If further tests bear this out, I'll, of course, have to eat some crow...and like it!
I would think that you should miscue when you're very, very close to the straight-stroke miscue limit with the added swipe. But if you can get more spin while safely away from the limit when swiping, you'll have proved your point.
I'm wondering how you're determining that the "sidespin lessens considerably?" It's not all that easy to see the sidespin component as the ball acquires topspin. If you use a striped ball with the stripe horizontal and hit very firmly at the equator with lots of english, the stripe reorients itself from horizontal to inclined (almost 45 degrees) as roll sets in (i.e., you can clearly see the tilted spin axis, indicating both spins are present: topspin and english.) With the firm hit and lots of english, the physical stripe tends to remain closely aligned with the new spin equator as it tilts along with the spin axis. At slower speeds, however, or with smaller amounts of english, the physical stripe doesn't remained aligned so well and thus wobbles. It's no longer that obvious that the ball is spinning about the tilted axis.
I'm pretty sure I've seen something like that amongst Dr. Dave's videos, at least a ball on the way to developing roll, but the ones I tried today aren't them. (I'm on dialup and it could take some time to locate them.)
IMO, I don't think it's important to be all that precise about the speed. Eyeballing it should be good enough. The spin/speed ratio is the most important thing. We're just trying to eliminate the speed variable as much as possible.
It's a lot to ask and I wouldn't try to pressure you to do it. (It's a lot easier to sit back and comment....trust me.But for the sake of "science" I will do the test and let you analyze it
Jim
Tips of english or stroke?
- Thread starter Mikjary
- Start date
Tennessee, either way you look at it is fine. Mathematically speaking, it's spinning about two axes in the sense that a car traveling NE can be considered to be moving both east and north at the same time. Both spin components, as with the car's velocity components, have at least enough reality to them such that the physical effects they may exert on things (or are exerted upon them), can be treated as independent of each other.
But is it really, really spinning about both axes? I really, really couldn't say. That's more of a philosophical issue, or semantics, imo. Your single axis undergoing a change of direction is certainly a valid way of looking at it, and admittedly more attuned to common sense.
Jim
Jim,
I suspect you are referring to this video:
Regards,
Dave
The term "natural roll" has nothing to do with side spin. A ball can be "rolling naturally" and have tremendous side spin. Here is an example of this:
Set the cue ball spinning like a top in place by shooting full at an object ball hard with side spin but no follow or draw. (A skilled player can make the cue ball spin in place like that for 30 seconds or more.) While the ball is still spinning rapidly, tap it lightly with another ball so that it won't quite reach a cushion. Within just a short distance of travel across the cloth, the cue ball will go from sliding to rolling smoothly. It will also have a lot of side spin. If you started the ball with enough side spin, it will come to rest still spinning.
Some may not consider this "rolling smoothly" or "natural roll" but for good reason the side spin is ignored in this situation. The component of spin about the vertical axis has almost no interaction with the bed cloth, while the components of spin around the other two axes (which include draw, follow and masse) interact very strongly with the bed cloth. While the cue ball can have components of spin along three axes, it has a total spin along only one axis (which is the vector sum of the three component axes).
Thank you Bob. Now how does that translate when a ball is struck with the cue? I noticed that it's very difficult for me to hit the ball slowly but with maximum spin and have it reach the end rail with maximum spin intact.
Play with draw as well as side to have the cue ball arrive softly at a far cushion with lots of spin. It is impossible (or at least I've never seen it done) to hit the cue ball with side spin and not hit a ball or cushion and come to rest still spinning. Different cloths rub off side spin at different rates, and I have found that snooker cloth (with a thick nap) destroys side spin on soft shots faster than Simonis 860, so that if I'm trying to play a soft hit off the cushion with side spin, it's much harder or I have to start the ball with a lot more spin on snooker cloth.
The inverse of this difference is that it might be possible to design cloth (or maybe an artificial surface) that retains spin better or stops rolling sooner and you could leave a cue ball spinning in place without hitting anything. There is nothing I know of that directly links the two rates of energy loss. That is to say, "boring friction" (of a side-spinning ball) is through a fundamentally different mechanism than rolling friction. Both of those are different in turn from sliding friction which causes draw and follow to act.
Yes. As I'm sure you've seen, a ball can come to rest spinning like a top. That spin is not interacting with the bed cloth except for the fairly slow process of boring friction.
You're saying, 'about the vertical axis' and talking about the horizontal spin, right?
I ask this question to bring up another point about cueing and want to emphasize the vertical axis.
Best,
Mike
Last edited:
I'm talking about left and right side spin. The vertical axis is the line that goes through the (3-dimensional) center of the cue ball and is perpendicular to the playing surface of the table. When someone says "hit the ball on the vertical axis" they are being sloppy in their speech. The correct geometrical way to say that would be "with the axis of the cue stick in the vertical plane that passes through the center of the cue ball." That vertical plane also contains the vertical axis of the cue ball.
The vertical axis exits the cue ball at its north pole and at its south pole where it touches the cloth.
I think a better way to say to hit the ball without side spin would be to say "hit it on the Greenwich meridian" but that requires some knowledge of geography to understand.
Actually, as an American and being the center of the universe, I feel the Prime Meridian should be through our country.
We'll allow the Canucks and a few others to share it because of physical definition, but not to be noteworthy.Cueing for spin with a straight stroke allows the tip to contact an outside edge of the cue ball with a portion of the center of the tip and its edge. When you use right english, you hit the cue ball on the right side and finish with the left edge of your tip making contact on the follow through.
Though this takes place in thousandths of a second, the top players are able to maximize contact by a smooth stroke. Instead of punching the ball which shortens the contact time, they maintain contact longer and apply more spin more accurately. This can be debated, but a simple test can be done by stroking smoothly versus a punch stroke. You can feel the length of time your tip stays with the cue ball and almost foul it by continued follow through.
With a crossover stroke for right english, the first contact with the cue ball is the right side of the tip. Because the contact is not straight into the cue ball, but at an angle the cue ball doesn't move away as quickly. This allows a stroke to continue contact with the tip moving across the face of the cue ball in the follow through to the right side.
Small movements could decrease deflection ala BHE, and increase the amount of spin by virtue of the cue tip contact period. Staying close to center may limit the amount of miscues caused by going out to the edge of the cue ball for spin.
Food for thought. I'm not advocating this stroke. I'm just looking into it and trying to understand it. I have been known to use it on occasion for certain shots. You can still miscue if not done correctly, but not as much.
Best,
Mike
To the best of my knowledge (and study) the smoothness of the stroke has negligible effect on the spin. When the cue stick hits the cue ball it is in effect not connected to the hand. Many people find this hard to accept, mostly because they do not understand the underlying details of how the impact works. Let's try it from a different direction: golf.
When a golfer hits a golf ball it is the head of the club that hits the ball, not the golfer's body or arms or hands or grip. That's because the news of the club head hitting the ball and any return change can only happen at the rate that force can be transmitted through the flesh of the hands and down the shaft of the club. That process is very slow compared to how long the club head is on the ball.
Suppose we had a high-powered laser. If we aimed the laser at the bottom of the grip on the golf club and fired it a microsecond before the club head hit the golf ball, and cut the shaft in two, the shot would be unchanged. The destiny of the shot would already have been determined by how the player had "prepared" the club head for the shot. It is not possible for the player to make any significant change to the shot during the instant of contact. The speed, direction and rotation of the club head at impact completely determine how the shot will come out.
In a similar way, the speed, tip offset, direction and elevation of the cue stick one microsecond before contact with the cue ball completely determine how the shot will come out. The skill is all in preparing the cue stick for what it has to do, as accurately and repeatably as possible.
Since there are so few variables involved in what the stick is doing, it is in fact possible for any beginner who can move the stick forward at a sufficient speed to duplicate any shot of a master player, because just by chance they might have the stick moving in the right direction with the right offset and speed and elevation. And maybe by some miracle they remembered to chalk. It's just very rare that they catch lightning.
Note in the above I said "at a sufficient speed." That's one killer for most beginners. At any speed above a lag, their delivery becomes a totally random mix of speeds and directions and miscues.
I thought they did studies that showed the contact time is the same.
However, your findings are consistent with what Lee Brett says and many others. I feel that contact can be prolonged as well.
This sort of puts pendulum stroke, which is a punching stroke on a defensive as well.
You are correct. Studies have been done by various people, and the contact time does not vary with the "type" of stroke. For more information, see the
Before Tom Ross and I worked on VEPS together, we had a big argument about this topic. Tom was convinced that the "type" of stroke made a big difference with the action of the shot by somehow prolonging contact between the cue tip and cue ball. After we did a few simple experiments together, he was finally convinced that all that really matters is cue speed, tip contact point, and cue elevation at contact with the CB. Two strokes of entirely different "types" will have identical shot outcomes if the cue elevation, tip contact point, and cue speed are the same, regardless of how "ugly," "pretty," "punchy," or "smooth" the stroke might be. For more info, see Tom Ross' April '08 and August '08 Billiards Digest articles.
Also, as Bob has pointed out, nothing you do with your body, arm, or hand can make any practical difference during the 0.001 sec the tip is in contact with the CB. For more info on this topic, see:
"effects of light vs. tight grip" resource page
"stroke acceleration" resource page
"follow through" resource page
"stroke acceleration" resource page
"follow through" resource page
Regards,
Dave
Except for the possibility of the cue tip making multiple contact with the cue ball during the single stroke, which can be seen on some slow-motion video but seldom observable by the human eye.
The only time I've seen this happen is with a large tip-offset shot (e.g., maximum English or draw) with a really light and stiff shaft (e.g., carbon fiber), where the end of the shaft doesn't whip out enough or returns too quickly. I've also gotten close with a Predator shaft at extreme tip offset (e.g., see the 4th shot in HSV A.106). For more info, see my October '05 BD article dealing with maximum English.
Regardless, secondary tip contact isn't something you would want to have happen, because it would generally decrease the amount of spin and result in a miscue-type action (i.e., unpredictable CB direction). Also, it is theoretically a foul; although, just as with most miscues, it would not be ruled as a foul because there is no clear and convincing visual evidence of a double hit.
Regards,
Dave
Last edited:
There was a guy named Larry something that claimed when he did the amazing exhibition draw shots he hit the CB 3 to 4 times.
Again, regardless of what the claim might be, if this were happening (which I doubt), it wouldn't be a good thing.
Regards,
Dave