He demonstrates the elemental application of draw to the situation; getting the primary ball to roll. Since the effective zone of this principle is so small <straightish in>, application of draw or just hitting low might be a function of trying to hit the primary ball as accurately as possible.
Getting a object ball to follow thru?
- Thread starter alphadog
- Start date
About 30 years ago I had a lesson with Mark Wilson in St. Louis, he said there's top spin and there's Pro Top Spin. He hit the CB pretty dam high.
I have read many times there is no such thing as force follow, overspin, whatever someone chooses to call it. I have also seen the cue ball hit a ball, start on the tangent line, and take off forwards like a scalded ass ape. So far I haven't had much success explaining to someone that the shot wasn't possible while they are picking up my cash!
Hu
I've done that accidentally by hitting too low and off center. I think the effect is something like those fouette shots Dr. Dave detailed. Regardless something in that stroke gets high roll without high ball speed - kinda like it would act if you rolled the CB from across the table. I've seen Aranas and Reyes do it deliberately.
Of course "force follow" is real. This is all from Dr. Dave (so you probably already know it)...Overspin is created by a rolling cue ball hitting an object ball. The collision causes the cue ball to gain more topspin than a rolling cue ball and dive forward of the tangent line. For a long shot, you may only need speed, e.g. a center ball hit, because the cue ball may stop sliding at some point on the way to the object ball and roll. For a short shot, you will need instant roll--you don't want the cue ball to slide into the object ball and result in a stop shot--and instant roll can be achieved by hitting the cue ball at a point that is 40% of the radius above the equator (the miscue limit is 50% of the radius). The faster the cue ball travels on small angle cuts, i.e. closer to straight in, the more overspin the cue ball gains from the collision.
You can get overspin on the cue ball without colliding with another ball if you hit the top of the cue ball at the miscue limit, but the overspin wears off so quickly--and the cue ball begins to roll--that there may not be any practical use for doing that.
Applied to the op's question, you want the first object ball to have as much speed as possible while still rolling into the second object ball. If the two object balls are so close together that the first object ball won't be rolling when it strikes the second object ball, then hitting the cue ball with backspin can transfer a small amount of topspin to the first object ball. Hitting backspin on the cue ball when the first object ball is going to roll into the second object ball anyway is useless.
Last edited:
I think this is false if the cue stick is (pretty) level. It is certainly possible to hit sidespin such that the opposite side of the cue ball is moving back towards you.
You can see that this is true with a thought experiment. Imagine a car tire sitting freely in a parking lot. You then take a baseball bat and swing at the tire, just barely skimming the top. The tire will not spin in place before it moves forward because the downward component of force of the impact increases the friction between the tire and the ground.
If you repeat this experiment with the tire on a skating rink you will get the same result.
The curved surface of the top of the tire (or ball) means that the higher you try to hit the ball, the more downward component and more friction, bounding the bottom of the tire/ball as a fulcrum.
You would need an almost frictionless surface to break the fulcrum and cause the bottom of the ball to move negatively. A ball hit with side spin is not bounded horizontally, and a ball hit with draw is not bounded vertically. Top spin is the only situation that “traps” the ball against two points.
Last edited:
So if you hit real high on the the cueball and it skips a little it may actually spin faster then it is rolling for a short ways?
I hit the shot quite well that is cueball near the head rail and object ball is 3 diamonds out of the far corner pocket needing to be slightly cut. Shoot with top and go thru to the foot rail and back down to the foot rail. I was gambling with a road player and he left that shot. I hit it too good and ending up down and back only to go back once more. He said I never seen that before. Me neither.
I hit the shot quite well that is cueball near the head rail and object ball is 3 diamonds out of the far corner pocket needing to be slightly cut. Shoot with top and go thru to the foot rail and back down to the foot rail. I was gambling with a road player and he left that shot. I hit it too good and ending up down and back only to go back once more. He said I never seen that before. Me neither.
...so the cue ball was 4-5 diamonds from the object ball? Depending on how hard you hit the cue ball, you might have got the same effect hitting center ball. As long as the cue ball achieves full roll before hitting the object ball, it doesn't matter whether you hit top, center, or backspin. The speed of a rolling cue ball and the collision are what create the overspin that makes the cue ball dive forward of the tangent line. Of course, it can be really hard to judge if the cue ball will achieve full roll before hitting the object ball, so we hit the cue ball high to make sure it's rolling when it hits the object ball, but it pays to know that you don't have to hit the cueball anywhere near the miscue limit to achieve a full rolling cue ball on a fast, long shot.
Last edited:
Are you aware of the real experiments that have actually been done on a pool table and recorded with high-speed video?
Badpenguin
Well-known member
Evidence? Science? This is America, pooh pooh on all that.
These are both close to the miscue limits. No part of the ball moves towards the player.
it's "the skill shot", it's an e8b expression. there's also the "loss of turn (shot)".
You can hit farther from center.
These are both close to the miscue limits. No part of the ball moves towards the player.
For those interested, here is a previous thread about the limits of extreme spin on the cue ball (right off the tip):
The Myth of Top Spin???
Im refering to the article by Tom Simpson in the May/June Indide Pool Mag, page 26. Has anyone else who's read this article come away with disbelief as I did? Mr Simpson says top spin doesn't exist, that overspin means the cue ball would be spinning faster than it is rolling and THAT DOESN"T...
forums.azbilliards.com
Last edited:
The easiest way to see that you can get part of the cue ball to move back towards you with extreme spin is to have the cue ball nearly frozen to an object ball and shoot a very thin cut shot with outside side spin. You can throw the ball backwards.
Several, along with the math and physics can be found here:
You said it Hu!!
I'll use the upper limit on some bank shots where the ob is frozen to the rail and you'll double kiss any other way. Crank up the dial, the cb hits the ob, backs up a tad and shoots off down the rail like a scalded dog. You can also kill the cb right on the rail after ob contact if shot requires it. Depends on the shape you want.
You can do some crazy stuff w high, if you play around with it. Stroke em, don't poke em.
Depending on how you were taught, miscue limit is different for some players. Get so far out on the cb you wonder how they hit it. CB sits there spinning for 20 seconds giving you time to eat your sandwich b4 the next shot.
Last edited:
H
Grady was an expert on those shots.