Is it possible to throw an object ball? Nope
- Thread starter mohrt
- Start date
Ok, fair enough.
My diagram shows how you can transfer a small amount of spin to an object ball.
I also don't believe in being able to transfer spin or throw to an object ball to make it go around an impeding object ball. I think maybe Ron may have been referring to that.
JoeyA
yeah this is where definitions for terms comes in really handy...
If he was talking about transfering swerve, that's completely different from throw.
Throw is the change of angle due to prolonged (or multiple contacts for those who don't believe that continued contact is possible) contact between CB and OB.
Swerve is the tendency of a ball to curve on the table due to friction with the cloth from sidespin.
The amount of transfered sidespin to the OB is negligable to the point that noticable swerve would not be possible, and definitely not enough to avoid another OB.
Jaden
If he was talking about transfering swerve, that's completely different from throw.
Throw is the change of angle due to prolonged (or multiple contacts for those who don't believe that continued contact is possible) contact between CB and OB.
Swerve is the tendency of a ball to curve on the table due to friction with the cloth from sidespin.
The amount of transfered sidespin to the OB is negligable to the point that noticable swerve would not be possible, and definitely not enough to avoid another OB.
Jaden
I think it's a good demonstration of that. I like the proposition shot below even better. Long bank the ball on the spot to either side of the blocker ball which is in the middle of the normal bank shot. On some tables you can put two blocker balls next to each other and still make the shots.
![CropperCapture[3].png](https://forums.azbilliards.com/data/attachments/132/132431-df57a067d705f55ea5cad6619acf2aa5.jpg "CropperCapture[3].png")
I don't believe it's due to either one. It's due to rubbing friction between the balls during the normal contact time.
pj
chgo
agreed and i didnt mean no throw would be involved meant no curve would be involved but the amount of angular motion would increase form the transferred side spin after contact with the rail.
infact we all do this eveytime when we want to shallow a bank angle with the use of inside english or open up the rebound angle with outside english on the cueball.
What does this rubbing friction do to change the angle????
Ok fine PJ you're right. end of argument
Jaden
Ok fine PJ you're right. end of argument
Jaden
It pushes the OB one way and the CB the opposite way along the tangent line (during normal contact time).
Were we arguing?
pj
chgo
So put up the 10k and prove Ron wrong..so far I see a lot of people who disagree with diagrams but nobody is willing to grab what seems to be a free 10k in their minds. Remember Ron V. is the guy who gave HIS systems to Mika..Niels..Robles..Hopkins..Thorston..Hofstatter and Lee at THEIR request..he wasn't offering..just to name a few (theres many more) so to simply imply he's some above average "coach"..isn't scratching the surface. He's a legend in the Pro's circle so I would pause before I dismiss him with "he's just mad". Mike Sigel says the exact same thing as Ron on this issue..EXACT. I think Sigel might now a little bit more about "throw" than most of us. But maybe you know better then Sigel and Vitello. You might be an unknown pool legend yourself, school us and put up the 10k and lets find out.
Maybe that's what Ron was trying to say: that an object ball can't be made to curve/swerve around another object ball.
JoeyA
Prove him wrong about what? He doesn't admit saying what the OP said he said.
1. Again, Ron hasn't admitted saying there's no such thing as throw. He said there's no such thing as OB curve. I agree with that.
2. Sigel has been proven wrong for years.
Maybe. Better than you too, it seems.
I'm kind of a big deal on AzB...
You don't seem very open to "schooling" from non-legends.
Again, Ron hasn't yet said anything I disagree with. I disagree with what the OP says Ron said. If Ron is betting an OB can't be thrown, I can raise much more than 10K for that bet. Are you going to back Ron?
pj
chgo
What does that mean?
pj
chgo
Good question. Here's my definition...
Throw is the component of the net force (or impulse) imparted on the OB by the CB whose direction is along the tangent line of the contact point.
Had to think carefully about that one.
Here's the definition from my online glossary:
throw: object ball motion away from the impact line (line of centers) due to relative sideways sliding motion between the cue ball and object ball caused by sidespin or a cut angle.
I know that's a mouth full. For a visual definition, with examples, see:
FYI, many illustrations, videos, articles, and other resources related to throw can be found on my throw resource page.
Regards,
Dave
No we weren't not really...
upon further analysis, I can see how the spin and the friction can actually carry the OB in the direction of the spin tangentially to the initial exit angle without increasing the contact time. The way that I was thinking is that the friction would necessarily increase the contact time, and while it may actually increase the contact time, the amount would be negligible and immaterial to the actual effect.
Also, that when the angle is wider the friction can carry the OB along the tangent prior to contact exit, changing the exit angle without sidespin being necessary.
Jaden
upon further analysis, I can see how the spin and the friction can actually carry the OB in the direction of the spin tangentially to the initial exit angle without increasing the contact time. The way that I was thinking is that the friction would necessarily increase the contact time, and while it may actually increase the contact time, the amount would be negligible and immaterial to the actual effect.
Also, that when the angle is wider the friction can carry the OB along the tangent prior to contact exit, changing the exit angle without sidespin being necessary.
Jaden