Rail Shots - target point

[Patrick Johnson]

Me:
...it's possible to make a rail-first shot with any kind of english

bud green:
I know its possible, I just don't think it feels natural and don't remember hearing any good players saying they shoot rail first with outside to give themselves the largest margin of error.

It might just be the way the shot looks to my eye.

I think it's impossible to actually see whether you're hitting these shots rail first, ball first or both at the same time, so I don't think most players, even the best ones, really know how they hit them. We all have our own idea about how we do it, but we don't really know for sure if that's what's really happening unless we can "read" the results (how the balls act after impact).

The best clue I know is whether sidespin "takes" off the rail or not. If you hit the rail first and the rail has pretty much uncompressed by the time the CB hits the OB, then sidespin doesn't affect the CB's path much - it comes off the rail at about a 90-degree angle because the OB is in the way and the CB caroms off it (there are specialty shots based on this fact). But if you hit the OB first, then sidespin affects the CB's path off the rail "normally" because the CB isn't in the way any more.

However, reading these results is complicated a little by the fact that there's an "in-between" range where the CB hits the rail first but is still compressed into the rail and firmly against it when it hits the OB. Then some of the CB's sidespin takes effect after the OB is out of the way and you get an "in-between" result.

pj
chgo

 

[mdavis228]

I've seen Reyes play some pretty damned incredible shape from the kind of rail first, outside english action that pj is referring to. The man makes it look entirely too easy...

 

[Patrick Johnson]

justadub:
I had never heard the "pretend the rail isn't there" approach before...
...I don' think it's always applicable

When do you think it's not applicable?

pj
chgo

 

[Bob Jewett]

I have to say that this thread was quite helpful to me recently. I had never heard the "pretend the rail isn't there" approach before, and so I tried using it. While I don' think it's always applicable, it was really helpful for me on several shots.

Thanks for bringing it up! I can use all the help Ican get

Ignoring the rail is what Mizerak recommends in at least one of his books. I think he has some other useful stuff in there as well.

 

[greyghost]

I think we're both saying the same thing... differently... but with the same end results.

You say ignore the rail... which really may be a better way to play most rail shots.
I say to contact the rail slightly first... which I think gives the highest percentages.

This is how i also aim I just cut the ball like it was sitting in the middle of the table. I would agree with you that percentage wise contacting rail first is much better than trying to aim to hit the rail & ball at the same time. Thats adding in another angle/axis into the shot and thats the only shot that anyone really aims like that on, some aim certain combos get like that...it just doesn't make good sense as a method. I liken that to shooting a jacked up, or on a nice jump shot...its difficult to see the more axis you add to the shot. In a perfect world we would see the game in 2D, it would be easy then to aim. Sadly everythings 3D on the pool table, this is more difficult. Just the same go to 4D and the difficulty is compounded again.

Thats actually one of the ways I like to shoot those really close quarter really tight cut shots. I can get down and visually being that the balls are close it looks more 2D, more flat. You line up the edges and slice it in.

There is actually one instance where its actually beneficial to view the shot in 4D oddly enough. When the balls are too close and the cut angle/OB contact point cant be seen when down on the shot. You Stand up higher sometimes almost all the way up. You just find the spot on the OB that you have to hit. THen the top birdseye view in that unique instance becomes the same 2D style shot optically just lining up edge to edge and you turn in and out till you find those edges...its easy to see.


Aiming to hit simultaneous would have a higher possibility to hit the ball first on the thick side...missing wide and selling out. You go rail 1st, or forget the rail exists and your more liable to hit it on the thin side which will keep you towards the pocket...you might make it with a miss, but its likley to come back up to where it was on the table after contact with the short side rail, and vice versa SS to LS to SS.

 

[Ralph Kramden]

I've tried your setup, by the way, but I could never be really sure whether or not the "cue ball" was hitting the OB and rail simultaneously (too sensitive to setup errors). You can make the same adjustments (moving the 2nd OB away from the first one) with my 2-ball setup. Like you say, though, you have to be careful not to "contaminate" the results by hitting the first OB offcenter or putting spin on the CB.

pj
chgo

I can't make the shot as shown in post #12 very often, when the 2 ball and rail are connected at the same time.

I can pocket the 2 ball almost every time when it's 1/8" closer to the pocket and the rail is contacted first.

I think it's an experiment everyone should try... just to see what happens.