One-rail kick power/spin choices for smallest margin of error
- Thread starter Oikawa
- Start date
Gearing english is the amount that "rolls" the ball's surface across the rail's surface so there's no rubbing.
It's the same tip offset for the same angle of approach: 2/5 of the distance from center CB to the point on the CB opposite the ball/rail contact point.
pj
chgo
"Gearing" english means the amount of side spin that rolls the ball across the cloth (or OB if that's what you're hitting) with no friction - i.e., to eliminate any "taking hold". It's generally used to describe "gearing" across an OB to avoid throw, but can also mean rolling ("gearing") across the rail surface to avoid friction.
pj
chgo
To answer your question that I highlighted in bold in your response: I think the nuances, or perhaps a better way of putting it --- a standardized way of optimizing a hit in a perfect setting that you're seeking, would be pretty much immediately sacrificed to the needs of dealing with the other more important variables, such as table conditions, layout of the table, blocking balls forcing an angle change, and desired result after the hit.
So if that information does exist on paper --- and I don't know that it does --- it probably would never be used in an actual game.
pagaspoling
Member
I think that the hardest thing to predict with one rail kicks is the curve after rail contact. If you have a small angle I think its okay to use a rolling cue ball but on most other angles i think stun is the best spin to use. If you look at pros that try to make balls with one rail kicks stun and medium fast speed is the most common way. If the OB is close to the rail speed is not that important since the ball wont have time to curve so then you can use sidespin to make the pot as thick as possible.
Any kick thats on or less than number one you can both roll and stun. From 1 to 3 i would stun the ball to avoid curve.
the fact that the gearing english helps the ball slide/roll off the object (rail or object ball)
decreases the "grab/friction " but i dont see how it eliminates friction since the objects touch each other and the english has to have an effect on the collsion
i could be wrong
when using gearing english to "eliminate" throw
isnt the english throwing the object ball just enough to get a "pure" angle from the collision and not enough to "throw"the object ball?
Oikawa
Member
For thinner kicks like 3 (or 4 which isn't drawn in that diagram following the same logic), I personally find it more consistent to shoot them hard, but with top instead of stun. Might just be that I'm more used to doing it like that, but stunning for me seems more prone to missing the target due to slight errors in power (or tip position, if you have bad fundamentals. But this isn't really an issue for me, I can hit the tip pretty accurately) causing much more of a difference compared to using top. So even though top curves more, as long as you predict the curve well, it's more repeatable and less sensitive to misjudging the power.
Not slide - only roll. That's how friction is eliminated.
It's the same as if the objects touch each other while sitting still - there's just enough english so the CB's surface (where it touches the rail) travels backwards at the same speed the ball is moving forward, so no rubbing and no friction.
pj
chgo
Oikawa
Member
To clarify on this, even if using that method, wouldn't you still need to hit the cue ball at a very specific speed, for the cue ball to have exactly the right amount of spin left upon hitting the rail? So CB further from the rail = need to hit with more speed. Any info on this?
I'll have to let a more knowledgeable poster answer that one. I learned the basic principle from Dr. Dave - maybe he or Bob J. will notice this and help us out.
pj
chgo
The player will have to practice with different spins and distances and angles and speeds to learn the system. In theory it should make the shot immune to slide. The player would be learning the required spin, etc. to make the rail act like a perfect mirror. I think different conditions are likely to require a different spin.
Does anyone else think @Oikawa is alittle too obsessed with these details ? And obsessed in general based on his other posts?
you use the general accepted principles and learn fro experience
@Oikawa
no disrespect intended but paralysis by analysisis a well known condition
this post is to help you
good luck with your game
you use the general accepted principles and learn fro experience
@Oikawa
no disrespect intended but paralysis by analysisis a well known condition
this post is to help you
good luck with your game
Oikawa
Member
My curiosity for the technicalities of the game does not take away from appreciating and doing the grind of shooting all the common shots thousands of times required to get better. I don't see how those two take anything away from eachother. It's both an interesting game to understand deeply, and an interesting game to play with experience and instincts.
I understand how analysis by paralysis could affect some folks negatively during matches, but I don't find I have an issue with it, and that's also a completely separate issue from simply being curious about the details in general. I'm not advocating for overthinking things during matches and spending too much time every shot, but it's an intricate game, and I believe that the more analytical understanding and curiosity you have, the more food your subconscious gets to digest, which leads to better results in the long run, even if you play at a quicker pace and/or don't think about anything theoretical during the games.
Last edited:
GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR GAME.....
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
this seems to give me the best results, I may slide or spin too much or too little so a rolling ball has less to go wrong.
pagaspoling
Member
The mai reason I think that most good players use stun and medium fast speed is that it is the easiest shot to visualize and feel, you basically just have to judge the rebound of the cushion. If you play roll you would have to judge where the curve will grab and how big it will be. More speed will make the curve larger and maybe that makes the shot easier to judge.
Last edited:
Jimmy Fusco was probably one of the greatest kickers in the game. I traveled to Philly just to spend time with him learning kicks. You guys can theorize all you want about the optimal kick speed, but Jimmy taught me that the speed you choose should be directly related to the outcome of the shot that you desire.
Another of the greatest kickers is Efren, who also mixes it up. If there was an optimal kick speed for each type of kick shot, his diversity goes against that, but he sure seems to get good outcomes.
Another of the greatest kickers is Efren, who also mixes it up. If there was an optimal kick speed for each type of kick shot, his diversity goes against that, but he sure seems to get good outcomes.
Yes, there are some people who go too far and endlessly spin and spin, trying to analyze every little thing. I don't see that about Oikawa. I think this person is asking some interesting questions and keeping an open mind as well. He (or she) is trying to formulate a baseline for himself for kicks, which would serve as a reference point.
There are kicking systems and theories and all kinds of opinions out there about the topic because kicking isn't easy. There are a several variables to consider.