https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C6cbmMaENE I found it pretty informative.
Cool Dr.Dave racking cheat/no-cheat vid.............
- Thread starter garczar
- Start date
FYI, I posted it in the "SVB cheating?" thread here:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=6081728#post6081728
but maybe it would have been better to start a new thread free from all of the "Fake News" and "alternative facts."
Thanks for posting the link,
Dave
Dr Dave, thanks for your efforts on the video. I'm not exactly following. Are you saying gaps are myths and that having gaps didn't contribute any advantage to the breaker? I'm also not following the logistics behind generalizing the observations from one trained table to what was being accused for at the DCC.
I know there have been numerous examples in the past of pros pattern racking and manipulating gaps to cheat; but as my video shows, cheating is not required to achieve the action Shane and Dennis were getting. Now, things can vary some with conditions. And if the wing ball was going high with a tight rack, then gaps (in the near "L" or on the back ball) can be helpful (but illegal). But I think my fairly new 860 Simonis and Aramith balls are fairly representative of typical tournament conditions.
Regards,
Dave
That's not true. On VENT-I, Bob and I show numerous examples where gaps in different places can allow a player to cheat in different situations. I am currently working on a feature article with Mike Panozzo for Billiards Digest that will illustrate and describe many of these cheats. I'll post a link when the article comes out.
Regards,
Dave
No. See the reply I just posted.
You are correct that people (including me) need to be careful generalizing results. Things do vary some with conditions. The purpose for the video was to show that under typical conditions (fairly new Simonis 860 with fairly new Aramith balls), it is possible and very effective to break like Shane and Dennis did at the DCC, and you don't need to cheat the rack to get their results with a tight rack.
Regards,
Dave
Actually, both ends of my table are trained because I started out breaking from the other side when I first got the table. Also, I don't have room on the other side of the table to set up the tripod, and I wanted the camera on the rack end for the best views of ball directions. Also, I like using the tissue so people can clearly see where the gap(s) are.Only question, why didn't you rack the balls at the other,untrained end, to show gaps?:smile:
Regards,
Dave
Thanks for the video and explanation of what happens under certain conditions....I'm getting up in years so...I'll be practicing the softer break. I'm looking forward to the difference..at least for me. Thanks again, I hate hearing false accusations of cheating because shane or Dennis or Corey or even Jason are getting better results than others....usually they do better as a result of hard work and experimenting with different ways to the problems at hand.
minnesota_slim
Registered
hmmmm...
I did a similar analysis a while back and had slightly different results. I was using a magic rack, diamond table with Simonis 860. I also incorporated the break speed mobile app (I am not sure if it was accurate, but it should at least be precise, which was useful).
The major difference between my tests and Dr. Dave's results was that I always made the wing ball from the side rail with many different cut angles and many different speeds.
With a full hit, however, I was never able to make the wing ball from the "box". Break speed did not seem to matter, as the wing ball went consistently high of the pocket. The "cut break" was successful, but the full hit always caused the wing ball to hit high of the corner pocket.
I am not sure what the discrepancy is- but I will look through my old data. Of note- I was also pattern racking to determine the approximate final positions of the balls depending on where they originated in the rack. Some interesting results from that analysis as well, but predicted most of what the balls did during Dr. Dave's breaks.
I have a feeling that conditions have a fairly significant impact, but I haven't revisited these tests. I also did not take the next (planned, but never realized) step of analyzing gaps.
I did a similar analysis a while back and had slightly different results. I was using a magic rack, diamond table with Simonis 860. I also incorporated the break speed mobile app (I am not sure if it was accurate, but it should at least be precise, which was useful).
The major difference between my tests and Dr. Dave's results was that I always made the wing ball from the side rail with many different cut angles and many different speeds.
With a full hit, however, I was never able to make the wing ball from the "box". Break speed did not seem to matter, as the wing ball went consistently high of the pocket. The "cut break" was successful, but the full hit always caused the wing ball to hit high of the corner pocket.
I am not sure what the discrepancy is- but I will look through my old data. Of note- I was also pattern racking to determine the approximate final positions of the balls depending on where they originated in the rack. Some interesting results from that analysis as well, but predicted most of what the balls did during Dr. Dave's breaks.
I have a feeling that conditions have a fairly significant impact, but I haven't revisited these tests. I also did not take the next (planned, but never realized) step of analyzing gaps.
No kiddin'. I was thinking same thing.So Dave, did it ever get boring making the wing ball over and over again?
And that's just one symptom of why the break at nine ball is a problem.
This was always my issue with the thread. If a really good (almost perfect) rack ensure a wing ball...why would I try and cheat. Fewer variables in a good rack every time. Then place cue ball in same and regulate speed to make ball and one ball placement. Tadda.
If someone doesn't believe that SVB can hit them hard and get good results then they should rewatch the TAR race to 100 with Donny Mills on his home table. Donny was soft braking and SVB after a slow start started to crush the rack and run away with it.
If someone doesn't believe that SVB can hit them hard and get good results then they should rewatch the TAR race to 100 with Donny Mills on his home table. Donny was soft braking and SVB after a slow start started to crush the rack and run away with it.
Does 10-ball have this issue? If not, is there any reason to believe it may become one in the future?
This is like that golf joke about whether it becomes boring hitting the fairway over and over again.
Nope :thumbup:
No. I loved it every time, especially when it hit the heart of the pocket and I could hear the ball slam off the rear leather wall of the pocket and back to the slate lip (almost being rejected from the pocket, which happens sometimes on pockets like the ones I have with a perfect hit at fast speed).So Dave, did it ever get boring making the wing ball over and over again?
Regards,
Dave