Enough Spin Transfer To Cause Object Ball To Curve? Watch Video and You Decide.

S

sde

...
Silver Member
I found this video of a 9 ball break and always liked it because of the way the 8 ball chases the 9 into the hole. I recorded it 2008 and just for fun I did some editing with a new software.


After making it slow motion I noticed a couple of balls (4 and 8) making large curves and the 4 ball with a large amount of spin even after all the other balls have come to rest (or in a hole).

I have never noticed object balls curving like this before and hope that someone can explain what is happening.

Here is the link to the short video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m314ciJZX2g


Thanks
Steve

I added a new version of the same video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PXnDLUosuw
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Siz
It is pretty cool but I have never watched a break in slow motion to know if its uncommon or not. But that 4 is really spinning hard.
 
This is an awesome video, first of all. It is incredibly informative, and offers great insight to the English transfer debate. To those who think you can't apply spin to an object ball, this should discredit you. I believe Alciatore said it was roughly 30% that can be transferred, under normal, clean conditions. Add humidity, dirt, and anything else, and that percentage goes up or down. High speed cameras are incredible, and are key to understanding the incredible physics complexities in billiards.
 
Luxury said:
Awesome video. Someone is going to try to invent a new shot now.
Click to expand...

Thanks.


SkyscraperChris said:
This is an awesome video, first of all. It is incredibly informative, and offers great insight to the English transfer debate. To those who think you can't apply spin to an object ball, this should discredit you. I believe Alciatore said it was roughly 30% that can be transferred, under normal, clean conditions. Add humidity, dirt, and anything else, and that percentage goes up or down. High speed cameras are incredible, and are key to understanding the incredible physics complexities in billiards.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

When I first watched this in slow motion I was thinking the same thing about the spin transfer. That 4 ball must have had an incredible amount of spin to get that much transfer, maybe to double contact increased the transfer. I don't know.

FYI, I was not using a high speed camera, just consumer grade HD Canon and in the SD mode. I live streamed this and ustream at the time (Aug. 2008) would not support HD input. The editing software did a good job of smoothing out the slomo.


flash5153 said:
6 balls on the break and on video ,,,ain't too shabby either!! Considering the few times it happens.
Click to expand...

True and did you notice where he parked the cue ball?
 
Looks like the spin of both balls are created by the collision, NOT by one spin transferring to another.
 
Steve...good stuff with this video....was cool how you broke it down and explained what was going to happen prior to it....His break wasnt bad either. :)
 
The 4 was a wing ball and got its spin from hitting the side and lower rail. It come across table and collided with the 8. The 8 bumped the side rail before it went up table. When a spinning ball contacts another it throws both balls off there axis to some degree.

There is a trick shot I use to shoot. I'd spin a ball, then shoot it to the end rail near a corner pocket. It hits the end rail then goes 1 rail into the opposite side. It takes a lot of spin and slow speed, I had to compensate aim and shoot over a foot from the corner pocket to keep it from going in the corner.
What I'm saying is that both-- the c/b and ob get kicked off course from all of the spin on the o/b.

That's what I see happening here and it not unusual to have that effect.

Rod
 
To me it looks like cushion induced spin on the 4 ball. Nothing odd here.

With respect to the 8 ball, it has "top spin" coming off the rail from normal rolling motion. Nothing relevant to the ball's curving comes from the 4. Due to the forward roll, when the 4 ball alters the 8's path (blocking it), it curves forward. If any spin was transferred to the 8, it would be manifested off the top rail - but it rebounds almost the same as it's incidence angle - so there is little to no side spin actually on the 8.

Put succinctly, I doubt that the 4 ball transfered any side spin to the 8, or contributed to its curving. Keep in mind that side spin does nothing to a balls path without top or bottom. For example, look at the 4 ball at the end of the break - it's spinning in place. In my opinion, there is nothing here that sheds any light on collision induced spin in this video. To the contrary, cushion induced spin seems very relevant.

-td
 
It's called swerve. In situations like this with so much energy the crashing balls create spin. The 8 ball would have hit the rail but the spin grabbed and brought it out.

It would be nearly impossible IMO for a person to use the cue ball to hit another ball and have the object ball get this much spin. I think that a person cannot generate that much directed energy through a cue ball to another ball. However it might be possible to create a trick shot which allows a similar effect to happen.

If anyone could then it's probably Jamision Neu or Florian Kohler. They like to make things this happen.
 
John, its real simple. Like I said in an earlier post. Spin an object ball in place, then shoot the c/b into it. They both get knocked way off course. Its easy to get lots of spin in finger pool. Like Mike Massey does or did in exhibitions.

Rod
 
Rod said:
John, its real simple. Like I said in an earlier post. Spin an object ball in place, then shoot the c/b into it. They both get knocked way off course. Its easy to get lots of spin in finger pool. Like Mike Massey does or did in exhibitions.

Rod
Click to expand...

Sure, I agree with you. I don't think that the curve effect shown on the video is a result of masse' but is instead the swerve effect of the ball grabbing the cloth.

To elaborate a little, the swerve effect to me is when the ball is hit along a straight line with side spin and the side spin causes it to grab the cloth and go in the direction of the spin.

The masse' effect is where the ball is hit in pretty much the opposite direction and it reverses course at some point.

Or, to put it another way, it's very difficult if not impossible to swerve around a whole ball and it's very easy to masse around one.

So upon thinking about it I'd say that the 8 ball had some masse-like spin to it but that this was created due to the energy and rails plus the spinning 4 ball.

In any event it's a very cool video and a great topic. Jason Kirkwood is a MONSTER.
 
Lets see a person hit one ball with the cue ball and get the effect you are looking for. With the break, which is awesome, there are just too many things happening to conclude your theory.
 
td873 said:
To me it looks like cushion induced spin on the 4 ball. Nothing odd here.

With respect to the 8 ball, it has "top spin" coming off the rail from normal rolling motion. Nothing relevant to the ball's curving comes from the 4. Due to the forward roll, when the 4 ball alters the 8's path (blocking it), it curves forward. If any spin was transferred to the 8, it would be manifested off the top rail - but it rebounds almost the same as it's incidence angle - so there is little to no side spin actually on the 8.

Put succinctly, I doubt that the 4 ball transfered any side spin to the 8, or contributed to its curving. Keep in mind that side spin does nothing to a balls path without top or bottom. For example, look at the 4 ball at the end of the break - it's spinning in place. In my opinion, there is nothing here that sheds any light on collision induced spin in this video. To the contrary, cushion induced spin seems very relevant.

-td
Click to expand...
Well stated! If had to bet, I'd go with your explanation. While it's quite possible for a ball to "transfer" enough spin to make the eight curve as much as it did, in this case the 4-ball probably had too much sidespin to transfer that much horizontal-axis spin (e.g. "topspin") to the eight. It would be possible if the 8-ball was spinning clockwise before the second collision, such that the balls had relatively little horizontal surface speed between them (i.e., gearing), but that's not the case. The eight ball didn't have the right sidespin component.

For what it's worth, the only thing I disagree with is that it appears to me that the 8-ball did develop enough of a counter-clockwise component to affect its rebound off the top cushion. But it must have gotten that from the side-cushion and not from the 4-ball, which was spinning in the wrong direction to have induced it.

Your contention that imparted sidespin has nothing to do with a ball curving, is also on the mark.

One thing I think we can be nearly certain of, is that the 8-ball did pick up its horizontal-axis spin ("topspin") from both the cushion/bed and the 4-ball. That's assuming the 4-ball had some forward roll before before the second collision, which it appears to have had. But I think it obtained most of it from the cushion/bed and not the 4-ball, for the reasons just stated.

Jim
 
Jal said:
td873 said:
To me it looks like cushion induced spin on the 4 ball. Nothing odd here.

With respect to the 8 ball, it has "top spin" coming off the rail from normal rolling motion. Nothing relevant to the ball's curving comes from the 4. Due to the forward roll, when the 4 ball alters the 8's path (blocking it), it curves forward. If any spin was transferred to the 8, it would be manifested off the top rail - but it rebounds almost the same as it's incidence angle - so there is little to no side spin actually on the 8.

Put succinctly, I doubt that the 4 ball transfered any side spin to the 8, or contributed to its curving. Keep in mind that side spin does nothing to a balls path without top or bottom. For example, look at the 4 ball at the end of the break - it's spinning in place. In my opinion, there is nothing here that sheds any light on collision induced spin in this video. To the contrary, cushion induced spin seems very relevant.
Click to expand...
Well stated! If had to bet, I'd go with your explanation. While it's quite possible for a ball to "transfer" enough spin to make the eight curve as much as it did, in this case the 4-ball probably had too much sidespin to transfer that much horizontal-axis spin (e.g. "topspin") to the eight. It would be possible if the 8-ball was spinning clockwise before the second collision, such that the balls had relatively little horizontal surface speed between them (i.e., gearing), but that's not the case. The eight ball didn't have the right sidespin component.

For what it's worth, the only thing I disagree with is that it appears to me that the 8-ball did develop enough of a counter-clockwise component to affect its rebound off the top cushion. But it must have gotten that from the side-cushion and not from the 4-ball, which was spinning in the wrong direction to have induced it.

Your contention that imparted sidespin has nothing to do with a ball curving, is also on the mark.

One thing I think we can be nearly certain of, is that the 8-ball did pick up its horizontal-axis spin ("topspin") from both the cushion/bed and the 4-ball. That's assuming the 4-ball had some forward roll before before the second collision, which it appears to have had. But I think it obtained most of it from the cushion/bed and not the 4-ball, for the reasons just stated.
Click to expand...
Excellent posts. I agree. Balls don't curve due to sidespin about a vertical axis (for more info, see: OB "swerve" and "turn"). There must be a horizontal-axis masse spin component (like the "roll" of a plane or ship).

In this particular video, when the 4-ball collision changes the direction of motion of the 8-ball, the topspin the 8-ball had before the collision now looks like masse spin. This is the same effect as with a follow or draw cut shot. The top or bottom spin before the collision has a masse component after the collision (due to the change in ball direction), causing the ball to curve away from the tangent line (see HSV B.23 for a super-slow-motion demonstration). The ball is still spinning about roughly the same axis in space both before and after the collision, but the axis is no longer perpendicular to the direction of travel, which causing curving.

Regards,
Dave
 
Thanks for all the replies.

When I posted this thread i didn't quite understand how the 8 ball curved as much as it did. My thought process was mislead by the spinning 4 ball, even though I knew the cause, I didn't recognize it until it was explained by the resident experts.

That explains the path of the 8 ball.

I'm still confused with how the 4 ball acquired all that spin.

td873 said
td873 said:
To me it looks like cushion induced spin on the 4 ball. Nothing odd here.

-td
Click to expand...

I thought I understood cushion induced spin but perhaps I don't. Sorry for not using the correct terms here but how does the 4 ball go into the side rail at ~50 degrees and leave at ~80 degrees, if it didn't already have the side spin or what in effect would be draw. Is it possible that the cushion was compressed and that is causing the ~80 degree exit angle?

Steve
 
Wow! How fascinating is that??? Non-linear Chaos Reigns!!

It's obvious from stopping the video and trying to trace back what happened
( I couldn't) the 4B is the most blurred ball on the table before hitting the 8B.
If I assume that is because it is moving the fastest, where the hell did all
that energy on that single ball come from?

Great video. Cost me abut 45 minutes time out of my life, but worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top