English on very thin cuts. Poll.

[Cuebacca]

It is hard to be consistent using outside english on a thin cut. For some shots, throw can vary by around nine degrees over a range of tip offsets which span less than one-tenth of an inch. That's the difference between a large amount of throw in one direction and a similar amount in the other direction, and assuming a reasonably fast cueball speed to move the object ball (the span is even greater at slower speeds). As you approach 90 degrees, the offsets that produce one or the other come closer and closer together.

On the other hand, throw is almost constant for thin cuts when using either pure stun, any amount of follow or draw, and even random amounts inside english. In all of these cases, it's predicted to be 0.5 to 0.9 degree, and mostly in the 0.6 to 0.8 degree range for fairly brisk cueball speeds (7 mph and up).

I think the moral is that if you absolutely have to throw the object ball in the reverse direction, outside is the way to go. But it's pretty much of a crap shoot as to what results you'll see. You can overspin it to get a more moderate and predictable amount of throw. But for cuts sixty degrees or more, you have to get precariously close to the miscue limit to do so (you're already close just to get it to reverse in the first place).

Just more babble.

Jim

Thats some interesting babble though, IMO. One could just say "outside english makes judging thin cuts very difficult sometimes", but quantifying it as you did really drives the point home. Now I understand why I always prefer to use inside to thin cut a close object ball down the rail, even if its not frozen to the cushion. Thanks, I think that deserves some rep!

 

[scruggsinhand]

It can "cut" more with inside, but less than 90 degrees. It will "throw" more with outside, so you can get a more than 90 degree result.

unknownpro

well stated....

 

[Masayoshi]

top, if the cut is so thin that you NEED english to pocket it you probably shouldnt be shooting it anyways.

 

[PoolSleuth]

Good Question, with lots of interesting answers.

 

[randyg]

One of my practice routines is half table cut shots using both inside and outside english. Dosen't seem to matter what side I spin the ball on, both are difficult enough. Still the shot comes up more than a little. I find that I don't back off of either shot, just shoot the shot and play position. What more could anyone do....SPF=randyg

 

[CaptainJR]

The throw that inside english gives off reduces the amount of cut you can get on a ball. Outside english throws the object ball toward cutting more. I see no contest here. Outside (or natural) english wins hands down about what can cut the ball at more of an angle.

However, inside english puts the correct spin on the ball that if it does catch the rail a little before the pocket, it will be spinning into the pocket when it hits the side wall of the pocket. So just by saying that outside english will cut the ball more doesn't necessarily mean you are more likely to make the shot. (Colin?)

It really doesn't matter which will do more. The position you need determines which you need to use, not which one cuts a little more or less. Usually the difference is not significant.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... It really doesn't matter which will do more. The position you need determines which you need to use, not which one cuts a little more or less. Usually the difference is not significant.

I think this is mostly true, but sometimes you just have to make the ball and position doesn't matter. When the cut is really thin, and you have to make the ball, what technique gives you the best chance? I think that's what the original poster was getting at.

Here is a test each of us could do to help clear things up.

First, I agree that you can get more than 90-degree cuts with masse. I've heard that Boston Shorty would bet you (with enough tries) that he could cut a spot shot directly into the side pocket. The following test lets you elevate as much as you want.

Put the object ball on the center spot (the spot on the table that is sometimes used at straight pool that is exactly between the side pockets). Put the cue ball on the head string where you please. Place a reference ball on the head spot. Cut the object ball into the side pocket.

This shot is already challenging enough for some with the cue ball near the side cushion, but the idea is to see, for a particular way of shooting, how close you can have the cue ball to the reference ball (head spot) and still shoot the object ball in the side a reasonable percentage of the time.

Let's say that 25% of the time is often enough to make the shot a reasonable one to try.

Try various ways to make the ball: inside, outside, and plain ball. Elevate if you want, but you still have to make 25% of your shots.

Report here on which method, for you, gets the cue ball closest to the reference ball while maintaining a 25% pocketing percentage.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... The following test lets you elevate as much as you want. ...

Some players (such as Efren) are said to be able to cut a spotted ball into either the corner or side with the cue ball in the jaws of a foot pocket. That's more than a 90-degree cut in either direction. In terms of the test above, a similar shot would be to have the cue ball on the head spot (where the reference ball is) and cut the ball on the center spot into either side pocket. I wonder if this is a 25% shot for anyone.

 

[Cornerman]

When the cut is really thin, and you have to make the ball, what technique gives you the best chance? I think that's what the original poster was getting at.

I didn't think that's what the poster was getting at, but you could be right. If, however, he simply wanted to know which tip position/english would cut the ball the most, I would think that you could simply setup any shot (using reinforcing circles, of course) and simply cut the object ball into the cushion, marking where you hit the cushion. Repeat with various amounts of english. See which one gets the most cut.

Fred

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Repeat with various amounts of english. See which one gets the most cut.

The most cut under any condition is with masse or jump. It's possible with masse to bring the object ball straight back towards you -- a 180-degree cut. It's also possible to do that by jumping the cue ball to land on the back side of the ball.

While either of those is possible, I think the shot needs to be be restricted to the practical.

 

[sixpack]

Some players (such as Efren) are said to be able to cut a spotted ball into either the corner or side with the cue ball in the jaws of a foot pocket. That's more than a 90-degree cut in either direction. In terms of the test above, a similar shot would be to have the cue ball on the head spot (where the reference ball is) and cut the ball on the center spot into either side pocket. I wonder if this is a 25% shot for anyone.

Last night playing one pocket: My opponent needed all three and I needed one. All the balls were uptable. He made a ball in the foot corner on my side and left me in the jaws. So I had the aforementioned cut shot. CB Ball in jaws on my side, OB on spot. I made it with a little inside and a little low. And I mean very little low. I've found this to be the easiest and most consistent way to make this shot. Even though I'm a relative novice at 1h, I make this shot on a fairly consistent basis and don't hesitate to shoot it if it's free. I've made it 3 times in the last week, which constitutes about 6 hours of 1-pocket. It's a shot I've found that people love to leave me

CueTable Help

EDIT: I bet this is about a 10% shot for me. I am having trouble visualizing what you're saying about cutting into the side.

RC

 

[Bob Jewett]

... So I had the aforementioned cut shot. CB Ball in jaws on my side, OB on spot. ...

That's a very nice shot when you make it -- psychologically devastating to your opponent. I shoot it some times, and I think it works out OK more than half the time. I play the cue ball with nothing or maybe a little follow.

But that's not the shot I was talking about. Move the cue ball to the jaws of your opponent's pocket and then cut the spotted ball straight into your pocket. That is the shot Efren and some other players are said to shoot as propositions.

 

[Andrew Manning]

EDIT: I bet this is about a 10% shot for me. I am having trouble visualizing what you're saying about cutting into the side.

RC

I was picturing this shot, with the two arrows representing the side and corner referred to:

CueTable Help

Seems like it could only be done with jump.

-Andrew

 

[skins]

the greatest advantage to me of using outside english on thin cuts is the object ball wants to be pushed along (thrown) by the spinnig cue ball towards the pocket. this is very handy when you need to keep the cue ball close for position on the next ball. which means you can hit much softer on the cue. this situation comes up allot.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Seems like it could only be done with jump....

That's what I guess, too, but I'd be willing to pay to see it done. Is there a witness here who noticed the technique used?

 

[sixpack]

I was picturing this shot, with the two arrows representing the side and corner referred to:

CueTable Help

Seems like it could only be done with jump.

-Andrew

Gotcha. Thanks both to you and Bob for the additional explanation. I've never tried that....

Cheers,
RC

 

[Bob Jewett]

I tried the following test last night. I didn't exactly go for 25%; instead I went for a cut-angle difficulty that was even money for at least 1 in 4 tries. This turns out to be very close to a 1 in 6 for an individual shot, or 16%.

I was surprised by the results.

First, all three techniques that I tried (inside, outside, nothing) gave pretty close to the same maximum cut angle for "possible shot" as defined by a 16% success rate. Within about a degree they were:

Inside -- 80 degrees
Outside -- 81 degrees
No side -- 79 degrees

If you would like to see the shot I was looking at, put the cue ball on the headstring 2 ball spaces from the "reference ball" which is spotted on the head spot. When first seen, the shot looks impossible. The object ball is on the center spot, in the middle of the table.

My procedure was to place a coin to mark my current location, try up to four times from that location, and move the coin to a harder or easier location according to whether the shot was made from the current location. This procedure automatically moves the coin to the 16% success point without having to keep any statistics.

I could play the no spin shot with a lot more speed than the side spin shots. The inside spin shot did not move the object ball as far as the other two shots.

My conclusion is that on very thin shots, any kind of spin is OK as far as the percentages go. Inside tends not to move the object ball as far as outside for the same stick speed.

I think this is mostly true, but sometimes you just have to make the ball and position doesn't matter. When the cut is really thin, and you have to make the ball, what technique gives you the best chance? I think that's what the original poster was getting at.

Here is a test each of us could do to help clear things up.

First, I agree that you can get more than 90-degree cuts with masse. I've heard that Boston Shorty would bet you (with enough tries) that he could cut a spot shot directly into the side pocket. The following test lets you elevate as much as you want.

Put the object ball on the center spot (the spot on the table that is sometimes used at straight pool that is exactly between the side pockets). Put the cue ball on the head string where you please. Place a reference ball on the head spot. Cut the object ball into the side pocket.

This shot is already challenging enough for some with the cue ball near the side cushion, but the idea is to see, for a particular way of shooting, how close you can have the cue ball to the reference ball (head spot) and still shoot the object ball in the side a reasonable percentage of the time.

Let's say that 25% of the time is often enough to make the shot a reasonable one to try.

Try various ways to make the ball: inside, outside, and plain ball. Elevate if you want, but you still have to make 25% of your shots.

Report here on which method, for you, gets the cue ball closest to the reference ball while maintaining a 25% pocketing percentage.

 

[Colin Colenso]

I tried the following test last night. I didn't exactly go for 25%; instead I went for a cut-angle difficulty that was even money for at least 1 in 4 tries. This turns out to be very close to a 1 in 6 for an individual shot, or 16%.

I was surprised by the results.

First, all three techniques that I tried (inside, outside, nothing) gave pretty close to the same maximum cut angle for "possible shot" as defined by a 16% success rate. Within about a degree they were:

Inside -- 80 degrees
Outside -- 81 degrees
No side -- 79 degrees

If you would like to see the shot I was looking at, put the cue ball on the headstring 2 ball spaces from the "reference ball" which is spotted on the head spot. When first seen, the shot looks impossible. The object ball is on the center spot, in the middle of the table.

My procedure was to place a coin to mark my current location, try up to four times from that location, and move the coin to a harder or easier location according to whether the shot was made from the current location. This procedure automatically moves the coin to the 16% success point without having to keep any statistics.

I could play the no spin shot with a lot more speed than the side spin shots. The inside spin shot did not move the object ball as far as the other two shots.

My conclusion is that on very thin shots, any kind of spin is OK as far as the percentages go. Inside tends not to move the object ball as far as outside for the same stick speed.

View attachment 24384

Nice work Bob!

FWIW: For this kind of shot I would usually play no spin for accuracy.

If the CB was within 12 inches and the OB was closer to the pocket I'd more likely choose OE. The shorter the distance, the less variation I would have with the CB contact point using BHE. And the lower the speed required, the more I believe the OE will affect the relative throws, making it capable of significantly wider cuts for the same contact points.

Colin

 

[Tennesseejoe]

Great replies Bob and Colin. Not only good information but useful. This is what the forum is all about. Thanks.

 

[Jal]

Nice work Bob!

FWIW: For this kind of shot I would usually play no spin for accuracy.

If the CB was within 12 inches and the OB was closer to the pocket I'd more likely choose OE. The shorter the distance, the less variation I would have with the CB contact point using BHE. And the lower the speed required, the more I believe the OE will affect the relative throws, making it capable of significantly wider cuts for the same contact points.

Colin

Colin, at these severe angles, I'm not sure that using outside for the purpose of aiding the cut is a good idea. If you use it for position, you can apply a pretty fair amount of it without increasing throw very much. But if you use enough of it to attempt to cancel or reverse the throw direction, you can easily find yourself getting the opposite result and maximizing it in the wrong direction.

To reverse it enough to make the complications from swerve and squirt worth it, you have to generate spin/speed ratios (RW/V) just over 1 (approx. 1.05). But here the amount of reversal is extremely sensitive to variations in the ratio. To make it more predictable, you have to go out even further where miscue looms large. And here you don't get much throwback for your trouble.

I think the only situation where it's called for is when you truely have to squeeze every degree out to have any hope of making the shot.

But maybe you see it differently.

Jim

P.S. I downloaded about 3/4 of your video on backhand english (dialup). Great stuff. Thanks for taking the time and trouble.