Look at Joe Tucker's video where he makes three out of four cross side banks. It's not from a wavy cushion. Also, the shot in David Sapolis's video above was on a DCC tournament table, and those were all near perfect in my experience.
Banking with the beard?
- Thread starter CeaseLess
- Start date
Check out the videos of the table tennis playing robot. Pretty amazing.
On p. 38, the Beard seems to say that a 2:1 bank that is lined up straight in with the cue ball and hit with EASY speed is equivalent to the same bank hit with FIRM (medium) speed with two tips of draw (max draw?). When I read that, I did not believe the FIRM hit with backspin would go in on a Diamond table, and I doubted it would work on a Brunswick table either. I wondered what his theory was on why the FIRM hit with two tips of draw should also go in? Topspin transfer from the cue ball to the object ball making the object ball curve after it hits the rail? On p 18, the Beard shows that he understands that object balls hit with more speed into the cushion bank shorter, but I did not believe there would be enough topspin transfer to the object ball to make it curve into the pocket. In other words, I believed the speed effect would be more than the topspin effect. I tested it out on a round blue label Diamond table, and the FIRM bank with draw does not go. Does that somehow work on a Brunswick table??
Last edited:
I think it is top spin transfer. While that gives the object ball a little forward roll, it does not immediately cause smooth rolling, which is what you need to make 2:1 come close.
If the object ball is close to the cushion, there is almost no difference in fast/slow bank angles.
I should have mentioned that I used the setup in the diagrams, where the OB appears to be a 1/2 diamond from the long rail, and I used a 30->12 banking line, which goes at EASY speed.
Maybe that is what the Beard had in mind with those two shots. I'll try the shots again: now I have doubts that I had the OB's as close to the rail as in the diagrams.
Last edited:
By "close to the cushion", what I mean is close enough that the object ball will not pick up any significant follow from the cloth before it hits the cushion. Half a diamond back from the cushion is far enough that the OB can pick up some follow at medium speed and will definitely pick up follow at slow speed.
Neither Solution 1, or Solution 2, will work with that 2 to 1 angle, on my GC3, with rails built by RKC. They both come up a little short of the intended corner pocket. If I alter the initial set up (move the cue ball slightly to the right, or object ball slightly left), then they both go as depicted in the book. Or, I can cut the object ball just a tiny bit to the left, and pocket both banks, using either solution.
That's just the way my table plays, I guess.
You have to find a track that works for the EASY speed on a particular table, then explore whether the other banks listed are equivalent. I adjusted for a Diamond table banking shorter than 2:1, so my track for the EASY speed was 30 -> 12. The doubt I had was whether that same track would work with two tips of backspin and FIRM speed. I'll give it another try in a couple of hours.
Last edited:
Obviously you hit the ball too close to the point and it’ll throw wide. But that’s the titty, we get that.
But it seems to me and I may be wrong, that there’s still a margin of space past the point that’s a little curved. I might have assumed it was the cloth along the nose being pulled tight enough to cause a microscopic compression bend some small distance upwards that can affect rebound angles.
So when I suggest that might be the case, I didn’t mean wavy in the sense that one specific rail might be defective to gaffe the shot. Certainly not suggesting the rail might be unnatural like in need of repair.
I was more suggesting that might be an aspect of the rail profile (on all tables) that gives the shot a little help whether it was your table, a table at DCC, or even my own home table.
But if you’re confident that’s not the case then I do defer to your judgement.
Mechanics do have a tendency to overtighten the cloth near the pockets. It usually loosens up shortly but I think we have all seen pockets with that slight inward curve. One of my first tests of a table used to be running a ball down the rail past the side pockets from both directions checking for a much more common problem, a point sticking out a little!
The shot can work several ways and when I was young with the eyes of an eagle I made it without too much difficulty. I haven't tried it in years now.
Hu