Help settle an argument

Is it easy to 'roll-up' behind a ball in the heat of battle?

  • Total voters
    10
TheThaiger

TheThaiger

Banned
Gromulan and I have a difference of opinion. He says playing 1,000 perfect roll-up shots in the heat of battle is easy to achieve. I say they're tricky shots, and even the pros have difficulty with them sometimes.

So who is right and who is wrong? You decide. The first page of this thread adds context, although it should be noted that gromulan has now added the roll-up distance as '3 inches', when, in reality, these shots are more likely to be substantially further, often a couple of feet.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=256025&highlight=roll
 
TheThaiger said:
Gromulan and I have a difference of opinion. He says playing 1,000 perfect roll-up shots in the heat of battle is easy to achieve. I say they're tricky shots, and even the pros have difficulty with them sometimes.

So who is right and who is wrong? You decide. The first page of this thread adds context, although it should be noted that gromulan has now added the roll-up distance as '3 inches', when, in reality, these shots are more likely to be substantially further, often a couple of feet.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=256025&highlight=roll
Click to expand...

Of course the problem is how to define "easy". I say that some of them are tricky and some of them are easy. I think it is possible to do 1000 easy ones in a row. I'd bet against 1000 tricky ones. I'd be willing to bet against 1000 3-inch roll-ups in a row. (Roll up on brown on its spot with two reds on the cushions half way from the top to the middle pockets.)
 
Bob Jewett said:
Of course the problem is how to define "easy". I say that some of them are tricky and some of them are easy. I think it is possible to do 1000 easy ones in a row. I'd bet against 1000 tricky ones. I'd be willing to bet against 1000 3-inch roll-ups in a row. (Roll up on brown on its spot with two reds on the cushions half way from the top to the middle pockets.)
Click to expand...

Oh gromulan...
 
A Tale of Two Stragegies

There are rollups and then there are rollups.

At the World Qualifiers, the kid's strategy, when behind the baulk line and close to it, was to graze the yellow or green and snooker behind the brown.

A long-time pro chose to roll straight up behind a baulk colour, finished a silly millimetre short, and found himself in the wonderful snooker he had intended for his opponent. Since they play the 'miss' rule, his opponent sat happily in his seat, scoring many points.

Those two strategies are some of the reasons why the kid, Luca Brecel, and the chair sitter, Ken Doherty, are in the World Championship, and Mark King and Anthony Hamilton will be watching on TV.
 
TheThaiger said:
Gromulan and I have a difference of opinion. He says playing 1,000 perfect roll-up shots in the heat of battle is easy to achieve. I say they're tricky shots, and even the pros have difficulty with them sometimes.

So who is right and who is wrong? You decide. The first page of this thread adds context, although it should be noted that gromulan has now added the roll-up distance as '3 inches', when, in reality, these shots are more likely to be substantially further, often a couple of feet.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=256025&highlight=roll
Click to expand...
Well, Thaiger...as usual, I'm gonna throw a monkey wrench in the works.
I think you AND Gromulan are wrong....and right.

The snooker style is not conducive to roll-ups.
Just saw Igor in the world qualifying come up short on a green-ball and it
cost him about 20 points. Steve Davis, in the 80's, used to bat the object
ball a few inches on roll-ups.
The problem is that the 'chin on cue' style makes roll-ups very difficult.
Most North American players have no mental blocks about how far their
head is over he cue, so they would tend to roll up better.

However, in the 6x12 world, there are players that can roll up with any-
body...they are the English billiard players.
They stay up in their stance on these shots so they can see the distance
between the two balls....just like pool and 3-cushion billiard players.

Here's an example of a 6x12 player who could roll up with anyone.
https://www.google.ca/url?url=http:...outube&usg=AFQjCNHhIusUVdikEdb2VQewfrzCUc37sA

And here's a 3-cushion player who can do it all day also....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH2N6R9onPE&feature=related

The best of the British pros that I saw in the 80's for rolling up was
Rex Williams...a World English billiard champion...and he stood up like
John Roberts jr when he did it.
http://www.eaba.co.uk/mags/bp/1920/12/robertsInAction.jpg

Personally, I wouldn't bet on ANYONE rolling up 1,000 times though.
 
Last edited:
Scaramouche said:
There are rollups and then there are rollups... Luca Brecel, and the chair sitter, Ken Doherty, are in the World Championship, and Mark King and Anthony Hamilton will be watching on TV.
Click to expand...

Yes, and having watched both those matches, a 'simple' roll up isn't nearly so simple in such circumstances.
 
TheThaiger said:
Gromulan and I have a difference of opinion. He says playing 1,000 perfect roll-up shots in the heat of battle is easy to achieve. I say they're tricky shots, and even the pros have difficulty with them sometimes.

So who is right and who is wrong? You decide. The first page of this thread adds context, although it should be noted that gromulan has now added the roll-up distance as '3 inches', when, in reality, these shots are more likely to be substantially further, often a couple of feet.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=256025&highlight=roll
Click to expand...

Actually what I said was that the shot was too easy for professionals in a real competition, and that as such it gains an unfair advantage.

I went on to say that I would bet on doing 100 in a row and maybe 1000 if the bet was high enough. Thaiger, who doesn't actually play snooker of course (or doesn't play it well, anyways), disagrees and wants to prove himself right without having to put up any cash (shocking), so he created the pole here.

But this shot, like so many others, is primarily solved through technique and practice, so for those of you who want to see my point, do it like this: Set the cue ball at some distance from the object ball, say 6 inches. Now take the shot from a slightly higher position than you normally take, and with a very short stroke, gently cue through the bottom of the cue ball, basically playing a mini 'drag' shot. The drag spin will effectively put the brakes on the cue ball just as it approaches the object ball, and even on new cloth the balls will kind of adhere as a result and you should lay a perfect snooker. Practice that a dozen times or so and pretty soon you'll be able to do it at pretty much any reasonable distance.
 
gromulan said:
Actually what I said was that the shot was too easy for professionals in a real competition, and that as such it gains an unfair advantage.

I went on to say that I would bet on doing 100 in a row and maybe 1000 if the bet was high enough. Thaiger, who doesn't actually play snooker of course (or doesn't play it well, anyways), disagrees and wants to prove himself right without having to put up any cash (shocking), so he created the pole here.

But this shot, like so many others, is primarily solved through technique and practice, so for those of you who want to see my point, do it like this: Set the cue ball at some distance from the object ball, say 6 inches. Now take the shot from a slightly higher position than you normally take, and with a very short stroke, gently cue through the bottom of the cue ball, basically playing a mini 'drag' shot. The drag spin will effectively put the brakes on the cue ball just as it approaches the object ball, and even on new cloth the balls will kind of adhere as a result and you should lay a perfect snooker. Practice that a dozen times or so and pretty soon you'll be able to do it at pretty much any reasonable distance.
Click to expand...

^^

The sound of gromulan squirming.
 
With the "miss" rule as it is, the roll-up to a colored ball, particularly behind a color in baulk, is a shot that I believe should be outlawed in today's modern game of snooker.

I would like to see at some point in the future the existing "free-ball" rule applied at all times - namely you cannot snooker directly behind the nominated free-ball, or in this case the nominated colored ball. But of course you'd still be permitted to play a colored ball and leave the cue-ball resting behind another colored ball.

Snooker players are not so keen to see radical changes in the rules, but I think this change would be better for the game as a whole.
 
Alan Morris said:
With the "miss" rule as it is, the roll-up to a colored ball, particularly behind a color in baulk, is a shot that I believe should be outlawed in today's modern game of snooker.

I would like to see at some point in the future the existing "free-ball" rule applied at all times - namely you cannot snooker directly behind the nominated free-ball, or in this case the nominated colored ball. But of course you'd still be permitted to play a colored ball and leave the cue-ball resting behind another colored ball.

Snooker players are not so keen to see radical changes in the rules, but I think this change would be better for the game as a whole.
Click to expand...

Interesting idea. Sounds good. I'm always surprised how reticent snooker players are towards change - I cannot understand why they don't want the measles CB, for instance.
 
Alan Morris said:
With the "miss" rule as it is, the roll-up to a colored ball, particularly behind a color in baulk, is a shot that I believe should be outlawed in today's modern game of snooker.

I would like to see at some point in the future the existing "free-ball" rule applied at all times - namely you cannot snooker directly behind the nominated free-ball, or in this case the nominated colored ball. But of course you'd still be permitted to play a colored ball and leave the cue-ball resting behind another colored ball.

Snooker players are not so keen to see radical changes in the rules, but I think this change would be better for the game as a whole.
Click to expand...

Lot of snooker players will not want to hear this.....
American snooker rules takes care of all this.

'Free ball' should have been taken out and shot long ago...as soon as
the 'shoot again' option was introduced.
And the 'miss' rule makes a mickey mouse snooker too important.
 
pt109 said:
Lot of snooker players will not want to hear this.....
American snooker rules takes care of all this.

'Free ball' should have been taken out and shot long ago...as soon as
the 'shoot again' option was introduced.
And the 'miss' rule makes a mickey mouse snooker too important.
Click to expand...

Indeed... I know several of the top professional players myself, but it seems at any level of the game snooker players are not in favor of radical changes in the rules.

You are right in saying that the current "miss" rule can make such a simple roll-up snooker have too much of an impact on the outcome of a frame, and the new rule I suggested would negate this. It would also cut out that defensive play which can slow down the pace of a frame.

We at the United States Snooker Association don't recognize the American snooker rules, so I would personally like to see these changes at some time in the future.
 
I agree with Steve Davis. It is not easy, at least not at distance and when the pressure of competition is placed on one's shoulders. I don't recall the specific tournament, but when doing commentary, he has made comments about the roll up shot on many occasions.

I'm no pro, but it seems to me that anytime you need to precisely control distance under pressure things can go wrong.

By the way, I am a traditionalist such has been mentioned. I like the rules the way they are, thank you very much.
 
Well, I've seen two players completely hound it up already, with Ebbo lousing up a third this afternoon.

Three 'easy' shots cocked up in three days, and they're just the ones I've seen. Now, where's grommy gone? Practicing, perhaps?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top