you raise an interesting thought. if the more difficult cuts throw more, then that may explain why i have been missing some of the difficult ones. my method of aiming to the right or left side of the pocket may not be enough compensation.otoh, i have overcompensated on ocassion.

velocity- i am thinking that hitting the ob with more speed results in less throw. am i wrong on this? if i am right, then that may explain why harder hitters do not experience as much throw and therefore do not believe in throw. i hit softer because i am not that good at position. i find that if i hit too hard, i lose cb control, so i would rather deal with throw than loss of cb control.

i know about dirty balls. i am thinking about taking some wipes with me to our playoffs tonight LOL. their balls are very dirty.

lots of what you say gives me hope for getting better at cuts and also see the factor of even if one has the concept and a decent stroke, practice, experience and time on the table will also be required.

thanks

blu

Fred Agnir
12-19-2002, 07:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote silverbullet:</font><hr> I noticed that when I aim a cut dead center and the cb was striking on the left ob, the ob ball frequently bounced off the left tip or in some caes i missed it to the left by a couple of inches. <hr /></blockquote>
This is cut/collision induced throw. The friction between the balls is in play. More friction (dirty balls) will make you miss more. There's more throw on slower shots. That's a physics thing, and is easily observed. That's probably one of a couple of reasons why hitting them harder than pocket speed can be an advantage on dirty tables. Get yourself Byrne's Standard Book of Pool. Go to the chapter entitled "Welcome to a Weird World," or something like that.

Early on, most players will find that using outside-english allows them to aim to the center of the pocket and still make the ball (like WW). Some would call this "relieving the cut" (Hal Houle). You can become a world champion using this idea (Mike Sigel). However, if you subscribe to this style, then things will get confusing for the rest of the mere mortals when you hit with inside-english since outside-english is part of the process of making the object ball. You will notice how the vast majority of players will avoid inside-english like the Plague. Now you know why.

I'd say 90% of all pool players go through this process. I wish I hadn't. Years ago, I thought using outside english was easy, and inside english was difficult. Today, I treat them nearly equal. Neither is easy, but neither is avoided like the Plague.

Fred

John in NH
12-19-2002, 11:02 AM
Hi Fred,

I agree with your assessment (oe, ie) entirely and in addition if i'm playing 9-ball extreme cut shots usually appear when i've come up short or long on my position play on another ball or my opponent has missed a shot and left a difficult cut shot for me, in this situation I have a choice of either playing a safety or being aggressive and trying to pocket the ball knowing that regaining position on the next ball is extremely difficult, in this case I will usually opt for the safety.

Regards,

John

Paul_Mon
12-19-2002, 11:14 AM
If you're the Jimbo I think that you are.

GO AWAY

Fred Agnir
12-19-2002, 11:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Paul_Mon:</font><hr> If you're the Jimbo I think that you are.

GO AWAY

<hr /></blockquote>
Wrong Jimbo. This one can spell and is polite.

Fred

heater451
12-19-2002, 11:22 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote silverbullet:</font><hr> I noticed that when I aim a cut dead center and the cb was striking on the left ob, the ob ball frequently bounced off the left tip or in some caes i missed it to the left by a couple of inches. In the exact same scenario, I started aiming to the right side of the pocket. My cut shot % went up dramatically. WW puts oe on all his cuts and claimed his method was better. This did not work as consistently for me. I am also aware that some players have played similar shots so many times, that they appear to just know how to hit it to pot the ball.

A ccb friend of mine has doubts that these methods are valid but i am using this possibly due to stroke problems or an aim that isnt perfect. . . .<hr /></blockquote>Bluewolf, both methods of compensation are valid.

You could be undercutting due to throw, as the other posts mention, but you may also be simply aiming a bit too full. Regardless, you have the choice of how you wish to compensate.

Aiming to overcut a little, which you say that you have better results with, works--as does using outer-english. The benefit of adjusting aim, is that you get more practice in honing your aiming (and your stroke, as you are attempting to avoid errant english). You also get to learn the (more) natural movement of the cueball after contact. To a degree (pardon the pun), it should be easier to hit well, as you don't have to deal with too much/too little english either.

The aim-adjustment method starts to become a harder, and the outer-english method starts to be easier, as you approach very thin cuts. With the english, you can hit a little more of the OB, and the spin will compensate, instead of having to aim at an impossibly thin target.

Now the rub is, if you are consistent with your application of english, in regards to your aiming tendencies, the outer-english method will probably work out better--as with Whitewolf's experience. Some of this may be due to the tendency to aim a tiny bit too full (which I think is due to a couple of reasons, but I won't put those in here). The other factor in using outer-english is that we also have strong habits of aiming 'center-pocket'.

What I'm (badly) trying to illustrate, is that if you can remember to change the aim-path of the OB to 'off-center' of the pocket, as you have experimented with, then you can hit center-ball to make the cut. Otherwise, you can aim center-pocket (which is what we learn first and practice the most), and let the english alter the path of the OB.

In a perfect world/game, you would use the 'aim-adjustment' method primarily, and resort to using the 'outer-english' method when you required the english for position after the shot. Of course, an argument to that might be that you always plan your positioning around how you prefer to shoot. . . .

I recommend sticking with what works/feels best right now, and worry about the rest during practice, or just let it come in its own time. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif


======================

Barbara
12-19-2002, 11:49 AM
Is this the Jimbo I know?

Barbara

12-19-2002, 01:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Paul_Mon:</font><hr> If you're the Jimbo I think that you are.

GO AWAY

<hr /></blockquote>
Gee I have never even posted her before and already I have enemies!! I have no idea who you think I am but if we have played pool in the past I am sure I gave you walking money after busting you so I see no reason why you might hold a grudge for this many years.

I am the Jimbo who Allan provided links to a few of my pool stories a week or so ago. I have quite a few from the 60's through the 80's which I may post ocassionally unless my welcome is already worn out before I get started.

Jim (Jimbo) Turner

silverbullet
12-19-2002, 01:38 PM
Please stay. That person must have been talking about someone else. I liked your post.

blu

smfsrca
12-19-2002, 02:46 PM
The initial response to your query from Jim Turner (Jimbo) pretty much said it all. Study the mechanics of throw. A good source for this is Jack Koehler's "The Science of Pocket Billiards".
Oh yeah, and don't let anybody tell you one way is particularly better than another unless thay can tell you why. Most techniques have there place, it is the knowing of when and why that matters. Then you can decide for yourself.

Steve in CA

TomBrooklyn
12-19-2002, 07:54 PM
Throw Or Just Aiming Wrong?
bw, if you are hitting the left corner on some of your cuts to the right, I submit you are simply aiming wrong; not experiencing throw, which I believe is negligible or non-existent.

I usually aim for the center of the pocket using the ghost ball method except for the shots that I just put in by feel. Sometimes I use the equal opposite aiming method (Jimmy Reid: No Time For Negative et. al.). Neither of these aiming methods account for throw and I ignore any compensation for it with no loss of accuracy that is apparent to me.

What It Takes To Recognize Throw
To qualify the above, I am not that good of a player, so there is a possibility that I may be compensating for it without even realizing it, or missing sometimes because of it. I simply cannot pot accurately enough and consistently enough to be sure.

In that vein, I would estimate that for someone who cannot consistently pot a shot accurately enough to call the part of the pocket the OB will go in, i.e. left, center or right, they could not realistically distinguish throw even if it did exist, and they are adding unnecessary complication to their aiming.

Using Outside English
As far as using outside english[/b] to assist in offsetting throw, Mike Segal, recently wrote in BD that english will not throw an OB. On the other hand, I think he advocates using a touch of OE on his instructional videos, so I'm not sure what he believes or if he even understands what he doing or writing.

If throw due to english does not exist, then there is no reason to use it.

If throw due to english does exist but throw due to simply hitting the ball does not exist as I believe, using english would complicate a shot, not simplify it, which seems to me to be a good reason for D players to avoid it.

Regardless of whether of not enlish can throw a ball, there is no argument that english causes squirt, changing the direction of the CB. This seems to me to be another reason why D players should avoid the complication of it until they get good enough to pot consistently without it.

Also, english has a big effect on a CB coming off a rail, so as Jimbo mentioned above, getting used to relying on outside english to pot balls may make it more difficult to adjust to using english for positional purposes.

Should D Players Use English?
Therefore, I see the using outside english as an aid to potting balls as a bad idea all around, especially for beginners and D players, who have enough things to work on without worrying about english.

12-19-2002, 07:56 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote silverbullet:</font><hr> I noticed that when I aim a cut dead center and the cb was striking on the left ob, the ob ball frequently bounced off the left tip or in some caes i missed it to the left by a couple of inches. In the exact same scenario, I started aiming to the right side of the pocket. My cut shot % went up dramatically. WW puts oe on all his cuts and claimed his method was better. This did not work as consistently for me. I am also aware that some players have played similar shots so many times, that they appear to just know how to hit it to pot the ball.

A ccb friend of mine has doubts that these methods are valid but i am using this possibly due to stroke problems or an aim that isnt perfect.

Just throwing this out to see what others think. to see if i am all wet, according to others with more experienc.

blu <hr /></blockquote>

Here is a tip that worked for me on cut shots....and in a way it will play into the using outside or "running" english on the cue ball.

It is pretty simple actually...when you line up a left hand cut, use the "left edge" of your shaft to line up on the shot to the edge of the objet ball. when cutting to the right use the "right edge". You will be playing the shot as if your using center english, but because you are using either side of the shaft, it will apply a "touch" of runnig english on the cue ball. it may or may not assist in pocketing the object ball, but it has helped me make MANY a tough cut shot.

I have also learned to apply all different types of english using this method, but nine times out of ten, your main goal will be to "sinch" the shot and take the shape that is given.......

Tom_In_Cincy
12-19-2002, 08:32 PM
Geeze Paul, the guy posts a decent reply, is polite and you want him to go away? ..

12-19-2002, 08:40 PM
Tom,
You made some very good points. I particularly liked the fact you pointed out where until you can consistently pocket balls allowing for throw will not solve any of your other troubles.

You said this as well "As far as using outside english to assist in offsetting throw, Mike Segal, one of the greatest players ever, recently wrote in BD that english will not throw an OB." Is there a possibility he was either misquoted or quoted out of context? I can easily prove english will throw an object ball. If you have ever seen a ball cut backwards (at an angle greater than 90 degrees) this must be what occurs. (unless someone here has a better explanation)

As far as you being unsure as to whether or not throw exists I am able to assure you it does. As you continue to improve and begin missing cut shots you "know" you struck correctly then you too will be sure. /ccboard/images/graemlins/ooo.gif


Jimbo

TomBrooklyn
12-19-2002, 08:55 PM
Jimbo,
That is what Mike Segal said about english induced throw. Like you, I disagree with him. I could swear I've thrown balls into a pocket with english that were unmakable otherwise because I could not see the correct contact point due to an interfering ball. This is a topic for a thread of it's own however, as there is a lot of controversy about it, and it was debated on this board a couple a few months ago when the article was published.

As far as collision induced throw which has nothing to do with english, some persons such as yourself say it exists. Many experts have at best ignored or not recognized it. I say I can't observe it. It certainly doesn't bother me on short shots say up to a third of a table length. Beyond that, my accuracy is not good enough anyway. When my accuracy is good enough hit a pocket or cheat a pocket to either side with consistancy, maybe I'll be able to notice the effect.

Tom_In_Cincy
12-19-2002, 09:13 PM
Tom,

Collision induced throw.. You set up the shot and shoot it..

START(
%Ag1J9%HO3C9%Ie9J5%Pl8H3%WP9D6%Xg8K1%YF1Z4%Zk9H7

)END

Make sure the 1 and 9 ball are froze. Line them up so that the 1-9 combo will hit the 8 ball.. then line the cb up to make the 1 ball into the corner.

Hit the one ball with pocket speed (for the corner pocket) and watch what happens to the 9 ball..

The rule of thumb I have seen is its about inch for every 2 feet.

TomBrooklyn
12-19-2002, 11:03 PM
Quote-The Cincy Kid: Collision induced throw... [RSB pic] <hr /></blockquote>Ya,...for two balls frozen together.

Tom,
You've nicely illustrated the throw possible on the second ball in a pair of frozen balls. I agree that you can get a lot of throw out of that. I can visibly see the ball thrown off line when I try that shot.

But what bw brought up is collision induced throw on a single ball. Big difference, as I'm sure you'll agree. I'm still not convinced there even is such a phenomenoa; or as I said earlier, if their is, it is simply too small of a factor for me to see or sense. Therefore, I can't comprehend a need to compensate for it.

A lot of instructional material doesn't bring it up. Why wouldn't they if it was a big factor, or a factor at all?

Rod
12-20-2002, 01:40 AM
Blu, when you miss the cut shot as described, your aim is off, possibly stance and alignment and/or a minor stroke flaw. Throw has nothing to do with this miss. If you were hitting the pocket fat or to the right side it could be a factor at slow speed but not likely. Yes it can happen, dirty balls is usually the problem. The fact you make it aiming for the right side just tells me your not quite sure of your aim point and you are adjusting. Do this, cut the same shot to the right pocket, chances are your going to hit the pocket fat to the left side of the pocket or the rail. Usually when one hits it thin one way they will hit the same shot fat the other way or dead center. Rarely will they hit it thin or over cut that direction. Do not confuse this with throw, it's how you see the ball, your aim. Throw does exist but nothing to be concerned about above slow speeds and center english. Use a spot shot from both sides as a reference if you like.

Paul_Mon
12-20-2002, 05:20 AM
Jimbo,
I thought that perhaps you were Jimbo from CT. Who's really a great guy that I've met a few times and shared some table time with. I was trying to break his stones a little. You're obviously not the same guy an I apologize for the mistake. Welcome to the board.

Paul Mon~~~~removing foot from mouth?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Paul_Mon:</font><hr> If you're the Jimbo I think that you are.

GO AWAY

<hr /></blockquote>
Gee I have never even posted her before and already I have enemies!! I have no idea who you think I am but if we have played pool in the past I am sure I gave you walking money after busting you so I see no reason why you might hold a grudge for this many years.

I am the Jimbo who Allan provided links to a few of my pool stories a week or so ago. I have quite a few from the 60's through the 80's which I may post ocassionally unless my welcome is already worn out before I get started.

Jim (Jimbo) Turner
<hr /></blockquote>

silverbullet
12-20-2002, 06:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> Tom,
You made some very good points. I particularly liked the fact you pointed out where until you can consistently pocket balls allowing for throw will not solve any of your other troubles.

As far as you being unsure as to whether or not throw exists I am able to assure you it does. As you continue to improve and begin missing cut shots you "know" you struck correctly then you too will be sure. /ccboard/images/graemlins/ooo.gif


Jimbo
<hr /></blockquote>

Jimbo, you were not here when I got insulted for being a low sl player and I was told that my opinions were due to not being good and in a sense held no value.(of course, otoh, many of my posts were kinda dumb and the result of having too much time on my hands) Many were kinder than this, but some were brutal. So I am sensitive to this, I guess.

While this may not have been your intent, it appeared that you were implying that Tom's disbelief in throw is due to lack of experience and that that opinion will change as he gets better. Fred and others have pointed out that increased velocity reduces throw. So, if Tom is a harder hitter than I am, I am assuming that he would be getting less 'throw' or neglible throw if he hits hard. Well on with the topic. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Jimbo, that is exactly what happened to me. My stroke and aim are sure (thankyou scott and randy) and I knew I had aimed correctly, yet missed the cut. As I play low on the ball, I do rarely have popping head up errors. However, I have made aiming errors due to errors in my personal eye pattern, ie- for me, locking on the ob at the last backswing, stroke and follow. So, even though I am not an excellent player, I do know when I missed due to aim and when it is due to other factors and what factors caused this. Randy teaches how to figure this out in 'pool school' which he calls 'diagnostics' and this has served me well.

Many people say that english does not throw the ob. They say that english only affects the cb and its action from the rail. IMO, this is a matter of semantics. This is how I believe that oe and ie have what I would call an 'indirect' effect on the ob. Tell me if I am wrong, but this is how it seems to me.

In applying ie to a corner cut,the ie will spin the cb away from the ob striking the rail, but in doing this will slide into the ob somewhat. This was a useful tool for me when I was hitting too thin. At ccb suggestion, I went back to centerball to work on accuracy. Using Randy Gs edge to edge for thin cuts has also served me well.(as a result of randy's method, I have actually made a few 90% cuts in matches /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif) When the ie ball spins away from the ob, striking the rail on a soft shot, this will typically bring it out from the rail, if that is where you want it for shape. If I want it to be closer to the rail for a shot to the opposite corner, I typically use soft centerball or soft oe.

This is something I just learned. It, I think will be useful on shape, when I want position on a ball at the other end of the table. Oe,with top tends to send the cb down the table. When I noticed this yesterday and complained, ww said this is what you want and it is called running english. I said 'what if I want the cb to stay at this end for shape?' he said 'use draw" . Well I have a lot to learn and am just trying out these new things and running ideas past.

i learn a lot from experienced players here. As far as D players not using english, I knew some english when i picked up a cue 3 years ago. I had been taught it 30 years before. In my short pool playing career, I have intentionally stayed away from it, primarily at suggestions here because I do not want to be using it to the extent that it interferes with shape or that I am using it as a crutch for inaccurate aiming. I also feel that the use of varying degrees of english does require more experience and skill than not using it, or rarely using it.I feel that if I did not use centerball 90% of the time, I would be far less accurate, and therefore not as good of a shooter.

I was interested in different methods on compensating for throw but when and when not to use english and when and when not to use it for shape is also something I wish to learn. I also am using half and quarter ball hits for shape on straight in shots(when I want an angle off the rail insead of a stop or draw). At this point, this seems more predictable than english.

thanks.

blu

silverbullet
12-20-2002, 07:05 AM
Tom,

Is this no time for neg by jimmy reed a bok or a tape

blu

Fred Agnir
12-20-2002, 07:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TomBrooklyn:</font><hr>
As far as collision induced throw which has nothing to do with english, some persons such as yourself say it exists. Many experts have at best ignored or not recognized it. I say I can't observe it<hr /></blockquote>
By physics, collision induced throw would be greater than spin-induced throw, because even though they are the same phenomenon (caused by the friction between two touching surface moving relative to one another), the coefficient of friction decreases as the relative surface speed increases (less throw for faster shots). Throw due to spin has a much higher relative surface speed. That's why I've said in the past that throw due to spin is negligible, or at the very least it's not as much as people think it is.

There are many proofs for collision-induced throw, however. Bob Jewett suggested this one:

First setup this following combination. Use a straight edge, like a pool cue to make sure you are perfectly straight. It's important to use at least four balls in the combination. DO NOT SHOOT YET.

START(
%AP9R7%BQ4S7%CR0T7%DR6U6%IS7U8%PN6M0%Ws7[3%XT7V1%eB9a4

)END

Then, remove the four ball:

START(
%AP9R7%BQ4S7%CR0T7%IS7U8%PN6M0%Un8\0%VT9V6%Ws7[3%XT7V1%eB9a4

)END

Do we agree that the setup is now geometrically correct for the 9-ball to go straight in? Shoot it. The results will also answer BW's question as to why she has trouble with close cuts that the OB has to go along way. Answer: because she actually sees the geometrically correct angle better, but the geometrically correct angle is wrong due to collision induced throw.

Fred

Fred Agnir
12-20-2002, 07:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> I can easily prove english will throw an object ball. <hr /></blockquote>
This has been discussed many times before, and as of yet, I haven't seen anyone show me with relatively clean balls that throw from spin is anything above negligible. I have described a challenge shot where it at least proves that spin-induced throw isn't as much as people think it is. The shot is to shoot a dead-straight shot with english and leaving the cuebal dead in its tracks while spinning like crazy. If you accomplish the sit-and-spin aspect, you'll see that the object ball goes pretty damned straight.

I've opined that what the majority of people think is "spin-induced throw" is actually cue ball swerve. It doesn't take a lot of swerve to make a dramatic difference in the object ball path, but, as the challenge shot above clearly shows, spin alone doesn't change the object ball path enough to throw the object ball off. Try it. Report your results.

Caveat: there are times that I will use outside (or inside)english to reduce or counter the collision-induced throw, so it's not like I'm saying that spinning the cueball isn't important.

Fred

silverbullet
12-20-2002, 07:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TomBrooklyn:</font><hr> Throw Or Just Aiming Wrong?
bw, if you are hitting the left corner on some of your cuts to the right, I submit you are simply aiming wrong; not experiencing throw, which I believe is negligible or non-existent.
-----------
blu /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

I think you misunderstood me, Tom, On cuts, I aim to the opposite side of the pocket from the side that the cb is striking the ob. The ob ball then pots in the center of the pocket on most ocasions.

____________________________

tom:

I usually aim for the center of the pocket using the ghost ball method except for the shots that I just put in by feel. Sometimes I use the equal opposite aiming method (Jimmy Reid: No Time For Negative et. al.). Neither of these aiming methods account for throw and I ignore any compensation for it with no loss of accuracy that is apparent to me.

________________________

blu:

I do not use ghost ball. I do not use contact point either. I have come up with my own method, which is primarily, for lack of better words a hybrid of the two.I am not sure what you would call it, but I am essentially looking at a dime to nickel area on the ob where i want to strike the cb.

_______________________________
tom:

What It Takes To Recognize Throw
To qualify the above, I am not that good of a player, so there is a possibility that I may be compensating for it without even realizing it, or missing sometimes because of it. I simply cannot pot accurately enough and consistently enough to be sure.

In that vein, I would estimate that for someone who cannot consistently pot a shot accurately enough to call the part of the pocket the OB will go in, i.e. left, center or right, they could not realistically distinguish throw even if it did exist, and they are adding unnecessary complication to their aiming.

_______________________________
blu:

On shots I am good at, I am accurate in this regard. On shots I miss, I use randy g's diagnostics. If my stroke and personal eye pattern, alignment,bridge etc were good, then I look at aiming errors ie- was unwanted eng applied, did i hit too fat or too thin, or did I under or over compensate for throw etc /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

_____________________________
Tom:

Using Outside English
As far as using outside english[/b] to assist in offsetting throw, Mike Segal, recently wrote in BD that english will not throw an OB. On the other hand, I think he advocates using a touch of OE on his instructional videos, so I'm not sure what he believes or if he even understands what he doing or writing.

If throw due to english does not exist, then there is no reason to use it.

If throw due to english does exist but throw due to simply hitting the ball does not exist as I believe, using english would complicate a shot, not simplify it, which seems to me to be a good reason for D players to avoid it.

______________________________
blu:

I watched a decent two last nite at the playoffs. She was making long cuts rather well and knew some defensive play also. She was using a touch of oe. I am sure her captain or other teamate taught her how to do this.Sometimes teamates are more concerned with winning than helping their beginners to learn sound fundamentals. she did not have a good bridge and was dropping elbow very much on follow through . to me those are the most important things to learn.

_________________________

Tom:

Regardless of whether of not enlish can throw a ball, there is no argument that english causes squirt, changing the direction of the CB. This seems to me to be another reason why D players should avoid the complication of it until they get good enough to pot consistently without it.

Also, english has a big effect on a CB coming off a rail, so as Jimbo mentioned above, getting used to relying on outside english to pot balls may make it more difficult to adjust to using english for positional purposes.

____________________

blu:

I agree. if someone is dependent on oe for throw, what happens when they need centreball or ie for shape? [as someone here mentioned]

___________________________

Tom:

Should D Players Use English?
Therefore, I see the using outside english as an aid to potting balls as a bad idea all around, especially for beginners and D players, who have enough things to work on without worrying about english.

___________________________

blu:
good point tom. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif i have two shots i use oe with and two i use ie with. not a high percentage. the only other time is ocasionally for shape but when available use rails, ballspeed and half/quarter hits more, some draw and follow or stop. And I still need much improvement in the shape area!!! i am definately just learning this!!! i have known for a long time that cb control was key but had not a clue how to do it. All of the permutations were simply too confusing 2-3 years ago. Now that I am starting to learn, I am feeling like 'whew'. I can do this, it will just take time with good instruction to get good at this.

Thanks as always for stimulating my mind. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

blu

12-20-2002, 09:49 AM
Hello Paul,

Not the Jimbo from Ct, in fact the only time I have been there I was on my way to Boston on a Thanksgiving weekend and got a speeding ticket. Funny, I was being passed by other drivers on both sides of me yet I got pulled over. You think it was because I was driving a sports car with Texas plates? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Best Regards,

Jimbo

silverbullet
12-20-2002, 10:04 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TomBrooklyn:</font><hr> Jimbo,
That is what Mike Segal said about english induced throw. Like you, I disagree with him. I could swear I've thrown balls into a pocket with english that were unmakable otherwise because I could not see the correct contact point due to an interfering ball. This is a topic for a thread of it's own however, as there is a lot of controversy about it, and it was debated on this board a couple a few months ago when the article was published.

As far as collision induced throw which has nothing to do with english, some persons such as yourself say it exists. Many experts have at best ignored or not recognized it. I say I can't observe it. It certainly doesn't bother me on short shots say up to a third of a table length. Beyond that, my accuracy is not good enough anyway. When my accuracy is good enough hit a pocket or cheat a pocket to either side with consistancy, maybe I'll be able to notice the effect. <hr /></blockquote>

ww suggested an exercise for me. throw out 15 balls on the table and pot with all oe then the same thing with ie and see what happened. i tried the oe and 13 of the 15 went in. what a crutch that would be for me!!!! i previously wasnt able to do this with less oe but could do this time. i am convinced that using this method on a consistent basis would be a huge mistake for me!!!!

i have worked hard to get reasonable accuracy with centerball hits. i think if i took the easy way out, i would lose all of that and well maybe it is okay for experienced players but for me feels too much like cheating and taking the easy way out.

i think i will try playiing ww, centerball only, no eng, top or bottom allowed and just see how much of an edge this enlish is giving him. in a 6-2 race, i am curious to see if i will fare better against him, even by one game than i usually do....he says he used to play this way so it may not matter, esp since he is a 7 but i am curious to try a new experiment.

blu

Perk
12-20-2002, 10:10 AM
Silver..If i understood your experiment.."center ball, NO english",,,I wish you the luck...I honestly dont think that I could make it threw a rack without using some sort of english, whether its draw/follow/side. I think after realizing the need for the little things of pool such as follow/draw/stun shots, them center ones would make me pull out my hair. Good luck, let me know how it turns out.

silverbullet
12-20-2002, 10:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Perk:</font><hr> Silver..If i understood your experiment.."center ball, NO english",,,I wish you the luck...I honestly dont think that I could make it threw a rack without using some sort of english, whether its draw/follow/side. I think after realizing the need for the little things of pool such as follow/draw/stun shots, them center ones would make me pull out my hair. Good luck, let me know how it turns out. <hr /></blockquote>

whether i win loose, do crappy, the thought of it stimulates me.

blu

12-20-2002, 10:20 AM
Hi Blu, you said:

Jimbo, you were not here when I got insulted for being a low sl player and I was told that my opinions were due to not being good and in a sense held no value.(of course, otoh, many of my posts were kinda dumb and the result of having too much time on my hands) Many were kinder than this, but some were brutal. So I am sensitive to this, I guess. I certainly never meant to insult Tom, nor you by proxy for that matter.

While this may not have been your intent, it appeared that you were implying that Tom's disbelief in throw is due to lack of experience and that that opinion will change as he gets better. Fred and others have pointed out that increased velocity reduces throw. So, if Tom is a harder hitter than I am, I am assuming that he would be getting less 'throw' or neglible throw if he hits hard. Well on with the topic. Actually if you read Tom's post he said this not me. I simply agreed with him, no implication at all just total agreement. It is true that you will experience less throw as velocity increases but little difference from a soft shot to a firm shot. It takes an excessive increase in speed to drastically diminish the effect of throw. For that matter if Tom had told me he believed the world to be flat since he had never traveled farther than 200 miles from home I would have told him he was incorrect but as he gained more travel experience he would someday realize he was incorrect. I consider my comment to him to be similiar, my comments about throw are not opinion but facts. In our universe there is friction at least on a planet with atmosphere and gravity. If we were to shoot pool in outer space I believe throw might be either negligible or non-existent.

Jimbo, that is exactly what happened to me. My stroke and aim are sure (thankyou scott and randy) and I knew I had aimed correctly, yet missed the cut. As I play low on the ball, I do rarely have popping head up errors. However, I have made aiming errors due to errors in my personal eye pattern, ie- for me, locking on the ob at the last backswing, stroke and follow. So, even though I am not an excellent player, I do know when I missed due to aim and when it is due to other factors and what factors caused this. Randy teaches how to figure this out in 'pool school' which he calls 'diagnostics' and this has served me well. On this subject you might try practicing spot shots by lining up the shot, stroking, close your eyes, stroke 2 or 3 more times then shoot. It will not be long before you train yourself to stop switching eye aim during your shot. Well at least it worked well for me! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Many people say that english does not throw the ob. They say that english only affects the cb and its action from the rail. IMO, this is a matter of semantics. This is how I believe that oe and ie have what I would call an 'indirect' effect on the ob. Tell me if I am wrong, but this is how it seems to me. This is a very interesting statement. I have never gotten into such an in depth discussion of throw prior to now but when it was discussed I never heard someone doubt it's existence before. This has become a great thread Blu, kudos to you for bringing up the subject in the first place.

Best Regards,

Jimbo

Tom_In_Cincy
12-20-2002, 10:48 AM
Tom,
Everyone that I have shared this example with has has a revelation about aiming for cut shots. All of them have gone on to play better and have had more confidence in their aim.

I don't entirely agree that there is a BIG difference between two frozen balls and what BW was discussing. But, there is a difference between the two frozen balls and just using the cb and ob.. like in the example, but the difference is not as dramatic as you might think.

Try doing the back cut on the 9 ball from my example without the 1 ball. You might be surprized.

And, my opinion, about why this isn't covered in instructional tapes and videos, is that it is an advanced theory and not that easily understood.

silverbullet
12-20-2002, 11:02 AM
Thanks Jimbo. You have added so much to this topic. I love your idea of shooting with eyes closed. I love doing this, it is such a great check on the stroke. Most people advocate this. I also think it is fun to lline up the shot, then do the preshot and stroke follow freeze with eyes closed.

I was scewing up last nite missing shots because I wasnt focussed and not locking onto that ob. This was not a match, just playing around before the match. i was messing around with a 4, actually a pretty good 4, which is always fun for me. Fours are my favorite players to play with.

I have a friend who is probably the best 4 in the ph and should be a 5 and even he does not understand why he hasnt been moved up. I know he would clean my clock but boy would playing him be a rush!!!!

blu

12-20-2002, 11:21 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> I can easily prove english will throw an object ball. <hr /></blockquote>
This has been discussed many times before, and as of yet, I haven't seen anyone show me with relatively clean balls that throw from spin is anything above negligible. I have described a challenge shot where it at least proves that spin-induced throw isn't as much as people think it is. The shot is to shoot a dead-straight shot with english and leaving the cuebal dead in its tracks while spinning like crazy. If you accomplish the sit-and-spin aspect, you'll see that the object ball goes pretty damned straight.

I've opined that what the majority of people think is "spin-induced throw" is actually cue ball swerve. It doesn't take a lot of swerve to make a dramatic difference in the object ball path, but, as the challenge shot above clearly shows, spin alone doesn't change the object ball path enough to throw the object ball off. Try it. Report your results.

Caveat: there are times that I will use outside (or inside)english to reduce or counter the collision-induced throw, so it's not like I'm saying that spinning the cueball isn't important.



Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Hi Fred,

I am not sure your challenge shot would prove what you believe it will prove but rather the opposite. By striking the ball hard enough to leave the cue ball spinning you would see less throw but it will nonetheless exist. In addition you state that you do believe in "cue ball curve" which will prove useful in my examples below. I never meant to imply that spin induced throw is massive but it is however relevant and useful in fact necessary to understand if you wish to play world class speed. The best examples I can offer are below, one is on a pool table and one is not.

First it is necesary to understand that when you impart right hand english on the cue ball it transfers to left hand english on the object ball. Do you agree with this? My example for this is the childrens toy the superballtm. Spin the superball backwards tossing it away from you on a hard surface and watch what it does. It will first bounce back towards you then bounce away, reversing it's spin with each successive spin until it either settles quietly to the floor or loses it's inertia to spin.

To demonstrate this using pool balls line the cue ball and one object ball in a straight line perpendicular to the side rail. Shoot at medium speed with either left or right hand english, about 1.5 cue tips off center with stop. Be sure to allow for squirt so that the cue ball contacts the object ball dead center. Now if there was no spin induced throw you would expect the object ball to bounce back off the rail and impact the cue ball. This will not happen since the english applied to the cue ball was transferred to the object ball and it will deflect from the rail in the opposite direction from whatever english you chose to use. From this we can infer the object ball must have been spinning which we know changes the path of a ball and should verify my contention that we imparted throw with cue ball english.

If you do not like this example please explain how a ball can be cut at an angle greater than 90 degrees.

Best Regards,

Jimbo

Fred Agnir
12-20-2002, 12:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> First it is necesary to understand that when you impart right hand english on the cue ball it transfers to left hand english on the object ball. Do you agree with this? My example for this is the childrens toy the superballtm. Spin the superball backwards tossing it away from you on a hard surface and watch what it does. <hr /></blockquote>

What you're describing is neither spin transfer nor throw. It's rebound of stored energy. Different animal.


[ QUOTE ]
To demonstrate this using pool balls line the cue ball and one object ball in a straight line perpendicular to the side rail. Shoot at medium speed with either left or right hand english, about 1.5 cue tips off center with stop. Be sure to allow for squirt so that the cue ball contacts the object ball dead center. Now if there was no spin induced throw you would expect the object ball to bounce back off the rail and impact the cue ball. This will not happen since the english applied to the cue ball was transferred to the object ball and it will deflect from the rail in the opposite direction from whatever english you chose to use. <hr /></blockquote>

Spin transfer and spin-induced throw are generally two different but related concepts. It doesn't take much spin transferred to make a dramatic change in path when the object ball hits a cushion. However, just like the superball example, that's still not an example of spin-induced throw. My challenge shot directly addresses how much the object ball is thrown off the centerline from spin alone.


Fred

Fred Agnir
12-20-2002, 12:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> I am not sure your challenge shot would prove what you believe it will prove but rather the opposite. By striking the ball hard enough to leave the cue ball spinning you would see less throw but it will nonetheless exist. <hr /></blockquote>
I don't believe I said anything about striking the cue ball hard. I also didn't say that spin-induced throw doesn't exist.

Fred

12-20-2002, 01:07 PM
Fred said "Spin transfer and spin-induced throw are generally two different but related concepts. It doesn't take much spin transferred to make a dramatic change in path when the object ball hits a cushion. However, just like the superball example, that's still not an example of spin-induced throw. My challenge shot directly addresses how much the object ball is thrown off the centerline from spin alone. Fred you seem to agree that the cue ball will transfer spin to the object ball yet also assert that this "spinning" object ball will travel on a straight path on it's way to the rail? How do you resolve the conflict between your present statement and the one where you agreed that a spinning cue ball will curve on it's way to the object ball? You missed my reason for describing the rail deflection of the object ball. It was to demonstrate that the object ball was in fact spinning due to the transfer of english from the cue ball and therefore it must "throw" ie: curve on it's way to the rail as well as rebound at an angle. Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you consider to be contact throw. My simple definition would be that the object ball travels in a path other than the geometric calculation would indicate without compensating for friction. In other words I strike the ball dead center in a straight line towards a specific point at the rail and the object ball strikes a point to either side of the point that a straight line would dictate. Please keep in mind that I do understand that as velocity increases the throw will decrease at a ratio that is proportional to the square of the increased velocity. If you double the cue ball speed from 2 to 4 mph I believe the throw would decrease by a factor of 4. By the time you go from 2 to 10 mph the throw for all practical purposes will not exist.

You keep saying . My challenge shot directly addresses how much the object ball is thrown off the centerline from spin alone. Would you mind explaining to me why it is necessary for the cue ball to spin in place in oreder to satisfy your proof? I believe your test is self defeating since in order to accomplish this spinning cue ball you would necessarily exceed the velocity where any throw would be perceptible. In addition the cue ball must be spinning perfectly perpendicular to the table so as not to drift and any imperfection in the balance of the cue ball would make this feat extremely difficult to perform.

Best Regards.

Jimbo


ps: I agree you did not say it does not exist but that is negligible. I contend that it is more than negligible at balls shot at pocket speed.

Fred Agnir
12-20-2002, 01:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> Fred you seem to agree that the cue ball will transfer spin to the object ball yet also assert that this "spinning" object ball will travel on a straight path on it's way to the rail? How do you resolve the conflict between your present statement and the one where you agreed that a spinning cue ball will curve on it's way to the object ball?<hr /></blockquote>

There is no conflict. A spinning ball on its own does not curve. It must have a force component perpendicular to its motion. You can prove this to yourself by spinning a ball with your fingers. It sits and spins without traveling due to its spin. The amount of spin transferred is minimal, but enough to make a change in the rebound angle.



[ QUOTE ]
You keep saying . My challenge shot directly addresses how much the object ball is thrown off the centerline from spin alone. Would you mind explaining to me why it is necessary for the cue ball to spin in place in oreder to satisfy your proof? <hr /></blockquote>
By spinning dead in place, it ensures that you hit the geometrically correct contact point. It is my contention that what 99% of the people see as a miss (or make) due to spin-induced throw is actually a miss due to swerve. If in your attempts to hit my challenge shot, you miss the object ball (away from the side the english is applied) but the cueball slides away (toward the side of the english applied), then swerve is your culprit. If it sits dead and spins, and the object ball misses away from the side the english is applied, then spin-induced throw is your culprit.

Unless the object balls are extremely dirty, nobody has ever shown me the latter. I've presented this challenge shot to this board for 5 years now. I've never had anyone report that they observed something else.


Fred

TonyM
12-20-2002, 01:33 PM
I'd pay money to see an open pot (not an object ball frozen to a rail) cut backwards (or forwards, or any way you want) at an angle of 90 degrees or more.

Note, masse doesn't count.

I think that it is physically impossible.

Tony
-any takers?

TonyM
12-20-2002, 01:40 PM
"The shot is to shoot a dead-straight shot with english and leaving the cuebal dead in its tracks while spinning like crazy. If you accomplish the sit-and-spin aspect, you'll see that the object ball goes pretty damned straight."

Well the problem with this shot Fred is the comment "pretty damned straight".

In fact the object ball will always be thrown unless the balls are waxed. A short shot into the side pocket hides the amount of throw.

Try it on a long shot into the far corner pocket.

Now it might not be as much as some people think, but it does matter imo.

And it depends on both the condition of the balls, and the speed of the shot and the amount of spin used. And as we know, a stun shot can produce the most amount of spin (no doubt why you chose the shot).

When I try this shot on my Snooker table (the balls are clean, but not new) I can get as much as 4 to 5 degrees of throw when the cue ball sits still spinning after the shot.

And while swerve might be the culprit sometimes, throw should not be ignored completely.

If you do, you should expect to be surprised by tyhe reactions on different equipment.

Tony

TonyM
12-20-2002, 01:51 PM
"It was to demonstrate that the object ball was in fact spinning due to the transfer of english from the cue ball and therefore it must "throw" ie: curve on it's way to the rail as well as rebound at an angle."

I think that you don't have a good understanding of the conventional definition of "throw". Throw is neither a description of a "curved' path of an object ball (that is masse or swerve) nor the effect of spin off a rail.

In fact, Bob Jewett has a long standing bet that has never been successfully challenged, for anyone that can demonstrate object ball curve after collision with a cueball and BEFORE it strikes a cushion.

It doesn't happen I'm afraid.

Throw is simply the deviation in the path of an object ball, caused by a sliding (or spinning) object ball away from the path determined by the ghost ball method.

The object ball will not curve after being struck by a spinning ball, but will instead, take a straight line path that will deviate to some degree (depending on various factors) away from the ghost ball path.

Btw, I do not believe that it is possible to cut a ball past 90 degrees.

Care to demonstrate it?

Tony
-would put money on it....

TonyM
12-20-2002, 01:55 PM
"I say I can't observe it. It certainly doesn't bother me on short shots say up to a third of a table length."

Tom, you need to play some Snooker. You'd become a believer in a hurry!

Try a ten foot pot with a soft stun shot, and see how close you come to the center of the pocket.

Tony

Fred Agnir
12-20-2002, 02:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TonyM:</font><hr>
Try it on a long shot into the far corner pocket.<hr /></blockquote>
You'd think over the course of 5 years, I would have done this at least once.

[ QUOTE ]
Now it might not be as much as some people think, but it does matter imo.<hr /></blockquote>

In the grand scheme of english compensations, swerve and squirt greatly outweigh spin-induced throw. It's understanding is important. How do we define "understanding"? By continuing the 99CS model?

[ QUOTE ]
And as we know, a stun shot can produce the most amount of spin (no doubt why you chose the shot).<hr /></blockquote>
The comment was specific to spin-induced throw. That is, the higher velocity of the rubbing surfaces and its associated throw.

[ QUOTE ]
When I try this shot on my Snooker table (the balls are clean, but not new) I can get as much as 4 to 5 degrees of throw when the cue ball sits still spinning after the shot.<hr /></blockquote>
Show me. Forgive me when I say I simply can't believe it. I have done this shot hundreds upon hundreds of times, shown dozens upon dozens of people. Over a 7' length, that would represent over 7" of absolute distance at 5. Yet, I'm pocketing the balls, off the face, when lining up the shot to the face. You got some extra dirt on your balls?

Fred

12-20-2002, 02:16 PM
Hi TonyM,

Here is my definition of throw as stated in one of my posts above: "My simple definition would be that the object ball travels in a path other than the geometric calculation would indicate without compensating for friction. In other words I strike the ball dead center in a straight line towards a specific point at the rail and the object ball strikes a point to either side of the point that a straight line would dictate."[/b] What is it about this definition that is incorrect? I may have gotten off on a tanget in my response to Fred and implied or even said it was the object ball curving (although I do believe this can happen as well) it was not my intention to include the object ball curving but as the name implies being "thrown" in a different path. I do believe I understand throw perfectly well.

Now as for cutting a ball at an angle of greater than 90 degrees I suggest you just attend any tournament and ask a pro or two to demonstrate this for you. David Matlock comes to mind as well as James Walden, Randy Wallace, Jeff Melton, Danny Harriman in addition to all the big names on the tour. For that matter I can still probably do it 5% of the time and I haven't practiced it for many years. In the days of "honest effort" nine ball before two shot or one shot fouls it was necessary to bank well, kick well and cut even better. These days safety play precludes the need for any excessively difficult shots except under the most rare circumstances.

A godd example of cutting a ball backwards is to place a ball on the seven spot on a snooker table and place the cue ball inside the D about 2 balls width either side of the four spot. This should be reasonably close enough to 90 degrees that you can setup the shot several times without a triangle and compass! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Best Regards,

Jimbo

12-20-2002, 02:27 PM
Fred you said "You'd think over the course of 5 years, I would have done this at least once." I am sure you have done it more than once but may have failed to recognize why you either hit the ball other than where you aimed and pocketed the ball or successfully hit the ball where you aimed and missed the shot.

Do not take this as derogatory but my first 5 years of play I did not yet know what I didn't know either. In fact I compensated for squirt, spin throw and contact throw long before I understod what it was I was compensating for. However if you typically fire balls into the pocket you may have not been affected by spin throw. Then again I may just be bored at work and am enjoying debating an unprovable point!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Best Regards,

Jimbo

Rod
12-20-2002, 04:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> I can easily prove english will throw an object ball. <hr /></blockquote>
This has been discussed many times before, and as of yet, I haven't seen anyone show me with relatively clean balls that throw from spin is anything above negligible. I have described a challenge shot where it at least proves that spin-induced throw isn't as much as people think it is. The shot is to shoot a dead-straight shot with english and leaving the cuebal dead in its tracks while spinning like crazy. If you accomplish the sit-and-spin aspect, you'll see that the object ball goes pretty damned straight.

I've opined that what the majority of people think is "spin-induced throw" is actually cue ball swerve. It doesn't take a lot of swerve to make a dramatic difference in the object ball path, but, as the challenge shot above clearly shows, spin alone doesn't change the object ball path enough to throw the object ball off. Try it. Report your results.

Caveat: there are times that I will use outside (or inside)english to reduce or counter the collision-induced throw, so it's not like I'm saying that spinning the cueball isn't important.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Fred,
Your test is more of a compensation in aim, and yes there is a little throw. I shot that about a week ago and stopped the ball in it's tracks the first two times. The problem as I view it is we have compensations in aim due to squirt, and swerve depending on the distance given the english, speed and cue angle. Almost every post here is related to compensations. As long as this exists, and it does, it's difficult to define how much because of the variables.

Here is a trick shot I shoot sometimes. I think this shot defines spin induced throw best. It takes away the variables, to a large degree. To make the shot is has to be shot at a slower speed. Here is where the effect of throw really shows up on both the o/b and c/b. With more speed the shot can not be made but it still shows the effect of throw and how speed alters the effect. I think its a good expierment whether one makes the shot or just wants to see the effect. Throw has more effect than some give credit because of the variables mentioned earlier.

Start out with clean balls. If they are clean and super polished it will reduce the effect. However that is not the conditions we play under. We all understand how this maks a difference. Spin the one ball clockwise in place as diagramed, you do have to be able to spin the ball. Set the c/b behind and shoot near the first diamond center ball, green arrow. The yellow arrow shows the path the one ball will take because of throw caused by spin. It of course varies on conditions but it may throw even more than shown.
The red line is the one going in the side pocket. Also note where the c/b travels, the small yellow line is an indicator. This of course is reversed since the o/b has spin but it still shows the effect of english induced throw. The variable here is spin and speed but aim, squirt and swerve is out of the equation to a large degree. Even if the aim is off a hair it doesn't matter the effect is still there. When we aim with the c/b using spin that's another matter and goes right back to your and others, conception that it was most likely caused by swerve, which is a variable. I do agree that happens a lot. Were all talking about the same effect, its just to what degree. There will always be variables, its just how we deal with them as an individual player that counts. Also noted we need to know that this does exist.
Here is the shot.

START(
%Aj5F2%Pn8E8%UD8F6%Vm7F3%WZ5Z9%XC5F5%YE0H8%Zq8E7%_ l6G0%`j7D7
%aj3D0
)END

Everybody interested should try this or similar. If you can't spin the ball in place, and most can't, have someone who can do it for you. Tell me what your observation is after this little experiment.

silverbullet
12-20-2002, 04:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TonyM:</font><hr> I'd pay money to see an open pot (not an object ball frozen to a rail) cut backwards (or forwards, or any way you want) at an angle of 90 degrees or more.

Note, masse doesn't count.

I think that it is physically impossible.

Tony
-any takers? <hr /></blockquote>

ww says he can hit a 92% cut with extreme inside english. i asked what kind of shot, he said, 'a cut shot'.

I have never done this or seen this, this is just what ww says.

blu

12-20-2002, 05:19 PM
Fred,

I have attached a couple of links to some Billiards World articles that elaborate on throw. Hope you enjoy them.

Jimbo

http://www.billiardworld.com/sqrtthro.html
http://www.billiardworld.com/morthro.html
http://www.billiardworld.com/cancsqrt.html
http://www.billiardworld.com/aiming2.html

There are many more articles but I found these to be most relevant to the current discussion. I feel the last article to be the most compelling.

Fred Agnir
12-21-2002, 09:21 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> Fred you said "You'd think over the course of 5 years, I would have done this at least once." I am sure you have done it more than once but may have failed to recognize why you either hit the ball other than where you aimed and pocketed the ball or successfully hit the ball where you aimed and missed the shot. <hr /></blockquote>

I encourage you to read more of the CCBoard and get a feel for the group as I think you have a lot to offer. That being said, you have misunderstood my post. I have been presenting this challenge for 5+ years. I have shot this shot on average over one time every day. THat's literally 100's upon 100's of times. I have been playing for over 20 years now, and everyone on this board that has been reading my posts knows that I study the game at both the micro and macro level, and that I can actually play at a pretty decent level. All of that means squat, however.

I take it you haven't tried the challenge shot yet? I wish you would and report your findings.


[ QUOTE ]
Do not take this as derogatory but my first 5 years of play I did not yet know what I didn't know either. <hr /></blockquote>
Okay. Don't take this derogatory. I think you need to read a bit more to find out that you still are unclear on some issues. I can help.

Fred

Fred Agnir
12-21-2002, 09:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> Fred,

I have attached a couple of links to some Billiards World articles that elaborate on throw. Hope you enjoy them.

Jimbo

http://www.billiardworld.com/sqrtthro.html
http://www.billiardworld.com/morthro.html
http://www.billiardworld.com/cancsqrt.html
http://www.billiardworld.com/aiming2.html

There are many more articles but I found these to be most relevant to the current discussion. I feel the last article to be the most compelling.
<hr /></blockquote>
These are excellent articles and I encourage everyone to read them.

And Jimbo, just for your information, I knew the author, Jim Meador. We exchanged many pool and billiard ideas for a few years before his untimely passing.

Fred

Fred Agnir
12-21-2002, 09:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr>

Fred,
Your test is more of a compensation in aim, and yes there is a little throw. I shot that about a week ago and stopped the ball in it's tracks the first two times. The problem as I view it is we have compensations in aim due to squirt, and swerve depending on the distance given the english, speed and cue angle. Almost every post here is related to compensations. As long as this exists, and it does, it's difficult to define how much because of the variables.<hr /></blockquote>
I think your eval. is 100% correct. There *is* a *little* throw due to spin. The challenge is to show how little there is. In making the ball and keeping the cueball spinning dead, the compensation is sqirt and swerve. It's the aim-and-pivot squirt compensation test. If you hit it slow and level, it's still squirt. If you hit it slow with an unlevel cue, it's swerve compensation. Spin-throw basically plays little part. And if that's the case on a straight shot like this, why would it be different in a cut shot?


[ QUOTE ]
Here is a trick shot I shoot sometimes. I think this shot defines spin induced throw best.

START(
%Aj5F2%Pn8E8%UD8F6%Vm7F3%WZ5Z9%XC5F5%YE0H8%Zq8E7%_ l6G0%`j7D7
%aj3D0
)END
<hr /></blockquote>
It certainly illustrates spin transfer as the cueball picks up spin. It also illustrates why 99CS is so full of it. If the object ball throws to the left from spin, then the cueball must go to the right. That is, you can't expect to throw the object ball to one side without losing the cueball to the other. By correlation, if you keep the cueball from going to one side after contact on a dead straight shot, then the object ball will go pretty straight as well. That's my challenge shot, which you point out is really more of a spin compensation shot.

Fred

12-21-2002, 10:01 AM
Hello Fred,

I apologize I did misunderstand your post. I still believe you are confused as to the proof your "challenge" offers. Without setting up your shot in a specific attempt to accomplish your goal I have accidently done this many times when trying to slide the cue ball sideways for shape and instead it sat still and spun. IMO this does nothing to prove or disprove spin throw. In addition any challenge that might "appear" to prove something does not exist ( or in you words is neglible) which I know does exist (and is very important) would in itself be faulty. I understand you said this challenge will prove throw exists not disprove it but I would like to ask you to develope another challenge that can be performed with a softer stroke than I believe this current one requires. If you are able to come up with one which proves still to you that spin induced throw is negligble I promise to be objective in evaluating it myself.

You mentioned that you knew the author. May I ask what you thought of his opinions on this subject?

I offer sincere thanks for your offer of help. If I have violated the forum decorum with my previous post again I apologize. Will you please elaborate on some of the issues that I am still unclear about either here or in a PM?

Best Regards,

Jimbo

ps: In order to give you a benchmark about my playing ability, I play similiar to both George Brunt and George Breedlove in their respective best games. They, as well as many others, used to come to my current home town and donate during their road trips. Also I have played for 40 years with 23 of them on the road and all of them profitable.

Vapros
12-21-2002, 10:34 AM
The arguments on this topic appear frequently and continue for amazing periods and numbers of posts. Sometimes I will get involved to the extent that I try to follow some of the online debates, back and forth. Rarely does anyone convince anyone else of anything.

Fred, I'm sure there is great merit, in one sense, in your proposed demonstration, but I would like to toss in a thought that I have not seen presented before.

Throwing a ball with spin, on a dead-straight shot, is very difficult. It's asking a lot of the english to exert any great influence on the path of the object ball. I think the main reason would be the weight of the balls and the force of the shot. However, if we change to a cut shot, especially within a limited range of angles, we give the english a running start and it will suddenly become much more of a factor. I'm saying that english will change the path of the OB much more on a cut shot than a straight shot. Any thoughts on this?

12-21-2002, 12:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TonyM:</font><hr> I'd pay money to see an open pot (not an object ball frozen to a rail) cut backwards (or forwards, or any way you want) at an angle of 90 degrees or more.

Note, masse doesn't count.

I think that it is physically impossible.

Tony
-any takers? <hr /></blockquote>

How much you offering???????
This shot can be made using low inside english...hit at a SLOW pace (NOT MASSE) the ball will deflect right or left, and swerve back to the object ball, reducing the angle to less than 90 degrees. I have seen this done on many occaisions...and have done this myself. I would not shoot this type of shot in a match....(unless I'm way ahead)...but it can be done

Alfie
12-21-2002, 04:18 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Richard Cranium:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote TonyM:</font><hr> I'd pay money to see an open pot (not an object ball frozen to a rail) cut backwards (or forwards, or any way you want) at an angle of 90 degrees or more.

Note, masse doesn't count.

I think that it is physically impossible.

Tony
-any takers? <hr /></blockquote>

How much you offering???????
This shot can be made using low inside english...hit at a SLOW pace (NOT MASSE) the ball will deflect right or left, and swerve back to the object ball, reducing the angle to less than 90 degrees. I have seen this done on many occaisions...and have done this myself. I would not shoot this type of shot in a match....(unless I'm way ahead)...but it can be done <hr /></blockquote> He is not talking about the the angle formed by the line from the CB to the ghost ball and the OB path after contact. That can be cheated with your low grade masse (yes, ya big galoot /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif, it IS a masse). He means the angle formed by the direction of CB travel immediately before contact and the OB path after contact.

silverbullet
12-21-2002, 05:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> What you are describing is called "throw". Dependent on how much off center you are required to cut a ball throw will begin to affect the path your object ball takes on it's way to your original point of aim due primarily to friction.

Many beginning and intermediate players compensate for throw with outside english, as you mentioned, and it is quite effective. There are two problems using only OE to compensate. One is that it narrows down your options on acquiring position on your next shot. Another is that you must now also compensate for the amount of english applied as well as velocity.


<hr /></blockquote>

I really do do all of my thinking while I am standing, thankyou randy. But I am standing looking at the natural aim to the centerr and saying but the cb hits this side and drags the ob this way, so i really have to aim at this side of the pocket and therefore strike this other part of the ob with the cb....and then with what speed and where is the cb gonna go after the shot so i can hit the next one etc etc....

ww said he was glad that ccb was answering my questions because he could not stand all this stuff. he sez if he had to think that much before he got down on the ball, he would not even have time to play pool. I am laughing my a** off while i write this with tears rolling down my cheeks.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

blu

12-21-2002, 08:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote silverbullet:</font><hr> ww said he was glad that ccb was answering my questions because he could not stand all this stuff. he sez if he had to think that much before he got down on the ball, he would not even have time to play pool. I am laughing my a** off while i write this with tears rolling down my cheeks.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

blu <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> WW is tired of all your yapping too? Like listening to a 5 year old! </font color>

Fred Agnir
12-22-2002, 06:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vapros:</font><hr>


Throwing a ball with spin, on a dead-straight shot, is very difficult. It's asking a lot of the english to exert any great influence on the path of the object ball. I think the main reason would be the weight of the balls and the force of the shot.<hr /></blockquote>
The reason the challenge shot is straight on is so that the shooter can see how much throw is due to spin alone. You can't see that on a cut shot. Spin-throw should be a maximum at a straight on shot and a minimum at a wafer thin cut.

You say how difficult it is to spin-throw a straight in shot, yet many people believe you can throw it as much as ... well, as much as Ray Martin says in 99CS. On this board, people for years have advised shots similar to Ray Martin's and Bob Byrne's "throw the ball but leave the cue ball dead for a better break shot..." And yet when anyone tries it, it simply doesn't do what they say. And if it doesn't do what they say, then everyone who believes they understand spin-throw mustn't, if it's those "straight in spin-throw shots" form the basis of their perception.

Fred

Fred Agnir
12-22-2002, 06:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> In addition any challenge that might "appear" to prove something does not exist ( or in you words is neglible) which I know does exist (and is very important) would in itself be faulty.<hr /></blockquote>
That's not a very open mind to experimention. It is not my intention to say that spin-throw isn't important. It is important. But in my opinion, the vast majority of people who think they understand spin-throw (that includes players greater than I will ever be) are still misled. It's not as much as people think it is. The challenge shot shows the range of throw due to spin.

[ QUOTE ]
...I would like to ask you to develope another challenge that can be performed with a softer stroke than I believe this current one requires.<hr /></blockquote>
Again, I don't understand why you think my shot needs to be hard. Hit it soft if you want. Just leave it spinning in place. That way you can see how much throw occurs from the spin.



[ QUOTE ]
You mentioned that you knew the author. May I ask what you thought of his opinions on this subject?<hr /></blockquote>

As with any opinions, I respect everyone's. Jim was always a great communicator, and was open to experiments that would prove or disprove previous myths. The first illustration of spin throw is exactly the shot that he would have to show me. I'm 100% sure that if he were shoot that shot and the object ball throws to the left by his 4-6", then the cueball will also throw to the right, and will not stay in place.

Fred

silverbullet
12-22-2002, 06:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote A.L.F:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote silverbullet:</font><hr> ww said he was glad that ccb was answering my questions because he could not stand all this stuff. he sez if he had to think that much before he got down on the ball, he would not even have time to play pool. I am laughing my a** off while i write this with tears rolling down my cheeks.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

blu <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> WW is tired of all your yapping too? Like listening to a 5 year old! </font color>
<hr /></blockquote>

ALF,

You have posted 16 times. I challenge anyone to pull up your posts. In every single one of them, you are insulting someone or something. I am trying to learn here. Others are kind enough to offer their expertise.

I am going to get good at pool, no matter how long it takes me, how many lessons I have to pay for, or how many hours i have to spend on the table in practice and drills. You are sadly mistaken if you think I will let the likes of you stand in my way.

I know exactly who you were before ccb stopped anons from posting. You do not fool me and I doubt you fool anyone here.

If you have no legitamate questions about pool or insight as an experienced player of the game then SHADDUP and GO AWAY and return to the rock you came from!!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif

A student of the game!!!!!

Blu

12-22-2002, 07:20 AM
Hey....I'm just going by the rules.....In every tournament I've played in that has the "NO masse" or "jump" rules, a "masse" is defined by an elevated cue of 45 degrees or more...

Now if you want to change the rules and say NO English......Well then we don't need to play...We can just break out the 10th grade geometry book....(I hate it when they change the rules in the middle of a match)/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

TonyM
12-22-2002, 09:21 AM
Maybe you can make a WEI diagram of it?

Again, I have to say that cutting a ball past 90 degrees is impossible.

It might look like you are doing that, but looks can be deceiving.

Tony

TonyM
12-22-2002, 09:24 AM
Thanks Alfie, that's exactly correct!

Besides, didn't the original poster claim that the past 90 degree cut was "proof" of object ball throw? Now he says it's due to cue ball curve?

What's up with that?

Tony

TonyM
12-22-2002, 09:37 AM
Your definition of throw is o.k., but I think you confused everyone with talk of curving object balls and the like. If you really believe that object balls can curve after collision with a cue ball (but not a rail) then why not set up such a shot, show it can be done and collect $200.00 from Bob Jewett?
(hint - Bob doesn't bet unless he's pretty sure he won't ever have to pay!).

As for the past 90 degree cut shot, I think that it is either an illusion (it's not really 90 degrees) or uses masse to change the angle. It is in fact physically impossible. I'm talking about the direction of the cue ball immediately before it strikes the object ball. An angle of greater than 90 degrees misses the object ball! Even very near 90 is impossible.

Maybe you could diagram it?

As for the snooker shot you mentioned, it is one of my occasional practice shots, so I know it well.

In fact, I will try and back cut the black to the right, when the cue ball is on the yellow spot. While it is a very severe cut, it is nowhere near 90 degrees in actual fact.

What many people seem to be claiming is a cut shot of somewhere near 80 degrees that "appears" to be 90 degrees to them.

Tony

12-22-2002, 09:51 AM
<font color="blue"> Was it something I said?
</font color>

12-22-2002, 10:15 AM
I am in full agreement that anything past a 90 degree cut is unmakeable with no English,Masse etc. even 90 degrees would have to be hit absoulutly perfect and probably a very firm cue ball just to get the ball moving.

The shot I am talking about is a object ball placed at the center diamond of the end rail 1/2 ball width away from the rail and the cue ball at the opposite end "center diamond".
with low right or low left you can cut the ball in either pocket...(seen it done many times and have done it myself)
Very Very low percentage shot I would point out....

Without English, or "low form Masse" As I just found out it is now called ...the shot can not be made...At least I would bet against it all day long........ /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

CarolNYC
12-22-2002, 03:01 PM
Having been ALERTED again,you LOCO-LOBO,
It seems you have so much damn time to actually search and count how many times ALF has posted-if you want to learn pool, get off the computer,find a teacher and practice-If I were to go into archives,which I wouldnt give you the time of day, it would show EVERYWHERE I have posted, you are right there,so who has the problem-many have pmed me stating no names have been mentioned and that you've come to your senses and have been asking normal questions-but your personnal illnesses"woe is me tales" are worn out! And one more very important thing I must let you know, IF I EVER hear you BRAG how you took one of natures most beautiful creatures such as the WOLF from its natural environment for your own selfish purposes, believe me, I will contact MHS and have them sent to your home,also, if you knew about the wolf, they seek one mate and stay loyal to that mate FOREVER,as for you, it seems you have put down WW-so your such a phony, give me a break-all I hope is you got down on all fours and at least gave the wolf a chance to mate!
Now I say these final words to you which Ive never used:
"ka-maka-huki-lani"
Carol~last words to you-dont respond!

silverbullet
12-22-2002, 05:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jimbo:</font><hr> What you are describing is called "throw". Dependent on how much off center you are required to cut a ball throw will begin to affect the path your object ball takes on it's way to your original point of aim due primarily to friction.

<hr /></blockquote>

In another vein, if a person has a good, straight stroke and an accurate aim, why is not a 90% cut (not a rail one) easier than a 60% cut which involves experience with throw and knowing how much to compensate or how much oe to apply.

After all,the 90% cut requires no compensation. So what do you say? Including Scott and Randy, which one is easier for you?

blu

12-22-2002, 06:15 PM

silverbullet
12-22-2002, 06:46 PM
Carol,

You have said that you do not want to speak with me or for me to speak with you. You have said that you want no association with me. Yet, you have spoken to me. Are you saying that our pact of silence is now broken or do you wish to go back to our original aggreement?

As one of the best women pool players on this forum, you do deserve an amount of respect. I mean no disrespect by responding.

I just need clarity regarding what you wish. That is all.

blu

Barbara
12-22-2002, 07:04 PM
WW,

Today in my Sunday paper I read an article about Tippi Hedren (of "The Birds/Alfred Hitchcock fame) who runs a sanctuary for abandoned/abused/neglected wild Tigers/leopards/cats/and one Elephant in CA. She's just about broke but runs this 72-acre sanctuary and takes in these animals. What it costs her is offset by the donations and sightseeing tours she gives. It's incredible. She has this one three-legged cheetah that was born deformed with its fourth leg. Which one, the article didn't say. It can get up to speeds of 35 mph. She has shelters for snow tigers that are air conditioned year 'round. She has taken in wild animals that people thought could be trained in a domestic way of life, only to have their owners start abusing them when they proved untrainable. Some of these tigers are from drug dealers who had them protecting their "stash".

While it is my secret desire to give a Bengal tiger a "little scritchy" behind those round ears, I have to respect the animal. I have my own two kitties and they love us when they want to, but I love them all the time. Can't force love with an animal, they don't understand.

Wild animals are just that - wild. What people fell in love with in "Dances With Wolves" - Kevin Costner making friends with a wolf, that was just a movie.

Malamutes are part wolf/part dog. They were bred to be that way. I think the misconception was that bw had a wolf for a pet which some animal lovers wouldn't want to hear.

That was the misconception. Carol thought bw had domesticated a wolf, but it is the malamute in the picture. No one is dissing the wolf here. I applaud that they're being re-introduced to the West even though the ranchers are crying over this. Hell, we almost killed off this species in the first place.

Happy Holdays and Peace,

Barbara

nAz
12-22-2002, 08:53 PM
Hmm what the Hell does "ka-maka-huki-lani" mean? i remember this Hawaiian chick i use to date say something to similar to me. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif

You know i was just thinking if i got my hands on some extinct saber tooth tiger DNA and cloned one Ala jurasic park. then cross bred it with a Tabby cat would i be in trouble? is there a law against that? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

silverbullet
12-23-2002, 04:14 AM
Barbara,

I have always taken in rescues because so many were dying every year. Ironically, this year I got my first purebred puppy dog, the siberian. By four months, it was apparent she had a bleeding disorder. The breeder offered to take her back but she was already our 'little girl' so we kept her.

The dog in the picture is indeed sammy, the 92% wolf. Every day of his life until he ended up at the vets, he was kept in a kennel all alone. When left inside, he trashed the house.

The man who had him was a nice person, but did not seem to understand his packing needs. So I took in sammy as a rescue and began my education about wolves. We understood that he could not be left alone. He took jasper, my other dog, and even the kitties as his pack. That seems kind of funny, but as sam had never lived in the wild, he did not understand normal wolf packs. Since he always had his pack, he never tore up anything.We loved him dearly and grieveed deeply when he died.

Barbara, you touch on an important point. People take in animals that are meant to run free out of their natural habitat and the results are often disastrous. I do not want to get on my bandwagon here, about my disgust for the breeding of wolfdogs. No matter how good of an enclosure you have it is still a prison for an animal who was born to run free and often ranges 100 miles a day.So many jerks buy wolf-dogs thinking it is kool and then abuse them or dump them when the wd does not act like a dog.

As far as the alaskan malamute goes, malamute lovers would vehemently say that they are a purebreed and not part wolf. However, in one book I have, it is stated that the AKC allowed malamute bitches to be tied out in the 1950's, so that male wolves would breed with them, because malamutes were having some genetic problems. Regardless of what camp you fall into, most will agree that the malamute is the closest relationship to the wolf.

To keep this pool related, my sibe puppy jumped up on my pool table and often puts her paws on our cues when she thinks we are payiing too much attention to pool and not to her &lt;g&gt;.

Laura

12-23-2002, 09:40 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote silverbullet:</font><hr> Carol, You have said blah blah blah... You have said yada yada yada... Yet, you have this that this. Are you saying that do re mi or fa so la?

As one of the (kissing sound here), you do deserve an amount of respect. (amount not specified) I mean no blah blah. I just need need need.... That is all. <hr /></blockquote>Could you hens continue your squabbling out by the hen house. The men are having a discussion here. Thank you.

cheesemouse
12-23-2002, 09:47 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Could you hens continue your squabbling out by the hen house. The men are having a discussion here. Thank you. <hr /></blockquote>

Hahahaaaaaaa... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif You are a brave man MR. SLIM...LMAO

Fred Agnir
12-23-2002, 09:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TonyM:</font><hr> As for the past 90 degree cut shot, I think that it is either an illusion (it's not really 90 degrees) or uses masse to change the angle. It is in fact physically impossible. I'm talking about the direction of the cue ball immediately before it strikes the object ball. An angle of greater than 90 degrees misses the object ball! Even very near 90 is impossible.<hr /></blockquote>

I'd think a framing square, a pencil, and some properly placed obstructions would be of help.

Fred

silverbullet
12-23-2002, 11:11 AM
Point well taken, Mr. Slim Jim. In the dog world, there is nothing like a 'bitch fight'. Male dogs fight for dominance, female bitches fight to the death. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

blu

CarolNYC
12-23-2002, 04:36 PM
WW,
Not to sound sarcastic, but, write to "Ripleys believe it or not" or the "fact*fiction" show- I personnally do not care-92% wolf-ridiculous-and then what 8% chihuahua-no mind- its over-
You have a nice Holiday!
Carol~has neighbor across street 50%wolf/50%husky-"NANOOK"

nAz
12-24-2002, 02:28 AM
/ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

http://johnmarshallstudios.com/images/Christmas-card.jpg

silverbullet
12-24-2002, 05:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> WW,
Not to sound sarcastic, but, write to "Ripleys believe it or not" or the "fact*fiction" show- I personnally do not care-92% wolf-ridiculous-and then what 8% chihuahua-no mind- its over-
You have a nice Holiday!
Carol~has neighbor across street 50%wolf/50%husky-"NANOOK" <hr /></blockquote>

the other 8% was alaskan malamute. This topic will be continued on the non pool forum for anyone interested in wolves.

bw