spin transfered... a myth?

KMRUNOUT · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
For starters, why would you bank at a 90 degree angle? Second, you'll have to show an example of where strictly transferred spin was the reason you were able to manipulate the angle and not throw.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiBM6JLcmK4

Someone posted this. At first I was thinking that the first shot pretty much kills this argument. It is 100% clear that throw is NOT the cause of this bank being made, as you can clearly see the place it hits the end rail is further from the pocket than where it starts out. However, I don't think english is used to produce this effect. It would appear that the contact of the cue ball going across the object ball would create the right kind of spin on the object ball to facilitate this bank. I guess we have to split another hair: is contact induced *spin* (not throw) the same as transferred english? I would say that in principle they are the same thing, but that the contact created spin is probably much more than the standard transfer of english.

Thoughts?

KMRUNOUT

KMRUNOUT · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
Look, I'm sure you can find a physicist that can help determine the moon's gravitational pull influences the flight of a baseball. That doesn't mean this information has any practical application in a baseball game. My comments were not intended to be "jackassery" but instead meant to illustrate a point. Getting the opinion of a physicist doesn't matter. It's a game. You're trying to shoot a ball in a hole from 5 feet away at a 30 degree angle at 15 mph and with a cueball rotation that will hopefull bring the cueball to an area of the table that will yield another shot. Who the hell cares if the object ball rotated on its axis a little?

Ask any physicist to rank all the ways an object ball's path can be influenced. I'd be curious to see where transferred spin ranks.

Some people dislike all information. Some people dislike some information. Some people dislike NO information. We all fall into one of these categories. I personally prefer knowing to not knowing. I have no personal application of knowing the speed of light. But I still like knowing it, I think its cool, and I feel it gives me an appreciation of the vastness of creation. No one said you have to like it too. I didn't notice the original poster ask about the *relevance* of transfer of english. So *this* thread is about whether or not it exists.

KMRUNOUT

bud02 · Mar 28, 2012

KMRUNOUT said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiBM6JLcmK4

Someone posted this. At first I was thinking that the first shot pretty much kills this argument. It is 100% clear that throw is NOT the cause of this bank being made, as you can clearly see the place it hits the end rail is further from the pocket than where it starts out. However, I don't think english is used to produce this effect. It would appear that the contact of the cue ball going across the object ball would create the right kind of spin on the object ball to facilitate this bank. I guess we have to split another hair: is contact induced *spin* (not throw) the same as transferred english? I would say that in principle they are the same thing, but that the contact created spin is probably much more than the standard transfer of english.

Thoughts?

KMRUNOUT

My though exactly

Banks · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
This "twist shot" that Cleary posted is still an incredibly small angle. Without doing the math and looking at a grainy video, how much spin actually was transferred between cueball and object ball? 3% at most? Had he not hit it at mach 4, that spin likely gets lost.

One of three things.. I'm either on ignore, you don't know how to read or you just want to sit here and argue with KM and D. If you don't hit that shot hard, you can easily risk overspinning. Do you think bankers hit shots the way they do just for fun?

Patrick Johnson said:
If you mean the bank angle starting out uptable from the first rail and coming back downtable from the second rail (like in twice-across banks to the side pocket), the changing-direction part of that is actually caused by spin imparted to the OB by the first rail, not by the CB.

pj
chgo

I know, I was just messing around with another shot that some people question. I prefer that shot to cross over the first side pocket. When my one rail back in the side just doesn't quite seem to go despite how I may be able to juice it up, the cross-back odds are pretty high.

Patrick Johnson · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
As for your ranking of importance, even in bank shots, you might want to consider a few other things before you get down on your shot.

What makes you think I don't? To be sure, transferred spin is mostly critically important in banks as something you want to avoid - any unwanted offcenter hit on the CB will change the bank angle enough to miss most shots. But it's also necessary to be able to take lots of shots that you couldn't otherwise. Bankers get very good at judging and using it.

This "twist shot" that Cleary posted is still an incredibly small angle. Without doing the math and looking at a grainy video, how much spin actually was transferred between cueball and object ball? 3% at most? Had he not hit it at mach 4, that spin likely gets lost.

Loss of transferred sidespin over distance is a real concern, but not as much as you think.

1hole is a forgiving game too.

You underestimate the exacting demands of both of these games - unless, of course, you only play them against 9-ball players.

pj
chgo

itsfroze · Mar 28, 2012

WhatsTheSpot said:
Of course spin transfers.

Just look at when 2 balls are frozen and you run the cueball into the first one. If you couldn't transfer spin, the 2nd ball would always travel straight in line.

But of course if you spin the cueball, the 2nd ball will be thrown one way or the other. Or if you cut the first ball you can throw the 2nd ball.

IT'S OBVIOUS IF YOU PAY ATTENTION. ALL THAT'S NEEDED IS TO PAY A BIT OF ATTENTION AND THERE IS NO DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

HOW CAN ANYONE DENY SUCH SIMPLY THINGS. IT IS GOD DAMN OBVIOUS

HOW CAN ANYONE DENY SUCH SIMPLE THINGS

------------>it is god dam obvious ^

Jude Rosenstock · Mar 28, 2012

Banks said:
One of three things.. I'm either on ignore, you don't know how to read QUOTE]

And it was nice to meet you too Banks.

SeanC · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
Ask any physicist to rank all the ways an object ball's path can be influenced. I'd be curious to see where transferred spin ranks.

I am a physicist, and use spin transfer all the time to clear balls, especially when banking.

I'll bet you anything you want, and here's the drill: I will set up a position, you are only allowed center ball hits, and I can use whatever spin I want on the cue ball. You won't be able to make the ball, and I will.

Or you can even put Sigel up if you don't want to take the shot :thumbup:

Spider1 · Mar 28, 2012

So the thread has gone from "me and Sigel don't think it exists" to "Well it might exist but only in extremely small amounts" to "ok it exists but how often is it ever used?" to "Yeah well ok it gets used a lot by other people, but I don't play their game so it doesn't matter."

Some people just cannot man up and admit they were wrong. Ever. Hilarious stuff.

Again: you can test yourself and see if spin is imparted in about 3 shots on any table. If you think that doesn't matter because "I play 9-ball" (as if opponents don't leave no-choice banks

) I don't know what to tell you besides you probably need to be playing a lot, lot more.

Jude Rosenstock · Mar 28, 2012

SeanC said:
I am a physicist, and use spin transfer all the time to clear balls, especially when banking.

I'll bet you anything you want, and here's the drill: I will set up a position, you are only allowed center ball hits, and I can use whatever spin I want on the cue ball. You won't be able to make the ball, and I will.

Or you can even put Sigel up if you don't want to take the shot :thumbup:

I mean, these situations come up even without transferred spin. What's your point?

Banks · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
I mean, these situations come up even without transferred spin. What's your point?

You should just stop talking. Not for my benefit, but for your own. (Not mine, because you're going on ignore for posting worthless, counterproductive drivel.)

Jude Rosenstock · Mar 28, 2012

Banks said:
You should just stop talking. Not for my benefit, but for your own. (Not mine, because you're going on ignore for posting worthless, counterproductive drivel.)

Banks, what I was specifically referring to are banks that are possible because of throw.

I admit, there is a nice twist bank that is only possible because of english that I am now hip to. However, I fail to see how this applies to much else.

SeanC · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
I mean, these situations come up even without transferred spin. What's your point?

Point is this: You can't make the shot on cleary's post without spin. Throw itself won't be enough to make that shot.

Videos posted so far proved that spin is transferred, and even though it may not be much, it is enough to clear a full ball width, or maybe even more (see the full table twist bank shot on cleary's post) depending on the spin/speed.

To be able to clear a full ball width with spin transfer could be very important depending on the situation. And it looks like you have a lot to learn, no matter how good a player you think you are.

Hits 'em Hard · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
Banks said:

One of three things.. I'm either on ignore, you don't know how to read

And it was nice to meet you too Banks.

Click to expand...

Yea I'm with Banks on this, you can't read.

Set up this shot, ob and cb on the headstring, ob on the center spot, aim the ob along the headstring, using down table English on the cb, the ob will rebound at an angle, not a straight line, and if you got the right touch, it will bank in. Now how can a straight shot like that happen if the spin isn't transferred? My suggestion, start playing all games available, and you'll stop being so ignorant.

Jude Rosenstock · Mar 28, 2012

SeanC said:
Point is this: You can't make the shot on cleary's post without spin. Throw itself won't be enough to make that shot.

Videos posted so far proved that spin is transferred, and even though it may not be much, it is enough to clear a full ball width, or maybe even more (see the full table twist bank shot on cleary's post) depending on the spin/speed.

To be able to clear a full ball width with spin transfer could be very important depending on the situation. And it looks like you have a lot to learn, no matter how good a player you think you are.

I'm not a very good player. I'm still learning.

SeanC · Mar 28, 2012

Jude Rosenstock said:
I'm not a very good player. I'm still learning.

Great, looks like you learned one more thing today!

To convince yourself further, set up a couple of balls exactly on a straight line, and shoot the object ball to the rail with and without imparting spin on the cue ball. Play around with the speed/spin combinations, and observe how much difference it can make. Good luck

whammo57 · Mar 28, 2012

WhatsTheSpot said:
Of course spin transfers.

Just look at when 2 balls are frozen and you run the cueball into the first one. If you couldn't transfer spin, the 2nd ball would always travel straight in line.

But of course if you spin the cueball, the 2nd ball will be thrown one way or the other. Or if you cut the first ball you can throw the 2nd ball.

IT'S OBVIOUS IF YOU PAY ATTENTION. ALL THAT'S NEEDED IS TO PAY A BIT OF ATTENTION AND THERE IS NO DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

HOW CAN ANYONE DENY SUCH SIMPLY THINGS. IT IS GOD DAMN OBVIOUS

I like you...............

Kim

itsfroze · Mar 28, 2012

KMRUNOUT said:
What sort of spin does the rail apply to an object ball that contacts the rail at a 90 degree angle?

KMRUNOUT

The rail only allows the spin on the object ball to be observed if the rail wasn't there the object ball would continue traveling and spinning you just wouldn't be able to observe the spin as well unless the object ball had dots on it, or the rail was there so that you could see it change direction.

Aten · Mar 28, 2012

lol

.......

Jude Rosenstock · Mar 29, 2012

So, I headed off to the poolroom last night and gave this bank shot a try. Initially, like an earlier post, I tried going into a rail at a 90 degree angle using a lot of spin but truthfully, there's just so much going on with all the throw that I found it difficult to get truly conclusive evidence so I set up a simpler version of the shot Cleary posted.

My first try I nailed it. (diagram below). I didn't even use a whole lot of spin and honestly, the object ball doesn't "spin", you really are just shifting its axis just enough to make a difference. Initially, I thought this was conclusive but then realized that I was using english & contact-induced spin. Of course the objectball was going to shift.

So I set up the shot below and actually managed to miss it on the "impossible" side on my first try. It really doesn't take much to get it going. It's a very interesting shot. In truth, I honestly don't know how often this "twist bank" is going to come up but that doesn't really matter. It's simply very useful information for banking with english. Thanks guys and I apologize for any feathers I ruffled yesterday.

spin transfered... a myth?

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Banned

Fish of the Day

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

needs practice...

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Banned

AzB Silver Member

needs practice...

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

needs practice...

Kim Walker

AzB Silver Member

m8

AzB Silver Member