Help with this shot

[td873]

http://www.kamuitips.com/performance.htm

Shot #8, I can't figure out how he does it

[VIDEO LINK BELOW]
King,

Here is how you shoot this on NORMAL cloth:
1) line the cue ball and object ball up so that they are pointed 1 ball to the inside of the first diamond.
2) line up so that you are shooting with as little angle as possible - but with the maximum draw you can muster
3) shoot the shot with no english - just straight draw
4) hit it pretty hard
5a) if you run into the stack of balls, you can either hit it a bit harder or change your angle a tiny bit so that you are hitting object ball slightly thinner.
5b) After contact with the object ball, the cue ball will hit the rail and - if you have enough draw - it will curl back.
6) Smile when it works

This is a pretty hard shot because of the angle the stick has from shooting so close to the rail, how hard you have to hit it, and the amount of draw required for it to work on older cloth. Difficult - put possible. It is MUCH easier on new/fast cloth.

Also, on NEW cloth you may have to adjust the angle by moving the line of centers closer to the first diamond. I don't have new cloth, so I'm not certain how far, but it shouldn't be much. Lastly, you don't have to hit it as hard because the spin will "stay" longer on new cloth.

Although you could theoretically shoot this with either inside or outside english - it is not necessary or recommended for a number of reasons:
1) moving away from the center line means you will be getting less draw
2) you have to account for deflection with english
3) you have to adjust your aim with english.

To illustrate, here is my video of this shot. Note that my cloth is not new so I am shooting this pretty hard. Also, I am shooting with the measels cue ball so you can see that there is no english on the ball - only draw. Lastly, I didn't shoot at it 100 times and clip out the one time it worked. I shot this 5 times in a row - camera rolling - making 4, and barely missing the 5th. If you want pudding - here's your pudding

Let me know if you have any other questions. I'll be happy to help.

-td

 

[Craig Fales]

If the diagram of the CB's path for shot 8 is accurate, the tip placement shown for that shot (low center) is wrong. It can only be made with low left.

Left is necessary to drive the CB forward off the rail to get it past the blocking balls, then the draw takes over and curves it back uptable.

If I was trying that shot for a video, I'd slick the CB and chalk the rail.

pj
chgo

P.S. But after looking at the video I don't think the diagram is accurate - low center may work for the shot on the video.

You can see in the vid he uses low left...

 

[rcarson]

[VIDEO LINK BELOW]
King,

Here is how you shoot this on NORMAL cloth:
1) line the cue ball and object ball up so that they are pointed 1 ball to the inside of the first diamond.
2) line up so that you are shooting with as little angle as possible - but with the maximum draw you can muster
3) shoot the shot with no english - just straight draw
4) hit it pretty hard
5a) if you run into the stack of balls, you can either hit it a bit harder or change your angle a tiny bit so that you are hitting object ball slightly thinner.
5b) After contact with the object ball, the cue ball will hit the rail and - if you have enough draw - it will curl back.
6) Smile when it works

This is a pretty hard shot because of the angle the stick has from shooting so close to the rail, how hard you have to hit it, and the amount of draw required for it to work on older cloth. Difficult - put possible. It is MUCH easier on new/fast cloth.

Also, on NEW cloth you may have to adjust the angle by moving the line of centers closer to the first diamond. I don't have new cloth, so I'm not certain how far, but it shouldn't be much. Lastly, you don't have to hit it as hard because the spin will "stay" longer on new cloth.

Although you could theoretically shoot this with either inside or outside english - it is not necessary or recommended for a number of reasons:
1) moving away from the center line means you will be getting less draw
2) you have to account for deflection with english
3) you have to adjust your aim with english.

To illustrate, here is my video of this shot. Note that my cloth is not new so I am shooting this pretty hard. Also, I am shooting with the measels cue ball so you can see that there is no english on the ball - only draw. Lastly, I didn't shoot at it 100 times and clip out the one time it worked. I shot this 5 times in a row - camera rolling - making 4, and barely missing the 5th. If you want pudding - here's your pudding

Let me know if you have any other questions. I'll be happy to help.

-td

very nice

All I was trying to say was that the site showed you the cue tip location and that is how it was made, no need to argue. Thank you for posting your video, nice job by the way.

 

[shankster8]

Dang, a hundred posts have appeared, so it's probably been explained better than this: Low left brings the ball to the side rail, the left spins it downtable (below the cluster) and then the draw kicks in and pulls it back uptable after the cue ball clears the cluster, IMHO

 

[rcarson]

Dang, a hundred posts have appeared, so it's probably been explained better than this: Low left brings the ball to the side rail, the left spins it downtable (below the cluster) and then the draw kicks in and pulls it back uptable after the cue ball clears the cluster, IMHO

Actually if you view the video that td873 posted of himself making the shot with just DRAW you would see that left english isn't needed.

td873, can you do another video showing what would happen with low left... I think IMHO that the cue ball would go towards the side rail between the corner pocket and the half way point to the side. I don't think you will get the same results or even anything that would be similar. You couldn't get on the same line to bring the cue ball above or even near the side pocket.

 

[Colin Colenso]

You can play a similar shot with pure draw, however, a touch of left, as it appears he uses in this video, helps move the CB lower down the table before the draw kicks in.

A slippery cloth certainly makes this shot easier.

 

[shankster8]

You can play a similar shot with pure draw, however, a touch of left, as it appears he uses in this video, helps move the CB lower down the table before the draw kicks in.

A slippery cloth certainly makes this shot easier.

IMHO, the left is necessary to move the cueball below the cluster, then, the draw kicks in.

 

[Rod]

Speed has as much or more influence than english. Any c/b hop as in cue elevation will also delay draw as well. There are several types of such shots with draw or follow. It may not matter if english is used or not. In this case I really doubt it matters other than less effective draw if side english is used.

Rod

 

[shankster8]

Rod, I agree, and I am no one to be correcting real shooters like this forum is full of, just thought I could add something. Good post!

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I am 100% certain that this shot can and should be shot with no side spin - only straight draw. Ask me how I know.

Not as diagrammed (with the cueball hitting the rail at the angle shown). As I said, slick rails don't make the CB rebound longer than the geometric angle (angle in = angle out) without sidespin or follow. The geometric angle in the diagram sends the CB into the blocking balls. (By the way, your video shows your CB hitting about a half diamond farther down the rail than the angle shown in the diagram - exactly what I said was needed to make this shot with just draw.)

I am not trying to be offensive or antagonistic here, but ... I know where I fall on the "those than can - do, those that can't - teach" line.

LOL. No need to be an ass over a simple difference, dude.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

You can play a similar shot with pure draw, however, a touch of left, as it appears he uses in this video, helps move the CB lower down the table before the draw kicks in.

Yes, either way could work, although from the video it looks like he uses a shallower angle to the rail (like td873 does in his video). It works better to hit the shot with a shallower angle and straight draw, because adding left spin really reduces the amount of draw you can get.

A slippery cloth certainly makes this shot easier.

And/or a "juiced" CB - I bet they use silicone spray or something similar for these videos.

pj
chgo

 

[td873]

Not as diagrammed (with the cueball hitting the rail at the angle shown). [...]
The geometric angle in the diagram sends the CB into the blocking balls. (By the way, your video shows your CB hitting about a half diamond farther down the rail than the angle shown in the diagram - exactly what I said was needed to make this shot with just draw.)

If I remember correctly, you were the one who provided the Wei diagram. Thus, IMO, your argument is fundamentally circular. I.e., you are bootstrapping your argument with a diagram you drew to support your argument. In reality, this shot as referenced by the original poster, as shown on the original website, and as shown in the online video - does not need english to be executed. The ONLY way you need english is if you set it up TO need english. I.e., as you diagrammed it.

And, I am not convinced that your description of "needing" english is accurate in any event, since the cue ball will be hopping, and it is just as likely that you will avoid the blocking balls without english. But, I'm on the fence with this one. If you (or anyone else) has time, please go ahead and post a video illustrating your description and execution.

LOL. No need to be an ass over a simple difference, dude.

After all these years posting with you - back to the RSB days - I didn't take you to be a sensitive one. Lighten up - no need to resort to name calling. My comment was just pointing out that sometimes people take positions without the ability to back their statements up. I wasn't poking directly at you, but it appears you took it that way. Sorry if I hurt your feelings...

Lastly, I'm not going to get into any further debate on this issue. As it stands:
1) I stated my position.
2) I set the shot up.
3) I executed the shot on video.
To a large degree, I think I have supported my theoretical position with practical results.

-td

 

[Patrick Johnson]

If I remember correctly, you were the one who provided the Wei diagram. Thus, IMO, your argument is fundamentally circular. I.e., you are bootstrapping your argument with a diagram you drew to support your argument. In reality, this shot as referenced by the original poster, as shown on the original website, and as shown in the online video - does not need english to be executed. The ONLY way you need english is if you set it up TO need english. I.e., as you diagrammed it.

Sorry, but the shot shown on the original website does need english (but maybe not the one shown in the online video).

kingwang:
http://www.kamuitips.com/performance.htm

Shot #8, I can't figure out how he does it

See the website's diagram below. My Wei diagram duplicates this diagram. This shot can't be made as diagrammed without sidespin.

... Sorry if I hurt your feelings...

I'm sorry you feel the need for all this oneupsmanship.

Lastly, I'm not going to get into any further debate on this issue. As it stands:
1) I stated my position.
2) I set the shot up.
3) I executed the shot on video.
To a large degree, I think I have supported my theoretical position with practical results.

You've shown that the shot you tried works as you said it would. Funny thing is I said the same thing from the beginning - I just pointed out that it may not be the same shot diagrammed on the kamuitips.com web site, and the two shots can't be made the same way (I even provided two Wei diagrams to show the difference, labeled "DIAGRAM" and "VIDEO"). This isn't a trivial difference - it's something that's worth knowing and is in direct response to the OP's question.

Sometimes these things are hard to communicate online, even with diagrams. Unnecessary drama makes it even harder.

pj
chgo

 

[td873]

PJ,

It appears that you are relying (incorrectly in my mind) on the results, and trying to formulate a starting position that will achieve it. In particular, you want to create a shot that REQUIRES english to fulfill the prophecy. However, if you start with the indiacated ball position, it becomes apparent that the arrows in the diagram are an approximation - and not an actual diagram of the cue ball path in the shot. That this is true is born out by the linked video. I am attempting to address this using your illustrations in order to specifically demonstrate that a faulty premise results in a flawed conclusion. I do concede that if you START with what you indicated, your conclusion becomes necessary. However, IMO, if you start with the balls as set up in the originally provided diagram, it leads to another conclusion, as illustated below.

==================================================

Sorry, but the shot shown on the original website does need english [...]

See the website's diagram below. My Wei diagram duplicates this diagram. This shot can't be made as diagrammed without sidespin.

First, I believe your interpretation of the original diagram is incorrect. In particular, the original diagram (below) shows that the center to center of the balls is as actually about one ball from the diamond, and NOT 1 ball from the pocket.



..

Second, it appears that you dramatically misplaced the balls on the Wei you drew. Specifically, note the center-center line and also how the 8 ball is not inside the line as illustrated in the original. This will dramatically alter the shot - both in execution and results.



Actually, it appears that the center-center line you created is virtually a straight in shot. I am of the opinion that this does not approximate the original diagram.

In contrast, I believe the shot as illustrated in the original diagram and the original video (as well as mine), reflects a shallower beginning angle than you perceive.



...

In sum, I do not agree that the original shot is how you interpret it. But, I believe that the masses are more than able to judge for themselves.

==============================================

I'm sorry you feel the need for all this oneupsmanship.

Actually, you are the one that stated:

No need to be an ass

I'm just pointing out my position. If you want to illustrate how your position is right, please post your video.

You've shown that the shot you tried works as you said it would.

Pot. Kettle. This is exactly what you have done. However, I believe my set up is more faithful to the original.

This isn't a trivial difference - it's something that's worth knowing and is in direct response to the OP's question.

Clearly, a center-center difference of 6-8" is not trivial. In fact, it may lead to (what I believe is) inaccurate information. Vis a vis



-td

 

[Patrick Johnson]

td,

All you have to look at in either of the diagrams is the angle that the CB goes into the rail. That's the the important thing in both the website diagram and my Wei diagram, because it's the thing that determines how the cue ball will rebound without sidespin.

In both the website diagram and my diagram the CB goes into the rail at about a 45-degree angle and would have to leave the rail at a much shallower (longer) angle to get past the blocking balls. That's the only thing that matters to our discussion. The CB simply can't do that without some sidespin or follow. It's a simple fact.

In the website's video of the shot and your video of the shot it appears that the CB goes into the rail at a much shallower angle (hitting at about two diamonds from the side pocket rather than 1.5 diamonds as shown in the diagram). This is how the CB gets around the object balls (not because it "slides more" on the rail). The diagrams and the videos show two different shots with two different cue ball paths into the rail - one can be made without sidespin (the videos) but the other can't (the diagrams).

pj
chgo

P.S. Not that this matters much, but if you take my Wei diagram to cuetable.com and turn on the gridlines, you'll see that I very carefully placed the CB and all the OBs in pretty much exactly the same locations as on the website diagram. They just look different because the balls on the website diagram are out of proportion to the table size.

 

[td873]

...look at ...the angle that the CB goes into the rail.

...the CB goes into the rail...

This confirms my point that you are illustrating your position through the RESULTS you want and not by the actual setup.

That this is so is reflected in your admission that "In the website's video of the shot and your video of the shot it appears that the CB goes into the rail at a much shallower angle."

I very carefully placed the CB and all the OBs in pretty much exactly the same locations as on the website diagram. They just look different because the balls on the website diagram are out of proportion to the table size.

First, this does not explain why are the center to center lines so far off. Further, I disagree with your assessment, especially in view of the video that illustrates the correct setup. That is, any ambiguity in the diagram as to ball placement should be resolved by the set up in the video - NOT by making up ball placement.

[1] The diagram is inteded to be an exact representation of the shot AND the video is intended to be an illustration of the diagram. I.e., they are intended to represent the same thing - not 2 different shots as you suggest. It is clear you recognize that the video provides a very specific result - which NECESSARILY depend on the setup - however, you disregard this starting position when discussing your setup.

[2] The VIDEO illstrates the correct set up (with correct ball to table proportions). The results (i.e., where the cue ball hits on the rail) should resolve any ambiguity in set up.

[3] The video results cannot be achieved through your set up.

[4] Ergo, your set up cannot be correct, nor the intended one.

Put another way, there is an inconsistency between your interpretation of the shot and the understanding of people who made the diagram and the video. Personally, I resolve this by using all the facts they provided (i.e., the video).

The [your] diagrams and the videos show two different shots

I disagree. They are the same shot. Your argument strains credulity (i.e., that they would diagram one thing, and shoot another - or they would shoot one thing and diagram another). As noted above, the original diagram and shot are intended to be the same. Just look at all the other diagram/videos if you need more proof. They are all the same.

Lastly, I am still not convinced that the shot can even be executed as you diagram it (i.e., almost straight in, 1 diamond from the rail, with draw/inside) such that it achieves the results shown. But, if you have the time, go ahead and post up your video proving your point. I'd like to see it executed.

-td

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I am still not convinced that the shot can even be executed as you diagram

We don't seem to be communicating, so I'll just repeat my one point one more time so it isn't buried in all this:

Regardless of the slickness of the rail cloth or the force of the shot, the CB will not rebound at an angle significantly more shallow than its "incoming" angle unless it has sidespin or follow.

If you think that's wrong, I'd be interested to see your demonstration (neither of the videos show the angles clearly).

pj
chgo

 

[td873]

so I'll just repeat my one [remaining valid] point

[...]

Regardless of the slickness of the rail cloth or the force of the shot, the CB will not rebound at an angle significantly more shallow than its "incoming" angle unless it has sidespin or follow.

I recognized that you are baiting additional commentary for reasons not related to the orignal post. Howver, for the sake of clarity, I will continue to address your "new" points, as well as emphasize the previous points.

============================================
By your above statemetns, it appears you have narrowed your argument to the rebound angle and ignored all other points related to shot execution. In essence, you have deflected all discussion on how to execute this shot, and are now only discussing the physical properties of a cue ball contacting a rail. [E.g., see your previous post #18 "The question was about how the shot can be made, so we're discussing that."]

Thus, IMO it appears, you have focused your argument on the only logical position that has not been disproved through your own statements, logic, common sense, and empirical evidence. I.e.: english affects a cue ball's path after contacting a rail.

A brief recap is in order, and then I will address your most recent argument:

[1] Your set up is fundamentally incorrect - english
The speed at which the shot MUST be executed inherently means the cue ball's spin will have little effect. I.e., english on "faster" shots have less result. Based on this, your shot must be executed with MASSIVE english to have any possible effect. Executing with extreme english reduces the draw on the cue ball and also makes executing the shot more difficult.

[2] Your set up is fundamentally incorrect - angle
The angle of your set up means that the majority of the cue ball's speed is transferred to the OB. Thus, the cue ball will not have sufficient speed to rebound off the side cushion to achieve the intended results.

[3] Your argument is irrelevant - interpretation
The originally posted diagram indicates a shot setup. Those skilled in this discpline would recognize that the cue ball path is an approximation. The intended results (and actual setup) are provided in a directly linked video. Rather than rely on the provided information, you improperly interpret the arrows to be the intended shot, thus the need to discuss english on this shot.

[4] Your argument is irrelevant - 2-shots
The originally posted diagram indicates a shot setup. You believe this is a separate shot from that shown in the video. However, those skilled in this discpline would recognize that they are intended to be identical.

=======================================
As for your further point:

"the CB will not rebound at an angle significantly more shallow than its "incoming" angle unless it has [...] follow."

[5] Your argument is irrelevant - top
This argument is irrelevant. The OP shot cannot be made with top. I'm going to ignore this, since it is completely irrelevant to the execution of this shot.

[6] Stating the obvious - english
English necessarily affects angles off the rail. This is a non-issue, and moreover, obfuscates the true intent of this thread: how to shoot the illustated shot.

======================================

[7] Requesting a demonstration - quid pro quo

If you think that's wrong, I'd be interested to see your demonstration

Likewise. I'd be insterested in your video of the originally diagrammed shot proving your setup is (1) correct and (2) achieves results as shown in the corresponding video(s).

To illustrate the fact that your advocated starting position is flawed [see items [1]-[4] above], I added two more videos. Quid pro quo, please post your demonstration. That is, it's only fair to "put up" after you you call someone out and they comply.

As mentioned, I made a couple more videos to illustate the originally posted shot - and to specifically illustrate that the shot as you described is incorrect and, more importantly cannot be executed as shown in the original diagram and video. Specifically, due to the nature of the hit on the object ball (i.e., a full hit), there is not enough momentum for the cue ball to hit the rail and then rebound around the pile before the draw catches.
Video I
Video II

8I anticipate you will have comments on how the illustration is incorrect in some way, or that some statement I made earlier can be picked apart and discussed out of context. But rather than comment on how my illustrations or comments are deficient, please post your demonstration of how it should work.

In this regard, as I believe I have made my points very clear - both through argument and illustration - unless you have something substantive to add, I'll bypass any retort to your continuing inapplicable position(s) while waiting for your demonstration.

-td

 

[kingwang]

Td, thanks a lot for the video!

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I anticipate you will have comments on how the illustration is incorrect in some way

I have only one comment: you have too much time on your hands.

pj
chgo