Strickland comments on spin

lfaust

New member
I've been enjoying watching the weekly Billiards Channel matches on Youtube with Earl Strickland providing commentary. There are 4 done over the last month.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChr1NNyX6oc4uecKtVk4mVw

Earl seems to suggest using spin/English on most shots, far more than I use. I'm a decent mid level player (Fargo 487). I generally avoid spin except when essential for cue ball position or when object ball is close enough to the intended pocket that I don't have to adjust much.

Other than recommending it, Earl doesn't explain why(at least not through #3) Some of my thoughts:
- by using even a small amount of intentional spin, you avoid the possibility of aiming for center and being off.
- using outside spin on cut shots to compensate for throw
- better approach for position play?

I'm wondering if I should be trying to expand my normal game to include more spin generally? As I work to improve my position play, it's natural to start using more spin, but often I see alternatives for getting position using center top, mid or low instead. I've opted for this route as lower risk, but know that it has meant I don't use spin as much.

Let me also take the opportunity to say thanks to this forum. Although I'm a lurker that doesn't post much, I've learned a great deal.
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
There are players who prefer to spin the cue ball more often and players who prefer to punch the cue ball with little or no spin. Earl prefers to spin the cue ball more often so he will say that he favors spin on every shot. I'm with Earl, but that's because I prefer to spin the cue ball as well. If you prefer to play closer to center and punch the cue ball, this style of play probably won't suit you. It's purely a matter of style.
 

lfaust

New member
Thanks, Fran

I like spin, as it can make it easier for position sometimes. I try to avoid it because of adjustments in aiming required, just trying to keep things simple as possible.

Just read in another forum post:

He knows the difference between a cue ball that kicked and a skid. He understands that a ball with any kind of spin is less susceptible to either.

Would you agree? Would this line only refer to left and right spin?

Thinking I need to increase my use for awhile and see how it goes.
 

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
not an instructor..but I can relate
personally, I always gravitated toward using spin and hitting the extra rail, so I do that
but I also know that there are many ways to hit a cb, so (when I was actually playing- covid)
I'm working on being familiar/comfortable using ALL of the cb, not just the edges
good luck and keep enjoying the pool, 'faust :thumbup:
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
- by using even a small amount of intentional spin, you avoid the possibility of aiming for center and being off.
The idea that intentionally hitting off center reduces the consequences of stroke errors isn't unheard of (CJ Wiley even says so), but sadly I'm pretty sure it's a myth. Your stoke will be just as inaccurate trying to hit off center as it is trying to hit on center, and the aiming consequences will be the same.

pj <- wish it was that easy
chgo
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
The huge reason for using outside spin is to reduce the chance of a skid. If you have close the right spin on the cue ball there is no chance of a skid. It doesn't have to be exact "gearing" stun, it just has to be close.

There are lots of position situations where that's not possible, but if you practice at it you can create patterns where a lot of outside stun shots are used. I think Ronnie O'Sullivan uses a lot of these where many pool players would use inside follow.

And I agree with Pat about adding side spin because you are not capable of hitting the cue ball near the center reliably. If you can't hit the center reliably, you can't do a little bit of side reliably.
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Thanks, Fran

I like spin, as it can make it easier for position sometimes. I try to avoid it because of adjustments in aiming required, just trying to keep things simple as possible.

Just read in another forum post:

He knows the difference between a cue ball that kicked and a skid. He understands that a ball with any kind of spin is less susceptible to either.

Would you agree? Would this line only refer to left and right spin?

Thinking I need to increase my use for awhile and see how it goes.

I don't know what you mean by a cue ball that kicked. As for the other, I'm not so sure that a ball with any kind of spin is less susceptible to skidding. I've said this before and the only proof I have is my own experience, and I have found that low outside is less likely to cause a skid than other forms of spin. I guess it has to do with how the chalk mark rotates around the ball as its moving. You have to experiment for yourself. There are variables in all this, such as how you personally apply spin as opposed to how Earl applies spin. That's why it's best to experiment on your own and find out what works for you.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
I have found that low outside is less likely to cause a skid than other forms of spin. I guess it has to do with how the chalk mark rotates around the ball as its moving.
Yes, the right amount of outside spin “rolls” across the object ball without friction so skids (and even normal throw) can’t happen. (Called “gearing” English.)

You have to experiment for yourself. There are variables in all this, such as how you personally apply spin as opposed to how Earl applies spin. That's why it's best to experiment on your own and find out what works for you.
There’s a pretty easy way to know exactly how much outside spin = perfect gearing english for any cut angle: locate the point on the CB’s equator that will be directly opposite the CB/OB contact point and offset your tip 2/5 of the distance toward that spot from center ball. It’s a little sensitive to speed and distance, but usually close enough for government work.

pj
chgo

P.S. The same technique works for putting “rolling” english on a kick shot to eliminate CB/rail friction, allowing a sliding CB to rebound at the “equal angle”.
 
Last edited:

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yes, the right amount of outside spin “rolls” across the object ball without friction so skids (and even normal throw) can’t happen. (Called “gearing” English.)


There’s a pretty easy way to know exactly how much outside spin = perfect gearing english for any cut angle: locate the point on the CB’s equator that will be directly opposite the CB/OB contact point and offset your tip 2/5 of the distance toward that spot from center ball. It’s a little sensitive to speed and distance, but usually close enough for government work.

pj
chgo

P.S. The same technique works for putting “rolling” english on a kick shot to eliminate CB/rail friction, allowing a sliding CB to rebound at the “equal angle”.

Very interesting. Was this the result of a study of some sort?
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Very interesting. Was this the result of a study of some sort?
This is a fairly simple result from the physics. The ratio of 2/5 comes from the way the mass of a ball is distributed (uniform sphere) and how the spin momentum is connected to the linear momentum.

This was covered in fairly readable form in Ron Shepard's paper on pool physics for pool players which is available here:

http://www.sfbilliards.com/Misc/Shepard_apapp.pdf

This particular idea is given in Problem 4.27 on page 61.

Ron is a pretty good pool player so his problems and insights in the paper are actually useful as compared to some previous works that were much more physics and much less pool.

I think Dave Alciatore also has several discussions on gearing side spin.

It's important to note that you don't need to have exact gearing stun. If the amount of side spin is close, the balls will have time to come to gearing contact during the collision and then the coefficient of friction of the contact is not important. If it is very large from a bad contact the resulting cut will be the same as for a normal contact.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
This is a fairly simple result from the physics.

...

This was covered in fairly readable form in Ron Shepard's paper on pool physics for pool players

...

I think Dave Alciatore also has several discussions on gearing side spin.
I'm sure I got the info from one of those sources (or from you or Mike Page) - I definitely don't know the "simple" physics myself.

pj
chgo
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
This is a fairly simple result from the physics. The ratio of 2/5 comes from the way the mass of a ball is distributed (uniform sphere) and how the spin momentum is connected to the linear momentum.

This was covered in fairly readable form in Ron Shepard's paper on pool physics for pool players which is available here:

http://www.sfbilliards.com/Misc/Shepard_apapp.pdf

This particular idea is given in Problem 4.27 on page 61.

Ron is a pretty good pool player so his problems and insights in the paper are actually useful as compared to some previous works that were much more physics and much less pool.

I think Dave Alciatore also has several discussions on gearing side spin.

It's important to note that you don't need to have exact gearing stun. If the amount of side spin is close, the balls will have time to come to gearing contact during the collision and then the coefficient of friction of the contact is not important. If it is very large from a bad contact the resulting cut will be the same as for a normal contact.

Strange. I recall a couple of years ago, mentioning about outside spin helping to avoid skids and your response it's just a theory and there's no proof. Maybe it hadn't been scientifically thought of by you science guys yet so it wasn't real? What about outside low, medium and high? Does any one help more than the others?
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Strange. I recall a couple of years ago, mentioning about outside spin helping to avoid skids and your response it's just a theory and there's no proof. Maybe it hadn't been scientifically thought of by you science guys yet so it wasn't real? What about outside low, medium and high? Does any one help more than the others?
I may have said it is not easy to get the outside to work right. It would be nice to see the original thread.

It is important to match the side spin to the cut and that is not easy to do without practice. It is harder as was pointed out if there is some distance between the balls and you have to start the cue ball with some draw to obtain stun.

I think that for the average player -- might run a rack once a session -- it is a much less useful technique because skids are not the major problem for such players. For someone at the level of Sigel or Strickland, who both promote outside side spin, avoiding skids can reduce their misses by a substantial percentage. At snooker, many matches between the top players have turned on a skid (or "kick" as the snooker people say).
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I may have said it is not easy to get the outside to work right. It would be nice to see the original thread.

It is important to match the side spin to the cut and that is not easy to do without practice. It is harder as was pointed out if there is some distance between the balls and you have to start the cue ball with some draw to obtain stun.

I think that for the average player -- might run a rack once a session -- it is a much less useful technique because skids are not the major problem for such players. For someone at the level of Sigel or Strickland, who both promote outside side spin, avoiding skids can reduce their misses by a substantial percentage. At snooker, many matches between the top players have turned on a skid (or "kick" as the snooker people say).

No, I'm pretty sure you were a non-believer at that time. I wish I could remember the thread. It was quite awhile ago. Posts often go in different directions than the original thread title so it's unlikely that I'll find it but I'll keep an eye open for it.

I recall that the issue with skidding was always prominent at pro tournaments with new cloth -- not so much on a day-to-day basis in local pool rooms. The charity events held just prior to the start of the pro tournaments helped a lot in breaking in the new cloth.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
I recall that the issue with skidding was always prominent at pro tournaments with new cloth -- not so much on a day-to-day basis in local pool rooms. The charity events held just prior to the start of the pro tournaments helped a lot in breaking in the new cloth.
I don't think cloth condition has anything to do with skidding - that's purely due to excess friction between the balls.

I guess the mistaken idea is that the OB is pushed "sideways" before continuing "straight" (and the cloth resists that) - but it isn't sideways and then straight; it's straight in the new direction from the beginning.

Maybe it's this distinction that you recall Bob commenting on?

pj
chgo
 

Scott Lee

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
PJ...It is a myth, and what you posted is correct.

Scott Lee
2019 PBIA Instructor of the Year
Director, SPF National Pool School Tour

The idea that intentionally hitting off center reduces the consequences of stroke errors isn't unheard of (CJ Wiley even says so), but sadly I'm pretty sure it's a myth. Your stoke will be just as inaccurate trying to hit off center as it is trying to hit on center, and the aiming consequences will be the same.

pj <- wish it was that easy
chgo
 

Geosnooker

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been enjoying watching the weekly Billiards Channel matches on Youtube with Earl Strickland providing commentary. There are 4 done over the last month.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChr1NNyX6oc4uecKtVk4mVw

Earl seems to suggest using spin/English on most shots, far more than I use. I'm a decent mid level player (Fargo 487). I generally avoid spin except when essential for cue ball position or when object ball is close enough to the intended pocket that I don't have to adjust much.

Other than recommending it, Earl doesn't explain why(at least not through #3) Some of my thoughts:
- by using even a small amount of intentional spin, you avoid the possibility of aiming for center and being off.
- using outside spin on cut shots to compensate for throw
- better approach for position play?

I'm wondering if I should be trying to expand my normal game to include more spin generally? As I work to improve my position play, it's natural to start using more spin, but often I see alternatives for getting position using center top, mid or low instead. I've opted for this route as lower risk, but know that it has meant I don't use spin as much.

Let me also take the opportunity to say thanks to this forum. Although I'm a lurker that doesn't post much, I've learned a great deal.

Perhaps the most studied players have been Steve Hendry and Ronnie OSullivan. More so Ronnie because of newer technology.

OSullivan puts spin on 100% of shots. Even a light tap in. It’s often what pros comment on when describing his technique. I’m no
Ronnie ( understatement) but use spin on about 80% of shots whether playing American pool or Snooker.

Using spin is more than a tool to get a result on a specific shot. It’s tapping the brain into seeing the layout on the table differently. Not better but different. Instead of seeing a series of straight lines, one sees a series of curves. One player used an analogy of picking up a rock and trying to hit a tree trunk...some see hitting the tree like an arrow being shot...others more like tossing a frisbee.
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I don't think cloth condition has anything to do with skidding - that's purely due to excess friction between the balls.

I guess the mistaken idea is that the OB is pushed "sideways" before continuing "straight" (and the cloth resists that) - but it isn't sideways and then straight; it's straight in the new direction from the beginning.

Maybe it's this distinction that you recall Bob commenting on?

pj
chgo

Somehow I didn't see this so I'll answer it now. My point about the new cloth being a factor has to do with the cb sliding more and the chalk mark not wearing off.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Somehow I didn't see this so I'll answer it now. My point about the new cloth being a factor has to do with the cb sliding more and the chalk mark not wearing off.
I think there might be something to that. It seems like the old, napped cloths may have been more effective at keeping the ball clean. Hard to test.
 
Top