Shanon Daulton wins the Banks

Williebetmore said:
J,
It could be that you are considering a different shot than the rest of us (not an uncommon occurrence with Wei shots, that often are a little difficult to assess). I believe we are talking about a shot where the object ball has to be cut at an angle AWAY from the foot rail cushion, striking the long rail at least a balls width UPtable from the corner pocket, and then having enough English to make it rebound in enough of a DOWNTABLE direction to come back to the corner pocket. The object ball has to have enough spin applied (in this case counterclockwise) to make it grab the long rail, cancel the directional momentum that it has in the uptable direction, and spin off the rail in a down table direction, back to the corner pocket.

I was instructed that this can ONLY be done with very heavy left English (near the edge of the ball), and yes there is SIGNIFICANT throw and deflection to account for if you are to shoot it successfully. In addition, the speed is critical. Too hard and the object ball has too much momentum for the counterclockwise spin to overcome. To soft and there is not enough speed to make it back to the corner pocket, or even the possibility of the object ball banking too far back into the foot rail.

I think you may be considering a different shot, for there is no way to make this bank without imparting serious counterclockwise spin to the object ball with heavy inside. If there is another way, I would love to know about it; but what you are describing seems impossible given the scenario I was considering. Perhaps some of the one-pocket heavyweights will weigh in on the subject - I would certainly defer to them. Anyway, back to the woodshed, big match Wednesday.
Willie,
I believe Jal is talking about the same shot, and he is talking about maximizing counterclockwise spin (lets call it right english) on the object ball.

Because the CB is cutting across the OB at an angle here, it can impart significant right english on the OB.

On a full ball contact, the only way to get this right english is to use left english on the CB.

I believe Jal has studied quite a bit of testing and theoretical modeling for transfer of spin. I'll guess that he has some information to indicate that more right english could be applied to the OB on greater than 30 degree angles with no english than with left english added. It may have something to do with the contact time on the ball surfaces I suspect.

Try the shot out, perhaps with a little more angle using both center and left english. You'l find the shot is quite makable with center.

Note: If that 1-ball is actually on the rail it requires a different shot. Never tried this one.
 
Last edited:
Williebetmore said:
J,
It could be that you are considering a different shot than the rest of us ....
I don't mean to ignore Black-Balled and Scott's challenges, but let me respond to them through you.

First of all, thanks for taking the time to lay it out so thoroughly. You've definitely established that we're talking about the same shot. And so I think we all agree that you need to get counter-clockwise spin on the OB to bring it back to the bottom right pocket after banking it off the upper long cushion.

Now, if someone knows how to make this shot with heavy left at some specific shot speed (such as yourself), far be it for me to suggest that it should be done some other way. My only contention is that you can get more counter-clockwise spin on the OB with no english or just a touch of it. One consequence would be that you could bank the OB a little higher up on the long cushion, or maybe have better success on slick cloth, where having the spin take on the cushion might be a problem. But I'm not arguing for any particular method, only the issue of what english (or lack of it) imparts the most spin on the OB.

The reason I think you'll get max spin with little or no english is that imparted spin and throw of the OB go hand-in-hand. The more throw, the more spin. This is well established and follows from the fact that the friction which throws the OB is the very same thing that causes it to spin.

Now it just happens to be that for a stun shot (or near stun shot) without any cueball sidespin, maximum throw occurs somewhere between 20 and 35 degrees, depending on shot speed and ball surface conditions, both of which affect the magnitude of the friction. For medium speed shots with normal balls, it's around 25-30 degrees. Given that the shot we're discussing is roughly 30 degrees, it follows that hitting it with stun and little or no english will impart maximum spin. Heavy left will actually reduce the spin because the magnitude of the frictional force is diminished due to increasing relative surface speed between the balls.

I was thinking of going into a long-winded explanation of what causes maximum throw/spin, but this post may be getting tedious already. Bob Jewett has some experimental results concerning throw here (item 24):

http://www.sfbilliards.com/misc.htm

And here is a theoretical treatment:

http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/technical_proofs/new/TP_A-14.pdf

The graph on page 10 is most relevant. The bottom of it is labeled with things like "RWx/v". These are spin/speed ratios. A value of zero (middle of the bottom axis) represents no english, while a value of -1 (left side of the axis) represents near maximum inside english, and a value of 1 (right side of the axis), near maximum outside english. The purple line is for a pure stun shot, the others for various amounts of added topspin.

If the above isn't your cup of tea, or you still think I'm wrong (which is always possible of course) I think a more intuitive explanation can be offered up.

Jim
 
Jal said:
If the above isn't your cup of tea, or you still think I'm wrong (which is always possible of course) I think a more intuitive explanation can be offered up.

Jim

J,
Many thanks. I know its makeable with heavy inside. I'll try the shot with your suggestions and see if it is still makeable (though I'm not back to the woodshed until Friday). I love the theoretical aspects, but I MUST see results on the table to be convinced.
 
Jal said:
I don't mean to ignore Black-Balled and Scott's challenges, but let me respond to them through you...Jim
N/P! I don't feel ignored- more like intrigued/ enjoying the read! :)
 
Back
Top