It's a simple matter to over "moosh" it; upper cut it so to speak. Cue ball has nowhere to go except where the stick alignment averages out when the obstructing ball gets out the way.
WWYD -- 9 ball total trap
- Thread starter Bob Jewett
- Start date
It's a simple matter to over "moosh" it; upper cut it so to speak. Cue ball has nowhere to go except where the stick alignment averages out when the obstructing ball gets out the way.
Even if that were true, and like Bob I largely think it isn't, it still didn't address my question at all in any case.
I wasn't addressing your question. What was it?
(kidding, snort etc...)
And yes it does. The outcome of the shot is very much force related and as to the Bob part, how is it you can tell immediately you hit two balls and not one; maybe even blindfolded?
Bisecting the perpendicular line from the CB/OB line of centers is how you find the aim line. Until you do that you don’t know where it is. I should have mentioned the bisecting in the diagram.
pj
chgo
Again, this doesn't even address the question I asked, much less answer it. It is already beyond clear that you aren't the person who can answer my question because the person who would be able to answer the question would not be capable of so badly misunderstanding the question (and it's a tough question, no worries), but I do appreciate your effort.
That was obvious and had occurred to me and is really what prompted me to start asking questions because it wasn't jiving, nor was your diagram the way I was looking at it either. Anyway, I figured out where I went wrong and what took me down the rabbit hole. For some reason I was looking at the diagram and reversing the "2 times fuller aim line" and the "2 times fuller CB travel" lines. Yes, they are labeled clear as day and I did it anyway in my head. Obviously didn't bother to look at the actual cue ball path to the rail either which also would have snapped me back to reality. I apparently for some reason had in my mind one of the systems where the cue ball path would be half the distance to the aim path instead of double the distance and was therefore just looking at in in those terms instead of letting what it said and showed sink in. Embarrassing brain fart moment. Anyway, thanks for the response.
Last edited:
Sleep in the guest room? You were wondering what was bisected. Since the shot outcome is force related, you will have to adjust depending on the carom angle or more specifically how deep into the ball you are shooting. IOW, glancing off it or straight through it. You can even go line of centers from the obstructing ball and apexing at the spherical center of the obstructing ball, shoot at the exit point of the bisecting line on the front of the obstructing ball. This is what you find in those general knowledge books. Point still is, it's how hard you hit the shot that determines the actual carom of the cue ball.
Well I was obviously up in the middle of the night tired for sure. That aside, you still think you had answered my question and I don't think you ever had. Patrick Johnson answered it nicely, see post #64 for the answer. And it would still be the right answer in in my scenario of having reversed the lines too, not sure what the heck I was thinking, clearly I wasn't.
That's what bisecting the right angle line does for you.
Is there an English version of this?
pj
chgo
@ Pat
That is the English version. IIRC the shot in that form is depicted in Ray M's 99 critical shots. You bisect the angle and not the distance. The apex is the center of the obstructing ball and the aim point is the exit point of the bisector; exit point meaning the front of the ball.
It doesn't have the resolution of bisecting the distance to the object ball BUT, like I said, the actual carom is force dependent anyway. The other thing about it is since the cue ball is sandwiched in, things like grip force and degree of push become relevant.
That is the English version. IIRC the shot in that form is depicted in Ray M's 99 critical shots. You bisect the angle and not the distance. The apex is the center of the obstructing ball and the aim point is the exit point of the bisector; exit point meaning the front of the ball.
It doesn't have the resolution of bisecting the distance to the object ball BUT, like I said, the actual carom is force dependent anyway. The other thing about it is since the cue ball is sandwiched in, things like grip force and degree of push become relevant.
It's easy to demonstrate that bisecting the angle is the wrong thing to do. Halving a distance (or doubling the distance in some cases) is the correct thing to do.
Halving the angle is almost correct for shots that are nearly full into the obstructing ball. That's because 2*tan(x) = 2*x for small x (angle).
An obvious place where the half-angle idea fails is when you want to send the cue ball nearly along the kiss line, or almost 90 degrees to the line of centers of the CB and OB. The half-angle formula says to shoot at 45 degrees. That's very wrong.
Thanks - I think I follow you now.
I wonder if there's a shot speed and/or angle range that's best for Bob's 2 times fuller method.
pj
chgo
The two times fuller method seems to have two major sources of error assuming you have measured the distances correctly:
Because there is throw on the shot, the object ball is pulled towards the line of the cue ball and the cue ball is in turn pulled towards the object ball. You can compensate for this by aiming a little wider. Maybe it can also be compensated by using outside spin, but I've nearly always used center ball on the cue ball.
The second major source of error is draw or follow on the cue ball. Because the cue ball is pushed away from the line of the stick, any draw or follow will make the cue ball curve. How much will it curve? Hard to say, but certainly more than enough to cause a miss or make. This is another reason for using center ball on the cue ball.
To answer the question more directly, I don't think there are any problem angles or speeds with the two-times-fuller system. It's easy enough to test and anyone who hopes to use it in a game should try a full range of angles/speeds in practice.
Last edited:
The OP's question was," Suppose the cue ball is tight against the 6. What would you do?" I would call it frozen and shoot the 2 times fuller shot I suggested.
What is the correct answer?
I think that is a good answer if the ball is frozen. In the actual shot there was enough room to shoot to the lower side rail and get the hit, so the ball wasn't frozen. It's hard to tell on the video without a closeup.
But for a frozen cue ball, I think the one-rail kick off the end cushion gives nearly the same chance to move the 1/9 and it does have a chance to get a good hit.
I mean to have my cue stick go towards the single point that is the center of the cue ball so that the cue ball leaves the tip without any spin whatsoever.
Yeah, that's what I meant. Counterintuitive to me that the CB is driven through the OB that way as if with follow. Seems a little pushy.
pj
chgo
Risky, but how about the double the pocket point shot in the upper right hand corner pocket? Outside the box I know, but this is horrible position. Depending on body type, the short rail kick with a bridge might be too tough.
Last edited:
I use the plus 2 system for kicks which I learned from none other that Bob Jewett on a video. Dr Dave also shows it in one of his videos.
It looks to me like pretty close to 4.2 diamonds apart on the long rail and I think you can go 2 rails around the 3 ball and hit the 1 ball.
It looks to me like pretty close to 4.2 diamonds apart on the long rail and I think you can go 2 rails around the 3 ball and hit the 1 ball.
Last edited: