IMO the ball absolutely goes forward past the tangent line before spinning back. I think this happens when the cue ball is heaver than the OB
Breakdown of Earl Strickland Shot
- Thread starter BeiberLvr
- Start date
He cheats the pocket by slightly over cutting and the tangent line extends toward the second diamond. The cue ball follows this path.
Also keep in mind that this is a video. The angles on all videos are slightly distorted by the camera lens. If you compare the birds eye camera view to the first person camera view, the shots can look quite different. The commentators sometimes mention how much different a shot looks in person than on the monitor too.
+1 great analysis
Agreed. That 2 is not a straight in shot, it has a slight angle to it.
The tangent does not appear to extend toward the second diamond to me.
And if you watch the cue ball after the hit, it appeared to be headed past the second diamond.
At that speed, I sure don't think the cue ball is NOT going to slide before the backspin bites.
Attachments
He cut the ball into the right hand side of the pocket, increasing the angle and lowering the tangents landing spot on the rail.
The person who made the video even demonstrates this and explains it at the end as the way he was able to accurately replicate Earls shot.
This shit is not that tough folks.
You wanna know whats tough?
Stocker........ :thumbup:
The person who made the video even demonstrates this and explains it at the end as the way he was able to accurately replicate Earls shot.
This shit is not that tough folks.
You wanna know whats tough?
Stocker........ :thumbup:
Last edited:
He cut the ball into the right hand side of the pocket, increasing the angle and lowering the tangents landing spot on the rail.
The person who made the video even demonstrates this and explains it at the end as the way he was able to accurately replicate Earls shot.
This shit is not that tough folks.
You wanna know whats tough?
Stocker........ :thumbup:
Comedy...
As is evident here.
Every.
Single.
Day.
:grin:
Yeah, but can you make money with this Stocker?
He cut the ball into the right hand side of the pocket, increasing the angle and lowering the tangents landing spot on the rail.
The person who made the video even demonstrates this and explains it at the end as the way he was able to accurately replicate Earls shot.
This shit is not that tough folks.
You wanna know whats tough?
Stocker........ :thumbup:
10 years from now, I can get into West Point.... Its all coming down to video game reflexes. :thumbup:
Hell, Chuck, you can get into West Point right *NOW*!. They'll at LEAST let you into the lobby of the main administration building!
:rotflmao1:
( Comedy is **tough**! Unless you're **ME**!!! )
Need Quote Marks?
Funny "Vincent" said that twenty-five years ago and it is coming to pass. Oddly enough the drones in the mideast were or still are flown out of middle America. Kansas or somewhere, I can't remember. It does seem like they would like the operators closer to the drone to reduce lag time.
The recruiters are hanging around the big gamer conventions now.
Hu
Funny "Vincent" said that twenty-five years ago and it is coming to pass. Oddly enough the drones in the mideast were or still are flown out of middle America. Kansas or somewhere, I can't remember. It does seem like they would like the operators closer to the drone to reduce lag time.
The recruiters are hanging around the big gamer conventions now.
Hu
You are either blind or you like to argueThe tangent line is an approximation, it will not travel exactly on the tangent depending on speed and spin. If you want to get technical, the CB does not travel straight on *any* cut shot, it curves right after impact.
Julian
The tangent line is an approximation, it will not travel exactly on the tangent depending on speed and spin. If you want to get technical, the CB does not travel straight on *any* cut shot, it curves right after impact. With respect sir you are wrong. This is simply not the case. The only thing that alter what the tangent line is is a difference in weight between the CB and OB. If the CB is heavier, it will push forward of the tangent line. If lighter it will bounce back from the tangent line. I’m talking about it’s initial force vector immediately after contact. And yes the cue ball does not travel “on” the tangent line. The center of the cue ball travels parallel to the tangent line exactly one ball radius away. Exactly. Every time. The speed has no impact on the tangent line. Some arguments could be made that the left/right spin at impact may alter the initial tangent line slightly. But *I* am not advanced in physics enough to make those arguments. The cue ball most assuredly departs from impact with a force vector equal to the tangent line at separation of the two balls. Respectfully, “if you want to get technical”, I suggest you first review the materials from the your intro physics class. The principles of mechanics have been nailed down pretty tight for a few centuries now.
KMRUNOUT
Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums
I have discussed this shot at length in person with Earl. He is using an almost unimaginable amount of left. He claims it is indeed center left and no follow. However I believe he has a tiny bit of follow on there. Regardless, he gets extraordinary action from the application of English alone. I don’t recall seeing anyone that can spin the ball like him.
KMRUNOUT
Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums
I agree with all of this except where the tangent points. It's hard to be sure looking at a picture, but here's how it looks to me - the solid white line represents the tangent line:
pj
chgo
I agree with the slight follow, if you watch his cue it appears to be just above center ball on impact and it travels upwards at the same time.
If that was the tangent line the 2 would hit about 6" down rail.
EDIT: 2-4" down rail.
I guess that's technically true, but the line at the center of the CB will always be "pool's tangent line" to me.
pj
chgo
With no backspin or forward spin it will travel right along the tangent line (as we've been discussing here). So if my tangent line is right and the CB has no forward spin (like this shot), it can't hit closer to the side pocket than about two diamonds away (where the tangent line points).
Maybe you meant "down rail" from where the arrow points...?
pj
chgo
I agree this thread is useful. Your last sentence above is very encouraging!
There are a couple of inaccuracies in what you have said, and there are also some inaccuracies in the Barry Stark video. While his credentials as a Snooker coach and all of his advice on the topic is excellent, lets not pretend he is a physicist. The problem with both your and Barry Stark's descriptions is with the use of the word "momentum". If you are aware of the idea of conservation of momentum, then you know that all of the energy required to make the object ball move is LOST by the cue ball. And then some. The cueball begins with a whole lot of kinetic energy, and of different types. "translational" kinetic energy, or momentum, is only part of the energy that the cueball has. It also has rotational kinetic energy. At impact, a LOT of things happen. Energy is lost to heat, sound, friction against the cloth, etc. When the conservation of momentum equation comes into play, the rotation of the cueball is not so much a part of that equation. The equivalence in the conservation equation is between the energy LOST by the cueball and gained by the object ball. So to say that the cueball "still has momentum" in its initial direction is not correct. The altering of its initial direction IS the energy imparted to the object ball. If the masses of the two balls are equivalent, then the new trajectory of the cue ball is ALWAYS on a line parallel to the line tangent to both balls at the point of contact.
At this point, it has nothing to do with the cueball's "momentum" where it goes. It has to do with its remaining rotational kinetic energy, This energy gets converted into friction and an altering of the path of the cueball from the tangent line. (For sure, there is a conservation of rotational energy as well. Some of the cueballs rotation is imparted to the opbject ball, some is lost as friction, and some is converted into translational kinetic energy, while still some remains as rotational kinteic energy as the cueball rolls to a stop.)
When you can think about the separation of all of these forces and their vectors, and the interplay between these different types of energy, I think this topic will become more clear to you. I would recommend in the future, however, to get your physics info from physics textbooks rather than from Snooker coaches. I'd likewise avoid the physics books for pool instruction.
KMRUNOUT