Potting balls with sidespin...

[predator]

Talking about the effect of spin on the object ball. When the cueball is struck softly with side, I noticed that object balls also deflect slightly from their path, that is, the path they would normally have if the cueball had been struck with pure centre. I don't think the effect is as big as with bigger pool balls, but it is there.

Now the question is, are you supposed to use this effect at snooker? We all know that pure centre ball is the most precise, but playing today I really needed a few of these type of shots to stay nearer the black spot. And they worked!

For the first time ever I tried a drill on a snooker table today. I used a standard practice called around the black spot I think. You just pot the ball off the black spot and try to position the cueball for the same type of shot, black spot shot. Sounds easy, but you'll lose the cueball very quickly! Slight angle or straight in will do fine. I noticed that when I left myself too much of an angle (ended up too high), the only way to regain good position was to play with side and draw/screw at the same time changing my aiming point accordingly. Or the opposite, if I ended up too low, I would play top with slight side to throw the object ball in and at the same time try to avoid the cueball to go too high above the black spot. Hopefully I'm making sense.

People talk about how snooker players don't use much sidespin, but only centre ball. I don't think this is true at all. I just can't believe all those table clearences are achieved using just the vertical axis of the cueball.

Any thoughts snooker boys?

 

[Bob Jewett]

Talking about the effect of spin on the object ball. When the cueball is struck softly with side, I noticed that object balls also deflect slightly from their path, that is, the path they would normally have if the cueball had been struck with pure centre. I don't think the effect is as big as with bigger pool balls, but it is there.

Now the question is, are you supposed to use this effect at snooker? ...

When the cue ball strikes the object ball, the simple assumption is that the object ball will travel along the line joining the centers of the two balls at the moment of impact. Of course, in reality this is false. The amount by which this simple idea may be in error amounts to several ball-widths in ten feet, and certainly a ball width in the distance from the pyramid spot to a top pocket. (Sadly, many who have written about snooker and billiards don't believe this. They should have done the experiment, like Joe Davis did.)

There is friction between the cue ball and the object ball. If the surface of the cue ball is moving relative to the object ball at the time of impact, there will be a frictional force. If there is side spin on the cue ball, that force will be to the side and the object ball will be angled away from the line of centers.

What many don't understand is that you do not need spin on the cue ball for its surface to rub on the object ball. If you play a stun shot at an angle, the surface of the cue ball will pull the path of the object ball forward from the line of centers.

(At pool, this effect is called "throw" but that means something else in Commonwealth countries. Is there a UK term for the US "throw"?)

So, you have to routinely deal with this effect during normal play. Many players learn to adjust subconsciously, and I would argue that thinking about the effect is guaranteed to ruin ones potting ability. Is it useful to use side to change the path of the object ball? I think only rarely, and that you should nearly always restrict the use of side to shots that require action on the cushions.

 

[Boro Nut]

Talking about the effect of spin on the object ball. When the cueball is struck softly with side, I noticed that object balls also deflect slightly from their path, that is, the path they would normally have if the cueball had been struck with pure centre. I don't think the effect is as big as with bigger pool balls, but it is there.

Now the question is, are you supposed to use this effect at snooker?

I will freely admit it's not an effect I'd ever seen used in snooker. Nor have I been able to replicate the effects I've seen on videos here. There's every possibility that says more about my technique than the difference in the balls. My natural inclination would be to accept the steeper cut on the black and recover position if necessary on the next shot either by screwing round the angles to use up all the pace on the white, or kill the bounce off the top cushion with check side.

People talk about how snooker players don't use much sidespin, but only centre ball. I don't think this is true at all. I just can't believe all those table clearances are achieved using just the vertical axis of the cueball.
Any thoughts snooker boys?

You're quite correct. You try to land in the optimum zone to leave a flattish potting angle such that you'll only need natural roll, top, stun or screw to get to the next optimum position. In reality I'm often tweaking the ball off the cushion using side to maintain optimum position. John Spencer was my first snooker hero and I seem to remember him making 100 once without touching the cushion. I may have made this memory up, but it was his precision engineering around the pack that made me take to him.

A few shots I can think of where I always use side:-
The break off.
Cutting balls close to the middle pocket and trying to stay on the blue.
Whenever it's needed around the black spot (very often).
Shots where you need to go around the table to get to the next ball eg blue-pink-black.
Laying or escaping from snookers when required.

Funnily enough, I knew a few old time billiard players who couldn't pot to save their lives. For slightly off straight shots they used to cue it straight, but play the shot with a tweak of side. It was the deflection of the cue ball that made the cut angle, not the friction/throw between the balls. You can get fairly consistent results up to a point, but it explains why they were crap potters really.

Boro Nut