Secrets!

[Snapshot9]

Comments

Very few 'secrets' can not figured out on your own, but most expect someone just to tell them to them automatically when the person that knows them has learned on their own after years of playing. Why can't the person learning just use their own brain to figure things out???????????

One area I will talk about is hardly ever shared by players, and never will be.
There are a couple of books about it, and that is racking. Mostly because racking secrets fall into a gray area of being legal or not. Players learn to rack out of survival, and the little things they learn are not shared with others.

 

[Mikjary]

I still don't think it's throw that adds to the OB's roll distance - except indirectly by allowing you to hit the OB slightly fuller.

If spin-throw added distance to the OB's roll, it would add it on every sidespin shot, not just very thin ones. Is there any reason to think sidespin adds distance to the OB's roll on a straight shot?

pj
chgo

P.S. What's a dig stroke?

This is a very good point and the possibility exists that it may contribute to the increased travel distance of the object ball with spin. A high speed camera would shed some light on this, for sure.

A couple of additional scenarios come to mind. What if the spin allowed the object ball to achieve a more vertical roll from the gearing action of the throw? We all know from a very thin hit, the slow wobble of the object ball to the hole. We are used to seeing the slight dragging of the object ball before it moves toward the pocket and its angular roll. A truer roll to the target would allow the object ball to move more easily.

The second idea is along the lines of a thicker hit on the object ball. This allows more time for the cue ball english to grab and influence object ball direction. A slower speed is best for this shot and probably clean balls inhibit the results, but the results are a fact.

I would think that a straight on shot using spin would be counter productive unless there was even a slight angle. The momentum of the spin would not be enough to overcome the impulse of the collision.

I use the term "digging" into the cue ball to describe a stroke I use for mainly left and right spin. It is a close to center stroke with less cue ball deflection than regular english. It will have an amount of swerve on the cue ball and loses it spin fairly quickly due to the softer stroke of the shot.

The Pinoy invasion uses this regularly on their victims and control the cue ball well, rarely turning it loose. Johnny Archer is another pro who uses it well as are quite a few others. I had hoped to start a meaningful discussion here and I've talked about it several times with few takers. I remember watching Dave Yeager run routine big table six packs with it, but didn't understand it as I watched it. Bobby Cotton showed the stroke to me years ago and up until a short time ago I didn't really think about it too much. Now I am and using it more as I get back into stroke.

I think one of the reasons I haven't gotten too much response is because the guys who know this stroke and can discuss it don't care for it to be out there. I'm not that way...I'll sprinkle some food on top of the water. :grin:

It's a stroke we all use, most unknowingly as your game improves. And it causes a lot of misses on spin shots when it happens and you don't want it to. Once you see it and understand it, it's pretty cool. But right now it'll have to remain a secret. J/K We can discuss it if anybody cares. I'll tell all I know and maybe some of the tight lipped champions reading this will speak up.

But first, with PJ's help, and others (don't anybody be shy), I would like to figure out the thin cut with spin. What makes the object ball travel further with a softer stroke than hitting it firm with just a thin cut. Can the object ball gain speed from the spin as it appears to do?

Best,
Mike

 

[ShootingArts]

didn't want to jump in the middle

This is a very good point and the possibility exists that it may contribute to the increased travel distance of the object ball with spin. A high speed camera would shed some light on this, for sure.

A couple of additional scenarios come to mind. What if the spin allowed the object ball to achieve a more vertical roll from the gearing action of the throw? We all know from a very thin hit, the slow wobble of the object ball to the hole. We are used to seeing the slight dragging of the object ball before it moves toward the pocket and its angular roll. A truer roll to the target would allow the object ball to move more easily.

The second idea is along the lines of a thicker hit on the object ball. This allows more time for the cue ball english to grab and influence object ball direction. A slower speed is best for this shot and probably clean balls inhibit the results, but the results are a fact.

I would think that a straight on shot using spin would be counter productive unless there was even a slight angle. The momentum of the spin would not be enough to overcome the impulse of the collision.

I use the term "digging" into the cue ball to describe a stroke I use for mainly left and right spin. It is a close to center stroke with less cue ball deflection than regular english. It will have an amount of swerve on the cue ball and loses it spin fairly quickly due to the softer stroke of the shot.

The Pinoy invasion uses this regularly on their victims and control the cue ball well, rarely turning it loose. Johnny Archer is another pro who uses it well as are quite a few others. I had hoped to start a meaningful discussion here and I've talked about it several times with few takers. I remember watching Dave Yeager run routine big table six packs with it, but didn't understand it as I watched it. Bobby Cotton showed the stroke to me years ago and up until a short time ago I didn't really think about it too much. Now I am and using it more as I get back into stroke.

I think one of the reasons I haven't gotten too much response is because the guys who know this stroke and can discuss it don't care for it to be out there. I'm not that way...I'll sprinkle some food on top of the water. :grin:

It's a stroke we all use, most unknowingly as your game improves. And it causes a lot of misses on spin shots when it happens and you don't want it to. Once you see it and understand it, it's pretty cool. But right now it'll have to remain a secret. J/K We can discuss it if anybody cares. I'll tell all I know and maybe some of the tight lipped champions reading this will speak up.

But first, with PJ's help, and others (don't anybody be shy), I would like to figure out the thin cut with spin. What makes the object ball travel further with a softer stroke than hitting it firm with just a thin cut. Can the object ball gain speed from the spin as it appears to do?

Best,
Mike

Mike,

I had already stepped in early once before someone had time to reply just a bit earlier in this thread so I was trying to give you a chance to reply this time!

I'll note that I'm avoiding splitting hairs and there is actually a few degrees of error in what I am saying and then get on to the point. When a ball collides with another one with spin on the first ball that force has to go somewhere. The laws permit nothing else. Some remains with the cue ball, some transforms into heat and noise, some transfers to the object ball. An easy proof is to place a ball six inches in front of the cue ball and hit it full face with stun, extreme draw, and force follow, trying to hit with the same force. We have removed most variables other than spin so when we see the object ball travel different distances this directly proves that some of the force of spin is translated into forward motion or retards forward motion. Hardest to hit the object ball with but force follow actually retards forward motion on the object ball. Once we have demonstrated that spin does affect distance then it is easy to see that spin is still spin, doesn't matter if it is horizontal or vertical.

As PJ's diagram indicates and again without splitting hairs in a full face hit the force of the spin is at a right angle to the force of forward motion. As a result it neither adds or subtracts to forward speed.

The further to the side the collision is the more leverage the spin has to work with and the greater the effect until we get to the optimum attack angle for spin to have maximum effect. As I noted in an earlier post, inside spin where the object ball is hit with the leading edge of the cue ball adds speed. Outside spin with the trailing edge of the cue ball hitting the object ball reduces speed compared to a cue ball hitting the object ball with no spin at all.

This is well explained in many machinist's handbooks and manuals. When spinning particularly a large tool direction of travel and the side of the tool we are cutting with has to be considered. We measure cutting speed in inches per second. On the trailing edge of the tool we cut slower because travel speed is now subtracting from turning speed. On the leading edge we cut faster because the travel speed is adding to the turning speed.

If we were foolish enough to leave the piece of work we were cutting floating loose the result would be that it would fly faster and further when hit with the leading edge of a big cutting tool than it would when hit with the trailing edge. The same effect has to apply to pool balls unless we are to say that none of the energy of spin is transferred. Too many examples of that exist to practically argue that position.

To tie up a loose end, we usually get better spin transfer between objects with a slower speed collision. Freddy the Beard put it as speed kills action. With very slow speed the action dies before the balls contact and has no effect but in the vast middle ground often a slower speed results in better spin transfer and greater action. We often see beginners smashing a ball trying to get adequate draw while a more experienced player seemingly effortlessly taps the cue ball for table length draw. Part of the issue is where the cue ball is hit of course but another issue is after a certain point the harder we hit the balls together the less spin is transferred. I don't know the exact formula but energy transfer has to do with time of contact and friction. Slow to medium speed hits seem to maximize the equation.

Hu

 

[JoeyA]

Mike,

I had already stepped in early once before someone had time to reply just a bit earlier in this thread so I was trying to give you a chance to reply this time!

I'll note that I'm avoiding splitting hairs and there is actually a few degrees of error in what I am saying and then get on to the point. When a ball collides with another one with spin on the first ball that force has to go somewhere. The laws permit nothing else. Some remains with the cue ball, some transforms into heat and noise, some transfers to the object ball. An easy proof is to place a ball six inches in front of the cue ball and hit it full face with stun, extreme draw, and force follow, trying to hit with the same force. We have removed most variables other than spin so when we see the object ball travel different distances this directly proves that some of the force of spin is translated into forward motion or retards forward motion. Hardest to hit the object ball with but force follow actually retards forward motion on the object ball. Once we have demonstrated that spin does affect distance then it is easy to see that spin is still spin, doesn't matter if it is horizontal or vertical.

As PJ's diagram indicates and again without splitting hairs in a full face hit the force of the spin is at a right angle to the force of forward motion. As a result it neither adds or subtracts to forward speed.

The further to the side the collision is the more leverage the spin has to work with and the greater the effect until we get to the optimum attack angle for spin to have maximum effect. As I noted in an earlier post, inside spin where the object ball is hit with the leading edge of the cue ball adds speed. Outside spin with the trailing edge of the cue ball hitting the object ball reduces speed compared to a cue ball hitting the object ball with no spin at all.

This is well explained in many machinist's handbooks and manuals. When spinning particularly a large tool direction of travel and the side of the tool we are cutting with has to be considered. We measure cutting speed in inches per second. On the trailing edge of the tool we cut slower because travel speed is now subtracting from turning speed. On the leading edge we cut faster because the travel speed is adding to the turning speed.

If we were foolish enough to leave the piece of work we were cutting floating loose the result would be that it would fly faster and further when hit with the leading edge of a big cutting tool than it would when hit with the trailing edge. The same effect has to apply to pool balls unless we are to say that none of the energy of spin is transferred. Too many examples of that exist to practically argue that position.

To tie up a loose end, we usually get better spin transfer between objects with a slower speed collision. Freddy the Beard put it as speed kills action. With very slow speed the action dies before the balls contact and has no effect but in the vast middle ground often a slower speed results in better spin transfer and greater action. We often see beginners smashing a ball trying to get adequate draw while a more experienced player seemingly effortlessly taps the cue ball for table length draw. Part of the issue is where the cue ball is hit of course but another issue is after a certain point the harder we hit the balls together the less spin is transferred. I don't know the exact formula but energy transfer has to do with time of contact and friction. Slow to medium speed hits seem to maximize the equation.

Hu

Perhaps what is making the object ball appear to pick up speed is that the collision induced throw (not spin induced throw) is putting "running English) spin on the object ball and does make the object ball pick up spin or appear to. This theory doesn't have anything to do with the cut shots that Mike set up and I don't have any perspective to share about that.

When I played pinball machines, I used to be able to hit the pinball machine with my hands in a whip-like manner, where I didn't put as much follow-through into the hit and this would still make the ball bounce off of the pins quite well, except I was doing it that way to avoid tilting the machine and it seemed a little easier on my hands.

With all of the science in the world at our fingertips, it is still not the science that makes the balls for it is only the person behind the cue which can use his inate talent and experience to master the shots.

I've often said that the attempt to do certain things, is what sometimes helps a player make the balls, not the "dumbing-up" of the science of what is actually happening on an individual shot.

 

[Mikjary]

Hu,

Very insightful post and I might add your comments are always welcome at any time as far as I'm concerned. Your reference to using the leading edge of a cutting tool to add to the speed makes sense. This is how most circular or cylindrical cutting tools do operate. On occasion I have used them in reverse for a specific purpose. Although this is a secrets thread, I won't give those up.:grin:

I agree with Freddy's statement about the speed of the balls being a factor in spin transfer and cue ball management. Speed kills. I don't think any amount of side spin on a straight-on collision will overcome the momentum of the cue ball. But I do understand that as an angle appears, the cue ball side spin will become a big part of object ball direction and speed.

Concerning top and bottom spin, draw and follow will add or subtract to forward roll on the object ball. At least initially and to varying degrees depending on the stroke. Side spin is angular momentum. Why can't it be transferred to the object ball?

Dr. Dave has several examples of english transferring from the cue ball to the object ball. With enough stroke this will also affect speed and direction. Again, speed of the stroke affects spin transfer.

Best,
Mike

 

[Patrick Johnson]

What if the spin allowed the object ball to achieve a more vertical roll from the gearing action of the throw? We all know from a very thin hit, the slow wobble of the object ball to the hole. We are used to seeing the slight dragging of the object ball before it moves toward the pocket and its angular roll. A truer roll to the target would allow the object ball to move more easily.

I think a ball rolls "true" even when its axis of spin is tilted (i.e., with some sidespin) - there's no "wobble" in its roll; the stripe on the ball just makes it look that way. The clearest analogy I've heard is of a tilted barrel rolling on its edge.

The second idea is along the lines of a thicker hit on the object ball. This allows more time for the cue ball english to grab and influence object ball direction. A slower speed is best for this shot and probably clean balls inhibit the results, but the results are a fact.

Yes, it's well known that a fuller, slower hit increases the effect of sidespin; I just don't think increased OB speed is one of the effects (except indirectly because of the fuller hit).

I use the term "digging" into the cue ball to describe a stroke I use for mainly left and right spin. It is a close to center stroke with less cue ball deflection than regular english. It will have an amount of swerve on the cue ball and loses it spin fairly quickly due to the softer stroke of the shot.

...

We can discuss it if anybody cares. I'll tell all I know and maybe some of the tight lipped champions reading this will speak up.

I'm interested - but it sounds like another thread. I warn you that I'm skeptical of the claim that it squirts less.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

When a ball collides with another one with spin on the first ball that force has to go somewhere.

Of course - the question is whether any of it goes into increasing OB speed.

As PJ's diagram indicates and again without splitting hairs in a full face hit the force of the spin is at a right angle to the force of forward motion. As a result it neither adds or subtracts to forward speed.

The drawing doesn't depict only a straight shot - it's the same no matter what the cut angle.

The further to the side the collision is the more leverage the spin has to work with and the greater the effect until we get to the optimum attack angle for spin to have maximum effect.

The optimum attack angle for sidespin to have maximum effect on the OB is straight on. But I think you're talking about the "leading and trailing edges" effect of your cutting tool analogy - see my comment about that below.

This is well explained in many machinist's handbooks and manuals. When spinning particularly a large tool direction of travel and the side of the tool we are cutting with has to be considered. We measure cutting speed in inches per second. On the trailing edge of the tool we cut slower because travel speed is now subtracting from turning speed. On the leading edge we cut faster because the travel speed is adding to the turning speed.

OK, but if the cutting tool's spinning edges are adding or subtracting from the travel speed of the material being cut, then it's because the spinning edges are spinning at least partly in the direction (or against the direction) of travel speed. This isn't true of a CB with sidespin - its spinning direction is always at a right angle to the OB's travel direction - don't forget that as the cut angle changes, so does the OB's travel direction, keeping it always at a right angle to direction of CB spin. There is no "leading or trailing edge effect" with CB/OB contact.

To tie up a loose end, we usually get better spin transfer between objects with a slower speed collision.

And with slower sidespin (half or less of maximum sidespin), with the counterintuitive result that inside spin often results in less throw (and less transferred spin) than no sidespin at all, and outside spin can result in more throw and transferred spin, in the opposite direction of the spin.

pj
chgo

 

[dr_dave]

Joey,

Your thread inspired me to create a webpage for the Top 100 Pool "Secrets" and "Gems". It is located here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/pool_secrets_gems.html​

The subtitle for the page is:

"The things all great players know and wish they had known when they were younger."​

Check it out.

The site could have many more categories and hundreds of additional topics, but I limited the list to what I thought were the top 100 topics in 15 categories.

I've also provided links for most of the topics, providing additional resources (e.g., video demonstrations) and more information (e.g., illustrated instructional articles) for each.

Thanks for the inspiration and the thread! :thumbup:

Regards,
Dave

... Your efforts are great but on the topic of aiming you are incredibly biased and kind of mean in your comments. ...

John,

FYI, I've revised my aiming system item to read:

Be leery and suspicious of exaggerated claims concerning some cut-shot aiming systems. Having said this, these systems do offer benefits to some people.​

You might still think this is "biased," but I think it is appropriate. We have seen many ridiculous claims about "aiming systems" over the years, and I think these claims have done more harm than good. I think the "aiming systems" would be "received" much more respectfully if there were fewer outrageous claims and more focus on the positive benefits these systems provide.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Mikjary]

Of course - the question is whether any of it goes into increasing OB speed.


...And with slower sidespin (half or less of maximum sidespin), ... and outside spin can result in more throw and transferred spin

pj
chgo

Here is a definitive simple shot that illustrates the principle that side spin increases object ball speed/travel. The one ball is in the center of the table. The cue ball is about 15 inches away with a small cut angle to the side pocket.

The first shot is with a soft center ball stroke and the one ball stopping at the opening of the side pocket. The cue ball travels 28 inches after contact. With the soft stroke it picks up a small amount of forward roll/spin.

CueTable Help

The second shot is with center right spin and rolling the one ball the same distance up to the side pocket opening. The contact point difference is minimal because of the thicker cut.

CueTable Help

The cue ball travels only half the distance of the first shot, 14 inches, yet the object ball travels the same distance. This is only possible with a spin/speed transfer from the cue ball to the object ball.

Best,
Mike

 

[hunger strike]

Read "The Allegory of the Cave," by Plato...

Someone told me that Dave Matlock had run 20 racks or so of 9-ball in KCMO. In discussing this, the person said "Matlock has a system for everything." If this is true, do you know what that tells me about Matlock? That tells me that he has shared "secrets." Otherwise, we wouldn't know about how he just made that incredible shot. We would just assume great talent. But we should anyway, because it took talent to come up with any system that works, and his apparently do. I have met him and he seems like a friendly guy, so it does not surprise me if he shares secrets.
I define a system as a general idea of how to play a particular billiard shot, which can be or ought to be adjusted to fit conditions such as humidity and situations such as layout. I told a well-known billiard author about one of my systems that I came up with for kicking in one-pocket 3 rails when you are against or close to the first rail. He ANGRILY said "know what I think of your system? I think your system sucks!" Well, he is a former national champion who I was friends with for years, and he did not share any systems from his chosen game. My system uses extreme english, and he has an extreme english system, so I think he thought I was plagiarizing or something. But my system works on 7, 8, 9, and 10-foot tables and is easy to adjust. It works for all my friends who have tried it. If that "sucks," then I wanna learn everything that sucks. If you read Plato's story, you will understand part of the reason that not all players share secrets. It is not always out of selfishness. Sometimes it is out of wisdom. And sometimes it is because the man with the secrets has nothing left in life but those secrets. Plato would tell you that sharing knowledge can also get you attacked by those who want to stay in the darkness.

 

[BasementDweller]

Here is a definitive simple shot that illustrates the principle that side spin increases object ball speed/travel. The one ball is in the center of the table. The cue ball is about 15 inches away with a small cut angle to the side pocket.

The first shot is with a soft center ball stroke and the one ball stopping at the opening of the side pocket. The cue ball travels 28 inches after contact. With the soft stroke it picks up a small amount of forward roll/spin.

The second shot is with center right spin and rolling the one ball the same distance up to the side pocket opening. The contact point difference is minimal because of the thicker cut.

The cue ball travels only half the distance of the first shot, 14 inches, yet the object ball travels the same distance. This is only possible with a spin/speed transfer from the cue ball to the object ball.

Best,
Mike

I know this is between you and PJ but I have been following this pretty closely.

What I did was I went to the table and I grabbed the cue ball and I spun it like a top by hand on the table. I did this and got the cue ball spinning pretty good, but it was just barely moving. I then had it bump up against an object ball to see if the spin would transfer forward roll to the object ball - No luck. The object ball just barely moved. It was pretty much equal to the speed of the cue ball minus the energy lost by the friction (or whatever else happens during a collision). So, the spin on the cue ball doesn't propel the object ball forward (unless I'm missing something here). I think what you are pointing out is a combination of throw and the increase in friction at the moment of impact dependent on the type of english used.

I might be a bit off here, but I think I'm in the right ballpark.

 

[quadrary]

Outside spin curves the CB in the other direction, so it hits the OB from a thinner angle.

pj
chgo

That is true but the squirt on an outside english shot directs it to a fuller hit so the amount of each is critical.

 

[Neil]

................

 

[quadrary]

Here is a definitive simple shot that illustrates the principle that side spin increases object ball speed/travel. The one ball is in the center of the table. The cue ball is about 15 inches away with a small cut angle to the side pocket.

The first shot is with a soft center ball stroke and the one ball stopping at the opening of the side pocket. The cue ball travels 28 inches after contact. With the soft stroke it picks up a small amount of forward roll/spin.

CueTable Help

The second shot is with center right spin and rolling the one ball the same distance up to the side pocket opening. The contact point difference is minimal because of the thicker cut.

i believe that it is due to the fuller hit taking more off of the cue ball rather than spin transfer.

CueTable Help

The cue ball travels only half the distance of the first shot, 14 inches, yet the object ball travels the same distance. This is only possible with a spin/speed transfer from the cue ball to the object ball.

Best,
Mike

i believe that it is due to the fuller hit taking more off of the cue ball rather than spin transfer

 

[Patrick Johnson]

That is true but the squirt on an outside english shot directs it to a fuller hit so the amount of each is critical.

We weren't talking about hitting different OB contact points, but different angles of CB approach to hit the same OB contact point.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Neil:
All you need to know is the principle behind it working, not all the math behind it. Once you know the principle, then you can adapt it to other shots.

If you're wrong about how this happens, then you don't "know the principle behind it working"; you only know that it works on the shots you've actually tried.

And, by the way, nobody but you has mentioned math.

pj
chgo

 

[dr_dave]

Due to squirt, squerve, throw, fuller hit, it would take someone with a heavy math background to figure out how to allow for all the changes or variables involved to actually figure it out. Bottom line is, it works and is another arrow in the old quiver. Who really cares just WHY it works?? All you need to know is the principle behind it working, not all the math behind it. Once you know the principle, then you can adapt it to other shots.

If people are curious about this topic, I have links to a well-illustrated instructional article, a math/physics analysis, and a good test from Bob Jewett here:

using throw for a "hold" or "kill" shot to limit cue ball drift​

Check it out,
Dave

 

[Neil]

..............

 

[pt109]

Sorry Mike, but I don't think that is a valid test. The reason is because when you applied the right english, you admitted that you had to hit the one fuller. Hitting the one fuller will naturally transfer more energy to the one and leave less for the cb to travel after the hit.

It may not feel like it, but I am pretty sure you actually hit the cb softer on the the spin shot to hold the one from falling in the pocket.

I don't feel this invalidates the premise of the test, just that testing this way doesn't work. Due to squirt, squerve, throw, fuller hit, it would take someone with a heavy math background to figure out how to allow for all the changes or variables involved to actually figure it out. Bottom line is, it works and is another arrow in the old quiver. Who really cares just WHY it works?? All you need to know is the principle behind it working, not all the math behind it. Once you know the principle, then you can adapt it to other shots.

BINGO!
It's what I call 're-directing' the object ball.....tough to have a run at
straight pool without using this

 

[Patrick Johnson]

The cue ball travels only half the distance of the first shot, 14 inches, yet the object ball travels the same distance. This is only possible with a spin/speed transfer from the cue ball to the object ball.

As others have also said, this isn't the only possibility, or even the most likely. We know that a slightly fuller hit reduces CB travel, but there's no evidence or even a plausible rationale for sidespin doing it.

You highlighted this part of my post: "outside spin can result in more throw and transferred spin". If you think it supports your theory, then you misunderstand it. I was talking about increased throw compared with non-spin collision throw, but still in the direction of collision throw (outside spin can increase collision throw rather than decrease it), which is opposite the direction you're talking about. It was a sidebar comment and isn't relevant to this.

pj
chgo