PDA

View Full Version : Inside english rail shot



bluewolf
10-21-2003, 05:49 AM
I struggled with this shot trying to get it right with centerball and/or outside english. It seems to work better for me with a touch of inside.Maybe I am aiming left of pocket on the left long rail? Any ideas why or if this is what I am doing?

START(
%AW7X3%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pg9Y3%WX7X5%Xf8Y6%]B8[0%^V9X2
)END

Thanks in advance.

Laura

tateuts
10-21-2003, 06:11 PM
Laura,

The pocket is small at this angle, so this is a stroke tester. Any flaw in your stroke, or head/body movement while you shoot, will be magnified.

What you want to do is roll this softly centerball until you get a good feel for the aim on this shot. Then progressively shoot it a little harder (but don't fire it) until you can sink it every time. Important: Keep your head and your body very still, very quiet. Look at where you're aiming when it's going in it's more of a straight shot than a cut.

Your mind says "cut the shot" because it's an illusion. Using any kind of spin to aim with is a dangerous trap. I'm still trying to de-program myself from spinning the ball. First, you want to learn all the shots with centerball (center, low, and high) then learn how to use spin to steer the cue ball around.

I've found this shot hits a little cleaner with a half-tip of low center. This imparts follow on the object ball which helps sink the ball off the corner rails.


Chris

randyg
10-22-2003, 06:43 AM
CHRIS: What an excellent piece of advice for Laura. Well done.

Would you do me a favor and explain the physics of your statement in the last paragraph, please...randyg

bluewolf
10-22-2003, 07:13 AM
Thanks for your suggestion Chris.But, if using cb, how do you compensate for throw? In using oe, I tended to either use too much or not enough.For some reason, I think I am looking at the cut angle, aiming at the left tip and putting 1/2 tip ie, and it goes in.

This other one has to do with position on the opposite corner shot or if I have to shoot at the corner at the opposite end of the table after the first shot. Please disregard the rack of balls in the middle. I did not move them out of the way but they are not really there but pocketed or not obstructing the shots.

START(
%AW7X3%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%El6V4%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NE0F7%OJ5M0%Pg9Y3%WX7X5%Xf8Y6%]B8[0%^V9X2
)END

Fl told me that (in one of our many conversations) and I hope I am not misstating this that OE was more natural.He has much more delicate cb control than I, however.

Since I am not that great at position, running english tends to get away from me and unless I am very very careful on my ball speed.I have had oe get away from me in a match before if I was too nervous and screw up position.This has also happened to a less degree with centerball also.

When I use ie and it often kills the cb on the rail, it tends to leave me in position for a nearby shot if hit soft or if hit firm, go a couple of rails and end up in the middle of the table. It just has seemed to give me a larger margin of error.

I still do use centerball on some shots and oe but need work on those for position. Ultimately the goal is to use any hit I need depending on where I want the cb to go but I am not there yet. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Laura

10-22-2003, 08:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bluewolf:</font><hr> I struggled with this shot trying to get it right with centerball and/or outside english. It seems to work better for me with a touch of inside.Maybe I am aiming left of pocket on the left long rail? Any ideas why or if this is what I am doing?

START(
%AW7X3%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pg9Y3%WX7X5%Xf8Y6%]B8[0%^V9X2
)END

Thanks in advance.

Laura

<hr /></blockquote>

Ah so Grasshopper, as long as you ask questions and continue to learn, the game always remains fresh and exciting. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

CrispyFish
10-22-2003, 08:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bluewolf:</font><hr> Thanks for your suggestion Chris.But, if using cb, how do you compensate for throw? In using oe, I tended to either use too much or not enough.For some reason, I think I am looking at the cut angle, aiming at the left tip and putting 1/2 tip ie, and it goes in.<hr /></blockquote>
My guess -- and it's really just a guess -- is that you're actually aiming wrong and the deflection from the inside english is correcting your aim.

Here's a suggestion: try doing some progressive shot drills, hitting each shot with 9 different hits: center, top, bottom, left, right, top left, top right, bottom left, bottom right. When you miss a shot, note the direction that you missed in and adjust accordingly. Keep hitting that shot with the same english until you're sure you know how to make it. Over time, what you *think* is right will start to match up much better with what's *actually* right.

I've been doing this drill 3 times a week for the last few weeks, and my shotmaking has improved TREMENDOUSLY.

Hope that helps.

-CF

tateuts
10-22-2003, 08:35 AM
Laura,

I'm confused as to what you're asking. However, I'm going to try to explain why a lot of people miss this shot.

English (meaning right and left) should only primarily be used to change the angle on a shot in order to move the cue ball certain way, or to put spin on the cue ball to make it move a certain direction off the rail.

The main problem is this: on these rail shots the pocket size is cut down a bit. At this angle, a 4 1/2" pocket is reduced to 3 1/2". So if you go adding the english and the accompanying complication of throw and squirt and you're shooting at a 3 1/2" hole with some speed, well, the ball's going to rattle a lot unless you're stroke is dead on.

As far as making the ball in the pocket goes, people look at these and think "cut" because of the angle, but the shot is closer to straight in than most people think. In other words, they usually miss this shot by overcutting it.

You should try just aiming slightly right of center of the object ball. You want to be in the dead center of the cue ball. A slight draw stroke helps because it puts follow on the object ball, so it's less likely to rattle out if it hits the edge first.


Most good players would not want to hit this shot with inside unless they were trying to get some goofy action on the cueball. outside is common on this to bring the cueball back toward the head of the table off the rail. Draw or follow, or just a little english, can get the ball most places you need to go.

I think the reason why you find it easier to pocket the ball with IE is because the english is correcting your aim by spinning ohe object ball back to where you should be aiming with center anyway.

Chris

pooltchr
10-22-2003, 08:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CrispyFish:</font><hr> Here's a suggestion: try doing some progressive shot drills, hitting each shot with 9 different hits: center, top, bottom, left, right, top left, top right, bottom left, bottom right. When you miss a shot, note the direction that you missed in and adjust accordingly. Keep hitting that shot with the same english until you're sure you know how to make it. Over time, what you *think* is right will start to match up much better with what's *actually* right.

I've been doing this drill 3 times a week for the last few weeks, and my shotmaking has improved TREMENDOUSLY.

Hope that helps.

-CF <hr /></blockquote>

Excellent Advise!!!!! When any shot is giving you problems, work on it until you get it right. Mark the table so you are setting up the exact same shot every time. (those little paper re-enforcements are great for this) Once you get the response you are looking for, increase the distances and keep after it.

tateuts
10-22-2003, 09:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote randyg:</font><hr> CHRIS: What an excellent piece of advice for Laura. Well done.

Would you do me a favor and explain the physics of your statement in the last paragraph, please...randyg <hr /></blockquote>

Well, I haven't conducted a study on it, but as a player I've found that hitting this shot with low center pockets the ball more often.

Here's why I think that happens. Hitting the cue ball with draw puts follow on the OB. Since you're shooting at a smaller pocket from this angle, the object ball hits the short rail in the corner first before dropping, or actually even hits the side rail first.

When the OB has follow on it and hits one of these rails at this angle, it tends to continue it's forward momentum anyway and get into the hole. Draw tends to make it skid and rattle.

Personally, that's why I think it's a lot harder to pocket rail shots with hard follow on the cue ball - the draw put on the object ball tends to throw it right out of the pocket.

Chris

Fred Agnir
10-22-2003, 09:46 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bluewolf:</font><hr> I struggled with this shot trying to get it right with centerball and/or outside english. It seems to work better for me with a touch of inside.Maybe I am aiming left of pocket on the left long rail? Any ideas why or if this is what I am doing?
<hr /></blockquote> Where does the object ball go when you use centerball or outside english (right hand in this case, correct?)

How hard (in table lengths) are you shooting?

I'm guessing that you are missing to the same side of the pocket with both center ball and with outside english. Which side? Right or left?

Fred &lt;~~~ has some guesses, but it's awful tough on the screen

bluewolf
10-22-2003, 10:11 AM
Right. Soft speed or medium speed if I need the cb to go 2 rails. I found that with centerball, in an experiment after I read these posts, that it goes in if I aim at the left tip. Still have not gotten the oe right however.Will have to experiment some more on that to find the right amount.

One thing, for the last month when I was out of town, I was on tight pocket tables. My table at home also has tight pockets. So maybe this is part of it too,having even less of a pocket to shoot at.

Straight in shots go straight in [or into the right side of the pocket,slightly off dead center but cleanly in] if that helps. I may hit a tad off center because the long ones sometimes put the cueball at the right tip instead of following the object ball into the pocket. So if I am 1/8 tip off to the left, that may mean I am using 5/8 left english when I think I am using 4/8. If I use top on a short [less than 3 foot shot]straight in as an experiment, the cb follows the ob into the pocket.

Laura

randyg
10-22-2003, 11:06 AM
CHRIS: Are you positive you can transfer draw &amp; follow to an object ball????....randyg

Fred Agnir
10-22-2003, 11:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bluewolf:</font><hr> Right. Soft speed or medium speed if I need the cb to go 2 rails. I found that with centerball, in an experiment after I read these posts, that it goes in if I aim at the left tip. Still have not gotten the oe right however.Will have to experiment some more on that to find the right amount.<hr /></blockquote>

When you say, "tip" are you talking about the left "point" of the pocket? If so, then this is perfectly normal. You're compensating for collison/cut induced throw.

When you use OE, where does the object ball go?

Fred

bluewolf
10-22-2003, 11:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> I found that with centerball, in an experiment after I read these posts, that it goes in if I aim at the left tip. Still have not gotten the oe right however.Will have to experiment some more on that to find the right amount.<hr /></blockquote>

When you say, "tip" are you talking about the left "point" of the pocket? If so, then this is perfectly normal. You're compensating for collison/cut induced throw.

When you use OE, where does the object ball go?

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

For centerball, I can get it in if I aim at the left point, historically called the 'tit'. The problem I think I am having with oe is putting too much or not enough. If I put too much it hits the long rail to the left of the pocket. If I do not put enough, it still hits to the right of the pocket on the short rail.

I know I need to practice this because I need to be able to do all types of hits for each shot for position.

I thought that I was dealing with throw too. Dont know why the ie was easier to figure out. If I put the same amount of oe as I am putting ie, the ob is missing to the right.At least that is the way it seems.

For some reason, when the cb is about 2 inches out from the rail and the ob is out a little more, cutting it back to the corner I drew is easier with ie[centerball i have figured out too thanks to these posts] than oe. When the situation is reversed and the ob is 2 inches out from the rail, with the cb out a little like 4 inches, oe is easier for me. Dont know why.

Laura

Fred Agnir
10-22-2003, 01:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bluewolf:</font><hr> For centerball, I can get it in if I aim at the left point, historically called the 'tit'. The problem I think I am having with oe is putting too much or not enough. If I put too much it hits the long rail to the left of the pocket. If I do not put enough, it still hits to the right of the pocket on the short rail. <hr /></blockquote>

When you say "put too much," what do you mean? Do you mean you hit farther out from center or do you mean you're hitting the same point from center, only harder.

I'd like to see you shoot this shot, Laura. From everything you're saying, it most likely has little to do with throw. I think it's a combination of aim, swerve, and ... squirt. Not necessarily in that order

Fred

tateuts
10-22-2003, 01:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote randyg:</font><hr> CHRIS: Are you positive you can transfer draw &amp; follow to an object ball????....randyg <hr /></blockquote>

Randy,

Yes - the cue ball imparts exactly the reverse spin to the object ball on impact. For example, right english imparts left spin on the object ball and vice versa, draw imparts follow, etc. Follow doesn't really impart much draw because there are physical limitations, but you get the idea.

This knowledge is important when executing combinations. Here's a pretty good demonstration of draw being converted to object ball follow:


START(
%Aq9E2%Br8D4%Pi8M1
)END

WEI Table (http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/pooltable2.html)

Hit the one ball head on with center or follow, and the one ball stays put, no matter how hard you shoot. Hit it with draw, which puts follow on the one, and watch the one roll forward into the pocket. Same holds true if you move the one ball out away from the two (it's just harder to make the shot).

This is more than just a trick shot - this is useful information. I've seen more than one case of a player not realizing they were imparting spin on an object ball, and throwing a combo off. Another example is a player making a combo on a hanger and accidentally sinking both balls - leaving themselves out of position on the next shot.

Chris

Fred Agnir
10-22-2003, 02:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote randyg:</font><hr> CHRIS: Are you positive you can transfer draw &amp; follow to an object ball????....randyg <hr /></blockquote>

Randy,

Yes - ... Follow doesn't really impart much draw because there are physical limitations, but you get the idea. <hr /></blockquote> I think that's one point Randy was getting at.

[ QUOTE ]
This knowledge is important when executing combinations. Here's a pretty good demonstration of draw being converted to object ball follow:


START(
%Aq9E2%Br8D4%Pi8M1
)END

WEI Table (http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/pooltable2.html)

Hit the one ball head on with center or follow, and the one ball stays put, no matter how hard you shoot.<hr /></blockquote>

Speaking of knowledge... you might be surprised to find that you can indeed make the one ball follow into the pocket with a centerball shot. Follow is tough for you or me to prove since the cueball will... follow into the object ball. If try the centerball shot again, you might find yourself scratching your head as you recall your post.

Two "knowledge" ideas to chew on:
elastic collision
10 times fuller system

Fred

bluewolf
10-22-2003, 02:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> When you say "put too much," what do you mean? Do you mean you hit farther out from center or do you mean you're hitting the same point from center, only harder.

I'd like to see you shoot this shot, Laura. From everything you're saying, it most likely has little to do with throw. I think it's a combination of aim, swerve, and ... squirt. Not necessarily in that order

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Too far out from the center. Too much oe like 1.5 when it should have been 1 tip.

Laura

tateuts
10-22-2003, 03:25 PM
OK - I'll try it tonight.

Chris

randyg
10-22-2003, 05:18 PM
Thanks FRED. You sure understand where I was leading the person to. Just having fun.....randyg

10-22-2003, 05:48 PM

tateuts
10-22-2003, 06:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote randyg:</font><hr> Thanks FRED. You sure understand where I was leading the person to. Just having fun.....randyg <hr /></blockquote>

Thanks Randy G,

I thought the original question was sincere. My suggestion is, if you disagree with something I say, or something anyone says, or would like to present a different point of view from your vast arsenal of knowledge, I would appreciate it if you just said it.

Your coy behavior is immature, smug, and manipulative, and you wasted my time.

Chris

tateuts
10-22-2003, 06:28 PM
Very hard center did work too as you suggested - but I suspect for an entirely different reason, possibly rebounding back off the cue ball. Is that right?

Also, thanks for pointing out that Randy G was jerking me off - what a monumental waste of time that clown is.

Chris

Rod
10-23-2003, 12:07 AM
WW,

I have to admit that this thread is confusing at best. My reading comprenhension must be getting poor. No matter, I still don't get the light off center being part of the solution. If lighting was a problem, then you learn it on one side and carry aim over to the other side. I don't think you nuts, yet. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif I have a question, why don't you just center the light if you think it's that big of a deal?

Rod

bluewolf
10-23-2003, 03:58 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr> WW,

I have to admit that this thread is confusing at best. My reading comprenhension must be getting poor. No matter, I still don't get the light off center being part of the solution. If lighting was a problem, then you learn it on one side and carry aim over to the other side. I don't think you nuts, yet. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif I have a question, why don't you just center the light if you think it's that big of a deal?

Rod
<hr /></blockquote>

Ray does better with this because he is better than me.After he saw that i was having so much problem with this, he decided to get an electrician to install a good pool light which is centered. I was shooting better when I was home on those tight pockets so I guess in that pool hall the light was okay.

My eyes are not that great anyway so until I am good enough to shoot by feel, I guess I need the light.

Your suggestions are good however.

Laura

Fred Agnir
10-23-2003, 06:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote whitewolf:</font><hr> It appears that she was having problems with cuts on the side with the poorer lighting.

On a side note, it took me six months to a year to figure this out. <hr /></blockquote>
I think this lighting problem is all too common. I know it sounds like an excuse for missing, but that "excuse" has been discussed by so many top players that I think it's worth a look.

Good lighting is important. The Diamond light, IMO, is the best light in the business hands down. It has no competition.

Fred

Fred Agnir
10-23-2003, 06:50 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> Very hard center did work too as you suggested - but I suspect for an entirely different reason, possibly rebounding back off the cue ball. Is that right?

Also, thanks for pointing out that Randy G was jerking me off - what a monumental waste of time that clown is.

Chris <hr /></blockquote>

Easy there, Chris. I don't think Randy was "jerking you off." And he's certainly no clown. It's a double-edge (or triple-edge) sword for an instructor to partake in a discussion. If s/he states something emphatically, s/he'll be accused of being a know-it-all or playing the "higher authority trump card." If s/he states something with an effort to motivate more discussion or experimentation, s/he'll be accused of playing coy. If s/he states something in more of an inquisitive nature, people might question if s/he knows anything at all.

These three things plague all the well-known instructors that have visited this board. Fran, Scott, Randy, and yes... even FL.

Fred

randyg
10-23-2003, 06:52 AM
Chris: Sorry to offend you, my apologies.

Straight to the point. Transfer of top/bottom spin from a cueball to a lone object ball is marginal at best. At collision the object ball first takes the directional energy from the cueball. Secondly the object ball immediately leaves in a skid before table friction forces the object ball into Natural roll.....randyg

Fred Agnir
10-23-2003, 07:03 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> Very hard center did work too as you suggested - but I suspect for an entirely different reason, possibly rebounding back off the cue ball. Is that right?
<hr /></blockquote>I think it's a matter of the inelastic collision. The balls do compress, albeit an extremely small amount. But it's enough that the decompression will send the first object ball forward.

I think draw works better on this because the minute amount of elastic effect plus the minute amount of spin transfer are working in the same direction. And it is pretty minute, IMO. But it's enough to make this particular shot. In fact, I'm not really convinced that draw puts follow on the object ball, as much as I think draw helps to get the object ball into a natural forward roll more readily.

Try this experiment (I will, too): Hit a full-face draw on a single striped ball.. Note if it skids first, or does it roll immediately. If it skids, then spin wasn't transferred.

Fred

SPetty
10-23-2003, 08:11 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> Try this experiment (I will, too): Hit a full-face draw on a single striped ball.. Note if it skids first, or does it roll immediately. If it skids, then spin wasn't transferred. <hr /></blockquote>I have actually done this over and over, looking for the transfer of spin. I could never see any transfer of spin.

I also did it with sidespin, attempting to transfer side spin and could never see that transfer of spin either, although the throw was evident.

tateuts
10-23-2003, 08:26 AM
The point was, I was trying to help Laura learn how to make a shot which I sincerely thought she was having a problem with.

You seized upon a small part of what I wrote in order to prove me wrong. In doing so you were rude, manipulative, and condescending. Well, that pretty much sums up what I've found virtually all poor instructors to be like. Good knowledge but poor people skills and smug.

The smug part is what upsets me.

Chris

Fred Agnir
10-23-2003, 08:30 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr> I have actually done this over and over, looking for the transfer of spin. I could never see any transfer of spin.

I also did it with sidespin, attempting to transfer side spin and could never see that transfer of spin either, although the throw was evident. <hr /></blockquote>The sidespin transfer is the one I would expect the most of, since the table cloth doesn't act against it. There is enough sidespin transfer to influence banks considerably. But how much? I think we can measure it with a video camera and a marking the object ball with a piece of tape or something. Maybe the Jacksonville Tapes have it.

IIRC, the last I tried to do this, the object ball barely turned. Again, barely, but enough to influence banks significantly. Especially at shorter ranges.

Fred

randyg
10-23-2003, 10:06 AM
CRIS: Proving you wrong? You did that yourself. Laura dosen't need any more wrong information in her game.

Once again, I apologize. Smug or Smog, life is too short to carry this any further....randyg

tateuts
10-23-2003, 10:07 AM
The gear effect is definitely there, but it's small. There are one pocket shots where you can hit what would be impossible backward banks by imparting spin on the object ball.

I'll try to set up some shots tonight to demonstrate this.

Chris

tateuts
10-23-2003, 10:13 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote randyg:</font><hr> Chris: Sorry to offend you, my apologies.

Straight to the point. Transfer of top/bottom spin from a cueball to a lone object ball is marginal at best. At collision the object ball first takes the directional energy from the cueball. Secondly the object ball immediately leaves in a skid before table friction forces the object ball into Natural roll.....randyg <hr /></blockquote>

Absolutely 100% wrong. Spin is transferred to the object ball. It may be a small amount, but it's there and it has an effect on the shots.

Chris

DoomCue
10-23-2003, 10:13 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> *SNIP*

In fact, I'm not really convinced that draw puts follow on the object ball, as much as I think draw helps to get the object ball into a natural forward roll more readily.

*SNIP*

Try this experiment (I will, too): Hit a full-face draw on a single striped ball.. Note if it skids first, or does it roll immediately. If it skids, then spin wasn't transferred.

Fred<hr /></blockquote>
Fred,

I'm not sure I'm reading the statement I snipped out correctly. If spin is not transferred to the OB, then how could contact help the "object ball into a natural forward roll more readily?" It seems to me intuitively, if this is true, that some force other than the collision itself is at work, which is probably spin.

I'm not sure if your proposed experiment to test this is valid. There are two factors at work in your experiment. One is the force of the collision, the other is what you're testing for, which is spin or lack thereof. If the collision force is greater than the spin, then the OB should ALWAYS skid first. That doesn't necessarily prove the lack of a spin transfer. It's difficult to empirically prove whether there is a spin transfer to an OB, especially when we're just eye-balling it.

Anyway, I have another proposition for an experiment. Using draw, follow, center (those are what I call vertical axis contact, or VAC), shoot the CB at an OB to bank it and see if there's a difference in the paths the OB takes after coming off the rail. Use center ball as the control. Mark the end point with a piece of chalk, and compare results using different VAC. Probably should plot those paths on a graph, but that might be taking this "experiment" a little too far. Obviously, to reduce variability, make sure the contact point on the rail is the same, and the stroke force is the same throughout the experiment. In addition, make sure the OB is not being cut into the rail, as that introduces throw as a variable. Also, if we can assume the amount of spin that MIGHT be transferred is small, the OB should be placed fairly close to the rail. Since we know the effects of VAC on the CB coming off a rail (draw comes up short, follow goes long), we should see the same results if spin is transferred to the OB, right? Drawing the CB should place follow on the OB, causing the OB to go long, and vice versa when following with the CB. If the paths are different using different VAC, then spin must be transferred (or else there's another variable I haven't accounted for, which is entirely possible). I won't be seeing a table until tomorrow night, so if you have a chance to test this (both your experiment and mine) before I do, let me know your findings.

Intuitively, I feel that VAC spin is transferred, just as sidespin is (which might trigger another debate, I know), so I expect the paths the OB takes to be different.

BTW, I enjoyed meeting you and some of the other CCB'ers (Ross, Eric, Tom, Jimbo, et al) at the Open!

-djb &lt;--- generally hates physics-type discussions, but hey, I'm curious about this one

bluewolf
10-23-2003, 11:03 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> The gear effect is definitely there, but it's small. There are one pocket shots where you can hit what would be impossible backward banks by imparting spin on the object ball.

I'll try to set up some shots tonight to demonstrate this.

Chris <hr /></blockquote>

It appears that many fine instructors and players have different opinions on this. To me it does seem that there is a gear affect. Just like throw, people disagree. Some say english does not affect the object ball.Some even say that english only has an impact when hitting the rail.If this were the case, then why does english 'throw' the ob into the pocket and why would players use english on banks to throw the balls so that the angle would be such that the ball is pocketed? Futhermore, why would pros use english if it did not throw the ball?

All of these different opinions are interesting.

Laura

Fred Agnir
10-23-2003, 11:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DoomCue:</font><hr> Fred,

I'm not sure I'm reading the statement I snipped out correctly. If spin is not transferred to the OB, then how could contact help the "object ball into a natural forward roll more readily?" It seems to me intuitively, if this is true, that some force other than the collision itself is at work, which is probably spin. <hr /></blockquote> I'm speculating that in the case of the frozen pair, by drawing the ball, the cueball gets away from the object ball. In fact, a true center ball hit I think would have the cueball bouncing backwards anyway. But if the cueball actually stopped, I think the final analysis of the three ball problem (3 body problem) is that the object ball will only go forward as long as the cueball goes backward.

Again, I'm just speculating based on my understanding of a frozen three object collision.

BTW, I didn't say that spin wasn't transferred. But, I don't think it would be fair to call what's happening as the "gear effect" either. 3-5% has been suggested. I'd guess less. It's enough to change bank angles.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure if your proposed experiment to test this is valid. There are two factors at work in your experiment. One is the force of the collision, the other is what you're testing for, which is spin or lack thereof. If the collision force is greater than the spin, then the OB should ALWAYS skid first. <hr /></blockquote> If spin is tranferred, shouldn't it happen during contact.? Spin should happen immediately in conjunction with forward motion. Why should it skid first? Shouldn't the angular velocity be independant of the linear velocity?

A test to see how much spin is actually transferred from draw to follow is to setup the same combination, except don't have them frozen (less than 1mm apart should suffice). Any linear velocity of the 1st object ball will be transferred immediately so that all that is left is spin. The first object ball will probably crawl forward an inch. That's how much follow is transferred from spin.


[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, I have another proposition for an experiment. Using draw, follow, center (those are what I call vertical axis contact, or VAC), shoot the CB at an OB to bank it and see if there's a difference in the paths the OB takes after coming off the rail<hr /></blockquote>I'm 100% sure this setup has too many variables, and that people have been coming to a misled conclusion for years. Wouldn't it be easier to video-tape the collision and play it in relatively slow motion. You wouldn't need super duper slow motion to see the amount of spin transfer there is. Just super slow. Like the step function on most VCRs

Fred

SPetty
10-23-2003, 11:07 AM
Yep, I remember those discussions. The empirical evidence clearly demonstrates that there obviously must be spin on the object ball, even if it can't be seen. The discussion was about hitting the object ball straight into the end cushion with lots of spin on the cue ball. You can't (well, I can't) see the object ball spin, but it obviously does based on the angle it comes off the rail.

Clearly, this is simply a case of pool magic.

tateuts
10-23-2003, 11:39 AM
Anyway, before I was interrupted, the point was originally that I said the shot Laura set up was cleaner to pocket with a small amount of draw. I speculated, probably incorrectly, that it's because follow is being put on the object ball. From what Fred and (gulp) randyG have said it's probably not enough follow to make much difference. But still, I swear, the shot goes in better with a tip of low. I wonder if it's possible that the collision between the object ball and the cue ball is "cleaner". Am I crazy?


Chris

pooltchr
10-23-2003, 11:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> I swear, the shot goes in better with a tip of low. I wonder if it's possible that the collision between the object ball and the cue ball is "cleaner". Am I crazy?


Chris <hr /></blockquote>
Just a thought here...Is it possible you are personally more comfortable stroking a bit below center. I know I am more confident at or above center on the vertical axis, and it shows in the accuracy of my shots. I probably make some kind of subconscious adjustment when aiming below center. I'm not saying this is the case, just asking about the possibility.

Fred Agnir
10-23-2003, 12:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> I wonder if it's possible that the collision between the object ball and the cue ball is "cleaner". Am I crazy?


Chris <hr /></blockquote> I think that a cueball ball with follow or draw will have less collision throw than a sliding cueball.

Fred

DoomCue
10-23-2003, 12:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr><blockquote><font class="small">Quote doomcue:</font><hr> *SNIP*

I'm not sure if your proposed experiment to test this is valid. There are two factors at work in your experiment. One is the force of the collision, the other is what you're testing for, which is spin or lack thereof. If the collision force is greater than the spin, then the OB should ALWAYS skid first. <hr /></blockquote> If spin is tranferred, shouldn't it happen during contact.? Spin should happen immediately in conjunction with forward motion. Why should it skid first? Shouldn't the angular velocity be independant of the linear velocity?<hr /></blockquote>

Sorry, I guess during my editing I left out a couple of very important words. My statement should have read, "If the collision force is greater than the spin, then the OB should ALWAYS appear to skid first." In fact, this is exactly what I've observed to occur in the past, it seems the OB skids, then rolls (but I've learned not to trust a lot of what my eyes tell me). But yes, absolutely, linear and angular velocities should be independent, it's just hard to see the results with the naked eye.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr>A test to see how much spin is actually transferred from draw to follow is to setup the same combination, except don't have them frozen (less than 1mm apart should suffice). Any linear velocity of the 1st object ball will be transferred immediately so that all that is left is spin. The first object ball will probably crawl forward an inch. That's how much follow is transferred from spin.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote doomcue:</font><hr>Anyway, I have another proposition for an experiment. Using draw, follow, center (those are what I call vertical axis contact, or VAC), shoot the CB at an OB to bank it and see if there's a difference in the paths the OB takes after coming off the rail<hr /></blockquote>I'm 100% sure this setup has too many variables, and that people have been coming to a misled conclusion for years. Wouldn't it be easier to video-tape the collision and play it in relatively slow motion. You wouldn't need super duper slow motion to see the amount of spin transfer there is. Just super slow. Like the step function on most VCRs

Fred <hr /></blockquote> Well, hell, Fred, I thought using a VCR would be cheating! You just took all the fun out of the academic exercise./ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Your almost frozen-ball solution is definitely more elegant than mine, and easily repeatable. I would rather use that than my bank solution. However, you can't test the effects of using follow on the CB with that setup, since the CB will just run through the OBs. But, since we're just talking about spin transfer using VAC in general, that's moot, your solution would probably be the best way to test whether or not spin transfer occurs.

BTW, what is the "misled conclusion?"

-djb

Fred Agnir
10-23-2003, 12:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DoomCue:</font><hr> BTW, what is the "misled conclusion?"

<hr /></blockquote>
It's just like the "bank the balls hard to shorten the angle." Though true to an extent on the surface, that conclusion was misled to point at the speed of the balls as the main parameter. In fact further testing and isolation shows that the topspin is the major parameter and speed has nothing to do with shortening the angle. Nothing aside from giving the object ball less chance to pick up forward roll when hitting the balls faster.

By your experiment, the the speed of the stroke, the cushion and the cloth will impact the test. And even the most minute change in cut angle can have a profound effect on the rebound. So, the conclusions may be led astray because of the extra variables.

In this case, hit slowly enough, an object ball hit with follow may have topspin by the time it hits the cushion. That would certainly mislead the conclusion.

Fred

tateuts
10-23-2003, 08:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr> I have actually done this over and over, looking for the transfer of spin. I could never see any transfer of spin.

I also did it with sidespin, attempting to transfer side spin and could never see that transfer of spin either, although the throw was evident. <hr /></blockquote>

Here's a pretty good way to see it.

START(
%Ag8V1%Pm1V2%WD0V1%Xf8V0%[q4Z3%\C3V2%]r4Q1%^C5U9%e@)U8

)END

WEI (http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/9egg/)

I shot the object ball straight into the rail with right english, aiming at a piece of chalk. The object ball banks left and toward the pocket, and vice versa with right english. This clearly demonstrates the transfer of spin and works best on a table with good rails and cloth.

I'm still trying to figure out a way of showing the gear effect with draw and follow.

Chris

ras314
10-23-2003, 11:08 PM
On the transfer of top spin to an ob with draw on the cb. Seems to me when trying to make the ob follow another ball into the pocket it goes fairly consistenly (assuming both balls are close to the pocket) if I put draw on the cb. Looks a lot like the natural roll the ob will have from a longer distance.

For me at least, top spin on the cb will not make the ob follow the first ball in.

So, in my ignorance, something similar to transfer of spin must be happening.

tateuts
10-23-2003, 11:31 PM
I'm still trying to come up with a way to demonstrate the effect but it's difficult. I think what we as players are really seeing is the difference between a rolling object ball (like you said - it looks like a natural roll) and a skidding one. I'm beginning to think that the object ball hit with follow (cue ball follow) skids for a while before rolling.

Chris

tateuts
10-24-2003, 08:45 AM
Here's a shot that pretty clearly shows that cue ball draw and follow are transferred to the object ball:

START(
%Aq1I9%Bq9G1%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pp7P2
)END

WEI (http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/pooltable2.html)

Hitting the combo with draw, the one ball cannot be made to stop. Hitting it cleanly with follow, the one ball can be stopped dead - you might have to try it a few times to hit it clean. The collision is the same - so the only difference is the spin on the cue ball.


Chris

tateuts
10-24-2003, 09:12 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ras314:</font><hr>
So, in my ignorance, something similar to transfer of spin must be happening. <hr /></blockquote>

You and I as players know it is happening. We see it and feel it. We know that there are some shots that are easier to pocket with a little english, and some shots we don't even want to think about trying with english.

The people who deny that things like this are possible do so by disregading these experiences. Instead of denying that such things happen, they should be seeking to find out exactly why they do.

Chris

Fred Agnir
10-24-2003, 09:56 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> The people who deny that things like this are possible do so by disregading these experiences. Instead of denying that such things happen, they should be seeking to find out exactly why they do.

Chris <hr /></blockquote>Did anyone deny that the first object ball moves forward? Did anyone deny that spin transfer existed? Are you implying that people who question what is going on aren't players?

Fred

ras314
10-24-2003, 10:56 AM
I believe most good players could care less about the physics. They do know what happens when they use english, probably due to repretition and good memory. Almost as important is the ability to adjust to the table and balls. IMO.

I've been studying the Jacksonville tapes and am suprised at how little spin seems to be transfered. Anyway all this makes the game more interesting to me, though won't make me a better player. It does give me an idea what to try sometimes.

DoomCue
10-24-2003, 11:13 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ras314:</font><hr>Anyway all this makes the game more interesting to me, though won't make me a better player. It does give me an idea what to try sometimes.<hr /></blockquote>

I agree with some of your sentiment, but not totally. Knowledge of physics won't help your game one bit. Knowledge of the application of the physics does a world of good, though. That's what makes a better player. Does it mean you HAVE to know the physics to be good? Nope. But I think it helps, especially if you make an attempt to learn how the physics can be applied. By the last sentence in your statement above, I think you're acknowledging that it does, too. If knowing some of the physics gives you an idea of what to try sometimes, but someone ignorant of the physics doesn't have that knowledge, you have an advantage over the other player.

-djb

Fred Agnir
10-24-2003, 11:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ras314:</font><hr> I believe most good players could care less about the physics. They do know what happens when they use english, probably due to repretition and good memory. Almost as important is the ability to adjust to the table and balls. IMO.<hr /></blockquote> I couldn't agree more.

[ QUOTE ]
I've been studying the Jacksonville tapes and am suprised at how little spin seems to be transfered. Anyway all this makes the game more interesting to me, though won't make me a better player. It does give me an idea what to try sometimes. <hr /></blockquote> Oh wait. I have to agree more. I absolutely 100% agree. Done.

Fred

ras314
10-24-2003, 11:30 AM
I'm too lazy to get out my old physics textbooks. Angular mometum problems have my head turning sideways trying to get directions straight. Then the questions on nonlinear friction, nonelastic collisions, seem to make the whole situation non analytic anyway. Lots of non's there.

Unfourtantly my stroke is not good enought to make trial and effect methods too reliable either. So I'll just have to play more. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

tateuts
10-24-2003, 11:34 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> The people who deny that things like this are possible do so by disregading these experiences. Instead of denying that such things happen, they should be seeking to find out exactly why they do.

Chris <hr /></blockquote>Did anyone deny that the first object ball moves forward? Did anyone deny that spin transfer existed? Are you implying that people who question what is going on aren't players?

Fred <hr /></blockquote>

Not you at all. I think you in particular are the one person I've seen adept at studing the various (complicated) forces at work and applying that knowledge to actual playing conditions.

I know people who probably know more about the physics of pool than anyone on the planet - they model simulations of billiards for video games. When it comes to actually playing the game, they're just like the rest of us; good, bad, baffled, confused, unbeatable, amazing, out of line and why did I bother to get up this morning.

Chris

Rod
10-25-2003, 02:19 PM
I think it all matters, especially when trying to hit the pocket clean. Low might seem to give it a cleaner hit but like Fred, in this case, I like a c/b turning over one direction or the other, no flat liners. LOL Most important to me is a clean smooth stroke.

Making the shot is one thing but depending on position, things noted aboove are subject to change.

Rod