question for gwenn

Blue said:
I thought she explained it in the following page?

Page is titled Scaling.
Click to expand...

can you explain how the shots in the lower half of the pic have the ratios sugessted???
i tried to post the pic of the scaling but it didnt work
sorry
at least you answered ....:)
where is gwenn???:mad:
 
Well I do not know Gwyen, but I'll try to explain the way as I understand it.

It basically shows how to identify the shot as a quart, half or 3 quarts.

Think of them as ratios. I am using the page titled IDENTIFYING ANGLES to explain.

Quart or 1/4 cuts, from the top RHS table example. Look at where the cue ball is sitting on.
it is 2 diamonds distance to the long rail on the right
and look at spot of the 9ball, it is 2 diamonds to the same spot on the long rail.
This forms a triangle with equal lengths 2 diamonds to 2 diamonds. hence 2:2 or 1:1 ratio.

Half cut
From the center pocket example. the 9 ball is sitting inbetween 2 circles. Distance from the 9 ball to the rail is 1 diamond and that distance to the pocket is 1/2 diamond. Hence you form an imagined triangle with 1 diamond distance to the rail and 1/2 diamond to the pocket. so 1/2 : 1 or 1:2 ratio

3 quarts
look at the bottom 9ball example . distance to the long rail on the RHS is 2 diamonds and the distance from that spot to the pocket is 1/2 diamond. So the ratio is 1/2 : 2 or 1:4 ratio

hope this helps.
 
Blue said:
Well I do not know Gwyen, but I'll try to explain the way as I understand it.

It basically shows how to identify the shot as a quart, half or 3 quarts.

Think of them as ratios. I am using the page titled IDENTIFYING ANGLES to explain.

Quart or 1/4 cuts, from the top RHS table example. Look at where the cue ball is sitting on.
it is 2 diamonds distance to the long rail on the right
and look at spot of the 9ball, it is 2 diamonds to the same spot on the long rail.
This forms a triangle with equal lengths 2 diamonds to 2 diamonds. hence 2:2 or 1:1 ratio.

Half cut
From the center pocket example. the 9 ball is sitting inbetween 2 circles. Distance from the 9 ball to the rail is 1 diamond and that distance to the pocket is 1/2 diamond. Hence you form an imagined triangle with 1 diamond distance to the rail and 1/2 diamond to the pocket. so 1/2 : 1 or 1:2 ratio
i see how you got the ratio for the object ball but the cue ball isnt in the equation....if the cue ball moves to a different location its no longer a half ball hit......:confused:

3 quarts
look at the bottom 9ball example . distance to the long rail on the RHS is 2 diamonds and the distance from that spot to the pocket is 1/2 diamond. So the ratio is 1/2 : 2 or 1:4 ratio
same comment as above

hope this helps.
Click to expand...

thanks for trying to help
the first example makes sense since it incorporates the cue ball
the next 2 examples are atill confusing to me based on my comments above
 
Two options for this visual to work.

1) The object ball has to be at one corner of the imaginary rectangle of the proper ratio (1:1 for a 1/4 ball, 1:2 for a 1/2 ball, 1:4 for a 3/4 ball) and the cue ball on the opposite corner of that same rectangle. If the cue ball is anywhere else it's no longer a 1/4, 1/2, or 3/4 ball hit

2) The object ball is on one of the extension lines in the middle of an imagined rectangle of the proper ratio, and the cue ball is roughly parallel to the object ball and intended pocket, as in the lower two examples


These are demonstrated on her next page (Scaling), although more inferred through the diagrams, not as many words describing it. I believe her premise was to get people to recognize these common cut angles and give them a way to recreate them as well for practice.

Personally I visualize or measure these angles in a different way, but everyone perceives things differently, so her attempt to come up with a measuring and reference system as she has is just an additional take on things a little different from the usual. She certainly put some work and time into it and the diagrams and relation to music principles is interesting...

Scott
 
scottjen26 said:
Two options for this visual to work.

1) The object ball has to be at one corner of the imaginary rectangle of the proper ratio (1:1 for a 1/4 ball, 1:2 for a 1/2 ball, 1:4 for a 3/4 ball) and the cue ball on the opposite corner of that same rectangle. If the cue ball is anywhere else it's no longer a 1/4, 1/2, or 3/4 ball hit

2) The object ball is on one of the extension lines in the middle of an imagined rectangle of the proper ratio, and the cue ball is roughly parallel to the object ball and intended pocket, as in the lower two examples


These are demonstrated on her next page (Scaling), although more inferred through the diagrams, not as many words describing it. I believe her premise was to get people to recognize these common cut angles and give them a way to recreate them as well for practice.

Personally I visualize or measure these angles in a different way, but everyone perceives things differently, so her attempt to come up with a measuring and reference system as she has is just an additional take on things a little different from the usual. She certainly put some work and time into it and the diagrams and relation to music principles is interesting...

Scott
Click to expand...

scott thanks for your opinions
:thumbup:
 
Sure! Just be aware if you start adopting that type of visualization that the only angle and ratio that is correct is for 45 degrees - a one to one ratio is correct for that. For the other angles, it's not 1 to 2 or 1 to 4 but a little than that for both - closer to 1 to 1 3/4 and 1 to 3 3/4. So if you are measuring and not making balls with a pure 1/2 ball or 3/4 ball hit that could be why... :)

I've seen these ratios in many places, and also people comparing 15, 30, and 45 to 3/4, 1/2, and 1/4 ball hits, which is also not quite technically correct. But I think in both cases they are close enough and give people a way to break down the angles into smaller more manageable pieces.
Scott
 
Ugh, Seems I really missed this discussion. Sorry, been quite busy during the last couple of weeks.


In the example you posted, the lowest ball (the three quart):

If you extend the black line from the pocket point to the rail on the left, it will cut through the first diamond. So you have a triangle between the two rails and this black line. One side (the left side) is 1 diamonds distance wide. The bottom side (the short rail) is the full length of a short rail (4 diamonds distance) wide. You can use this ratio to estimate the angle of your shot, because your cue ball is sitting "behind" the object ball (i.e. perpendicular to the rail).

In this case (1 diamond to the left on 4 diamonds distance (1:4), that would be a three quart cut. You can verify this by simply imagining that the table was rotated 90 degrees to the left. In that case, you could extend the black line all the way back to the opposite short rail. You would see that the black line crosses the short rail at the second diamond (middle diamond). That's the diamond that's labelled "three quart" in the system.

For the example in the center of the table, the "half ball" you can simply imagine a scaled down table that is sitting below the center line horizontally, to apply a "standard situation". But you can also see that if you extend the black line there, it will cross the left rail on the scecond diamond below the center pocket. Again, the cue ball is perpendicular behind the 9-ball to the rail. So we can map this to a standard situation. In this case, the black line goes 2 diamonds right on half the table (4 diamonds distance) if you extend it across the table. So the ratio is 2:4, which equals 1:2, which is a half ball cut. It is the same as 4:8 (which on the full table would be the line cutting the table in 2 equal halves through opposite corner pockets).

If course, in this example you could also easily see because the cue ball is placed on the junction of those two circles, that the ratio is 0.5:1 (0.5 diamonds right on 1 diamond distance from the pocket), and 0.5:1 also equals 1:2, if you multiply it by 2.
So this also is a standard shot.

Now the example at the top, the "quarter ball". Since this ball is very close to the rail, its resulting path is also perpendicular to a rail. That means, again we can easily find the appropriate cut shot in the art of balls system using the diamonds. The only thing we have to find is a diamond ratio. But this time it is the ratio between the cue ball and the cushion (the white line). In this example the cue ball is 2 Diamonds above the object ball, and 2 diamonds out on the left, so the ratio is 1:1. This is a Quarter-Ball. Since the rail will not move, you can use this ratio to estimate the angle for any cut shot when the object ball is sitting on the rail.

If the cue ball is sitting 2 diamonds "above" the object ball (as in the example), then:
- if the cue ball is 2 diamonds away from the rail, it is a quarter ball. (2:2)
- if the cue ball is 1 diamond away from the rail, it is a half ball (1:2)
- if the cue ball is 1/2 diamond away from the rail, it is a Three-Quart (0.5:2, or 1:4)

- If the cue ball is 1.5 diamonds away from the rail, you need a Forty.
- If the cue ball is 0.75 diamonds away from the rail, you need a Sixty.

I recommend that you "memorize" a couple of these ratios, because they come up often. For my taste, memorizing them for a distance of "2" (i.e. X:2) makes the most sense because 2D is a distance you will often play for to string mezzo shots together.

Knowing that the half ball (which is a 30 degree shot) is 1:2 diamonds can also help you estimate the path of the cue ball, since the cue ball will travel at approximately 30 degrees from the line of the shot when the cue ball is rolling. It helps in a ton of situations to know that 30 degrees is 1:2 diamonds, which when shooting perpendicular to the rail (or a ball that is travelling perpendicular to the rail) will require a half ball cut.

Best wishes
Gwenn
 
bbb said:
thanks for trying to help
the first example makes sense since it incorporates the cue ball
the next 2 examples are atill confusing to me based on my comments above
Click to expand...


The next two examples work, because the line through cue ball and object ball is perpendicular to a rail. That's what the standard situations were defined on in the first place.

That's the two cases when a standard situation can 100% be mapped:
- The object ball travels parallel to a rail.
- The line through cue ball center and object ball center is parallel (or perpendicular) to a rail.

In the latter case you can always scale down the standard shots from the full table.
In the first case you can apply the diamond ratios to your angle into the rail (between rail, and the line cue ball--object ball.

And those situations are not so uncommon. Imagine "overshooting" a position for the 9 in nine-ball end game, with the cue ball sitting close to the rail around the 2nd diamond, and the 9 still on or near the spot. You will instantly know that you will be somewhere around a Quarter-Ball, and only have to find out whether you're a tad thicker or thinner. But this now has become a standard situation and with that knowledge your percentage on that shot will go up.

Or imagine a break ball behind the rail in straight pool. You will usually try to play so the cue ball and object ball have the same distance from the bottom rail to get a "decent" cut angle. At least with that method you can know exactly what type of shot is required if the line through cue ball and object ball "would be" parallel to the bottom rail. If it's an inch above or below then does most likely translate to a step thicker or thinner, depending on the distance between the two balls. But at least you have a solid anchor, and an only minor correction.

Best wishes
Gwenn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top