Transferring English

Creedo:
...if a ball gets the chance to start natural roll, the spin has died off...
Click to expand...

If you're saying that a naturally rolling ball can't have sidespin, then I'm sorry to be the one to tell you that you're mistaken. Spinning balls still have their sidespin after their backspin or follow turns into natural roll, a fact that can be used to "boost" the spin/speed ratio on some shots (make the spin more effective).

...you can't hit a CB so it's spinning clockwise, hoping it makes a 2nd ball spin counterclockwise, and hoping that ball in turn makes a 3rd ball spin clockwise and therefore bank differently off a rail, or get thrown an appreciable amount...
Click to expand...

Probably not unless the two OBs are frozen together. If they are frozen together then you can get significant throw and transferred spin on the second OB. Set it up and try it.

By the way, here's another "proof" of transferred spin. If it didn't happen I couldn't make this shot - but I can, even with clean balls on new worsted cloth. With older or dirtier equipment you can do even more.

pj
chgo

CueTable Help



pj
chgo
 
CreeDo said:
I guess I wasn't thinking when I wrote my post, I didn't mean to say the spin can't be held over a long distance, was just meaning to point out that without much speed, if a ball gets the chance to start natural roll, the spin has died off. But with speed, yeah, spin can last all the way across the table.
Click to expand...

There is nothing inconsistent with natural roll AND spin. The object ball will achieve natural roll almost immediately and will keep any acquired spin as well. If the bed cloth is in good shape, it will not kill much of the spin on a rolling ball. On a good billiard table the cue ball can still have spin after five or six cushions and after having traveled over 30 feet. The ball would have been rolling naturally for almost all of that distance.

Mark
 
[/QUOTE]The best I was ever able to do in at least an hour of trying is to hit about a quarter-inch of the far ball (the 4 in the above diagram).[/QUOTE]

The quarter inch is still an amazing feat. I am wondering about the possibility of using an intentional kick (skid) .001% chance. I don't know the proper term for a kick I believe this is how they refer to it in snooker. What I am talking about is the rare event that the chalk spot you leave on the cue ball rolls over at the perfect time to hit the contact point on the object ball thus creating added friction between the two balls.

Would this still be considered putting chalk on the ball? If not then I am pretty sure this could be done. Not often at all, probably the most inconsistent shot of all time.

One thing is for sure. This would be the only time a kick would be helpfull in the history of cue sports.
Jamison
 
CreeDo said:
....But you can't hit a CB so it's spinning clockwise, hoping it makes a 2nd ball spin counterclockwise, and hoping that ball in turn makes a 3rd ball spin clockwise and therefore bank differently off a rail, or get thrown an appreciable amount into a pocket when it normally can't be cut enough.
Click to expand...
Well, since everyone else is jumping on your post, you can get some useful throw action on the second object ball. Not a lot, but some.

If all three balls are more or less lined up with a bit of a gap between the two object balls, ie, not frozen but pretty close together, you should be able to throw the second ball 1 to 1-1/2 degrees with english. That translates as 1 to 1-1/2 inches of sideways displacement over a travel distance of a cue (58 inches). This is enough to make or break some shots. Hitting with soft stun at about half of maximum english should do it.

Of course, if the object balls are frozen to each other, as Patrick mentioned, more throw is possible.

Jim
 
I guess I always had a misunderstanding of natural roll, I thought it meant roll that you get when there's no more english left and it's just nap vs. ball.

I get that a ball can be rolling and spinning at the same time :P
 
JamisonNeu said:
The best I was ever able to do in at least an hour of trying is to hit about a quarter-inch of the far ball (the 4 in the above diagram).
Click to expand...

The quarter inch is still an amazing feat. I am wondering about the possibility of using an intentional kick (skid) .001% chance. I don't know the proper term for a kick I believe this is how they refer to it in snooker. What I am talking about is the rare event that the chalk spot you leave on the cue ball rolls over at the perfect time to hit the contact point on the object ball thus creating added friction between the two balls.

Would this still be considered putting chalk on the ball? If not then I am pretty sure this could be done. Not often at all, probably the most inconsistent shot of all time.

One thing is for sure. This would be the only time a kick would be helpfull in the history of cue sports.
Jamison
Click to expand...
I think it is not possible for the referee to call "shot-induced-cue-ball-chalking" fouls unless the player does something out of the ordinary to get extra chalk onto the cue ball, such as intentionally use damp chalk (if that even works). I have played such a shot, and I think I made it. Spot two balls (as at one pocket). Play the second ball straight into your pocket with ball in hand. I used what would be inside english on the front ball but struck the second ball as full as possible. I also used a little follow, but I don't know if that helped. Maybe it was not my chalk spot but some other chalk spot on the cue ball that made the shot. In any case, it was a demo shot and not in a game. The standard way to make the second ball straight in is to jump the cue ball a little to get over the first ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top