His shot at 4:00 he says is a foul, but it looked good to me (edit: looks like a bad hit on further review). He isn't talking about tangents but rather full hits on the 2nd ball. So, this is a good analysis.
Of course. A thread was started about a still unidentified player beating a regional action player known to a few in a game not identified in a place not identified. That's great information. More threads like this one please!
I agree slow mo shouldn't be used in games. Where the balls go is enough. And if it's too close to call, don't call a damn thing. I just mentioned the slow mo cuz cornerman said he wasn't so sure anymore it was a bad hit. It was.
I'll be clearer. I've seen just as many slow mo videos as anyone else. There is at least one video that it isn't clear at all if the 4-ball was hit first, and it looks like the 8-ball may have been hit first in that video. We literally cannot see the contact point since it's on the other side of the 8-ball. This is why refereess are trained at looking at the cueball path. Unless someone can give me a better analysis on where physics say the cueball would go on a bad hit vs good hit, the cueball path tells me the 4-ball was hit last as it followed the 4-ball tangent and not the 8-ball tangent.
