John Schmidt's 626
- Thread starter pk249
- Start date
That's not exactly the hypothesis. If the red and white parts wear at a different rate or the spots are not even to begin with, there can be a problem. I have seen brand new phenolic balls which had bulging numbers.
I believe that the red and white parts are necessarily from different batches of resin.
It was not a red circle ball. It was a "measles" ball.
He's an old time pool player, just like you and me. I would guess he was capable of running 50 balls at one time or another.
I did mean the red spot, on the measles ball, if you couldn't tell.
But the question still is, those red spots, are they a different compound from the rest of the cue ball? I've heard that urban legend, but have no confirmation of that. Have you checked with Aramith?
I have put plenty of juice on cue balls with horizontal spin. Never have I seen one take a turn like that in the video. I think you had an unlevel table, and there could be many reasons for that. Natural materials, carpet, humidity, suddenly a table gets a bit off. I've seen it in tournaments, many times.
But you still think it was the spin, combined with a different resin/compound with the measles ball? Again, I think Aramith would need to confirm that. I sure haven't seen or heard of it.
All the best,
WW
If the table had been "that off" it would have been noticed over and over for hours, with or without a spinning ball. I would think that the red and white parts of the ball would be a slightly different compound. The dye alone would ensure that.
I don't think it was cue ball irregularity. I think this table, at that point of the match, had a bit of lean to it.
All the best,
WW
Last edited:
Are you kidding? I watched Oliver Ortman and Allen Hopkins play a straight pool match in New York in 2000, and they were testing the roll of the table. Bottom to top, big roll to the right. Ortman said no big deal, we'll just play it. Tables sometimes start out bad, but the players go on with it.
Red and white a different compound? Do you have that from Aramith? After all they make carom balls that are either sold white, solid red, or have some spots on them. Do you know them to be different compounds?
All the best,
WW
With this break shot, John puts extreme right hand spin on the cue ball. For some reason, it looks like it's going clockwise at first, but that's an illusion, if you're ever seen tires balanced. It settles out to counter clockwise when it nears the upper right hand pocket, which it was in the first place.
But again, I don't think it was cue ball irregularity. I think this table, at that point of the match, had a bit of lean to it. It happens.
All the best,
WW
Last edited:
I think the ball had right spin the whole time. John clearly hit the ball on the right side from his view point.
I think you're failing to take the stroboscopic effect of video into account. Like wagonwheels that you see in movies, mentioned above.
Yes, I corrected that above, also like airplane propeller blades. They appear to reverse as they speed up.
But again, I don't think it was the cue ball that would have caused that scratch I think John would have started out with a good ball set, including the cue ball. It still looks like the table rolled off.
All the best,
WW
a little cold water
Once we put spin reversing to bed, that didn't happen, we can move on. As has been said many ways, we are just looking at an illusion created by a constant rate of frames per second and a slowing spin. Several factors can come into play. We may be looking at one dot, we may be looking at multiple dots having the same effect as a cartoon as they appear in a slightly different place.
Now the real catch, the cue ball can not have any forward roll at all and remain on a single dot! So for the rough dot giving traction on the surface of the cloth to be true we also have to assume the cue ball has zero roll or it would simply roll off of that dot before it has any real effect.
Anyone believe the cue ball is only spinning with no forward roll? If not, the rough dot theory won't fly.
A little clumsily worded. To be clearer, if the cue ball has any forward roll it wouldn't stay on a rough dot.
Hu
Once we put spin reversing to bed, that didn't happen, we can move on. As has been said many ways, we are just looking at an illusion created by a constant rate of frames per second and a slowing spin. Several factors can come into play. We may be looking at one dot, we may be looking at multiple dots having the same effect as a cartoon as they appear in a slightly different place.
Now the real catch, the cue ball can not have any forward roll at all and remain on a single dot! So for the rough dot giving traction on the surface of the cloth to be true we also have to assume the cue ball has zero roll or it would simply roll off of that dot before it has any real effect.
Anyone believe the cue ball is only spinning with no forward roll? If not, the rough dot theory won't fly.
A little clumsily worded. To be clearer, if the cue ball has any forward roll it wouldn't stay on a rough dot.
Hu
Last edited:
Correct, for the cue ball to be rolling at all, it cannot stay on one dot. That's the problem with these measles ball theories.
Also, the cue ball takes it's most dramatic turn toward the corner pocket when it's spin speed is lowering, not increasing, which puts the blame on the table, rather than the cue ball.
This could be a good reason for getting rid of the measles ball. It lends itself to too many stupid theories. Go back to only making plain cue balls, no markings, or just Blue Circle, or Blue Dot. That's what it was in the old days, and nobody argued about whether the cue ball was at fault.
All the best,
WW
What I'm saying is if the colors on a ball are not the same then they are a slightly different compound even if its at a molecular level. But I guess if carom balls are red, yellow and white...I must be incorrect:wink:
Aramith has not called me in weeks, maybe even longer
What I'm saying is if the colors on a ball are not the same then they are a slightly different compound even if its at a molecular level. But I guess if carom balls are red, yellow and white...I must be incorrect:wink:
Aramith has not called me in weeks, maybe even longer
Two guesses:
One, two low a molecular level of color differences, otherwise the carom players would have noticed it. After all, Aramith carom balls sometimes come with dots.
Second guess: Aramith will not get back to you.
All the best,
WW
You guess very well on this one. I never said the variables in the ball compound would make a noticeable difference, rather that they would be different.
If it is spinning like a top, it can stay on one small patch. Spin a ball in place and then knock it softly. It mostly keeps a pole up.
The cue ball was not new. I got some measurements from the ball that is believed to be the cue ball in the problem shot.
As near as I could measure, the largest diameter was 2.2180 and the smallest was 2.2115 by the cheapie digital micrometer I have. It easily falls through a round hole ball gauge that is 2.240 with plenty of clearance.
We have:
2.255 -- largest allowed diameter by specs
2.250 -- nominal diameter
2.245 -- smallest allowed diameter by specs
2.2180 -- largest measured diameter of the cue ball
2.2115 -- smallest measured diameter of the cue ball
I don't have the right equipment to measure local hills and valleys on a ball, but the dots appeared to have the smallest diameters. 6 mils is a lot of variation for a ball.
As you know I've measured a lot of balls
2.2180 max to 2.2115 min variation within a single ball is huge, huge, huge. And, that CB was way way way too small. Did you by chance measure any of the object balls? I almost can't believe he could play a good stop shot if the OB's were to spec with the CB that small. 2.218 is the kind of difference in size an experienced player could pick up on sight alone, IMO. (without any machinist measurement experience)
I think it was the set he had been practicing with for a long time so kind of like the frog in the pot. I failed to "borrow" any of the object balls.As you know I've measured a lot of balls
As has been discussed, John is a fanatic about using the ball polisher.
Do you think if we could try to recreate the ball (by milling down one of the measles dots), there could be a way to test your theory with a real shot?