2 rail kick fail and here is why.

oh great while the rest of us have to wait while you do all the math only to miss by a foot. They should remove the diamonds entirely imo. This isn't paint by numbers. I got rid of my diamonds. I guarantee I can kick more accurately than any of you system guys. 1 rail, 2 rail, 3 rail, 4 rail, 5 rail.
Prove it. Post an uncut video of your alleged skills. And with random ball positions.
 
See why systems don't help you?

He is using a 2 rail center point, parallel cue system. He ends up adding right english to lengthen the angle off the long rail, and shorten the angle on the short rail, in hopes to get the 2 rail kick. I mean he knew enough to feel that he needed a tonne of right english from the contact point he chose...because he felt the running english angle he was getting would bring him under the 2 ball. It turned out that even with the right english he still came under it. Why not just adjust the contact point and hit lower on the long rail?

He would have done better to just visualize the two rail kick versus trying to force the contact point he got from the system and compensating with right english to accomplish what running english would do naturally if he hit farther down the long rail. The problem is he was relying on the system instead of just knowing or "feeling" the shot.

Actually if you look at when he parallels the cuestick it actually lines up with a lower contact point that where he hit on the long rail. So if he hit the proper point with running english it would have worked. I have used this system at times, but I recall it would tend to run long in some situations or something about it not being totally consistent in different scenarios...better as a guide. Anyway I now do all my kicks by "feel".

Actually he did not find his angle to the pocket frm the correct position, which should be halfway between the OB and Cueball and on the direct line between them, so the shot had little chance from the git go, and if he actually loaded up with any english like you claim, well that didn't help either as that system is best used with little to no running english whenever possible, and there it was possible.
 
Dear thenatural
I will play with you but only briefly.
First it seems you have come to this forum recently with the desire to be regarded as an authority. The handle you have chosen strikes me as pretentious. If you desire credibility, why not use your name?
A statement of your credentials would also go a long way towards establishment of credibility.
My prejudgment is that you are more than likely a troll that simply likes to stir. Well if that's the only way to get others to talk with you..... Perhaps Porkchop would have been a better username.🤷
He's a total bullshitter, and his skill level nor face will ever be seen on this forum. Like I said in another thread to him, I bet he can't run 5 balls.
 
Actually he did not find his angle to the pocket frm the correct position, which should be halfway between the OB and Cueball and on the direct line
I've always found my banks to go wide doing this. Running English tends to make them go even wider. If I am coming in to the first rail wider than 45 degrees, the ball picks up an excess of running spin widening the angle off the second rail. Is this something you just mentally correct for or is there something I am missing?
 
I've always found my banks to go wide doing this. Running English tends to make them go even wider. If I am coming in to the first rail wider than 45 degrees, the ball picks up an excess of running spin widening the angle off the second rail. Is this something you just mentally correct for or is there something I am missing?
As I said, but you cut it out in the quote, that 2 rail system works better with out running english.
 
maybe learn from best kickers...
i had seen this a while ago and then couldnt find it when i searched
now i have saved it as a faqvorite
thanks for the link.....(y)
i wish i knew why 3 cushion players call kick shots "bank" shots
 
See why systems don't help you?

He is using a 2 rail center point, parallel cue system. He ends up adding right english to lengthen the angle off the long rail, and shorten the angle on the short rail, in hopes to get the 2 rail kick. I mean he knew enough to feel that he needed a tonne of right english from the contact point he chose...because he felt the running english angle he was getting would bring him under the 2 ball. It turned out that even with the right english he still came under it. Why not just adjust the contact point and hit lower on the long rail?

He would have done better to just visualize the two rail kick versus trying to force the contact point he got from the system and compensating with right english to accomplish what running english would do naturally if he hit farther down the long rail. The problem is he was relying on the system instead of just knowing or "feeling" the shot.

Actually if you look at when he parallels the cuestick it actually lines up with a lower contact point that where he hit on the long rail. So if he hit the proper point with running english it would have worked. I have used this system at times, but I recall it would tend to run long in some situations or something about it not being totally consistent in different scenarios...better as a guide. Anyway I now do all my kicks by "feel".

If you noticed, he lined up a wide angle off the short rail. That is what he wanted, a full hit with a wide angle. He couldn't accomplish that playing it flat with no spin. He couldn't play that shot by the numbers to get the result he wanted (sticking the cueball and either making the ball in the side or leaving the object ball safe, up table). Going two rails "flat" with little or no spin had a high probability of leaving a shot.
 
If you noticed, he lined up a wide angle off the short rail. That is what he wanted, a full hit with a wide angle. He couldn't accomplish that playing it flat with no spin. He couldn't play that shot by the numbers to get the result he wanted (sticking the cueball and either making the ball in the side or leaving the object ball safe, up table). Going two rails "flat" with little or no spin had a high probability of leaving a shot.
He kinda left a shot 😁
 
He kinda left a shot 😁
Well, yeah...

Personally I try not to shoot these two railers where you come fairly straight into the second rail with tons of sidespin. You need to really know the table and the conditions, because these shots will sometimes grab unexpectedly or not at all. If I shoot them, the object ball needs to be close to the rail. Small differences in speed will often result in dramaticly different outcomes. But I'm not in their league, anyway, I'm sure he knows that better than me.

For instance, on the tables I learned to play on, you could lengthen the angle of the first rail on this kind of shot, quite a bit. On a Diamond, the ball just kicks out and doesn't lengthen much at all. Then at the second rail, you could make the ball go very wide, on a diamond it kicks it out, almost in a square fashion, like a misadjusted snooker cushion. Even if the net result was a full hit on the ball in both cases (due to the effects cancelling each other out), the resulting object ball lines would be completely different.
 
Well, yeah...

Personally I try not to shoot these two railers where you come fairly straight into the second rail with tons of sidespin. You need to really know the table and the conditions, because these shots will sometimes grab unexpectedly or not at all. If I shoot them, the object ball needs to be close to the rail. Small differences in speed will often result in dramaticly different outcomes. But I'm not in their league, anyway, I'm sure he knows that better than me.

For instance, on the tables I learned to play on, you could lengthen the angle of the first rail on this kind of shot, quite a bit. On a Diamond, the ball just kicks out and doesn't lengthen much at all. Then at the second rail, you could make the ball go very wide, on a diamond it kicks it out, almost in a square fashion, like a misadjusted snooker cushion. Even if the net result was a full hit on the ball in both cases (due to the effects cancelling each other out), the resulting object ball lines would be completely different.
The most predictable way to shoot that particular kick is without the use of any sidespin, just no reason for it at all. Watching the video it's hard to tell, he hit the cue ball high, but was it high and right? I can't tell for sure.
 
from the best i could tell (my feel of the shot 😂)
the cue ball was coming from 60
the object ball was on the 35 diagonal line
so with running english you hit 25
but that was blocked so
with no english you hit 20 which was not blocked
and you will hit the 2 ball full in the face
jmho
icbw
 
Last edited:
Worked on video lol.
Where is your video?


maybe learn from best kickers...
I watched the whole video and still waiting for the first ball to fall. Might as well take lessons from thenacheralbser!(grin)


from the best i could tell (my feel of the shot 😂)
the cue ball was coming from 60
the object ball was on the 35 diagonal line
so with running english you hit 25
but that was blocked so
with no english you hit 20 which was not blocked
and you will hit the 2 ball full in the face
jmho
icbw
I just poke and hope myself. I would like my chances against the natcheral BS'er a whole lot though. He is either in his first or second childhood. Either way ...

Hu
 
You do realize that center ball is an impossibility right? You will always impart some english on the cueball.
WTF! Why do you keep saying this? I suck at this game and can do it. OB on foot spot, cue ball one diamond from foot rail. Shoot ob straight up. It returns and hits cue ball. Cue ball returns to tip of cue. If I manage to go deep enough for there to be open tables. I do this while waiting. Any competent player can do it.
 
Back
Top