Swerve or Throw?
- Thread starter jsp
- Start date
RBC
Deceased
jsp,
It really depends.
If you have new shiny slick balls, then the throw is very little as compared to old dirty balls.
If you have new slick cloth, then swerve is very little as compared to old dirty cloth.
If you are using "High" with side spin, then swerve greatly reduced as compared to using "low" with side spin.
We get questions about swerve all the time. Our cue shafts have very little "Squirt" or Cue Ball Deflection, but they do spin the ball better. Some players feel that, on a long soft shot with inside english, the swerve is severe. This is mostly because they don't get the "Squirt" that normally move the cue ball drastically off line before the swerve brings it back some. Invariably, when they show me this shot, they all hit it with "Low" and inside. I have them shoot the same shot with 1 tip of "high" instead and they are amazed at the results. Soft shots with high instead of low will swerve much less!
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
It really depends.
If you have new shiny slick balls, then the throw is very little as compared to old dirty balls.
If you have new slick cloth, then swerve is very little as compared to old dirty cloth.
If you are using "High" with side spin, then swerve greatly reduced as compared to using "low" with side spin.
We get questions about swerve all the time. Our cue shafts have very little "Squirt" or Cue Ball Deflection, but they do spin the ball better. Some players feel that, on a long soft shot with inside english, the swerve is severe. This is mostly because they don't get the "Squirt" that normally move the cue ball drastically off line before the swerve brings it back some. Invariably, when they show me this shot, they all hit it with "Low" and inside. I have them shoot the same shot with 1 tip of "high" instead and they are amazed at the results. Soft shots with high instead of low will swerve much less!
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
I guess you're right. I'm talking more of an "in general" sense.skor said:
I personally think about throw all the time on practically ALL shots. If I use english, then I have to adjust my aim for the effects of throw for that particular spin.
However, I hardly ever (at least consciously) think about swerve, unless it's a table length shot or if my cue is significantly jacked up.
So for my question, I would have to say throw has definitely a greater effect...in general.
But I've also come to read from many reputable posters/sources that throw is one of the most overrated effects. I don't think this is so at all.
Last edited:
jsp said:
I agree.
That's probably because squirt is cancelling most of the throw effect.
I think trying to compare swerve and throw is confusing because (1) swerve is inseperable from squirt and (2) swerve changes the object ball's path indirectly by changing the cue ball's path (in conjunction with squirt) while throw changes the object ball's path directly.
Throw may be underrated, but there's a more important underrating going on here:
I think swerve is usually grossly underrated in the squirt/swerve equation - for most shots I think it plays an almost equal role with squirt in determining the path of the cue ball (and is a more difficult effect to judge). The path of the cue ball determines where it hits the object ball, so swerve has a huge impact on the object ball's path (indirectly).
The only way I can think to compare the overall impact of swerve vs. throw is to imagine what would happen if we ignored each separately. If we ignored throw (but correctly compensated for swerve) we'd miss many sidespin shots by a little. If we ignored swerve (but correctly compensated for throw) we'd miss virtually all sidespin shots by a lot. So I'd have to conclude that swerve has the greater overall effect, and by a lot.
pj
chgo
P.S. I seem to be the only voter who came to that conclusion so far.
P.P.S. Edited parts in blue for accuracy.
Last edited:
PJ, you make some great points. You're right that I probably haven't noticed the effects of swerve because it is inseparable from squirt. The only times I do "observe" swerve are on table-length or jacked-up shots when it's noticeable that the CB does curve back in the direction opposite that of squirt.Patrick Johnson said:
I wonder if there have been experiments that have actually measured the effects of swerve by completely separating swerve and squirt from each other. It would help if you had frictionless felt or shoot on a block of ice to do these experiments.
Patrick Johnson said:
PJ,
I'm with you. There are at least a couple of top instructors and top pro's who have told me over and over that more English shots are missed by miscalculating the squirt/swerve than any other reason (including miscalculating the throw - which I believe to be fairly minor in comparison unless the hit is very slow, full, close to the object ball, and with a LOT of English).
The usual error is to not allow for enough squirt.
Last edited:
jsp said:
Dr. Dave's squirt tests are done with a special jig that keeps the stick perfectly level, so there's no swerve in those tests - and I think the amount of squirt measured is much larger than most players expect (because swerve isn't reducing it).
pj
chgo
P.S. Just to be accurate: in my previous post I somewhat overstated the effect of swerve in comparison with squirt on most shots. Squirt is usually the greater factor, as you can tell because you have to adjust for net squirt, not net swerve, on most shots. But swerve is still a major factor (and the harder factor to judge) and still a much greater factor than throw in the overall outcome of the shot.
Last edited:
I think that either can be larger depending on the shot. For a shot where the cue ball travels 3', swerve will usually be larger, but not always.jsp said:
For shots where the cue ball is close to the object ball, throw will usually dominate. For shots where the object ball is far from the cue ball, swerve (with squirt) will usually dominate. However, in both situations the non-dominant effect can still be large enough to cause a miss.
If the object ball is two diamonds or more from the pocket, throw is a significant factor on all shots. (Maybe 1 diamond if things are sticky or the pockets small.)
If the object ball is more than six inches from the cue ball, squirt and swerve are important if the object ball has more than a short distance to the pocket. (Or maybe three inches depending on distance to the pocket, how much elevation and speed you are using, and how squirty your stick is.)
RBC said:
Players miss a lot of shots because of reduced anticipated squerve when using high side spin. They normally hit a cut shot too fat because they are anticipating the same amount of squerve as when they shoot the shot with low side spin.
JoeyA
I'm not sure if you're talking about inside or outside sidespin, Joey, but I'll assume you mean inside because then I agree with you
. My experience is different from what Mr. Bunnell says - I usually get more swerve effect with high sidespin, not less. Maybe this is because I try to keep my cue as level as possible, which minimizes swerve when hitting low.pj
chgo
I wonder if he's done experiments comparing the results of a perfectly level stick with the results of a slightly elevated stick (as so in a normal shot with a rail). That should give some clue as to how much of an impact swerve has. But I feel that even with a perfectly level stick, you won't completely eliminate the effects of swerve.Patrick Johnson said:
Patrick Johnson said:
You assumed correctly about the "high" inside sidespin. I didn't mean outside-thanks! The cueball seems to start swerving earlier when using high inside sidespin than when I use "low" inside sidespin. That gives me the impression that you would get more swerve with high than with low.
Maybe Royce's OB 1 shafts impact the cue ball a little differently than your shaft or you just strike the cue ball oddly.
Actually, he mentioned something that I especially agree with and that is the amount of spin that you can get with his shafts. OB1 shafts seem to provide more spin on the cueball or it is simply easier to apply spin so it appears like the OB1 shaft provides more spin on the cueball. Or maybe it's just the way I strike the cue ball.
I'm going to go back and read what Royce said to make sure.
JoeyA
Some thoughts:
When the CB is close to the OB throw is the major factor to compensate for.
When the CB is far from the OB swerve is the major factor.
At higher speeds, for most shots, both throw and swerve become less significant.
I use compensation mechanisms for both. Pivot length for swerve and adjusted aim for throw. It's swerve that bothers me the most. Particularly on long pots at slow to medium speeds.
Colin
When the CB is close to the OB throw is the major factor to compensate for.
When the CB is far from the OB swerve is the major factor.
At higher speeds, for most shots, both throw and swerve become less significant.
I use compensation mechanisms for both. Pivot length for swerve and adjusted aim for throw. It's swerve that bothers me the most. Particularly on long pots at slow to medium speeds.
Colin
Colin Colenso said:
Colin,
Sorry but I hate to ask but I just have to..... How does the Pivot Length affect swerve? Shorter pivot length vs. longer pivot length. Which one reduces and why?
Some brand new 760 Simonis cloth helps out on the swerve too. :smile:
Thanks,
JoeyA
Swerve is basically a masse effect. It's impossible to actually shoot with a flat cue, however the cue can be flatter when hitting above center compared to hitting below center.JoeyA said:
If you can imagine where your tip is pointing to the cloth, when striking the CB, the CB will swerve toward that point. The flatter the cue, the further away that point is, which means less angle of swerve.
The skid won't have any significant effect in reducing the swerve. A rolling CB with some component of English skids in a sense also, the english aspect slides.
But there may be an argumant from a static friction standoint that rolling english is likely to take grip earlier than backward spinning english.
We get the same effect with spin induced throw on extreme cut shots where a touch of outside english causes more throw (more friction) than either, sliding ball, Inside english or Heavy Outside english. The similar direction of movements of the surfaces allows greater grip.
So this could provide a mechanism for rolling english to curve earlier than draw english.
Colin
Technically speaking you might not eliminate 100% of the swerve (I suppose there might be some minimal curve from the CB rolling with sidespin in the tiny depression its weight makes in the cloth), but I'd be surprised if it's enough to affect any shot.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
I would have to say it would be definitely be throw on close shots. Now on longer shots it may be swerve. The throw that you get from applying english to the ball can be tricky, you have to adjust for it, believe it or not you also have to adjust for follow, and draw as well. And spin that is applied to the cue ball affects the way that the object ball comes off of it. You will even see pros missing shots because of this as well, ie Ga Young Kim, Jasmin Ouschan. This happens when to get shape or something, they have to put something on the ball that they normally wouldn't want to put. Even center ball can cause the ball to roll a little funny. IMO, putting a little bit of draw makes the balls go in the easiest because it makes the object ball roll towards the pocket.
This guy said it exactly.Colin Colenso said:
Last edited: