Oikawa
Well-known member
This makes sense. I guess the better and more consistent your speed control is, the more you start to find stun more preferable over curving the ball with top, when all other things are equal.
One-rail kick power/spin choices for smallest margin of error
- Thread starter Oikawa
- Start date
Oikawa
Well-known member
You can, and should do both. Shoot 200 a day and think a bit on top of that. I find that even better than just kicking 200 with no attempt of analytical understanding about what you are doing on top of it. Intuition develops faster when you understand more, and also the analytical understanding can lead to practicing more of the important kicks over those that you'd almost never end up using in a match. Of course you don't need any of that analytical stuff to become great, I'm just saying it can speed things up a little.
Last edited:
Oikawa
Well-known member
I agree, but think that it's about how good you are at certain shots. Efren and other great kickers do that varying of spin/power for practically all kicks because they simply are so good. For them, hitting the target to not scratch in most kicks is trivial, and they are able to reliably control which side of the target they want to hit with various speeds and spins in their arsenal.
However, most of us aren't at that level, and the lower your skill and the tougher the kick is, the more useful it is to aim full, and/or know what speed and tip position that kick should be shot at, if you want to minimize the error margin. Then once you play more, more kicks become consistent enough with various speeds or spins, that you stop choosing the "most accurate hit" tool for specific shots, due to the choice of spin/speed outweighting the extra accuracy, so now you can pick any of those styles.
Of course even as a beginner there are some kicks where the hit is easy enough that you should do it like Efren to begin with, e.g. when the OB is very close to the cushion. The better you are, the less and less one-railers you should approach by optimizing for not scratching. To generalize, at fargo 400, this style of thinking is useful in most one-rail kicks. At 600, it's mostly useless, but there's still some tougher one-railers that you risk scratching. At 800, it's practically useless. But even a 800 is probably optimizing to not scratch for a four-railer. It's all about being good at assessing your error margins for different options.
Last edited:
both
Oikawa
Well-known member
From this thread, to not repeat myself or others too much, I'll just say that there's very knowledged people on here and I appreciate all the information and opinions that have been posted this far.
In general, all sorts of things. Some systems, some principles, some intuition, some knowledge. My answer might seem like I'm avoiding the question or being too pedantic, but I don't see value in starting to list all the hundreds or thousands of little intricacies for various shots or types of shots.
I have only played for 3 years, I don't claim to be an expert. I'm here to learn and absorb.
i just wondered if you could give a short summary from your studies and answers provided
whats most important?
as if i came to you in the pool room and said
could you teach me one rail kicks?
what would you tell me
what factors would you prioritze for me to know?
Oikawa
Well-known member
First of all, I would tell that I am not an instructor or a pro, and that everything I say should be taken with a grain of salt. With that clear, I would ask what you already know, and what you want to learn.
If you were a beginner, I would start by saying that learning one rail kicks well is not high on your priority list, but to learn the basics, I'd first set up a simple kick several times in a row, and have you shoot at it with various spins and powers, talking about the effects of how they change the kick while doing so.
Then I'd probably show and have them try a few variations of basic mirror systems, see what suits them best and explain on a basic level which direction to adjust from the baseline for various things like sidespin, soft vs firm or shallow vs sharp angle of impact.
I'd also talk basics about choosing when to kick or not, and what type of kick you should do, or in other words, strategy and tactics of kicking in various game situations.
Lastly, I'd stress how repetition and doing the work is neccessary to improve your kicks, and perhaps point them to some good online resources that they can use if they want to learn more.
If you were a somewhat experienced player, I'd probably ask about what specific part of kicking you feel you should work on, and discuss that part with you, incase I have some insights about it.
If you were better than me, you wouldn't be asking me about kicking.
As a note, the things I asked about in this thread originally are not some big part of kicking that suddenly makes things easy if figured out, just some small things I was curious about. So I wouldn't go into them, if someone asked me to teach them kicks, unless that topic specifically came up in some context and they were curious about my opinion.
Last edited:
For those who want to test any one-rail kick system, I urge you to set up a spot-on-the-wall target.
For example, if you are working on the 2:1 diamond system, it is useful to observe that all of the whole-number lines in the system, 2-to-1, 4-to-2, 6-to-3, converge/cross at a single point. That point is really easy to find -- just put a ball on a bar stool and move it around a little until it is on all those lines. It helps to know that 0-to-0 is also a line in the system and it is along the nose of the cushion.
All the other 2:1 paths also go towards that target -- 3-to-1.5, 1-to-0.5, 2.86-to-1.43, and all the rest.
With the target out there you don't have to do any arithmetic. If you miss, it's not because you forgot to carry the 1. Also, if you change your stroke, speed, or spin somehow, you can see how far from the spot-on-the-wall target you have to aim.
The spot is almost never on the wall, in spite of the name. The distance from the table for the target is critical for the system to work.
For some systems the spot is not a sharp, single point. It ends up kind of smeared out. Usually the center of the smear works well enough.
For example, if you are working on the 2:1 diamond system, it is useful to observe that all of the whole-number lines in the system, 2-to-1, 4-to-2, 6-to-3, converge/cross at a single point. That point is really easy to find -- just put a ball on a bar stool and move it around a little until it is on all those lines. It helps to know that 0-to-0 is also a line in the system and it is along the nose of the cushion.
All the other 2:1 paths also go towards that target -- 3-to-1.5, 1-to-0.5, 2.86-to-1.43, and all the rest.
With the target out there you don't have to do any arithmetic. If you miss, it's not because you forgot to carry the 1. Also, if you change your stroke, speed, or spin somehow, you can see how far from the spot-on-the-wall target you have to aim.
The spot is almost never on the wall, in spite of the name. The distance from the table for the target is critical for the system to work.
For some systems the spot is not a sharp, single point. It ends up kind of smeared out. Usually the center of the smear works well enough.
snookered_again
Well-known member
my take is centerball and no spin, not very too hard or the ball wont return at the correct angle, it will instead come out straighter than the inbound angle. easier to make a lighter shot than to compensate with spin.
I'd go the other direction ( toward the head rail) thinking I'm unlikely to make the shot because a scratch is less likely. maybe try to end up with the CB against the bottom rail or near the rail
with my experience a hit is likely, sinking it, maybe but not even a 50% chance. getting lucky and making a hook also possible but less likely so Id be thinking where on the table is the cue ball likely to end up and try to give the opponent the worst shot you can. and hope for the best.
i'd be unlikely to move the opponents ball, I;d try my best to try to get the CB as far from his as possible.
the other thing that could possibly help is try to hit the black ball on the side that is furthest from his ball, hope to put the black ball between and if not at least the CB will be bouncing down away from his ball and not end up near it.
how you approach it may be better one way or the other , depending upon your experience level and confidence level. I'm no pro, so I'd basically try to play the safety because I'm taking that into account in the choice.
id be happy to get the black ball near a rail and not near the side pocket so if he makes his last ball , at least it's on a rail and he may miss. Bob might play a bit more confidently and with more experience and hope to sink the black ball. I do agree with what he said about taking it lightly.
part o that choisc might depend upon the skill level of your opponent.
often we play snooker in teams with a couple less experienced players and a couple of more experienced ones on either side, that way we learn , its fair and everyone is pretty happy. in such play its important to watch who is following you, if they are really good, I'd play more safety shots. set them up for one and they will be racking up points. with that shot I'd say I have no shot, so try not to leave one, but try to actually hit the black ball.
of course sinking the black is possible. I'd guess 10% chance, for me, so safety shot it is.
What is possible and what I expect to make are two different things entirely.
I'd go the other direction ( toward the head rail) thinking I'm unlikely to make the shot because a scratch is less likely. maybe try to end up with the CB against the bottom rail or near the rail
with my experience a hit is likely, sinking it, maybe but not even a 50% chance. getting lucky and making a hook also possible but less likely so Id be thinking where on the table is the cue ball likely to end up and try to give the opponent the worst shot you can. and hope for the best.
i'd be unlikely to move the opponents ball, I;d try my best to try to get the CB as far from his as possible.
the other thing that could possibly help is try to hit the black ball on the side that is furthest from his ball, hope to put the black ball between and if not at least the CB will be bouncing down away from his ball and not end up near it.
how you approach it may be better one way or the other , depending upon your experience level and confidence level. I'm no pro, so I'd basically try to play the safety because I'm taking that into account in the choice.
id be happy to get the black ball near a rail and not near the side pocket so if he makes his last ball , at least it's on a rail and he may miss. Bob might play a bit more confidently and with more experience and hope to sink the black ball. I do agree with what he said about taking it lightly.
part o that choisc might depend upon the skill level of your opponent.
often we play snooker in teams with a couple less experienced players and a couple of more experienced ones on either side, that way we learn , its fair and everyone is pretty happy. in such play its important to watch who is following you, if they are really good, I'd play more safety shots. set them up for one and they will be racking up points. with that shot I'd say I have no shot, so try not to leave one, but try to actually hit the black ball.
of course sinking the black is possible. I'd guess 10% chance, for me, so safety shot it is.
What is possible and what I expect to make are two different things entirely.
snookered_again
Well-known member
of course, but getting a grasp on why things work is also helful. I know some like to think more analytically. Often I find peope tell me things and it takes a while to grasp what they are saying then two days later during practicing I'tll come together and help a lot.
I know my comments above were not from the same rationale or experience bob has, that doesn't' mean I cant' still comment or think about things and try to work some of what he is saying into a part of my brain where it makes sense. It does mean that bob's opinion and advice may be more technically correct. I think adult learners often need to understand the "why" because then things sink in and fit together. Its not a substitute for table time but I think a combination of technical mind boggling info. combined with periods of relaxed play is the way forward , for me.
Id never heard of this "gearing" term but I guess it's just sort of natural that since the ball is changing direction during it's bounce, the sligght spin is actually just basically helping the ball do it's most "relaxed" motion.
I take it the "gearing" is different from changing spin to avoid the true angle to steer around a ball that is in your path and using spin to accomplish that. The gearing, as I take it, is just enough spin to assure a true bounce angle basically.
if I deciphered that sort of right, it's food for thought and I'd say it was helpful , to me.
Oikawa
Well-known member
During today's practice session, I did some one-rail testing with two different methods that I found the most promising for the most common range of shot angles:
1. Top spin, soft rolling speed, using the diamond line as a mirror
2. Top spin, varying shot speed by a combination of knowledge and feel, using the "true" mirror point as a mirror
My setup was the following:
Yellow line = diamond mirror line
Red line = "true" mirror point (the point where the cue ball's center is on impact)
Six different cue ball positions, all 1 diamond off the long rail, starting from 0.5 from the long rail and going 0.5 forward each time until the 3rd diamond.
I did each of the 6 shots 4 times for both of the styles, so 24 shots per style. It should be noted that I didn't use any chalk on the rail or other external tools to aid me in sighting to the mirror points, I checked/memorized/aimed at it just like I would in games (within a reasonable time, takes me around 20-25 seconds when done carefully for the whole execution from walking to start finding the mirror line to shooting the ball), so there obviously will be slightly more random results compared to using a marker, but I'd say I'm pretty good at seeing and keeping that line.
The results were the following:
With style 1 (soft rolling speed):
8 pots
13 hits
3 misses
With style 2 (varying speed with feel/knowledge):
7 pots
17 hits
0 misses
Observations:
- I'm not entirely sure why I missed 3 times with the rolling one, it didn't seem like I aimed them wrong or rushed my fundamentals. All of the 3 misses were from the two leftmost cue ball positions, and were just barely missed, none was way off. Maybe I shot them too softly, and it has an effect? Or perhaps the soft speed causes the cushions to me more prone to behaving more unpredictably due to imperfections in the table? No idea at all, just guessing here. I wouldn't say that the two leftmost cue ball positions simply require an adjustment, because I also potted from them 2 times out of 8.
- Both methods were missing roughly equal amounts to both sides, which is a good sign.
- Both methods seem to pot the ball roughly 1/3 of the time for me from that distance.
- For both methods, I had more pots the closer I was to the 8 ball, or in other words, the smaller the kick angle was. This isn't too surprising, especially with rolling ball I had a vague expectation that it's most consistent for smaller angles.
- I never missed with style 1, even though I used varying speed, which in the original post, I considered might generally be a bad idea over varying your aiming offset or tip position, but it works well for this specific shot type at least. This is the method I've been using the most for many months now when faced with a kicks where I try to pot the OB, so I guess the experience pays off as well. The larger the kick angle, the harder you need to shoot, and past a certain angle+distance, you simply can't aim harder, and therefore need to start adding an aiming offset to compensate for the larger curve. All of the shots in this experiment were small enough to not require that aiming offset.
1. Top spin, soft rolling speed, using the diamond line as a mirror
2. Top spin, varying shot speed by a combination of knowledge and feel, using the "true" mirror point as a mirror
My setup was the following:
Yellow line = diamond mirror line
Red line = "true" mirror point (the point where the cue ball's center is on impact)
Six different cue ball positions, all 1 diamond off the long rail, starting from 0.5 from the long rail and going 0.5 forward each time until the 3rd diamond.
I did each of the 6 shots 4 times for both of the styles, so 24 shots per style. It should be noted that I didn't use any chalk on the rail or other external tools to aid me in sighting to the mirror points, I checked/memorized/aimed at it just like I would in games (within a reasonable time, takes me around 20-25 seconds when done carefully for the whole execution from walking to start finding the mirror line to shooting the ball), so there obviously will be slightly more random results compared to using a marker, but I'd say I'm pretty good at seeing and keeping that line.
The results were the following:
With style 1 (soft rolling speed):
8 pots
13 hits
3 misses
With style 2 (varying speed with feel/knowledge):
7 pots
17 hits
0 misses
Observations:
- I'm not entirely sure why I missed 3 times with the rolling one, it didn't seem like I aimed them wrong or rushed my fundamentals. All of the 3 misses were from the two leftmost cue ball positions, and were just barely missed, none was way off. Maybe I shot them too softly, and it has an effect? Or perhaps the soft speed causes the cushions to me more prone to behaving more unpredictably due to imperfections in the table? No idea at all, just guessing here. I wouldn't say that the two leftmost cue ball positions simply require an adjustment, because I also potted from them 2 times out of 8.
- Both methods were missing roughly equal amounts to both sides, which is a good sign.
- Both methods seem to pot the ball roughly 1/3 of the time for me from that distance.
- For both methods, I had more pots the closer I was to the 8 ball, or in other words, the smaller the kick angle was. This isn't too surprising, especially with rolling ball I had a vague expectation that it's most consistent for smaller angles.
- I never missed with style 1, even though I used varying speed, which in the original post, I considered might generally be a bad idea over varying your aiming offset or tip position, but it works well for this specific shot type at least. This is the method I've been using the most for many months now when faced with a kicks where I try to pot the OB, so I guess the experience pays off as well. The larger the kick angle, the harder you need to shoot, and past a certain angle+distance, you simply can't aim harder, and therefore need to start adding an aiming offset to compensate for the larger curve. All of the shots in this experiment were small enough to not require that aiming offset.
Last edited:
Forget about the calculator. For me, this is the best system to start with. Use some paper hole reinforcers for a starting and ending point. Shoot the same shot with various speeds and english until you are comfortable with the combinations. Then repeat with a completely different set up. Good luck...
Yes, I understand your position for beginners. There are some things we can do to help the cb hold the line as it comes off of a rail, based on the angle of the kick, and it doesn't hurt to know some basic theory that would apply in perfect conditions.
But whatever way you decide as your baseline, if you want that information to be effective, you have to develop a protocol of adjustments for yourself.
As you practice, set up a kick shot, know your baseline kick for that shot, and then practice shooting the kick with softer and harder speeds, and various amounts of side spin. Then when you're in a match and you see a situation where for example, you may be able to pocket a kick shot with a softer hit, you will know how to make the adjustment, at least the basic stuff. There are of course, other factors, particularly the table condition that you can't practice on just one table, but at least you'll be ahead of the game with what you know.
Here are several videos on the subject that Dr. Dave posted recently.
Oikawa
Well-known member
With the mirror system, I almost always aim into a fractional point between diamonds. After standing away from the table, pointing the cue from the mirror point towards the cueball, I observe where that line crosses the diamond line, and memorize it, sometimes as a number, decimal or fraction, and sometimes as a purely visual distance, depending on which is more accurate. For example, 1.5 represents the halfway point between the first and the second diamond. Or if the line happens to land exactly or almost 2/3 of the way between two diamonds, I would just memorize 2/3, or 2/3 plus a millimeter, etc.
There are cases where I aim for something else, e.g. when the middle pocket is along the line. Instead of imagining the middle of the pocket acting as the 4th diamond, I simply pick another visual target from the middle pockets details, for example a certain point on the pockets edge, or some artwork on the table. Whatever is the most accurate to aim at across a given line.
