Search results

Interesting idea. I can’t make a recommendation on whether it makes sense to include the feature. I do think exact cut angle would be useful to know. We obviously know if we over or under cut a ball by where it goes, but it could be useful to learn if you think a shot is more of a cut or less...

Yeah if there is a long history of mixed results, this is less likely to be fraudulent data.

I wonder if Mike Page has any thoughts on this. Depending on how often this is done and what the review process is, it could introduce a systematic bias in the Salotto data.

For those interested in the physics of this shot, this video discusses a similar phenomenon for super balls. It’s the same principle for these banks, but the tangential compliance is in the rail instead of the ball.

Well, I tried tonight for about 15 minutes. I was able to get about 80% of the way back to the side pocket after 5 rails. Diamond table. Hard to keep the ball on the table. Makes me feel like it’s possible but the stars have to align. Maybe fast cloth would help.

I think I’ve gotten close to making it 5 rails, but it’s tough to get enough speed on the ball. Can’t remember if I’d made it or not.. I’ll have to try.

I think the difference in throw between a waxed/lubricated ball and a normal ball could be that large with a slow stun shot at that angle.

This is a pretty good point. I can also think of a scenario where a long safety battle causes both players’ clocks to be low so instead of trying to run out they try to “flag” the other player (make their time run out). I’ll have to think about this more. That might add an interesting element...

I don’t think this particular implementation would work because an inning might last several minutes without returning to the chair. The whole idea of a chess clock is that the time limit is per game, not per shot or inning.

I think a chess clock is the best option, and I'll say that anytime it's mentioned. Maybe it'll catch on eventually. I think this could even operate without any officials/timekeepers. There are options for a delay and an increment which could make it more suited to pool where players need to...

I’ve played some casual 1p games with a chess clock. I think this is the right solution.

Here is the original video with Magnus. The comments discuss this a little. That opening has been played tens of thousands of times. Probably he guessed because the game was notable for some other reason.

It’s real, but I think Magnus’s memory is a bit of an abnormality even among top chess players in the world. I don’t think most grandmasters can do this, and I think that is a fairer comparison to most top pool players. Also, chess has a discrete number of positions. Pool has infinite...

I like this idea. 8.13 clears it up for me. @iusedtoberich have a look.

Yes, object ball. That was an oversight. Maybe “legally pocketed” would be another to way to say it. That would also cover the situation — which I forgot — of pocketing an object ball and also scratching. Rules are hard!

Just out of curiosity, for what reasons do you think it’s the right way to do it? Would you please point me to where this is stated? I’m probably biased because rerack was introduced before I started playing 1p. I think there’s a good argument for rerack even with a referee racking. Yeah...

I'm not experienced with English 8-ball, but I found these rules, which state: So, yes.

I gave the onepocket.org rules a re-read, and read the WPA rules. Here are some interesting differences I noticed: No mention of re-rack option for balls pocketed on the break. Some form of this is pretty much always used these days in my experience matching up. Pretty sure DCC uses it, too. I...

I'm glad to see these changes. Thanks to those involved!

I’ll buy! PM me. Edit: I mistook the shaft diameter, and I'm not interested in 12.9 mm. Sorry!