I use Any Video Converter but there are other ways.
Did Ortmann foul? Bustamante says Yes!
- Thread starter Magog30
- Start date
I use Any Video Converter but there are other ways.
I used the screen capture tool in Pinnacle 19. I think I also used youtube's .25 speed. Pinnacle also does zoom/crop.
http://rowvid.com/?v=qFIgSWvK3hQ
It's a split hit.
I used RowVid at 1/4 speed and frame by frame. The moment of impact is at 3903.16. If you can get it to pause at that moment (I was very lucky to do so), then you can just go back and forth a frame and see that both balls move at the same time.
The issue is that since the 6 is moving laterally to our perspective, it's movement is much larger than the 13's which is moving towards us.
I did a side by side comparison but it's pretty much useless since the movement at that particular frame is so small for both balls. Maybe someone can do one of those overlays?
It's a split hit.
I used RowVid at 1/4 speed and frame by frame. The moment of impact is at 3903.16. If you can get it to pause at that moment (I was very lucky to do so), then you can just go back and forth a frame and see that both balls move at the same time.
The issue is that since the 6 is moving laterally to our perspective, it's movement is much larger than the 13's which is moving towards us.
I did a side by side comparison but it's pretty much useless since the movement at that particular frame is so small for both balls. Maybe someone can do one of those overlays?
Agreed, for the cue ball to take the path it took, the 6 ball had to be contacted first. How can you hit the side of the object ball, and have the cue ball travel in the same direction as the object ball? Impossible.
That's what I was thinking. It seemed like he wanted to kick his ball in after breaking up the cluster. Kind of a crazy attempt. It took him about 5 minutes to shoot the shot. It would have taken me 20 seconds to intentionally foul. Maybe intentionally fouling is frowned upon in German pool, lol.
I had the same questions.
He was playing the time shot, it was call-shot and he called it (you can see
him pointing his cue to the pocket just a few seconds before shooting the shot).
gr. Dave
Last edited:
I disagree. Giving Django ball-in-hand there is suicide. Even if you tie up the 7,14,8 he can untie
them while leaving you snookered in most cases or break up the cluster from a different ball.
The shot Oliver tried wasn't far off from suicide but still better then an intentional foul imo.
gr. Dave
This is how I feel to. To make it a foul he must have just grazed the 6, but it travelled quite a
distance. Instead I think he hit the 13 first with draw (and left) on the cueball, cueball hit the 6
nearly full and the draw made the cueball come back a few inches. Tough call though.
gr. Dave
The ball went in because the pool gods were unhappy with the bad call on the foul.
Gideon
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
What tho is interesting is this. If it was truly a split hit, the cue ball should park one would think, but the resting place of the cue ball was right of the intersection of both balls. But since whitey had forward motion, is it impossible for it too move right of the split hit.
Another had mentioned camera angle, boy there's a game changer. Like when I watch pro golf, the camera angle makes the tee shot look like its going right or left, almost never does it feel like it's going ''down the middle''.
The draw is not in that direction. In your scenario the cue ball would have come back towards him and instead it went close to perpendicular to the path of the 13.
It would be interesting to set up the same shot and see the hits with high speed video.
Bob did you see my post on the previous page?
If it's the one where you said it's a split hit, then yes, I did see it. In fact the frame rate is such that you can't tell whether it was a split hit or not. Both balls have not moved in one frame and have moved in the next. What would a frame half way between the two show?
The path of the cue ball can be explained by hitting the 6 first. The path of the cue ball cannot be explained by hitting the 13 first.
As for a true split hit, the cue ball will stop dead if the two object balls are 90 degrees apart on the surface of the cue ball. This can only happen if the two object balls are (roughly) a US quarter dollar apart (0.93 inches). For any other separation, the cue ball must have some remaining speed in some direction.
You can click on the gear icon at the bottom right hand corner and change the play speed to 1/4 of the normal rate. I've watched it a dozen times and it seems to have been very, very close. The movement of the cue ball would suggest foul but you have to remember the ball slides on new cloth so even with such a short travel, it would've slid into the six if it was legal.
It's unbelievable how people prefer to trust their eyes than doing a simple thought experiment to solve this nonsense argument.
Have Anybody ever heard of " you see what you want to see" ?
Freaking ANGLE please, there is no freaking angle for the CB to go to the RIGHT if it hits the 6 ball first.
Let me do it for you, CB hits the 6 on the left --> CB moves to the left, it then hits the 13, with left english + follow through (as Orthman did) the CB will slide forward in approximately the same direction as it goes before impact.
same thing with the so-called SPLIT, there's still no ANGLE for the CB to go to the right.
The ONLY possibility for the CB to go to the RIGHT as it did in the video is to hit the 13 first so when it hits the 6, it did not hit the 6 on the left side but nearly full in the face ( or even slightly on the right side ), there CB could slide to the right.
Please save us from this misery and put this thread to rest :sorry:
Have Anybody ever heard of " you see what you want to see" ?
Freaking ANGLE please, there is no freaking angle for the CB to go to the RIGHT if it hits the 6 ball first.
Let me do it for you, CB hits the 6 on the left --> CB moves to the left, it then hits the 13, with left english + follow through (as Orthman did) the CB will slide forward in approximately the same direction as it goes before impact.
same thing with the so-called SPLIT, there's still no ANGLE for the CB to go to the right.
The ONLY possibility for the CB to go to the RIGHT as it did in the video is to hit the 13 first so when it hits the 6, it did not hit the 6 on the left side but nearly full in the face ( or even slightly on the right side ), there CB could slide to the right.
Please save us from this misery and put this thread to rest :sorry:
Last edited:
I wouldn't say an intentional foul would be "suicide" if there aren't any solids close to the cluster that Busti can use to easily break it up.
Even if Oliver shot the CB straight into a pocket, his chances would have been much better than his ill-fated attempt on the time shot, which he was probably only 0.5% to make. As it stood, the 7 didn't have a clear path to any pocket, even with BIH.
And even if Oliver did make the 1 in 200 shot, there is absolutely no guarantee he would have a shot on the 8.