View Full Version : Using Side to change the Draw angle
05-06-2003, 08:49 AM
I see Snooker players use this a lot
Using side to alter the draw angle slightly, no cushion contact at all
i've done some experimentation with this, can be useful for sure
I am a little confused about this, but I hope some of the other more experienced players will respond. Scott, if I have this incorrect please correct me. Left or right english do not change the path of the cue ball after contacting an object ball, only top and bottom. Is this correct?
I see that Bigbro is seeing this happen, but I also saw Scott prove it does not happen. LOL
05-06-2003, 02:24 PM
I think it's difficult to acheive a huge change, but adding sidespin would produce a masse effect, no?
05-06-2003, 02:37 PM
I think it's all in the interpretation, eg8r (a common theme today...).
Take the following example, played with NO sidespin:
Now look at the same shot, but with a lot of right-hand english as well:
(These examples are not meant to be exact.) When you are referring to pocketing a ball while playing the two shots, the angle will change with sidespin. HOWEVER, this is only because you are actually hitting a slightly different spot on the object ball. Playing with the sidespin allows for a slightly fuller hit, which can dramatically increase the draw results.
When I mentioned above that it was up for interpretation, it is because if you are talking about two shots - where both of them hit the SAME spot on the object ball - then, no, I would say sidespin wouldn't change anything. But when you are referring to actually pocketing a ball, the sidespin will change your point of contact - thus indirectly affecting the positional path.
05-06-2003, 02:37 PM
This is completly opposite to my limited snooker experience. Most advice I got was to avoid side english entirely in the interest of accuracy. It has no effect on the cb angle, just the amount of draw (or follow) does this. Maybe a little if the balls are really dirty and stickey. IMHO.
05-06-2003, 02:43 PM
[ QUOTE ]
When I mentioned above that it was up for interpretation, it is because if you are talking about two shots - where both of them hit the SAME spot on the object ball - then, no, I would say sidespin wouldn't change anything. <hr /></blockquote> This is what I was talking about. Without worrying about pocketing the ball, and just strictly relating to the "physics" of the shot, if you shoot the exact same shot with sidespin and no spin the results will be the cb travelling along the same line.
I do understand your reasoning on whether we are pocketing a ball and adjusting for the english. Good point.
05-06-2003, 03:40 PM
Ed...No you don't have it wrong. However, Steve is correct in the examples he used too! For far and above the majority of players, you will find you get a much truer reaction with the CB, if you understand that sidespin has little or no effect on the tangent line of the CB. Topspin and draw are the only ways to radically alter the path of the CB. Speed, of course, is a definitive factor too! Like I told you, and showed you, most players add Right or Left english when they shoot top or bottom, without realizing that it doesn't effectively change the tangent line. Rod and I agreed and demonstrated to one another, just HOW much arc you could get using just topspin...and a smooth stroke (his is tops imo!).
05-06-2003, 09:10 PM
Steve, or anyone else: Can someone explain this? I shot this straight-in shot last night with low left and the cb took the path of the black arrow. Any ideas on how that happened? The 8 ball and the cb were lined up straight into the center of the pocket and the 8 went in the pocket dead center.
05-06-2003, 11:05 PM
Fran, when you hit that shot, did you feel like you made it? I ask because one possible explanation is that you actually would have missed the ball, but it skidded into the pocket. The fact that you hit the wrong spot on the object ball could explain the odd cueball path.
The above is probably about a 1 in 1,000 chance, but stranger things have happened of course.
If you feel like you made the correct hit, then I'm at a loss as to how the cueball could've veered that much. It's always possible to take a straight in shot and change the cueball path slightly (especially when hitting with a lot of force), but not nearly as much in your diagram.
Very, very strange.
Fran like Steve said, with force. I might shoot something like this with force but about a 1/2 tip of draw so it doesn't react quickly and draw to far. It does something like this but not near your angle.
Are you playing with those " magic balls " again? LOL
Scott, LOL it sure does bend a lot! Like you said top or bottom, side has little effect. I have to say little because there can be a little. Nothing I'd care to use to alter the path though, assuming the contact points are the same.
05-07-2003, 06:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr> Fran like Steve said, with force. I might shoot something like this with force but about a 1/2 tip of draw so it doesn't react quickly and draw to far. It does something like this but not near your angle.
Are you playing with those " magic balls " again? LOL
Rod <hr /></blockquote>
Man, you guys are again, way over my head. How did you get the cb to do that after the 8 ball hit?
05-07-2003, 07:21 AM
Steve, I think you're on to something. Maybe the chalk mark on the cb hit the 8 and the 8 did skid, but because it was a straight-in shot, it didn't veer off course. Maybe the chalk mark gave the cb a fraction more cling, enough for the left side spin to kick in more than usual.
I'd better shoot that shot a few more times today just to make sure I'm not supposed to be able to do that. LOL!
05-07-2003, 07:30 AM
Rod, I normally carry my own cue ball with me but the only ball I had in my case was a golf ball, so I used that instead. Could that be the reason?
But seriously, I think it was some kind of clingy thingy with the chalk mark. I actually didn't use much force at all, probably no more than medium-soft.
05-07-2003, 07:40 AM
Just my opinion, (not necessarily fact), but I think side has more effect on the angle of draw than actually shows. My reason for saying this is that when I shoot a draw shot with side on it, I usually have to alter the aim point slightly to compensate for the side. This has the effect of cancelling out much of what I was intending to do with the side. Of course, I could be thinking too much again. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
05-07-2003, 08:13 AM
Could the 8 actually have been straight in but perhaps a 1/2 inch left of where your arrow shows? And when the 8 went in it went in 1/2 inch right of the arrow? That would give the necessary angle for your result and/or compensate for throw. Only way to prove it is to draw a pencil line on the table and video tape it and watch the track of the 8. I would think that chalk on the CB at the contact point would just add throw to the 8. I guess you just proved Sigel's point that there is no such thing as throw. Okay, I'll get back in my box now and shup up. LOL
05-07-2003, 09:02 AM
Throw varies with the cut angle and other cling factors, such as chalk and dirt.
The only thing I proved was that I don't know what happened. I hardly think that supports anyone's theory.
05-07-2003, 11:11 AM
Couldn't there have simply been the action of the low-left application causing a slight CB squirt, which would lead to an "off-center-but-self-compensating" hit on the OB? This, in turn, would allow the draw to cause the CB to return at an angle.--Of course, the compensation might have been in your aim as well. . . .
This reminds me of a shot that I've only made about 2 out of the 7 or so times I've ever tried it:
"A" is the centerline of the OB to pocket, and the CB is off-center.
"B" is the general direction for position. This is altered by speed/stroke.
The OB doesn't usually go to center-pocket, since the aim has to be compensated with the slight masse. (This makes Fran's long 8-ball shot more impressive--to get that draw angle.)
However, I might add that a major difference is that your shot doesn't require the CB to curve out of line, and then back to the contact point.
05-08-2003, 07:03 PM
Heater, just for the fun of it I tried that shot you drew and was amazed and surprised that it is quite easy. Almost got to the end rail a couple of times. And sometimes it even went toward the bottom right pocket. Most of the time I found that the CB would bounce back off the OB and then the spin on the CB would grab the cloth and move the CB to the right, just like magic. Thanks. Jake
05-08-2003, 07:57 PM
The shot you describe has all the right ingredients for the results you received. I often elevate 5 to 10 degrees to alter the return of a straight-in shot, cheat the pocket if possible, and even add some side to change the angle of entry via squirt.
The example below is a shot I demo when working on masse with someone (using maybe 45 degrees of elevation). The shot that you diagrammed looks the similar to me (using less elevation, less sidespin, and more bottomspin than my example).
05-08-2003, 08:57 PM
Yep. I'm thinking that I must have unconsciously compensated in my aim and maybe I only consciously "thought" that I was aiming for a straight-in shot. Interesting how we do those things without thinking.
05-08-2003, 09:21 PM
That's the same shot Heater diagramed - just going to the left instead of right.
05-09-2003, 09:33 AM
FWIW, you're welcome.
If you think through the aimpoint, it's probably not that hard to make it. I was always just stepping up to it, looking for the position, and then just snapping it off.
Most of the time I would miss by rattling the ball in the pocket mouth.
I also figure that the shot will probably arise due to a bad positioning, so if you're better at that then I am, you probably won't need to shoot it. OTOH, it's a neat shot if you need it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.