CanadianGuy said:

if we could begin to define a criteria it would be a start

golf may be harder, however I have met scores of people who cannot process pool, everything from stroke to understanding basic spin just completely eludes them, even the logic and rule sets around different games confuses alot of people to a significant degree

pool is the easiest of cue sports,
I think games like snooker and carom are tougher than golf,
carom in particular is a total mind f*&@k

Click to expand...

ye im sure people struggling to understand the pool stroke would find the golf swing a breeze

No cue sport is remotely close to golf in terms of difficulty.

Bump

if we could begin to define a criteria it would be a start

golf may be harder, however I have met scores of people who cannot process pool, everything from stroke to understanding basic spin just completely eludes them, even the logic and rule sets around different games confuses alot of people to a significant degree

pool is the easiest of cue sports,
I think games like snooker and carom are tougher than golf,
carom in particular is a total mind f*&@k

3kushn said:

Love Taom chalk, but if you think just because your bridge hand no longer gets blue means it leaves Nothing on the table that can change rebound angles? CB or OB

Think differently.

You still need to clean your table.

I got lazy and didn't vaccume my table for maybe a week and noticed basic system kicks were coming up short.. WTF

Vacuumed and put on clean balls, and problem solved.

Yep, I changed 2 things, so this isn't conclusive.

That said, I change ball sets regularly.

Need to vacuum more I'm thinking.

Taom doesn't eliminate the need to vacuum.

Click to expand...

Bob Jewett posted awhile back about using a DAMP rag to wipe down your cloth and I've been doing it for a couple of months, some of the best advice I've ever had for cleaning my table, I do the cushions and the the bed of the table, just try it once for yourself, you'll see.....

He is a user interface design instructor. Articulate and well educated in his field. This is why his projection system looks simple and clean. His application of it to pool is a little rudimentary, but other projection systems have the opposite problem (good material but lazy UI) he could pair with a known pool instructor to raise the bar on what we should expect from projection systems. Especially the camera feedback.

dendweller said:

I think people that don't golf or golfed very little underestimate how difficult it is to consistently strike the ball well. Forget about scoring, just solidly connect with the ball without hitting the ground first or missing by a quarter of an inch in the other direction and hitting a worm burner.

It's why golf equipment companies keep selling new gear, the promise of making it easier.

Click to expand...

Yup. And scoring is another animal altogether. Once I finally got to the point in my short game where I could cleanly hit the ball reliably, there was still no shortage of shots on the course where I hit it clean, got the trajectory I wanted, landed where I hoped, and still ended up not all that close to the hole because the course designer tricked my eyes. Golf is hard af.

dr_dave said:

FYI, I just posted a new video with a thorough analysis of the call on the final shot in the 2026 8-Ball World Championship. The shot was taken by Aloysius Yapp against Francisco Sanchez Ruiz (FSR). The shot, which was called good, gave Yapp the title and $90,000. Conclusive proof the shot was a foul is provided along with advice on how to judge wrong-ball-first shots like this accurately. Check it out:

​

Enjoy!

Click to expand...

[Cross-post from other thread - simulation seems to match Dr. Dave's analysis, which is expected IMO]

FWIW, I asked ChatGPT to create a physics-based analysis and statistical model (including actual physical parameters as well as information gleaned from Dr. Dave), then run Monte Carlo simulations on extreme right spin shots and then to plot the results of
1) hitting 4 first and
2) hitting 8 first.

I had it run 250,000 attempts and show the results on an overhead of the actual [real world] table. These tests resulted in resting cue ball locations that had no overlap between 8-ball-first and 4-ball-first shots (as would be expected). The estimated end location of the actual shot aligns with a 4-first hit. I then had it run a second simulation at 25% higher speed (10,000 attempts) to show a broader plot.

Below are the graphs and here is ChatGPT's answer: Under standard WPA rules, such contact would constitute a foul. However, absent clear real-time evidence, the original ruling remains valid.

[edit: the object balls are so close, and are separately approximately by the diameter of a ball. Super close hit. The line of centers [arguably] supports that the cue ball path will almost exclusively be because of natural roll after contact. The cue ball contacts the 2nd ball (whatever that is) almost immediately and would lose almost all movement along the tangent line. The resulting location is largely a result roll.

-td

Bob Jewett said:

One way to answer that question is to answer instead:

For the top 100 players in each sport, how many hours of practice did it take them to break into the top 100?

Next: Which is harder, chess or curling?

Click to expand...

This is a great point. I didn't start playing golf until later in life, and I've often wondered if I had the opportunity to practice at the range or on a course every time I've screwed my cue together and hit balls, how good of a golfer would I be. The amount of practice hours is vastly different. With our weather, I probably average 6-10 rounds of golf a year.