Short rail to long rail kicks.
- Thread starter buckshotshoey
- Start date
System Sid is basically a mirror system that assumes the angle out is the same as the angle in. I pointed out to Walt Harris (author of the 4-volume Billiard Atlas series) that the correct numbers for the long cushion are actually slightly different from the numbers shown in the OP diagram. Walt said that may be true but the numbers shown are easier to remember and come close enough for most shots. If you want a totally accurate (according to the mirror) system, you also have to take into account that the cue ball does not reflect from the diamond line as shown in the diagram but rather from the rail groove which is about half a ball in front of the nose of the cushion.
A poster above said that the 1.0 on the top long rail should be 1.5. That's not right. The idealized correct value for that diamond based on mirror reflection, using the nose of the cushion as the reflection point and ignoring the diameter of the ball is 10/9 or 1.111 so 1.0 is a better value than 1.5. Here are the theoretical numbers for the long rail:
10/9 = 1.111
2
30/11 = 2.73
10/3 = 3.333 (side pocket)
50/13 = 3.846 (typpo fixed)
30/7 = 4.28
14/3 = 4.667
5 (corner pocket)
These are easy to work out with high-school-level geometry. If you want to include the rail-groove reflection as well as the landing spot on the second cushion corrected or not for the rail groove, and keep the diamond locations in the middle of the sort rails, the numbers get harder to calculate and even less even.
A poster above said that the 1.0 on the top long rail should be 1.5. That's not right. The idealized correct value for that diamond based on mirror reflection, using the nose of the cushion as the reflection point and ignoring the diameter of the ball is 10/9 or 1.111 so 1.0 is a better value than 1.5. Here are the theoretical numbers for the long rail:
10/9 = 1.111
2
30/11 = 2.73
10/3 = 3.333 (side pocket)
50/13 = 3.846 (typpo fixed)
30/7 = 4.28
14/3 = 4.667
5 (corner pocket)
These are easy to work out with high-school-level geometry. If you want to include the rail-groove reflection as well as the landing spot on the second cushion corrected or not for the rail groove, and keep the diamond locations in the middle of the sort rails, the numbers get harder to calculate and even less even.
Last edited:
Thanks. Fixed.
The only drawback to using the mirror system is that some people aren't visually oriented and have a hard time seeing, or adjusting to find the midpoint.
While it can be a lot simpler to come up with a quick multiplication and aim that way.
However, when you can use the mirror system, one rail kicks become deadly accurate when you measure from the CB to the ghostball aim point =P
The problem with systems like this is that in order to know where your cue ball *is*, you have to know where its going. In other words, in order to extend the line back to the rail you are kicking away from, you need to know where the cue ball is going in order to create that line. If you already know this, you don't need the system.
The benefit I see is using the system as a check for the point you have already decided to hit.
KMRUNOUT
The benefit I see is using the system as a check for the point you have already decided to hit.
KMRUNOUT
Yes...each table is different, just as I stated in original post. On my table, I use center ball, or rolling english to keep the cue ball from sliding. Lag speed is all that is necessary.
And the mirror system becomes difficult when the object ball is at 3.5 or 4. There is one more advantage over the mirror system. For me, just trying to visualize ends up leaving doubt in my mind. And this doubt lingers as im trying to make the shot. With Sid system, I can make the shot with no doubt....just aim at a rail point. Much easier for me.
Last edited:
Very useful system, and yes I have what I think is a nice discussion of it on my blog... 
As mentioned, tables will play differently - rails that play "bouncy" or short, new cloth slide, etc - plus other table and room conditions. I have found certain tables where the conditions are just too different where even making certain adjustments with systems just don't work.
With this system in particular the conditions are not as big of an influence since a rolling ball is used at lag-type speeds and only one cushion is being contacted and usually in a fairly direct manner. There is the factor of the "true" numbers as Bob mentioned vs. the system numbers, and most people won't take the time to study that. But even as presented it will at least generate a hit if not coming very close to making the ball if calculated correctly.
Even with multi-rail, running english or other more complex systems, on the vast majority of tables I've played the systems can be used as is or with slight adjustments with just a few test shots. Knowing systems like this can at least give you something to draw on under pressure, something to enhance and confirm your feel or visual perception of the shot. Not a bad tool to have in the arsenal.
Scott
As mentioned, tables will play differently - rails that play "bouncy" or short, new cloth slide, etc - plus other table and room conditions. I have found certain tables where the conditions are just too different where even making certain adjustments with systems just don't work.
With this system in particular the conditions are not as big of an influence since a rolling ball is used at lag-type speeds and only one cushion is being contacted and usually in a fairly direct manner. There is the factor of the "true" numbers as Bob mentioned vs. the system numbers, and most people won't take the time to study that. But even as presented it will at least generate a hit if not coming very close to making the ball if calculated correctly.
Even with multi-rail, running english or other more complex systems, on the vast majority of tables I've played the systems can be used as is or with slight adjustments with just a few test shots. Knowing systems like this can at least give you something to draw on under pressure, something to enhance and confirm your feel or visual perception of the shot. Not a bad tool to have in the arsenal.
Scott
A good positive attitude post, as a few of the others. Thank you. On my table my aim point is actually the diamonds on the rail. Other tables might need to be aimed at the nose of cushion. You never know till you try it.
Thank you Dave. Where this system helps me the most is when object ball is at 4, and cue ball is , say for instance, near the head spot. Tough for me to envision the mirror angle.
Here is another way I've used this system to sucess....and making my opponent mutter WTF. Since I don't have a photo editor, I'll describe it as short as possible. Say you have an object ball 4 or 5 inches from the rail. I pick the second rail contact point to make a 2 rail kick out of it. 95 percent of the time, i get a hit. If I hit it right, there's a really good chance of making the ball. And there's a chance to go too far down rail, contact the backside of object ball and scratch. Sometimes its worth the risk.
Last edited:
To dispense with the complex math, I set up reference shots. 3 from each rail. My reference is to my table at home. 3 well hit shots will tell you this table plays plus one, or minus 1. Plus 2, minus 2, etc. And since this system usually doesnt use a hit rail number higher then 20, all shots from that rail should use that same deviation number. Again, let me be clear, not always, butt percentage wise, usually.
Keep the math simple and more brainpower can be used to execute the shot.
Keep the math simple and more brainpower can be used to execute the shot.
Buck,
I hope you don't mind but I thought I'd add a little bit to this post by introducing something DEADAIM called the SID/ Plus Variation which is a way of aiming two rail kicks off the short rail.
And it looks like this:
Shooting from CB position 5, trying to hit 5.5 on the third rail, you'd need to multiply the two together for 27.5 and that's your aim point. Then, a tip of running English will shift your third rail hit point up one diamond, and two tips of running English will shift two diamonds.
This is a fun system I've incorporated into my game, and it's accurate as all hell.
EDIT: The basic premise of the system is with a "dead ball" hit. The tips of English shift the system.
-Richard
I hope you don't mind but I thought I'd add a little bit to this post by introducing something DEADAIM called the SID/ Plus Variation which is a way of aiming two rail kicks off the short rail.
And it looks like this:
Shooting from CB position 5, trying to hit 5.5 on the third rail, you'd need to multiply the two together for 27.5 and that's your aim point. Then, a tip of running English will shift your third rail hit point up one diamond, and two tips of running English will shift two diamonds.
This is a fun system I've incorporated into my game, and it's accurate as all hell.
EDIT: The basic premise of the system is with a "dead ball" hit. The tips of English shift the system.
-Richard
Well you are incorrect. Your system is guessing based on past experience. That system is no better than any other system and adjustments will need to be made for table conditions. Your system however lacks a firm foundation for anything and thus you will be trying to figure it out on the fly. At least with a system you have a foundation to start with and can make the incremental adjustments as needed.
I think you misunderstand how such systems are used. You find your starting point and ending point simultaneously, by adjusting your aim until the calculation works for both.
pj
chgo