Skid

[lfigueroa]

In case Bob isn't online, I'll answer for him.

Yes, especially when those surface marks attract and hold chalk more readily than the surrounding ball surface.

Also, scuffs caused by miscues (which can happen even with non-phenolic tips used by any players in any setting) can have similar effects.

Regards,
Dave

I think this explains a lot of it, Dave. All the stuff about cloth and pocket marks... just red herrings with nothing to back them up.

Lou Figueroa

 

[CJ Wiley]

it's the "pool paraghosts,

I think this explains a lot of it, Dave. All the stuff about cloth and pocket marks... just red herrings with nothing to back them up.

Lou Figueroa

That makes a lot of sense, it's the "pool paraghosts," it couldn't be the cloth or balls.

 

[JB Cases]

I think the whole thing needs to be revisited. With clean balls, dirty balls, slow cloth, fast cloth, waxed balls, scuffed balls, etc....

Too much on the personal anecdote side of things and not enough on the science. Yes I saw Blake's slomo and Dave's slomo but to me these are inconclusive because of the lack of comparative variables.

I don't think Chris' missed shot against Ko was a skid as defined by the science side. If it were then the ball would have gone in anyway IMO. Ken was about to say Chris stood up on the shot and quickly changed his commentary when Chris turned to the booth and complained about a skid.

So the way I see it is that the pros do NOT agree with the amateurs about what a skid is and what causes it. Chris obviously feels that the balls are the problem. Bill Stroud thinks that the balls are fine, Marc thinks it's the dye marks, CJ thinks it's the cloth, Lou thinks he knows more than all of them........

So for me the jury is still out on this.

 

[Fast Lenny]

I think the whole thing needs to be revisited. With clean balls, dirty balls, slow cloth, fast cloth, waxed balls, scuffed balls, etc....

Too much on the personal anecdote side of things and not enough on the science. Yes I saw Blake's slomo and Dave's slomo but to me these are inconclusive because of the lack of comparative variables.

I don't think Chris' missed shot against Ko was a skid as defined by the science side. If it were then the ball would have gone in anyway IMO. Ken was about to say Chris stood up on the shot and quickly changed his commentary when Chris turned to the booth and complained about a skid.

So the way I see it is that the pros do NOT agree with the amateurs about what a skid is and what causes it. Chris obviously feels that the balls are the problem. Bill Stroud thinks that the balls are fine, Marc thinks it's the dye marks, CJ thinks it's the cloth, Lou thinks he knows more than all of them........

So for me the jury is still out on this.

I think a skid is a combination of a few things and not just one.

 

[CJ Wiley]

Is this really in the "best interest" of the Game? Honestly.......?

I think the whole thing needs to be revisited. With clean balls, dirty balls, slow cloth, fast cloth, waxed balls, scuffed balls, etc....

Too much on the personal anecdote side of things and not enough on the science. Yes I saw Blake's slomo and Dave's slomo but to me these are inconclusive because of the lack of comparative variables.

I don't think Chris' missed shot against Ko was a skid as defined by the science side. If it were then the ball would have gone in anyway IMO. Ken was about to say Chris stood up on the shot and quickly changed his commentary when Chris turned to the booth and complained about a skid.

So the way I see it is that the pros do NOT agree with the amateurs about what a skid is and what causes it. Chris obviously feels that the balls are the problem. Bill Stroud thinks that the balls are fine, Marc thinks it's the dye marks, CJ thinks it's the cloth, Lou thinks he knows more than all of them........

So for me the jury is still out on this.

I believe it's a combination of the cloth and balls, mostly the black marks and "other" stuff on the balls.

The cloth is an issue all unto it'self. If a sponsor wanted to play on pink ice we would be skating, playing pool listening to 'The Best of ABBA'. This is the main point.

Do we let the sponsors dictate the playing conditions? If anyone wants to take the sponsors position on this I'll publicly debate them on AZ LIVE. I will have no "takers' on this because they know that would be a losing position. This has not been done in the history of any other sport/game.

It's not the "only thing wrong" with pool or anything silly like that ....but really......does anyone "real eyes" that the sponsors and promoters have dictated 100% of the rules and playing regulations the last 13 years? Is this really in the "best interest" of the Game? Honestly.......?

I love all the promoters and sponsors, but even they would agree that making the rules and playing conditions should NOT be in their job description.....it should be done with a panel of pros, with guys like Jay H., Pat F., Greg S., and Mark G. involved in making the best decision for the integrity of the Game. We all want the ideal conditions to showcase the game/sport, that "should" go with out saying......although it hasn't.

I also understand that they don't particularly want to take on that responsibility, however, it is VERY IMPORTANT to have rules, equipment regulations and policies that are agreed on by a panel of those with a vested interest. The Pros MUST be involved in this decision because their perspective and participation is most valuable.

I for one don't like the idea of Mary K. sponsoring a tour with pink cloth and 4 pockets. 'The Game is the Teacher'

 

[real bartram]

I think the whole thing needs to be revisited. With clean balls, dirty balls, slow cloth, fast cloth, waxed balls, scuffed balls, etc....

Too much on the personal anecdote side of things and not enough on the science. Yes I saw Blake's slomo and Dave's slomo but to me these are inconclusive because of the lack of comparative variables.

I don't think Chris' missed shot against Ko was a skid as defined by the science side. If it were then the ball would have gone in anyway IMO. Ken was about to say Chris stood up on the shot and quickly changed his commentary when Chris turned to the booth and complained about a skid.

So the way I see it is that the pros do NOT agree with the amateurs about what a skid is and what causes it. Chris obviously feels that the balls are the problem. Bill Stroud thinks that the balls are fine, Marc thinks it's the dye marks, CJ thinks it's the cloth, Lou thinks he knows more than all of them........

So for me the jury is still out on this.

I'm not sure what it was the balls cloth or whatever
But I can tell you that ball in the side the 1 that was 4 in from the pocket skid
Real bad weather I jumped up or not

 

[JB Cases]

I believe it's a combination of the cloth and balls, mostly the black marks and "other" stuff on the balls.

The cloth is an issue all unto it'self. If a sponsor wanted to play on pink ice we would be skating, playing pool listening to 'The Best of ABBA'. This is the main point.

Do we let the sponsors dictate the playing conditions? If anyone wants to take the sponsors position on this I'll publicly debate them on AZ LIVE. I will have no "takers' on this because they know that would be a losing position. This has not been done in the history of any other sport/game.

It's not the "only thing wrong" with pool or anything silly like that ....but really......does anyone "real eyes" that the sponsors and promoters have dictated 100% of the rules and playing regulations the last 13 years? Is this really in the "best interest" of the Game? Honestly.......?

I love all the promoters and sponsors, but even they would agree that making the rules and playing conditions should NOT be in their job description.....it should be done with a panel of pros, with guys like Jay H., Pat F., Greg S., and Mark G. involved in making the best decision for the integrity of the Game. We all want the ideal conditions to showcase the game/sport, that "should" go with out saying......although it hasn't.

I also understand that they don't particularly want to take on that responsibility, however, it is VERY IMPORTANT to have rules, equipment regulations and policies that are agreed on by a panel of those with a vested interest. The Pros MUST be involved in this decision because their perspective and participation is most valuable.

I for one don't like the idea of Mary K. sponsoring a tour with pink cloth and 4 pockets. 'The Game is the Teacher'

Well this is another conversation but I think it goes back to the golden rule. He who has the gold makes the rules. I am sure you can go all the way back to Phelan in the 1800s and find that sponsors insisted in their equipment, thus requiring pros to adapt.

Fwiw Earl was saying the same as you to me 15 years ago when he caught me in the hallway at a camel event.

 

[CJ Wiley]

that one time in Enid Oklahoma.

Well this is another conversation but I think it goes back to the golden rule. He who has the gold makes the rules. I am sure you can go all the way back to Phelan in the 1800s and find that sponsors insisted in their equipment, thus requiring pros to adapt.

Fwiw Earl was saying the same as you to me 15 years ago when he caught me in the hallway at a camel event.

Actually this has never happened in any other sport in the history of the universe....except for that one time in Enid Oklahoma.....but that's another story entirely.