3-Rail Kick Tracks

[Patrick Johnson]

In another thread I threatened to go to the pool hall and work on my 3-rail kicks. Well, against all odds I have actually done that, and in the process I began thinking (uh oh) of a simplified way to estimate 3-rail kicks to given targets on the fourth rail. This simplified 3-rail kick system is vaguely similar to the Spot-On-The-Wall system and the Corner-Five system, but instead of off-table visual references (Spot-On-The-Wall) or math (Corner Five), it uses simple diamond-to-diamond alignments.

Three rail kicks that start out parallel to each other (their first legs are parallel) end up hitting the fourth rail very close together - they "converge" on a fourth rail target. It's easy to see parallel lines on the pool table using the diamonds. If we start with a line stretched between one diamond on the near long rail and another diamond on the far long rail, we can simply move each end of the line one diamond to the right to find a parallel line. Move each end another diamond in the same direction (left or right) and there's another parallel line, etc. The angle of these parallel lines between the diamonds is determined by how many diamonds along the rail one diamond is from the other - call this their "separation". For instance, diamonds on opposite long rails with "4 diamonds of separation" make parallel lines at 45 degrees (see third diagram below), while diamonds with "3 diamonds of separation" make parallel lines at 51 degrees (see fourth diagram below).

Using these easy-to-see diamond-to-diamond lines, we get sets of parallel lines to use as reference tracks for 3-rail kicks. Fortunately for us, each set of parallel lines converges near a pocket or diamond on the fourth rail, making both our first legs and our fourth rail targets easy to remember. The correlations are:

- a first leg line with 6 diamonds of separation will come close to the corner pocket on the fourth rail
- a first leg line with 5 diamonds of separation will come close to the 1st diamond on the fourth rail
- a first leg line with 4 diamonds of separation will come close to the 2nd diamond on the fourth rail
- a first leg line with 3 diamonds of separation will come close to the 3rd diamond on the fourth rail

Below are diagrams illustrating these basic reference tracks:

Use a "6-diamond separation" to hit the corner pocket on the 4th rail.


Use a "5-diamond separation" to hit the 1st diamond on the 4th rail.



Use a "4-diamond separation" to hit the 2nd diamond on the 4th rail.



Use a "3-diamond separation" to hit the 3rd diamond on the 4th rail.



pj
chgo

 

[Masayoshi]

Thanks, I often have trouble visualizing these paths. I'm assuming you are using running english on all of them?

 

[flips]

they converge at the fourth rail, not the third rail.

anyhow, you're making this unnecessarily complex.

track lines, and specifically third cushion points for shots arriving at the same end point are dependent upon the initial position of the cue ball. just read pp.131-135 in byrne's book he explains it better than i can.

 

[McChen]

agree with poster above. these are basic 'natural' 3c shots....best way to learn these is not to memorize an endless series of tracks, but learn the corner 5 diamond system and the various adjustments to the system to make it work in various situations.

 

[flips]

agreed, with the following caveat. many pool tables are set up poorly, have dead cushions, ancient cloth, etc. if you dogmatically apply any system you will miss balls. there are too many variables (stroke, speed, humidity, material, etc.) when you actually hit the ball, to merely rely on arithmetic.

the corner 5 system is a great reference tool, but a player needs to actually know what the ball, hit with a particular stroke and at a specific speed, is going to do when it hits a particular point on a cushion.

 

[McChen]

very good point....i've found most pool tables play very short. and totally agree that systems are a reference/general guide, adjustments based on judgement must always be made.

 

[dr_dave]

Three rail kicks that start out parallel to each other (their first legs are parallel) end up hitting the third rail very close together - they "converge" on a third rail target.

You meant "fourth rail," right?

This is basically the "spot on the wall system." For three-rail kicks, aiming at a fairly distant point (on a wall) results in convergence on the 4th rail (with rolling CB, running English, and consistent speed). With spot-on-the-wall, the initial aiming lines are not parallel, but close.

As others have pointed out, a good understanding of the Corner-5 system is also useful for these types of shots.

Thanks for your always-interesting and thought-provoking posts.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Patrick Johnson]

they converge at the fourth rail, not the third rail.

LOL. Thanks - I've fixed that in the post.

anyhow, you're making this unnecessarily complex.

Actually, I'm pointing out an alternative way to visualize these tracks that may make it simpler for some players. It does for me.

track lines, and specifically third cushion points for shots arriving at the same end point are dependent upon the initial position of the cue ball. just read pp.131-135 in byrne's book he explains it better than i can.

Yes, I'm aware this is the "corner five" system re-imagined. I think that system is too "mathematical" for many players, so I'm suggesting a more "visual" way of using it.

pj
chgo

 

[BWTadpole]

Why not just remember where one of each of these kicks goes -- the yellow line on each diagram -- and learn how to draw parallel lines in your head to adjust for the cueball position? That's how I learned three-rail kicks. All I was ever told is "Learn this line, and wherever the cueball is from here, draw a parallel line to this one."

 

[Patrick Johnson]

You meant "fourth rail," right?

LOL. Yup, I fixed that.

This is basically the "spot on the wall system." For three-rail kicks, aiming at a fairly distant point (on a wall) results in convergence on the 4th rail (with rolling CB, running English, and consistent speed). With spot-on-the-wall, the initial aiming lines are not parallel, but close.

As others have pointed out, a good understanding of the Corner-5 system is also useful for these types of shots.

Yes, this is a sort of hybrid of the Spot-On-The-Wall and the Corner Five systems, made more "visual" and "memory friendly" by using simple diamond alignments.

Simplifying the visualization is the point here. Instead of memorized number scales and math (like the Corner Five system) or off-table visual references (like the Spot-On-The-Wall system), this method uses a seldom-mentioned fact [parallel first-leg tracks converge very nearly to the same spot on the fourth rail] to suggest a simpler visualization using only the relative positions of the diamonds on the opposite long rails.

For instance, notice that my "4:5 slopes" (first diagram above) include the Corner Five "benchmark" shot you demonstrate on your VEPS IV disk, but re-visualized as a simpler diamond-to-diamond alignment (corner diamond to opposite diamond 5 diamonds farther along the long rail). This method suggests these simplified visualizations:

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a six-diamond separation will come close to the corner pocket on the fourth rail (not diagrammed above)

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a five-diamond separation will come close to the first diamond on the fourth rail (first diagram above: "4:3 slopes")

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a four-diamond separation will come close to the second diamond on the fourth rail (second diagram above: "4:4 slopes")

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a three-diamond separation will come close to the third diamond on the fourth rail (third diagram above: "4:2 slopes")

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a two-diamond separation will come close to the side pocket on the fourth rail (not diagrammed above)

These are more approximate than the Corner Five calculations, but they're much simpler to visualize and memorize and therefore maybe more useful to some players (like me) who find the Corner Five math to be too much work.

Thanks for your always-interesting and thought-provoking posts.

Aw shucks.

pj
chgo

 

[12squared]

View attachment 154525
pj
chgo

Patrick,

You the man taking all this time to post up your findings, but I would like to add a couple of things, some in the form of questions:

1) what speed are you hitting these test shots? Speed plays a big roll in the tracks off the 3rd rail, the slower you shoot, like a lag speed in your 1-pocket example, the shorter the track off the 3rd rail. Especially on a pool table.

2) where are you hitting the cue ball? I assume it is the same for each. running english is typically used for a 3 railer to maintan consistancy. The ideal is to get the cue ball to imulate the spin you pick up off the 1st & 2nd rails so you can better judge the speed & direction of all three rail paths. (example: if you hit it center ball, the off the second rail it will go much longer to hit the 3rd rail higher up).

3) The corner five results are very different on a pool table than a 3C table, so it is very important to test the 3 railer from the corner into the diamond you are familiar with what the result shoud be, as you have illustrated. Just so you know, on a 3-C table and using your examples above; the yellow one would have the cue ball end up in the corner, not into the 1st diamond; the blue one would end up longer hitting the end rail about 1/4 diamond before the corner; and the red would end up slightly longer yet, a little bit further away from the corner than the red.

4) Grady & Jimmy Reid do a really good job of explaining this on a pool table without using all the math, but in both cases it requires you to know a starting point result and adjust from there depending on where you want the cue ball to travel to hit the 4th rail. They typically start w/the corner hitting through the 2nd diamond to get the corner, which seems right on many pool tables, but again, speed and english play a big roll in your results.

Nice job as always, Patrick. The spot on the wall that Dr. Dave mentioned is awesome, but only works once you've found a path that works a specific table.

Sorry to butt into your post.

Dave

 

[dr_dave]

This is basically the "spot on the wall system." For three-rail kicks, aiming at a fairly distant point (on a wall) results in convergence on the 4th rail (with rolling CB, running English, and consistent speed). With spot-on-the-wall, the initial aiming lines are not parallel, but close.

As others have pointed out, a good understanding of the Corner-5 system is also useful for these types of shots.

Yes, this is a sort of hybrid of the Spot-On-The-Wall and the Corner Five systems, made more "visual" and "memory friendly" by using simple diamond alignments.

Simplifying the visualization is the point here. Instead of memorized number scales and math (like the Corner Five system) or off-table visual references (like the Spot-On-The-Wall system), this method uses a seldom-mentioned fact [parallel first-leg tracks converge very nearly to the same spot on the fourth rail] to suggest a simpler visualization using only the relative positions of the diamonds on the opposite long rails.

For instance, notice that my "4:5 slopes" (first diagram above) include the Corner Five "benchmark" shot you demonstrate on your VEPS IV disk, but re-visualized as a simpler diamond-to-diamond alignment (corner diamond to opposite diamond 5 diamonds farther along the long rail). This method suggests these simplified visualizations:

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a six-diamond separation will come close to the corner pocket on the fourth rail (not diagrammed above)

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a five-diamond separation will come close to the first diamond on the fourth rail (first diagram above: "4:3 slopes")

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a four-diamond separation will come close to the second diamond on the fourth rail (second diagram above: "4:4 slopes")

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a three-diamond separation will come close to the third diamond on the fourth rail (third diagram above: "4:2 slopes")

- any diamond-to-diamond alignment with a two-diamond separation will come close to the side pocket on the fourth rail (not diagrammed above)

These are more approximate than the Corner Five calculations, but they're much simpler to visualize and memorize and therefore maybe more useful to some players (like me) who find the Corner Five math to be too much work.

Good summary and good points. This would have been good to add to VEPS-IV. I wish you had posted it about 8 months ago instead. I will at least add it to my bank and kicks FAQ page.

Regards,
Dave

 

[3kushn]

Well this proves why I can't play a lick on a pool table. The diagrams show IMO the table playing a full diamond short compared to a 3C table using the 5 system. The few times I play pool the tables seem to be between 1/2 and a full diamond short to the 4th rail. All that doesn't matter if you know your table.

Here's a simple almost no math system with minimal memorization.

Find your first rail from the corner (5) to kick 3 rails to the other corner. On this table it would be 5 to 2. Now for every diamond the CB moves up the long rail your first cushion moves up 1/2 diamond. So if you move to diamond 4-1/2 (first diamond up the long) your first rail is 1-1/2. For every diamond the CB moves across the short you come back a full diamond. If you look at this you'll see that it sorta proves your parallel lines. You might try making 1/10 diamond adjustment for each diamond either direction from your reference point that the CB is positioned.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Good summary and good points. This would have been good to add to VEPS-IV. I wish you had posted it about 8 months ago instead.

That would have been during my banishment.

I will at least add it to my bank and kicks FAQ page.

Please feel free to use anything I post here as public domain material, Dave (or anybody). I've made some clarifications to my original post that may make it more useful for you.

pj
chgo

 

[dr_dave]

Please feel free to use anything I post here as public domain material, Dave (or anybody). I've made some clarifications to my original post that may make it more useful for you.

Excellent improvement to your post. I now also have it quoted here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/banks_and_kicks.html#Corner​

You, Bob Jewett, and Mike Page are the most frequently-quoted people in my FAQ pages. That's pretty good company ... you should be proud.

Regards,
Dave

 

[AtLarge]

Thanks, Patrick. I think this will be extremely easy to remember. Notice that for each of the cases you cited, the number of diamonds of separation plus the 4th-rail convergence diamond (counting from the pocket as zero) totals 6. That is, 6+0=6. 5+1=6. 4+2=6. 3+3=6. So we could call it the "Sixes System" for three-rail kicks.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Excellent improvement to your post. I now also have it quoted here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/banks_and_kicks.html#Corner​

You, Bob Jewett, and Mike Page are the most frequently-quoted people in my FAQ pages. That's pretty good company ... you should be proud.

Regards,
Dave

Good company indeed, and don't forget yourself. I've learned more from you three guys than I ever thought there was to know about pool. I'm just a good listener and translator. You guys know stuff (and share it freely).

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Thanks, Patrick. I think this will be extremely easy to remember. Notice that for each of the cases you cited, the number of diamonds of separation plus the 4th-rail convergence diamond (counting from the pocket as zero) totals 6. That is, 6+0=6. 5+1=6. 4+2=6. 3+3=6. So we could call it the "Sixes System" for three-rail kicks.

Great observation, and a nice succinct way to describe the basic workings of the system.

It might also be a quick way to adjust the system for different tables or shooting styles - if shots are going short you can "dial the system up" to 6.5 and if they go long you can "dial it down" to 5.5, etc. This also keeps the focus on the important principle of converging parallel tracks rather than on the specific targets defined by circumstances.

pj
chgo

 

[book collector]

3 Rail Kick Tracks

LOL. Thanks - I've fixed that in the post.


Actually, I'm pointing out an alternative way to visualize these tracks that may make it simpler for some players. It does for me.


Yes, I'm aware this is the "corner five" system re-imagined. I think that system is too "mathematical" for many players, so I'm suggesting a more "visual" way of using it.

pj
chgo

I was having trouble understanding this at first but once I understood it , I actually think its a pretty good way to look at it , all systems have adjustments but this gets you right on the correct track pretty quick. I use the spot on the wall most times but I will try this next time I am out, thanks for posting it. I think it might be a great way to explain kicks to some players.

 

[Jal]

Great observation, and a nice succinct way to describe the basic workings of the system.

It might also be a quick way to adjust the system for different tables or shooting styles - if shots are going short you can "dial the system up" to 6.5 and if they go long you can "dial it down" to 5.5, etc. This also keeps the focus on the important principle of converging parallel tracks rather than on the specific targets defined by circumstances.

pj
chgo

Patrick,

Thanks for this nice twist on the 3-rail system. AtLarge's observation should help us to remember it, although it re-introduces advanced math. As a variant on his "Sixes," I might try to recall it as "Sum to Six," or possibly "SixTI" (sounds like Sixty), as a reminder that 6=T+I, where T is the target and I is the interval from long rail to long rail. In moments of extreme clarity, I might even interpret the latter as 6-T=I (nah).

Jim......if I could just remember that darn 6 to begin with!